Wesley Corpus

5. The nature of religion is so far from consisting in these, in forms of worship, or rites and ceremonies, that it does not properly consist in any outward actions, of what kind so ever. It is true, a man cannot have any religion who is guilty of vicious, immoral actions; or who does to others what he would not they should do to him, if he were in the same circumstance. And it is also true, that he can have no real religion who "knows to do good, and doth it not." Yet may a man both abstain from outward evil, and do good, and still have no religion. Yea, two persons may do the same outward work; suppose, feeding the hungry, or clothing the naked; and, in the meantime, one of these may be truly religious, and the other have no religion at all: For the one may act from the love of God, and the other from the love of praise. So manifest it is, that although true religion naturally leads to every good word and work, yet the real nature thereof lies deeper still, even in "the hidden man of the heart." 6. I say of the heart. For neither does religion consist Orthodoxy, or right opinions; which, although they are not properly outward things, are not in the heart, but the understanding. A man may be orthodox in every point; he may not only espouse right opinions, but zealously defend them against all opposers; he may think justly concerning the incarnation of our Lord, concerning the ever-blessed Trinity, and every other doctrine contained in the oracles of God; he may assent to all the three creeds, -- that called the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian; and yet it is possible he may have no religion at all, no more than a Jew, Turk, or pagan. He may be almost as orthodox -- as the devil, (though, indeed, not altogether; for every man errs in something; whereas we can't well conceive him to hold any erroneous opinion,) and may, all the while be as great a stranger as he to the religion of the heart.

6. It in not surprising, if one in such circumstances as these, dosed with the opiates of flattery and sin, should imagine, among his other waking dreams, that he walks in great liberty. How easily may he persuade himself, that he is at liberty from all vulgar errors, and from the prejudice of education; judging exactly right, and keeping clear of all extremes. "I am free," may he say, "from all the enthusiasm of weak and narrow souls; from superstition, the disease of fools and cowards, always righteous over much; and from bigotry, continually incident to those who have not a free and generous way of thinking." And too sure it is, that he is altogether free from the "wisdom which cometh from above," from holiness, from the religion of the heart, from the whole mind which was in Christ. 7. For all this time he is the servant of sin. He commits sin, more or less, day by day. Yet he is not troubled: He "is in no bondage," as some speak; he feels no condemnation. He contents himself (even though he should profess to believe that the Christian Revelation is of God) with, "Man is frail. We are all weak. Every man has his infirmity." Perhaps he quotes Scripture: "Why, does not Solomon say, -- The righteous man falls into sin seven times a day! -- And, doubtless, they are all hypocrites or enthusiasts who pretend to be better than their neighbours." If, at any time, a serious thought fix upon him, he stifles it as soon as possible, with, "Why should I fear, since God is merciful, and Christ died for sinners" Thus, he remains a willing servant of sin, content with the bondage of corruption; inwardly and outwardly unholy, and satisfied therewith; not only not conquering sin, but not striving to conquer, particularly that sin which doth so easily beset him. 8. Such is the state of every natural man; whether he be a gross, scandalous transgressor, or a more reputable and decent sinner, having the form, though not the power of godliness. But how can such an one be convinced of sin How is he brought to repent To be under the law To receive the spirit of bondage unto fear This is the point which in next to be considered.

17. Such is the ground and the nature of that joy whereby an adult Christian rejoiceth evermore. And from all this we may easily infer, First, that this is not a natural joy. It does not arise from any natural cause: Not from any sudden flow of spirits. This may give a transient start of joy; but the Christian rejoiceth always. It cannot be owing to bodily health or ease; to strength and soundness of constitution: For it is equally strong in sickness and pain; yea, perhaps far stronger than before. Many Christians have never experienced any joy, to be compared with that which then filled their soul, when the body was well nigh worn out with pain, or consumed away with pining sickness. Least of all can it be ascribed to outward prosperity, to the favour of men, or plenty of worldly goods; for then, chiefly, when their faith has been tried as with fire, by all manner of outward afflictions, have the children of God rejoiced in Him, whom unseen they loved, even with joy unspeakable. And never surely did men rejoice like those who were used as "the filth and off scouring of the world;" who wandered to and fro, being in want of all things; in hunger, in cold, in nakedness; who had trials, not only of "cruel mockings," but, "moreover of bonds and imprisonments;" yea, who, at last, "counted not their lives dear unto themselves, so they might finish their course with joy."

Sermon 16: The Means of Grace Text: "Ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them." Mal. 3:7. I. Introduction and Historical Context 1. The question of whether God ordained specific means of grace under Christian dispensation would never have been proposed in the apostolic church except by one openly avowing himself a heathen. The entire body of Christians agreed that Christ had ordained outward means for conveying grace to souls. This practice was evident in how "all that believed were together, and had all things common," continuing "steadfastly in the teaching of the Apostles, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers." (Acts 2:44, 42.) 2. Over time, as "the love of many waxed cold," some began mistaking means for the end, placing religion in outward works rather than in hearts renewed after God's image. They forgot that "the end of every commandment is love, out of a pure heart," with "faith unfeigned." Others imagined that while religion didn't principally consist in outward means, God was pleased with them anyway--that they could neglect "the weightier matters of the law, in justice, mercy, and the love of God." 3. Those who abused these ordinances received no blessing; instead, "the things which should have been for their health, were to them an occasion of falling." They drew curses rather than blessings. Observing this, some concluded generally that these means didn't convey God's grace at all. 4. Eventually, men of great understanding and apparent love for true inward religion--"burning and shining lights"--arose to address this abuse. These venerable men initially intended only to show that outward religion means nothing without the religion of the heart; that "God is a Spirit, and they who worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth"; that external worship without a heart devoted to God is "lost labour"; that outward ordinances profit much when advancing inward holiness, but "when they advance it not, are unprofitable and void, are lighter than vanity."

5. But no sooner is the child born into the world, than he exists in a quite different manner. He now feels the air with which he is surrounded, and which pours into him from every side, as fast as he alternately breathes it back, to sustain the flame of life: And hence springs a continual increase of strength, of motion, and of sensation; all the bodily senses being now awakened, and furnished with their proper objects. His eyes are now opened to perceive the light, which, silently flowing in upon them, discovers not only itself, but an infinite variety of things, with which before he was wholly unacquainted. His ears are unclosed, and sounds rush in with endless diversity. Every sense is employed upon such objects as are peculiarly suitable to it; and by these inlets the soul, having an open intercourse with the visible world, acquires more and more knowledge of sensible things, of all the things which are under the sun. 6. So it is with him that is born of God. Before that great change is wrought, although he subsists by Him, in whom all that have life "live, and move, and have their being," yet he is not sensible of God; he does not feel, he has no inward consciousness of His presence. He does not perceive that divine breath of life, without which he cannot subsist a moment: Nor is he sensible of any of the things of God; they make no impression upon his soul. God is continually calling to him from on high, but he heareth not; his ears are shut, so that the "voice of the charmer" is lost to him, "charm he never so wisely," He seeth not the things of the Spirit of God; the eyes of his understanding being closed, and utter darkness covering his whole soul, surrounding him on every side. It is true he may have some faint dawnings of life, some small beginnings of spiritual motion; but as yet he has no spiritual senses capable of discerning spiritual objects; consequently, he "discerneth not the things of the Spirit of God; he cannot know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

11. But the great lesson which our blessed Lord inculcates here, and which he illustrates by this example, is, that God is in all things, and that we are to see the Creator in the glass of every creature; that we should use and look upon nothing as separate from God, which indeed is a kind of practical atheism; but, with a true magnificence of thought, survey heaven and earth, and all that is therein, as contained by God in the hollow of his hand, who by his intimate presence holds them all in being, who pervades and actuates the whole created frame, and is, in a true sense, the soul of universe. II. 1. Thus far our Lord has been more directly employed in teaching the religion of the heart. He has shown what Christians are to be. He proceeds to show, what they are to do also; -- how inward holiness is to exert itself in our outward conversation. "Blessed," saith he, "are the peacemakers; for they shall be called the children of God." 2. "The peace-makers:" The word in the original is oi eirhnopoioi. It is well known that eirhnh, in the sacred writings, implies all manner of good; every blessing that relates either to the soul or the body, to time or eternity. Accordingly, when St. Paul, in the titles of his epistles, wishes grace and peace to the Romans or the Corinthians, it is as if he had said, "As a fruit of the free, undeserved love and favour of God, may you enjoy all blessings, spiritual and temporal; all the good things which God hath prepared for them that love him."

Upon Our Lord's Sermon On The Mount: Discourse Four "Ye are the salt of the earth. But if the salt hath lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted It is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out, and trodden under foot of men. "Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. "Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light to all that are in the house. "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matt. 5:13-16 1. The beauty of holiness, of that inward man of the heart which is renewed after the image of God, cannot but strike every eye which God hath opened, -- every enlightened understanding. The ornament of a meek, humble, loving spirit, will at least excite the approbation of all those who are capable in any degree, of discerning spiritual good and evil. From the hour men begin to emerge out of the darkness which covers the giddy, unthinking world, they cannot but perceive how desirable a thing it is to be thus transformed into the likeness of him that created us. This inward religion bears the shape of God so visibly impressed upon it, that a soul must be wholly immersed in flesh and blood when he can doubt of its divine original. We may say of this, in a secondary sense, even as of the Son of God himself, that it is the "brightness of his glory, the express image of his person;" apaugasma ths doxhs autou, -- "the beaming forth of his" eternal "glory;" and yet so tempered and softened, that even the children of men may herein see God and live; carakthr ths upostasevs autou, -- "the character, the stamp, the living impression, of his person," who is the fountain of beauty and love, the original source of all excellency and perfection.

3. "But does not the Apostle direct us to `follow after charity' And does he not term it `a more excellent way'" -- He does direct us to "follow after charity;" but not after that alone. His words are, "follow after charity;" and desire spiritual gifts." (1 Cor. 14:1) Yea, "follow after charity;" and desire to spend and to be spent for your brethren. "Follow after charity;" and as you have opportunity do good to all men. In the same verse also wherein he terms this, the way of love, "a more excellent way," he directs the Corinthians to desire other gifts besides it; yea, to desire them earnestly. "Covet earnestly," saith he, "the best gifts; and yet I show unto you a more excellent way." (1 Cor. 12:31.) More excellent than what Than the gifts of healing, of speaking with tongues, and of interpreting, mentioned in the preceding verse; but not more excellent than the way of obedience. Of this the Apostle is not speaking; neither is he speaking of outward religion at all: So that this text is quite wide of the present question. But suppose the Apostle had been speaking of outward as well as inward religion, and comparing them together; suppose, in the comparison, he had given the preference ever so much to the latter; suppose he had preferred (as he justly might) a loving heart, before all outward works whatever; yet it would not follow that we were to reject either one or the other. No; God hath joined them together from the beginning of the world; and let not man put them asunder. 4. "But `God is a Spirit; and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth.' And is not this enough Nay, ought we not to employ the whole strength of our mind herein Does not attending to outward things clog the soul, that it cannot soar aloft in holy contemplation Does it not damp the vigour of our thought Has it not a natural tendency to encumber and distract the mind Whereas St. Paul would have us to be `without carefulness', and to `wait upon the Lord without distraction.'"

But to come closer. Can we use his first plea with God, which is, in substance, "I do no harm: I live in no outward sin. I do nothing for which my own heart condemns me." Do you not Are you sure of that Do you live in no practice for which your own heart condemns you If you are not an adulterer, if you are not unchaste, either in word or deed, are you not unjust The grand measure of justice, as well as of mercy, is, "Do unto others as thou wouldst they should do unto thee." Do you walk by this rule Do you never do unto any what you would not they should do unto you, Nay, are you not grossly unjust Are you not an extortioner Do you not make a gain of anyone's ignorance or necessity; neither in buying nor selling Suppose you are engaged in trade: Do you demand, do you receive, no more than the real value of what you sell Do you demand, do you receive, no more of the ignorant than of the knowing, -- of a little child, than of an experienced trader If you do, why does not your heart condemn you You are a barefaced extortioner! Do you demand no more than the usual price of goods of any who is in pressing want, -- who must have, and that without delay, the things which you only can furnish him with If you do, this also is flat extortion. Indeed you do not come up to the righteousness of a Pharisee.

Thirdly. Fall not short of a Pharisee in doing good. Give alms of all thou dost possess. Is any hungry Feed him. Is he athirst Give him drink. Naked Cover him with a garment. If thou hast this world's goods, do not limit thy beneficence to a scanty proportion. Be merciful to the uttermost of thy power. Why not, even as this Pharisee Now "make thyself friends," while the time is, "of the mammon of unrighteousness," that when thou failest," when this earthly tabernacle is dissolved, "they may receive thee into everlasting habitations." 13. But rest not here. Let thy "righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees." Be not thou content to "keep the whole law, and offend in one point." Hold thou fast all His commandments, and all "false ways do thou utterly abhor." Do all the things whatsoever He hath commanded, and that with all thy might. Thou canst do all things through Christ strengthening thee; though without Him thou canst do nothing. Above all, let thy righteousness exceed theirs in the purity and spirituality of it. What is the exactest form of religion to thee the most perfect outside righteousness Go thou higher and deeper than all this! Let thy religion be the religion of the heart. Be thou poor in spirit; little, and base, and mean, and vile in thy own eyes; amazed and humbled to the dust at the "love of God which is in Christ Jesus thy Lord! Be serious: Let the whole stream of thy thoughts, words, and works, be such as flows from the deepest conviction that thou standest on the edge of the great gulf, thou and all the children of men, just ready to drop in, either into everlasting glory, or everlasting burnings! Be meek: Let thy soul be filled with mildness, gentleness, patience, long-suffering toward all men; at the same time that all which is in thee is athirst for God, the living God, longing to awake up after his likeness, and to be satisfied with it. Be thou a lover of God, and of all mankind. In this spirit, do and suffer all things. Thus "exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees," and thou shalt be "called great in the kingdom of heaven."

1. In the preceding chapter our Lord has described inward religion in its various branches. He has laid before us those dispositions of soul which constitute real Christianity; the inward tempers contained in that "holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord;" the affections which, when flowing from their proper fountain, from a living faith in God through Christ Jesus, are intrinsically and essentially good, and acceptable to God. He proceeds to show, in this chapter, how all our actions likewise, even those that are indifferent in their own nature, may be made holy, and good and acceptable to God, by a pure and holy intention. Whatever is done without this, he largely declares, is of no value before God. Whereas whatever outward works are thus consecrated to God, they are, in his sight, of great price. 2. The necessity of this purity of intention, he shows, First, with regard to those which are usually accounted religious actions, and indeed are such when performed with a right intention. Some of these are commonly termed works of piety; the rest, works of charity or mercy. Of the latter sort, he particularly names almsgiving; of the former, prayer and fasting. But the directions given for these are equally to be applied to every work, whether of charity or mercy. I. 1. And, First, with regard to works of mercy. "Take heed," saith he,"that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: Otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven." "That ye do not your alms:" -- Although this only is named, yet is every work of charity included, every thing which we give, or speak, or do, whereby our neighbour may be profited; whereby another man may receive any advantage, either in his body or soul. The feeding the hungry, the clothing the naked, the entertaining or assisting the stranger, the visiting those that are sick or in prison, the comforting the afflicted, the instructing the ignorant, the reproving the wicked, the exhorting and encouraging the well-doer; and if there be any other work of mercy, it is equally included in this direction.

2. In the fifth chapter, our great Teacher has fully described inward religion in its various branches. He has there laid before us those dispositions of soul which constitute real Christianity; the tempers contained in that "holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord;" the affections which, when flowing from their proper fountain, from a living faith in God through Christ Jesus, are intrinsically and essentially good, and acceptable to God. In the sixth he hath shown how all our actions likewise, even those that are indifferent in their own nature, may be made holy, and good, and acceptable to God, by a pure and holy intention. Whatever is done without this he declares is of no value with God: Whereas, whatever outward works are thus consecrated to God are, in his sight, of great price. 3. In the former part of this chapter, he points out the most common and most fatal hindrances of this holiness: In the latter, he exhorts us by various motives, to break through all, and secure that prize of our high calling. 4. The first hindrance he cautions us against is judging. "Judge not, that ye be not judged." Judge not others, that ye be not judged of the Lord, that ye bring not vengeance on your own heads. "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again:" -- A plain and equitable rule, whereby God permits you to determine for yourselves in what manner he shall deal with you in the judgment of the great day.

5. Now, then, "strive to enter in at the strait gate," being penetrated with the deepest sense of the inexpressible danger your soul is in, so long as you are in a broad way, -- so long as you are void of poverty of spirit, and all that inward religion, which the many, the rich, the wise, account madness. "Strive to enter in;" being pierced with sorrow and shame for having so long run on with the unthinking crowd, utterly neglecting, if not despising, that "holiness without which no man can see the Lord." Strive, as in an agony of holy fear, lest "a promise being made you of entering into his rest," even that "rest which remaineth for the people of God," you should nevertheless "come short of it." Strive, in all the fervour of desire, with "groanings which cannot be uttered. Strive by prayer without ceasing; at all times, in all places, lifting up your heart to God, and giving him no rest, till you "awake up after his likeness" and are "satisfied with it." 6. To conclude. "Strive to enter in at the strait gate," not only by this agony of soul, of conviction, of sorrow, of shame, of desire, of fear, of unceasing prayer; but likewise by ordering thy conversation aright, by walking with all thy strength in all the ways of God, the way of innocence, of piety, and of mercy. Abstain from all appearance of evil: Do all possible good to all men: Deny thyself, thy own will, in all things, and take up thy cross daily. Be ready to cut off thy right hand, to pluck out thy right eye and cast it from thee; to suffer the loss of goods, friends, health, all things on earth, so thou mayst enter into the kingdom of heaven!

4. They come, Thirdly, with an appearance of religion. All they do is for conscience' sake! They assure you, it is out of mere zeal for God, that they are making God a liar. It is out of pure concern for religion, that they would destroy it root and branch. All they speak is only from a love of truth, and a fear lest it should suffer; and, it may be, from a regard for the Church, and a desire to defend her from all her enemies. 5. Above all, they come with an appearance of love. They take all these pains, only for your good. They should not trouble themselves about you, but that they have a kindness for you. They will make large professions of their good-will, of their concern for the danger you are in, and of their earnest desire to preserve you from error, from being entangled in new and mischievous doctrines. They should be very sorry to see one who means so well, hurried into any extreme, perplexed with strange and unintelligible notions, or deluded into enthusiasm. Therefore it is that they advise you to keep still, in the plain middle way; and to beware of "being righteous overmuch," lest you should "destroy yourself." III. 1. But how may we know what they really are, notwithstanding their fair appearance This was the Third thing into which it was proposed to inquire. Our blessed Lord saw how needful it was for all men to know false prophets, however disguised. He saw, likewise, how unable most men were to deduce a truth through a long train of consequences. He therefore gives us a short and plain rule, easy to be understood by men of the meanest capacities, and easy to be applied upon all occasions: "Ye shall know them by their fruits."

12. In a word: Let thy religion be the religion of the heart. Let it lie deep in thy inmost soul. Be thou little, and base, and mean, and vile (beyond what words can express) in thy own eyes; amazed and humbled to the dust by the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. Be serious. Let the whole stream of thy thoughts, words, and actions flow from the deepest conviction that thou standest on the edge of the great gulf, thou and all the children of men, just ready to drop in, either into everlasting glory or everlasting burnings! Let thy soul be filled with mildness, gentleness, patience, long-suffering towards all men; -- at the same time that all which is in thee is athirst for God, the living God; longing to awake up after his likeness, and to be satisfied with it! Be thou a lover of God and of all mankind! In this spirit do and suffer all things! Thus show thy faith by thy works; thus "do the will of thy Father which is in heaven!" And, as sure as thou now walkest with God on earth, thou shalt also reign with him in glory!

4. But alas! the law of God, as to its inward, spiritual meaning, is not hid from the Jews or heathens only, but even from what is called the Christian world; at least, from a vast majority of them. The spiritual sense of the commandments of God is still a mystery to these also. Nor is this observable only in those lands which are overspread with Romish darkness and ignorance. But this is too sure, that the far greater part, even of those who are called Reformed Christians are utter strangers at this day to the law of Christ, in the purity and spirituality of it. 5. Hence it is that to this day, "'the Scribes and Pharisees," the men who have the form but not the power of religion, and who are generally wise in their own eyes, and righteous in their own conceits, -- "hearing these things, are offended;" are deeply offended, when we speak of the religion of the heart; and particularly when we show, that without this, were we to "give all our goods to feed the poor," it would profit us nothing. But offended they must be; for we cannot but speak the truth as it is in Jesus. It is our part, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, to deliver our own soul. All that is written in the book of God we are to declare, not as pleasing men, but the Lord. We are to declare, not only all the promises, but all the threatenings, too, which we find therein. At the same time that we proclaim all the blessings and privileges which God hath prepared for his children, we are likewise to "teach all the things whatsoever he hath commanded." And we know that all these have their use; either for the awakening those that sleep, the instructing the ignorant, the comforting the feeble-minded, or the building up and perfecting of the saints. We know that "all Scripture, given by inspiration of God is profitable," either "for doctrine," or "for reproof," either "for correction or for instruction in righteousness;" and "that the man of God," in the process of the work of God in his soul, has need of every part thereof, that he may at length "be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

The Nature Of Enthusiasm "And Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself." Acts 26:24. 1. And so say all the world, the men who know not God, of all that are of Paul's religion: of every one who is so a follower of him as he was of Christ. It is true, there is a sort of religion, nay, and it is called Christianity too, which may be practised without any such Imputation, which is generally allowed to be consistent with common sense, --that is, a religion of form, a round of outward duties, performed in a decent, regular manner. You may add orthodoxy thereto, a system of right opinions, yea, and some quantity of heathen morality; and yet not many will pronounce, that "much religion hath made you mad." But if you aim at the religion of the heart, if you talk of "righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost," then it will not be long before your sentence is passed, "Thou art beside thyself." 2. And it is no compliment which the men of the world pay you here. They, for once, mean what they say. They not only affirm, but cordially believe, that every man is beside himself who says, "the love of God is shed abroad in" his "heart by the Holy Ghost given unto him;" and that God has enabled him to rejoice in Christ "with joy unspeakable and full of glory." If a man is indeed alive to God, and dead to all things here below; if he continually sees Him that is invisible, and accordingly walks by faith, and not by sight; then they account it a clear case: beyond all dispute, "much religion hath made him mad." 3. It is easy to observe, that the determinate thing which the world account madness is, that utter contempt of all temporal things, and steady pursuit of things eternal; that divine conviction of things not seen; that rejoicing in the favour of God that happy, holy love of God; and that testimony of His Spirit with our spirit, that we are the children of God, --that is, in truth, the whole spirit, and life, and power of the religion of Jesus Christ.

4. They will, however, allow, in other respects, the man acts and talks like one in his senses. In other things, he is a reasonable man, it is in these instances only his head is touched. It is therefore acknowledged, that the madness under which he labours is of a particular kind; and accordingly they are accustomed to distinguish it by a particular name, "enthusiasm." 5. A term this, which is exceeding frequently used, which is scarce ever out of some men's mouths; and yet it is exceeding rarely understood, even by those who use it most. It may be, therefore, not unacceptable to serious men, to all who desire to understand what they speak or hear, if I endeavour to explain the meaning of this term -- to show what enthusiasm is. It may be an encouragement to those who are unjustly charged therewith; and may possibly be of use to some who are justly charged with it; at least to others who might be so, were they not cautioned against it. 6. As to the word itself, it is generally allowed to be of Greek extraction. But whence the Greek word, enqousiasmos, is derived, none has yet been able to show. Some have endeavoured to derive it from en qev, -- in God; because all enthusiasm has reference to Him. But this is quite forced; there being small resemblance between the word derived, and those they strive to derive it from. Others would derive it from en qusia, -- in sacrifice; because many of the enthusiasts of old were affected in the most violent manner during the time of sacrifice. Perhaps it is a fictitious word, invented from the noise which some of those made who were so affected. 7. It is not improbable, that one reason why this uncouth word has been retained in so many languages was, because men were not better agreed concerning the meaning than concerning the derivation of it. They therefore adopted the Greek word, because they did not understand it: they did not translate it into their own tongues, because they knew not how to translate it; it having been always a word of a loose, uncertain sense, to which no determinate meaning was affixed.

8. It is not, therefore, at all surprising, that it is so variously taken at this day; different persons understanding it in different senses, quite inconsistent with each other. Some take it in a good sense, for a divine impulse or impression, superior to all the natural faculties, and suspending, for the time, either in whole or in part, both the reason and the outward senses. In this meaning of the word, both the Prophets of old, and the Apostles, were proper enthusiasts; being, at divers times, so filled with the Spirit, and so influenced by Him who dwelt in their hearts, that the exercise of their own reason, their senses, and all their natural faculties, being suspended, they were wholly actuated by the power of God, and "spake" only "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 9. Others take the word in an indifferent sense, such as is neither morally good nor evil: thus they speak of the enthusiasm of the poets; of Homer and Virgil in particular. And this a late eminent writer extends so far as to assert, there is no man excellent in his profession, whatsoever it be, who has not in his temper a strong tincture of enthusiasm. By enthusiasm these appear to understand, all uncommon vigour of thought, a peculiar fervour of spirit, a vivacity and strength not to be found in common men; elevating the soul to greater and higher things than cool reason could have attained. 10. But neither of these is the sense wherein the word "enthusiasm" is most usually understood. The generality of men, if no farther agreed, at least agree thus far concerning it, that it is something evil: and this is plainly the sentiment of all those who call the religion of the heart "enthusiasm." Accordingly, I shall take it in the following pages, as an evil; a misfortune, if not a fault.

11. As to the nature of enthusiasm, it is ,undoubtedly a disorder of the mind; and such a disorder as greatly hinders the exercise of reason. Nay, sometimes it wholly sets it aside: it not only dims but shuts the eyes of the understanding. It may, therefore, well be accounted a species of madness; of madness rather than of folly: seeing a fool is properly one who draws wrong conclusions from right premisses; whereas a madman draws right conclusions, but from wrong premisses. And so does an enthusiast suppose his premisses true, and his conclusions would necessarily follow. But here lies his mistake: his premisses are false. He imagines himself to be what he is not: and therefore, setting out wrong, the farther he goes, the more he wanders out of the way. 12. Every enthusiast, then, is properly a madman. Yet his is not an ordinary, but a religious, madness. By "religious," I do not mean, that it is any part of religion: quite the reverse. Religion is the spirit of a sound mind; and, consequently, stands in direct opposition to madness of every kind. But I mean, it has religion for its object; it is conversant about religion. And so the enthusiast is generally talking of religion, of God, or of the things of God, but talking in such a manner that every reasonable Christian may discern the disorder of his mind. Enthusiasm in general may then be described in some such manner as this: a religious madness arising from some falsely imagined influence or inspiration of God; at least, from imputing something to God which ought not to be imputed to Him, or expecting something from God which ought not to be expected from Him. 13. There are innumerable sorts of enthusiasm. Those which are most common, and for that reason most dangerous, I shall endeavour to reduce under a few general heads, that they may be more easily understood and avoided.

17. Ah poor self-deceivers! Christians ye are not. But you are enthusiasts in a high degree. Physicians, heal yourselves! But first know your disease: your whole life is enthusiasm; as being all suitable to the imagination, that you have received that grace of God which you have not. In consequence of this grand mistake, you blunder on, day by day, speaking and acting under a character which does in no wise belong to you. Hence arises that palpable, glaring inconsistency that runs through your whole behaviour; which is an awkward mixture of real Heathenism and imaginary Christianity. Yet still, as you have so vast a majority on your side, you will always carry it by mere dint of numbers, "that you are the only men in your senses, and all are lunatics who are not as you are." But this alters not the nature of things. In the sight of God, and His holy angels, yea, and all the children of God upon earth, you are mere madmen, mere enthusiasts all! Are you not Are you not "walking in a vain shadow, a shadow of religion, a shadow of happiness Are you not still "disquieting yourselves in vain" with misfortunes as imaginary as your happiness or religion Do you not fancy yourselves great or good -- very knowing and very wise How long Perhaps till death brings you back to your senses, to bewail your folly for ever and ever! 18. A second sort of enthusiasm is that of those who imagine they have such gifts from God as they have not. Thus some have imagined themselves to be endued with a power of working miracles, of healing the sick by a word or a touch, of restoring sight to the blind: yea, even of raising the dead -- a notorious instance of which is still fresh un our own history. Others have undertaken to prophesy, to foretell things to come, and that with the utmost certainty and exactness. But a little time usually convinces these enthusiasts. When plain facts run counter to their predictions, experience performs what reason could not, and sinks them down into their senses.

28. It may be expected that I should mention what some have accounted a Fourth sort of enthusiasm, namely, the imagining those things to be owing to the providence of God which are not owing thereto. But I doubt: I know not what things they are which are not owing to the providence of God; in ordering, or at least in governing, of which, this is not either directly or remotely concerned. I except nothing but sin; and even in the sins of others, I see the providence of God to me. I do not say His general providence; for this I take to be a sounding word. which means just nothing. And if there be a particular providence, it must extend to all persons and all things. So our Lord understood it, or He could never have said, "Even the hairs of your head are all numbered;" and, "Not a sparrow falleth to the ground without" the will of "your Father" which is in heaven. But if it be so, if God preside universis tanquam singulis, et singulis tanquam universis; "over the whole universe as over every single person, and over every single person as over the whole universe;" what is it (except only our own sins) which we are not to ascribe to the providence of God So that I cannot apprehend there is any room here for the charge of enthusiasm. 29. If it be said, the charge lies here: "When you impute this to Providence, you imagine yourself the peculiar favourite of heaven": I answer, you have forgot some of the last words I spoke: Praesidet universis tanquam singulis: "His providence is over all men in the universe, as much as over any single person." Do you not see that he who, believing this, imputes anything which befalls him to Providence, does not therein make himself any more the favourite of heaven, than he supposes every man under heaven to be Therefore you have no pretence, upon this ground, to charge him with enthusiasm.

The lowest circumstance we can understand thereby, is, he has no outward connexion with us. We do not labour in conjunction with each other. He is not our fellow-helper in the gospel. And indeed whensoever our Lord is pleased to send many labourers into his harvest, they cannot all act in subordination to, or connexion with, each other. Nay, they cannot be personal acquaintance with, nor be so much as known to, one another. Many there will necessarily be, in different parts of the harvest, so far from having any mutual intercourse, that they will be as absolute strangers to each other as if they had lived in different ages. And concerning any of these whom we know not, we may doubtless say, "He followeth not us." 2. A Second meaning of this expression may be, --he is not of our party. It has long been matter of melancholy consideration to all who pray for the peace of Jerusalem, that so many several parties are still subsisting among those who are all styled Christians. This has been particularly observable in our own countrymen, who have been continually dividing from each other, upon points of no moment, and many times such as religion had no concern in. The most trifling circumstances have given rise to different parties, which have continued for many generations; and each of these would be ready to object to one who was on the other side, "He followeth not us."

4. "Search me, O Lord, and prove me. Try out my reins and my heart! Look well if there be any way of" bigotry "in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." In order to examine ourselves thoroughly, let the case be proposed in the strongest manner. What, if I were to see a Papist, an Arian, a Socinian casting out devils If I did, I could not forbid even him, without convicting myself of bigotry. Yea, if it could be supposed that I should see a Jew, a Deist, or a Turk, doing the same, were I to forbid him either directly or indirectly, I should be no better than a bigot still. 5. O stand clear of this! But be not content with not forbidding any that casts out devils. It is well to go thus far; but do not stop here. If you will avoid all bigotry, go on. In every instance of this kind, whatever the instrument be, acknowledge the finger of God. And not only acknowledge, but rejoice in his work, and praise his name with thanksgiving. Encourage whomsoever God is pleased to employ, to give himself wholly up thereto. Speak well of him wheresoever you are; defend his character and his mission. Enlarge, as far as you can, his sphere of action; show him all kindness in word and deed; and cease not to cry to God in his behalf, that he may save both himself and them that hear him.

"Now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations." 1 Pet. 1:6. 1. In the preceding discourse I have particularly spoken of that darkness of mind into which those are often observed to fall who once walked in the light of God's countenance. Nearly related to this is the heaviness of soul which is still more common, even among believers. Indeed, almost all the children of God experience this, in an higher or lower degree. And so great is the resemblance between one and the other, that they are frequently confounded together; and we are apt to say, indifferently, "Such an one is in darkness," or "Such an one is in heaviness;" -- as if they were equivalent terms, one of which implied no more than the other. But they are far, very far from it. Darkness is one thing; heaviness is another. There is a difference, yea, a wide an essential difference, between the former and the latter. And such a difference it is as all the children of God are deeply concerned to understand: Otherwise nothing will be more easy than for them to slide out of heaviness into darkness. In order to prevent this, I will endeavor to show, I. What manner of persons those were to whom the Apostle says, "Ye are in heaviness." II. What kind of heaviness they were in: III. What were the causes: and, IV. What were the ends of it. I shall conclude with some inferences. I. 1. I am, in the first place, to show what manner of persons those were to whom the Apostle says, "Ye are in heaviness." And, first, it is beyond all dispute, that they were believers at the time the Apostle thus addressed them: For so he expressly says, (1 Pet. 1:5,) "Ye who are kept through the power of God by faith unto salvation." Again, (1 Pet. 1:7,) he mentions "the trial of their faith, much more precious than that of gold which perisheth." And yet again, (1 Pet. 1:9,) he speaks of their "receiving the end of their faith, the salvation of their souls." At the same time, therefore, that they were "in heaviness," they were possessed of living faith. Their heaviness did not destroy their faith: They still "endured, as seeing him that is invisible."

II. 2. Such was man, with regard to his corporeal part, as he came out of the hands of his Maker. But since he sinned, he is not only dust, but mortal, corruptible dust. And by sad experience we find, that this "corruptible body presses down the soul." It very frequently hinders the soul in its operations; and, at best, serves it very imperfectly. Yet the soul cannot dispense with its service, imperfect as it is: For an embodied spirit cannot form one thought but by the mediation of its bodily organs. For thinking is not, as many suppose, the act of a pure spirit; but the act of a spirit connected with a body, and playing upon a set of material keys. It cannot possibly, therefore, make any better music than the nature and state of its instruments allow it. Hence every disorder of the body, especially of the parts more immediately subservient to thinking, lay an almost insuperable bar in the way of its thinking justly. Hence the maxim received in all ages, Humanum est errare et nescire, -- "Not ignorance alone,' (that belongs, more or less, to every creature in heaven and earth; seeing none is omniscient, none knoweth all things, save the Creator,) "but error, is entailed on every child of man." Mistake, as well as ignorance, is, in our present state, inseparable from humanity. Every child of man is in a thousand mistakes, and is liable to fresh mistakes every moment. And a mistake in judgment may occasion a mistake in practice; yea, naturally leads thereto. I mistake, and possibly cannot avoid mistaking the character of this or that man. I suppose him to be what he is not; to be better or worse than he really is. Upon this wrong supposition I behave wrong to him; that is, more or less affectionately than he deserves. And by the mistake which is occasioned by the defect of my bodily organs I am naturally led so to do. Such is the present condition of human nature; of a mind dependent on a mortal body. Such is the state entailed on all human spirits, while connected with flesh and blood!

4. Every one, therefore, that has a soul to be saved, is entitled to this good office from thee. Yet this does not imply, that it is to be done in the same degree to everyone. It cannot be denied, that there are some to whom it is particularly due. Such, in the first place, are our parents, if we have any that stand in need of it; unless we should place our consorts and our children on an equal footing with them. Next to these we may rank our brothers and sisters, and afterwards our relations, as they are allied to us in a nearer or more distant manner, either by blood or by marriage. Immediately after these are our servants, whether bound to us for a term of years or any shorter term. Lastly, such in their several degrees are our countrymen, our fellow-citizens, and the members of the same society, whether civil or religious: The latter have a particular claim to our service; seeing these societies are formed with that very design, to watch over each other for this very end, that we may not suffer sin upon our brother. If we neglect to reprove any of these, when a fair opportunity offers, we are undoubtedly to be ranked among those that "hate their brother in their heart." And how severe is the sentence of the Apostle against those who fall under this condemnation! "He that hateth his brother," though it does not break out into words or actions, "is a murderer:" And ye know," continues the Apostle, "that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." He hath not that seed planted in his soul, which groweth up unto everlasting life: In other words, he is in such a state, that if he dies therein, he cannot see life. It plainly follows, that to neglect this is no small thing, but eminently endangers our final salvation. III. We have seen what is meant by reproving our brother, and who those are that we should reprove. But the principal thing remains to be considered. How, in what manner, are we to reprove them

13. But what means did the wisdom of God make use of in effecting this great work He thrust out such labourers into his harvest as the wisdom of man would never have thought on. He chose the weak things to confound the strong, and the foolish things to confound the wise. He chose a few young, poor, ignorant men, without experience, learning, or art; but simple of heart, devoted to God, full of faith and zeal, seeking no honour, no profit, no pleasure, no ease, but merely to save souls; fearing neither want, pain, persecution, nor whatever man could do unto them; yea, not counting their lives dear unto themselves, so they might finish their course with joy. Of the same spirit were the people whom God by their word called out of darkness into his marvellous light, many of whom soon agreed to join together, in order to strengthen each other's hands in God. These also were simple of heart, devoted to God, zealous of good works; desiring neither honour, nor riches, nor pleasure, nor ease, nor anything under the sun; but to attain the whole image of God, and to dwell with him in glory. 14. But as these young Preachers grew in years, they did not all grow in grace. Several of them indeed increased in other knowledge; but not proportionably in the knowledge of God. They grew less simple, less alive to God, and less devoted to him. They were less zealous for God; and, consequently, less active, less diligent in his service. Some of them began to desire the praise of men, and not the praise of God only; some to be weary of a wandering life, and so to seek ease and quietness. Some began again to fear the faces of men; to be ashamed of their calling; to be unwilling to deny themselves, to take up their cross daily, "and endure hardship as good soldiers of Jesus Christ." Wherever these Preachers laboured, there was not much fruit of their labours. Their word was not, as formerly, clothed with power: It carried with it no demonstration of the Spirit. The same faintness of spirit was in their private conversation. They were no longer "instant in season, out of season," "warning every man, and exhorting every man," "if by any means they might save some."

Beyond the bounds of this diurnal sphere O no! far from it! His dying words ought never to be forgotten. "Where are you going, Sir" said one of his friends. He answered, "I am taking a leap in the dark!" and died. Just such an evidence of the invisible world can bare reason give to the wisest of men! 5. Secondly. Reason alone cannot produce hope in any child of man: I mean scriptural hope, whereby we "rejoice in hope of the glory of God:" That hope which St. Paul in one place terms, "tasting the powers of the world to come;" in another, the "sitting in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:" That which enables us to say, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath begotten us again unto a lively hope; -- to an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away; which is reserved in heaven for us." This hope can only spring from Christian faith: Therefore, where there is not faith, there is not hope. Consequently, reason, being unable to produce faith, must be equally unable to produce hope. Experience confirms this likewise. How often have I laboured, and that with my might, to beget this hope in myself! But it was lost labour: I could no more acquire this hope of heaven, than I could touch heaven with my hand. And whoever of you makes the same attempt will find it attended with the same success. I do not deny, that a self-deceiving enthusiast may work in himself a kind of hope: He may work himself up into a lively imagination; into a sort of pleasing dream: He may "compass himself about, "as the Prophet speaks, "with sparks of his own kindling:" But this cannot be of long continuance; in a little while the bubble will surely break. And what will follow "This shall ye have at my hand, saith the Lord, ye shall lie down in sorrow."

2. Permit me to recite my own experience, in confirmation of this: -- I distinctly remember, that, even in my childhood, even when I was at school, I have often said, "They say the life of a schoolboy is the happiest in the world; but I am sure I am not happy; for I am not content, and so cannot be happy." When I had lived a few years longer, being in the vigour of youth, a stranger to pain and sickness, and particularly to lowness of spirits; (which I do not remember to have felt one quarter of an hour since I was born;) having plenty of all things, in the midst of sensible and amiable friends who loved me, and I loved them; and being in the way of life which, of all others, suited my inclinations; still I was not happy. I wondered why I was not, and could not imagine what the reason was. The reason certainly was, I did not know God; the Source of present as well as eternal happiness. What is a clear proof that I was not then happy is, that, upon the coolest reflection, I knew not one week which I would have thought it worth while to have lived over again; taking it with every inward and outward sensation, without any variation at all. 3. But a pious man affirms, "When I was young, I was happy; though I was utterly without God in the world." I do not believe you; Though I doubt not but you believe yourself. But you are deceived, as I have been over and over. Such is the condition of human life! Flowerets and myrtles fragrant seem to rise: All is at distance fair; but near at hand, The gay deceit mocks the desiring eyes With thorns, and desert heath, and barren sand. Look forward on any distant prospect: How beautiful does it appear! Come up to it; and the beauty vanishes away, and it is rough and disagreeable. Just so is life. But when the scene is past, it resumes its former appearance; and we seriously believe, that we were then very happy, though, in reality, we were far otherwise. For as none is now, so none ever was, happy, without the loving knowledge of the true God.

4. We may learn hence, Secondly, that this happy knowledge of the true God is only another name for religion; I mean Christian religion; which, indeed, is the only one that deserves the name. Religion, as to the nature or essence of it, does not lie in this or that set of notions, vulgarly called faith; nor in a round of duties, however carefully reformed from error and superstition. It does not consist in any number of outward actions. No: it properly and directly consists in the knowledge and love of God, as manifested in the Son of his love, through the eternal Spirit. And this naturally leads to every heavenly temper, and to every good word and work. 5. We learn hence, Thirdly, that none but a Christian is happy; none but a real inward Christian. A glutton, a drunkard, a gamester may be merry; but he cannot be happy. The beau, the belle, may eat and drink, and rise up to play; but still they feel they are not happy. Men or women may adorn their own dear persons with all the colours of the rainbow. They may dance, and sing, and hurry to and fro, and flutter hither and thither. They may roll up and down in their splendid carriages, and talk insipidly to each other. They may hasten from one diversion to another: But happiness is not there. They are still "walking in a vain shadow, and disquieting themselves in vain." One of their own poets has truly pronounced, concerning the whole life of these sons of pleasure, 'Tis a dull farce, and empty show: Powder, and pocket-glass, and beau. I cannot but observe of that fine writer, that he came near the mark, and yet fell short of it. In his "Solomon" (one of the noblest poems in the English tongue) he clearly shows where happiness is not; that it is not to be found in natural knowledge, in power, or in the pleasures of sense or imagination. But he does not show where it is to be found. He could not; for he did not know it himself. Yet he came near it when he said, Restore, Great Father, thy instructed son; And in my act may thy great will be done!

Yon ample, azure sky, Terribly large, and wonderfully bright, With stars unnumber'd, and unmeasured light 8. Beautiful objects are the next general source of the pleasures of the imagination: The works of nature in particular. So persons in all ages have been delighted With sylvan scenes, and hill and dale, And liquid lapse of murmuring streams. Others are pleased with adding art to nature; as in gardens, with their various ornaments: Others with mere works of art; as buildings, and representations of nature, whether in statues or paintings. Many likewise find pleasure in beautiful apparel, or furniture of various kinds. But novelty must be added to beauty, as well as grandeur, or it soon palls upon the sense. 9. Are we to refer to the head of beauty, the pleasure which many take in a favourite animal Suppose a sparrow, a parrot, a cat, a lap-dog Sometimes it may be owing to this. At other times, none but the person pleased can find any beauty at all in the favourite. Nay, perchance it is, in the eyes of all other persons, superlatively ugly. In this case, the pleasure seems to arise from mere whim or caprice; that is, madness. 10. Must we not refer to the head of novelty, chiefly, the pleasure found in most diversions and amusements; which were we to repeat them daily but a few months would be utterly flat and insipid To the same head we may refer the pleasure that is taken in collecting curiosities; whether they are natural or artificial, whether old or new. This sweetens the labour of the virtuoso, and makes all his labour light. 11. But it is not chiefly to novelty that we are to impute the pleasure we receive from music. Certainly this has an intrinsic beauty, as well as frequently an intrinsic grandeur. This is a beauty and grandeur of a peculiar kind, not easy to be expressed; nearly related to the sublime and the beautiful in poetry, which give an exquisite pleasure. And yet it may be allowed, that novelty heightens the pleasure which arises from any of these sources.

26. But allowing that "the friendship of the world is enmity against God," and consequently, that it is the most excellent way, indeed the only way to heaven, to avoid all intimacy with worldly men; yet who has resolution to walk therein who even of those that love or fear God for these only are concerned in the present question. A few I have known who, even in this respect, were lights in a benighted land; who did not and would not either contract or continue any acquaintance with persons of the most refined and improved understanding, and the most engaging tempers, merely because they were of the world, because they were not alive to God: Yea, though they were capable of improving them in knowledge, or of assisting them in business: Nay, though they admired and esteemed them for that very religion which they did not themselves experience: A case one would hardly think possible. but of which there are many instances at this day. Familiar intercourse even with these they steadily and resolutely refrain from, for conscience sake. 27. Go thou and do likewise, whosoever thou art that art a child of God by faith! Whatever it cost, flee spiritual adultery. Have no friendship with the world. However tempted thereto by profit or pleasure, contract no intimacy with worldly-minded men. And if thou hast contracted any such already, break it off without delay. Yea, if thy ungodly friend be dear to thee as a right eye, or useful as a right hand, yet confer not with flesh and blood, but pluck out the right eye, cut off the right hand, and cast them from thee! It is not an indifferent thing. Thy life is at stake; eternal life or eternal death. And is it not better to go into life having one eye or one hand, than having both to be cast into hell-fire When thou knewest no better, the times of ignorance God winked at. But now thine eyes are opened, now the light is come, walk in the light! Touch not pitch, lest thou be defiled. At all events, "keep thyself pure!"

13. Hitherto I have supposed that the persons with whom you converse are such as we use to call good sort of people; such as are styled, in the cant term of the day, men of worthy characters; -- one of the silly, insignificant words, that ever came into fashion. I have supposed them to be free from cursing, swearing, profaneness; from Sabbath-breaking and drunkenness; from lewdness, either in word or action; from dishonesty, lying, and slandering: In a word, to be entirely clear from open vice of every kind. Otherwise, whoever has even the fear of God must in any wise keep at a distance from them. But I am afraid I have made a supposition which hardly can be admitted. I am afraid, some of the persons with whom you converse more than business necessarily requires, do not deserve even the character of good sort of men, -- are not worthy of anything but shame and contempt. Do not some of them live in open sin -- in cursing and swearing, drunkenness, or uncleanness You cannot long be ignorant of this; for they take little pains to hide it. Now, is it not certain, all vice is of an infectious nature for who can touch pitch and not be defiled From these, therefore, you ought undoubtedly to flee as from the face of a serpent. Otherwise how soon may "evil communications corrupt good manners!" 14. I have supposed, likewise, that those unholy persons with whom you frequently converse have no desire to communicate their own spirit to you, or to induce you to follow their example. But this also is a supposition which can hardly be admitted. In many cases their interest may be advanced by your being a partaker of their sins. But supposing interest to be out of the question, does not every man naturally desire, and more or less endeavour, to bring over his acquaintance to his own opinion or party So that, as all good men desire and endeavour to make others good, like themselves, in like manner all bad men desire and endeavour to make their companions as bad as themselves.

4. Thus is God able to deliver out of temptation, by taking away the very ground of it. And he is equally able to deliver in the temptation; which, perhaps, is the greatest deliverance of all. I mean, suffering the occasion to remain as it was, he will take away the bitterness of it; so that it shall not be a temptation at all, but only an occasion of thanksgiving. How many proofs of this have the children of God, even in their daily experience! How frequently are they encompassed with trouble, or visited with pain or sickness! And when they cry unto the Lord, at some times he takes away the cup from them: He removes the trouble, or sickness, or pain; and it is as though it never had been: At other times he does not make any outward change; outward trouble, or pain, or sickness continues; but the consolations of the Holy One so increase, as to over-balance them all; and they can boldly declare, Labour is rest, and pain is sweet, When thou, my God, art near. 5. An eminent instance of this kind of deliverance is that which occurs in the Life of that excellent man, the Marquis de Renty. When he was in a violent fit of the rheumatism, a friend asked him, "Sir, are you in much pain" He answered, "My pains are extreme: But through the mercy of God, I give myself up, not to them, but to him." It was in the same spirit that my own father answered, though exhausted with a severe illness, (an ulcer in the bowels, which had given him little rest day or night, for upwards of seven months.) when I asked, "Sir, are you in pain now" He answered, with a strong and loud voice, "God does indeed chasten me with pain; yea, all my bones with strong pain. But I thank him for all; I bless him for all; I love him for all."

6. Meantime let us remember that God has joined these together in the experience of every believer; and therefore we must take care, not to imagine they are ever to be put asunder. We must beware of that mock humility which teacheth us to say, in excuse for our wilful disobedience, "O, I can do nothing!" and stops there, without once naming the grace of God. Pray, think twice. Consider what you say. I hope you wrong yourself; for if it be really true that you can do nothing, then you have no faith. And if you have not faith, you are in a wretched condition: You are not in a state of salvation. Surely it is not so. You can do something, through Christ strengthening you. Stir up the spark of grace which is now in you, and he will give you more grace. 7. Secondly, God worketh in you; therefore you must work: You must be "workers together with him," (they are the very words of the Apostle,) otherwise he will cease working. The general rule on which his gracious dispensations invariably proceed is this: "Unto him that hath shall be given; but from him that hath not," -- that does not improve the grace already given, -- "shall be taken away what he assuredly hath." (So the words ought to be rendered.) Even St. Augustine, who is generally supposed to favour the contrary doctrine, makes that just remark, Qui fecit nos sine nobis, non salvabit nos sine nobis: "He that made us without ourselves, will not save us without ourselves." He will not save us unless we "save ourselves from this untoward generation;" unless we ourselves "fight the good fight of faith, and lay hold on eternal life; "unless we "agonize to enter in at the strait gate," "deny ourselves, and take up our cross daily," and labour by every possible means to "make our own calling and election sure."

2. Diversions are of various kinds. Some are almost peculiar to men, as the sports of the field-hunting, shooting, fishing, wherein not many women (I should say, ladies) are concerned. Others are indifferently used by persons of both sexes; some of which are of a more public nature, as races, masquerades, plays, assemblies, balls. Others are chiefly used in private houses, as cards, dancing, and music; to which we may add the reading of plays, novels, romances, newspapers, and fashionable poetry. 3. Some diversions indeed which were formerly in great request, are now fallen into disrepute. The nobility and gentry (in England at least) seem totally to disregard the once fashionable diversion of hawking; and the vulgar themselves are no longer diverted by men hacking and hewing each other in pieces at broad-sword. The noble game of quarter-staff, likewise, is now exercised by very few. Yea, cudgelling has lost its honour, even in Wales itself. Bear-baiting also is now very seldom seen, and bull-baiting not very often. And it seems cock-fighting would totally cease in England, were it not for two or three right honourable patrons.

7. And here I beg- leave to mention a thought which has been long upon my mind, and which T should long ago have inserted in the public papers, had I not been unwilling to stir up a nest of hornets. Many gentlemen have done my brother and me (though without naming us) the honour to reprint many of our hymns. Now they are perfectly welcome so to do, provided they print them just as they are. But I desire, they would not attempt to mend them : for they really are not able. None of them is able to mend either the sense or the verse. Therefore, I must beg of them one of these two favours : either to let them stand just as they are, to take them for better for worse; or to add the true reading in the margin, or at the bottom of the page ; that we may no longer be accountable either for the nonsense or for the doggerel of other men. 8. But to return. That which is of infinitely more moment than the spirit of poetry, is the spirit of piety. And I trust, all persons of real judgment will find this breathing through the whole Collection. It is in this view chiefly, that I would -ecommend it to every truly pious reader, as a means of raising or quickening the spirit of devotion ; of confirmino" his faith ; of enlivening his hope ; and of kindling and increasing his love to God and man. When Poetry thus keeps its place, as the handmaid of Piety, it shall attain, not a poor perishable wreath, but a crown that fadeth not away. London, Oct. 20, 1779. JOHN WESLEY. N. B. The Additional Hymns at the end of this book, and a few others distinguished by the prefix of an asterisk, which are inserted in this edition, were not in the editions published during the life of Mr. Wesley. SECTION I. Exhorting Sinners to return to God II. Describing, 1. The Pleasantness of Religion 2. The Goodness of God 3. Death 4. Judgment 5. Heaven 6. Hell . 111. Praying for a Blessing SECTION I. Describing Formal Religion . II. Inward Religion . SECTION I. Praying for Repentance II. For Mourners convinced of Sin III. For Persons convinced of Backsliding IV. For Backsliders recovered

7 I do the thing thy laws enjoin, And then the strife give o'er ; To thee I then the whole resign ; 1 trust in means no more. 8 I trust in Him, who stands between The Father's wrath and me ; Jesu, thou great eternal Mean, I look for all from thee ! HYMN 93. s. m. 1 IV/f Y gracious, loving Lord, IV A Xo thee what shall I say ? Well may I tremble at thy word, And scarce presume to pray Ten thousand wants have I ; Alas ! I all things want; .But thou hast bid me always cry, And never, never faint. Describing Formal Religion. &o Yet, Lord, well might I fear, Fear even to ask thy grace ; So oft have I, alas ! drawn near, And mock'd thee to thy face : With all pollutions stain'd, Thy hallow' d courts I trod : Thy name and temple I profaned, And dared to call thee God ! 3 Nigh with my lips I drew ; My lips were all unclean : Thee with my heart I never knew ; My heart was full of sin : Far from the living Lord, As far as hell from heaven, Thy purity I still abhorr'd, Nor look'd to be forgiven. 4 My nature I obey'd : My own desires pursued ; And still a den of thieves I made The hallow'd house of God. The worship he approves To him 1 would not pay : My selfish ends, and creature-loves, Had stole my heart away. 5 My sin and nakedness I studied to disguise, Spoke to my soul a flattering peace, And put out my own eyes : In fig-leaves I appear'd, Nor with my form would part ; But still retain'd a conscience sear'd, A hard, deceitful heart. 6 A goodly, formal saint I long appear'd in sight : By self and Satan taught to paint My tomb, my nature, white. J4 Describing Formal Religion. The Pharisee within Still undisturb'd remained ; The strong man, ann'd with guilt of sin, Safe in his palace reign'd. 7 But O ! the jealous God In my behalf came down ; Jesus himself the stronger show'd, And claim'd me for his own. My spirit he alarm'd, And brought into distress ; He shook and bound the strong man arm'd, In his self-righteousness. 8 Faded my virtuous show,

My form without the power; The sin-convincing Spirit blew, And blasted every flower : My mouth was stopp'd, and shame Cover' d my guilty face : I fell on the atoning Lamb, And I was saved by grace. HYMN 94. ' c. m. 1 HPHE men who slight thy faithful word, *■ In their own lies confide, These are the temple of the Lord, , And Heathens all beside ! 2 The temple of the Lord are these, The only church and true, Who live in pomp, and wealth, and ease, And Jesus never knew. 3 O would'st thou, Lord, reveal their sins, And turn their joy to grief; The world, the Christian world, convince Of damning unbelief! 4 The formalists confound, convert, And to thy people join ; And break, and fill the broken heart With confidence divine ! Describing Inward Religion. HYMN 95. l. m. 1 A UTHOR of faith, eternal Word, -^ Whose Spirit breathes the active flame ; Faith, like its Finisher and Lord, To-day, as yesterday the same : 2 To thee our humble hearts aspire, And ask the gift unspeakable : Increase in us the kindled fire, In us the work of faith fulfil. 3 By faith we know thee strong to save : (Save us, a present Saviour thou !) Whate'er we hope, by faith we have, Future and past subsisting now. 4 To him that in thy name believes, Eternal life with thee is given ; Into himself he all receives, Pardon, and holiness, and heaven. 5 The things unknown to feeble sense, Unseen by reason's glimmering ray, With strong, commanding evidence, Their heavenly origin display. 6 Faith lends its realizing light, The clouds disperse, the shadows flv ; The' Invisible appears in sight, And God is seen by mortal eye. HYMN 96. s. m. OW can a sinner know His sins on earth forgiven ? How can my gracious Saviour show My name inscribed in heaven ? What we have felt and seen, With confidence we tell ; And publish to the sons of men The signs infallible. •vO Describing Inward Religion. 2 We who in Christ believe That he for us hath died, We all his unknown peace receive, And feel his blood applied ; Exults our rising soul, Disburden'd of her load, And swells unutterably full Of glory and of God. 3 His love, surpassing far

The love of all beneath, We find within our hearts, and dare The pointless darts of death. Stronger than death and hell, The mystic power we prove ; And, conquerors of the world, we dwell In heaven, who dwell in Love. 4 Wre by his Spirit prove And know the things of God, The things which freely of his love He hath on us bestow'd : His Spirit to us he gave, And dwells in us, we know : The witness in ourselves we have, And all its fruits we show. 5 The meek and lowly heart That in our Saviour was, To us his Spirit doth impart, And signs us with his cross : Our nature 's turn'd, our mind Transform'd in all its powers ; And both the Witnesses are join'd, The Spirit of God with ours. 6 Wrhate'er our pardoning Lord Commands, we gladly do ; And, guided by his sacred Word, We all his steps pursue : Describing Inward Religion. «^7 His glory our design, We live our God to please ; And rise, with filial fear divine, To perfect holiness. * HYMN 97. 8'* §• &s. 1 r I ^HOU great mysterious God unknown, -*- Whose love hath gently led me on, Even from my infant days ; Mine inmost soul expose to view, And tell me, if I ever knew Thy justifying grace. 2 If I have only known thy fear, And follow'd, with a heart sincere, Thy drawings from above ; Now, now the further grace bestow, And let my sprinkled conscience know Thy sweet forgiving love. 3 Short of thy love I would not stop, A stranger to the gospel hope, The sense of sin forgiven ; I would not, Lord, my soul deceive, Without the inward witness live, That antepast of heaven. 4 If now the witness were in me, Would he not testify of thee In Jesus reconciled ? And should I not with faith draw nigh, And boldly, Abba, Father, cry, And know myself thy child ? 5 Whate'er obstructs thy pardoning love, -- Or sin, or righteousness,-- remove, Thy glory to display ; Mine heart of unbelief convince, And now absolve me from my sins, And take them all away. <JO Praying for Repentance. 6 Father, in me reveal thy Son, And to my inmost soul make known

4 There for me the Savior stands, shows His wounds and spreads His hands. God is love! I know, I feel; Jesus weeps, but loves me still!

3 Thee may I set at my right hand, whose eyes mine in-most substance see, and labor on at Thy command, and offer all my works to Thee.

In vain Thou strugglest to get free, I never will unloose my hold! Art Thou the Man that died for me? The secret of Thy love unfold; Wrestling, I will not let Thee go, Till I Thy name, Thy nature know.

Wilt Thou not yet to me reveal Thy new, unutterable Name? Tell me, I still beseech Thee, tell; To know it now resolved I am; Wrestling, I will not let Thee go, Till I Thy Name, Thy nature know.

'Tis all in vain to hold Thy tongue Or touch the hollow of my thigh; Though every sinew be unstrung, Out of my arms Thou shalt not fly; Wrestling I will not let Thee go Till I Thy name, Thy nature know.

My strength is gone, my nature dies, I sink beneath Thy weighty hand, Faint to revive, and fall to rise; I fall, and yet by faith I stand; I stand and will not let Thee go Till I Thy Name, Thy nature know.

6. You should particularly endeavour to instruct your children, early, plainly, frequently, and patiently. Instruct them early, from the first hour that you perceive reason begins to dawn. Truth may then begin to shine upon the mind far earlier than we are apt to suppose. And whoever watches the first openings of the understanding, may, by little and little, supply fit matter for it to work upon, and may turn the eye of the son, toward good things, as well as toward bad or trifling ones. Whenever a child begins to speak, you may be assured reason begins to work. I know no cause why a parent should not just then begin to speak of the best things, the things of God. And from that time no opportunity should be lost, of instilling all truths as they are capable of receiving. 7. But the speaking to them early will not avail, unless you likewise speak to the plainly. Use such words as little children may understand, just such as they use themselves. Carefully observe the few ideas which they have already, and endeavour to graft what you say upon them. To take a little example: Bid the child look up; and ask. "What do you see there" "The sun." "See, how bright it is! Feel how warm it shines upon you hand! Look, how it makes the grass green! But God, though you cannot see him, is above the sky, and is a deal brighter than the sun! It is he, it is God that makes the grass and the flowers grow; that makes the trees green, and the fruit to come upon them! Think what he can do! He can do whatever he pleases. He can strike me or you dead in a moment! But he loves you; he loves to do you good. He loves to make you happy. Should not you then love him And he will teach you how to love him."

On The Education Of Children "Train up a child in the way wherein he should go: And when he is old, he will not depart from it." Prov. 22:6. 1. We must not imagine that these words are to be understood in an absolute sense, as if no child that had been trained up in the way wherein he should go had ever departed form it. Matter of fact will by not means agree with this: So far form it, that it has been a common observation, "Some of the best parents have the worst children." It is true, this might sometimes be the case, because good men have not always a good understanding; and, without this, it is hardly to be expected that they will know how to train up their children. Besides, those who are in other respects good men have often too much easiness of temper; so that they go no farther in restraining their children form evil, than an old Eli did, when he said gently, "Nay, my sons, the report I hear of you is not good." This, then, is no contradiction to the assertion; for their children are not "trained up in the way wherein they should go." But it must be acknowledged, some have been trained therein with all possible care and diligence; and yet before they were old, yea, in the strength of their years, they did utterly depart form it. 2. The words, then, must be understood with some limitation, and then they contain an unquestionable truth. It is a general, though not an universal, promise; and many have found the happy accomplishment of it. As this is the most probable method for making their children pious which any parents can take, so it generally, although not always, meets with the desired success. The God of their fathers is with their children; he blesses their endeavours; and they have the satisfaction of leaving their religion, as well as their worldly substance, to those that descend from them. 3. But what is "the way wherein a child should go" and how shall we "train him up" therein The ground of this is admirably well laid by Mr. Law, in his "Serious Call to a Devout Life." Part of his words are, --

8. The next disease natural to every human soul, born with every man, is love of the world. Every man is, by nature, a lover of the creature, instead of the Creator; a "lover of pleasure," in every kind, "more than a lover of God." He is a slave to foolish and hurtful desires, in one kind or another; either to the "desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes or the pride of life." "The desire of the flesh" is a propensity to seek happiness in what gratifies one or more of the outward senses. "The desire of the eyes" is a propensity to seek happiness in what gratifies internal sense, the imagination, either by things grand, or new, or beautiful. "The pride of life" seems to mean a propensity to seek happiness in what gratifies the sense of honour. To this head is usually referred "the love of money;" one of the basest passions that can have place in the human heart. But it may be doubted whether this be not an acquired rather than a natural, distemper. 9. Whether this be a natural disease or not, it is certain anger is. The ancient philosopher defines it, "a sense of injury received, with a desire of revenge." Now, was there ever anyone born of a woman who did not labour under this Indeed, like other diseases of the mind, it is far more violent in some than in others. But it is furor brevis, as the poet speaks; it is a real, though short, madness wherever it is. 10. A deviation from truth is equally natural to all the children of men. One said in his haste, "All men are liars;" but we may say, upon cool reflection, All natural men will, upon a close temptation, vary from, or disguise, the truth. If they do not offend against veracity, if they do not say what is false, yet they frequently offend against simplicity. They use art; they hang out false colours; they practise either simulation, or dissimulation. So that you cannot say truly of any person living, till grace has altered nature, "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!"

20. In direct opposition to all this, a wise and truly kind parent will take the utmost care, not to cherish in her children the desire of the flesh; their natural propensity to seek happiness in gratifying the outward senses. With this view she will suffer them to taste no food but milk, till they are weaned; which a thousand experiments show is most safely and easily done at the end of the seventh month. And then accustom them to the most simple food, chiefly of vegetables. She may inure them to taste only one kind of food, beside bread, at dinner, and constantly to breakfast and sup on milk, either cold or heated, but not boiled. She may use them to sit by her at meals; and ask for nothing, but take what is given them. She need never, till they are at least nine or ten years old, let them know the taste of tea; or use any other drink at meals but water or small beer. And they will never desire to taste either meat or drink between meals, if not accustomed thereto. If fruit, comfits, or anything of the kind be given them, let them not touch it but at meals. And never propose any of these as a reward; but teach them to look higher than this. But herein a difficulty will arise; which it will need much resolution to conquer. Your servants, who will not understand your plan, will be continually giving little things to your children, and thereby undoing all your work. This you must prevent, if possible, by warning them when they first come into your house, and repeating the warning from time to time. If they will do it notwithstanding, you must turn them away. Better lose a good servant than spoil a good child.

7. It is with admirable wisdom that the Father of spirits has given this direction, that as the strength of the parents supplies the want of strength, and the understanding of the parents the want of understanding, in their children, till they have strength and understanding of their own; so the will of the parents may [should] guide that of their children till they have wisdom and experience to guide themselves. This, therefore, is the very first thing which children have to learn, -- that they are to obey their parents, to submit to their will, in all things. And this they may be inured to, long before they understand the reason of it; and, indeed, long before they are capable of understanding any of the principles of religion. Accordingly, St. Paul directs all parents to bring up their children "in the discipline and doctrine of the Lord." For their will may be broken by proper discipline, even in their early infancy; whereas it must be a considerable time after, before they are capable of instruction. This, therefore, is the first point of all: Bow down their wills from the very first dawn of reason; and, by habituating them to submit to your will, prepare them for submitting to the will of their Father which is in heaven.

10. I cannot tell how to enforce this point sufficiently. To fix it upon your minds more strongly, permit me to add part of a letter on the subject, printed some years ago: -- "In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is to conquer their will. To inform their understanding is a work of time, and must proceed by slow degrees; but the subjecting the will is a thing which must be done at once; and the sooner the better. For by our neglecting timely correction they contract a stubbornness which is hardly ever to be conquered, and never without using that severity which would be as painful to us as to the children. Therefore, I call those cruel parents who pass for kind and indulgent; who permit their children to contract habits which they know must be afterwards broken. "I insist upon conquering the wills of children betimes; because this is the only foundation for a religious education. When this is thoroughly done, then a child is capable of being governed by the reason of its parent, till its own understanding comes to maturity. "I cannot yet dismiss this subject. As self-will is the root of all sin and misery, so whatever cherishes this in children, ensures their after-wretchedness and irreligion; and whatever checks and mortifies it, promotes their future happiness and piety. This is still more evident if we consider that religion is nothing else but the doing the will of God, and not our own; and that self-will being the grand impediment to our temporal and eternal happiness, no indulgence of it can be trivial; no denial of it unprofitable. Heaven or hell depends on this alone. So that the parent who studies to subdue it in his children, works together with God in the saving of a soul. The parent who indulges it does the devil's work, makes religion impracticable, salvation unattainable; and does all that in him lies to damn his child, soul and body, for ever!

6. Permit me now to apply myself to you, children; particularly you that are the children of religious parents. Indeed if you have no fear of God before your eyes,"I have no concern with you at present; but if you have, if you really fear God, and have a desire to please him, you desire to understand all his commandments, the fifth in particular. Did you ever understand it yet Do you now understand what is your duty to your father and mother Do you know, at least do you consider, that by the divine appointment their will is law to you Have you ever considered the extent of that obedience to your parents which God requires "Children, obey your parents in all things." No exception, but of things unlawful. Have you practised your duty in this extent Did you ever so much as intend it 7. Deal faithfully with your own souls. Is your conscience now clear in this matter Do you do nothing which you know to be contrary to the will either of your father or mother Do you never do anything (though ever so much inclined to it) which he or she forbids Do you abstain from everything which they dislike, as far as you can in conscience On the other hand, are you careful to do whatever a parent bids Do you study and contrive how to please them, to make their lives as easy and pleasant as you can Whoever you are that add this to your general care to please God in all things, blessed art thou of the Lord! "Thy days shall be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee."

On Obedience To Pastors "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: For they watch over your souls, as they that shall give account, that they may do this with joy, and not with grief: For that is unprofitable for you." Heb. 13:17. 1. Exceeding few, not only among nominal Christians, but among truly religious men, have any clear conception of that important doctrine which is here delivered by the Apostle. Very many scarce think of it, and hardly know that there is any such direction in the Bible. And the greater part of those who know it is there, and imagine they follow it, do not understand it, but lean too much either to the right hand or to the left, to one extreme or the other. It is well known to what an extravagant height the Romanists in general carry this direction. Many of them believe an implicit faith is due to the doctrines delivered by those that rule over them, and that implicit obedience ought to be paid to whatever commands they give: And not much less has been insisted on by several eminent men of the Church of England: Although it is true that the generality of Protestants are apt to run to the other extreme, allowing their Pastors no authority at all, but making them both the creatures and the servants of their congregations. And very many there are of our own Church who agree with them herein; supposing the Pastors to be altogether dependent upon the people, who in their judgment have a right to direct as well as to choose their Ministers. 2. But is it not possible to find a medium between these two extremes Is there any necessity for us to run either into one or into the other If we set human laws out of the question, and simply attend to the oracles of God, we may certainly discover a middle path in this important matter In order thereto, let us carefully examine the words of the Apostle above recited. Let us consider, I. Who are the persons mentioned in the text, they "that rule over" us II. Who are they whom the Apostle, directs to "obey and submit themselves" to them

4. But we may bring this matter to a short issue by recurring to the very words of the text. They that have voluntarily connected themselves with such a pastor as answers the description given therein; such as do in fact, "watch over their souls, as they that shall give account;" such as do "nourish them up with the words of eternal life;" such as feed them as with the "pure milk of the word," and constantly apply it to them "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness;" -- all who have found and chosen guides of this character, of this spirit and behaviour, are undoubtedly required by the Apostle to "obey and submit themselves" to them. III. 1. But what is the meaning of this direction This remains to be considered. In what sense, and how far, does the Apostle direct them to "obey and submit" to their spiritual guides If we attend to the proper sense of the two words here used by the Apostle, we may observe that the former of them peiqesqe, (from peiqv to persuade) refers to the understanding, the latter, upeikete to the will, and outward behaviour. To begin with the former. What influence ought our spiritual guides to have over our understanding! We dare no more call our spiritual fathers Rabbi, than the "fathers of our flesh." We dare no more yield implicit faith to the former than to the latter. In this sense "one is our Master," (or rather Teacher,) "who is in heaven." But whatever submission, of even our understanding, is short of this, we may, nay, we ought to yield to them. 2. To explain this a little farther. St. James uses a word which is nearly allied to the former of these: "The wisdom which is from above is, eupeiqhs, easy to be convinced, or to be persuaded." Now, if we ought to have and to show this wisdom toward all men, we ought to have it in a more eminent degree, and to show it upon every occasion, toward those that "watch over our souls." With regard to these, above all other men, we should be "easy to be entreated;" easily convinced of any truth, and easily persuaded to anything that is not sinful.

But is it easy for anyone to conceive a scene of deeper distress than this Suppose you are standing by, just when the messenger comes in, and the message is delivered, "I am sorry to tell you, but you must know it; your husband is no more! He was making haste out of the vessel, and his foot slipped. It is true, after a time, his body was found; but there it lies, without any signs of life." In what a condition are now both the mother and the children! Perhaps, for a while, stupid, overwhelmed, silent; staring at each other; then bursting out into loud and bitter lamentation! Now is the time to help them, by assisting those who make it their business so to do. Now let nothing hinder you from improving the glorious opportunity! Restore the husband to his disconsolate wife, the father to his weeping children! It is true, you cannot do this in person; you cannot be upon the spot. But you may do it in an effectual manner by assisting those that are. You may now, by your generous contribution, send them the help which you cannot personally give. O shut not up your bowels of compassion towards them! Now open your hearts and your hands! If you have much, give plenteously; if not, give a little, with a willing mind. 2. To you who believe the Christian Revelation, I may speak in a still stronger manner. You believe, your blessed Master "left you an example, that you might tread in his steps." Now, you know his whole life was one labour of love. You know "how he went about doing good," and that without intermission; declaring to all, "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." Is not that, then, the language of your heart -- Thy mind throughout my life be shown, While list'ning to the wretches' cry, The widows' and the orphans' groan, On mercy's wings I swiftly fly, The poor and helpless to relieve, My life, my all, for them to give.

were, First, making love, in the grossest sense, to all the married women whom he conveniently could. (Single women he advises him to refrain from, for fear of disagreeable consequences). Secondly. Constant and careful dissimulation; always wearing a mask; trusting no man upon earth, so as to let him know his real thoughts, but perpetually seeming to mean what he did not mean, and seeming to be what he was not. Thirdly. Well-devised lying to all sorts of people; speaking what was farthest from his heart; and in particular, flattering men, women, and children, as the infallible way of pleasing them. It needs no great art to show, that this is not the way to please our neighbour for his good, or to edification. I shall endeavour to show, that there is a better way of doing it; and indeed a way diametrically opposite to this. It consists, I. In removing hindrances out of the way; and II. In using the means that directly tend to this end. I. 1. I advise all that desire to "please their neighbour for his good to edification," First, to remove all hindrances out of the way; or, in other words, to avoid everything which tends to displease wise and good men, men of sound understanding and real piety. Now "cruelty, malice, envy, hatred, and revenge" are displeasing to all good men, to all who are endued with sound understanding and genuine piety. There is likewise another temper related to these, only in a lower kind, and which is usually found in common life, wherewith men in general are not pleased. We commonly call it ill-nature. With all possible care avoid all these; nay, and whatever bears any resemblance to them, -- as sourness, sternness, sullenness, on the one hand; peevishness and fretfulness, on the other, -- if ever you hope to "please your neighbour for his good to edification."

5. Shall we endeavour to go a little deeper, to search into the foundation of this matter What is the source of that desire to please which we term courtesy Let us look attentively into our heart, and we shall soon find the answer. The same Apostle that teaches us to be courteous, teaches us to honour all men; and his Master teaches me to love all men. Join these together, and what will be the effect A poor wretch cries to me for an alms: I look and see him covered with dirt and rags. But through these I see one that has an immortal spirit, made to know and love and dwell with God to eternity. I honour him for his Creator's sake. Lo, I see through all these rags that he is purpled over with the blood of Christ. I love him for the sake of his Redeemer. The courtesy, therefore, which I feel and show toward him is a mixture of the honour and love which I bear to the offspring of God; the purchase of his Son's blood, and the candidate for immortality. This courtesy let us feel and show toward all men; and we shall please all men to their edification. 6. Once more. Take all proper opportunities of declaring to others the affection which you really feel for them. This may be done with such an air, and in such a manner, as is not liable to the imputation of flattery: And experience shows, that honest men are pleased by this, full as much as knaves are by flattery. Those who are persuaded that your expressions of good-will toward them are the language of your heart will be as well satisfied with them, as with the highest encomiums which you could pass upon them. You may judge them by yourselves, by what you feel in your own breast. You like to be honoured; but had you not rather be beloved

22. It has been particularly shown, First, that unworthiness is no excuse; because though in one sense we are all unworthy, yet none of us need be afraid of being unworthy in St. Paul's sense, of "eating and drinking unworthily." Secondly, that the not having time enough for preparation can be no excuse; since the only preparation which is absolutely necessary, is that which no business can hinder, nor indeed anything on earth, unless so far as it hinders our being in a state of salvation. Thirdly, that its abating our reverence is no excuse; since he who gave the command, "Do this," nowhere adds, "unless it abates your reverence." Fourthly, that our not profiting by it is no excuse; since it is our own fault, in neglecting that necessary preparation which is in our own power. Lastly, that the judgment of our own Church is quite in favour of constant communion. If those who have hitherto neglected it on any of these pretences, will lay these things to heart, they will, by the grace of God, come to a better mind, and never forsake their own mercies.

7. But that the generality of men were not one jot wiser in ancient times than they are at the present time we may easily gather from the most authentic records. One of the most ancient nations concerning whom we have any certain account is the Egyptian. And what conception can we have of their understanding and learning when we reflect upon the objects of their worship These were not only the vilest of animals, as dogs and cats, but the leeks and onions that grew in their own gardens. Indeed, I knew a great man (whose manner was to treat with the foulest abuse all that dared to differ from him: I do not mean Dr. Johnson -- he was a mere courtier compared to Mr. Hutchinson) who scurrilously abused all those who are so void of common sense as to believe any such thing concerning them. He peremptorily affirms, (but without condescending to give us any proof,) that the ancient inhabitants of Egypt had a deep hidden meaning in all this. Let him believe it who can. I cannot believe it on any man bare assertion. I believe they had no deeper meaning in worshipping cats than our schoolboys have in baiting them. And I apprehend, the common Egyptians were just as wise three thousand years ago as the common ploughmen in England and Wales are at this day. I suppose their natural understanding like their stature, was on a level with ours, and their learning, their acquired knowledge, many degrees inferior to that of persons of the same rank either in France, Holland, or Germany. 8. However, did not the people of former times greatly excel us in virtue This is the point of greatest importance; -- the rest are but trifles in comparison of it. Now, is it not universally allowed, that every age grows worse and worse Was it not observed by the old heathen poet, almost two thousand years ago, -- Aetas parentum pejor avis tulit Nos nequiores, mox daturos Progeniem vitiosiorem That is, in plain prose, "The age of our parents was more vicious -- than that of our grandfathers; our age is more vicious than that of our fathers; we are worse than our fathers were, and our children will be worse than us."

10. But let us endeavour, without prejudice or prepossession, to take a view of the whole affair. And, upon cool and impartial consideration, it will appear that the former days were not better than these; yea, on the contrary, that these are, in many respects, beyond comparison better than them. It will clearly appear, that as the stature of men was nearly the same from the beginning of the world, so the understanding of men, in similar circumstances, has been much the same, from the time of God's bringing a flood upon the earth unto the present hour. We have no reason to believe that the uncivilized nations of Africa, America, or the South-Sea Islands, had ever a better understanding, or were in a less barbarous state than they are now. Neither, on the other hand, have we any sufficient proof that the natural understandings of men in the most civilized countries, -- Babylon, Persia, Greece, or Italy, -- were stronger or more improved, than those of the Germans, French, or English, now alive. Nay, have we not reason to believe, that, by means of better instruments, we have attained that knowledge of nature which few, if any, of the ancients ever attained So that, in this respect, the advantage (and not a little one is clearly on our side: And we ought to acknowledge, with deep thankfulness to the Giver of every good gift, that the former days were not to be compared to these wherein we live. 11. But the principal inquiry still remains: Were not "the former days better than these," with regard to virtue or, to speak more properly, religion This deserves a full consideration. By religion I mean the love of God and man filling the heart and governing the life. The sure effect of this is, the uniform practice of justice, mercy, and truth. This is the very essence of it; the height and depth of religion, detached from this or that opinion, and from all particular modes of worship. And I would calmly inquire, "Which of the former times were better than these, with regard to this to the religion experienced and practised by Archbishop Fenelon, in France; Bishop Ken, in England; and Bishop Bedell, in Ireland'

17. And all this being allowed, what lack they yet Can anything be laid to their charge I wish calmly and candidly to consider this point, in the fear and in the presence of God. I am far from desiring to aggravate the defects of my brethren, or to paint them in the strongest colours. Far be it from me to treat others as I have been treated myself; to return evil for evil, or railing for railing. But, to speak the naked truth, (not with anger or contempt, as too many have done,) I acknowledge that many, if not most, of those that were appointed to minister in holy things, with whom it has been my lot to converse in almost every part of England or Ireland, for forty of fifty years last past, have not been eminent either for knowledge or piety. It has been loudly affirmed, that most of those persons now in connexion with me, who believe it their duty to call sinners to repentance, having been taken immediately from low trades, -- tailors, shoemakers, and the like, -- are a set of poor, stupid, illiterate men, that scarce know their right hand from their left: Yet I cannot but say, that I would sooner cut off my right hand, than suffer one of them to speak a word in any of our chapels, if I had not reasonable proof that he had more knowledge in the Holy Scriptures, more knowledge of himself, more knowledge of God and of the things of God, than nine in ten of the Clergymen I have conversed with, either at the Universities or elsewhere.

31. Another consequence would follow from the supposition that no grace is conveyed by wicked Ministers; namely, that a conscientious person cannot be a member of any national Church in the world. For wherever he is, it is great odds, whether a holy Minister he stationed there; and if there be not, it is mere lost labour to worship in that congregation. But, blessed be God, this is not the case; we know by our own happy experience, and by the experience of thousands, that the word of the Lord is not bound, though uttered by an unholy minister; and the sacraments are not dry breasts, whether he that administers be holy or unholy. 32. Consider one more consequence of this supposition, should it ever be generally received. Were all men to separate from those Churches where the Minister was an unholy man, (as they ought to do, if the grace of God never did nor could attend his ministry,) what confusion, what tumults, what commotions would this occasion throughout Christendom! What evil-surmisings, heart-burnings, jealousies, envyings, must everywhere arise! What censuring, tale-bearing, strife, contention! Neither would it stop here; but from evil words the contending parties would soon proceed to evil deeds; and rivers of blood would soon be shed, to the utter scandal of Mahometans and Heathens.

On Conscience "For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience." 2 Cor. 1:12. 1. How few words are there in the world more common than this, Conscience! It is in almost every one's mouth. And one would thence be apt to conclude, that no word can be found which is more generally understood. But it may be doubted whether this is the case or no; although numberless treatises have been written upon it. For it is certain, a great part of those writers have rather puzzled the cause than cleared it; that they have usually "darkened counsel by uttering words without knowledge." 2. The best treatise on the subject which I remember to have seen is translated from the French of Mons. Placette, which describes in a clear and rational manner the nature and offices of conscience. But though it was published near a hundred years ago, it is in very few hands; and indeed a great part of those that have read it complain of the length of it. An octavo volume of several hundred pages, upon so plain a subject, was likely to prove a trial of patience to most persons of understanding. It seems, therefore, there is still wanting a discourse upon the subject, short, as well as clear. This, by the assistance of God, I will endeavor to supply, by showing, First, the nature of conscience; and, Then, the several sorts of it; after which, I shall conclude with a few important directions.

4. Can it be denied that something of this is found in every man born into the world And does it not appear as soon as the understanding opens, as soon as reason begins to dawn Does not every one then begin to know that there is a difference between good and evil; how imperfect soever the various circumstances of this sense of good and evil my be Does not every man, for instance, know, unless blinded by the prejudices of education, (like the inhabitants of the Cape of Good Hope,) that it is good to honour his parents Do not all men, however uneducated or barbarous, allow, it is right to do to others as we would have them do to us And are not all who know this condemned in their own mind when they do anything contrary thereto as, on the other hand, when they act suitable thereto, they have the approbation of their own conscience 5. This faculty seems to be what is usually meant by those who speak of natural conscience; an expression frequently found is some of our best authors, but yet not strictly just. For though in one sense it may be termed natural, because it is found in all men; yet, properly speaking, it is not natural, but a supernatural gift of God, above all his natural endowments No; it is not nature, but the Son of God, that is "the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world." So that we may say to every human creature, "He," not nature, "hath showed thee, O man, what is good." And it is his Spirit who giveth thee an inward check, who causeth thee to feel uneasy, when thou walkest in any instance contrary to the light which he hath given thee.

On God's Vineyard "What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes" Isa. 5:4. The vineyard of the Lord, taking the word in its widest sense, may include the whole world. All the inhabitants of the earth may, in some sense, be called "the vineyard of the Lord;" "who hath made all nations of men, to dwell on all the face of the earth; that they might seek the Lord, if haply they may feel after him, and find him." But, in a narrower sense, the vineyard of the Lord may mean the Christian world; that is, all that name the name of Christ, and profess to obey his word. In a still narrower sense, it may be understood of what is termed the Reformed part of the Christian Church. In the narrowest of all, one may, by that phrase, "the vineyard of the Lord," mean, the body of people commonly called Methodists. In this sense I understand it now, meaning thereby that society only which began at Oxford in the year 1729, and remain united at this day. Understanding the word in this sense, I repeat the question which God proposes to the Prophet: "What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes" What could God have done more in this his vineyard, (suppose he had designed it should put forth great branches and spread over the earth,) which he hath not done in it, I. With regard to doctrine II. With regard to spiritual helps III. With regard to discipline And, IV. With regard to outward protection These things being considered, I would then briefly inquire, "Wherefore, when he looked it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes"

6. They know, indeed, that at the same time a man is justified, sanctification properly begins. For when he is justified, he is "born again," "born from above," "born of the Spirit;" which, although it is not (as some suppose) the whole process of sanctification, is doubtless the gate of it. Of this, likewise, God has given them a full view. They know, the new birth implies as great a change in the soul, in him that is "born of the Spirit," as was wrought in his body when he was born of a woman: Not an outward change only, as from drunkenness to sobriety, from robbery or theft to honesty; (this is the poor, dry, miserable conceit of those that know nothing of real religion;) but an inward change from all unholy, to all holy tempers, -- from pride to humility, from passionateness to meekness, from peevishness and discontent to patience and resignation; in a word, from an earthly, sensual, devilish mind, to the mind that was in Christ Jesus. 7. It is true, a late very eminent author, in his strange "Treatise on Regeneration," proceeds entirely on the supposition, that it is the whole gradual progress of sanctification. No; it is only the threshold of sanctification, the first entrance upon it. And as, in the natural birth, a man is born at once, and then grows larger and stronger by degrees; so in the spiritual birth, a man is born at once, and then gradually increases in spiritual stature and strength. The new birth, therefore, is the first point of sanctification, which may increase more and more unto the perfect day. 8. It is, then, a great blessing given to this people, that as they do not think or speak of justification so as to supersede sanctification, so neither do they think or speak of sanctification so as to supersede justification. They take care to keep each in its own place, laying equal stress on one and the other. They know God has joined these together, and it is not for man to put them asunder: Therefore they maintain, with equal zeal and diligence, the doctrine of free, full, present justification, on the one hand, and of entire sanctification both of heart and life, on the other; being as tenacious of inward holiness as any Mystic, and of outward, as any Pharisee.

10. Touching this important point, of denying ourselves, and taking up our cross daily, let us appeal to matter of fact; let us appeal to every man's conscience in the sight of God. How many rich men are there among the Methodists (observe, there was not one, when they were first joined together) who actually do "deny themselves and take up their cross daily" who resolutely abstain from every pleasure, either of sense or imagination, unless they know by experience that it prepares them for taking pleasure in God Who declines no cross, no labour or pain, which lies in the way of his duty Who of you that are now rich, deny yourselves just as you did when you were poor Who as willingly endure labour or pain now, as you did when you were not worth five pounds Come to particulars. Do you fast now as often as you did then Do you rise as early in the morning Do you endure cold or heat, wind or rain, as cheerfully as ever See one reason among many, why so few increase in goods, without decreasing in grace! Because they no longer deny themselves and take up their daily cross. They no longer, alas! endure hardship, as good soldiers of Jesus Christ!

4. Without this spring of life, this vital fire, there could be no circulation of the blood; consequently, no motion of any of the fluids, of the nervous fluid in particular (if it be not rather, as is highly probable, this very fire we are speaking of). Therefore there could not be any sensation, nor any muscular motion. I say, there could be no circulation; for the cause usually assigned for this, namely, the force of the heart, is altogether inadequate to the supposed effect. No one supposes the force of the heart, in a strong man, to be more than equal to the weight of three thousand pounds. Whereas it would require a force equal to the weight of a hundred thousand pounds, to propel the blood from the heart through all the arteries. This can only be effected by the ethereal fire contained in the blood itself, assisted by the elastic force of the arteries through which it circulates. 5. But beside this strange compound of the four elements, -- earth, water, air, and fire, -- I find something in me of a quite different nature, nothing akin to any of these. I find something in me that thinks; which neither earth, water, air, fire, nor any mixture of them, can possibly do: Something which sees, and hears, and smells, and tastes, and feels; all which are so many modes of thinking. It goes farther: Having perceived objects by any of these senses, it forms inward ideas of them. It judges concerning them; it sees whether they agree or disagree with each other. It reasons concerning them: that is, infers one proposition from another. It reflects upon its own operations; it is endued with) imagination and memory; and any of its operations, judgment in particular, may he subdivided into many others.

6. But by what means shall I learn in what part of my body this thinking principle is lodged Some eminent men have affirmed, that it is "all in all, and all in every part." But I learn nothing from this: They seem to be words that have no determinate meaning. Let us then appeal, in the best manner we can, to our own experience. From this I learn, that this thinking principle is not lodged in my hands, or feet, or legs, or arms. It is not lodged in the trunk of my body. Any one may be assured of this by a little reflection. I cannot conceive that it is situated in my bones, or in any part of my flesh. So far as I can judge, it seems to be situated in some part of my head; but whether in the pineal gland, or in any part of the brain, I am not able to determine. 7. But farther: This inward principle, wherever it is lodged, is capable, not only of thinking, but likewise of love, hatred, joy, sorrow, desire, fear, hope, &c., and a whole train of other inward emotions, which are commonly called passions or affections They are styled, by a general appellation, the will; and are mixed and diversified a thousand ways. And they seem to be the only spring of action in that inward principle I call the soul. 8. But what is my soul It is an important question, and not easy to be resolved. Hear'st thou submissive, but a lowly birth, Some separate particles of finer earth A plain effect which nature must beget, As motion dictates, and as atoms meet

On Discoveries Of Faith "Now faith is the evidence of things not seen." Heb. 11:1. 1. For many ages it has been allowed by sensible men, Nihil est in intellectu quod non fuit prius in sensu: That is, "There is nothing in the understanding which was not first perceived by some of the senses." All the knowledge which we naturally have is originally derived from our senses. And therefore those who want any sense cannot have the least knowledge or idea of the objects of that sense; as they that never had sight have not the least knowledge or conception of light or colours. Some indeed have of late years endeavoured to prove that we have innate ideas, not derived from any of the senses, but coeval with the understanding. But this point has been now thoroughly discussed by men of the most eminent sense and learning. And it is agreed by all impartial persons that, although some things are so plain and obvious that we can very hardly avoid knowing them as soon as we come to the use of our understanding, yet the knowledge even of these is not innate, but derived from some of our senses. 2. But there is a great difference between our senses, considered as the avenues of our knowledge. Some of them have a very narrow sphere of action, some a more extensive one. By feeling we discern only those objects that touch some part of our body; and consequently this sense extends only to a small number of objects. Our senses of taste and smell (which some count species of feeling) extend to fewer still. But on the other hand our nobler sense of hearing has an exceeding wide sphere of action; especially in the case of loud sounds, as thunder, the roaring of the sea, or the discharge of cannon; the last of which sounds has been frequently heard at the distance of near an hundred miles. Yet the space to which the hearing itself extends is small, compared to that through which the sight extends. The sight takes in at one view, not only the most unbounded prospects on earth, but also the moon, and the other planets, the sun, yea, the fixed stars; though at such an immeasurable distance, that they appear no larger through our finest telescopes than they do to the naked eye.

3. But still none of our senses, no, not the sight itself, can reach beyond the bounds of this visible world. They supply us with such knowledge of the material world as answers all the purposes of life. But as this was the design for which they were given, beyond this they cannot go. They furnish us with no information at all concerning the invisible world. 4. But the wise and gracious Governor of the worlds, both visible and invisible, has prepared a remedy for this defect. He hath appointed faith to supply the defect of sense; to take us up where sense sets us down, and help us over the great gulf. Its office begins where that of sense ends. Sense is an evidence of things that are seen; of the visible, the material world, and the several parts of it. Faith, on the other hand, is the "evidence of things not seen;" of the invisible world; of all those invisible things which are revealed in the oracles of God. But indeed they reveal nothing, they are a mere dead letter, if they are "not mixed with faith in those that hear them." 5. In particular, faith is an evidence to me of the existence of that unseen thing, my own soul. Without this I should be in utter uncertainty concerning it. I should be constrained to ask that melancholy question, Hear'st thou submissive; but a lowly birth, Some separate particles of finer earth But by faith I know it is an immortal spirit, made in the image of God; in his natural and his moral image; "an incorruptible picture of the God of glory." By the same evidence I know that I am now fallen short of the glorious image of God; yea, that I, as well as all mankind, am "dead in trespasses and sins:" So utterly dead, that "in me dwelleth no good thing;" that I am inclined to all evil, and totally unable to quicken my own soul. 6. By faith I know that, besides the souls of men there are other orders of spirits; yea, I believe that Millions of creatures walk the earth, Unseen, whether we wake, or if we sleep.

3. In order thoroughly to understand this important truth, it may be proper to consider the whole matter. All the children of men that are not born of God "walk by sight," having no higher principle. By sight, that is, by sense; a part being put for the whole; the sight for all the senses; the rather, because it is more noble and more extensive than any, or all the rest. There are but few objects which we can discern by the three inferior senses of taste, smell, and feeling; and none of these can take any cognizance of its object, unless it be brought into a direct contact with it. Hearing, it is true, has a larger sphere of action, and gives us some knowledge of things that are distant. But how small is that distance, suppose it were fifty or a hundred miles, compared to that between the earth and the sun! And what is even this in comparison of the distance of the sun and moon and the fixed stars! Yet the sight continually takes knowledge of objects even at this amazing distance. 4. By sight we take knowledge of the visible world, from the surface of the earth to the region of the fixed stars. But what is the world visible to us, but "a speck of creation," compared to the whole universe to the invisible world -- that part of the creation which we cannot see at all, by reason of its distance; in the place of which, through the imperfection of our senses, we are presented with an universal blank. 5. But beside these innumerable objects which we cannot see by reason of their distance, have we not sufficient ground to believe that there are innumerable others of too delicate a nature to be discerned by any of our senses Do not all men of unprejudiced reason allow the same thing, (the small number of Materialists, or Atheists, I cannot term men of reason,) that there is an invisible world, naturally such, as well as a visible one But which of our senses is fine enough to take the least knowledge of this We can no more perceive any part of this by our sight, than by our feeling. Should we allow, with the ancient poet that, Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth Unseen, both when we wake, and when we sleep;

10. This observation gives us a clear answer to that question in the Assembly's Catechism: "For what end did God create man" The answer is, "To glorify and enjoy him for ever." This is undoubtedly true; but is it quite clear, especially to men of ordinary capacities Do the generality of common people understand that expression, "To glorify God" No; no more than they understand Greek. And it is altogether above the capacity of children; to whom we can scare ever speak plain enough. Now, is not this the very principle that should be inculcated upon every human creature, -- "You are made to be happy in God," as soon as ever reason dawns Should not every parent, as soon as a child begins to talk, or to run alone, say something of this kind: "See! what is that which shines so over your head That we call the sun. See, how bright it is! Feel how it warms you! It makes the grass to spring, and everything to grow. But God made the sun. The sun could not shine, nor warm, nor do any good without him." In this plain and familiar way a wise parent might, many times in a day, say something of God; particularly insisting, "He made you; and he made you to be happy in him; and nothing else can make you happy." We cannot press this too soon. If you say, "Nay, but they cannot understand you when they are so young;" I answer, No; nor when they are fifty years old, unless God opens their understanding: And can he not do this at any age 11. Indeed, this should be pressed on every human creature, young and old, the more earnestly and diligently, because so exceeding few, even of those that are called Christians, seem to know anything about it. Many indeed think of being happy with God in heaven; but the being happy in God on earth never entered into their thoughts. The less so, because from the time they come into the world, they are surrounded with idols. Such, in turns, are all "the things that are seen," (whereas God is not seen,) which all promise an happiness independent of God. Indeed, it is true that, Upright both in heart and will We by our God were made; But we turn'd from good to ill, And o'er the creatures stray'd;

4. But why is it that so little advantage is derived from it to the Christian world Are Christians any better than other men Are they better than Mahometans or Heathens To say the truth, it is well if they are not worse; worse than either Mahometans or Heathens. In many respects they are abundantly worse; but then they are not properly Christians. The generality of these, though they hear the Christian name, do not know what Christianity is. They no more understand it than they do Greek or Hebrew; therefore they can be no better for it. What do the Christians, so called, of the Eastern Church, dispersed throughout the Turkish dominions, know of genuine Christianity those of the Morea, of Circassia, Mongrelia, Georgia Are they not the very dregs of mankind And have we reason to think that those of the Southern Church, those inhabiting Abyssinia, have any more conception than they, of "worshipping God in spirit and in truth" Look we nearer home. See the Northern Churches; those that are under the Patriarch of Moscow. How exceedingly little do they know either of outward or inward Christianity! How many thousands, yea, myriads, of those poor savages know nothing of Christianity but the name! How little more do they know than the heathen Tartars on the one hand, or the heathen Chinese on the other! 5. But is not Christianity well known, at least, to all the inhabitants of the western world a great part of which is eminently termed Christendom, or the land of Christians. Part of these are still members of the Church of Rome; part are termed Protestants. As to the former, Portuguese, Spaniards Italians, French, Germans, what do the hulk of them know of scriptural Christianity Having had frequent opportunity of conversing with many of these, both at home and abroad, I am bold to affirm, that they are in general totally ignorant, both as to the theory and practice of Christianity; so that they are "perishing" by thousands "for lack of knowledge," -- for want of knowing the very first principles of Christianity.

6. "But surely this cannot be the case of the Protestants in France, Switzerland, Germany, and Holland; much less in Denmark and Sweden." Indeed I hope it is not altogether. I am persuaded, there are among them many knowing Christians; but I fear we must not think that one in ten, if one in fifty, is of this number; certainly not, if we may form a judgment of them by those we find in Great Britain and Ireland. Let us see how matters stand at our own door. Do the people of England, in general, (not the highest or the lowest; for these usually know nothing of the matter; but people of the middle rank,) understand Christianity Do they conceive what it is Can they give an intelligible account, either of the speculative or practical part of it What know they of the very first principles of it -- of the natural and moral attributes of God; of his particular providence; of the redemption of man; of the offices of Christ; of the operations of the Holy Ghost; of justification; of the new birth; of inward and outward sanctification speak of any of these things to the first ten persons you are in company with; and will you not find nine out of the ten ignorant of the whole affair And are not most of the inhabitants of the Scotch Highlands full as ignorant as these; yea, and the common people in Ireland (I mean the Protestants, of whom alone we are now speaking.) Make a fair inquiry, not only in the country cabins, but in the cities of Cork, Waterford, Limerick; yea, in Dublin itself. How few know what Christianity means! How small a number will you find that have any conception of the analogy of faith! of the connected chain of scripture truths, and their relation to each other, -- namely, the natural corruption of man; justification by faith; the new birth; inward and outward holiness. It must be acknowledged by all competent judges, who converse freely with their neighbours in these kingdoms, that a vast majority of them know no more of these things than they do of Hebrew or Arabic. And what good can Christianity do to these, who are so totally ignorant of it

On Knowing Christ After The Flesh "Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we did know Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more." 2 Cor. 5:16. 1. I have long desired to see something clearly and intelligibly wrote on these words. This is doubtless a point of no small importance: it enters deep into the nature of religion; and yet what treatise have we in the English language which is written upon it Possibly there may be such; but none of them has come to my notice, no, not so much as a single sermon.' 2. This is here introduced by the Apostle in a very solemn manner. The words literally translated run thus: 'He died for all, that the who live', all who live upon the earth, 'might not henceforth from the moment they knew him, 'live unto themselves seek their own honour, or profit, or pleasure, "but unto him," in righteousness and true holiness. (2 Cor. 5:15) "So that we from this time," we that know him by faith, "know no one," either the rest of the Apostles, or you, or any other person, "after the flesh." This uncommon expression, on which the whole doctrine depends, seems to mean, we regard no man according to his former state, -- his country, riches, power, or wisdom. We consider all men only in their spiritual state, and as they stand related to a better world. `Yea, if we have known even Christ after the flesh, (which undoubtedly they had done, beholding and loving him as a man, with a natural affection,) yet now we know him so no more. We no more know him as a man, by his face, shape, voice, or manner of conversation. We no more think of him as a man, or love him under that character. 3. The meaning, then, of this strongly figurative expression appears to be no other than this. From the time that we are created anew in Christ Jesus we do not think, or speak, or act, with regard to our blessed Lord, as a mere man. We do not now use any expression with relation to Christ which may not be applied to him not only as he is man, but as he is "God over all, blessed for ever."

2. With how many instances of this melancholy truth, -- that those whose eye is not single are totally ignorant of the nature of true religion, -- are we surrounded on every side! How many, even of good sort of people, of them whose lives are innocent, are as ignorant of themselves, of God, and of worshipping him in spirit and in truth, as either Mahometans or Heathens! And yet they are not any way defective in natural understanding: And some of them have improved their natural abilities by a liberal education, whereby they have laid in a considerable stock of deep and various learning. Yet how totally ignorant are they of God and of the things of God! How unacquainted both with the invisible and the eternal world! O why do they continue in this deplorable ignorance It is the plain effect of this, -- their eye is not single. They do not aim at God, he is not in all their thoughts. They do not desire or think of heaven; therefore, they sink deep as hell. 3. For this reason they are as far from real holiness as they are from valuable knowledge. It is because their eye is not single that, they are such strangers to vital religion. Let them be ever so accomplished in other respects; let them be ever so learned, ever so well versed in every branch of polite literature; yea, ever so courteous, so humane; yet if their eye is not singly fixed on God they can know nothing of scriptural religion. They do not even know what Christian holiness means; what is the entrance of it, the new birth, with all the circumstances attending it: They know no more of this, than do the beasts of the field. Do they repent and believe the Gospel How much less are they "renewed in the spirit of their minds," in the image of him that created them As they have not the least experience of this, so they have not the least conception of it. Were you to name such a thing, you might expect to hear, "Much religion hath made thee mad:" So destitute are they, whatever accomplishments they have beside, of the only religion which avails with God.

4. And till their eye is single they are as far remote from happiness as from holiness. They may now and then have agreeable dreams, from Wealth, honour, pleasure, or what else This short-enduring world can give: But none of these can satisfy the appetite of an immortal soul. Nay, all of them together cannot give rest, which is the lowest ingredient of happiness, to a never-dying spirit, which God created for the enjoyment of himself. The hungry soul, like the busy bee, wanders from flower to flower; but it goes off from each, with an abortive hope, and a deluded expectation. Every creature cries, (some with a loud and others with a secret voice,) "Happiness is not in me." The height and the depth proclaim to an attentive ear, "The Creator hath not implanted in me a capacity of giving happiness: Therefore, with all thy skill and pains, thou canst not extract it from me." And indeed the more pains any of the children of men take to extract it from any earthly object, the greater will their chagrin be, -- the more secure their disappointment. 5. "But although the vulgar herd of mankind can find no happiness; although it cannot be found in the empty pleasures of the world; may it not be found in learning, even by him that has not a single eye! Surely Content of spirit must from science flow; For 'tis a godlike attribute to know." By no means. On the contrary, it has been the observation of all ages, that the men who possessed the greatest learning were the most dissatisfied of all men. This occasioned a person of eminent learning to declare, "A fool may find a kind of paradise upon earth," (although this is a grand mistake,) "but a wise man can find none." These are the most discontented, the most impatient, of men. Indeed, learning naturally effects this: "Knowledge," as the Apostle observes, "puffeth up.' But where pride is, happiness is not; they are utterly inconsistent with each other. So much ground there is for that melancholy reflection, wherever true religion is not, Avails it then, O Reason! to be wise To see this mournful sight with quicker eyes To know with more distinction to complain, And have superior sense in feeling pain

3. In order to this, I would inquire, First, What is a dream You will say, "Who does not know this" Might you not rather say, Who does know Is there anything more mysterious in nature Who is there that has not experienced it, that has not dreamed a thousand times Yet he is no more able to explain the nature of it, than he is to grasp the skies. Who can give any clear, satisfactory account of the parent of dreams, sleep It is true, many physicians have attempted this, but they have attempted it in vain. They have talked learnedly about it, but have left the matter at last just as dark as it was before. They tell us some of its properties and effects; but none can tell what is the essence of it. 4. However, we know the origin of dreams, and that with some degree of certainty. There can be no doubt but some of them arise from the present constitution of the body; while others of them are probably occasioned by the passions of the mind. Again: We are clearly informed in Scripture, that some are caused by the operation of good angels; as others, undoubtedly, are owing to the power and malice of evil angels (if we may dare to suppose that there are any such now; or, at least, that they have anything to do in the world). From the same divine treasury of knowledge we learn that, on some extraordinary occasions, the great Father of spirits has manifested himself to human spirits, "in dreams and visions of the night." But which of all these arise from natural, which from supernatural, influence, we are many times not able to determine.

5. And how can we certainly distinguish between our dreams and our waking thoughts What criterion is there by which we may surely know whether we are awake or asleep It is true, as soon as we awake out of sleep, we know we have been in a dream, and are now awake. But how shall we know that a dream is such while we continue therein What is a dream To give a gross and superficial, not a philosophical, account of it: It is a series of persons and things presented to our mind in sleep, which have no being but in our own imagination. A dream, therefore, is a kind of digression from our real life. It seems to be a sort of echo of what was said or done a little when we were awake. Or, may we say, a dream is a fragment of life, broken off at both ends; not connected either with the part that goes before, or with that which follows after And is there any better way of distinguishing our dreams from our waking thoughts, than by this very circumstance It is a kind of parenthesis, inserted in life, as that is in a discourse, which goes on equally well either with it or without it. By this then we may infallibly know a dream, -- by its being broken off at both ends; by its having no proper connection with the real things which either precede or follow it. 6. It is not needful to prove that there is a near resemblance between these transient dreams, and the dream of life. It may be of more use to illustrate this important truth; to place it in as striking a light as possible. Let us then seriously consider, in a few obvious particulars, the case of one that is just awaking out of life, and opening his eyes in eternity.

10. "How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished!" What are the weapons that are so terrible among us, to the inhabitants of eternity How are the wise, the learned, the poet, the critic fallen, and their glory vanished away! How is the beauty fallen, the late idol of a gazing crowd! In how complete a sense are "the daughters of music brought low," and all the instruments thereof forgotten! Are you not now convinced, that (according to the Hebrew proverb) "a living dog is better than a dead lion" For the living know, yea, must know, unless they obstinately refuse, "that they shall die; but the dead know not anything" that will avail for the ease of their pain, or to lessen their misery. Also "their hope and fear, and their desire," all are perished; all of them are fled; "they have not any portion in the things that are done under the sun!" 11. Where, indeed, is the hope of those who were lately laying deep schemes, and saying, "To-day, or to-morrow, we will go to such a city, and continue there a year, and traffic, and get gain" How totally had they forgotten that wise admonition, "Ye know not what shall be on the morrow! For, what is your life It is a vapour that appeareth awhile, and then vanisheth away!" Where is all your business where your worldly cares, your troubles or engagements All these things are fled away like smoke; and your soul is left. And how is it qualified for the enjoyment of this new world Has it a relish for the objects and enjoyments of the invisible world Are your affections loosened from things below, and fixed on things above, -- fixed on that place where Jesus sitteth at the right hand of God Then happy are ye; and when He whom ye love shall appear, "ye shall also appear with him in glory."

On Faith "Now faith is the evidence of things not seen." Heb. 11:1. 1. Many times have I thought, many times have I spoke, many times have I wrote upon these words; and yet there appears to be a depth in them which I am in no wise able to fathom. Faith is, in one sense of the word, a divine conviction of God and of the things of God; in another, (nearly related to, yet not altogether the same,) it is a divine conviction of the invisible and eternal world. In this sense I would now consider, -- 2. I am now an immortal spirit, strangely connected with a little portion of earth; but this is only for a while: In a short time I am to quit this tenement of clay, and to remove into another state, Which the living know not, And the dead cannot, or they may not tell! What kind of existence shall I then enter upon, when my spirit has launched out of the body How shall I feel myself, -- perceive my own being How shall I discern the things that are round about me, either material or spiritual objects When my eyes no longer transmit the rays of light, how will the naked spirit see When the organs of hearing are mouldered into dust, in what manner shall I hear When the brain is of no farther use, what means of thinking shall I have When my whole body is resolved into senseless earth, what means shall I have of gaining knowledge 3. How strange, how incomprehensible, are the means whereby I shall then take knowledge even of the material world! Will things appear then as they do now, -- of the same size, shape, and colour Or will they be altered in any, or all these respects How will the sun, moon, and stars appear the sublunary heavens the planetary heavens the region of the fixed stars -- how the fields of ether, which we may conceive to be millions of miles beyond them Of all this we know nothing yet. And, indeed, we need to know nothing.

5. But is there no exception as to the wickedness of man's heart Yes, in those that are born of God. "He that is born of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." God has "purified his heart by faith," so that his wickedness is departed from him. "Old things are passed away, and all things" in him "are become new." So that his heart is no longer desperately wicked, but "renewed in righteousness and true holiness." Only let it be remembered, that the heart, even of a believer, is not wholly purified when he is justified. Sin is then overcome, but it is not rooted out; it is conquered, but not destroyed. Experience shows him, First, that the roots of sin, self-will, pride, and idolatry, remain still in his heart. But as long as he continues to watch and pray, none of them can prevail against him. Experience teaches him, Secondly, that sin (generally pride or self-will) cleaves to his best actions: So that, even with regard to these, he finds an absolute necessity for the blood of atonement. 6. But how artfully does this conceal itself, not only from others, but even from ourselves! Who can discover it in all the disguises it assumes, or trace it through all its latent mazes And if it be so difficult to know the heart of a good man, who can know the heart of a wicked one, which is far more deceitful No unregenerate man, however sensible, ever so experienced, ever so wise in his generation. And yet these are they who pique themselves upon "knowing the world," and imagine they see through all men. Vain men! One may boldly say they "know nothing yet as they ought to know." Even that politician in the late reign neither knew the heart of himself or of other men, whose favourite saying was: "Do not tell me of your virtue, or religion: I tell you, every man has his price." Yes, Sir R[obert]; every man like you; everyone that sells himself to the devil.

7. Did that right honourable wretch, compared to whom Sir R[obert] was a saint, know the heart of man, -- he that so earnestly advised his own son, "never to speak the truth, to lie or dissemble as often as he speaks, to wear a mask continually" that earnestly counselled him, "not to debauch single women," (because some inconveniences might follow,) "but always married women" Would one imagine this grovelling animal ever had a wife or a married daughter of his own O rare Lord C[hesterfield]! Did ever man so well deserve, though he was a Peer of the realm, to die by the side of Newgate Or did ever book so well deserve to be burned by the common hangman, as his Letters Did Mr. David Hume, lower, if possible, than either of the former, know the heart of man No more than a worm or a beetle does. After "playing so idly with the darts of death," do you now find it a laughing matter What think you now of Charon Has he ferried you over Styx At length he has taught you to know a little of your own heart! At length you know it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God! 8. One of the ablest champions of infidelity (perhaps the most elegant, and the most decent writer that ever produced a system of religion without being in the least obliged to the Bible for it) breaks out in the fullness of his heart: "Who would not wish that there was full proof of the Christian revelation, since it is undoubtedly the most benevolent system that ever appeared in the world!" Might he not add a reason of another kind, -- Because without this man must be altogether a mystery to himself Even with the help of Revelation, he knows exceeding little; but without it, he would know abundantly less, and nothing with any certainty. Without the light which is given us by the oracles of God, how could we reconcile his greatness with his meanness While we acknowledged, with Sir John Davies, -- I know my soul has power to know all things, Yet is she blind, and ignorant of all: I know I'm one of nature's little kings; Yet to the least and vilest things in thrall.

4. As no air could penetrate its sable recess, it consequently could have no hearing. Whatever organs it was provided with, they could be of no use; seeing no undulating air could find a way through the walls that surrounded it. And there is no reason to believe that it had any sense analogous to those either of smelling or tasting. In a creature which did not need any food these could have been of no possible use. Neither was there any way whereby the objects of smell or taste could make their approach to it. It must be very little, if at all, that it could be acquainted even with the general sense, -- that of feeling: As it always continued in one unvaried posture amidst the parts that surrounded it, all of these being immovably fixed could make no new impression upon it. So that it had only one feeling from hour to hour, and from day to day, during its whole duration. 5. And as this poor animal was destitute of sensation, it must have equally been destitute of reflection. Its head (of whatever sort it was,) having no materials to work upon, no ideas of sensation of any kind, could not produce any degree of reflection. It scarce, therefore could have any memory, or any imagination. Nor could it have any locative power, while it was so closely bound in on every side. If it had in itself some springs of motion, yet it was impossible that power should be exerted, because the narrowness of its cavern could not allow of any change of place.

4. But there are those who are conscious before God that they are rich. And, doubtless, some among you are of the number. You have more of the goods of this world than is needful either for yourself or your family. Let each consider for himself. Do your riches increase Do not you understand that plain expression Have you not more money, or more of money's worth, than you had ten or twenty years ago, or at this time last year If you keep any account, you can easily know this. Indeed you ought to know; otherwise, you are not a good steward, even in this respect, of the mammon of unrighteousness. And every man, whether engaged in trade or not, ought to know whether his substance lessens or increases. 5. But many have found out a way never to be rich, though their substance increase ever so much. It is this: As fast as ever money comes in, they lay it out, either in land, or enlarging their business. By this means, each of these, keeping himself bare of money, can still say, "I am not rich;" yea, though he has ten, twenty, a hundred times more substance than he had some years ago. This may be explained by a recent case: A gentleman came to a merchant in London, a few years since, and told him, "Sir, I beg you will give me a guinea for a worthy family that is in great distress." He replied, "Really, Mr. M., I cannot well afford to give you it just now; but if you will call upon me when I am worth ten thousand pounds, upon such an occasion I will give you ten guineas." Mr. M., after some time, called upon him again, and said, "Sir, I claim your promise; now you are worth ten thousand pounds." He replied, "That is very true: But I assure you, I cannot spare one guinea so well as I could then."

The Late Work Of God In North America "The appearance was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel." Ezek. 1:16. 1. Whatever may be the primary meaning of this mysterious passage of Scripture, many serious Christians, in all ages have applied it in a secondary sense, to the manner wherein the adorable providence of God usually works in governing the world. They have judged this expression manifestly to allude to the complicated wheels of his providence, adapting one event to another, and working one thing by means of another. In the whole process of this, there is an endless variety of wheels within wheels. But they are frequently so disposed and complicated, that we cannot understand them at first sight; nay, we can seldom fully comprehend them till they are explained by the event. 2. Perhaps no age ever afforded a more striking instance of this kind than the present does, in the dispensations of divine providence with respect to our colonies in North-America. In order to see this clearly, let us endeavour, according to the measure of our weak understanding, First, to trace each wheel apart: And, Secondly, to consider both, as they relate to and answer each other. I. And, First, we are to trace each wheel apart. It is by no means my design to give a particular detail of the late transactions in America; but barely to give a simple and naked deduction of a few well-known facts. I know this is a very delicate subject; and that it is difficult, if not impossible, to treat it in such a manner as not to offend any, particularly those who are warmly attached to either party. But I would not willingly offend; and shall therefore studiously avoid all keen and reproachful language, and use the softest terms I can, without either betraying or disguising the truth.

On Laying The Foundation Of The New Chapel, Near The City-Road, London. "According to this time it shall be said, -- What hath God wrought!" Num. 23:23. 1. We need not now inquire, in what sense this was applicable to the children of Israel. It may be of more use to consider in what sense the words are applicable to ourselves; -- how far the people of England have reason to say, "According to this time, what hath God wrought!" 2. A great man, indeed, who I trust is now in a better world, Dr. Gibson, late Lord Bishop of London, in one of his Charges to his Clergy, flatly denies that God has wrought any "extraordinary work" in our nation; -- nay, affirms, that to imagine any such thing is no better than downright enthusiasm. It is so, if his Lordship's supposition is true, -- if God has not wrought any extraordinary work; but if he really has, then we may believe and assert it, without incurring any such imputation. 3. Yet a still greater man of a neighbouring nation, a burning and a shining light, equally eminent in piety and in learning, partly confirmed the Bishop's supposition; for Bengelius, being asked why he placed the grand revival of religion so late as the year 1836, replied, "I acknowledge all the prophecies would incline me to place it a century sooner; but an insurmountable difficulty lies in the way: I cannot reconcile this to matter of fact; for I do not know of any remarkable work of God which has been wrought upon earth between the years 1730 and 1740." This is really surprising. It is strange that sensible men should know so little of what is done at so small a distance. How could so great a man be ignorant of what was transacted no farther off than England -- especially considering the accounts then published in Germany, some of which were tolerably impartial; nay, considering the particular account which I had sent, as early as the year 1742, to one well known through all the empire, Pastor (afterwards Superintendent) Steinmetz.

III. So was the Scripture fulfilled. But it was far more gloriously fulfilled in that late eminent servant of God; as will clearly appear if we consider a few circumstances, First, of his life, and Secondly, of his triumphant death. 1. Indeed we have, as yet, but a very imperfect knowledge of his life. We know little more of his early years, than that he was from his infancy so remarkably regardless of food, that he would scarce take enough to sustain life; and that he had always much of the fear of God, and a real sense of religion. He was born September 12, in the year 1729, at Nyon, in Switzerland, of a very reputable family. He went through the usual course of academical studies in the University of Geneva. One of his uncles, who was at that time a General Officer in the Imperial service, then invited him into the same service, promising to procure him a commission. But just as he came into Germany, the war was at an end. Being so far on his way, he was then invited into Holland by another uncle, who had, a little before been desired by a correspondent in England to procure a tutor for a gentleman's sons. He asked Mr. Fletcher whether he was willing to go into England and undertake this office. He consented, and accordingly went over to England, and undertook the care of Mr. Hill's two sons, at Tern, in Shropshire; and he continued in that office till the young gentlemen went to the University.

There is little need of adding any farther character of this man of God to the foregoing account, given by one who wrote out of the fullness of her heart. I would only observe,that for many years I despaired of finding any inhabitant of Great Britain, that could stand in any degree of comparison with Gregory Lopez or Monsieur de Renty. But let any impartial person judge, if Mr. Fletcher was at all inferior to them. Did he not experience as deep communion with God, and as high a measure of inward holiness, as was experienced either by one or the other of those burning and shining lights And it is certain his outward holiness shone before men with full as bright a lustre as theirs. But if any should attempt to draw a parallel between them, there are two circumstances that deserve consideration. One is, we are not assured that the writers of their lives did not extenuate, if not suppress, what was amiss in them; and some things amiss we are assured there were, viz., many touches of superstition, and some of idolatry, in worshipping saints, the Virgin Mary in particular: But I have not suppressed or extenuated anything in Mr. Fletcher's character; for, indeed, I knew nothing that was amiss, -- nothing that needed to be extenuated, much less suppressed. A second circumstance is, that the writers of their lives could not have so full a knowledge of them, as both Mrs. Fletcher and I had of Mr. Fletcher; being eye and ear witnesses of his whole conduct. Consequently, we know that his life was not sullied with any mixture of either idolatry or superstition. I was intimately acquainted with him for above thirty years; I conversed with him morning, noon, and night, without the least reserve, during a journey of many hundred miles. And in all that time I never heard him speak one improper word nor saw him do an improper action. -- To conclude: Many exemplary men have I known, holy in heart and life, within fourscore years, but one equal to him I have not known, -- one so inwardly and outwardly devoted to God. So unblamable a character in every respect I have not found either in Europe or America; and I scarce expect to find another such on this side of eternity.

6. And even as to the hours assigned for study, are they generally spent to any better purpose Not if they are employed in reading (as is too common) plays, novels, or idle tales, which naturally tend to increase our inbred corruption, and heat the furnace of our unholy desires seven times hotter than it was before How little preferable is the laborious idleness of those who spend day after day in gaming or diversions, vilely casting away that time the value of which they cannot know, till they are passed through it into eternity! 7. Know ye not then so much as this, you that are called moral men, that all idleness is immorality; that there is no grosser dishonesty than sloth; that every voluntary blockhead is a knave He defrauds his benefactors, his parents, and the world; and robs both God and his own soul. Yet how many of these are among us! How many lazy drones, as if only fruges consumere nati! "born to eat up the produce of the soil." How many whose ignorance is not owing to incapacity, but to mere laziness! How few, (let it not seem immodest that even such a one as I should touch on that tender point,) of the vast number who have it in their power, are truly learned men Not to speak of the other eastern tongues, who is there that can be said to understand Hebrew Might I not say, or even Greek A little of Homer or Xenophon we may still remember; but how few can readily read or understand so much as a page of Clemens Alexandrinus, Chrysostom, or Ephrem Syrus And as to philosophy, (not to mention mathematics, or the abstruser branches of it,) how few do we find who have laid the foundation, -- who are masters even of logic; who thoroughly understand so much as the rules of syllogizing; the very doctrine of the moods and figures! O what is so scarce as learning, save religion!

If any species of this unprofitable passion be more particularly useless than the rest, it is that which we feel when we sorrow for the dead. We destroy the health of our body, and impair the strength of our minds, and take no price for those invaluable blessings; we give up our present, without any prospect of future, advantage; without any probability of either recalling them hither, or profiting them where they are. As it is an indifferent proof of our wisdom, it is still a worse of our affection for the dead. It is the property of envy, not of love, to repine at another's happiness; to weep, because all tears are wiped from their eyes. Shall it disturb us, who call ourselves his friends, that a weary wanderer has at length come to his wished-for home Nay, weep we rather for ourselves, who still want that happiness; even to whom that rest appeareth yet in prospect. Gracious is our God and merciful, who, knowing what is in man, that passion, when it has conquered reason, always takes the appearance of it, lest we should be misled by this appearance, adds the sanction of his unerring commands to the natural dictates of our own understanding. The judgment, perhaps, might be so clouded by passion, as to think it reasonable to be profuse in our sorrow at parting from a beloved object; but Revelation tells us, that all occurrences of life must be borne with patience and moderation, -- otherwise we lay a greater weight on our own souls than external accidents can do without our concurrence, with humility, -- because from the offended justice of God we might well have expected he would have inflicted much worse, and with resignation, -- because we know, whatsoever happens is for our good; and although it were not, we are not able to contend with, and should not therefore provoke, Him that is stronger than we.

1. God can distinguish and keep unmixed from all other bodies the particular dust into which our several bodies are dissolved, and can gather it together and join it again, how far soever dispersed asunder. God is infinite both in knowledge and power. He knoweth the number of the stars, and calleth them all by their names; he can tell the number of the sands on the sea-shore: And is it at all incredible, that He should distinctly know the several particles of dust into which the bodies of men are mouldered, and plainly discern to whom they belong, and the various changes they have undergone Why should it be thought strange, that He, who at the first formed us, whose eyes saw our substance yet being imperfect, from whom we were not hid when we were made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth, should know every part of our bodies, and every particle of dust whereof we were composed The artist knows every part of the watch which he frames; and if it should fall in pieces, and the various parts of it lie in the greatest disorder and confusion, yet he can soon gather them together, and as easily distinguish one from another, as if every one had its particular mark. He knows the use of each, and can readily give it its proper place, and put them all exactly in the same figure and order they were before. And can we think that the Almighty Builder of the world, whose workmanship we are, does not know whereof we are made, or is not acquainted with the several parts of which this earthly tabernacle is composed All these lay in one vast heap at the creation, till he separated them one from another, and framed them into those distinct bodies whereof this beautiful world consists. And why may not the same Power collect the ruins of our corrupted bodies, and restore them to their former condition All the parts into which men's bodies are dissolved, however they seem to us carelessly scattered over the face of the earth, are yet carefully laid up by God's wise disposal till the day of the restoration of all things. They are preserved in the waters and fires, in the birds and beasts, till the last trumpet shall summon them to their former habitation.

If, on the other hand, he should be willing to find out the miseries of his fall, his understanding might furnish him with reasons for constant mourning, for despising and denying himself; might point out the sad effects of turning away from God and losing his Spirit, in the shame and anguish of a nature at variance with itself; thirsting after immortality, and yet subject to death; approving righteousness, and yet taking pleasure in things inconsistent with it; feeling an immense want of something to perfect and satisfy all it faculties, and yet neither able to know what that mighty thing is, otherwise than from its present defects, nor how to attain it, otherwise than by going contrary to its present inclinations. Well might Adam now find himself naked; nothing less than God was departed from him. Till then he had experienced nothing but the goodness and sweetness of God; a heavenly life spread itself through his whole frame, as if he were not made of dust; his mind was filled with angelic wisdom; a direction from above took him by the hand; he walked and thought uprightly, and seemed not to be a child or novice in divine things. But now he had other things to experience; something in his soul that he did not find, nor need to fear, while he was carried on straight forward by the gentle gale of divine grace; something in his body that he could not see nor complain of; while that body was covered with glory. He feels there a self-displeasure, turbulence, and confusion; such as is common to other spirits who have lost God: He sees here causes of present shame and a future dissolution; and a strong engagement to that grovelling life which is common to animals that never enjoyed the divine nature.

The world has no longer any power over us, than we have a quick relish of its comforts; and suffering abates that. Suffering is, indeed, a direct confutation of the pretences which the flattering tempter gains us by: For I am in human life; and if that life contains such soft ease, ravishing pleasure, glorious eminence, as you promise, why am I thus Is it because I have not yet purchased riches to make me easy, or the current accomplishments to make me considerable. Then I find that all the comfort you propose is by leading me off from myself; but I will rather enter deep into my own condition, bad as it is: Perhaps I shall be nearer to God, the Eternal Truth, in feeling sorrows and miseries that are personal and real, than in feeling comforts that are not so. I begin already to find that all my grievances centre in one point: There is always at the bottom one great loss or defect, which is not the want of friends or gold, of health or philosophy. And the abiding sense of this may possibly become a prayer in the ears of the Most High; -- a prayer not resulting from a set of speculative notions, but from the real, undissembled state of all that is within me; nor, indeed, so explicit a prayer as to describe the thing I want, but, considering how strange a want mine is, as explicit a one as I can make. Since, then, suffering opens me a door of hope, I will not put it from me as long as I live: It helps me to a true discovery of one period of my existence, though it is a low one; and bids fairer for having some connexion with a more glorious period that may follow, than the arts of indulgence, the amusements of pride and sloth, and all the dark policy of this world, which wage war with the whole truth, that man must know and feel, before he can look towards God.

person whatever. Nor is any child received, unless his parents agree, (1.) That he shall observe all the rules of the house. And, (2.) That they will not take him from school, no, not for a day, till they take him for good and all." The reasonableness of this uncommon rule is shown by constant experience: for children may unlearn as much in one week, as they have learned in several, nay, and contract a prejudice to exact discipline, which never can be removed. 12. "The general rules of the house are these: The children rise at four, winter and summer." This I know, by constant observation, and by long experience, to be of admirable use, either for preserving a good, or improving a bad, constitution. It is of peculiar service in almost all nervous complaints, both in preventing and in removing them. "They spend the time till five in private; partly in reading, partly in singing, partly in prayer; and in selfexamination and meditation, those that are capable of it. "At five they are all together with the Master. Then till seven they breakfast, and walk or work: for as we have no play-days, the school being taught every day in the year but Sundays, so neither do we allow any time for play on any day. It is a wise German proverb, 'He that plays when he is a boy, will play when he is a man.' If not, why should he learn now what he must unlearn by and by? "On fair days they work, according to their strength, in the garden; on rainy days, in the house. But particular care is taken that they never work alone, but always in the presence of a Master." This circumstance I adopted from the great school at Jena, in Germany. It lays much labour upon the Masters; but the advantage is worth all the labour. It prevents abundance of evil; (and it is far better to prevent evils, than to punish them ;) not only rudeness and ill manners, but many sins that children would easily teach each other.

with the young men for their want of learning, he might be found as very an ignoramus as Mr. Middleton. And even with regard to many of those Tutors that have learning, how little are their pupils the better for it? Do they use all diligence to instil into them all the knowledge which they have themselves? Do they lecture them constantly? every day, either in the languages or sciences? Do they instruct them regularly and thoroughly, in logic, ethics, geometry, physics, and metaphysics? Are there not some, who, instea instead of once a day, do not lecture them once a week? perhaps not once a month, if once a quarter? Are not these precious instructers of youth? Indeed, when I consider many of the Tutors who were my contemporaries, (and I doubt they are not much mended since,) I cannot believe the want of such instructers to be an irreparable loss. 19. "Well, but they lose also the advantage of the public exercises, as well as of those in their several Colleges." Alas, what are these exercises? Excuse me if I speak with all simplicity. I never found them any other than an idle, useless interruption of my useful studies. Pray, of what use are the stated disputations for degrees? Are they not mere grimace? trifling beyond expression? And how little preferable to these are most of the disputations in our several Colleges! What worthy subjects are usually appointed for the scholars to dispute upon! And just suitable to the importance of the subject is the management of it. What are the usual examinations for the degree of a Bachelor or Master of Arts? Are they not so horribly, shockingly superficial as none could believe if he did not hear them? What is that, which should be the most solemn exercise we perform, for a Master of Arts' degree? The reading six lectures in the schools, three in natural, and three in moral philosophy. Reading them to whom? To the walls: it being counted an affront for any one that has ears to hear them. This is literally true: you know it is. But what an execrable insult upon com-mon sense! These are the public exercises: and is it a loss to have nothing to do with them? to spend all our time in what directly tends to improve us in the most useful knowledge.

Wed. 30.--I hoped a door was opened for going up immediately to the Choctaws, the least polished, that is, the least corrupted, of all the Indian nations. But upon my informing Mr. Oglethorpe of our design, he objected, not only the danger of being intercepted, or killed by the French there ; but much more, the inexpediency of leaving Savannah destitute of a minister. These objections I related to our brethren in the evening, who were all of opinion, “ We ought not to o yet.” ? Thur. July 1.--The Indians had an audience ; and another on Saturday, when Chicali, their head man, dined with Mr. Oglethorpe. After dinner, I asked the grey-headed old man, what he thought he was made for. He said, ** He that.is above knows what he made us for. We anow nothing. Weare inthe dark. But whitemenknow much. And yet white men build great houses, as if they were to live for ever. But white men cannot live for ever. In a little time, white men’will be dust as well as I.” I told him, “If red men will learn the good book, they may know as much as white men. But neither we nor you can understand that book, unless we are taught by Him that is above: and He will not teach, unless you avoid what you already know is not good.” He answered, “I believe that. He will not teach us while our hearts are not white. And our men do what they know is not good: they kill their own children. And our women do what they know is not good: they kill the child before it is born. Therefore, He that is above does not send us the good book.” Hearing the younger of the Miss Boveys was not well, I called upon them this evening. I found she had only the prickly heat, a sort of | rash, very common here in summer. We soon fell into serious conversation, after I had asked, if they did not think they were too young to trouble themselves with religion yet; and, whether they might not defer it ten or a dozen years. To which one of them replied, “If it will be reasonable ten years hence to be religious, it is so now: Iam not for deferring one moment.”

A. We believe the souls of red men walk up and down, near the place where they died, or where their bodies lie; for we have often heard cries and noises near the place where any prisoners had been burned. Q. Where do the souls of white men go after death? A. We cannot tell. We have not seen. Q. Our belief is, that the souls of bad men only walk up and down; but the souls of good men go up. A. I believe so too. But I told you the talk of the nation. (Mr. Andrews. They said at the burying, they knew what you was Journal I.--8 > DP Or OPO 30 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [July, 1736 doing. You was speaking to the beloved ones above, to take up the soul of the young woman. ) Q. We have a book that tells us many things of the beloved ones above; would you be glad to know them? A. We have no time now but to fight. If we should ever be at peace, we should be glad to know. Q. Do you expect ever to know what the white men know? (Mr. Andrews. They told Mr. O., they believe the time will come when the red and white men will be one.) Q. What do the French teach you ? A. The French black kings* never go out. We see you go about; we like that; that is good. Q. How came your nation by the knowledge they have ? A. As soon as ever the ground was sound and fit to stand upon, it came to us, and has been with us ever since. But we are young men; our old men know more: but all of them do not know. There are but a few, whom the beloved one chooses from a child, and is in them, and takes care of them, and teaches them. ‘They know these things; and our old men practise; therefore they know. But I do not practise; therefore I know little.

Thur. Nov. 3.--I appeared again at the court, holden on that day ; and again, at the court held, Tuesday, November 22d. On which day Mr. Causton desired to speak with me. He then read me some affidavits which had been made, September 15th, last past; in one of which it was affirmed, that I then abused Mr. Causton in his own house, calling him liar, villain, and so on. It was now likewise repeated before several persons, which indeed I had forgot, that I had been reprimanded at the last court, for an enemy to, and hinderer of, the public peace. I again consulted my friends, who agreed with me, that the time we looked for was now come. And the next morning calling on Mr. Causton, I told him, I designed to set out for England immediately. I set up an advertisement in the Great Square to the same effect, and quietly prepared for my journey. Fri. Dec. 2.--I proposed to set out for Carolina about noon, the tide then serving. But about ten, the magistrates sent for me, and told me, I must not go out of the province ; for I had not answered the allegations laid against me. I replied, “I have appeared at six or seven courts successively, in order to answer them. But I was not suffered so to do, when I desired it time after time.” Then they said, however, I must not go, unless I would give security to answer those allegations at their court. [asked, “ What security?” After consulting together about two hours, the recorder showed me a kind of bond, engaging me, under a penalty of fifty pounds, to appear at their court when I should be required. He added, “ But Mr. Williamson too has desired of us, that you should give bail to answer his action.” I then told him plainly, “ Sir, you use me very ill, and so you do the Trustees. [I will give neither any bond, nor any bail at all. You know your business, and I know mine.”

Arvin Grapin, a Swede, born in Dalecarlia, spoke to this purpose :-- “ Before I was ten years old, I had a serious sense of religion, and great fervour in prayer. This was increased by my reading much in the New Testament; but the more I read, the more earnestly I cried out, ‘ Either these things are not true, or we are not Christians.’ About sixteen my sense of religion began to decline, by my too great fondness for learning especially the oriental tongues, wherein I was instructed by a private preceptor, who likewise did all that in him lay to instruct me in true tivinity. 3 i sarenicen ‘I went to the University of Upsal, and a year or two * A small coin of about a half-penny [nearly one cent] value. 98 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. | Aug. 1738.

6. These extraordinary circumstances seem to have been designed by God for the further manifestation of his work, to cause his power to be known, and to awaken the attention ofa drowsy world. And yet, even from these some have drawn their grand objection against the whole work: “‘‘ We never saw it,’ say they, ‘on this fashion ;’ therefore the work is not of God.” To prove which further, they have not only greatly misrepresented many circumstances that really were, but have added many that were not, often without any regard either to truth or probability. A bare recital of those facts, which were “not done in a corner,” is the best answer to this sort of objections. To those which have been judged to be of more weight, I have occasionally given a more particular answer. 7. Yet I know even this will by no means satisfy the far greater part of those who are now offended. And for a plain reason,--because they will never read it: they are resolved to hear one side, and one only. I know also, that many who do read it will be just of the same mind they were before ; because they have fixed their judgment already, and do not regard any thing which such a fellow can say. Let them see to that. Ihave done my part. I have delivered mine own soul. Nay, I know that many will be greatly offended at this very account. It must be so from the very nature of the things which are therein related. And the best appellation I expect from them, is that of a fool, a madman, an enthusiast. All that in me lies is, to relate simple truth in as inoffensive a manner asl can. Let God give it the effect which pleaseth him, and which is most for his glory! 8. May “He who hath the key of the house of David, who openeth and no man shutteth,” open “a great and effectual door” by whom it pleaseth him, for his everlasting Gospel! May he “send by whom he will send,” so it may “run and be glorified” more and more! May he “ride on conquering and to conquer,” until “the fulness of the Gentiles” be come in; and “the earth be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea!”

condemned malefactors. It was the most glorious instance I ever saw of faith triumphing over sin and death. One observing the tears run fast down the cheeks of one of them in particular, while his eyes were steadily fixed upward, a few moments before he died, asked, “ How do you feel your heart now?” He calmly replied, “I feel a peace which I could not have believed to be possible. And I know it is the peace of God, which passeth all understanding.” My brother took that occasion of declaring the Gospel of peace to a large assembly of publicans and sinners. O Lord God of my fathers, accept even me among them, and cast me not out from among thy children! In the evening I proclaimed mercy to my fellow sinners at Basingshaw church; and the next morning, at St. Antholin’s. Friday, 10, I set out, and Saturday, 11, spent the evening with a little company at Oxford. I was grieved to find prudence had made them leave off singing psalms. I fear it will not stop here. God deliver me, and all that seek him in sincerity, from what the world calls Christian prudence ! Sun. 12.--I preached twice at the Castle. In the following week, I began more narrowly to inquire what the doctrine of the Church of England is, concerning the much controverted point of justification by faith ; and the sum of what I found in the Homilies, J extracted and printed for the use of others.

“My friends affirm I am mad, because I said I was not a Christian a year ago. I affirm, I am not a Christian now. Indeed, what I might have been I know not, had I been faithful to the grace then given, when expecting nothing less, I received such a sense of the forgiveness of my sins, as till thenI never knew. But that Iam not a Christian at this day, I as assuredly know, as that Jesus is the Christ. For a Christian is one who has the fruits of the Spirit of Christ, which (to mention no more) are love, peace, joy. But these Ihave not. I have not any love of God. I do not love either the Father or the Son. Do you ask, how doI know whether I love God, I answer by another question, ‘ How do you know, whether you love me?? Why, as you know, whether you are hot or cold. You feel’ this moment, that you do or do notlove me. And I feel this moment, I do not love God; which therefore I know, because I feel it. There is no word more proper, more clear, or more strong. “ And I know it also by St. John’s plain rule, ‘If any man love the lls REV. Js WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Jan. 1739. world, the love of the Father is not in him. For I love the world. I desire the things of the world, some or other of them, and have done all my life. I have always placed some part of my happiness in some or other of the things that are seen. Particularly in meat and drink, and in the company of those I loved. For many years I have been, yea, and still am, hankering after a happiness, in loving, and ‘being loved by one or another. And in these I have ‘from time to time taken more pleasure than in God. Again, joy in the Holy Ghost I have not. I have now and then some starts of joy in God: but it is not that joy. For it is not abiding. Neither is it greater than I have had on some worldly occasions. So that I can in no wise be said to ‘ rejoice evermore ;’ much less to ‘ rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory.’

Sun. 21.--We were surprised in the evening, while I was expounding in the Minories. A well-dressed, middle-aged woman, suddenly cried out as in the agonies of death. She continued so to do for some time, ' with all the signs of the sharpest anguish of spirit. When she was a little recovered, I desired her to call upon me the next day. She then told me, that about three years before, she was under strong convictions of sin, and in such terror of mind, that she had no comfort in any thing, nor any rest, day or night ; that she sent for the minister of her parish, and told him the distress she was in: upon which he told her husband, she was stark mad, and advised him to send for a physician immediately. A physician was sent for accordingly, who ordered her to be blooded, blistered, and so on. But this did not heal her wounded spirit. So that she continued much as she was before: till the last night, He whose word she at first found to be “sharper than any two-edged sword,” gave her a faint hope, that he would undertake her cause, and heal the soul which had sinned against him. Thur. 25.--I baptized John Smith (late an Anabaptist) and four other adults at Islington. Of the adults I have known baptized lately one only was at that time born again, in the full sense of the word ; that is, found a thorough, inward change, by the love of God filling her Feb. 1739. ] REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. 119 heart. Most of them were only born again in a lower sense ; that is, received the remission of their sins. And some, (as it has since too plainly appeared,) neither in one sense nor the other.

“7, These are some of those inward fruits of the Spirit, which must be felt wheresoever they are ; and without these, I cannot learn from Holy Writ that any man is ‘ born of the Spirit.’ I beseech you, sir, by the mercies of God, that if as yet you know nothing of such inward feelings, if you do not ‘feel in yourself these mighty workings of the Snirit of Christ,’ at least you would not contradict and blaspheme. When the Holy Ghost hath fervently kindled your love toward God, you will know these to be very sensible operations: .As you hear the wind and feel it too, while it strikes upon your bodily organs, you will know you are under the guidance of God’s Spirit the same way, namely, by feeling it .n your soul: by the present peace, and joy, and love, which you feel within as well as by its outward and more distant effects. I am,” &c. 148 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Aug. 1739. I have often wished, that all calm and impartial men would consider what is advanced by another writer, in a little discourse concerning enthusiasm, or religious delusion, published about this time. His words are,-- y ** A minister of our Church, who may look upon it as his duty to warn his parishioners, or an author who may think it necessary to caution his readers, against such preachers or their doctrine, (enthusiastic preachers, I suppose; such as he takes it for granted the Methodist preachers are,) ought to be very careful to act with a Christian spirit, and to advance nothing but with temper, charity, and truth. Perhaps the following rules may be proper to be observed by them :-- “1, Not to blame persons for doing that now which Scripture records holy men of old to have practised ; lest, had they lived in those times, they should have condemned them also. «° 2. Not to censure persons in holy orders, for teaching the same doctrines which are taught in the Scriptures and by our Church; lest they should ignorantly censure what they profess to defend.

Wed. 15.--I endeavoured to guard those who were in their first love, from falling into inordinate affection, by explaining those strange words at Baptist Mills, “« Henceforth know we no man after the flesh.” Fri. 17.--Many of our society met, as we had appoirted, at one in the afternoon ; and agreed that all the members of our society should obey the Church to which we belong, by observing, all Fridays in the year, as days of fasting or abstinence. We likewise agreed that as many as had opportunity should then meet, to spend an hour together in prayer. Mon. 20.--I preached on those words, to a much larger congregation than usual, ‘“* Oughtest not thou to have compassion on thy fellow servant, as I had pity on thee?” Wed. 22.--I was with many that were in heaviness ; two of whom were soon filled with peace and joy. In the afternoon, I endeavoured to guard the weak against what too often occasions heaviness,--levity of temper or behaviour,--from “T said of laughter, It is mad; and of mirth, What doeth it ?” Mon. 27.--For two hours I took up my cross, in arguing with a zealous man, and labouring to convince him that I was not an enemy to the Church of England. He allowed, I taught no other doctrines than those of the Church; but could not forgive my teaching them out of the church walls. He allowed, too, (which none indeed can deny, who has either any regard to truth, or sense of shame,) that “ by this teaching, many souls who, till that time, were ‘perishing for lack of knowledge,’ have been, and are brought, ‘from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God:’” But he added, “ No one cau tell what may be hereafter ; and therefore I say these things ought not to be suffered.” Indeed the report now current in Bristol was, that I was a Papist, if not a Jesuit. Some added, that I was born and bred at Rome; which many cordially believed. O ye fools, when will ye understand that the preaching of justification by faith alone ; the allowing no meritorious \ wise of justification, but the death and righteousness of Christ ; and 150 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Aug. 1739.

Mon. 12.--I left London, and in the evening expounded, at Wycombe, the story of the Pharisee and the Publican. The next morning, a young gentleman overtook me on the road, and, after awhile, asked me if I had seen Whitefield’s Journals. I told him I had. “And what do you think of them?’ said he. ‘ Don’t you think they are d--n’d cant, enthusiasm from end to end? I think so.” I asked him, “ Why do you think so?” He replied, “ Why, he talks so much about joy and stuff, and inward feelings. As I hope to be saved, I cannot tell what to make of it?” _ I asked, “ Did you ever feel the love of God in your heart? If not, how should you tell what to make of it? Whatever is spoke of the religion of the heart, and of the inward workings of the Spirit of God, must appear enthusiasm to those who have not felt them ; that is, if they take upon them to judge of the things which they own they know not.” At four in the afternoon I came to Oxford, and to a small company in the evening explained the nature and extent of that salvation wherewith, “by grace, we are saved through faith.” The next evening I showed, what it is to believe ; as well as, more largely, what are the fruits of true believing; from those words of the Apostle, “ This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.” Thur. 15.--My brother and I set out for Tiverton. About eleven I preached at Burford. On Saturday evening I explained, at Bristol, the nature and extent of Christian perfection: and at nine in the morning preached at Bath, on, “I know that in me dwelleth no good thing.” In the afternoon I exhorted four or five thousand people at Bristol,, neither to neglect nor rest in the means of grace. In the evening I endeavoured to lift up the hands that hung down, by declaring, “ He will not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax.” Mon. 19.--I earnestly exhorted those who had believed, to beware of two opposite extremes,---the one, the thinking while they were in light and joy, that the work was ended, when it was but just begun Nov. 1739. | REV. J. WESLEY S JOURNAL. 169

Thur. 3.--I left London, and the next evening came to Oxford: where I spent the two following days, in looking over the letters which I had received for the sixteen or eighteen years last past. How few traces of inward religion are here! I found but one among all my correspondents who declared, (what I well remember, at that time I knew not how to understand,) that God had “ shed abroad his love in his heart,” and given him the “ peace that passeth all understanding.” But, who believed his report? Should I conceal a sad truth, or declare it for the profit of others? He was expelled out of his society, as a madman ; and being disowned by his friends, and despised and forsaken of all men, lived obscure and unknown for a few months, and then went to Him whom his soul loved. Mon. '7.--I left Oxford. In the evening I preached at Burford ; the next evening at Malmsbury: and on Wednesday, 9, I once more described the “ exceeding great and precious promises,”’ at Bristol. Sut. 12.--I explained the former part of Hebrews vi, and many were “renewed again to repentance.” Sunday, 13, while the sacrament was administering at the house of a person that was sick in Kingswood, a woman, who had been before much tempted of the devil, sunk down as dead. One could not perceive by any motion of her breast, that she breathed; and her pulse was hardly discernible. A strange sort of dissimulation this! I would wish those who think it so, only to stop their own breath one hour, and I will then subscribe to their opinion. Mon. 14.--I began expounding the Scriptures in order, at the new room, at six in the morning; by which means many more attend the college prayers (which immediately follow) than ever before. In the afternoon I preached at Downing, four miles from Bristol, on, “God hath given unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son :” And on Tuesday, 15, at Sison, five miles from Bristol, on “ the blood” which “ cleanseth us from all sin.” After preaching I visited a young man, dangerously ill, who a day or two after cried out aloud, “ Lord Jesus, thou knowest that I love thee! And I have thee, and will never let thee go :” and died immediately.

I asked him, “ Is there still an old man in you?” He said, * Yes; and will be as long as I live.” I said, “Is there then corruption in your heart?” He replied, “In the heart of my old man there is: but not in.the heart of my new man.” I asked, “‘ Does the experience of your brethren agree with yours?” He answered, “ I know what I have now spoken is the experience of all the brethren and sisters throughout our Church.” A few of our brethren and sisters sitting by, then spoke what they experienced. He told them, (with great emotion, his hand a? aa -4 May, 1741.] REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. 209 trembling much,) “ You all deceive your own souls. There 3 no higher state than that I have described. You are in a very dangerous error. You know not your own hearts. You fancy your corruptions are taken away, whereas they are only covered. Inward corruption never can be taken away, till our bodies are in the dust.” Was there inward corruption in our Lord? Or, cannot the servant be as his Master? Sun. 3.--I gave the scriptural account of one who is “in Christ a new creature,” from whom * old things are passed away,” and in whom ‘all things are become new.” In the afternoon I explained at Maryle-bone Fields, to a vast multitude of people, “* He hath showed thee, O man, what is good. And what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” The devil’s children fought valiantly for their master, that. his kingdom should not be destroyed. And many stones fell on my right hand and on my left. But when I began to examine them closely, what reward they were to have for their labour, they vanished away like smoke.

“Now I would write a little of the travail of my own soul. I thought myself right long since; but when the light of life came, I saw myself ready to die in my sins. I had faith; but I had it by knowledge and not in power: yet by this faith I had great liberty. Nevertheless this faith kept my heart corrupt, and the whole man of sin alive. My way of proceeding was thus: sometimes I was overtaken in a fault, and so was put to a stand a little. But as soon as I could, I would wipe myself by knowledge, saying, ‘Christ died for sinners.’ I was right so far, and no further. He died fur sinners: but not to save him that continues in his sins. For whomsoever he cleanses, they are clean indeed ; first sinners, then saints, and so they remain. By and by I was overtaken again: and the oftener I was overtaken, the stronger I thought myself in the Lord. Yea, for my corruption’s sake I was forced to get more knowledge, or else I should have been condemned. So I arrived at such a pitch of knowledge, (that is, of notional faith,) that I could crucify Christ with a 250 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [ May, 1742. one hand, and take pardon with the other; so that I was always happy. Here was the mystery of iniquity, conceived in my heart. For it led me to this; if I was to take of any men’s goods, I would say or think, ‘{ am a sinner of myself; but Christ died for me; so his righteousness is mine.’ And further, I could not see, but if I was to kill a man, yet I should be pure. So great a friend to sin and the devil was I, that 1 would have made sin and the devil to become the righteousness of God in Christ ; yea, that I began to love him, whom the Lord hath reserved for everlasting fire.

** At six, as soon as family prayers were over, they had their supper; at seven, the maid washed them; and, beginning at the youngest, she undressed and got them all to bed by eight; at which time she left them in their several rooms awake; for there was no such thing allowed of in our house, as sitting by a child till it fell asleep. They wereso constantly used to eat and drink what was given them, that when any of them was ill, there was no difficulty in making them take the most unpleasant medicine: for they durst not refuse it, though some of them would presently throw it up. This I mention, to show that a person may be taught to take any thing, thovgh it be never so much against his stomach. ‘In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is to conquer their will, and bring them to an obedient temper. To inform the understanding is a work of time, and must with children proceed by slow degrees as they are able to bear it; but the subjecting the will, is a thing which must be done at once; and the sooner the better. For by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy, which is hardly ever after conquered; and never, without using such severity as would be as painful to me asto the child. In the esteem of the world they pass for kind and indulgent, whom I call cruel, parents, who permit their children to get habits which they know must be afterward broken. Nay, some are so stupidly fond, as in sport to teach their children to do things which, in a while after, they have severely beaten them for doing. Whenever a child is corrected, it must be conquered ; and this will be no hard matter to do, if it be not grown headstrong by too much indulgence. And when the will of a child is totally subdued, and it is brought to revere and stand in awe of the parents, then a great many childish follies and inadvertences may be passed by. Someshould be overlooked and taken no notice of, and others mildly reproved; but no wilful transgression ought ever to be forgiven children, without chastisement, less or more, as the nature and circumstances of the offence require.

“They were quickly made to understand, they might have nothing they cried for, and instructed to speak handsomely for what they wanted. They were not suffered to ask even the lowest servant for aught without saying, ‘Pray, give me such a thing;’ and the servant was chid, if she ever let them omit that word. Taking God’s name in vain, cursing and swearing, profaneness, cbscenity, rude, ill-bred names, were never heard among them. Nor were they ever permitted to call each other by their proper names, without the addition of brother or sister. “None of them were taught to read till five years old, except Kezzy,, in whose case I was overruled; and she was more years learning, than any of the rest had been months. The way of teaching was this :--The day before a child began to learn, the house was set in order, every one’s work appointed them, and a charge given, that none should come into. the room from nine till twelve, or from two till five; which, you know were our school hours. One day was allowed the child wherein to learn. its letters; and each of them did in that time know all its letters, great and small, except Molly and Nancy, who were a day and a half before they knew them perfectly; for which I then thought them very dull; but since I have observed how long many children are learning the hornbook, I have changed my opinion. But the reason why I thought them so then was, because the rest learned so readily; and your brother Samuel, who was the first child I ever taught, learned the alphabet in a few hours. He was five years old on the 10th of February; the next day he began to learn; and as soon as he knew the letters, began at the first chapter of Genesis. He was taught to spell the first verse, then to read it over and over, till he could read it off-hand without any hesitation; so on to the second, &c, till he took ten verses for a lesson, which he quickly did. Easter fell low that year; and by Whitsuntide he could read a chapter very well; for he read continually, and had such a prodigious memory, that I cannot remember ever to have told him the same word twice.

“J do yet further declare, that (whatever indiscretion I may in other respects have been guilty of) I know of no just offence or scandal which I ever gave by frequenting the meetings, or attending the expositions, of the persons commonly called Methodists; and that I verily believe no offence was ever taken thereat, unless either by persons loaded with prejudice, or by those who enter not into the kingdom of heaven themselves, and if others would enter in, suffer them not. I do, lastly, declare, that J look upon myself to be under no kind of obligation, (except only, that} do still assent and consent to the Articles and Liturgy of the Church, to observe any thing contained in that scandalous paper, so unchristianls imposed upon me. Witness my hand, * Cuartes Caspar Graves.” After having regulated the society here and in Kingswood, I set out again for Landon. On Monday, 30, I read over that excellent tract, ' TAOS a 268 _ REV. J. WESLEY § JOURNAL. [Sept. 1742. Mr. Middleton’s Essay on Church Government, so nicely avoiding the two extremes of either exalting or depressing the regal power. Tuesday, 31.--I read once more the Life of that good and wise (though much mistaken) man, Gregory Lopez. Surely it must be a compliment made him by the biographer, (of which Gregory himself was in no wise worthy,) that “he ascribed all his virtues to the merits and mediation of the Queen of Heaven.” We reached London in the afternoon. Friday, September 3.--I preached on Phil. i, 9: “ This I pray, that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and in all judgment ;” or rather “ feeling,” as it is mm the margin. It pleased God to make this discourse an occasion of discovering such wiles of Satan as it never entered into my heart to conceive.

Sat. 4.--I was pressed to visit a poor murderer in Newgate, whe was much afflicted both in body and soul. I objected; it could not be ; for all the turhkeys, as well as the keeper, were so good Christians, they abhorred the name of a Methodist, and had absolutely refused to admit me even to one who earnestly begged it the morning he was to die. However, I went, and found, by a surprising turn, that all the doors were now open to me. I exhorted the sick malefactor to cry unto God with all his might, for grace to repent and believe the Gospel. It was not long before the rest of the felons flocked round, to whom I spoke strong words concerning the Friend of sinners, which they received with as great signs of amazement as if it had been a voice from heaven. When I came down into the Common Hall, (I think they called it,) one of the prisoners there asking me a question, gave me occasion to speak among them also; more and more still running together, while I declared, God was “not willing any of them should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Mon. 6.--Finding many had been offended at the sermon I preached on Friday night, especially those who were supposed to be strong in faith, I determined to examine the matter thoroughly. Accordingly I desired M. C., M. F., E. H., and A. G., and a few others, to meet me with Sarah Cl., Jane J--n, and Ann P., to whom they had said most concerning the point in question. I then heard each of them relate her experience at large. I afterward examined them severally, touch- ‘ing the circumstances which I had not understood; on which I then talked with several others also. And thus far I approved of their experience, (because agreeable to the written word,) as to their feeling the working of the Spirit of God, in peace, and joy, and love. But as to what some of them said further, concerning feeling the blood of Christ running upon their arms, or going down their throat, or poured like warm water upon their breast or heart; I plainly told them, the utmost I‘could allow, without renouncing both Scripture and reason, was, that some of these circumstances might be from God (though I could not

which no body could understand ; that she had sent for a minister, but almost as soon as he came, began roaring in so strange a manner, (her tongue at the same time hanging out of her mouth, and her face being distorted into the most terrible form,) that he cried out, “It is the devil, doubtless! It is the devil!” and immediately went away. I suppose this was some unphilosophical minister; else he would have said, “ Stark mad! Send her to Bedlam.” I asked, “ What good do you think I can do?” One answered, “ We cannot tell; but Mrs. K.” (I just relate what was spoken to me, without passing any judgment upon it,) “ earnestly desired you might come, if you was any where near; saying she had seen you ina dream, and should know you immediately: but the devil said, (those were her own expressions,) ‘I will tear thy throat out before he comes.’ But afterward, she said, his words were, ‘If he does come, I will let thee be quiet; and thou shalt be as if nothing ailed thee, till he is gone away.’ ” A very odd kind of madness this! I walked over about noon; but when we came to the house, desired all those who came with me to stay below. One showing me the way, I went up straight to her room. As soon as I came to the bedside, she fixed her eyes, and said, “ You are Mr. Wesley; I am very well now, I thank God: nothing ails me; only I am weak.” I called them up, and we began to sing,

Fripay, October 28, 1'743.--We rode with William Holmes, “an Israelite indeed,” from Epworth to Sykehouse. Here I preached at ten, and hastened on to Leeds ; from whence, setting out early in the morning, I had hopes of reaching Wensley Dale before it was dark ; but it could not be; so in the dusk of the evening, understanding we had-five or six miles still to ride, I thought it best to procure a guide. In less than an hour, it being extremely dark, I perceived we were got out of all road. We were in a large meadow, near a river, and (it seemed to the) almost surrounded with water. I asked our guide, “Do you know where you are?” and he honestly answered, “ No.” So we rode on as we could, till about eight we came to a little house whence we were directed into a lane which led to Wensley. Sun. 30.--Mr. Clayton read prayers, and I preached, on, “ What must I do to be saved ?”? I showed, in the plainest words I could devise, that mere outside religion would not bring us to heaven; that ncne could go thither, without inward holiness, which was only to be attained by faith. As I went back through the church yard, many of the parish were in high debate what religion this preacher was of. Some said, “He must be a Quaker ;” others, “an Anabaptist:” but, at length, one deeper learned than the rest, brought them all clearly over to his opinion, that he was a Presbyterian Papist. Mon. 31.--We set out early in the morning, and in the evening came to Newcastle. Wed. November 2.--The following advertisement was published :-- For the benefit of Mr. Este. By the Edinburgh Company of Comedians, on Friday, November 4, will be acted, a Comedy, called To which will-be added, a Farce, called

nion, but of practice. We break with no man for his opinion. We think and let think. I cannot better express my sense of this, than it is done by a serious man in the following letter :-- “Dear Sir,--I ought to have mentioned sooner my receiving yours, concerning Mr. Edwards, of New England. Mr. Robe is of his opinion as to the thing, (the doctrine of particular redemption,) but not as to the absolute necessity of believing either the one or the other side of the question. And it is the maintaining the necessity of his side of the question, which you justly blame. For the same reason I suppose you would blame the maintaining the necessity of your side of the question. On whatsoever side of the question one be, I apprehend, this mistake of the necessity of it proceeds from what Mr. Locke calls, ‘ the association ot ideas.’ People long accustomed to explain the essential things of Chris tianity, in such a particular way, and never having observed, how they can be explained in any other, transfer their zeal for these essential things, to their own way of explication, and believe there. is a necessary connection between them, when in fact there is not. This has produced many mischiefs and animosities, among all sorts of people. I would take my ground to stand on for clearing this, on what you say in the same letter to me: ‘ Whosoever agrees with us in that account of practical religion given in The Character of a Methodist, I regard not what his other opinions are; the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. Iam more assured that love is of God, than that any opinion whatsoever is so. Herein may we increase more and more.’ “T have often thought since I was favoured with that letter, how far it natively and clearly went, as to many things that occasion contentions and schisms, even among real Christians: and what, as it natively and clearly follows from this principle, our practice ought to be.

“ Dear Sir,--For more than three years I walked clearly in the light of God’s countenance. Nothing could interrupt my peace, nor did I feel the least rising of any evil temper; so that I believed I was, in the full sense, born of God; but at last, I found I had been mistaken. It isnow about a year since I found, I could not bear all things; I could not bear to be slighted by those I loved. This occasioned pride and resentment to rise in my heart, so that I was forced to own, ‘I have still an evil heart” Then I was tempted to despair; but the Lord was still nigh me, and lifted up my head. He showed me my sin; yet did he not hide himself from me; but I could still call him, ‘ my Lord, and my God.’ 356 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Nov 1740 “It does not appear to me, that there is any need for us, in this case. tu ary to pull down one another. For though a person does think he has attained, when he has not; yet if he be simple and sincere, and desires to know himself, God will show him, in the time and manner that seemeth him best. As to myself, I often think, had I been faithful to the grace of God, I never had needed to know trouble more. For I believe he would have carried me on from grace to grace. till he had made me meet for glory. But I know not, if it is needful that I should see more of my heart. May his will be done! Only make me faithful in the fight, and then do what seemeth thee good.

“J find a great difference between what I once felt in myself, and what | feel now. Then I felt nothing but love, and peace, and joy in believing. Now, though I feel a measure of all these heavenly tempers, yet I feel other tempers also; and if I do not continually fight against them, Iam overcome. The devil tempted me then; but it was as nothing; for he seemed to have no part in me. But now I find an enemy in my own bosom, that is ready to betray me every moment. I believe, did I not yet expect a full deliverance from sin, I should grow faint and weary. But the hope of that gives me fresh courage to go on. For I cannot doubt but I shall be a living witness of it. O may the Lord hasten the time! Dear sir, do not fail to pray, that he may fulfil that great work in “ Your daughter i in Christ, ‘ “ Sept. 21, 1745. “Dear Sir, -I will let you know, as near as I can, how the Lord hath dealt with me ever since I can remember. When I was five or six years -oid, I had many serious thoughts about death and judgment. I wanted to be good, but I knew not how. I was often in great trouble for fear I should die and go to hell. If at any time I[ told a lie, I was like one in hell. I was afraid to be one moment by myself, for I thought the devil would come and tear me in pieces; and so I continued till I was about eight years old. Then I received a measure of the love of God. I loved Jesus Christ, so that I thought I could suffer any thing for his sake. I could not bear te be with other children; but when I was from school, I would go by myself, and pray, and read: I prayed much for death, for T wanted to be with Christ. And I thought if I lived, I should sin and yffend God.

“Rev. Sir,--The first sight of you, at Wakefield, sunk my proud spirits; and I believe had I not gone up stairs, to harden my heart against the truth, what you said would have made a deeper impression upon me. I often afterward thought, ‘ These things are true; but why does nobody understand them, but my husband and Frank Scot?’ Then the rich clave to me, and advised me to use my husband ill, and see if that. would not drive him from this way. And sometimes I used fair means. But this was dangerous; for then he could speak freely to me, and I found it stole upon me. But I took great care, he should not perceive it, lest he should follow on, and make me like himself. Then I went to the vicar, who said, my husband was mad, and there were no such things as he pretended to. Hereby my heart was hardened more and more, till I resolved to go away and leave him: so J told him; which made him weep much, and strive to show me the wickedness of my resolution. However, by the advice of my old friend, the vicar, I got over that doubt, took about sixty pounds of my husband’s money, and fixed the time of my privately setting out for London. But God prevented me; for I found myself with child: so that design was at an end. “ Soon after, as few in Wakefield would employ my husband, he was obliged to remove to Leeds. What I now feared was, that they of the society would come and talk to me. But I soon forced them away, I was so sharp and abusive to any that came. Yet my heart began to soften; and when [spoke things of them which I thought were false, J was after ward checked in my own mind. I began to like that my husband should overcome, when talking to gainsayers. I went more to church and sacrament; and the time you was here before, when my husband said you should come and sce me, it pleased me much, though I hid it from him; 358 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Nov. 1745

372 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Aug. 1746 ‘ though he had an estate of forty pounds a year, and a living of near three hundred, of which he has been rector three and forty years.” Wed. 6.--I preached at Oak Hill. How is this? I have not known so many persons earnestly mourning after God, of any society of this size in England, and so unblamable in their behaviour: and yet not one person has found a sense of the pardoning love of God, from the first preaching here to this day! When I mentioned this to the society, there was such a mourning, as one would believe should pierce the clouds. My-voice was quickly drowned. We continued crying to God with many loud and bitter cries, till I was constrained to break away, betwee. four and five, and take horse for Shepton. Here the good curate (I was informed) had hired a silly man, with a few other drunken champions, to make a disturbance. Almostas soon as I began, they began screaming out a psalm ; but our singing quickly swallowed up theirs. Soon after, their orator named a text, and (as they termed it) preached a sermon; his attendants mean time being busy (not in hearing him, but) in throwing stones and dirt at our brethren; those of them, I mean, who were obliged to stand at the door. When T had done preaching, I would have gone out to them; it being my rule, confirmed by long experience, always to look a mob in the face : but our people took me up, whether I would or no, and carried me into the house. The rabble melted away in a quarter of an hour, and we walked home in peace.

congregation, ‘ Now Wesley has sent down for a huncred pounds; and it must be raised directly. Nay, it is true.’ O sir, is this possible? Can it be, that you should be so totally void (I will not ay, of conscience, of religion, but) of good nature, as to credit such a tale? and of good manners and common sense, as thus to repeat it? I must beg that you would either justify or retract this; (for it is a point of no small concern ;) and that I may know what you propose to do, before I set out for London. ““T am, Reverend Sir, “Your brother and servant, for Christ’s sake.” But he never favoured me with an answer. Sat. 25.--I was welcomed into Port Isaac by more company than 1 expected. The man who had some time since headed the mob when they left Edward Grenfill for dead, had gathered all his troops, and ceceived us as soon as we entered the first street. They all attended us to Mr. Scantlebury’s door, who (Mr. T. informed me) desired I would lodge at his house. I knocked long at the door but no one answered: at length, the master appeared,----a hoary, venerable old man. I asked, “ Pray, is Mr. T. here?” He replied, “ Mr. T. is not here. But, pray what may thy name be?” I answered, “ My name is John Wesley.” He said, “I have heard of thee.” Perceiving that he had no more to say, I turned back to another house. The mob followed, hallooing and shouting ; but none of them offered to strike, or even throw any thing. Only their captain, after some hard words, lifted up his stick at me once or twice. But one of his companions interposed. He then went quietly away.

Sun. 23.--The room was so crowded in the morning, that I thought it best to begin before the usual time in the evening. Yet were a multitude of people got tegether, in the house, yard, and street, far more than my voice could reach. I cried aloud to as many of them as coula hear, “ All things are ready: come ye to the marriage.” I had then delivered my message: so before ten we took boat, and about eleven reached the ship. The wind was right ahead. Then succeeded a dead Sept. 1747. | REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. 407 calm; so that we did not get out of the bay till Monday evening ; nor within sight of Wales till Wednesday, 26. By this means we had an opportunity of talking largely both with our fellow passengers and the sailors, many of whom received our words with gladness. About two in the afternoon we landed at Holyhead. Between three and four we took horse, and came in the evening to Thomas Thomas’s, near Rydy-Spardon. He had before desired Jonathan Reeves to call there in fico return ; but we were at a great loss, none in the house understanding English, and none of us understanding Welsh; till Mr. Morgan, a neighbouring schoolmaster, came, who took us to his own house ; and in the morning, Thursday, 27, rode with us to the passage. We reached Carnarvon before ten, T'annabull in the evening, and Llanidloes, Friday, 28.

attempt climbing up the bank. This frighted the horse which was close behind, and made him prance and throw his head to and fro, till the bit of the bridle catched hold of the cape of my great coat, and pulled me backward off my horse. I fell as exact on the path, between the wagon and the bank, as if one had taken me in his arms and laid me down there. Both our horses stood stock still, one just behind me, the other before ; so, by the blessing of God, I rose unhurt, mounted again, and rode on. At twelve I preached at Deverel; in the evening at Bearfield; and on Friday, 29, came to Bristol. Mon. February 1.--1 received an account of Mr. Towers, of Leeds who had even prayed that he might not know his sins forgiven, as believing it was the highest presumption. But, notwithstanding this, as he lay one night upon his bed, he did receive the knowledge of salvation, by the remission of sins: and he declared it boldly to the confusion, at least, if not conviction, of those who denied the truth. Sat. 6. --I preached at eight in the morning at Bath, and in the evening at Coleford. The colliers of this place were “ darkness” indeed ; but now they are “light in the Lord.” Tues. 9.--I met about sixty of the society in Bristol, to consult about enlarging the Room; and indeed securing it, for there was no small danger of its falling upon our heads In two or three days, two hundred and thirty pounds were subscribed. We immediately procured experienced builders to make an estimate of the expense; and I appointed five stewards (besides those of the society) to superintend the work.

Mon. December 5.--I retired to Newington to write. I preached every evening to a little company. One who stumbled in among them on Wednesday was a man eminent for all manner of wickedness: he appeared much affected, and went away full of good desires and resolutions. Thur. 8.--A poor mourner found peace. When she related it to me in the morning, I told her, “If you watch and pray, God will give you more of his love.” She replied, “* More! Why, is it possible I should feel more love to God than I do now?” the natural thought of new-born babes, who feel as much as their hearts will then contain. In the evening I saw one in a far different state. He was crying vut, (in a high fever,) “ O sir, I am dying without God, without Christ, without hope!” Ispoke strongly of the mercies of God in Christ, and left him a little revived. The next night he told me, “ For some time after you was here, I was--I know not how; so light andeasy! I had no doubt but God would have mercy upon me; but now I am dark again: I fear lest I should perish at the last.” He then broke out into prayer. I left him a little easier, beginning again to cast his care upon God. Sun. 11.--Several of our brethren called upon him, and found his hope gradually increasing. Mon. 12.--He expressed a strong confiderce in the mercy of God, and said, he feared nothing but lest he should live and turn back into the world. Before noon he was a little delirious ; but as soon as any one spoke of God, he recovered himself, and prayed so vehemently as to set all that heard him in tears. I called once more about six in the evening, and commended his soul to God. He was speechless, but not without sense, as the motion of his lips plainly showed ; though his eyes were generally fixed upward, with a look which said, “ I see God.” About half an hour after I went away, his soul was set at liberty, Thus, in the strength of his years, died Francis Butts, one in whose lips was found no guile. He was an honest man, fearing God, and earnestly endeavouring to work righteousness.

the very sight of whom struck me with awe. He told me, his only son, about nine years ago, came to hear me preach at Bearfield. He was then in the flower of his age, but remarkable above his years, both for piety, sense, and learning. He was clearly and deeply convinced of the truth, but returned home ill of the small-pox. Nevertheless he praised God for having been there, rejoiced in a full sense of his love, and triumphed more and more over sickness, pain, and death, till his soul returned to God. He said, he had loved me ever since, and greatly desired to see me; and that he blessed God he had seen me once, before he followed his dear son into eternity. At five I preached at Bearfield again. This day I was wet from morning to night, with the continued rain; but I found no manner of inconvenience. Tues. 14.--Having set apart an hour weekly for that purpose, I met

In the evening [ preached at Lantrisant. Thursday, 6,--We rode to a hard-named place on the top of a mountain. I scarce saw any house near: however, a large number of honest, simple people soon came together; but few could understand me: so Henry Lloyd, when I had done, repeated the substance of my sermon in Welsh. The behaviour of the people recompensed us for our labour in climbing up to them. About noon we came to Abérdare, just as the bell was ringing for a burial. This had brought a great number together, to whom, after the burial, I preached in the church. We had almost continued rain from Aberdare to the great rough mountain that hangs over the vale of Brecknock: but as soon as we gained the top of this, we left the 448 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [ April, 1749 clouds behind us. We had a mild, fair, sunshiny evening the remainder of our journey. Fri. '7.--We reached Garth. Saturday, 8.--I married my brother and Sarah Gwynne. It was a solemn day, such as became the dignity of a Christian marriage.

Sun. 17.--I preached, morning and evening, in the Castle Garth ; and, on Wednesday, 20, set out for the western societies. In the evening, at Hinely Hill, our hearts were all melted down in considering our great High Priest; who, though he has gone into the heavens, is still sensibly “touched with the feeling of our infirmities.” A deep sense of his love constrained many to call upon him with “ strong cries and tears ;” and many others, though not in words, yet with groanings that could not be uttered. Thur. 21.--Moved by the pressing instances of Mr. Cownley, and convinced the providence of God called me thither, I left all my company, but Mr. Perronet, at Hinely Hill, and set out for Whitehaven. The next day I preached there in the market place, to a multitude of people, on, “ Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” I saw they were moved, and resolved to improve the opportunity. So, after preaching, I desired those who determined to serve God, to meet me apart from the great congregation. To these I explained the design, nature, and use of Christian societies. Abundance were present again at five in the morning, though we had no room but the market place. At three in the afternoon I preached at Hensingham, a large colliery, about a mile from the town. The eagerness of the people put me in mind of the early days at Kingswood. O why should we not be always what we were once? Why should any leave their first love? At six I preached again in Whitehaven, on, ‘“* Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden ;” and at eight endeavoured to mould as many as desired it into a regular society.

Sun. 22.--I preached at seven in Richard Cawley’s house; and, about one, at Little Acton. We then rode on to Woor; and the next afternoon came, wet and weary enough, to Wednesbury. I hoped for a few hours’ rest here; but it was a vain hope; for notice had been given that I would preach at Bilbrook in the evening; so I had seven or cight miles to ride back. I preached about six, and again in the morning. ‘qaoeeee PT eee oo oe a “ i ‘| 470 REV. Je WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Nov. 1749. On Tuesday, 24, about noon we came to Dudley. At one I went to the market place, and proclaimed the name of the Lord to a huge, unwieldy, noisy multitude; the greater part of whom seemed in no wise to know “wherefore they were come together.” I continued speaking about half an hour, and many grew serious and attentive, til] some of Satan’s servants pressed in, raging and blaspheming, and throwing whatever came to hand. I then retired to the house from which I came. The multitude poured after, and covered over with dirt many that were near me ; but I had only a few specks. I preached in Wednesbury at four, to a nobler people, and was greatly comforted among them: so I was likewise in the morning, Wednesday, 25. How does a praying congregation strengthen the preacher ! After preaching again at one, I rode to Birmingham. This had been long a dry uncomfortable place; so I expected little good here: but I was happily disappointed. Such a congregation I never saw there before: not a scoffer, nor a trifler, not an inattentive person (so far as I could discern) among them; and seldom have I known so deep, solemn a sense of the power, and presence,.and love of God. The same blessing we had at the meeting of the society ; and again at the morning preaching. Will then God at length cause even this barren wilderness to blossom and bud as the rose ?

Wed. 14.--The watch-night at the Foundery seemed the shortest I had ever known. Indeed, we knew not how the hours stole away, while prayer was lost in praise and thanksgiving. Ft. 16.--We had a solemn fast-day, meeting, as before, at five, seven, ten, and one. Many of the rich were at the chapel in the evening. ‘ Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” Sat. 17.--After preaching at Snowsfields, I went into a friend’s house. A poor sinner indeed followed me, one who was broken in pieces by the convincing Spirit, and uttered such cries as pierced the hearts of all that heard. We poured out our souls before God in prayer, and light sprung up in her heart. Sun. 18.--To-day, likewise, wherever we assembled together, God caused his power to be known ; but particularly at the love-feast. The honest simplicity with which several spoke, in declaring the manner of God’s dealings with them, set the hearts of others on fire. And the flame spread more and more ; till, having stayed near an hour longer than usual, we were constrained to part. Mon. 19.--I preached at Windsor about one, and at St. Ann’s in the evening. The congregation was large, and extremely still and attentive, a very few persons excepted. Tues. 20.--Mr. M had given notice, without my knowledge, that I would preach at Hayes on Tuesday. I was afraid few would trouble themselves to hear: but I was deceived; for there was a large congregation. Surely some of these will at length understand “ the things which belong unto their peace.” Wed. 21.--I preached 1n the old French church, in Greyeagle-street, Spitalfields. It was extremely full, and many of the hearers were greatly moved: but who will endure to the end? Thur. 22.--Having been sent for several times, I went to see a young woman in Bedlam. But I had not talked with her long, before one gave me to know, that none of these preachers were to come there. So we are forbid to go to Newgate, for fear of making them wicked ; and to Bedlam, for fear of driving them mad! Tues. 27.--I at length forced myself from London We dined a little beyond Colnbrook, spoke plain to all in the house, and left them full of thankfulness, and of good resolutions. I preached at Reading

Sun. 26.--I preached at Howell Thomas’s, in Trefollwin parish, to a small, earnest congregation. As many did not understand, one of the brethren repeated the substance of the sermon in Welsh. In the afternoon I went to William Pritchard’s, though much against my will, as there was none there to interpret, and I was afraid very few of my hearers could understand English. But I was mistaken: the congregation was larger than I had ever seen in Anglesey. A considerable number of them understood English tolerably well ; and the looks, sighs, and gestures of those that did not, showed that God was speaking to their hearts. It was a glorious opportunity : the whole congregation seemed to be melted down: so little dv we know the extent of God’s power. Tf he will work, what shall hinder him ? The wind being contrary, I accepted of the invitation of an honest exciseman, (Mr. Holloway,) to stay at his house till it should change. Here I was in a little, quiet, solitary spot, (maximé animo exoptatum meo !) [most heartily desired by me !] where no human voice was heard, but those of the family. On Tuesday I desired Mr. Hopper to ride ove~ to Holyhead, and inquire concerning our passage. He brought word that we might probably pass in a day or two: so on Wednesday we both went thither. Here we overtook John Jane, who had set out on foot from Bristol, with three shillings in his pocket. Six nights out of the seven since he set out, he had been entertained by utter strangers. He went by us we could not tell how, and reached Holyhead on Sunday, with one penny left.

In the evening I was surprised to see, instead of some poor, plain people, a room full of men, daubed with gold and silver. That I might not go out of their depth, I began expounding the story of Dives and Lazarus. It was more applicable than I was aware ; several of them (as I afterward learned) being eminently wicked men. I delivered my own soul; but they could in no wise bear it. One and another walked away, murmuring sorely. Four stayed till I drew to a close: they then put on their hats, and began talking to one another. I mildly reproved them; on which they rose up and went away, railing and blaspheming. I had then a comfortable hour with a company of plain, honest Welshmen. In the night there was a vehement storm. Blessed be God that we were safe on shore! Saturday, 31.--I determined to wait one week longer, and, if we could not sail then, to go and wait for a ship at Bristol. At seven in the evening, just as I was going down to preach, I heard a huge noise, and took knowledge of the rabble of gentlemen. They had now strengthened themselves with drink and numbers, and placed Captain Gr (as they called him) at their head. He soon burst open both the outward and inner door, struck old Robert Griffith, our landlord, several times, kicked his wife, and, with twenty fullmouthed oaths and curses, demanded, “‘ Where is the parson ?”” Robert Griffith came up, and desired me to go into another room, where he locked me in. The Captain followed him quickly, broke open one or two doors, and got on a chair, to look on the top of a bed: but his foot slipping, (as he was not a man made for climbing,) he fell down backward all his length, He rose leisurely, turned about, and, with his troop, walked away.

All this time God gave us great peace at Bandon, notwithstanding the unwearied labours, both public and private, of good Dr. B , to stir up the people. But, Saturday, 26, many were under great apprehensions of what was to be done in the evening. I began preaching in the main street at the usual hour, but to more than twice the usual congregation. After I had spoke about a quarter of an hour, a clergyman, who had planted himself near me, with a very large stick in his hand, according to agreement, opened the scene. (Indeed his friends assured me he was in drink, or he would not have done it.) But, before he had uttered many words, two or three resolute women, by main strength, pulled him into a house; and, after expostulating a little, sent him away through the garden. But here he fell violently on her that conducted him, not in anger, but love; (such as it was ;) so that she was constrained to repel force by force, and cuff him soundly before he would let her go. The next champion that appeared was one Mr. M » @ young gentleman of the town. He was attended by two others, with pistols in their hands. But his triumph too was but short; some of the people quickly bore him away, though with much gentleness and civility. The third came on with greater fury ; but he was encountered by a butcher of the town, (not one of the Methodists,) who used him as he would an ox, bestowing one or two hearty blows upon his head. This cooled his courage, especially as none took his part. So I quietly finished my discourse. Sun. 277.--I wrote to the mayor of Cork, as follows :-- ““ Mr. Mayor,--An hour ago I received ‘ A letter to Mr. Butler,’ just reprinted at Cork. The publishers assert, ‘it was brought down from Dublin to be distributed among the society; but Mr. Wesley called in as many as he could.’ Both these assertions are absolutely false. I read some lines of that letter when I was in Dublin; but never read it over before this morning. Who the author of it is I know not; but this I know, I never calleu in one, neither concerned myself about it; much less brought any down to distribute among the society.

“From the time she joined the society, she was a true lover of her ministers and her brethren ; not suffering any to speak evil of them, particularly of her ministers: and if her innocent answers did not stop them, she left theircompany. In the beginning of December (ast she was indisposed; and on Saturday, 8, took her room. In the afternoon she broke out, ‘ When shall I see my Jesus? I want to know that he has taken away my sins.’ After a while she cried, ‘He does love me. I know Jesus loves me. My Father! He is my Father and my God.’ “Yet on the Wednesday following she was in deep distress. ‘I found her,’ says one who then visited her, ‘crying out, “O that I was washed in the blood of the Lamb! Pray for me, that I may know my sins are forgiven.” I prayed with her several times, and stayed all night. She did not sleep at all; her pain of body, as well as mind, being exceeding great. She was almost continually in prayer, crying for mercy, till I went away, about eight in the morning. ** About nine in the evening 1 came again. She was still in violent pain, but did not seem to regard this in comparison of her soul. Her continual ery was, “I do not know Christ: I want an interest in Christ: O that I might know him! O that he would forgive my sins; that he would wash me whiter than-snow!” She had never any ease but while we were at prayer, with which she was never satisfied ; but held me, and would not let me rise from my knees, sometimes for an hour together. I was praying with her about twelve o’clock, when she called out, “ Help me to praise the Lord. I feel my sins are forgiven. 1am washed, and made whiter than snow.” She spent the remainder of the night in praise and prayer. About eight in the morning I went home. Pe Ad oe % ae ¥ 516 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Jane, 1751.

Thur. 19.--I rode to Birmingham, and, from the behaviour of the people, both this and the following evening, found reason to hope that some of the seed which has been sown here will bear lasting fruit. Saturday, 21.--I rode to Wednesbury, where Mr. , vicar of : had appointed to meet me. I rejoiced to find so great a change. Since he has known the pardoning love of God, he has been swiftly going on from faith to faith, and growing not in knowledge only, but in love. Sun. 22.--After preaching at five, I returned tu Birmingham. Many were much afraid of my preaching in the street, expecting I know not what mischief to be done. Vain fear! I saw not one person behave amiss, while I declared, “‘ There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth.” At one I preached at Tipton Green, to a large congregation, though the wind was ready to cut us in two; and about five, to a much larger, at Wednesbury ; where, in spite of all the wiles of Satan 28 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [ April, 1752. and the cunning craftiness of men, the plain, genuine Gospel runs and is glorified. Wed. 23.--I spent an agreeable hour with Mr. , curate of W. ; an honest, upright man, I verily believe, and willing to know the whole counsel of God. In the evening I preached to a small, serious congregation, at Billbrook. The storm of wind, snow, and hail, was ready for us in the morning, almost as soon as we set out, and continued most part of the day. When we had heaths or commons to cross, it was not easy to sit a horse, especially as the wind was, full in our teeth. . However, we reached Poole (two miles from Nantwich) in the evening, and found a congregation gathered from many miles round; several of whom sat up all night, for fear of losing the morning sermon. Wed. 25.--After preaching at five and at nine, I rode on to Alpraham, where a large congregation of serious, sensible people attended, both

Wed. 28.--We rode to Bristol. I now looked over Mr. Prince’s «Christian History.” What an amazing difference is there in the manner wherein God has carried on his work in England and in America! There, above a hundred of the established clergy, men of age and experience, and of the greatest note for sense and learning in those parts, are zealously engaged in the work. Here, almost the whole body of the aged, experienced, learned clergy, are zealously engaged against it; and few, but a handful of raw young men engaged in it, without name, learning, or eminent sense. And yet by that large number of honourable men, the work seldom flourished above six months at a time, and then followed a lamentable and general decay, before the next revival of it; whereas that which God hath wrought by these despised instruments, has continually increased for fifteen years together ; and at whatever time it has declined in any one place, has more eminently flourished in others. Mon. March 5.--I called on Mr. Farley, and saw a plain confutation of that vulgar error, that consumptions are not catching : he caught the consumption from his son, whereby he soon followed him to the grave. Wed. 14.--I preached at Frome, a dry, barren, uncomfortable place. The congregation at Shaftesbury in the evening were of a more gn ie? ot ws 548 REV. Je WESLEY'S JOURNAL. [ March, 1753 excellent spirit. Thur. 15.--I met the stewards of the neighbouring societies at Bearfield, and was much refreshed among them. Fri. 16.--I returned to Bristol ; and on Monday, 19th, set out with. my wife for the north. I preached in the evening at Wallbridge, near Stroud. The house being too small, many stood without ; but neither before nor after preaching, (much less while I was speaking,) did 1 hear the sound of any voice; no, nor of any foot; in so deepa silence did they both come, hear, and go away. Tues. 20.--I preached in the Town Hall at Evesham. At the upper end of the room a large body of people were still and attentive. Meantime, at the lower end, many were walking to and fro, laughing and talking, as if they had been in Westminster Abbey.

then in an instant she was quite calm. The next morning she fell into a fit of another kind,--being stretched out, and stiff, as a dead carcass: thus she lay about an hour. In the afternoon she was suddenly seized with violent involuntary laughter; and she had some or other of these fits several times a day, for about a month. In the intervals of them she was in great heaviness of soul, and continually erying for mercy; till, one Saturday, as she lay stretched out on the bed, she broke out, “ I know that my Redeemer liveth.” Her faith and love increased from that time; but so did the violence of her fits also. And often while she was rejoicing and praising God, she would cry out, “O Lord !” and, losing her senses at once, lie as dead, or laugh violently, or rave and blaspheme. In the middle of February she grew more outrageous than ever. She frequently strove to throw herself into the fire, or out of the window. Often she attempted to tear the Bible, cursing it in the bitterest manner; and many times she uttered oaths and blasphemies, too horrid to be repeated. Next to the Bible, her greatest rage was against the Methodists, --Mr. W. in particular. She frequently told us where he was, and what he was then doing; adding, “ He will be here soon;” and at another time, “ Now he is galloping down the lane, and two men with him.” In the intervals of her fits she was unusually stupid and moped, as if void of common understanding; and yet sometimes broke out into vehement prayer, to the amazement of all that heard. Sometimes she would strip herself stark naked, and run up and down the house, screaming and crying, “Save me! Save me! He will tear me Pidg fa i Soa ix ‘ 556 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [ June, 1753.

Tues. 18.--We had a solemn watch-night at Zoar. Wed. 26.-- Being much importuned thereto, I wrote “Serious Thoughts on the Earthquake at Lisbon ;” directed, not as I designed at first, to the small vulgar, but the great; to the learned, rich, and honourable Heathens, commonly called Christians. Tues. December 2.--I received a remarkable letter, part of which I have here subjoined :-- “Tt may seem strange, sir, that 1, whom you have no personal knowledge of, should write with the freedom I am now going to take. But, I trust, you desire as much to instruct, as I to be instructed. I have long laboured under a disease, which comes the nearest to that which is named skepticism. I rejoice at one time in the belief, that the religion of my country is true: but how transient my joy! While my busy imagination ranges through nature, books, and men, I often drop into that horrible pit of Deism, and in vain bemoan my fall. The two main springs, which alternately move my soul to these opposite opinions, are, first, Can it be that the great God of the boundless universe containing many thousaud §92 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. |, Dec. 1755. better worlds than this, should become incarnate here, and die on a piece of wood? There I lose my belief of Christianity. “ But on the other hand I think, Well, let me examine the fitness of - things which Deism boasts of. And certain it is, I discern nothing bu. _ beauty and wisdom in the inanimate parts of the creation. But how is the animate side of nature? It shocks me with powerful cruelty, and bleeding innocence. JI cannot call the earth, (as Fontenelle does,) ‘ A great rolling globe, covered over with focls;’ but rather, a great rolling globe. covered over with slaughter houses ; where few beings can escape but those of the butcher kind, the lion, wolf, or tiger. And as to man himself, he is undoubtedly the supreme lord, nay the uncontrollable tyrant, of this globe. Yet, survey him in a state of Deism, and I must pronounce him a very oor creature: he is then a kind of jack-catch, an executioner-general.

leisure, hurried away to me, and received them with all the genuine indi cations of passionate gratitude. All the books were very acceptable ; but none more so than the psalms and hymns, which enabled them to gratify their peculiar taste for psalmody. Sundry of them lodged all night in my kitchen; and sometimes when I have awaked at two or three in the morning, a torrent of sacred psalmody has poured into my chamber In this exercise some of them spend the whole night. “The good effects of this charity are already apparent. It convinces the Heathen, that however careless about religion the generality of the white people are, yet there are some who think it a matter of importance. It has excited some of their masters to emulation; and they are ashamed. that strangers on the other side the Atlantic ocean, should be at such pains to teach their domestics, while themselves are negligent about it. Such of the negroes as can read already, are evidently improving in knowledge. It has excited others to learn to read: for as I give books to none but such as can read, they consider them as a reward for their industry. And I am told, that in almost every house in my congregation, and in many other places, they spend every leisure hour in endeavouring to learn. Many do this from a sincere desire to know the will of God; and if some should do it from the meaner principle of vanity or curiosity, yet I cannot but rejoice, that it renders them the more capable of receiving instruction. To all this I may add, that the very distributing these books gives me an opportunity of speaking seriously, and with particular application, to many who would not otherwise come in my way. “There are thousands of, negroes in this colony who still continue. in the grossest ignorance, and are as rank Pagans now, as they were in the wilds of Africa. Not a few of these are within the bounds of my congre- gation. Butall are not of this character. Upon some my ministry of late --

Fri. 12.--I read over Leusden’s “ Dissertation in Defence of the Hebrew Points,” and was fully convinced, there is at least as much to be said on this as on the other side of the question. But how is it that men are so positive on both sides, while demonstration is to be had on neither? Certainly to be peremptory and dogmatical can never be so inexcusable as in a point so doubtful as this. Mon 22.--I read with the preachers this week the Glasgow “‘ Abridgment of Mr. Hutchinson’s Works ;” wherein the abridgers have expressed, with surprising exactness, not only his sense, but his very spirit: but, in truth, I cannot admire either; nay, I admire his hypethesis less and less, as I see the whole is unsupported by Scripture: very ingenious, but quite precarious. Wed. December 1.--One or two remarkable letters were put inte my hands: part of the first ran thus :--

* When she altered for death, she called for her mother and brothers, to each of whom she gave an earnest exhortation. Then she said, ‘ Now T have no more to do here; I am ready to die. Send to Mr. W., and tell him I am sorry I did not sooner believe the doctrine of perfect holiness. Blessed be God I now know it to be the truth! After greatly rejoicing in God, for two days more, she said one morning, ‘I dreamed last night I heard a voice, Christ will come to-day for his bride. It is for me. He will come for me to-day.’ And a few hours after, without one struggle, or sigh, or groan, she sweetly fell asleep.” One who was intimately acquainted with her writes thus :-- “Glory be to God for the blessed privilege I enjoyed, of being with her, night and day, for a month before she died! When I went to her first, she had kept her bed some days, and was extremely weak. And yet she spoke considerably plainer, than ever I heard her in my life. She called as soon as I entered the room, ‘ My dear friend, give me your hand. Let us rejoice that my time is so near approaching. Do not mourn; you know it is what we expected.’ I was soon brought to wish her safe on the happy shore. She said, ‘This is true friendship. But how is it that I do not feel greater transports of love, now I am so near the time of seeing my Lord face to face? Indeed I am ashamed to approach him, before whom the angels veil their faces!’ She often said, ‘I take it asa fresh token of his love, that he sent you to me at this time.’ Her pains were great; but she bore all with invincible patience and resignation, and often said, ‘I find it good for me to be afflicted; in his time I shall come out throughly purified. Afterward she said, ‘I experience more upon this bed of my own nothingness, and the free grace of God in Christ, than ever I did in ali my life. The best of my performances would be damnable without Christ.’

Tues. 16.--We rode to Lurgan. In the morning I walked to Lough Neagh, the most beautiful lake I ever saw. On the south-east shore stands a small mount, supposed to be raised by the Danes; on the top of which is a kind of arbour, benched round with turf, which might contain twenty or thirty people. This was the hottest day I ever felt in Ireland; near as hot as any I remember in Georgia. The next morning I was desired to see the house of an eminent scholar near the town. The door into the yard we found nailed up; but we got in at a gap which was stopped with thorns. I took the house, at first, for a very old barn, but was assured he had built it within five years; not indeed by any cld, vulgar model, but purely to his own taste. The walls were part mud, part brick, part stone, and part bones and wood. There were four windows, but no glass in any, lest the pure air should be kept out. The house had two stories, but no stair case, and no door. Into the upper floor we went by a ladder through one of the windows; through one of the lower windows, into the lower floor, which was about four foot high. This floor had three rooms ;--one three square, the second had five sides, the third, I know not how many. I give a particular description of this wonderful edifice, to illustrate that great truth: --There is no folly too great even for a man of sense, if he resolve to follow his own imagination! I spent Friday and Saturday at Newry, a town risen out of its ashes within these twenty years. Sun. 21.--I was much pleased with the seriousness and decency of the congregation at church. But they were a little hurried in the middle of the service: a young man dropped down as dead. In a little time, however, he came to himself, and was led out of church. Mon. 22.--I rode through a barren, dreary country, and by a miserable road, to Castle Blaney. The morning was extremely hot; but we had a cooler ride in the afternoon to Coot Hill. I preached, at seven, in an open place near the street, to a tolerably serious congre- June, 1758. | REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. 65?

Zeal Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1739), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- 1 Dead as I am, and cold my breast, Untouch’d by thee, celestial zeal, How shall I sing th’ unwonted guest? How paint the joys I cannot feel? 2 Assist me thou, at whose command The heart exults, from earth set free! ’Tis thine to raise the drooping hand, Thine to confirm the feeble knee. 3 ’Tis zeal must end this inward strife, Give me to know that warmth divine! Thro’ all my verse, thro’ all my life The active principle shall shine. 4 Where shall we find its high abode? To heav’n the sacred ray aspires, With ardent love embraces God, Parent and object of its fires. 5 There its peculiar influence known In breasts seraphic learns to glow; Yet darted from th’ eternal throne, It sheds a chearing light below. 6 Thro’ earth diffus’d, the active flame Intensely for God’s glory burns, And always mindful whence it came, To heav’n in ev’ry wish returns. 7 Yet vain the fierce enthusiast’s aim With this to sanctify his cause; To skreen beneath this awful name The persecuting sword he draws. 8 In vain the mad fanatick’s dreams To this mysteriously pretend; On fancy built, his airy schemes Or slight the means, or drop the end. 9 Where zeal holds on its even course, Blind rage, and bigotry retires; Knowledge assists, not checks its force, And prudence guides, not damps its fires. 10 Resistless then it wins its way; Yet deigns in humble hearts to dwell: The humble hearts confess its sway, And pleas’d the strange expansion feel. 11 12 13 14 15 16 [Page] 15 Superior far to mortal things, In grateful extasy they own, (Such antedated heav’n it brings,) That zeal and happiness are one. Now vary’d deaths their terrors spread, Now threat’ning thousands rage--in vain! Nor tortures can arrest its speed, Nor worlds its energy restrain. That energy, which quells the strong, Which cloaths with strength the abject weak, Looses the stamm’ring infant’s tongue, And bids the sons of thunder speak. While zeal its heav’nly influence sheds, What light o’er Moses’ visage plays! It wings th’ immortal prophet’s steeds, And brightens fervent Stephen’s face. Come then, bright flame, my breast inspire; To me, to me be thou but giv’n, Like them I’ll mount my car of fire, Or view from earth an op’ning heav’n. Come then, if mighty to redeem, Christ purchas’d thee with blood divine: Come, holy zeal! For thou thro’ him, Jesus himself thro’ thee is mine!

A Prayer Under Convictions Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1739), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- 1 Father of light,11 from whom proceeds Whate’er thy ev’ry creature needs, Whose goodness providently nigh Feeds the young ravens when they cry; To thee I look; my heart prepare, Suggest, and hearken to my pray’r. 2 Since by thy light myself I see Naked, and poor, and void of thee, Thine eyes must all my thoughts survey, Preventing what my lips would say: Thou seest my wants; for help they call, And ere I speak, thou know’st them all. 3 Thou know’st the baseness of my mind Wayward, and impotent and blind, Thou know’st how unsubdu’d my will, Averse to good, and prone to ill: Thou know’st how wide my passions rove, Nor check’d by fear, nor charm’d by love. 4 Fain would I know, as known by thee, And feel the indigence I see; Fain would I all my vileness own, And deep beneath the burden groan: Abhor the pride that lurks within, Detest and loath myself and sin. 11Only the 2nd edn. (1739) uses “Father of lights,” as in James 1:17. 5 Ah give me, Lord, myself to feel, My total misery reveal: Ah give me, Lord, (I still would say) A heart to mourn, a heart to pray; My business this, my only care, My life, my ev’ry breath be pray’r. 6 Scarce I begin my sad complaint, When all my warmest wishes faint; Hardly I lift my weeping eye, When all my kindling ardors die; Nor hopes nor fears my bosom move, For still I cannot, cannot love. 7 Father, I want a thankful heart; I want to taste how good thou art, To plunge me in thy mercy’s sea, And comprehend thy love to me; The breadth, and length, and depth, and height Of love divinely infinite. 8 Father, I long my soul to raise And dwell for ever on thy praise, Thy praise with glorious joy to tell, In extasy unspeakable; While the full pow’r of FAITH I know, And reign triumphant here below.

Matthew 5:3 Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1739), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- “Blessed are they that mourn.”16 1 Jesu! My great high-priest above, My friend before the throne of love! If now for me prevails thy prayer, If now I find thee pleading there; If thou the secret wish convey, And sweetly prompt my heart to pray, Hear; and my weak petitions join, Almighty advocate, to thine! 16In 2nd edn. (1739) and following this is titled: “Psalm CXXXIX. 23 [BCP]. ‘Try me, O God, and seek the ground of my heart.’” 2 Fain would I know my utmost ill, And groan my nature’s weight to feel, To feel the clouds that round me roll, The night that hangs upon my soul. The darkness of my carnal mind, My will perverse, my passions blind, Scatter’d o’er all the earth abroad, Immeasurably far from God. 3 Jesu! My heart’s desire obtain, My earnest suit present and gain, My fulness of corruption show, The knowledge of myself bestow; A deeper displicence17 at sin, A sharper sense of hell within, A stronger struggling to get free, A keener appetite for thee. 4 For thee my spirit often pants, Yet often in pursuing faints, Drooping it soon neglects t’ aspire, To fan18 the ever-dying fire: No more thy glory’s skirts are seen, The world, the creature steals between; Heavenward no more my wishes move, And I forget that thou art love. 5 O sovereign love, to thee I cry, Give me thyself, or else I die. Save me from death, from hell set free, Death, hell, are but the want of thee. 17A rare word meaning “dislike.” 18“To fan” changed to “Nor fans” in 4th edn. (1743) and 5th edn. (1756). Quicken’d by thy imparted flame, Sav’d, when possest of thee, I am; My life, my only heav’n thou art: And lo! I feel19 thee in my heart! 19Changed to “When shall I feel” in 3rd edn. (1739); and to “O might I feel” in 4th edn. (1743) and 5th edn. (1756). Part II.

Justified, But Not Sanctified Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1739), Part II Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- 1 My God (if I may call thee mine From heav’n and thee remov’d so far) Draw nigh; thy pitying ear incline, And cast not out my languid pray’r. Gently the weak thou lov’st to lead, Thou lov’st to prop the feeble knee, O break not then a bruised reed, Nor quench the smoaking flax in me. 2 Buried in sin, thy voice I hear, And burst the barriers of my tomb, In all the marks of death appear, Forth at thy call, tho’ bound, I come. Give me, O give me fully, Lord, Thy resurrection’s pow’r to know; Free me indeed; repeat48 the word, And loose my bands, and let me go. 3 Fain would I go to thee my God, Thy mercies and my wants to tell: I feel my pardon seal’d in blood; Saviour, thy love I wait to feel. 47This hymn is retitled “Another” in the 4th edn. (1743) and 5th edn. (1756); perhaps reflecting Wesley’s distinction between “initial sanctification,” which accompanies justification, and “entire sanctification.” 48“Repeat” changed to “pronounce” in 2nd edn. (1739) only. Freed from the pow’r of cancel’d sin; When shall my soul triumphant prove? Why breaks not out the fire within In flames of joy and praise and love? 4 When shall my eye affect my heart, Sweetly dissolv’d in gracious tears? Ah, Lord, the stone to flesh convert! And till thy lovely face appears, Still may I at thy footstool keep, And watch the smile of op’ning heav’n: Much would I pray, and love, and weep; I would; for I have much forgiv’n. 5 Yet O! Ten thousand lusts remain, And vex my soul absolv’d from sin, Still rebel nature strives to reign, Still am I all unclean, unclean! Assail’d by pride, allur’d by sense, On earth the creatures court my stay; False flatt’ring idols get ye hence, Created good be far away! 6 Jesu, to thee my soul aspires, Jesu, to thee I plight my vows, Keep me from earthly base desires, My God, my Saviour, and my spouse. Fountain of all-sufficient bliss, Thou art the good I seek below; Fulness of joys in thee there is, Without ’tis mis’ry all and woe. 7 Take this poor wandring, worthless heart, Its wandrings all to thee are known, May no false rival claim a part, Nor sin disseize thee of thine own. Stir up thy interposing pow’r, Save me from sin, from idols save, Snatch me from fierce temptation’s hour, And hide, O hide me in the grave! 8 I know thou wilt accept me now, I know my sins are now forgiv’n! My head to death O let me bow, Nor keep my life, to lose my heav’n. Far from this snare my soul remove, This only cup I would decline, I deprecate a creature-love, O take me, to secure me thine. 9 Or if thy wiser will ordain The trial, I would die to shun, Welcome the strife, the grief, the pain, Thy name be prais’d, thy will be done! I from thy hand the cup receive, Meekly submit to thy decree, Gladly for thee consent to live! Thou, Lord, hast liv’d, hast died for me!

3 By faith we know thee strong to save, (Save us, a present Saviour thou!) Whate'er we hope, by faith we have, Future and past subsisting now.

5 The things unknown to feeble sense, Unseen by reason's glimm'ring ray, With strong, commanding evidence Their heavenly origine display.

4 Thee thro' thy self we understand, When thou in us thyself hast shown, We see thy all creating hand, We feel a God thro' faith alone.

3 Pilgrims they here themselves confess'd, Who no abiding-place must know, Strangers on earth they could not rest, Or find their happiness below.

Morning Hymn Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1740), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- Hasten, hasten the glad hour, Come and be Unto me Health, and love, and power. Christ, my life, my inward heaven, Thro’ the whole Of my soul Spread thy little leaven. Make me to the end endure; Let me feel Love the seal: Love shall make it sure. Love, thine image love restore: Let me love, Hence remove, And be seen no more. Morning Hymn. Christ, whose glory fills the skies, Christ, the true, the only light, Sun of righteousness, arise, Triumph o’er the shades of night: Day-Spring from on high, be near: Day-Star, in my heart appear.

The Aspiration. From the Same [John Norris] Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1740), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- How do thy glorious streams of light, Ev’n thro’ this veil, refresh my sight! When shall my prison’d73 soul be free, And find light, life, love, heav’n in thee! The Aspiration.74 From the Same [Alter’d from Mr. Norris]. How long, great God, how long must I Immur’d in this dark prison lie! Where thro’75 the avenues of sense My soul has dim intelligence: Where but faint gleams salute my sight, Like moon-shine in a cloudy night. When shall I leave this dusky sphere, And be all mind, all eye, all ear! How cold this clime! And yet my sense Perceives ev’n here thy influence. Ev’n here the magnet’s pow’r I feel, And tremble like th’ attracted steel. And tho’ to beauties less divine, Sometimes my erring heart decline, Yet soon (so strong the sympathy) It turns, and points again to thee. I long to see this excellence, Which at such distance strikes my sense. My soul struggles to disengage Her wings from this her earthly cage: 73“M’ imprison’d” in CPH (1738). 74Source: John Norris, A Collection of Miscellanies (Oxford: J. Crosely, 1687), 117. First appeared in CPH (1738), 27. It was omitted from the 4th edn. (1743) and following of HSP (1739/40). 75“From” in CPH (1738).

To his Brother Samuel Date: OXON, June 17, 1724. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1724) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, -- I believe I need not use many arguments to show I am sorry for your misfortune, though at the same time I am glad you are in a fair way of recovery. If I had heard of it from any one else, I might probably have pleased you with some impertinent consolations; but the way of your relating it is a sufficient proof that they are what you don’t stand in need of. And indeed, if I understand you rightly, you have more reason to thank God that you did not break both, than to repine because you have broke one leg. You have undoubtedly heard the story of the Dutch seaman who having broke one of his legs by a fall from the main-mast instead of condoling himself, thanked God that he had not broke his neck. [See Spectator, No. 574.] I scarce know whether your first news vexed me, or your last news pleased me, more; but I can assure you that, though I did not cry for grief at the former, I did for joy at the latter part of your letter. The two things that I most wished for of almost anything in the world were to see my mother and Westminster once again; 'and to see them both together was so far above my expectations that I almost looked upon it as next to an impossibility. I have been so very frequently disappointed when I had set my heart on any pleasure, that I will never again depend on any before it comes. However, I shall be obliged to you if you will tell me as near as you can how soon my uncle is expected in England and my mother in London. I hope my sister is pretty well recovered by this time, and that all at Westminster are in as good health as Your loving Brother. PS.--Pray give my service to Mrs. Harris, and as many as ask after me. Since you have a mind to see some of my verses, I have sent you some, which employed me above an hour yesterday in the afternoon. There is one, and I am afraid but one, good thing in them--that is, they are short. As o'er fair Cloe’s rosy cheek,

To his Mother Date: OXON, June 18, 1725. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1725) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MOTHER--I am very much surprised at my sister's behavior towards my brother Charles, [Mrs. Samuel Wesley, jun., had evidently been vexed with Charles at Wroot. She had been a kind friend to John when he was at Charterhouse, and she was a young wife at Westminster. Charles told his brother in 1727 that he had cautioned Hetty “never to contraict my sister, whom she knows,’ and who. had been very kind to her (Stevenson's Wesley Family, p. 304).] and wish it is not in some measure of his own procuring. She was always, as far as I could perceive, apt to resent an affront, and I am afraid some reflection or other upon her, of which I have formerly heard him make several, has by accident come to her knowledge. If so, I don't at all wonder at anything which might follow; for though I believe she does not want piety, I am not of opinion she abounds in charity; having observed her sometimes to retaliate with great bitterness, on imagined contempt or slighting expression. She has always been particularly civil to me, ever since I was fifteen or sixteen years old; nor do I ever remember to have received an ill word from her, even to the time of her last being at Oxford. We had then a pretty deal of talk together, frequently by ourselves, and sometimes about my brother Charles, and I don't know that she once intimated anything to his disadvantage, so that either she must be a very skilful dissembler or the misunderstanding between them has took its rise very lately.

We have so invincible an attachment to truth already perceived, that it is impossible for us to disbelieve it. A distinct perception commands our assent, and the will is under a moral necessity of yielding to it. It is not, therefore, in every case a matter of choice whether we will believe ourselves worse than our neighbor or no; since we may distinctly perceive the truth of this proposition, He is worse than me; and then the judgment is not free. One, for instance, who is in company with a free-thinker, or other person signally debauched in faith and practice, can't avoid knowing himself to be the better of the two; these' propositions extorting our assent, --An Atheist is worse than a Believer; A man who endeavors to please God is better than he who defies Him. If a true knowledge of God be necessary to absolute humility, a true knowledge of our neighbor should be necessary to comparative. But to judge oneself the worst of all men implies a want of such knowledge. No knowledge can be, where there is not certain evidence; which we have not, whether we compare ourselves with acquaintance or strangers. In the one case we have only imperfect evidence, unless we can see through the heart and reins; in the other we have none at all. So that the best can be said of us in this particular, allowing the truth of the premises, is that we have been in a pious error, if at least we may yield so great a point to free-thinkers as to own any part of piety to be grounded on a mistake. Again, this kind of humility can never be well-pleasing to God, since it does not flow from faith, without which it impossible to please Him. Faith is a species of belief, and belief is defined 'an assent to a proposition upon rational grounds.' Without rational grounds there is therefore no belief, and consequently no faith.

To his Mother Date: LINCOLN COLLEGE, January 25, 1727. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1727) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MOTHER, -- I am shortly to take my Master's degree. [He took his M.A. on Feb. 14, gaining considerable reputation by his disputation for the degree. He told Henry Moore that he delivered three lectures: De Anima Brutorum, on Natural Philosophy; De Julio Caesare, on Moral Philosophy; and De Amore Dei, on Religion.] As I shall from that time be less interrupted by business not of my own choosing, I have drawn up for myself a scheme of studies from, which I do not intend, for some years at least, to very. I am perfectly come over to your opinion that there are many truths it is not worth while to know. Curiosity, indeed, might be a sufficient plea for our laying out some time upon them, if we had half a dozen centuries of life to come; but methinks it is great ill-husbandry to spend a considerable part of the small pittance now allowed us in what makes us neither a quick nor a sure return.

To Mrs. Wesley, At Epworth. To be left Date: GLOUCESTER, August 28, 1730. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1730) Author: John Wesley --- SIR,--I think myself extremely obliged to you for the favor of the sermon, and those letters that alone were worthy of the correspondence they maintained. I received them safe last week, and should sooner have made my acknowledgements for them but that I have been engaged with so much company since my return from dear, delightful Stanton, that till this moment I have not had time to express my gratitude for the elegant entertainment I have had, not only from the manuscripts, but in recollecting and repeating the conversation you and your brother made so agreeable, which I hope will soon be renewed. If you have any affairs that call you to Gloucester, don't forget you have two pupils who are desirous of improving their understanding and that friendship which has already taught them to be, sir, Your most sincere, humble servants. My companion joins with me in all I have said, as well as in service to Araspes.

Your knowledge would swiftly (though insensibly) improve, not so swiftly as your happiness. You would then find less pain from every accident; even from the absence of Aspasia. A treasure doubtless she is, the value of which nothing can teach so well as experience; every additional degree of intimacy with her may questionless enhance her value. Nor would it be human to be unconcerned at a separation from such a friend. Yet the time may come when that concern, though equally tender, shall not be equally painful to you: when you shall be as much pleased as ever with her presence, and yet not so much displeased at her absence. For there is a way (though it is a way which the world knows not) of dividing friendship from pain. It is called charity, or the love of God. The more acquainted we are with rids, the less anxiety shall we receive from the sharpest trial that can befall us. This, while it enlivens every virtuous affection of our souls, adds calmness to their strength; at the same time that it swells their stream, this makes it flow smooth and even. Soft peace she breathes wherever she arrives, She builds our quiet as she forms our lives, Leaves the rough paths of nature even, And opens in each breast a little heaven. [Prior's Charity, where it is brings,' not ' breathes,' in line I; 'heart,' in line 4; line 3, 'Lays the rough paths of peevish nature even.'] O Selima, never complain that it is not in your power to repay your friends much more than by receiving from them at least; don't complain with regard to me: any one of those! obliging things you have said is vastly more than a return for all the little service that is in my power to do you. I am amazed more and more, each time I reflect on those strange instances of your condescension, and feel how much I am overpaid, in (what I can never think of with due esteem and gratitude) the regard you show for Selima's Ever obliged friend and faithful servant, CYRUS. Araspes joins me in wishing he could make any return to Mrs. Granville's and Selima's goodness. I beg you to correct what you see wrong in the enclosed, and to send it when you write. Adieu. Mrs. Pendarves replies [4] GLOUCESTER, October 12, 1730.

SIR, -- I am almost afraid to own my having had both your letters, lest I should forfeit that good opinion that I extremely desire Cyrus should always have of Aspasia. I must farther confess that, had I not received the second letter, I should not have had courage to have wrote. I am but too sensible how unequal I am to the task. Could I, like our inimitable dear Varanese, express my sentiments, with what pleasure should I agree to the obliging request you make! But why should I be afraid of your superior understanding when I know at the same time the delight you take in not only entertaining but improving all those you converse with Then take me into your protection. Look on me as one surrounded with infirmities and imperfections, who flies to you for assistance against the assaults of vanity and passion. If you are desirous I should think you my friend, let this be the trial of it, not to leave any of my follies unreproved. I shall not scruple to discover to you those many defects which on a longer acquaintance with me your own observation must have pointed out to you; and it is no small argument of the great desire I have of improvement that I will run so great a hazard, for certainly you will value me less when you know how weak I am. You have no reason to make an apology for recommending the book you mention (which I suppose was the Bishop of Cork's). I have not yet read it; but I shall wait with impatience for the Abstract [See previous letter and that of Feb. 13, 1731.] you promise me, which I am sure will very well deserve the time I shall bestow in reading of it. My stay in Gloucester is uncertain; but when we go to town we shall call at Oxford, where we shall not fail of inquiring after Cyrus and Araspes. Selima adds: Aspasia is called away before she has finished her letter, and has not said one word for Selima, who thinks of Cyrus and Araspes with that esteem their merit justly claims, desires always to be thought their friend, and wishes Selima was worthy of it. When we go to Oxford, we don't know at what college to inquire after our agreeable friends. Mrs. Pendarves writes: GLOUCASTETR, October 26 [1730].

To his Father Date: LINCOLN COLLEGE, December 11, 1730. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1730) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, --- We all return you our sincere thanks for your timely and necessary advice, and should be exceeding glad if it were as easy to follow it, as 'tis impossible not to approve it. That doubtless is the very point we have to gain before any other can be managed successfully: to have an habitual lively sense of our being only instruments in His hand, who, can do all things either with or without any instrument. But how to affix this sense in us is the great question. Since to man this is impossible, we hope you and all our friends will continue to intercede for us to Him with whom all things are possible, To-morrow night I expect to be in company with the gentleman [The young gentleman of Christ Church who said, 'Here is a new sect of Methodists sprung up.'] who did us the honor to take the first notice of our little Society. I have terrible reasons to think he is as slenderly provided with humanity as with sense and learning. However, I must not slip this opportunity, because he is at present in some distress, occasioned by his being obliged to dispute in the schools on Monday, though he is not furnished with such arguments as he wants. I intend, if he has not procured them before, to help him to some arguments, that I may at least get that prejudice away from him that ' we are friends-to none but what are as queer as ourselves.'

To Mrs. Pendarves Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1730) Author: John Wesley --- Had I not been engaged almost every hour in an employment which set Aspasia continually before my eyes, [His MS., finished on Christmas Eve: see letter of Feb. 13, 1731.] I could by no means have satisfied myself so long without saying anything of my obligations to her; I could not have been easy without repeating my acknowledgements for them, particularly for the last, that lovely instance of your condescension, which so opportunely relieved me from the perplexity I was in. Every pleasing reflection it has given me since was a farther reason for me to thank you again; and I have been sometimes afraid that my omitting it so long might give you hard thoughts of my gratitude. But I sincerely ask pardon for that fear, so injurious both to Aspasia and Selima; with whom I should 'by no means presume to converse at all, had I not so often experienced that candor which was ever as unwilling to observe a fault as willing to excuse it when observed. Do not think, good Aspasia, I am yet so vain as to dare to maintain any intercourse with you but upon a full conviction that you are 'always ready to forgive me both when I say amiss, and when I do not so, what your goodness requires. While I am reflecting on this I can't but often observe with pleasure the great resemblance between the emotion I then feel, and that with which my heart frequently overflowed, in the beginning of my intercourse with our dear Varanese. Yet is there a sort of soft melancholy mixed with it, when I perceive that I am making another avenue for grief, that I am laying open another part of my soul, at which the arrows of fortune may enter. Nay, but here will I hold: since the Christian name for fortune is providence, or the hand of God, should it wound me even in the person of my friend there would be goodness in the severity. Should one to whom I was united by the tenderest tie, who was as my own soul, be torn from me, it would be best for me; to me, too, it would, be the stroke of mercy. Though, were it a less good to myself,

To Mrs. Pendarves Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- February 4 [1731]. I should have been exceedingly pleased could I have read over these papers with Aspasia and Selima: both because I should have hoped to have confirmed or altered my own judgment in several particulars, and because longer experience in things of this nature might perhaps have enabled me to be of some use toward fixing theirs. But 'tis well; I leave you in His hands, 'who shall lead into all truth.'

To Mrs. Pendarves Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- February 11 [1731]. 'Tis as impossible for us to remember as we ought our last obligation to Aspasia and Selima as it is to forget it; and that sure can never be--no, 'not in the land where all things are forgotten.' Even there we hope to remember, and with a more tender regard than we are here capable of, to whom we owe in great measure many changes in ourselves, of which we shall then feel the full advantage: who they were that so nobly assisted us in our great work in wearing off several stains from our nature; that so strongly recommended, by that irresistible argument example, whatsoever is honorable or lovely. There are few, except the harsher, passions of our souls which you did not engage in those late happy moments: but none more than our wonder; our joy itself was not greater than our admiration. That London is the worst place under heaven for preserving a Christian temper any one will immediately think who observes that there can be none where its professed, irreconcilable enemies, the lust of the eye and the pride of life, are more artfully and forcibly recommended. Yet even here you retain a constant sense what manner of spirit we are to be of. In the utmost affluence of whatever the world can afford to chain down your affections to it, the whole tenor of your words and actions shows they are reserved for sublimer objects.

The few hours that Selima and Aspasia enjoyed the conversation of Cyrus and Araspes are too valuable to be forgot; which I should sooner have endeavored to convince you of if I could have found time: and the favor of the book is of so high a nature that we can never be so ungrateful as to look on it without the greatest thankfulness. How happy should we have been to have heard it read by one who so well knows to recommend everything he approves of! I am sensible there must be several things we shall not be able to comprehend in such a treatise; you must therefore give me leave to trouble you with my ignorance by desiring your explanation of what I may not understand. I hope we shall hear from you soon; I have not time now to enlarge my letter. I must again repeat my acknowledgements for the friendship you have shown us in many instances. Selima and Aspasia will always gratefully remember them.

To Mrs. Pendarves Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- February 19 [1731]. Yes, it is better to assure Aspasia now, though it be but in one line, that I am sensible of her strange goodness in thus preventing me a second time, than to put off still what, could it have been avoided, ought not to have been delayed a moment. But what can I do, thus hemmed in as I am with business over and above my own I am persuaded you would not condemn me, Aspasia, did you know how many days pass over my head in which I have not one poor hour from five to seven but what is engaged long before it comes. Yet never shall any engagement of any kind make me so false both to justice and friendship as to neglect any commands which I may have the pleasure of receiving from Aspasia or Selima. That particular .one which your last gives me leave to expect, I should earnestly have requested myself had not you mentioned it first. O Aspasia, how gladly should I receive into my soul your ignorance of some points in philosophy could ignorance of pride, ingratitude, and passion pass at the same time into (I dare hardly say) Your friend, CYRUS. When Aspasia or Selima is the theme', I speak the sense of Araspes in my own. Adieu. Mrs. Pendarves replies: NEW BOND STREET, April 4, 1731.

I had rather expose my own ignorance in writing than not hear from Cyrus and Araspes, whose letters give so much pleasure and improvement to your friends. Beside, at present I have my mother's commands to warrant my own inclination. She orders me to be very particular in her acknowledgements of the last letter she received from you. We were extremely vexed when we came [to Stanton] to find our agreeable friends had left it. [He was at Stanton on April 19.] Except that disappointment, our journey was as prosperous as we could wish. But my sister was not with us. The weakness we felt at parting we endeavored to correct by saying, Would not Cyrus blame us for this The reflection dried our tears; but, I must confess sincerely, it did not ease our pain. Is not this wrong in us Did I (for my sister has more fortitude) make a proper progress in Christianity, the things of this world would certainly be more indifferent to me than I find they are. How shall I learn the happiness of being above trifles Nobody can so well point out the way to me as yourself. But I could not make such a request did I not know how ready you are to do good. I have not had the pleasure of a letter since I came home from our valuable Sappho, [Miss Sally Kirkham (1699-1764), eldest daughter of the Rev. Lionel Kirkham, Rector of Stanton. In

It is easy to observe that almost every one thinks that rule totally needless which he does not need himself; and as to the Christian spirit itself, almost every one calls that degree of it which he does not himself aim at, enthusiasm. If, therefore, we plead for either (not as if we thought the former absolutely needful, neither as if we had attained the latter), it is no great wonder that they who are not for us in practice should be against us. If you, who are a less prejudiced judge, have perceived us faulty in this matter, too superstitious or enthusiastic, or whatever it is to be called, we earnestly desire to be speedily informed of our error, that we may no longer spend our strength on that which profiteth not. Or whatever there may be on the other hand, in which you have observed us to be too remiss, that likewise we desire to know as soon as possible. This is a subject which we would understand with as much accuracy as possible; it being hard to say which is of the worse consequence, -- the being too strict, the really carrying things too far, the wearying ourselves and spending our strength in burdens that are unnecessary; or the being frightened by those terrible words from what, if not directly necessary, would at least be useful.

To Ann Granville Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- June 17 [1731]. In what words can I express my thanks to Selima for the favorable opinion she entertains of myself, of which she has given me so obliging a proof, as I extremely desired but knew not how to ask for Perhaps you don't know the inconvenience you are bringing upon yourself --- that your generosity will but embolden me to ask more. Yet thus I can assure you it will be: your letters will in one sense never satisfy me. But the oftener you favor me (if you should please to do it again), the more earnestly I shall desire it. You have already effectually convinced me of this--that it may be said with equal justice of every sort of conversation with Aspasia or you, ' It brings to its sweetness no satiety.' That the tearing asunder of such friendships as these should occasion a very sensible pain is surely the effect both of nature and reason, which don't require us to be without passions (no, be it a Roman virtue to be 'without natural affection '), but to proportion them to the occasion. Indeed, we are not required by reason to grieve on the severest occasion 'as those without hope': we have a good hope that, severe as it is, it is no less merciful--nay, more so; since no pain approaches a Christian but to pave the way for more than equal pleasure.

To Ann Granville Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- August 14 [1731]. I have neither time nor skill to thank Selima as I would for her repeated condescension to me, which nothing can excel, and that for which I am so deeply indebted to good Mrs. Granville. Both hers and your partiality toward me I cannot but observe with wondering gratitude; and hope it will continue to plead in my behalf, and to excuse my many faults and infirmities: and my observing this makes me the less surprised that, notwithstanding all my failings, you still have so favorable an opinion of me as to think me worth your correspondence. Perhaps 'tis one of these failings that even now I intend to speak the plain sense of my [mind]. I do it in so unhappy a manner as to make even sincerity look like flattery: a fault I desire as carefully to avoid as stabbing my friend with a smile. For doubtless those words that inspire vanity, if they ' be smooth as oil, yet be very swords.' God forbid that mine should ever be such to Selima, or Selima's to me. I trust they will not, but that I shall always be enabled to consider them in the true light as a picture of what you are and what I perhaps shall be, if your friendship has its perfect work. What you write with so generous a view as this justly claims the best return I can make: especially when it informs me 'that there is one particular wherein I may possibly be of some service to Selima. I had, indeed, spent many thoughts on the necessity of method to a considerable progress either in knowledge or virtue, and am still persuaded that they who have but a day to live are not wise if they waste a moment, and are therefore concerned to take the shortest way to every' point they desire to arrive at.

The method of or shortest way to knowledge seems to be this: (1) to consider what knowledge you desire to attain to; (2) to read no book which does not some way tend to the attainment of that knowledge; {3) to read no book which does tend to the attainment of it, unless it be the best in its kind; (4) to finish one before you begin another; and (5) to read them all in such an order that every subsequent book may illustrate and confirm the preceding. The knowledge which you would probably desire to attain to is a knowledge of divinity, philosophy, history, and poetry. If you will be so good as to direct me how I can be of use to you in any of these, it will give me a very particular pleasure. [See letters of June 17 and Dec. 1.] I am glad you passed your time so agreeably in the country, [Mrs. Pendarves writes to her sister on Sept. 10: ' I suppose by this time you are returned from Stanton.] and doubt not but Sappho would have made it yet more agreeable. Surely you are very just in observing that a country life is in many respects preferable to any other; particularly in its abounding with those beauties of nature that so easily raise our thoughts to the Author of them. Methinks, whenever about us round we see Hill, dale, and shady wood and sunny plain, And liquid lapse of murm'ring stream, [Paradise Lost, viii. 261-3, v. 153.] 'tis scarce possible to stop that obvious reflection: These are Thy glorious works, Parent of good. [Paradise Lost, viii. 261-3, v. 153.] Nor is it hard here, where the busy varieties of a great town do not flutter about us and break our attention, to fix that reflection so deep upon our souls that it may not pass away, like the objects that occasioned it.

Is it not likely that it was the same cause that produced the same effects in both these persons If so, we are not far from finding what it is; for in one I knew it was chiefly vanity. Her sense of honor was not under due regulation; she was too fond of being admired, and therefore could ill bear to miss of this, but much worse to be contemned; and from too strong a desire of being approved and too great an aversion to being despised, which was her original distemper, wholly proceeded those painful symptoms. She seldom thought she met with respect enough, because she loved it too well; the least shadow of disrespect pained her, because she hated it too much. Hence, too, she dreaded whatever might expose her to it, and therefore was uneasy when less well dressed than her companions. Perhaps her taking their supposed unkindness so deeply might flow from a better fountain. Is too tender a sense of the loss of a friend's affection a necessary proof of vanity May we not put a milder interpretation, even upon an aptness to suspect it where there is no real ground of suspicion This is a weed; but is it not the weed of an excellent soil for Such flaws are found in the most noble natures. It seems probable that this is the disease of yours as well as of my acquaintance, namely vanity; which you justly distinguish from pride, though indeed they are nearly related, pride regarding (as you well observe) our opinion of ourselves, vanity the opinions of other men concerning us: the former being immoderate self-esteem, the latter immoderate desire of the esteem of others. The proper remedy for either of these distempers you rightly judge to be humility. But how to infuse this God knows. With men it is impossible.

If the wise and good will believe those falsehoods which the bad invent, because I endeavour to save myself and my friends from them, then I shall lose my reputation, even among them, for, though not perhaps good, yet the best actions I ever did in my life. This is the very case. I try to act as my Lord commands: ill men say all manner of evil of me, and good men believe them. There is a way, and there is but one, of making my peace: God forbid I should ever take it! I have as many pupils as I need, and as many friends; when more are better for me, I shall have more. If I have no more pupils after these are gone from me, I shall then be glad of a curacy near you: if I have, I shall take it as a signal that I am to remain here. Whether here or there, my desire is to know and feel that I am nothing, that I have nothing, and that I can do nothing. For whenever I am empty of myself, then know I of a surety that neither friends nor foes, nor any creature, can hinder me from being 'filled with all the fullness of God.' Let not my father's or your prayers be ever slack in behalf of Your affectionate Son.

To Richard Morgan Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1734) Author: John Wesley --- Oxon, January 15, 1734. SIR, -- Going yesterday into your son's room, I providentially cast my eyes upon a paper that lay upon the table, and, contrary to my custom, read a line or two of it, which soon determined me to read the rest. It was a copy of his last letter to you; whereby, by the signal blessing of God, I came to the knowledge of his real sentiments, both with regard to myself and to several other points of the highest importance.

To Mrs. Pendarves Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1734) Author: John Wesley --- [July 1734.] Alas, Aspasia! are you, indeed, convinced that I can be of any service to you I fear you have not sufficient ground for such a conviction. Experience has shown how far my power is short of my will. For some time I flattered myself with the pleasing hope, but I grow more and more ashamed of having indulged it. You need not the support of so weak an hand. How can I possibly think you do (though that thought tries now and then still to obtrude itself) since you have so long and resolutely thrust it from you I dare not, therefore, blame you for so doing. Doubtless you acted upon cool reflection; you declined the trouble of writing, not because it was a trouble, but because it was a needless one. And if so, what injury have you done yourself As for me, you could do me no injury by your silence. It did, indeed, deprive me of much pleasure, and of a pleasure from which I ought to have received much improvement. But still, as it was one I had no title to but your goodness, to withdraw it was no iniustice. I sincerely thank you for what is past; and may the God of my salvation return it sevenfold into your bosom: and if ever you should please to add to those thousand obligations any new ones, I trust they shall neither be unrewarded by Him nor unworthily received by Aspasia's Faithful friend and servant, CYRUS. Araspes, too, hopes you will never have reason to tax him with ingratitude. Adieu!

15. But for the proof of every one of these weighty truths experience is worth a thousand reasons. I see, I feel them every day. Sometimes I cannot do good to others because I am unwilling to do it: shame or pain is in the way; and I do not desire to serve God at so dear a rate. Sometimes I cannot do the good I desire to do because I am in other respects too unholy. I know within myself, were I fit to be so employed, God would employ me in this work. But my heart is too unclean for such mighty works to be wrought by my hands. Sometimes I cannot accomplish the good I am employed in, because I do not pray more, and more fervently; and sometimes, even when I do pray, and that instantly, because I am not worthy that my prayer should be heard. Sometimes I dare not attempt to assist my neighbor, because I know the narrowness of my heart, that it cannot attend to many things without utter confusion and dissipation of thought. And a thousand times have I been mercifully withheld from success in the things I have attempted, because, were one so proud and vain enabled to gain others, he would lose his own soul.

To Dr. Burton Date: October 10, 1735. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1735) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- I have been hitherto unwilling to mention the grounds of my design of embarking for Georgia, for two reasons,---one, because they were such as I know few men would judge to be of any weight: the other, because I was afraid of making favorable judges think of me above what they ought to think; and what a snare this must be to my own soul I know by dear-bought experience. But, on farther reflection, I am convinced that I ought to speak the truth with all boldness, even though it should appear foolishness to the world, as it has done from the beginning; and that, whatever danger there is in doing the will of God, He will support me under it. In His name, therefore, and trusting in His defense, I shall plainly declare the thing as it is. My chief motive, to which all the rest are subordinate, is the hope of saving my own soul. I hope to learn the true sense of the gospel of Christ by preaching it to the heathen. They have no comments to construe away the text; no vain philosophy to corrupt it; no luxurious, sensual, covetous, ambitious expounders to soften its unpleasing truths, to reconcile earthly-mindedness and faith, the Spirit of Christ and the spirit of the world. They have no party, no interest to serve, and are therefore fit to receive the gospel in its simplicity. They are as little children, humble, willing to learn, and eager to do the will of God; and consequently they shall know of every doctrine I preach whether it be of God. By these, therefore, I hope to learn the purity of that faith which was once delivered to the saints; the genuine sense and full extent of those laws which none can understand who mind earthly things.

To Mrs. Williamson (Sophia Hopkey) Date: SAVANNAH, July 5, 1737. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1737) Author: John Wesley --- If the sincerity of friendship is best to be known from the painful offices, then there could not be a stronger proof of mine than that I gave you on Sunday; except that which I am going to give you now, and which you may perhaps equally misinterpret. Would you know what I dislike in your past or present behavior You have always heard my thoughts as freely as you asked them. Nay, much more freely; you know it well, and so you shall do as long as I can speak or write. In your present behavior I dislike (1) your neglect of half the public service, which no man living can compel you to; (2) your neglect of fasting, which you once knew to be an help to the mind without any prejudice to the body; (3) your neglect of almost half the opportunity of communicating which you have lately had. But these things are small in comparison of what I dislike in your past behavior. For (1) You told me over and over you had entirely conquered your inclination for Mr. Mellichamp. Yet at that very time you had not conquered it. (2) You told me frequently you had no design to marry Mr. Williamson. Yet at the very time you spoke you had the design. (3) In order to conceal both these things from me, you went through a course of deliberate dissimulation. Oh how fallen! How changed! Surely there was a time when in Miss Sophy's life there was no guile. Own these facts and own your fault, and you will be in my thoughts as if they had never been. If you are otherwise-minded, I shall still be your friend, though I cannot expect you should be mine.

To James Hutton Date: OXON, March 26, 1738. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1738) Author: John Wesley --- Enclosed I send the key of my brother's bureau. [Probably at James Hurtoh's house, near Temple Bar.] In one of the drawers are all my papers. Among them are several relating to Captain Watson. [Captain Watson, who owned an estate adjoining the Cowpen, four miles away, was confined for nearly three years in Savannah. Wesley was his friend and helper. After he was set at liberty, Wesley admitted him to Holy Communion, 'being fully satisfied of his integrity as well as understanding.' See Journal, i. 397-9; and Diary, 186, 237, 242, 320.] Out of these pray take Jo. Coates' affidavit, and the certificates of Elisha Foster, Thomas Salter, and a third signed by about forty persons concerning Mr. Watson's sound understanding (not that signed by me). These, and no more, when you have taken attested copies of them, deliver as soon as possible to Mrs. Watson. Lose not an hour. Mr. Campbell [Campbell had possibly returned from Savannah. See Journal, i. 188d 319d; viii. 3o9.] will tell you where she lives, whom I wish you would bring acquainted with Mr. Fox. [Journal, i. 448.] Dear Jemmy, adieu. Let me know by next post whether you can and will receive the money, and inquire when Mr. O. goes. I cannot write to him till I hear from you. I have not trusted myself to say any more. Sunday night.

To Arthur Bedford Date: LONDON, September 28, 1738. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1738) Author: John Wesley --- REVEREND SIR, -- 1. A few days ago I met with a sermon of yours, said to be written against me. It is entitled The Doctrine of Assurance. When I first read those three propositions there laid down, -- ‘(1) that an assurance of salvation is not of the essence of faith; (2) that a true believer may wait long before he hath it; and (3) that, after he hath it, it may be weakened and intermitted by many distempers, sins, temptations, and desertions,’ -- I thought there was nothing herein but what I both believed and preached. But in going on I was convinced of the contrary; and saw clearly that, by this one phrase, ‘assurance of salvation,’ we meant entirely different things: you understanding thereby ‘an assurance that we shall persevere in a state of salvation’; whereas I mean no more by that term than ‘an assurance that we are now in such a state.’ 2. How easily, then, might a short question have prevented this whole dispute and saved you the trouble of a mere ignoratio denchi for almost forty pages together! As to the assurance you speak of, neither my brother, nor I, nor any of our friends that I know of, hold it; no, nor the Moravian Church, whose present judgment I have had better opportunity to know than the author of what is called your Catechism. I dare not affirm so much of this assurance as that ‘it is given to very few’; for I believe it is given to none at all. I find it not in the Book of God. Yea, I take it to be utterly contrary thereto, as implying the impossibility of falling from grace; from asserting which fatal doctrine I trust the God whom I serve will always deliver me.

John Hutchings, of Pembroke College, was one of the company who met Wesley soon after his return from Georgia (Works, viii. 349) who were ‘resolved to be Bible Christians at all events, and, wherever they were, to preach with an their might plain, old, Bible Christianity’; Wesley was much confirmed by his experience (Journal, i. 457; W.H.S. v. 151): Hutchings was also present at the lovefeast in Fetter Lane on Jan. 1, 1739, with the Wesleys, Whitefield, and others (Journal, ii. 121). Mr. Combes was at Oxford (ibid. ii. 84--8d); he walked there with Charles Wesley (see C. Wesley's Journal, i. 131). Mr. Wells, of Jesus College, was another Oxford friend (Journal, ii. 87--8d); on May 31, 1738, Charles Wesley sent him a plain account of his conversion; he heard John Wesley's sermon in St. Mary's on Aug. 24, 1744, and sat just in front of Charles Wesley, ‘but took great care to turn his back upon me all the time, which did not hinder my seeing through him’ (see C. Wesley's Journal, i. 75, 76, 83, 98, 380). For Gambold's experience, see Tyerman's Oxford Methodists, pp. 175-6.] hath at length determined to know nothing but Jesus Christ and Him crucified, and to preach unto all remission of sins through faith in His blood. Mr. Sparks also is a teacher of sound doctrine. Mr. Hutchings is strong in the faith, and mightily convinces gainsayers, so that no man hitherto hath been able to stand before him. Mr. Kinchin, Gambold, and Wells have not yet received comfort, but are patiently waiting for it. Mr. Robson, [See letter of Sept. 30, 1735.] who is now a minister of Christ also, is full of faith and peace and love. So is Mr. Combes, a little child, who was called to minister in holy things two or three weeks ago. Indeed, I trust our Lord will let us see, and that shortly, a multitude of priests that believe. My brother and I are partly here and partly in London, till Mr. Whitefield or some other is sent to release us from hence. Pray for us continually, my dear brother, that we may make full proof of our ministry, and may ourselves stand fast in the grace of our Lord Jesus; and, as soon as you can, send word of what He is doing by and for you.

181) of reading Drake's Anatomy with ‘John.’ Boltzius had told, Wesley of something he thought wrong in his conduct, and had been reproved for doing so by those who thought he had usurped the office of the monitors.] reproved me; for which (as he could not deny) he was roundly reproved himself. Lastly, a general monitor commissioned by God to reprove every one of his brethren you have so long as you have any priest or deacon among you. Therefore methinks this point might be reconsidered. ‘They that speak stand up’ I don't understand. If I do understand it; I doubt of the propriety of it. Is the book and letters sent to Mr. Rook I believe the letter mentions money to be received of him, and sent hither as soon as may be. Nothing is done here yet. We are only beginning to begin. All the Scriptures direct me to think of suffering. I fear not that, but my own heart. Be not in haste, my dear brethren. Determine few things at a time, and those with the deepest deliberation. You know, we are blind children; and if it is our Father who leads us by the hand, He leads gently. We all remember you, and much desire to be remembered by you all. Let my dear brother Ingham and you pray very much for Your affectionate brother.

To his Brother Samuel Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1739) Author: John Wesley --- [January] 1739. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- ... I think Bishop Bull's sermon on the Witness of the Spirit (against the Witness of the Spirit it should rather be entitled) is full of gross perversions of Scripture and manifest contradictions both to Scripture and experience. I find more persons day by day who experience a clear evidence of their being in a state of salvation. But I never said this continues equally clear in all as long as they continue in a state of salvation. Some, indeed, have testified, and the whole tenor of their life made their testimony unexceptionable, that from that hour they have felt no agonies at all, no anxious fears, no sense of dereliction. Others have. But I much fear we begin our dispute at the wrong end. I fear you dissent from the fundamental Articles of the Church of England. I know Bishop Bull does. I doubt you do not hold justification by faith alone. If not, neither do you hold what our Articles teach concerning the extent and guilt of original sin; neither do you feel yourself a lost sinner: and if we begin not here, we are building on the sand. Oh may the God of love, if my sister or you are otherwise-minded, reveal even this unto you. Your affectionate Brother.

To his Brother Samuel Date: BRISTOL, April 4, 1739. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1739) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, -- I rejoice greatly at the temper with which you now write, and trust there is not only mildness but love also in your heart. If so, you shall know of this doctrine whether it be of God, though perhaps not by my ministry. To this hour you have pursued an ignoratio elenchi. Your assurance and mine are as different as light and darkness. I mean an assurance that I am now in a state of salvation; you an assurance that I shall persevere therein. The very definition of the term cuts off your second and third observation. As to the first, I would take notice: (1) No kind of assurance (that I know), or of faith, or repentance, is essential to their salvation who die infants. (2) I believe God is ready to give all true penitents who fly to His free grace in Christ a fuller sense of pardon than they had before they fell. I know this to be true of several; whether these are exempt cases, I know not. (3) Persons that were of a melancholy and gloomy constitution, even to some degree of madness, I have known in a moment (let it be called a miracle, I quarrel not) brought into a state of firm, lasting peace and joy.

We immediately began praying for him, and then for all the despisers. As we returned, they hollowed and hissed us along the streets; but when any of them asked, ‘Which is he’ and I answered, ‘I am he,’ they were immediately silent. Ten or twelve fine ladies followed me into the passage of Richard Merchant's [See letter of May 14.] house. I turned back to them, and told them I supposed what they wanted was to look at me, which they were very welcome to do. Perceiving them then to be more serious, I added: ‘I do not expect the rich of this world to hear me; for I speak plain truth -- a thing you know little of, and do not desire to know.’ A few words more passed between us, and, I hope, not in vain. Wednesday, 6th, two men and one woman were baptized. [Diary: ‘10.45 Newgate, three christened; ... 9.45 [p.m.] with Mrs. Cooper, she spoke; 11 at Mr. Labbe's! 11 supper; 12’ (Journal, ii. 213).] About two thousand five hundred were at Baptist Mills, to whom I explained the 9th of St. John. In the evening, after our meeting in Baldwin Street, I went (in obedience to God's command by lot) to the house of Mrs. Cooper, the supposed prophetess. Her agitations were nothing near so violent as those of Mary Piewit are. [See Journal, ii. 136n.] She prayed awhile (as under the hand of God), and then spoke to me for above half an hour. What spirit she spoke by I know not. The words were good. Some of them were these: ‘Thou art yet in darkness. But yet a little while and I will rend the veil, and thou shalt see the King in His beauty.’ I felt no power while she spoke. Appearances are against her; but I judge nothing before the time.

To Dr. Stebbing Date: July 31, 1739. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1739) Author: John Wesley --- REVEREND SIR, -- 1. You charge me (for I am called a Methodist, and consequently included in your charge) with ‘vain and confident boastings; rash, uncharitable censures; damning all who do not feel what I feel; not allowing men to be in a salvable state unless they have experienced some sudden operation, which may be distinguished as the hand of God upon them, overpowering, as it were, the soul; with denying men the use of God's creatures, which He hath appointed to be received with thanksgiving, and encouraging abstinence, prayer, and other religious exercises, to the neglect of the duties of our station.’ O sir, can you prove this charge upon me The Lord shall judge in that day! 2. I do, indeed, go out into the highways and hedges to call poor sinners to Christ; but not in a tumultuous manner, not to the disturbance of the public peace or the prejudice of families. Neither herein do I break any law which I know; much less set at naught all rule and authority. Nor can I be said to intrude into the labors of those who do not labor at all but suffer thousands of those for whom Christ died to ‘perish for lack of knowledge.’

7. These are some of those inward fruits of the Spirit which must be felt wheresoever they are; and, without these, I cannot learn from Holy Writ that any man is ‘born of the Spirit.’ I beseech you, sir, by the mercies of God, that if as yet you know nothing of such inward feelings, if you do not ' feel in yourself these mighty workings of the Spirit of Christ,' at least you would not contradict and blaspheme. When the Holy Ghost hath fervently kindled your love towards God, you will know these to be very sensible operations. As you hear the wind, and feel it too, 'while it strikes upon your bodily organs, you will know you are under the guidance of God's Spirit the same way -- namely, by feeling it in your soul: by the present peace and joy and love which you feel within, as well as by its outward and more distant effects. -- I am, &c.

To James Hervey Date: BRISTOL, August 8, 1739. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1739) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- Why is it I have never had a line from you since I wrote to you from London Have you quite forgotten me Or have the idle stories which you once despised at length prevailed over you If so, if try brother offend thee, what is to be done ‘Tell him of his fault between thee and him alone.’ God is able to do whatsoever pleaseth Him. How knowest thou, O man, but thou mayest gain thy brother But what are you doing yourself Sleeping on, taking your rest. I cannot understand this. Our Lord calls aloud for labourers in His vineyard, and you sit still. His people perish by thousands for lack of knowledge, and the servant of the Lord hideth himself in a cave. Come forth, my brother! Come forth, work for our Lord, and He will renew your strength! Oh that He would send you into this part of His harvest! Either with or without your preaching, here is work enough. Come, and let us again take sweet counsel together. Let me have joy over you once more. Think if there be no way for your once more seeing, my dear friend, Your affectionate brother.

‘That their children also might know the things that make for their peace, it was proposed some months since to build a school in Kingswood; and after many difficulties, the foundation of it was laid in June last in the middle of the wood, on a place called Two-Mile-Hill, between the London and Bath Roads, about three measured miles from Bristol. A large room was begun there for a school, having four small rooms at each end for the schoolmasters (and hereafter, if it should please God, some poor children) to lodge in it. Two persons are ready to teach, so soon as the house is fit to receive them, the shell of which is nearly finished. It is proposed in the usual hours of the day to teach chiefly the poorer children to read, write, and cast accounts; but more especially, by God's assistance, “to know God, and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent”: the elder people, being not so proper to be mixed with children (for we expect scholars of all ages, some of them gray-headed), will be taught in the inner room, either early in the morning of late at night, so as their work nay not be hindered. ‘It is true, although the masters will not take nay pay (for the love of Christ constrains them, as they freely received, freely to give), yet this undertaking is attended with great expense. But let Him that feedeth the young ravens see to that. If He puts it into your heart, or the hearts of any of your friends, to assist us in bringing this work to perfection, in this world look for no recompense; but it shall be remembered in that day, when our Lord shall say unto you, “Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least of these My brethren, ye did it unto me.”’

To George Whitefield Date: LONDON, April 27, 1741. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1741) Author: John Wesley --- Would you have me deal plainly with you, my brother I believe you would: then, by the grace of God, I will. Of many things I find you are not rightly informed; of others you speak what you have not well weighed. ‘The Society room at Bristol,’ you say, ‘is adorned.’ How Why, with a piece of green cloth nailed to the desk, two sconces for eight candles each in the middle, and -- nay, I know no more. Now, which of these could be spared I cannot tell; nor would I desire either more adorning or less. But ‘lodgings are made for me or my brother.’ That is, in plain English, there is a little room by the school, where I speak with the people that come to me; and a garret, in which a bed is placed for me. And do you grudge me this Is this the voice of my brother, my son Whitefield You say, farther, ‘that the children at Bristol are clothed as well as taught.’ I am sorry for it; for the cloth is not paid for yet, and was bought without my consent or knowledge. ‘But those of Kingswood have been neglected.’ This is not so, notwithstanding the heavy debt which lay upon it. One master and one mistress have been in the house ever since it has been capable of receiving them; a second master was placed there some months since; and I have long been seeking for two proper mistresses: so that as much has been done, as matters stand, if not more, than I can answer to God and man. Well, but ‘you sent down Brother Cennick to be schoolmaster, whom I have turned out.' What, from being schoolmaster You know he never was so at all. You know he now neither designs nor desires it.

3. As to truth. How little have you regarded that golden rule ‘Let love be without dissimulation’! How much, very much, of reserve, darkness, and evasion has been in all your proceedings! so much that in very deed I know not now where to have you or how to understand what you say. I know not whether you receive the gospel as the adequate rule either of faith or practice. The good God have mercy upon you if you do or if you do not. To Him I commend my cause, and remain Your sincere friend.

To Captain Robert Williams Date: LONDON, August 3, 1742. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1742) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- To prove that Robert Williams traded very largely during the time he was at Savannah, that he built several considerable buildings both at Savannah and other parts of the colony, that he greatly improved large tracts of land there, and was esteemed to have one of the chief settlements in the colony, you have not so much as quoted ‘common fame.’ So he that will believe it, let him believe it. But you have quoted common fame to support several charges against John Wesley, clerk: as, that he seduced its common persons settled there to idleness; that he used too great familiarities with Miss Hopkey, and continued so to do till she was married to Mr. William Williamson of Savannah, a gentleman of considerable note there ('tis much a gentleman of so considerable note as Mr. William Williamson would marry her!); that he sent her several letters and messages after her marriage, desiring her to meet him at divers unseasonable hours and places, many of which (hours or places) were at his, the said Wesley's, own closet. A report was, you say, that these things were so. Would any man desire better proof I am not surprised at all that upon such evidence you should advance such assertions. But I really am at what you afterwards assert as upon your own personal knowledge -- viz. that two Bills of Indictment being preferred against John Wesley and sent to the Grand Jury of Savannah (Bills of Indictment sent to a Grand Jury! What kind of proceeding is this), this deponent and the rest of the Grand Jury did UNANIMOUSLY agree to the said Bills. How dare you, sir, assert so gross a falsehood Have you no regard either for your reputation or your soul Do you think there is no God to judge the earth You know, you must know, how large a part of that Grand Jury did absolutely disagree to every Bill of the two presentments; and gave those reasons of their disagreement to the Trustees, which neither you nor any man has yet chose to answer.

To Captain Robert Williams Date: BRISTOL, October 17, 1742 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1742) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- I really did you wrong. I believed the letter said to come from your very humble servant had been of your own composing till I had read it half through. But, on a narrower observation, I soon took knowledge both of the style and turn of thought so peculiar to Mr. Thomas Christie, once Recorder of Savannah, but now I fear (as before) wandering about to seek a piece of bread. I would not tread upon a worm; therefore let him pass. My concern, sir, is with you. Not that I should take notice of such a composition; only some might think silence a proof of guilt. That Mr. Wesley's answer is so indirect and full of evasion as to be a justification rather than confutation of your charge; that his leaving any doubt as to your great and well-known improvements plainly shows his malice and insincerity; and that Mr. Christie has still farther mementoes to convince the world what a base and jesuitical man he is, -- these, being mere rhetorical flowers fit to embellish the discourse, need no particular reply. But the fact (says your friend) with regard to the indictments stands in a different light than he tells it, and, as to his relation of persons dissenting on the Grand Jury, must be a story of his own making. That is easily known. The original paper is lodged at the Trustees’ Office at Palace Yard. And Mr. Fallowfield, one of those dissenters, you know succeeded Mr. Causton when Mr. Christie and he were displaced from their offices.

Now, sir, feeling these accounts are utterly inconsistent, feeling it is impossible ever to reconcile them, give me leave to ask you one plain question, which I would beg you seriously to consider. Is Thomas Christie, Esq., a gross, notorious liar, one who neither fears God nor regards man Or is Robert Williams, merchant, a vain, weak man, who, having causelessly and willfully forsworn himself, neither knows how to get backward or forward, how to retract his perjury or how to defend it -- I am, sir, Your friend. To a Gentleman [5] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, November 16, 1742 My father’s method was to visit all his parishioners, sick or well, from house to house, to talk with each of them on the things of God and observe severally the state of their souls. What he then observed he minuted down in a book kept for that purpose. In this manner he went through his parish (which was near three miles long) three times. He was visiting it the fourth time round when he fell into his last sickness.

7. Let us now weigh these assertions. ‘They’ (that is, ‘the charms oftheir sour behavior’) ‘must be in your eye veryextraordinary.’ -- Do not you stumble at the threshold TheMoravians excel in sweetness of behavior. ‘As they can besufficient to cover such a multitude of errors and crimes.’ Such amultitude of errors and crimes! I believe, as to errors, they holduniversal salvation, and are partly Antinomians, (in opinion,) andpartly Quietists; and for this cause I cannot join with them. Butwhere is the multitude of errors Whosoever knows two or threehundred more, let him please to mention them. Such a multitude ofcrimes too! That some of them have used guile, and are of a closereserved behavior, I know. And I excuse them not. But to thismultitude of crimes I am an utter stranger. Let him prove thischarge upon them who can. For me, I declare I cannot. ‘To keep up the same regard and affection.’ -- Not so. I say, myaffection was not lessened, till after September, 1739, till I hadproof of what I had feared before. But I had not the same degree ofregard for them when I saw the dark as well as the bright side oftheir character. ‘I doubt your regard for them was not lessened tillthey began to interfere with what you thought your province.’ Ifthis were only a doubt, it were not much amiss; but it presentlyshoots up into an assertion, equally groundless: For my regard forthem lessened, even while I was in Georgia; but it increased again after my return from thence, especially while I was at Hernhuth;and it gradually lessened again for some years, as I saw more and more which I approved not. How then does it appear that ‘I wasinfluenced herein by a fear of losing my own authority; not by ajust resentment to see the honor of religion and virtue so scandalously trampled upon’ -- Trampled upon!By whom Not by the Moravians: I never sawany such thing among them. But what do you mean by ‘a just resentment’ I hope you do notmean what is commonly called zeal; a flame which often ‘sets onfire the whole course of nature, and is itself set on fire of hell!" "Rivers of water run from my eyes, because men keep not thy law.’ This resentment on such an occasion I understand. From all other may God deliver me!

I grant it. I grant also, that justification sometimes means a state of acceptance with God. But all this does not in the least affect my assertion, that ‘that justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and by our Church in the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth Articles, is not our acquittal at the last day, but the present remission of our sins.’ You add, ‘You write in other places so variously about this matter, that I despair to find any consistency. Once you held “a degree of justifying faith short of the full assurance of faith, theabiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him;” and yet you afterwards “warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assurance, that God had forgiven their sins.” What difference there is between this clearassurance, and the former full assurance and clear perception, Iknow not.’ (Page 40.) Let us go on step by step, and you will know. ‘Once you held “adegree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, theabiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christabideth in him.”’ And so I hold still, and have done for some years. ‘And yet you afterwards warned all not to think they werejustified before they had a clear assurance that God had forgiventheir sins.’ I did so. ‘What difference there is between this clear assurance, and that full assurance and clear perception, I knownot.’ Sir, I will tell you. The one is an assurance that my sins areforgiven, clear at first, but soon clouded with doubt or fear. Theother is such a plerophory or full assurance that I am forgiven, andso clear a perception that Christ abideth in me, as utterly excludesall doubt and fear, and leaves them no place, no, not for an hour. So that the difference between them is as great as the differencebetween the light of the morning and that of the midday sun.

Consider now (I would not speak, but I dare not refrain) what have been the consequences of even my preaching the other doctrine. By the fruits shall we know those of whom I speak; even the cloud of witnesses, who at this hour experience the gospel I preach to be the power of God unto salvation. The habitual drunkard, that was, is now temperate in all things. The whoremonger now flees fornication. He that stole, steals no more, but works with his hands. He that cursed or swore, perhaps at every sentence, has now learned to serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto him with reverence. Those formerly enslaved to various habits of sin, are now brought to uniform habits of holiness. These are demonstrable facts. I can name the men, with their several places of abode. One of them was an avowed Atheist for many years; some were Jews; a considerable number Papists; the greatest part of them as much strangers to the form, as to the power, of godliness. When you have weighed these things touching the consequences of my preaching, on the one hand, (somewhat different from those set down in your Remarks,) and of your preaching, on the other, I would earnestly recommend the following words to your deepest consideration: -- ‘Beware of false prophets; ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles Even so every good tree’ (every true Prophet or Teacher) ‘bringeth forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire’ (Matt. vii. 15-19). III. 1. Having spoken more largely than I designed on the principle I hold in common with the Moravians, I shall touch very briefly on those errors (so called) which you say I hold more than theirs. (Remarks, p. 55.) You name, as the first, my holding that ‘a man may have a degree of justifying faith before he has, in the full, proper sense, a new, a clean heart.’ (ibid.) I have so often explained this, that I cannot throw away time in adding any more now; only this, -- that the moment a sinner is justified, his heart is cleansed in a low degree. But yet he has not a clean heart, in the full, proper sense, till he is made perfect in love.

2. Another error you mention is this doctrine of perfection. (page 60.) To save you from a continual ignoratio elenchi, I wave disputing on this point also, till you are better acquainted with my real sentiments. I have declared them on that head again and again; particularly in the sermon on Christian Perfection. 3. Into this fallacy you plunge from the beginning to the end of what you speak on my third error, (so you term it,) relating to the Lord’s supper; confuting, as mine, notions which I know not (pages 56-7.) I cannot think any farther answer is needful here, than the bare recital of my own words: -- ‘Friday, June 27. I preached on, “Do this in remembrance of Me.” ‘It has been diligently taught among us, that none but those who are converted, who “have received the Holy Ghost,” who are believers in the full sense, ought to communicate. ‘But experience shows the gross falsehood of that assertion, that the Lord’s supper is not a converting ordinance. Ye are witnesses: For many now present know, the very beginning of your conversion to God (perhaps in some the first deep conviction) was wrought at the Lord's supper. Now, one single instance of this kind overthrows that whole assertion. ‘The falsehood of the other assertion appears both from Scripture precept and example. Our Lord commanded those very men who were then unconverted, who had not yet “received the Holy Ghost,” who, in the full sense of the word, were not believers, to do this in remembrance of him. Here the precept is clear. And to these he delivered the elements with his own hands. Here is example equally indisputable.

To Robert Young Date: March 4, 1745. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1745) Author: John Wesley --- ROBERT YOUNG, -- I expect to see you, between this and Friday, and to hear from you that you are sensible of your fault. Otherwise, in pity to your soul, I shall be obliged to inform the Magistrates of your assaulting me yesterday in the street. -- I am Your real friend. To a Clerical Friend NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, March 11, I 745. I have been drawing up this morning a short state of the case between the clergy and us: I leave you to make any such use of it as you believe will be to the glory of God. 1. About seven years since, we began preaching inward, present salvation as attainable by faith alone. 2. For preaching this doctrine we were forbidden to preach in the churches. 3. We then preached in private houses as occasion offered; and, when the houses could not contain the people, in the open air. 4. For this many of the clergy preached or printed against us as both heretics and schismatics. 5. Persons who were convinced of sin begged us to advise them more particularly how to flee from the wrath to come. We replied, if they would all come at one time (for they were numerous), we would endeavor it. 6. For this we were represented, both from the pulpit and the press (we have heard it with our ears, and seen it with our eyes), as introducing Popery, raising sedition, practicing both against Church and State; and all manner of evil was publicly said both of us and those who were accustomed to meet with us. 7. Finding some truth herein, viz. that some of those who so met together walked disorderly, we immediately desired them not to come to us any more. 8. And the more steady were desired to overlook the rest, that we might know if they walked according to the gospel. 9. But now several of the bishops began to speak against us, either in conversation or in public. 10. On this encouragement, several of the clergy stirred up the people to treat us as outlaws or mad dogs. 11. The people did so, both in Staffordshire, Cornwall, and many other places.

Agreeably to those ancient records, by ‘Christian’ or ‘justifying faith’ I always meant faith preceded by repentance and accompanied or followed by obedience. So I always preached; so I spoke and wrote. But my warm adversaries from the very beginning stopped their ears, cried out, ‘An heretic! An heretic!’ and so ran upon me at once. 21. But I let them alone: you are the person I want, and whom I have been seeking for many years. You have understanding to discern and mildness to repeat (what would otherwise be) unpleasing truths. Smite me friendly and reprove me: it shall be a precious balm; it shall not break my head. I am deeply convinced that I know nothing yet as I ought to know. Fourteen years ago I said (with Mr. Norris [Wesley read Norris on Faith and Practice in 1729 (Journal, i. 89n), and his Christian Prudence on the way to Georgia (ibid. i. 125, 126d). In the last paragraph of Reflections upon the Conduct of Human Life with reference to Learning and Knowledge. Extracted from Mr. Norris (1734), he speaks of reading books that ‘are rather persuasive than instructive; such as warm, kindle, and enlarge the affections, and awaken the divine sense in the soul; as being convinced, by every day's experience, that I have more need of heat than of light.’ See letter of March 14, 1756.]), ‘I want heat more than light’; but now I know not which I want most. Perhaps God will enlighten me by your words. O speak and spare not! At least, you will have the thanks and prayers of Your obliged and affectionate servant.

Having myself no knowledge of the General, I took the liberty to make this offer to you. I have no interest herein; but I should rejoice to serve as I am able my King and country. If it be judged that this will be of no real service, let the proposal die and be forgotten. But I beg you, sir, to believe that I have the same glorious cause, for which you have shown so becoming a zeal, earnestly at heart [The Mayor sent a message the following day saying that he would 'communicate my proposal to the General, and return me his answer as soon as possible.' Wesley preached near the camp several times. See Journal, iii. 218-19.]; and that therefore I am, with warm respect, sir, Your most obedient servant.

7. ‘Infallible testimony’ was your word, not mine: I never use it; I do not like it. But I did not object to your using that phrase, because I would not fight about words. If, then, the question be repeated, ‘In what sense is that attestation of the Spirit infallible’ any one has my free leave to answer, In no sense at all. And yet, though I allow that some may fancy they have it when in truth they have it not, I cannot allow that any fancy they have it not at the time when they really have. I know no instance of this. When they have this faith, they cannot possibly doubt of their having it; although it is very possible, when they have it not, they may doubt whether ever they had it or no. This [See A Short Account of the Death of Mrs. Hannah Richardson, by Charles Wesley, 1741; or Jackson's Charles Wesley, i. 275-6.] was Hannah Richardson's case; and it is more or less the case with many of the children of God. 8. That logical evidence that we are the children of God I do not either exclude or despise. But it is far different from the direct witness of the Spirit: of which, I believe, St. Paul speaks in his Epistle to the Romans; and which, I doubt not, is given to many thousand souls who never saw my face. But I spoke only of those I personally knew, concerning whom, indeed, I find my transcriber has made a violent mistake, writing 13,000 instead of 1,300: I might add, those whom I also have known by their writings. But I cannot lay so much stress on their evidence. I cannot have so full and certain a knowledge of a writer as of one I talk with face to face; and therefore I think the experiences of this kind are not to be compared with those of the other.

17. We are at length come to the real state of the question between the Methodists (so called) and their opponents. ‘Is there perceptible inspiration, or is there not Is there such a thing (if we divide the question into its parts) as faith producing peace, and joy, and love, and inward (as well as outward) holiness Is that faith which is productive of these fruits wrought in us by the Holy Ghost, or not And is he in whom they are wrought necessarily conscious of them, or is he not’ These are the points on which I am ready to join issue with any serious and candid man. Such I believe you to be. If, therefore, I knew on which of those you desired my thoughts, I would give you them freely, such as they are; or (if you desire it) on any collateral question. The best light I have I am ready to impart; and am ready to receive farther light from you. My time, indeed, is so short that I cannot answer your letters so particularly or so correctly as I would. But I am persuaded you will excuse many defects where you believe the design is good. I want to know what, as yet, I know not. May God teach it me by you, or by whom He pleaseth! ‘Search me, O Lord, and prove me! Try out my reins and my heart! Look well if there be error or wickedness in me; and lead me in the way everlasting!’

‘Yet, although both repentance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary before justification, neither the one nor the other is necessary in the same sense or in the same degree with faith. Not in the same degree. For in whatever moment a man believes (in the Christian sense of the word) he is justified. But it is not so at whatever moment he repents or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Consequently none of these are necessary to justification in the same degree with faith. ‘Nor in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith. This is proximately necessary thereto; repentance remotely, as it is necessary to faith.’ (So the error of the press is to be corrected.) ‘And the fruits of repentance still more remotely, as they are necessary to the increase or continuance of repentance. And even in this sense they are only necessary on supposition--if there be time and opportunity for them: for in many instances there is not; but God cuts short his work, and faith prevents the fruits of repentance.’ 2. Thus far I believe we are nearly agreed. But on those words, -- ‘Far other qualifications are required in order to our standing before God in glory than were required in order to His giving us faith and pardon. In order to this, nothing is indispensably required but repentance or conviction of sin. But in order to the other it is indispensably required that we be fully cleansed from all sin,’ - you remark, ‘Here, I apprehend, are two great mistakes: (1) you make too little necessary before pardon; (2) too much afterward. You confine repentance within too narrow limits, and extend holiness beyond its just bounds. ‘(1) By repentance you mean only conviction of sin. But this is a very partial account of it. Every child that has learned his Catechism can tell, that forsaking of sin is included in it; living in obedience to God’s will, when there is opportunity; and, even when there is not, a sincere desire and purpose to do so, and a faith in God’s mercies through Christ Jesus.’ (Second Letter, p. 92.)

6. The next instance which you relate as an instance of despair is that of a young woman of Kingswood; which you break off with, ‘Take me away, &c.’ (page 112). But why did you not decipher that &c. Why did you not add the rest of the paragraph Because it would have spoiled your whole argument. It would have shown what the end of the Lord was in permitting that severe visitation. The words are: ‘We interrupted her by calling again upon God; on which she sunk down as before (as one asleep), and another young woman began to roar as loud as she had done. My brother now came in, it being about nine o'clock. We continued in prayer till past eleven; when God in a moment spoke peace into the soul, first of the first tormented, and then of the other. And they both joined in singing praise to Him who had “stilled the enemy and the avenger.”’ (Journal, ii. 298-9.) 7. I am sorry to find you still affirm that, with regard to the Lord’s Supper also, I ‘advance many injudicious, false, and dangerous things. Such as: (1) That “a man ought to communicate, without a sure trust in God's mercy through Christ.”’ (Second Letter, p. 117.) You mark these as my words; but I know them not. (2) ‘That there is no previous preparation indispensably necessary but a desire to receive whatsoever God pleases to give.’ But I include abundantly more in that desire than you seem to apprehend, even a willingness to know and do the whole will of God. (3) ‘That no fitness is required at the time of communicating’ (I recite the whole sentence) ‘but a sense of our state, of our utter sinfulness and helplessness; every one who knows he is fit for hell being just fit to come to Christ in this as well as in all other ways of His appointment.’ But neither can this sense of our utter sinfulness and helplessness subsist without earnest desires of universal holiness. ‘There was another passage,’ you say, ‘which you chose to omit’ (page 118). Which this was I do not understand. Nor do I perceive any one of these dreadful positions (as you style them) to be contrary to the Word of God.

You remark: (11) ‘He talks in the style of inspired persons.’ I answered, ‘No otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.’ You reply, ‘The point was not whether you are actually inspired, but whether you have talked in the style of those who were so’ (Second Letter, p. 126). That was so much the point that, if it were allowed, it would overturn your whole argument. For if I was inspired (in your sense), you could not term that inspiration enthusiasm without blasphemy; but you again mistake my words. The plain meaning of them is, that I talk in the style of those persons who are ‘no otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.’ You remark: (12) ‘He applies Scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning or once considering the difference of times and circumstances’ (page 62). I answered: ‘I am not conscious of anything like this. I apply no Scripture phrase either to myself or any other without carefully considering, both the original meaning and the secondary sense, wherein (allowing for different times and circumstances) it may be applied to ordinary Christians.’ [See letter of Feb. 2, 1745, sect.111, 5.] You reply: ‘This also you deny to have done; holding, however, some secondary sense (what it is you have not told us) in which Scripture phrases may be applied to ordinary Christians.’ I have largely told you what I mean by a secondary sense, in the First Part of the Farther Appeal. You add: ‘Many things which were truly written of the preaching of Christianity at first, you have vainly applied to yourselves.’ Sir, I am to answer only for myself; as I will for that expression, ‘Behold, the day of the Lord is come; He is again visiting and redeeming His people!’ 3. I come now to what you expatiate upon at large as the two grand instances of my enthusiasm. The first is plainly this: At some rare times, when I have been in great distress of soul, or in utter uncertainty how to act in an important case which required a speedy determination, after using all other means that occurred, I have cast lots or opened the Bible. And by this means I have been relieved from that distress or directed in that uncertainty.

Inquire, then, ‘Which are greater, the numbers of serious men perplexed and deluded by these teachers, or of notorious sinners brought to repentance and good life,’ within the forest of Kingswood Many, indeed, of the inhabitants are nearly as they were, are not much better or worse for their preaching, because the neighboring clergy and gentry have successfully labored to deter them from hearing it. But between three and four hundred of those who would not be deterred are now under the care of those preachers. Now, what number of these were serious Christians before Were fifty were twenty were ten Peradventure there might five such be found. But it is a question whether there could be or no. The remainder were gross, open sinners, common swearers, drunkards, Sabbath-breakers, whoremongers, plunderers, robbers, implacable, unmerciful, wolves and bears in the shape of men. Do you desire instances of more ‘notorious sinners’ than these I know not if Turkey or Japan can afford them. And what do you include in ‘repentance and good life’ Give the strictest definition thereof that you are able, and I will undertake these once notorious sinners shall be weighed in that balance and not found wanting. 8. Not that all the Methodists (so called) ‘were very wicked people before they followed us.’ There are those among them, and not a few, who are able to stop the boasting of those that despise them, and to say, ‘Whereinsoever any of you is bold, I am bold also’; only they ‘count all these things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus.’ But these we found, as it were, when we sought them not. We went forth to ‘seek that which was lost’ (more eminently lost); ‘to call’ the most flagrant, hardened, desperate ‘sinners to repentance.’ To this end we preached in the Horsefair at Bristol, in Kingswood, in Newcastle; among the colliers in Staffordshire and the tinners in Cornwall; in Southwark, Wapping, Moorfields, Drury Lane, at London. Did any man ever pick out such places as these in order to find ‘serious, regular, well-disposed people’ How many such might then be in any of them I know not. But this I know, that four in five of those who are now with us were not of that number, but were wallowing in their blood, till God by us said unto them, ‘Live.’

9. In what respects the Brethren are Antinomians, in what sense they lean to Quietism, I have spoken at large. If they can refute the charge, I shall rejoice more than if I had gained great spoils. My brother, I heartily wish both you and them the genuine, open gospel simplicity; that you may always use that artless plainness of speech in which you once excelled; and that by manifestation of the truth you may commend yourself to every man's conscience in the sight of God. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

But to come closer yet, and weigh the point in debate in the balance of plain reason. You must allow there is a testimony of the Spirit with our spirit that we are the children of God. ‘But,’ you say, ‘it is not a perceptible one.’ How is this Let us examine it thoroughly. It is allowed (1) the Spirit of God (2) bears testimony to my spirit (3) that I am a child of God. But I am not to perceive it. Not to perceive what the first, second, or third particular Am I not to perceive what is testified -- that I am a child of God Then it is not testified at all. This is saying and unlaying in the same breath. Or am I not to perceive that it is testified to my spirit Yea, but I must perceive what passes in my own soul! Or, lastly, am I to perceive that I am a child of God, and that this is testified to my spirit, but not to perceive who it is that testifies not to know it is the Spirit of God O sir, if there really be a man in the world who hath this testimony in himself, can it be supposed that he does not know who it is that testifies who it is that speaks to his heart that speaks in his inmost soul as never man spake If he does not, he is ignorant of the whole affair. If you are in this state, I pray God you may say from the heart, ‘Lord, what I know not, teach Thou me.’ How much better were this than to canonize your own ignorance as the only knowledge and wisdom, and to condemn all the generation of God's children of ‘idiotism and madness’! 9. Under your last head you do not confine yourself now within the bounds you at first proposed, when you said, ‘I am not making conjectures of what may happen, but relating mischiefs which actually have happened.’ Take care you do not grow warm when I reply to this; you will have need of all your patience to bear it.

You ascribe it likewise in part to ‘a natural knack of persuasion.’ If either by a natural or an acquired power of persuasion I can prevail upon sinners to turn to God, am I to bury even that talent in the earth ‘No; but try if you cannot do more good in a college or in a parish.’ [See letter of March 20, 1739, to James Hervey.] I have tried both, and I could not do any substantial good, either to my pupils or my parishioners. Among my parishioners in Lincolnshire I tried for some years; but I am well assured I did far more good to them by preaching three days on my father's tomb than I did by preaching three years in his pulpit. But you ‘know no call I have to preach up and down, to play the part of an itinerant evangelist.’ Perhaps you do not. But I do: I know God hath required this at my hands. To me, His blessing my work is an abundant proof; although such a proof as often makes me tremble. But ‘is there not pride or vanity in my heart’ There is; yet this is not my motive to preaching. I know and feel that the spring of this is a deep conviction that it is the will of God, and that, were I to refrain, I should never hear that word, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant,’ but, ‘Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness, where is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.’

This is there shown, both by Scripture, by reason, and by authority, particularly that of Origen and Chrysostom, whom his Lordship of Lichfield had cited in his Charge [Richard Smallbroke, Bishop of Lichfield 1730-49, published treatises against Whiston and Woolaston. In a Charge, delivered in 1741 and published in 1744, he set himself ‘to obviate the Contagion of those Enthusiastical Pretensions that in several parts of the nation have lately, as well as formerly, betrayed whole Multitudes either into an unreasonable Presumption of their Salvation, or into melancholy if not desponding Opinions about it.’ He attempted to prove, with the aid of Origen and Chrysostom’s homily on I Cor. ii. 4, that the ‘demonstration of the Spirit and power’ referred to the miracles of the apostolic age (pp. 15, 26, 31-2), and that the Testimony of the Spirit, in the Sense of the Holy Scriptures, is abusively pretended to by a new sect of Enthusiastical Seducers among us.’ Whitefield wrote Some Remarks upon a late Charge against Enthusiasm, and Wesley answered the Bishop in A Farther Appeal.] as asserting just the contrary. But, waiving authorities, I reasoned thus: ‘You allow there is a testimony of the Spirit with our spirit that we are the children of God. But you say it is not a perceptible one. How is this Let us examine it thoroughly. It is allowed (1) the Spirit of God (2) bears testimony to my spirit (3) that I am a child of God. But I am not to perceive it. Not to perceive what the first, second, or third particular Am I not to perceive what is testified -- that I am a child of God Then it is not testified at all. This is saying and unlaying in the same breath. Or am I not to perceive that it is testified to my spirit Yea, but I must perceive what passes in my own soul! Or, lastly, am I to perceive that I am a child of God, and that this is testified to my spirit, but not to perceive who it is that testifies not to know it is the Spirit of God O sir, if there be really a man in the world who hath this testimony in himself, can it be supposed that he does not know who it is that testifies who it is that speaks to his heart’

To the Clergyman at Tredinny Date: TREDINNY, July 14, 1747. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1747) Author: John Wesley --- REVEREND SIR,--I was exceedingly surprised when I was informed yesterday of your affirming publicly in the church, in the face of a whole congregation, 'Now Wesley has sent down for an hundred pounds; and it must be raised directly. Nay, it is true.' O sir, is this possible Can it be that you should be so totally void, I will not say of conscience, of religion, but of good nature as to credit such a tale and of good manners and common sense as thus to repeat it I must beg that you would either justify or retract this (for it is a point of no small concern), and that I may know what you propose to do, before I set out for London.--I am, reverend sir, Your brother and servant for Christ's sake.

To his Brother Charles Date: BEERCROCOMB. July 31, 1747. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1747) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--Yesterday I was thinking on a desideratum among us, a genesis problematica on Justifying Faith. A skeleton of it, which you may fill up, or any one that has leisure, I have roughly set down. Is justifying faith a sense of pardon Negatur. I. Every one is deeply concerned to understand this question well: but preachers most of all; lest they should either make them sad whom God hath not made sad, or encourage them to say peace where there is no peace. Some years ago we heard nothing about either justifying faith or a sense of pardon: so that, when we did hear of them, the theme was quite new to us; and we might easily, especially in the heat and hurry of controversy, lean too much either to the one hand or to the other. II. By justifying faith I mean that faith which whosoever hath not is under the wrath and curse of God. By a sense of pardon I mean a distinct, explicit assurance that my sins are forgiven. I allow (1) that there is such an explicit assurance; (2) that it is the common privilege of real Christians; (3) that it is the proper Christian faith, which purifieth the heart and overcometh the world. But I cannot allow that justifying faith is such an assurance, or necessarily connected therewith. III. Because, if justifying faith necessarily implies such an explicit sense of pardon, then every one who has it not, and every one so long as he has it not, is under the wrath and under the curse of God. But this is a supposition contrary to Scripture as well as to experience. Contrary to Scripture (Isa. l.10; Acts x. 34). Contrary to experience: for Jonathan Reeves, &c. &c., had peace with God, no fear, no doubt, before they had that sense of pardon; and so have I frequently had. Again, the assertion that justifying faith is a sense of pardon is contrary to reason; it is flatly absurd. For how can a sense of our having received pardon be the condition of our receiving it

You say: (1) 'Either that notification was not so distinct.' It was so distinct that she could not then doubt. 'Or (2) Was notified to her by one of suspected credit, whom she could not believe.' Yes; she then believed, and knew it was the voice of God. 'Or (3) She was not of sound understanding if she disbelieved it.' When she disbelieved it, she was not. For as the serpent deceived Eve, so he then deceived her, fqeivrwn toV novmma aujth'". [See 2 Cor. xi. 3.] 'But could she possibly deny a plain matter of fact' You add, as if I have said so, 'Yes, in process of time she might, particularly if she drew back to perdition '; and then subjoin, 'But what is this evasive answer to the case of Hannah Richardson' I think, nothing at all. I never applied it to her case. She never denied her having had such a testimony. But after a time she doubted (as I said before) whether that testimony was true. 16. I presume Eve in paradise was at least equal in understanding with any of her posterity. Now, unto her God said, 'In the day that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge thou shalt surely die.' And doubtless 'this notification was as distinct and perceptible to her as the sun at noonday.' Yet after a time (perhaps only a few days) she utterly disbelieved it. You exclaim, 'Absurd! Impossible! There could be no such thing; as I shall prove immediately.' 'Either this notification was not so distinct as is pretended, or, if distinct, was notified by one of suspected credit, whom she could not believe. Or else, if it was both distinct and credible, she was not of sound understanding if she disbelieved it, nor of sound memory if she doubted of it.' Therefore the whole story is absurd and a self-inconsistent (not a cunningly devised) fable.

To William Mondet Date: CORK STREET, April 16, 1748. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1748) Author: John Wesley --- SIR,--A warm letter, subscribed by Mr. Binns and you, was given me the evening before I left Dublin. The most material part of it ran thus: 'Why did you not settle that affair with Mr. Cennick before you preached in the house, which you could not preach in a fortnight ago for conscience' sake' Have patience: I will tell you why. I did not settle that affair with Mr. Cennick before he went away because I heard not one word of his going till he was agone. Otherwise it was my full design to have settled it then, which might have been done in a few hours' time. I did not preach in the house a fortnight before because I was determined not to preach there till I should have made Mr. Cennick one more offer, as I thought brotherly love required; but after I had done this and he appeared to me (comparing his behaviour to me with his words to others) to trifle and put me off, I could not in conscience delay preaching there any longer. The fault lay at his door, and I now conceived myself to be clear in the sight of God and man, even though I should never have made him another offer of the place at all. You go on: 'How can you venture to take God's name in your mouth, and to call upon God in an house, at which time your own conscience must tell you that you have taken the house over people's heads It is our opinion, if you had the least feeling of God's love in your heart, you could not do it.' I suppose it is your opinion. But I stand before an higher Judge. You entirely mistake my motive of acting. I never looked upon the taking this house as 'the taking it over people's heads.' For it was advertised; and you positively refused to take it. This was not the ground of my scruple. But I desired to do as I would be done to. And I have done so to the best of my knowledge. Lord, what I know not teach Thou me!

To John Cennick Date: May 16, 1748. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1748) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I know you cannot indemnify me with regard to the rents and covenants I am under, which was the thing I always insisted on, and must insist on still, without encumbering yourselves. If, therefore, you cannot accept the house 'upon these conditions,' the case is determined at once. I wish you much happiness; and am Your very affectionate brother.

10. Another objection was: 'There is no scripture for this, for classes and I know not what.' I answer: (1) There is no scripture against it. You cannot show one text that forbids them. (2) There is much scripture for it, even all those texts which enjoin the substance of those various duties whereof this is only an indifferent circumstance, to be determined by reason and experience. (3) You seem not to have observed that the Scripture in most points gives only general rules, and leaves the particular circumstances to be adjusted by the common sense of mankind. The Scripture, for instance, gives that general rule, 'Let all things be done decently and in order.' But common sense is to determine on particular occasions what order and decency require. So in another instance the Scripture lays it down as a general, standing direction: 'Whether ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.' But it is common prudence which is to make the application of this in a thousand particular cases. 11. 'But these,' said another, 'are all man's inventions.' This is but the same objection in another form. And the same answer will suffice for any reasonable person. These are man's inventions. And what then That is, they are methods which men have found, by reason and common sense, for the more effectually applying several Scripture rules, couched in general terms, to particular occasions. 12. They spoke far more plausibly than these, who said: 'The thing is well enough in itself. But the Leaders are insufficient for the work; they have neither gifts nor graces for such an employment.' I answer: (1) Yet, such Leaders as they are, it is plain God has blessed their labour. (2) If any of these is remarkably wanting in gifts or grace, he is soon taken notice of and removed. (3) If you know any such, tell it to me, not to others, and I will endeavour to exchange him for a better. (4) It may be hoped they will all be better than they are, both by experience and observation, and by the advices given them by the Minister every Tuesday night, and the prayers (then in particular) offered up for them.

Might it not be well, sir, not to be quite so sure yet You may not always have the laugh on your side. You are not yet infallibly assured but that even Protestantism may produce something worth an answer. There may be some Protestants, for aught you know, who have a few grains of common sense left, and may find a way to defend, at least the Ante-Nicene Fathers, without 'disgracing their own character.' Even such an one as I have faintly attempted this; although I neither have, nor expect to have, any preferment, not even to be a Lambeth chaplain, which if Dr. Middleton is not, it is not his own fault. V. 1. The last thing you proposed was 'to refute some of the most plausible objections which have been hitherto made.' To what you have offered on this head I must likewise attempt a short reply. You say: 'It is objected, first, that, by the character I have given of the Fathers, the authority of the books of the New Testament, which were transmitted to us through their hands, will be rendered precarious and uncertain' (page 190). After a feint of confuting it, you frankly acknowledge the whole of this objection. 'I may venture,' you say, 'to declare that, if this objection be true, it cannot hurt my argument. For if it be natural and necessary that the craft and credulity of witnesses should always detract from the credit of their testimony, then who can help it And if this charge be proved on the Fathers, it must be admitted, how far soever the consequences may reach.' (Page 192.) 'If it be proved'! Very true. If that charge against the Fathers were really and substantially proved, the authority of the New Testament would be at an end so far as it depends on one kind of evidence. But that charge is not proved. Therefore even the traditional authority of the New Testament is as firm as ever. 2. 'It is objected,' you say, 'secondly, that all suspicion of fraud in the case of the primitive miracles is excluded by that public appeal and challenge which the Christian apologists make to their enemies the heathens to come and see with their own eyes the reality of the facts which they attest' (page 193).

No: I conceive the improbability supposed lies wholly on the other side. Whatever the Government of heathen Rome was (which I presume you will not depreciate), the Government of England is remarkable for tenderness to the very meanest subject. It is, therefore, not improbable in the least that an address from some thousands of those subjects, how contemptible soever they were generally esteemed, would not be totally disregarded by such a Government. But that they should 'not know that any such had been addressed to them' is not only improbable but morally impossible. If, therefore, it were possible for the heathens to 'have a worse opinion of the ancient Christians than we,' you say, 'have of our modern fanatics,' still it is utterly incredible that the Roman Government should, not only 'take no notice of their apologies,' but 'not even know that any such were addressed to them.' 4. 'But the publishing books was more expensive then than it is now; and therefore we cannot think the Christians of those days were able to provide such a number of them as was sufficient for the information of the public' (pages 198-9). Nay, if they were not able to provide themselves food and raiment, they would be sure to provide a sufficient number of these-sufficient, at least, for the information of the Emperor and Senate, to whom those apologies were addressed. And how great a number, do you suppose, might suffice for them How many hundred or thousand copies I apprehend the Emperor would be content with one; and one more would be needful for the Senate. Now, I really believe the Christians of those days were able to provide both these copies--nay, and even two more, if it should have fallen out that two or three Emperors were on the throne; even though we should suppose that in Tertullian's time there were but forty thousand of them in all Rome.

7. Have you considered, sir, how the case stood in our own country scarce two hundred years ago Not a multitude indeed, and yet not a few, of our own countrymen then expired in the flames. And it was not a general persuasion among them that martyrs feel no pain in death. That these have feeling as well as other men plainly appeared in the case of Bishop Ridley crying out, 'I cannot burn! I cannot burn!' when his lower parts were consumed. Do you think the fear of shame or the desire of praise was the motive on which these acted Or have you reason to believe it was mere obstinacy that hindered them from accepting deliverance Sir, since 'human nature has always been the same, so that our experience of what now passes in our own soul will be the best comment on what is delivered to us concerning others,' let me entreat you to make the case your own. You must not say, 'I am not one of the ignorant vulgar; I am a man of sense and learning.' So were many of them--not inferior even to you, either in natural or acquired endowments. I ask, then, Would any of these motives suffice to induce you to burn at a stake I beseech you, lay your hand on your heart, and answer between God and your own soul what motive could incite you to walk into a fire but an hope full of immortality. When you mention this motive, you speak to the point. And yet even with regard to this both you and I should find, did it come to a trial, that the hope of a fool or the hope of an hypocrite would stand us in no stead. We should find nothing else would sustain us in that hour but a well-grounded confidence of a better resurrection; nothing less than the 'steadfastly looking up to heaven, and beholding the glory which shall be revealed.' 8. 'But heretics,' you say, 'have been martyrs.' I will answer more particularly, when you specify who and when. It may suffice to say now, whosoever he be, that, rather than he will offend God, calmly and deliberately chooses to suffer death, I cannot lightly speak evil of him.

If this be as you assert (I repeat it again), then farewell the credit of all history. Sir, this is not the cant of zealots; you must not escape so: it is plain, sober reason. If the credibility of witnesses, of all witnesses (for you make no distinction), depends, as you peremptorily affirm, on a variety of principles wholly concealed from us, and consequently, though it may be presumed in many cases, yet can be certainly known in none, then it is plain all history, sacred or profane, is utterly precarious and uncertain. Then I may indeed presume, but I cannot certainly know, that Julius Caesar was killed in the Senate House; then I cannot certainly know that there was an Emperor in Germany called Charles V, that Leo X ever sat in the see of Rome, or Louis XIV on the throne of France. Now, let any man of common understanding judge whether this objection has any sense in it or no. 12. Under this same head you fall again upon the case of witchcraft, and say: 'There is not in all history any one miraculous fact so authentically attested as the existence of witches. All Christian' (yea, and all heathen) 'nations whatsoever have consented in the belief of them. Now, to deny the reality of facts so solemnly attested and so universally believed seems to give the lie to the sense and experience of all Christendom, to the wisest and best of every nation, and to public monuments subsisting to our own times.' (Page 221.) What obliges you, then, to deny it You answer: 'The incredibility of the thing' (page 223). O sir, never strain at the incredibility of this, after you have swallowed an hundred people talking without tongues! 13. What you aim at in this also is plain, as well as in your account of the Abbe de Paris. The point of your argument is: 'If you cannot believe these, then you ought not to believe the Bible; the incredibility of the things related ought to overrule all testimony whatsoever.' Your argument at length would run thus: 'If things be incredible in themselves, then this incredibility ought to overrule all testimony concerning them. 'But the Gospel miracles are incredible in themselves.'

8. Now, how highly desirable is such a faith, were it only on its own account! For how little does the wisest of men know of anything more than he can see with his eyes! What clouds and darkness cover the whole scene of things invisible and eternal! What does he know even of himself as to his invisible part what of his future manner of existence How melancholy an account does the prying, learned philosopher (perhaps the wisest and best of all heathens), the great, the venerable Marcus Antoninus, give of these things! What was the result of all his serious researches, of his high and deep contemplations 'Either dissipation, of the soul as well as the body, into the common, unthinking mass; or reabsorption into the universal fire, the unintelligent source of all things; or some unknown manner of conscious existence after the body sinks to rise no more.' One of these three he supposed must succeed death; but which he had no light to determine. Poor Antoninus! With all his wealth, his honour, his power; with all his wisdom and philosophy,-- What points of knowledge did he gain That life is sacred all-and vain: Sacred, how high, and vain, how low He could not tell, but died to know.' [Gambold's Epitaph: where in line 2 it is 'was,' not 'is'; and line 4 'He knew not here, but dy'd to know.'] 9. He 'died to know'! And so must you, unless you are now a partaker of Christian faith. O consider this! Nay, and consider, not only how little you know of the immensity of the things that are beyond sense and time, but how uncertainly do you know even that little! How faintly glimmering a light is that you have! Can you properly be said to know any of these things Is that knowledge any more than bare conjecture And the reason is plain. You have no senses suitable to invisible or eternal objects. What desiderata, then, especially to the rational, the reflecting part of mankind, are these,--a more extensive knowledge of things invisible and eternal, a greater certainty in whatever knowledge of them we have, and (in order to both) faculties capable of discerning things invisible!

10. Is it not so Let impartial reason speak. Does not every thinking man want a window, not so much in his neighbour's as in his own breast He wants an opening there, of whatever kind, that might let in light from eternity. He is pained to be thus feeling after God so darkly, so uncertainly; to know so little of God, and indeed so little of any beside material objects. He is concerned that he must see even that little, not directly, but in the dim, sullied glass of sense; and consequently so imperfectly and obscurely that it is all a mere enigma still. 11. Now, these very desiderata faith supplies. It gives a more extensive knowledge of things invisible, showing what eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither could it before enter into our heart to conceive. And all these it shows in the clearest light, with the fullest certainty and evidence. For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible. Oh who would not wish for such a faith, were it only on these accounts! How much more, if by this I may receive the promise, I may attain all that holiness and happiness! 12. So Christianity tells me; and So I find it, may every real Christian say. I now am assured that these things are so: I experience them in my own breast. What Christianity (considered as a doctrine) promised is accomplished in my soul. And Christianity, considered as an inward principle, is the completion of all those promises. It is holiness and happiness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit, a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life. Section III. 1. And this I conceive to be the strongest evidence of the truth of Christianity. I do not undervalue traditional evidence. Let it have its place and its due honour. It is highly serviceable in its kind and in its degree. And yet I cannot set it on a level with this.

9. Oh that the time were come! How do I long for you to be partakers of the exceeding great and precious promise! How am I pained when I hear any of you using those silly terms which the men of form have taught you, calling the mention of the only thing you want 'cant'! the deepest wisdom, the highest happiness 'enthusiasm'! What ignorance is this! How extremely despicable would it make you in the eyes of any but a Christian! But he cannot despise you who loves you as his own soul, who is ready to lay down his life for your sake. 10. Perhaps you will say, 'But this internal evidence of Christianity affects only those in whom the promise is fulfilled. It is no evidence to me.' There is truth in this objection. It does affect them chiefly, but it does not affect them only. It cannot in the nature of things be so strong an evidence to others as it is to them. And yet it may bring a degree of evidence, it may reflect some light on you also. For (1) You see the beauty and loveliness of Christianity when it is rightly understood, and you are sure there is nothing to be desired in comparison of it. (2) You know the Scripture promises this, and says it is attained by faith, and by no other way. (3) You see clearly how desirable Christian faith is even on account of its own intrinsic value. (4) You are a witness that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way. The more you have laboured after virtue and happiness, the more convinced you are of this. Thus far, then, you need not lean upon other men; thus far you have personal experience.

(5) What reasonable assurance can you have of things whereof you have not personal experience Suppose the question were, Can the blind be restored to sight This you have not yourself experienced. How, then, will you know that such a thing ever was Can there be an easier or surer way than to talk with one or some number of men who were blind but are now restored to sight They cannot be deceived as to the fact in question; the nature of the thing leaves no room for this. And if they are honest men (which you may learn from other circumstances), they will not deceive you. Now, transfer this to the case before us: and those who were blind, but now see--those who were sick many years, but now are healed--those who were miserable, but now are happy--will afford you also a very strong evidence of the truth of Christianity, as strong as can be in the nature of things, till you experience it in your own soul; and this, though it be allowed they are but plain men, and in general of weak understanding--nay, though some of them should be mistaken in other points, and hold opinions which cannot be defended. 11. All this may be allowed concerning the primitive Fathers; I mean particularly Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian; to whom I would add Macarius and Ephraim Syrus. I allow that some of these had not strong natural sense, that few of them had much learning, and none the assistances which our age enjoys in some respects above all that went before. Hence I doubt not but whoever will be at the pains of reading over their writings for that poor end will find many mistakes, many weak suppositions, and many ill-drawn conclusions. 12. And yet I exceedingly reverence them as well as their writings, and esteem them very highly in love. I reverence them, because they were Christians, such Christians as are above described. And I reverence their writings, because they describe true, genuine Christianity, and direct us to the strongest evidence of the Christian doctrine. Indeed, in addressing the heathens of those times, they intermix other arguments; particularly that drawn from the numerous miracles which were then performed in the Church, which they needed only to open their eyes and see daily wrought in the face of the sun.

To John Bennet Date: LONDON, January 9, 1749. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1749) Author: John Wesley --- What can be done more for William Darney's Societies [See letter of Feb. 9, 1750.] than this First, that you should visit them once or twice in a quarter; and then, that either John Nelson or our Yorkshire preacher should go through them as often as possible. I am sending a messenger to Sir John Strange (the other counsel), lest the Lancashire cause should be neglected on occasion of Mr. Glanville's death.[See Journal, iii. 328-9, 389; and letter of Aug. 26, 1748.] I wish you could talk yourself with James Hargrave. 'Tis very probable it would do good. I know not what to say concerning H. D. 'Tis an exceeding difficult case. I have no objection to your preaching in any meetinghouse. The place does not make the Dissenter. After you have once more talked freely and mildly to Sisters B-and C-, if they will not hear, you must let them go. [On the same page, and apparently part of the same letter, is the following:]

I must beg you, sir, in your Third Part to inform your reader that, whenever any solecism or mangled sentences appear in the quotations from my writings, they are not chargeable upon me; that if the sense be mine (which is not always; sometimes you do me too much honor even in this), yet I lay no claim to the manner of expression; the English is all your own. 14. ‘Corporal severities or mortification by tormenting the flesh’ (page 31) is the next thing you charge upon me. Almost two sentences you bring in proof of this. The one, ‘Our bed being wet’ (it was in a storm at sea), ‘I laid me down on the floor, and slept sound till morning; and I believe I shall not find it needful to go to bed, as it is called, any more.’ But whether I do or not, how will you prove that my motive is to ' gain a reputation for sanctity’ I desire (if it be not too great a favor) a little evidence for this. The other fragment of a sentence speaks ‘of bearing cold on the naked head, rain and wind, frost and snow’ (page 32). True; but not as matter of ‘mortification by tormenting the flesh.’ Nothing less. These things are not spoken of there as voluntary instances of mortification (you yourself know perfectly well they are not, only you make free with your friend), but as some of the unavoidable inconveniences which attend preaching in the open air. Therefore you need not be so ‘sure that the Apostle condemns that ’afeda sat, “not sparing the body,” as useless and superstitious, and that it is a false show of humility’ (page 33). Humility is entirely out of the question, as well as chastity, in the case of hardships endured (but not properly chosen) out of love to the souls for which Christ died. 15. You add a word or two of my ‘ardent desire of going to hell,’ which, you think, I ‘adopted from the Jesuit Nieremberg’ (page 34). Sir, I know not the man. I am wholly a stranger both to his person and to his doctrine. But if this is his doctrine, I disclaim it from my heart. I ardently desire that both you and I may go to heaven.

But what ‘advantage do they take care to secure’ a good salary a handsome fortune No; quite another matter: ‘free communications with God and fuller manifestations of His goodness’ (ibid.). I dare say you do not envy them, no more than you do those ‘self-interested enthusiasts’ of old who, were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection.’ 19. You proceed to prove my enthusiasm from my notions of conversion. And here great allowances are to be made, because you are talking of things quite out of your sphere; you are got into an unknown world! Yet you still talk as magisterially as if you was only running down the Fathers of the primitive Church. And, first, you say I ‘represent conversion as sudden and instantaneous’ (ibid.). Soft and fair! Do you know what conversion is (A term, indeed, which I very rarely use, because it rarely occurs in the New Testament.) ‘Yes; it is to “start up perfect men at once”’ (page 41). Indeed, sir, it is not. A man is usually converted long before he is a perfect man. It is probable most of those Ephesians to whom St. Paul directed his Epistle were converted; yet they were not ‘come’ (few, if any) ‘to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.’ 20. I do not, sir, indeed I do not, undertake to make you understand these things. I am not so vain as to think it is in my power. It is the utmost of my hope to convince you, or at least those who read your works, that you understand just nothing about them.

To put this out of dispute, you go on: ‘Thus faith and being born of God are said to be an instantaneous work, at once, and in a moment, as lightning. Justification, the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith, this always in a moment.’ (Ibid.) I know not which to admire most, the English or the sense, which you here father upon me; but in truth it is all your own: I do not thus confound faith and being born of God. I always speak of them as different things; it is you that thus jumble them together. It is you who discover justification also to be the same as regeneration and having a lively faith. I take them to be three different things -- so different as not ever to come under one genus. And yet it is true that each of these, ‘as far as I know,’ is at first experienced suddenly; although two of them (I leave you to find out which) gradually increase from that hour. 21. ‘After these sudden conversions,’ say you, ‘they receive their assurances of salvation’ (page 43). Sir, Mr. Bedford’s [See letter of Sept. 28, 1738.] ignorance in charging this doctrine upon me might be involuntary, and I am persuaded was real. But yours cannot be so. It must be voluntary, if it is not rather affected. For you had before you while you wrote the very tract wherein I corrected Mr. Bedford's mistake and explicitly declared, ‘The assurance whereof I speak is not an assurance of salvation.’ And the very passages you cite from me prove the same; every one of which (as you yourself know in your own conscience) relates wholly and solely to present pardon, not to future salvation. Of Christian perfection (page 45) I shall not say anything to you, till you have learned a little heathen honesty. 22. That this is a lesson you have not yet learned appears also from your following section, wherein you roundly affirm, ‘Whatever they think, say, or do’ (that is, the Methodists, according to their own account) ‘is from God. And whatever opposeth is from the devil.’ I doubt not but Mr. Church believed this to be true when he asserted it. But this is no plea for you, who, having read the answer to Mr. Church, still assert what you know to be false.

To Edward Perronet Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1750) Author: John Wesley --- IRELAND, [May] 1750. I have abundance of complaints to make as well as to hear. I have scarce any one on whom I can depend when I am an hundred miles off. ’Tis well if I do not run away soon, and leave them to cut and shuffle for themselves. Here is a glorious people; but oh! where are the shepherds The Society at Cork have fairly [Probably after the terrible riots in May. He left Ireland on July 22.] sent me word that they will take care of themselves and erect themselves into a Dissenting congregation. I am weary of these sons of Zeruiah; they are too hard for me. Dear Ted, stand fast, whether I stand or fall. [In another letter he says:] Charles and you behave as I want you to do; but you cannot or will not preach where I desire. Others can and will preach where I desire; but they do not behave as I want them to do. I have a fine time between the one and the other. [And again in a third:] I think both Charles and you have in the general a right sense of what it is to serve as sons in the gospel; and if all our helpers had had the same, the work of God would have prospered better both in England and Ireland. [About a fortnight afterwards he writes thus on the same subject:] You put the thing right. I have not one preacher with me, and not six in England, whose wills are broken enough to serve me as sons in the gospel. Come on, now. you have broken the ice, and tell me the other half of your mind. I always blamed you for speaking too little, not too much. When you spoke most freely, as at Whitehaven, [In Sept. 1749 (Journal, iii 430.)] it was best for us both. I did not always disbelieve when I said nothing. But I would not attempt a thing till I could carry it. Tu qued scis, nescis is an useful rule, till I can remedy what I know. As you observe many things are remedied already; and many more will be. But you consider I have none to second me. They who should do it start aside as a broken bow.

You supply us yourself with one unexceptionable answer: ‘Those of the clergy with whom I have conversed freely own they have not learning sufficient to comprehend your scheme of religion’ (page 30). If they have not, I am sorry for them. My scheme of religion is this: Love is the fulfilling of the law. From the true love of God and man, directly flows every Christian grace, every holy and happy temper; and from these springs uniform holiness of conversation, in conformity to those great rules, ‘Whether ye eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God,’ and ‘Whatsoever you would that men should do unto you, even so do unto them.’ But this, you say, ‘those of the clergy with whom you converse have not learning enough to comprehend.’ Consequently their ignorance or not understanding our doctrine is the reason why they oppose us. 2. I learn from you that ignorance of another kind is a second reason why some of the clergy oppose us: they, like you, think us enemies to the Church. The natural consequence is that, in proportion to their zeal for the Church, their zeal against us will be. 3. The zeal which many of them have for orthodoxy, or right opinions, is a third reason for opposing us. For they judge us heterodox in several points, maintainers of strange opinions. And the truth is, the old doctrines of the Reformation are now quite new in the world. Hence those who revive them cannot fail to be opposed by those of the clergy who know them not. 4. Fourthly. Their honor is touched when others pretend to know what they do not know themselves, especially when unlearned and (otherwise) ignorant men lay claim to any such knowledge. ‘What is the tendency of all this,’ as you observe on another head, ‘but to work in men’s minds a mean opinion of the clergy’ But who can tamely suffer this None but those who have the mind that was in Christ Jesus.

3. In order to be more fully informed, on Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath of St. Gennys, Mr. Haime of Shaftesbury, and I called at Mr. Morgan's at Mitchell. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the ‘honest, sensible woman.’ I immediately asked, ‘Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me’ (So the story ran in the First Part of the Comparison; it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) ‘Or did you or he ever affirm’ (another circumstance related at Truro) ‘that I was rude with your maid’ She replied vehemently, ‘Sir, I never said you was or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbors.’ She added: ‘When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word that he would dine at our house; but he did not, being invited to a neighboring gentleman’s He sent for me thither and said, “Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down Do you know Mr. Wesley Did not he tell you you would be damned if you took any money of him And did not he offer rudeness to your maid” I told him, “No, my Lord; he never said any such thing to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him; but a man told me once (who, I was told, was a Methodist preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.”’ 4. This is her own account given to me. And an account it is irreconcilably different (notwithstanding some small resemblance in the last circumstance) from that she is affirmed to have given your Lordship. Whether she did give that account to your Lordship or no, your Lordship knows best. That the comparer affirms it is no proof at all, since he will affirm anything that suits his purpose.

To Ebenezer Blackwell Date: BRISTOL, July 3, 1751. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1751) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- Before I left London I wrote to Mr. Butterfield, [See letter of April 16, 1752.] informing him of two families which are in great distress. As I have heard nothing since, I suppose the letter miscarried; unless my ominous name prevented its meeting with success. However, I have done my part, and it is only a little labor lost. Nay, in one sense it is not lost; for if we only desire to help one another, the willing mind cannot lose its reward. My brother left us on Saturday. He designed to be at Worcester to-day, and then to proceed slowly towards Scotland. His mind seemed to be altogether changed before he went. He was quite free and open to us, and pressed us much to make use of his house in his absence, just as if it were our own. There is a fair prospect on every side. The people of Bristol in general are much alive to God and they are so united together that the men of false tongues can make no impression upon them. Do you know what is the mater with John Jones [See letter of April 16 1748.] I suppose he will speak freely to you. He seems to be much troubled at something, and I doubt, offended. I know, ff you can remove that trouble, it will be a pleasure to you to do it. We join in good wishes both to Mrs. Blackwell and you. --I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate servant.

To his Brother Charles Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1751) Author: John Wesley --- [LONDON], December 4 1751. On some points it is easier to write than to speak, especially where there is danger of warmth on either side. In what respect do you judge it needful to break my power and to reduce my authority within due bounds I am quite ready to part with the whole or any part of it. It is no pleasure to me, nor ever was. There is another tender point which I would just touch on. The quarterly contribution of classes (something more than two hundred a year) is to keep the preachers and to defray all the expenses of the house. But for this it did never yet suffice. For you, therefore (who have an hundred and fifty pounds a year to maintain only two persons), [100 a year was guaranteed to Charles at his marriage. He had no child in 1751.] to take any part of this seems to me utterly unreasonable. I could not do it, if it were my own case: I should account it robbery -- yea, robbing the Spittle. [Spittle (or spital), hospital for ‘poor folks diseased’ or for lepers (Brewers Dic. Of Phrase and Fable).] I have often wondered how either your conscience or your sense of honor could bear it; especially as you know I am almost continually distressed for money, who am expected to make up the deficiencies of this as well as all the other funds. I am willing (if our judgments differ) to refer this or anything else, to Mr. Perronet or Mr. Blackwell. I desire only to spend and be spent in the work which God has given me to do. Adieu.

Here end your labored attempts to show the ‘uncharitable spirit’ of the Methodists, who (for anything you have shown to the contrary) may be the most charitable people under the sun. 30. You charge the Methodists next with ‘violation and contempt of order and authority’ (sect. xviii. p. 124) -- namely, the authority of the governors of the Church. I have answered every article of this charge in the Second and Third Parts of the Farther Appeal and the letter to Mr. Church. When you have been so good as to reply to what is there advanced, I may possibly say something more. What you offer of your own upon this head I shall consider without delay. ‘Women and boys are actually employed in this ministry of public preaching.’ Please to tell me where. I know them not, nor ever heard of them before. You add, what is more marvelous still: ‘I speak from personal knowledge that sometimes, a little before delivering of the elements at the Communion, three or four Methodists together will take it into their heads to go away; that sometimes, while the sentences of the Offertory were reading, they have called out to the minister who carried the basin, reproaching him for asking alms of them; that sometimes, when the minister has delivered the bread into their hands, instead of eating it, they would slip it into their pockets.’ Sir, you must show your face before these stories will find credit on your bare asseveration. ‘Yet they are surprised,’ you say, ‘that every man in his senses does not without the least hesitation join them.’ Sir, I am surprised (unless you are not in your senses) at your advancing such a barefaced falsehood. 31. You go on: ‘Under this head may not improperly be considered their undutiful behavior to the civil powers.’ What proof have you of this Why, a single sentence, on which I laid so little stress myself that it is only inserted by way of parenthesis in the body of another sentence: ‘Ye learned in the law, what becomes of Magna Charta and of English liberty and property Are not these mere sounds while on any pretence there is such a thing as a press-gang suffered in the land’

Sir, you run very fast. And yet I hope to overtake you by-and-by. ‘Mr. Wesley,’ you say, ‘has preached against the Moravians since he quarreled with them.’ Sir, I never quarreled with their persons yet: I did with some of their tenets long ago. He ‘gives them a box on the ear with the one hand and embraces them with the other.’ That is, I embrace what is good among them, and at the same time reprove what is evil. ‘who first brought over this wicked generation’ Not I, whether they be wicked or not. I once thought I did; but have since then seen and acknowledged my mistake. ‘Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide’ Not I, though I have occasionally consulted several. ‘who fanaticized his own followers and deprived them of their senses’ Not I. Prove it upon me if you can. ‘whose Societies (by his own confession) run over in shoals to Moravianism, forty or fifty at a time’ Truly not mine. Two-and-fifty of Kingswood Society ran over to Calvinism; and, a year before, part of Fetter Lane Society gradually went over to the Moravians. But I know none of ours that went over ‘in shoals.’ They never, that I remember, gained five at a time; nor fifty in all, to the best of my knowledge, for these last ten years. ‘Would they’ (of Fetter Lane) ‘have split on this rock, if they had not first been Methodists’ Undoubtedly they would; for several of them had not first been Methodists. Mr. Viney, for instance (as well as several others), was with the Germans before ever he saw me. ‘Lastly: where is the spawn of Moravianism working so strongly as in the children of Methodism’ If you mean the errors of Moravianism, they are not working at all in the generality of the children of Methodism; the Methodists in general being thoroughly apprized of and fully guarded against them. So much for your modest assertion that the Methodists in general are ‘all together by the ears’; the very reverse of which is true. They are in general in perfect peace. They enjoy in themselves ‘the peace of God which passeth all understanding.’ They are at peace with each other; and, as much as lieth in them, they live peaceably with all men.

‘On Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath of St. Gennys, Mr. Haime of Shaftesbury, and I called at Mr. Morgan's at Mitchell. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the “honest, sensible woman.” I immediately asked, “Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me” (So the story ran in the First Part of the Comparison; it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) “Or did you or he ever affirm” (another circumstance related at Truro) “that I was rude with your maid” She replied vehemently, "Sir, I never said you was or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbors.” She added: “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word he would dine at our house; but he did not, bring invited to a neighboring gentleman’s. He sent for me thither, and said, Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down Do you know Mr. Wesley Did not he tell you you would be damned if you took any money of him And did not he offer rudeness to your maid I told him, No, my Lord; he never said any such thug to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him; but a man told me once (who, I was told was a Methodist preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.”’ Your Lordship replies: ‘I neither sent word that I would dine at their house, nor did I send for Mrs. Morgan; every word that passed between us was at her own house at Mitchell’ (page 7). I believe it; and consequently that the want of exactness in this print rests on Mrs. Morgan, not on your Lordship.

But she declared father (so Mr. Bennet writes, ‘That Mr. John Wesley some time ago said to a maid of hers such thugs as were not fit to be spoken’ (page 11); and Mr. Morgan declared that he ‘did or said such indecent things to the above-named maid’ (the same fact, I presume, only a little embellished) ‘in his chamber in the night, that she immediately ran downstairs, and protested she would not go near him or any of the Methodists~ more’ (page 12). To save trouble to your Lordship as well as to myself, I will put this cause upon a very short issue: If your Lordship will only prove that ever I lay one night in Mrs. Morgan's house, nay, that ever I was in the town of Mitchell after sunset, I will confess the whole charge. What your Lordship mentions ‘by the way’ I will now consider. “Some of your Western correspondents imposed on the leaders of Methodism by transmitting to London a notoriously false account of my Charge to the clergy. Afterwards the Methodists confessed themselves to have been deceived; yet some time after, the Methodists at Cork in Ireland your own brother at the head of them, reprinted the same lying pamphlet as my performance.’ (Pages 4-5.) My Lord, I know not who are your Lordship's Irish correspondents; but here are almost as many mistakes as lines. For (1) They were none of my correspondents who sent that account to London. (2) It was sent, not to the leaders of Methodism, but to one who was no Methodist at all. (3) That it was a false account I do not know; but your Lordship may early put it out of dispute. And many have wondered that your Lordship did not do so long ago by printing the Charge in question. (4) I did never confess it was a false account; nor any person by my consent or with my knowledge. (5) That account was never reprinted at Cork at all. (6) When it was reprinted at Dublin, your Lordship had not disowned it. (7) My brother was not in Dublin when it was done; nor did either he or I know of it till long after.

Page 343: ‘No creature can suffer but what has merited punishment.’ This is not true: for the man Christ Jesus was a creature. But He suffered; yet He had not merited punishment, unless our sins were imputed to Him. But if so, Adam's sin might be imputed to us; and on that account even an infant may suffer. Now, if these things are so, if a creature may suffer for the sin of another imputed to him, then the whole frame of reasoning for the pre-existence of souls, raised from the contrary supposition, falls to the ground. Page 347: ‘There are but three opinions concerning the transmission of original sin.’ That is, there are but three ways of accounting how it is transmitted. I care not if there were none. The fact I know, both by Scripture and by experience. I know it is transmitted; but how it is transmitted I nether know nor desire to know. Page 353: ‘By this insensibility and spiritual lethargy in which all souls remain, ere they awake into mortal bodies, the habits of evil in some are totally extinguished.’ Then it seems there is a third possible way of curing moral evil. And why may not all souls be cured this way without any pain or suffering at all ‘If any impurity remains in them, it is destroyed in a middle state after death’ (ibid.). I read nothing of either of these purgations in the Bible. But it appears to me, from the whole tenor of his writings, that the Chevalier's notions are about one quarter scriptural, one quarter Popish, and two quarters Mystic. Page 360: ‘God dissipated the chaos introduced into the solar system by the fall of angels.’ Does sacred Writ affirm this Where is it written, except in Jacob Behmen Page 366: ‘Physical evil is the only means of curing moral evil.’ This is absolutely contrary both to Scripture, experience, and his own words (page 353). And ‘this great principle,’ as he terms it, is one of those fundamental mistakes which run through the whole Mystic divinity. Almost all that is asserted in the following pages may likewise be confuted by simply denying it. Page 373: ‘Hence we see the necessity of sufferings and expiatory pains in order to purify lapsed beings, the intrinsic efficacy of physical to cure moral evil.’

To Samuel Furly Date: BRISTOL September 21, 1754. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1754) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- It is necessary for me, if I would have a dean conscience, not to omit anything which I find by experience to be profitable to my soul. Therefore, if I find any particular preacher to be so profitable, or any particular acquaintance, it is necessary for me to make use of them. Otherwise my conscience would not be clear. If this be your case, you cannot innocently neglect any of the few opportunities that remain. When you are at Cambridge, you cannot enjoy them if you would. There, therefore, few acquaintance will be best. And probably these you will not find but make profitable. Till then the less you speak (unless to God) the better. --I am Your affectionate brother.

To Samuel Lloyd Date: BRISTOL March 20, 1755. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1755) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- The bearer has behaved extremely well from the very time that he left London. I do not perceive that he is addicted to drinking or any other vice. I am apt to think he would make a good servant. Wishing you the best happiness, I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant.

I know that I am accepted; and yet that knowledge is sometimes shaken, though not destroyed, by doubt or fear. If that knowledge were destroyed or wholly withdrawn, I could not then say I had Christian faith. To me it appears the same thing to say, ‘I know God has accepted me,’ or “I have a sure trust that God has accepted me.’ I agree with you that justifying faith cannot be a conviction that I am justified; and that a man who is not assured that his sins are forgiven may yet have a kind or degree of faith which distinguishes him not only from a devil but also from an heathen, and on which I may admit him to the Lord’s Supper. But still I believe the proper Christian faith, which purifies the heart implies such a conviction. -- I am, sir, Your Servant for Christ’s sake.

To Samuel Walker Date: BRISTOL September 24, 1755 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1755) Author: John Wesley --- REVEREND DEAR SIR, -- 1. You greatly oblige me by speaking your thoughts so freely, and the more by giving me hopes of seeing your farther sentiments on so nice and important an affair. I did not delay one day to follow your advice with regard to Mr. Adam, but sent him by the very next post a copy of those papers; although I am satisfied already as to the publishing them, and have laid aside that design, the reasons you urge against the expediency of it being abundantly sufficient. But you seem a little to misapprehend what we speak of hearing predestinarian preachers. We find by long experience that this is ‘deadly poison,’ not in itself but to the members of our Societies. This we know to be unquestionable truth; and it is a truth necessary to be observed, nay, and strongly insisted on (though without any deign of bearing hard on any particular person), when many were enlarging on ‘the poisonous doctrines’ which they heard at many of their parish churches. 2. All that you say concerning the inexpediency of a separation from the Church I readily allow; as likewise that the first and main question must be, ‘Is it lawful to separate’ Accordingly this was debated first, and that at large, in seven or eight long conversations. And it was then only, when we could not agree concerning the, that we proceeded to weigh the expediency of it. 3. As to the grounds on which those who plead for separation from the Church proceed, some of them have weighed the point long and deeply. They have very particularly, and with earnest and continued prayer, considered the lawfulness of it. And they allow, ‘If it be lawful to abide therein, then it is not lawful to separate.’ But they aver, ‘It is not lawful to abide therein’; and that for the following reasons: --

My difficulty is very much increased by one of your observations. I know the original doctrines of the Church are sound; I know her worship is (in the main) pure and scriptural. But if ‘the essence of the Church of England considered as such, consists in her orders and laws’ (many of which I myself can say nothing for), ‘and not in her worship and doctrines’ those who separate from her have a far stronger plea than I was ever sensible of. 4. At present I apprehend those, and those only, to separate from the Church who either renounce her or refuse to join in her pubic worship. As yet we have done neither; nor have we taken one step farther than we were convinced was our bounden duty. It is from a full conviction of this that we have (1) preached abroad, (2) prayed extempore, (3) formed Societies, and (4) permitted preachers who were not episcopally ordained. And were we punished on this side, were there no alternative allowed, we should judge it our bounden duty rather wholly to separate from the Church than to give up any one of these points. Therefore, if we cannot stop a seperation without stopping lay preachers, the case is clear - we cannot stop it at all. 5. ‘But if we permit them, should we not do more Should we not appoint them rather Since our bare permission puts the matter quite out of our hands and deprives us of all our influence.’ In a great measure it does; therefore to appoint them is far more expedient, if it be lawful. But is it lawful for presbyters circumstanced as we are to appoint our ministers This is the very point wherein we desire advice, being unafraid of leaning to our own understanding. It is undoubtedly ‘needful,’ as you observe, to come to some resolution in this point’; and the sooner the better. I therefore rejoice to hear that you think ‘that this matter may be better and more inoffensively ordered; and that a method may be found which, conducted with prudence and patience, will reduce the constitution of Methodism to due order, and render the Methodists under God more instrumental to the ends of practical religion.'

To Samuel Furly Date: BRISTOL September 25, 1755. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1755) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- It fell out extremely well that I received yours just as I was writing to York. So I have desired one to inquire when that young gentleman is to enter Cambridge. [Probably young Mr. Drake. See Journal, iv. 18-19; and letter of Nov. 20 1756, also Nov. 26, 1762.] What I want of you h to be always steady, always consistent with yourself, to follow divinity, and to beware of worldly wisdom, in which many Methodists abound, though they know it not. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

I say permit, because we ourselves have hitherto viewed it in no other light. This we are clearly satisfied we may do: that we may do more we are not satisfied. It is not clear to us that presbyters so circumstanced as we are may appoint or ordain others, but it is that we may direct as well as suffer them to do what we conceive they are moved to by the Holy Ghost. It is true that in ordinary cases both an inward and an outward call are requisite. But we apprehend there is something far from ordinary in the present case. And upon the calmer view of things we think they who are only called of God and not of man have more right to preach than they who are only called of man and not of God. Now, that many of the clergy, though called of man, are not called of God to preach His gospel is undeniable, (1) because they themselves utterly disclaim, nay, and ridicule, the inward call; (2) because they do not know what the gospel is, of consequence they do not and cannot preach it. Dear sir, coolly and impartially consider this, and you will see on which side the difficulty lies. I do assure you this at present is my chief embarrassment. That I have not gone too far yet I know; but whether I have gone far enough I am extremely doubtful. I see those running whom God hath not sent, destroying their own souls and those that hear them, perverting the right ways of the Lord, blaspheming the truth as it is in Jesus. I see the blind leading the blind and both falling into the ditch. Unless I warn in all ways I can these perishing souls of their danger, am I clear of the blood of these men Soul-damning clergymen lay me under more difficulties than soul-saying laymen.

Doubtless this eminent man (whose books on the Human Understanding and on Divine Analogy I would earnestly recommend to all who either in whole or in part deny the Christian Revelation) grounded his judgment both of the nature and duration of future punishments on these and the like passages of Scripture: -- ‘If we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge Of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins; but a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy: of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son of God! For we know Him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto Me, I will recompense. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.’ (Heb. x. 26-31.)

To Richard Tompson Date: LONDON, February 5, 1756. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1756) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- I was in Cornwall when your last was brought to the Foundry and delivered to my brother. When I returned, it was mislaid and could not be found; so that I did not receive it till some months after the date. You judge right with regard to the tract [The Address to the Clergy. Probably intended for the Rev. George Thompson Vicar of St. Gennys.] enclosed to you. It was sent to you by mistake for another that bears the same name. Christian perfection, we agree, may stand aside for the present. The point now to be considered is Christian faith. This, I apprehend, implies a divine evidence or conviction of our acceptance. You apprehend it does not. In debating this (or indeed any) point with you, I lie under a great disadvantage. (1) You know me; whereas I do not know you. (2) I am a very slow, you seem to be a very swift, writer. (3) My time is so taken up, from day to day and from week to week, that I can spare very little from my stated employments; so that I can neither write so largely nor so accurately as I might otherwise do. All, therefore, which you can expect from me is, not a close-wrought chain of connected arguments, but a short sketch of what I should deduce more at large if I had more leisure. I believe the ancient Fathers are far from being silent on our question; though none that I know have treated it professedly. But I have not leisure to wade through that sea. Only to the argument from the baptism of heretics I reply, If any had averred during that warm controversy, ‘I received a sense of pardon when I was baptized by such an heretic’ those on the other side would in no wise have believed him; so that the dispute would have remained as warm as ever. I know this from plain fact. Many have received a sense of pardon when I baptized them. But who will believe them when they assert it Who will put any dispute on this issue

To Samuel Furly Date: LONDON, February 18, 1756. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1756) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SAMMY, -- You are a very complaisant person. I know in my little circle of acquaintance more than twenty who have all the natural qualifications mentioned in the Address to the Clergy, and several others who have a~ the acquired ones, either by education or by grace; and I would engage to take any person of fourteen years of age who has good natural abilities and to teach him in seven years everything which is there required to a good degree of perfection. Ex pede Herculem. You may easily see what Latin I write by one of the Dissertations in Jobum, [By his father. See note to letter of Oct. 15, 1735.] or even by the short conversation with Count Zinzendorf which is printed in the Journal, [See Journal, ii. 488-90.] I do not know that I have any theme or declamation left. But why do you not talk Latin when you are with me Do this, and you will see the excellence of Terence’s language; whereas Tully would make you talk like a mere stiff pedant. Randal’s Geographical Grammar is far the best compendium of geography which I have seen; and you need nothing more on that subject, adding only the terrestrial globe.

To Richard Tompson Date: LONDON, February 18, 1756. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1756) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- You ask, 1. ‘Can a man who has not a clear assurance that his sins are forgiven be in a state of justification’ I believe there are some instances of it. 2. ‘Can a person be in a state of justification who, being asked, “Do you know your sins are forgiven’ answers, “I am not certainly sure; but I do not entertain the least doubt of it”’ I believe he may. 3. ‘Can he who answer “I trust they are”’ It is very possible he may be in that state. 4. ‘Can any one know that his sins are forgiven while he doubts thereof’ Not at the instant when he doubts of it. But he may generally know it, though he doubts at some particular time. I answer as plainly and simply as I can, that, if I am in a mistake, I may the more easily be convinced of it.

It will not answer it so well even with regard to those Societies with whom Peter Jaco and Thomas Johnson have settled. Be their talents ever so great, they will ere long grow dead themselves, and so will most of those that hear them. I know, were I myself to preach one whole year in one place, I should preach both myself and most of my congregation asleep. Nor can I believe it was ever the will of our Lord that any congregation should have one teacher only. We have found by long and constant experience that a frequent change of teachers is best. This preacher has one talent, that another. No one whom I ever yet knew has all the talents which are needful for beginning continuing and perfecting the work of grace in an whole congregation. But suppose this would better answer the end with regard to those two Societies, would it answer in those where W. Alwood and W. Crabb were settled as inspectors or readers First, who shall feed them with the milk of the Word The ministers of their parishes Alas, they cannot! they themselves neither know, nor live, nor teach the gospel. These readers Can, then, either they or I or you always find something to read to our congregation which will be as exactly adapted to their wants and as much blessed to them as our preaching And here is another difficulty still: what authority have I to forbid their doing what I believe God has called them to do I apprehend, indeed, that there ought, if possible, to be both an outward and inward call to this work; yet, if one of the two be supposed wanting I had rather want the outward than the inward call. I rejoice that I am called to preach the gospel both by God and man. Yet I acknowledge I had rather have the divine without the human than the human without the divine call.

Indeed, both heresy and schism (which are works of the flesh, and consequently damnable if not repented) are here mentioned by the Apostle in very near the same sense; unless by schisms be meant rather those inward animosity which occasioned heresies -- that is, outward divisions and parties. So that while one said, ‘I am Paul; another, I am of Apollos,’ this implied both heresy and schism: so wonderfully have latter ages distorted the words ‘heresies’ and ‘schisms’ from their scriptural meaning! Heresy is not in all the Bible taken for an error in fundamentals, nor in anything ere; nor schism for any separation from the communion of others. Therefore heresy and schism in the modern sense of the words are sins that the Scriptures know nothing of. 6. But though I aver this, am I quite indifferent to any man’s principles in religion Far from it; as I have declared again and again, in the very sermon under present consideration, in the Character of a Methodist, in the Plain Account, and twenty tracts besides, I have written severally against Deists, Papists, Mystics, &c. An odd way to ingratiate myself with them, to strike at the apple of their eye! [The version followed here and in the other letter to Clark is that which appears in Montanus Redivivus. Compare sect. 6 with that in Works, xiii. 214-15.] Nevertheless in all things indifferent (but not at the expense of truth) I rejoice to please all men for their good to edification, if happily I may gain the more proselytes to genuine scriptural Christianity, if I may prevail on the more to love God and their neighbor and to walk as Christ walked. So far as I find them obstructive of these, I oppose opinions with my might; though even then rather by guarding those that are free than by disputing with those that are deeply infected: I need not dispute with many of them to know there is no probability of success or of convincing them. A thousand times I have found my father’s word true: ‘You may have peace with the Dissenters, if you do not so humor them as to dispute with them; if you do, they will outface and outlung you, and at the end you will be just where you were in the beginning.’

‘“In the Lord shah all the house of Israel be justified”’ (page 149). It ought unquestionably to be rendered ‘By or through the Lord’: this argument therefore proves nothing. ‘Ye are complete in Him.’ The words literally rendered are ‘Ye are filled with Him’; and the whole passage (as any unprejudiced reader may observe) relates to sanctification, not justification. ‘They are accepted for Christ’s sake; this is justification through imputed righteousness’ (page 150). That remains to be proved. Many allow the former who cannot allow the latter. ‘The righteousness which justifies us is already wrought out’ (page 151). A crude, unscriptural expression! ‘It was set on foot, carried on, completed.’ Oh vain philosophy! The plain truth is, Christ lived and ‘tasted death for every man’; and through the merits of His life and death every believer is justified. ‘Whoever perverts so glorious a doctrine shows he never believed’ (page 152). Not so. They who ‘turn back as a dog to the vomit’ had once ‘escaped the pollutions of the world by the knowledge of Christ.’ ‘The goodness of God leadeth to repentance’ (page 153). This is unquestionably true; but the nice, metaphysical doctrine of Imputed Righteousness leads not to repentance but to licentiousness. ‘The believer cannot but add to his faith works of righteousness’ (page 154). During his first love this is often true; but it is not true afterwards, as we know and feel by melancholy experience. ‘We no longer obey in order to lay the foundation of our final acceptance’ (page 155). No; that foundation is already laid in the merits of Christ. Yet we obey in order to our final acceptance through His merits; and in this sense by obeying we ‘lay a good foundation that we may attain eternal life.’ ‘“We establish the law”; we provide for its honor by the perfect obedience of Christ’ (page 156). Can you possibly think St. Paul meant this that such a thought ever entered into his mind The plain meaning is, We establish both the true sense and the effectual practice of it; we provide for its being both understood and practiced in its full extent.

Health you shall have if health be best. And He that gives it will give a blessing with it -- an increase of spiritual as well as of bodily strength, but it is strength to labor not to sit still. And this strength will either increase or decrease in the same proportion with your sense of His love. You may lose this sense either (1) by committing sin; or (2) by omitting duty; or (3) by giving way to pride, anger or any other inward sin; or (4) by not watching unto prayer, by yielding to indolence or spiritual sloth. But it is no more necessary that we should ever lose it than it is necessary we should omit duty or commit sin. Mr. Law, therefore, speaking on this head, betrays deep ignorance both of the Scripture and the inward work of God. You are more liable to receive hurt from his late writings than from any others which I know. I shall write to Sammy [Her brother at Cambridge.] in the morning: it would not have been amiss if you had spoken freely to me concerning him. Why should not you, now you have in some measure broke that natural shyness, speak all that is in your heart to, dear Miss Furly, Your truly affectionate friend and brother.

To Samuel Furly Date: YORK, July 12, 1757. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1757) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SAMMY, -- In all my experience I never knew one so much altered for the worse as C. P. [Charles Perronet. See letters of Sept. 3, 1756 (to Nicholas Norton), and Dec. 14, 1757.] in so short a time. I am afraid that enemy is in real, actual possession of his understanding; though God, I hope, has still hold of his heart. Certainly the conversing with him at present would not be profitable to you. Nothing could be more seasonable than the notes you give me concerning M. B. [Miss Bosanquet and Mrs. Crosby.] I was just going to answer a letter from one who can say anything to her without offence. So that proper advice may now be conveyed to her with great probability of success. I hope you will write to Mr. Drake [See letter of Dec. 4, 1756.] without delay. He is in danger; for every possible snare is laid for him. His aunt here, Mrs. Dickson, [Dickens.] has been of great service to him. He was hurried hence by his mother (a woman bitter of spirit) to keep him out of my way. You may direct your next to me at Mr. Hutton's, [‘William Hutton mercer and grocer, a man in good repute in the town,’ with whom Wesley stayed when at Epworth. See Stevenson’s Wesley Family, p. 348; and letter of July 28 1775, to Mrs. Woodhouse.] in Epworth, Lincolnshire, by Thorne bag. Dear Sammy, fight on! Adieu. Miss Tancred, a gay, giddy girl, a mere coquette, is put in the way of Mr. Drake. Warn him earnestly to keep clear of her.

To Dorothy Furly Date: TREMENEARE, September 6, 1757. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1757) Author: John Wesley --- Why you should be afraid on account of anything you said to me I do not know. Certainly, if you had said whatever was in your heart, it might have been a means of lessening your burthen and not of increasing it. I believe you have often a desire, and almost a resolution, of saying a great deal to me; but when you come to write or speak, your heart fails. Why should it Why should you repress yourself I should not despise but love you for your openness. It is the fruit and the proof of an honest heart. I know you are weak; I know a little of your particular weaknesses. But so much the more am I concerned for you as a tender, sickly flower. Away, then, with this reserve; it answers no end but to trouble and embarrass you. Tell me freely and plainly any difficulty you meet with, any enemy against whom you want help. Use me as a friend, as I hope you will use Sarah Crosby, and you will find it a blessing to your soul. It will again bring the promise of holiness near; which, indeed, always seems to be far off when we give way to any known sin, when we any way grieve the Spirit of God. There may be some rare cases wherein God has determined not to bestow His perfect love till a little before death; but this I believe is uncommon: He does not usually put off the fulfilling of His promises. Seek, and you shall find; seek earnestly, and you shall find speedily. Lift up the hands that hang down; deny yourself; take up your cross, whether that of meeting your class or any other. Fight on, and victory is at hand! -- I am, dear Miss Fury, Your affectionate servant.

2. ‘If you beloved Mr. Vowler [Wesley heard Mr. Vowler preach two thundering sermons at St. Agnes on Sept. 4, 1757, and spent an afternoon with him. ‘He both preaches and lives the gospel.’ He died of fever on July 30, 1758. See Journal, iv. 234, 529.] to be a gracious person and a gospel minister, why, did you not in justice to your people leave them to him’ John Hingeston assured me that Mr. Vowler also had a dear conviction of his being reconciled to God. If so, I could not deny his being a gracious person; and I heard him preach the true though not the whole gospel. But had it been the whole, there are several reasons still why I did not give up the people to him. (1) No one mentioned or intimated any such thing, nor did it once enter into my thought. But if it had, (2) I do not know that every one who preaches the truth has wisdom and experience to guide and govern a flock. I do not know that Mr. Vowler in particular has. He may or he may not. (3) I do not know whether he could or would give that flock all the advantages for holiness which they now enjoy; and to leave them to him before I was assured of this would be neither justice nor mercy. (4) Unless they also were assured of the, they could not in conscience give up themselves to him; and I have nether right nor power to dispose of them contrary to their conscience.

But you say, ‘Really, before it can be effected, something must be done on your part.’ Tell me what, and I will do it without delay, however contrary it may be to my ease or intonation, provided only that it consist with my keeping a conscience void of offence toward God and toward man. It would not consist with this to give up the flock under my care to any other minister till I and they were convinced they would have the same advantages for holiness under him which they now enjoy. But ‘paying us visits can serve no other purpose than to bring us under needles difficulties.’ I will speak very freely on this head. Can our conversing together serve no other purpose You seem, then, not to have the least conception of your own wanting any such thing! But whether you do or not, I feel I do. I am not in memet torus totus teres atque rotundus. [Horace’s Satires, II vii. 86: ‘In myself completely smooth and rounded.’] I want more light, more strength, for my personal walking with God; and I know not but He may give it me through you. And (whether you do or no) I want more light and strength for guiding the flock committed to my charge. May not the Lord send this also by whom He will send and by you as probably as any other It is not improbable He may by you give me clearer light either as to doctrine or discipline. And even hereby how much comfort and profit might redound to thousands of those for whom Christ hath died! which, I apprehend would fully compensate any difficulties that might arise from such conversation.

And this you yourself account for extremely well. Sed oportet Palaemonem esse memorem. [‘But Palaemon ought to posses a good memory.’ Palaemon was the most famous grammarian in Rome and master of Quintillian.] ‘What a figure would a small number of ministers make in the Church either of England or Scotland who should agree to maintain the plain, obvious sense of their own public standards of doctrine, and insist upon an adherence to that sense as a term of holding communion with them in the sacred institutions! Their situation in the national Church would be very uncomfortable as well as extremely ridiculous. For many enemies would soon be awakened against them, to distress and misrepresent them in various respects.’ (Page 465.) Thus much as a specimen of your veracity. I object, secondly, that you know not what faith is. You talk about it, and labor and sweat, and at last come to a most lame and impotent conclusion. You say: ‘That Christ died for me is a point not easily settled, a point which the Scripture nowhere ascertains’ (the very thought, and nearly the words, of Cardinal Bellarmine, in his dispute with our forefathers): ‘so far from it, that it affirms the final. perdition of many who have great confidence of their interest in Christ’ (this only proves that many fancy they have what they have not, which I suppose nobody will deny); ‘yea, and declares that “wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction”’ (page 14). It is so; but this is nothing to the point -- the nature of true faith. ‘Nature, these men say, begins the work’ (I know none of them who say so); ‘and then grace helps out the efforts of nature, and persuades a man, though he be not mentioned in Scripture either by name or surname, that Christ died for him’ (page 33). ‘So the Spirit whispers something to the heart of a sinner beside what He publicly speaks in the Scriptures. But will any lover of the Scriptures allow the possibility of this -- that the Spirit should ever speak a syllable to any man beside what He publicly speaks there’ (Page 35.) You will presently allow something wonderfully like it. And you suppose yourself to be a ‘lover of the Scriptures.’

So you have brought matters to a fine conclusion; confuting an hundred of your own assertions, and doing the very thing for which you have been all along so unmercifully condemning other. You yourself here teach another ‘requisite to our acceptance beside the bare work of Christ’ -- namely, the knowing that work, the finding it true. Therefore by your own word ‘Christ shall profit you nothing.’ In one page you say, ‘Nothing is required in order to our acceptance with God’; in another, ‘Divine righteousness brought to view is requisite to our acceptance.’ ‘Brought to view’! What self-righteousness is this! Which of ‘the popular preachers’ could have done worse ‘Men are justified by a knowledge of the righteousness of Christ.’ ‘Knowledge’! What! our own knowledge! Knowledge in us! Why, this is the very thing which we call faith. So you have fairly given up the whole question, justified your opponents, and condemned yourself as ‘damnably criminal’! I object, fourthly, that you have no charity and that you know not what charity is. That you know not what it is manifestly appears from the wonderful definition you give of it. (1) ‘Charity,’ you say, ‘is fellowship with God in His blessedness’ (page 453). Muddy, confused, ut nihil sgpra! [“So as nothing can exceed it.] We know he that loveth hath fellowship with God. But yet the ideas of one and of the other are widely different. We know ‘God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him.’ But yet loving Him is not the same thing with dwelling in Him. If it were, the whole sentence would be flat tautology. You say (2): Charity is ‘the love of the truth’ (page 456). Not at all; no more than it is the love of the sun. It is the love of God, and of man for God’s sake; no more and no less. You say (3): ‘Christ is known to us only by report.’ That is not granted. ‘And charity is the love of that report’ (page 455). Every intelligent reader will want no farther proof that you know not what chatty is.

Do you find no interruption or abatement at any time of your joy in the Lord Do you continually see God, and that without any cloud or darkness or mist between Do you pray without ceasing, without ever being diverted from it by anything inward or outward Are you never hindered by any person or thing by the power or subtlety of Satan, or by the weakness or disorders of the body pressing down the soul Can you be thankful for everything without exception And do you feel all working together for good Do you do nothing, great or small, merely to please yourself Do you feel no touch of any desire or affection but what springs from the pure love of God Do you speak no words but from a principle of love and under the guidance of His Spirit O how I long to find you unblameable in all things, and holy as He that hath cared you is holy! -- I am yours, &c.

To Walter Sellon Date: LONDON, December 1, 1757. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1757) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER -- If only one stone were removed out of the way, the thing might be immediately effected. Only prevail upon John Brandon [John Brandon, a dragoon, formed a smll Society in Leicester, which Wesley visited in April 1757. He became an itinerant in 1765.] to spend a month or two in London or any other part of England, and I will immediately send another preacher to Leicester, Ashby, and the adjacent places. But during the present scarcity of laborers we cannot spare a second for that small circuit till you spare us the first. It is surprising that, from one end of the land to the other, so little good is done in a regular way. What have you to do but to follow that way which the providence of God points out And when they drive you from Smithsby, you know where to have both employment and the things needful for the body. I think also it will be highly profitable for your soul to be near those who have more experience in the ways of God. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

To Ebenezer Blackwell Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1759) Author: John Wesley --- [1] EVERTON, March 2, 1759. DEAR SIR,--When it is probable I may alter my judgement or practice, I am very willing to speak upon any head. But when I am clearly and fully fixed, then I do not speak; for it would be lost labour. For this reason I did not speak the other night; because I was fully fixed. My wife picks my lock and steals my papers. Afterwards she says, 'You cannot trust me.' I answer, 'I cannot, till you restore what you stole and promise to steal no more.' She replies, 'I will burn them, or lodge them with another, on such terms.' I answer nothing. Do you ask, Why so! I answer to you: (1) I will not consent my goods shall be burnt, much less accept it as a favour: I require her to restore them. (2) I will not thank her for lodging them with another: I require that they be restored to me. (3) I will not so much as consider the terms: I require the restitution of my own goods without any terms. And I know you would do so were it your case. And so would any man of common sense. 'But she will not restore them.' Then she must keep them. But let her not blame me because I cannot trust her. Permit me to add one word to you. You think yourself a match for her; but you are not. By her exquisite art she has already made you think ill of two very deserving women. [Mrs. Ryan and Mrs. Crosby. See next letter and that of July 12, 1758.] And you have been more than once much puzzled what to think of me! Nor could you help thinking me a little in the wrong. I am almost afraid she likewise entertains you with the faults of many in the Society; the knowing of which (be they real or feigned) does you no good at all. O sir, let us look inward; let us live at home! The more we know of our own faults and the less of other people's, the more will the work of God prosper in our hearts. Wishing all happiness to you and yours, I am, dear sir, -- Your affectionate servant

From Ebenezer Blackwell Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [2] DEAR SIR,--I this day received your favour of the 2nd inst. I am sensible of my incapacity either to speak or write in that lively, concise manner you do; but as well as I can I will paragraph by paragraph give a direct answer to your letter. And, first, I desire never to interfere between you and Mrs. Wesley, without there is at least a probability of my being of service to one, or (what I would much rather wish) to both of you; and I declare I have seldom if ever spoken of one to the other without being first desired either by yourself or Mrs. Wesley. Therefore you may be assured I will not in the least hinder your maintaining the authority of the husband in the greatest latitude that either myself or any man of common sense would wish. I likewise say that I do not think myself a match for Mrs. Wesley or any one that studies to deceive me; but I deny that by any exquisite art she has made me think ill of two very deserving women. I suppose you mean Mrs. Ryan and Mrs. Crosby. The first I know nothing of, having never seen her in my life, and hardly ever (for I won't say never) spoken of her to anybody but yourself. The latter I only know from the letter wrote by yourself, which she owned to me was her handwriting, and which I think will plainly prove to every one of common sense that she is not that very deserving woman you think her; and, permit me to add, I am afraid she has too much art for my dear friend.

I think my behaviour must fully convince you what my thoughts have been of yourself. When I have spoken to you, it has been without reserve; and if at any time I have expressed myself a little freer than many others would dare to do, do not think the harder of me, for indeed it has constantly been with a view if possible to have established peace between yourself and Mrs. W. And I seldom if ever see Mrs. Wesley from the time you leave London until you return, and would even then be glad to be excused that honour if it was not out of civility to yourself. Therefore she has no opportunity, or if she had I dare not give encouragement to her or any one, to entertain me with the faults of any either in your Society or not. Indeed, sir, I am sensible, if I did, it would very much hurt my soul. And yet, alas! I have been often much hurt, though I dare not blame my dear friend on that account, and yet must declare what you have said, and what I have seen of your brother, has very often much grieved and stumbled my poor soul. I feel I have an evil heart; I know I am not renewed; and I earnestly wish that my own faults were more and more engraver on my mind, that so I may never rest until I am born again and have the image of God stamped on my soul. I earnestly wish you all happiness, and pray that the peace and love of God may continually attend you.--I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate and much obliged servant, EBENEZER BLACKWELL.

Hitherto you have been greatly superior to every delicacy in food; but even this may assault you now, and perhaps raise in you other desires which you are now a stranger to. At present you are above the follies of dress; but will you be so a twelvemonth hence! May you not easily slide into the pride of life, in this as well as other instances! especially considering how your vanity will be gratified thereby! For who will not admire and applaud your admirable taste! It will only remain for you to marry some agreeable person that has much wit and sense with little or no religion; then it is finished! Either you will be throughly miserable in this world or miserable to eternity. 'But what business is this of yours! Cannot you let me alone! What have I to do with you!' Believe me, I could very easily let you alone, if I had not a real and tender goodwill toward you, and if I did not know (what perhaps you do not) that you have need even of me. You want friends who understand you well, and who dare tell you the whole, plain truth; and yet not in a surly, imperious manner, for then you could not receive it. I have endeavoured to do this once more. Will not you forgive me! I cannot but think, if you do not thank, you will at least excuse Your affectionate servant.

Notwithstanding this, you wrote me two loving letters. (I hope, not with a design of reading them to other people; which I shall not suspect if you assure me you have not read or shown them in part or in whole to any one.) So that I was a little surprised when at our meeting in Colchester I found you throughly out of humour. It really seemed as if you was heartily vexed by the papers you had taken, and so were resolved to have it out with me. Accordingly you could not refrain from throwing squibs at me even in company, [He was at Colchester on March 19.] and from speaking with such keenness when we were alone, as I think no wife ought to speak to an husband--such as I apprehend you could not have used decently to any but Noah Vazeille. [Her first husband.] Perhaps you may now take the greater liberty, because, having stripped me of all my papers, you imagine it is now absolutely impossible for me to justify myself. But you are under a mistake. To all that know me my word is a sufficient justification. And if anything more is needful, I know One that is able to say to the Grave, 'Give back!' Yea, and if He say it to Jealousy, cruel as the Grave, it shall hear and obey His voice. Wishing you the blessing which you now want above any other--namely, unfeigned and deep repentance,--I remain Your much injured yet still affectionate Husband. To Mrs. Wesley, At the Foundery, London.

To Dr. Taylor, of Norwich Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1759) Author: John Wesley --- [8] HARTLEPOOL, July 3, 1759. REVEREND SIR,--I esteem you as a person of uncommon sense and learning, but your doctrine I cannot esteem; and some time since, I believed it my duty to speak my sentiments at large concerning your doctrine of Original Sin. When Mr. Newton of Liverpool [Afterwards the Rev. John Newton of Olney. See letter of April 9, 1765.] mentioned this, and asked whether you designed to answer, you said you thought not, 'for it would only be a personal controversy between John Wesley and John Taylor.' How gladly, if I durst, would I accept of this discharge from so unequal contest! for I am throughly sensible, humanly speaking, it is formica contra leonem. ['An ant against a lion,'] How gladly, were it indeed no other than a personal controversy! But certainly it is not: it is a controversy de re, if ever there was one in this world; indeed, concerning a thing of the highest importance--nay, all the things that concern our eternal peace. It is Christianity or heathenism! for, take away the scriptural doctrine of Redemption or Justification, and that of the New Birth, the beginning of sanctification, or (which amounts to the same) explain them as you do, suitably to your doctrine of Original Sin, and what is Christianity better than heathenism! wherein, save in rectifying some of our notions, has the religion of St. Paul any pre-eminence over that of Socrates or Epictetus! This is, therefore, to my apprehension, the least a personal controversy of any in the world. Your person and mine are out of the question. The point is, Are those things that have been believed for many ages throughout the Christian world real, solid truths, or monkish dreams and vain imaginations! But farther: it is certain, between you and me there need be no personal controversy at all; for we may agree to leave each other's person and character absolutely untouched, while we sum up and answer the several arguments advanced as plainly and closely as we can.

To Samuel Furly Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1759) Author: John Wesley --- [9] YARM, July 7, 1759. DEAR SAMMY,--Our Conference at Leeds is to begin on Wednesday, August 1. I hope to see you at it. If you are in Yorkshire some days sooner, we shall have more time together. Your present call to Kippax is clear: when you are called farther, that will be clear also. What avails all knowledge but that which ministers to the knowledge of Christ, and which qualifies us for saving our own souls and the souls of them that hear us! What knowledge you have of other things retain; but secure this in all and above all.--I am, with love to Nancy, dear Sammy, Yours affectionately. To the Revd. Mr. Furly, At Lakenheath, Near Brandon, Suffolk.

It seems to me that, of all the persons I ever knew save one, you are the hardest to be convinced. I have occasionally spoken to you on many heads; some of a speculative, others of a practical nature: but I do not know that you was ever convinced of one, whether of great importance or small. I believe you retained your own opinion in every one, and did not vary an hair's breadth. I have likewise doubted whether you was not full as hard to be persuaded as to be convinced'; whether your will do not adhere to its first bias, right or wrong, as strongly as your understanding. I mean with regard to any impression which another may make upon them. For perhaps you readily, too readily, change of your own mere motion; as I have frequently observed great fickleness and great stubbornness meet in the same mind. So that it is not easy to please you long, but exceeding easy to offend you. Does not this imply the thinking very highly of yourself particularly of your own understanding Does it not imply, what is always connected therewith, something of self sufficiency 'You can stand alone; you care for no man; you need no help from man.' It was not so with my brother and me when we were first employed in this great work. We were deeply conscious of our own insufficiency; and though in one sense we trusted in God alone, yet we sought His help from all His children, and were glad to be taught by any man. And this, although we were really alone in the work; for there were none that had gone before us therein, there were none then in England who had trod that path wherein God was leading us. Whereas you have the advantage which we had not: you tread in a beaten path; others have gone before you, and are going now in the same way, to the same point. Yet it seems you choose to stand alone; what was necessity with us is choice with you; you like to be unconnected with any, thereby tacitly condemning all.

To his Brother Charles Editor's Introductory Notes: 1760 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1760) Author: John Wesley --- [11] COOLALOUGH, June 23, 1760. DEAR BROTHER,--Where you are I know not, and how you are I know not; but I hope the best. Neither you nor John Jones [See letter of June 1.] has ever sent me your remarks upon that tract in the late volume of Sermons. [The fourth volume, which included six tracts. Thoughts on Christian Perfection is the fifth. The doctrine had been largely considered at the London Conference in Aug. 1759, and the tract was published soon after. The Preface to it is dated Bristol, Oct. 16, 1759. See letter of June 12, 1759.] You are not kind. Why will you not do all you can to make me wiser than I am Sam. Furly told me his objections at once; so we canvassed them without loss of time. [See previous letter.] Do you know what is done, anything or nothing, with regard to the small edition of the Notes [First edition, 4to, 1755. Third, corrected, Bristol; Grabham & Pine, 1760-2, 12mo, 3 vols, See letter of June 18, 1756.] Mr. I'Anson writes me a long account of the Sussex affair. It is of more consequence than our people seem to apprehend. If we do not exert ourselves, it may drive us to that bad dilemma--Leave preaching, or leave the Church. We have reason to thank God it is not come to this yet. Perhaps it never may. In this kingdom nothing is wanting but a few more zealous and active labourers. James Morgan, [See letter of April 26.] John Johnson, [John Johnson became an itinerant preacher in 1755, and after sixteen years settled at Lisburn. For some time he was General Superintendent in Ireland. He died on Dec. 29, 1803, at the age of seventy eight. See letter of Sept. 26, 1784, to him.] and two or three more do their best; the rest spare themselves. I hope Sally and your little ones are well. Where and how is my wife I wrote to her on Saturday last. Adieu! Where must the Conference be, at Leeds or Bristol If we could but chain or gag the blatant beast, there would be no difficulty. [12]

To his Brother Charles REDRUTH September 21, 1760. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1760) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--I do not apprehend that letter to be any proof of L. A.'s understanding. [Nehemiah Curnock thought this reference might be to Wesley's sister Anne. see Journal, iv. 413n.] I believe you had not time to consider it. Do you really think she was the inditer That she was the transcriber of it I allow; but is not the hand of Joab in this Did you not take knowledge not only of the sentiments but the very language of honest James Relly [See Tyerman's Wesley, ii. 400-1n. He was an Antinomian of bad repute. But see letter of July 7, 1761.] Your message by John Jones seems to supersede the necessity of my writing; yet I think of sending a few civil lines, without entering into the merits of the cause. Is it not an excellent copy of our friend's countenance to 'beg leave to live apart' Quis enim negat ['For who forbids this'] If the unbeliever will depart, let her depart. But she will as soon leap into the sea. [Our friend is his wife. Charles wrote on the letter: 'She asks to part.'] I speak everywhere of bribery and run goods. I suppose John Jones has sent you the Minutes of the Conference. [Held at Bristol in August.] On Friday se'nnight I hope to preach at Shepton Mallet at noon and at Bristol in the evening. [On Oct. 3 he preached at both places at the time mentioned.] Vive hodie! ['Live to-day', the motto on his seal.] Adieu. I should think if you was solus cum solo, ['Closeted only with him.'] the point to be insisted on with John Gambold would be, 'You went to the Moravians to find happiness. Have you found it What have you gained by the exchange' It is time enough, I suppose, for me to write; for you cannot go to London soon.

To the Editor of 'Lloyd's Evening Post' TO MR. SOMEBODY, alias PHILODEMUS, alias T. H. Date: LONDON, December 1, 1760. SIR,--I am very happy in having given you 'infinite pleasure by my animadversions upon your letter,' and therefore cannot but add a few more, hoping they may give you still farther satisfaction. It is, indeed, great condescension in you to bestow a thought upon me, since 'it is only losing time' (as you observe in your last), as you 'judge arguing with Methodists is like pounding fools in a mortar.' However, do not despair; perhaps, when you have pounded me a little more, my foolishness may depart from me. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1760) Author: John Wesley --- I really was so foolish as to think that by saying' We Churchmen' you assumed the character of a clergyman. Whether you retain to the theatre or no is easily shown: tell your name, and the doubt is cleared up. [See letter of Nov. 17.] But who or what you are affects not me: I am only concerned with what you say. But you complain, I have 'passed over the most interesting and material circumstances' in your letter. I apprehend just the contrary: I think nothing in it is passed over which is at all material. Nor will I knowingly pass over anything material in this; though I am not a dealer in many words. You say: (1) 'You have impiously apostatized from those principles of religion which you undertook to defend.' I hope not. I still (as I am able) defend the Bible, with the Liturgy, Articles, and Homilies of our Church; and I do not defend or espouse any other principles, to the best of my knowledge, than those which are plainly contained in the Bible as well as in the Homilies and Book of Common Prayer.

(1) 'But it is said they are all good subjects. Perhaps they are; because under a Protestant Government they have all the indulgence they can wish for.' And do you seriously wish for a Popish Government to abridge them of that indulgence? 'But has not a bad use been made of this? Has not the decency of religion been perverted?' Not in the least: the decency of religion is never so well advanced as by advancing inward and outward religion together. (2) 'Have not the minds of the vulgar been darkened to a total neglect of their civil and social duties?' Just the contrary. Thousands in London as well as elsewhere have been enlightened to understand and prevailed on to practice those duties as they never did before. (3) 'Has not the peace of many families been ruined?' The lost peace of many families has been restored. In others a furious opposition to true religion has occasioned division, as our Lord foretold it would. (4) 'Have not the circumstances of many industrious tradesmen been hurt?' I believe not. I know no instance; but I know an hundred tradesmen in London who began to be industrious since they began to fear God, and their circumstances, low enough till then, are now easy and affluent. I am almost ashamed to spend time upon these threadbare objections, which have been answered over and over. But if they are advanced again, they must be answered again, lest silence should pass for guilt. 'But how can the Government distinguish between tenderness of conscience and schemes of interest?' Nothing more easy. 'They may withdraw the licenses of such.' Sir, you have forgot the question. Before they withdraw them they are to distinguish whether they are such or no. And how are they to do this? 'Oh, it is very easy'! So you leave them as wise as they were before.

Your fourth (for want of a better) is to serve for a reply to my answer. In this you stoutly say: 'Sir, your performance is frivolous and fallacious.' Very well; but others must judge of that. 'Shocks, sir, or violent operations of the Spirit are too fully evidenced by your trances, ecstasies, and I know not what.' I assure you, neither do I; but if you please to tell me, when you do know a little of the matter, I will give you what satisfaction I can. 'These appear in the practices of your followers, and as such must destroy free agency.' Nay, sir, you are now too severe, especially in that keen 'as such.' 'As you then assert such practices, you are (excuse the harshness of the expression) an enemy to religion and a deceiver of the people.' Sir, I do excuse you. I am pretty well used to such expressions: if they hurt not you, they hurt not me. 'Until you publish in plain, intelligible words your scheme of principles, it is impossible to say what you are.' I have done it ten times over, particularly in The Principles of a Methodist, the Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, and (what I am not without hope might be intelligible even to you) Instructions for Children. 'I must be plain with you: you seem, sir, to have as much knowledge of the Scriptures as a Mahometan.' Sir, I thank you; and I presume you do not expect any other answer to this. 'That you are an enthusiast, a very great enthusiast, not I, let your own Journals demonstrably prove.' Nay, why not you? I fear my Journals will not give such proof as will satisfy any impartial person. 'As to dogmas, I do not know that it is good English: I know it is false dog-Latin.' Now, I really thought it was neither Latin nor English: I took it to be mere heathen Greek. Whenever you please to favour the public with your name and place of abode, you may perhaps (if I have leisure) hear farther from Your humble servant and well-wisher.

But to turn the tables: I said, 'If the Romish bishops do.' For this I absolutely deny. I deny that the Romish bishops came down by uninterrupted succession from the Apostles. I never could see it proved; and I am persuaded I never shall. But unless this is proved, your own pastors on your principles are no pastors at all. But farther: it is a doctrine of your Church that the intention of the administrator is essential to the validity of the sacraments which are administered by him. Now, are you assured of the intention of every priest from whom you have received the Host? If not, you do not know but what you received as the sacrament of the altar was no sacrament at all. Are you assured of the intention of the priest who baptized you? If not, perhaps you are not baptized at all. To come close to the point in hand: if you pass for a priest, are you assured of the intention of the bishop that ordained you? If not, you may happen to be no priest, and so all your ministry is nothing worth: nay, by the same rule he may happen to be no bishop. And who can tell how often this has been the case? But if there has been only one instance in a thousand years, what becomes of your uninterrupted succession? This ad hominem. But I have a word more ad rem. Can a man teach what he does not know? Is it possible a man should teach others what he does not know himself? Certainly it is not. Can a priest, then, teach his hearers the way to heaven marked out in our Lord's Sermon on the Mount if he does not know or understand the way himself? Nothing is more impossible. But how many of your priests know nothing about it! What avails, then, their commission to teach what they cannot teach, because they know it not? Did God, then, send these men on a fool's errand? send them to do what they cannot do? O say not so! And what will be the event of their attempting to teach they know not what? Why, 'if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the pit.'

Finding all other means ineffectual, on Monday the 2nd instant I opened my wife's bureau and took what I found of my own. (No notes, bills, or papers of hers: in saying this, she only does as she uses to do.) Some hours after, she talked like an Empress Queen; on which I told her plainly, 'While you are in this mind I will neither bed nor board with you.' On .... following I found her of a better mind; so on Saturday and Sunday [He was then in London. ] we were together as usual. But if we should live to meet again, and she behaves as she did on that day, I should think it my bounden duty to do as I did then. I judge her case to be proper lunacy; but it is a preternatural, a diabolical lunacy, and therefore at those times (I know what I say) I do not think my life is safe with her. And yet I feel just as much resentment toward her as I do to Sall. Roqt. Peace be with you and yours.

To Thomas Olivers Date: WHITEHAVEN, April 25, 1761. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1761) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I have a desire to ask you some questions on two or three heads, which you may answer as particularly as you please. (1) Have you read over The Doctrine of Original Sin? I mean the book wrote in answer to Dr. Taylor? Have you read it with attention and prayer? Do you understand it? Have you seriously considered it? Is there anything in it which you think wrong? or does it express your own judgement? (2) Have you read over the sermons in the first and fourth volumes on Justification and the New Birth? Do you think you throughly understand them? Is there anything in them which you cannot agree to? (3) Have you read over the Thoughts upon Perfection in the fourth volume? Did you read them with humility and prayer? with calmness and deliberation? Have you considered them again and again, crying to God for help? Is there anything in them which you do not understand, or which you think is not right? On all these heads you may speak freely to, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Direct to Newcastle.

To Elizabeth Hardy Date: LONDON, December 26, 1761. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1761) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SISTER,--The path of controversy is a rough path. But it seems smoother while I am walking with you; so that I could follow you through all its windings, only my time will not permit. The plain fact is this: I know many who love God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength. He is their one desire, their one delight, and they are continually happy in Him. They love their neighbour as themselves. They feel as sincere, fervent, constant a desire for the happiness of every man, good or bad, friend or enemy, as for their own. They 'rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks.' Their souls are continually streaming up to God in holy joy, prayer, and praise. This is plain, sound, scriptural experience; and of this we have more and more living witnesses. But these souls dwell in a shattered, corruptible body, and are so pressed down thereby that they cannot exert their love as they would by always thinking, speaking, and acting precisely right. For want of better bodily organs, they sometimes inevitably think, speak, or act wrong. Yet I think they need the advocacy of Christ, even for these involuntary defects; although they do not imply a defect of love, but of understanding. However that be, I cannot doubt the fact. They are all love; yet they cannot walk as they desire. 'But are they all love while they grieve the Holy Spirit?' No, surely; they are then fallen from their steadfastness; and this they may do even after they are sealed. So that, even to such, strong cautions are needful. After the heart is cleansed from pride, anger, and desire, it may suffer them to re-enter; therefore I have long thought some expressions in the Hymns are abundantly too strong, as I cannot perceive any state mentioned in Scripture from which we may not, in a measure at least, fall.

To Christopher Hopper CORK, June 18, 1762. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1762) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--So your labour has not been in vain. I shall expect an account of the remaining part of your journey too. And you will be able to inform me of the real character and behaviour of Robert Miller also. I do not rightly understand him. But I see James Kershaw and he do not admire one another. Pray let me know as particularly as you can how William Fugill [Fugill, a native of Rothwell, near Leeds, was at first useful and acceptable; but he fell into 'some grievous sins,' and was excluded in 1764. See Atmore's Memorial, pp. 147-8.] has behaved in Scotland, and what has hindered the increase of the work at Edinburgh. I thought the Society would have been doubled before now. I expect to be in Dublin on Saturday, July 24. Then Providence will determine how I shall go forward, and whether I am to embark for Parkgate, Liverpool, or Holyhead in my way to Leeds, where I hope to meet you all on August 10. [Hopper was appointed to the Leeds Circuit at this Conference.]--I am Yours affectionately. I hope you will all exert yourselves in the Midsummer Collection for Kingswood.

To Ebenezer Blackwell Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1762) Author: John Wesley --- [6] DUBLIN, July 28, 1762. DEAR SIR,--It was seven or eight weeks before I could prevail upon any of our brethren in England to let me know whether 'Mr. Blackwell, an eminent banker, died at his house in Lewisham or not.' John Maddern was the first who occasionally told me he was alive. Now, a messenger of good news should be rewarded. But what can be done for this poor man, in truth I cannot tell. He hinted at a distance as if he would be much obliged if I would be bound for his behaviour. But how could I be bound for a thousand pounds who am not worth a groat I could not, therefore, but advise him to give up the thought of being in a banker's shop; as I see no manner of probability of his procuring such sureties as are requisite. Indeed, I heartily wish he was in any way of business, as he is capable of almost anything. The people in this kingdom have been frightened sufficiently by the sickness and by the Levellers, whose design undoubtedly was deep-laid, and extended to the whole kingdom. But they broke out too soon: nothing should have appeared till a French or Spanish squadron came. The nation is not now in the same state as it was in 1641. Then there were not four thousand soldiers in the kingdom: now there are near twenty thousand. I hope you and yours have escaped the general disorder or have found it a blessing. It little matters whether we escape pain or suffer it, so it be but sanctified. Without some suffering we should scarce remember that we are not proprietors here, but only tenants at will, liable to lose all we have at a moment's warning. Happy it were if we continually retained a lively impression of this on our minds; then should we more earnestly seek that portion which shall never be taken from us. In two or three days I am likely to embark in order to meet our brethren at Leeds. There I hope to have it under your own hand that both you, Mrs. Blackwell, Mrs. Dewal, and Miss Freeman are alive in the best sense.--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant.

To Samuel Furly DUBLIN, July 30, 1762. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1762) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SAMMY,--'If I am unanswered, then I am unanswerable.' Who can deny the consequence By such an argument you carry all before you and gain a complete victory. You put me in mind of the honest man who cried out while I was preaching, 'Quid est tibi nomen' and, upon my giving no answer, called out vehemently, 'I told you he did not understand Latin!' I do sometimes understand, though I do not answer. This is often the case between you and me. You love dispute, and I hate it. [See letter of Sept. 15 to him.] You have much time, and I have much work. Non sumus ergo pares. But if you will dispute the point with Nicholas Norton, he is your match. He has both leisure and love for the work. For me, I shall only once more state the case. Here are forty or fifty people who declare (and I can take their word, for I know them well), each for himself, 'God has enabled me to rejoice evermore, and to pray and give thanks without ceasing. He has enabled me to give Him all my heart, which I believe He has cleansed from all sin. I feel no pride, no anger, no desire, no unbelief, but pure love alone.' I ask, 'Do you, then, believe you have no farther need of Christ or His atoning blood' Every one answers, 'I never felt my want of Christ so deeply and strongly as I do now. I feel the want of Christ my Priest as well as King, and receive all I have in and through Him. Every moment I want the merit of His death, and I have it every moment.' But you think, 'They cannot want the merit of His death if they are saved from sin.' They think otherwise. They know and feel the contrary, whether they can explain it or no. There is not one, either in this city or in this kingdom, who does not agree in this.

To his Brother Charles Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1762) Author: John Wesley --- [7] [September 1762.] Some thoughts occurred to my mind this morning, which I believe it may be useful to set down, the rather because it may be a means of our understanding each other clearly, that we may agree as far as ever we can and then let all the world know it. I was thinking on Christian perfection, with regard to the thing, the manner, and the time. 1. By perfection I mean the humble, gentle, patient love of God and man ruling all the tempers, words, and actions, the whole heart and the whole life. I do not include a possibility of falling from it, either in part or in whole. Therefore I retract several expressions in our hymns which partly express, partly imply, such an impossibility. And I do not contend for the term 'sinless,' though I do not object against it. Do we agree or differ here If we differ, wherein 2. As to the manner, I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by faith, by a simple act of faith; consequently in an instant. But I believe a gradual work both preceding and following that instant. Do we agree or differ here 3. As to the time, I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before death. Do we agree or differ here I believe it is usually many years after justification, but that it may be within five years or five months after it. I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. Do you If it must be many years after justification, I would be glad to know how many. Pretium quotus arrogat annus [Horace's Epistles, II. i. 35: How many years should claim the prize'] And how many days, or months, or even years can you allow to be between perfection and death How far from justification must it be and how near to death If it be possible, let you and me come to a good understanding, both for our own sakes and for the sake of the people.

To his Brother Charles LONDON, December 11, 1762. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1762) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--For eighteen or twenty days I heard with both ears, but rarely opened my mouth. I think I now understand the affair at least as well as any person in England. The sum is this: (1) The meeting in Beech Lane, [The meeting was apparently in Joseph Guilford's house (see Journal, v. 7). On visiting the classes in November, Wesley found 'some were vehement for, some against, the meetings for prayer which were in several parts of the town. I said little, being afraid of taking any step which I might afterwards repent of' (ibid. iv. 538). Thomas Maxfield was making much trouble.] before I came to town, was like a bear-garden; full of noise, brawling, cursing, swearing, blasphemy, and confusion. (2) Those who prayed were partly the occasion of this, by their horrid screaming, and unscriptural, enthusiastic expressions. (3) Being determined either 'to mend them or end them,' I removed the meeting to the Foundery. (4) Immediately the noise, brawling, cursing, swearing, blasphemy, and confusion ceased. (5) There was less and less screaming and less of unscriptural and enthusiastic language. (6) Examining the Society, I found about threescore persons who had been convinced of sin and near fourscore who were justified at these meetings. So that on the whole they have done some hurt and much good. I trust they will now do more good, and no hurt at all. Seven persons had left the Society on this account; but four of them are come back already. I bought the ground before Kingswood School of Margaret Ward, and paid for it with my own money. [This plot was divided into pastures and gardens, in the latter of which the boys worked. See Kingswood School, p. 19.] Certainly, therefore, I have a right to employ it as I please. What can any reasonable man say to the contrary I have answered the Bishop, and had advice upon my answer. If the devil owes him a shame, he will reply. He is a man of sense; but I verily think he does not understand Greek! [See heading to letter on p. 338.]

To his Brother Charles Date: LONDON, February 26, 1763. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1763) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--I perceive verba fiunt mortuo [Plautus’s Poenulus, IV. ii. 18: ‘Words are wasted on a dead man.’]; so I say no more about your coming to London. Here stand I; and I shall stand, with or without human help, if God is with me. Yesterday Mr. Madan and I with a few more gave the full hearing to the famous Turk and his associate. [See letter of Feb. 8.] He is an exquisite wretch; was originally a Spanish Jew, afterwards a Turk, then a Papist, then a Jew again, then a Protestant, and now at last (under Mr. Lombardi’s wing) a zealous Papist! Concerning his companion we are still in doubt. We fear he is little better; though we cannot prove it. Mr. Gaussen tells us the stroke will come to-morrow evening; the rest say not till Monday. [The earthquake which Bell prophesied. The Gaussens were London friends. See C. Wesley’s Journal, ii, 217; and previous letter.] Let us live to-day! I labor for peace; but they still make themselves ready for battle. Peace be with you and yours! Adieu!

To Mr. ---- Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1763) Author: John Wesley --- May 1763. [Fragment] not so receive the sense they which I have been insisting on And I do not know that [Joseph] Guilford [See Journal, v. 7, 362; vi. 149.] [had any other] objection to them than more or less, than ‘By grace ye are saved through faith.’ And whenever we give up this fundamental truth, the work of God by us will come to an end. It is true saving faith is both the gift and the work of God; yea, and a work of Omnipotence. But, still, this does not exclude any man; because God is ready to work it in every man: there being nothing more sure, taking the words in a sacred sense, than that ‘every man may believe if he will.’ The matters in question between Mr. Maxfield and me [See previous letter.] may sleep till I have the pleasure of seeing you. Wishing you all light and love, I remain, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant.

‘I who believe.’ But cannot you as well expect it without believing If not, what is believing but a condition For it is something sine qua non. And what else do you, or I, or any one living mean by a condition And is not believing an inward act What is it else But you say, ‘Not performed by me.’ By whom, then God gives me the power to believe. But does He believe for me He works faith in me. But still is it not I that believe And if so, is not believing an inward act performed by me Is not, then, this hypothesis (to waive all other difficulties) contradictory to itself I have just set down a few hints as they occurred. Wishing you an increase of every blessing, I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Ryan Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1764) Author: John Wesley --- [3] WEDNESBURY, March 25, 1764. MY DEAR SISTER,--I am glad you wrote, and that you write so freely. There needs no reserve between you and me. It is very easy for you to judge concerning what you have heard. Who are they that 'always praise me' (that is, to my face). I really know none such. You are said to do so. But I think you are clear of the accusation. Certain it is, then, I cleave to none upon this account. For I know not the men. But you 'do not take those to be your real friends who tell you what they think wrong.' Do I not take Sally Ryan and Mary Bosanquet to be my real friends And certainly they have told me more of this kind than all the world besides. Do you now find an uninterrupted communion with God Is He in all your thoughts In what sense do you pray always and in everything give thanks Are you always happy Is your will wholly subject to the will of God Do you feel no repugnance to any of His dispensations Continue to pray for, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Thomas Newall NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, May 7, 1764. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1764) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--Pray tell Brother Johnson [John or Thomas Johnson. See notes in letters of Sept. 3, 1756 (to Samuel Walker), and June 23, 1760.] I am satisfied about the horse. I don't know what rules they are which he speaks of. I suppose the Conference will begin at Bristol the second week in August. [The Conference began on Aug. 6.] I have often complained that most of our preachers were unfaithful to each other, not [saying] freely to each other what they thought amiss. I doubt that has been the case between you and John Atlay. [Atlay was afterwards Wesley's Book Steward. See letter of May 6, 1774, to him.] 'Tis well if you have spoke freely to him. You don't know what good you might do thereby. An hint or two will do nothing. Take the opportunity when you give him my letter, and your labour will not be in vain. Press all our believers strongly and explicitly to go on to perfection.--I am Your affectionate brother. For the present you must act as an Assistant. To Mr. Newall, At Mr. John Hall's In Newgate Street, London.

9. Logic naturally follows; and I really think it is worth all the rest put together. But here I am at a full stop; for I know no good treatise on the subject in English, except Aldrich's Logic, and that I am afraid you cannot understand without an instructor. I shall be glad to give you a little assistance in the short time we have together. 10. As to Ethics (or Moral Philosophy) there is full as much of it as you want in Langbain's Compendium. 11. In Natural Philosophy you have a larger field. You may begin with a Survey of the Wisdom of God in the Creation. This contains the substance of Ray, Derham, Niewentyt, Nature Displayed, and all the other celebrated books on the subject. You may add that fine book, Mr. Jones's Principles of Natural Philosophy. Thence you will easily pass to the Glasgow [Edinburgh] abridgement of Mr. Hutchinson's Works. [See letter of Nov. 26, 1756.] The abridgers give not only all his sense, but all his spirit. You may add to these the beautiful tracts of Lord Forbes; and, if you would go a little farther, Mr. Baker's ingenious Treatise on the Microscope. 12. With any or all of the foregoing studies you may intermix that of History. Geography and Chronology are termed the two eyes of history. Geography has been mentioned before; and I think all you want of Chronology may be learned from Marshall's Chronological Tables. 13. You may begin with Rollin's Ancient History; and afterwards read in order, Puffendorf's Introduction to the History of Europe, the Concise Church History, Burnet's History of the Reformation, the Concise History of England, Clarendon's History of the Great Rebellion, Neal's History of the Puritans, his History of New England, and Solis's History of the Conquest of Mexico. 14. Whitby's Compendium of Metaphysics will introduce you to that science. You may go on with Locke's Essay on Human Understanding; Bishop Browne on the Nature, Procedure, and Limits of Human Understanding; and Malebranche's Search after Truth. 15. For Poetry you may read Spenser's Faery Queen; Fairfax's or Hoole's Godfrey of Bulloigne; select parts of Shakespeare; Paradise Lost; the Night Thoughts; and Moral and Sacred Poems.

Will it be agreeable to my dear Lady Maxwell that I trouble her with a letter so soon and that I write with so little ceremony that I use no compliment, but all plainness of speech If it be not, you must tell me so, and I shall know better how to speak for the time to come. Indeed, it would be unpleasing to me to use reserve: the regard I feel for you strongly inclines me to 'think aloud,' to tell you every thought which rises in my heart. I think God has taken unusual pains, so to speak, to make you a Christian;-- a Christian indeed, not in name, worshipping God in spirit and in truth; having in you the mind that was in Christ, and walking as Christ also walked. He has given you affliction upon affliction; He has used every possible means to unhinge your soul from things of earth, that it might fix on Him alone. How far the design of His love has succeeded I could not well judge from a short conversation. Your Ladyship will therefore give me leave to inquire, Is the heaviness you frequently feel merely owing to weakness of body and the loss of near relations I will hope it is not. It might, indeed, at first spring from these outward pressures. But did not the gracious Spirit of God strike in, and take occasion from these to convince you of sin, of unbelief, of the want of Christ And is not the sense of this one great cause, if not the greatest, of your present distress If so, the greatest danger is, either that you should stifle that conviction, not suffering yourself to be convinced that you are all sin, the chief of sinners; or that you should heal the wound slightly, that you should rest before you know Christ is yours, before His Spirit witnesses with your spirit that you are a child of God. My dear Lady, be not afraid to know yourself--yea, to know yourself as you are known. How soon, then, will you know your Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous! And why not this day why not this hour If you feel your want, I beseech the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ to look upon you now! O give Thy servant power to believe!

O give Thy servant power to believe! to see and feel how Thou hast loved her! Now let her sink down into the arms of Thy love; and say unto her soul, 'I am thy salvation.' With regard to particular advices, I know not how far your Ladyship would have me to proceed. I would not be backward to do anything in my power; and yet I would not obtrude. But in any respect you may command, my dear Lady, Your Ladyship's affectionate servant.

To Sarah Moore Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1764) Author: John Wesley --- [15] LEEDS, July 5, 1764. MY DEAR SISTER,--I am fully convinced that T. Bryant's staying another year in the Sheffield Circuit would neither be good for him nor for the people. I know his strength, and I know his weakness. But he shall go no farther than the Leeds Circuit, from whence he may now and then step over to Sheffield, and the Sheffield preacher to Leeds. Sally, see that you walk circumspectfully. The eyes of many are upon you; and, above all, the eye of God!--I am Your affectionate brother.

The ordinary objections to such an union are of little weight with you. You are not afraid of the expense. You already give unto the Lord as much as you need do then; and you are not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, even in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. Perhaps you will say, 'I am joined in affection.' True; but not to so good effect. This joining half-way, this being a friend to but not a member of the Society is by no means so open a confession of the work and servants of God. Many go thus far who dare not go farther, who are ashamed to bear the reproach of an entire union. Either you are ashamed or you are not. If you are, break through at once; if you are not, come into the light and do what those well-meaning cowards dare not do. This imperfect union is not so encouraging to the people, not so strengthening to the preachers. Rather it is weakening their hands, hindering their work, and laying a stumblingblock in the way of others; for what can any man think who knows you are so well acquainted with them and yet do not join in their Society What can he think but that you know them too well to come any nearer to them, that you know that kind of union to be useless, if not hurtful And yet by this very union is the whole (external) work of God upheld throughout the nation, besides all the spiritual good which accrues to each member. O delay no longer, for the sake of the work, for the sake of the world, for the sake of your brethren! Join them inwardly and outwardly, heart and hand, for the sake of your own soul. There is something not easily explained in the fellowship of the Spirit which we enjoy with a society of living Christians. You have no need to give up your share therein and in the various blessings that result from it. You have no need to exclude yourself from the benefit of the advice and exhortations given from time to time. These are by no means to be despised, even supposing you have yourself more understanding than him that gives them. You need not lose the benefit of those prayers which experience shows are attended with a peculiar blessing.

You need not lose the benefit of those prayers which experience shows are attended with a peculiar blessing. 'But I do not care to meet a class; I find no good in it.' Suppose you find even a dislike, a loathing of it; may not this be natural, or even diabolical In spite of this, break through, make a fair trial. It is but a lion in the way. Meet only six times (with previous prayer), and see if it do not vanish away. But if it be a cross, still bear it for the sake of your brethren. 'But I want to gain my friends and relations.' If so, stand firm. If you give way, you hurt them and they will press upon you the more. If you do not, you will probably gain them; otherwise you confirm both their wrong notions and wrong tempers. Because I love you I have spoken fully and freely; to know that I have not spoken in vain will be a great satisfaction to Your affectionate brother.

I was likewise grieved at the danger you was in of stopping short. Certainly you may attain that blessing soon. And I am throughly persuaded you did taste of it; though how you lost it I know not. It will be eternally true, 'If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.' Meanwhile faith is the voice of God in the heart proclaiming Himself. Have this faith, and you have salvation. And this is the very thing you want. When this is joined with a strong understanding, it is well; but it may exist with a very weak understanding. This is the case with Mrs. W., whose understanding is extremely weak. And yet she has strong faith, and such as exceedingly profits me; though I take knowledge the treasure is in an earthen vessel. I see all that is of nature; and this does not hinder my rejoicing in all that is of God. This is one branch of simplicity. While reason, assisted-- from above, enables me to discern the precious from the vile, I make my full use of the former without losing one moment in thinking upon the latter. Perhaps reason (enlightened) makes me simple. If I knew less of human nature (forgive me for talking so much of myself), I should be more apt to stumble at the weakness of it, and if I had not (by nature or by grace) some clearness of apprehension. It is owing to this (under God) that I never staggered at the reveries of George Bell. I saw it instantly, at the beginning and from the beginning, what was right and what was wrong. But I saw withal, 'I have many things to speak, but you cannot bear them now.' Hence many imagined I was imposed upon, and applauded themselves in their greater perspicacity; as they do at this day. 'But if you knew it, says his friend to Gregory Lopez, why did not you tell me' I answer with him, 'I do not speak all I know, but what I judge needful.' Still, I am persuaded there is no state under heaven from which it is not possible to fall. But I wish you was all love, and then you would not need to take any thought for the morrow.

To Samuel Furly YARMOUTH, October II, 1764. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1764) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SAMMY,--I have delayed writing thus long, [See letter of July 15. ] because I was not inclined to draw the saw of controversy, particularly on a subject not very important and with a person not very easy to be convinced. I simply told you my thoughts concerning style and concerning yourself. If you can profit by them, well; if not, there is no harm done. I wanted to have you write in the most excellent way; if you prefer any other, you may. I have no prejudice for or against any writer: but I may say, without much vanity, I know a good style from a bad one; and it would be a shame if I did not, after having spent five-and-forty years (with some natural understanding, much attention, and a free acquaintance with many eminent men) in reading the most celebrated writers in the English tongue. Observing you to want one of the things essential to a good style, namely, easiness, I warned you of it, and (to make the reason of my caution more clear) enlarged a little upon the head. You reply, 'Harmony is essential to a good style.' It may be so; I have nothing to say to the contrary. In the very lines I quoted there is admirable harmony; nihil supra; the soul of music breathes in them: but there is no stiffness. The lines are as easy as harmonious. This is the perfection of writing. Whether long periods or short are to be chosen is quite another question. Some of those you transcribe from Swift are long; but they are easy too, entirely easy, void of all stiffness, and therefore just such as I advise you to copy after. The paragraphs cited from Hawksworth are far inferior to them, not more harmonious, but more stiff and artificial. That from Wharton is worst of all, stiff as a stake, all art and no nature. I know not what taste they can have who admire his style; certainly they must prefer Statius to Virgil.

The truth is, we are continually forming general rules from our own particular experience. Thus Sarah Ryan, [See letter of April 23.] having gone about and about herself, which took up a considerable time, might very naturally suppose all who are sanctified must stay for it near as long a time as she did. Again: if God has so rooted and grounded her in love (which I neither affirm nor deny) that she cannot now fall from Him, she very naturally thinks this is the case with all that are sanctified. Formerly Sarah Crosby [See letter of Oct. 5, 1765.] drew the same inference from her own experience, and was as positive that she could not fall from that state or sin as Sarah Ryan can be now. But 'none can be sanctified without a deep knowledge of themselves and of the devices of Satan.' They may without the latter, which God will give them in due time. And the former He can give in a moment, and frequently does, of which we have fresh instances almost every day. In the Thoughts on Perfection it is observed that, before any can be assured they are saved from sin, they must not only feel no sin but 'have a direct witness' of that salvation. And this several have had as clear as Sarah Ryan has, who afterwards fell from that salvation: although Sarah Ryan, to be consistent with her scheme, must deny they ever had it; yea, and must affirm that witness was either from nature or from the devil. If it was really from God, is He well pleased with this I know not how to reconcile speaking sharply or roughly, or even a seeming want of meekness, with perfection. And yet I am fearful of condemning whom God has not condemned. What I cannot understand I leave to Him. How is it that you make me write longer letters to you than I do almost to any one else I know not how, I find a greater concern for your welfare. I want you to be exactly right. This occasions my not thinking much of any pains that may give you help or satisfaction. The Lord touch your heart now, that all your tempers, thoughts, words, and works may be holiness unto our God.--I am Your affectionate brother.

To the Printer of the 'St. James's Chronicle' Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1765) Author: John Wesley --- [2] LONDON, February 5, I 765. SIR,--To the four questions proposed to me in your last week's paper, I answer: 1. None of those six persons lately ordained by a Greek bishop were ordained with my consent or knowledge. 2. I will not, cannot, own or receive them as clergymen. 3. I think an ordination performed in a language not understood by the persons ordained is not valid. 4. I think it is absolutely unlawful for any one to give money to the Bishop (or to any one for him) for ordaining him.--I am, sir, Your humble servant.

As to the other tale, 'The Bishop told me himself' (I pray in what tongue for he speaks no English, and you no Greek, any more than your interpreter so called) 'that Mr. Wesley desired Mr. Jones to know of him if he would consecrate him bishop' Mr. Jones solemnly declares that he never told the Bishop any such thing. But, be that as it may, the point does not turn on the validity of ordination by a Greek bishop, but on the validity of ordination procured by money and performed in an unknown tongue. My advice to you is either be silent or procure a better defender of your cause.

When you have read what I have wrote on occasion of the Letters lately published, I may say something more on that head. And it will then be time enough to show you why some part of those Letters could not be wrote by Mr. Hervey. I think on Justification just as I have done any time these seven-and-twenty years, and just as Mr. Calvin does. In this respect I do not differ from him an hair's breadth. But the main point between you and me is Perfection. 'This,' you say, 'has no prevalence in these parts; otherwise I should think it my duty to oppose it with my whole strength-- not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.' Just so my brother and I reasoned thirty years ago. 'We think it our duty to oppose Predestination with our whole strength--not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion, to the most grievous offences.' That it has given occasion to such offences I know; I can name time, place, and persons. But still another fact stares me in the face. Mr. Haweis and Mr. Newton hold this, and yet I believe these have real Christian experience. But if so, this is only an opinion; it is not subversive (here is clear proof to the contrary) 'of the very foundations of Christian experience.' It is 'compatible with a love to Christ and a genuine work of grace.' Yea, many hold it at whose feet I desire to be found in the day of the Lord Jesus. If, then, I 'oppose this with my whole strength,' I am a mere bigot still. I leave you in your calm and retired moments to make the application.

To Miss March BRISTOL, August 31, 1765. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1765) Author: John Wesley --- You may be assured it is not a small degree of satisfaction to me to hear that your soul prospers. I cannot be indifferent to anything which concerns either your present or future welfare. As you covet, so I want you to enjoy, the most excellent gifts. To your outward walking I have no objection. But I want you to walk inwardly in the fullness of love, and in the broad light of God's countenance. What is requisite to this but to believe always now to believe with your whole heart, and to hold fast the beginning of this confidence steadfast unto the end And yet a self-complaisant thought, yea, or a blasphemous one, may steal across your spirit; but I will not say that is your own thought. Perhaps an enemy hath done this. Neither will I blame you for 'feeling deeply the perverseness of others,' or for 'feeling your spirit tried with it.' I do not wish that you should not feel it (while it remains), or that you should feel it otherwise than as a trial. But this does not prove that there is sin in your heart or that you are not a sacrifice to love. O my friend, do justice to the grace of God! Hold fast whereunto you have attained; and if you have not yet uninterrupted communion with Him, why not this moment, and from this moment If you have not, I incline to think it is occasioned by reasoning or by some inward or outward omission.

I want only more of the spirit of love and power and of an healthful mind. As to those 'many believing wives who practice pious frauds on their unbelieving husbands,' I know them not--no, not one of that kind; therefore I doubt the fact. If you know any such, be pleased to give us their names and places of abode. Otherwise you must bear the blame of being the lover if not the maker of a lie. Perhaps you will say, 'Why, a great man said the same thing but a few years ago.' What if he did Let the frog swell as long as he can, he will not equal the ox. He might say many things, all circumstances considered, which will not come well from you, as you have neither his wit, nor sense, nor learning nor age, nor dignity. Tibi parvula res est: Metiri se quemque suo modulo ac pede verum est. [Horace's Epistles, 1. vii. 98. Wesley here gives a free and edged translation: 'You are not upon a level with Bishop Warburton. Let every man know his own size.' See next letter.] If you fall upon people that meddle not with you, without either fear or wit, you may possibly find they have a little more to say for themselves than you was aware of. I 'follow peace with all men'; but if a man set upon me without either rhyme or reason, I think it my duty to defend myself so far as truth and justice permit. Yet still I am (if a poor enthusiast may not be so bold as to style himself your brother), reverend sir, Your servant for Christ's sake. [5] November 26, 1762.

But see 'the character he gives his own saints!" The more I converse with this people the more I am amazed. That God hath wrought a great work is manifest by saving many sinners from their sins. And yet the main of them are not able to give a rational account of the plainest principles of religion."' They were not able then, as there had not been time to instruct them. But the case is far different now. Again: Did I 'give this character,' even then, of the people called Methodists in general No, but of the people of a particular town in Ireland, where nine in ten of the inhabitants are Romanists. 'Nor is the observation confined to the people. He had made a proselyte of Mr. Drake, [See letter of Sept. 25, 1755.] Vicar of B[awtry]. And, to show he was no discredit to his master, he gives him this character: " He seemed to stagger at nothing, though as yet his understanding is not opened."' (Page 162.) Mr. Drake was never a proselyte of mine; nor did I ever see him before or since. I endeavoured to show him that we are justified by faith. And he did not object; though neither did he understand.

'To show that the loss of these will not be regretted when the Church has advanced from a state of infancy to manhood ' (alas the day! Were the Apostles but infants to us), 'he illustrates the case by an elegant similitude,--"When I was a child, I spake as a child; . . . but when I became a man, I put away childish things." His next remark, concerning the defects of human knowledge, is only an occasional answer to an objection. And the last verse shows that the superior duration of charity refers to the present life only,--"Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." That is, you may perhaps object, Faith and hope will likewise remain in the Church, when prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are ceased: they will so; but still charity is the greatest, because of its excellent qualities.' (Page 107.) 'The last verse shows'! Is not this begging the question How forced is all this! The plain natural meaning of the passage is, Love (the absolute necessity and the nature of which is shown in the foregoing verses) has another commendation--it 'never faileth,' it accompanies and adorns us to eternity. 'But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail,' when all things are fulfilled and God is all in all. 'Whether there be tongues, they shall cease': one language shall prevail among all the inhabitants of heaven, while the low, imperfect languages of earth are forgotten. The 'knowledge,' likewise, we now so eagerly pursue shall then 'vanish away.' As starlight is lost in that of the midday sun, so our present knowledge in the light of eternity. 'For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.' We have here but short, narrow, imperfect conceptions, even of the things round about us, and much more of the deep things of God; and even the prophecies which men deliver from God are far from taking in the whole of future events. 'But when that which is perfect is come,' at death and in the last day, 'that which is in part shall be done away.' Both that low, imperfect, glimmering light, which is all the knowledge we can now attain to; and these slow and unsatisfactory methods of attaining, as well as of imparting it to others.

'Human and worldly reason is not needful to the understanding the Scripture; but the "revelation of the Holy Ghost," who inspireth the true meaning unto them who with humility and diligence search for it' (Part II.). 'Make him know and feel that there is no other name given under heaven unto men whereby we can be saved.' 'If we feel our conscience at peace with God, through remission of our sins, all is of God.' (Homily on Rogation Week, Part III.) 'If you feel such a faith in you, rejoice in it, and let it be daily increasing by well working' (Homily on Faith, Part III.). 'The faithful may feel wrought, tranquillity of conscience, the increase of faith and hope, with many other graces of God' (Homily on the Sacrament, Part I.). 'Godly men feel inwardly God's Holy Spirit inflaming their hearts with love' (Homily on Certain Places of Scripture, Part I.). 'God give us grace to know these things, and feel them in our hearts! This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with His presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For without His lively inspiration we cannot so much as speak the name of the Mediator: "No man can say Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." Much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. "But we have received," saith St. Paul, "not the Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God"; for this purpose, "that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God." In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God and to please Him. It is He that purifieth the mind by His secret working. He enlighteneth the heart to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth on the tongue of man to stir him to speak His honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and selfsame Spirit.' (Homily for Rogation Week, Part III.)

To his Brother Charles Date: LONDON, January 27, 1767. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1767) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--Some thoughts occurred to my mind this morning which I believe it may be useful to set down: the rather because it may be a means of our understanding each other clearly; that we may agree as far as ever we can, and then let all the world know it. I was thinking on Christian Perfection, with regard to the thing, the manner, and the time. 1. By perfection I mean the humble, gentle, patient love of God and man ruling all the tempers, words, and actions, the whole heart by the whole life. I do not include an impossibility of falling from it, either in part or in whole. Therefore I retract several expressions in our Hymns which partly express, partly imply, such an impossibility. And I do not contend for the term sinless, though I do not object against it. Do we agree or differ here If we differ, wherein 2. As to the manner. I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by faith, by a simple act of faith, consequently in an instant. But I believe in a gradual work both preceding and following that instant. Do we agree or differ here 3. As to the time. I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before death. Do we agree or differ here I believe it is usually many years after justification, but that it may be within five years or five months after it. I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. Do you If it must be many years after justification, I would be glad to know how many. Pretium quotus arrogat annus [Horace's Epistles, II. i. 35 'What year must claim the reward'] And how many days or months or even years can you allow to be between perfection and death How far from justification must it be And how near to death If it be possible, let you and I come to a good understanding, both for our own sakes and for the sake of the people. [See letter of Feb. 12.]

To Peggy Dale Date: CASTLEBAR, May 17, 1767. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1767) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Concerning that displeasure, one may doubt whether it was any other than the concern you ought to have felt on the occasion; or, at least, whether it was any more than temptation to sin. But if it was, what would it prove Not that your heart had not been cleansed, but that, being off your guard, you suffered a degree of evil to re-enter. Was it so Then (if it be not done already) the Lord cleanse you from it this moment! Woman, be it unto thee even as thou wilt! Believe, and feel the blessing! Certainly the more vigorously you follow after Him the clearer will that unction be, without which it is not possible on some occasions to distinguish between temptation and sins. But you take the right way, without perplexing your mind about anything else. Now give yourself up to God. This is all you have to do. And even while you are doing it light will spring up. I feel it does me good to converse with you even at a distance. O never diminish either your love or your prayers for, my dear Peggy, Your affectionate brother.

To Henry Brooke Date: SUNDERLAND, May 25, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BRETHREN,--I know not what to say; the accounts I receive from Dublin are so contradictory to each other. In my last to T. Olivers I desired he would go immediately into Waterford Circuit. I wish Mr. Hilton would give me his cool judgement concerning the late transactions. I desire all the money subscribed in Ireland for the payment of the General Debt may be lodged in the hands of George Grant, James Martin, and James Freeman as trustees. But when this amounts to 100, let so much of the Dublin debt be paid without delay. See that you bear one another's burthens.--I am, my dear brethren, Your affectionate brother. What is the present debt on Dublin house

To Ann Bolton Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 7, 1768. MY DEAR SISTER,--As there is nothing new in your disorder only an increase of the same symptoms, I believe, if you will observe the directions I formerly gave, this will help you more than an hundred medicines. Oily medicines would kill you quickly; so would anything that loads your stomach. You must take care to have air enough at night: it would not hurt you to have the window a little open. When you have that tickling cough, chew a small bit of bark (as big as half a peppercorn), swallow your spittle four or five times, and then spit out the wood. So much bark as this I can allow you, but no more, at the peril of your life. Try if red currants agree with you; if they do, eat as many as you can. O Nancy, I want sadly to see you: I am afraid you should steal away into paradise. A thought comes into my mind which I will tell you freely. If you go first, I think you must leave me your seal for a token: I need not say to remember you by, for I shall never forget you. Experience shows what is the best means of grace to you. Read and think of the love of God. That is your point. Jesus loves you! He is yours. Be not so unkind as to distrust Him! Cast your soul at His feet! Prisoner of hope, be bold! Come unto Him now and take the water of life freely! If you are able to write, write to me soon, directing to me at Mrs. Hudson's in York. I want to know everything that concerns you. For you are exceeding near to, my dear Nancy, Your affectionate brother.

To George Merryweather Date: BRISTOL, September 26, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I have appointed Richard Boardman [Boardman was Assistant in the Dales, and took the place of Rowell at Yarm.] to supply (for the present at least) the place of Jacob Rowell. I desire John Heslop [Heslop was second preacher at Yarm in 1767. He had evidently been paying attention to a lady there. See letter of Oct.1.] may preach at Yarm no more. Quietly let him sink into nothing. And the less he preaches in other places the better till he comes again to his senses. Indeed, if anything of so notorious a kind occurs, I will thank any steward for preventing such a preacher from doing any more hurt till he has an answer from me.--I am, with love to Sister Merryweather, Your affectionate brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: WYCOMBE, November 7, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH,--You have now twenty more volumes of the Philosophical Transactions. Dr. Burton's Latin and Greek Poems you have in the study.[At Kingswood School.] Malebranche [Included in the list of studies for fourth year. See History of Kingswood School, p. 66.] and some other books are coming. Logic you cannot crack without a tutor: I must read it to Peter and you, if we live to meet. It would not be amiss if I had a catalogue of the books at Kingswood; then I should know the better what to buy. As fast as I can meet with them at sales, I shall procure what are yet wanting. But beware you be not swallowed up in books: an ounce of love is worth a pound of knowledge.--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother.

To Jane Hilton Date: LONDON, November 26, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--There seems to have been a particular providence in Hannah Harrison's coming to Beverley, especially at that very time when a peace-maker was so much wanting; and it was a pledge that God will withhold from you no manner of thing that is good. The words of our Lord Himself show us what we are to expect from 'those of our own household.' But all this likewise shall be for good. 'It is given to you to suffer' for Him; and all will turn to your profit, that you may be more largely a partaker of His holiness. Do you feel, when you are tried in a tender point, no temper contrary to love Grief there may be; but is there no resentment or anger Do you feel invariable calmness of spirit Do you perceive nothing but pity and tender goodwill both at the time and afterwards Write to me of the trials you meet with. You may always direct to London, and the letter will come safe. Expect more faith and love daily. Your affectionate brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: LONDON, December 4, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I cannot yet convince you of one thing (and it is a thing of importance), that you may make greater progress in valuable knowledge by reading those books (particularly if read in that order) than you can by reading any other books which are now extant in England. It follows that your friend B-- in this respect is not your friend. For he puts you out of your way; he retards you in the attainment of the most useful knowledge. He gratifies your curiosity (a bad principle too) at the expense of your improvement. It is better for you to read these books than his; which (if they are not hurtful or dangerous at least) do not lead directly to the end you propose. Choose the best way.--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: SHOREHAM, December 22, 1768. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1768) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR JOSEPH,--You do not quite take my meaning yet. [See letter of Dec. 4.] When I recommend to any one a method or scheme of study, I do not barely consider this or that book separately but in conjunction with the rest. And what I recommend I know; I know both the style and sentiments of each author, and how he will confirm or illustrate what goes before and prepare for what comes after. Now, supposing Mr. Stonehouse, [Dr. James Stonehouse, lecturer of All Saints', Bristol. See Tyerman's Whitefield, ii. 195; and for James Rouquet, letter of March 30, 1761.] Rouquet, or any other to have ever so great learning and judgement, yet he does not enter into my plan. He does not comprehend my views nor keep his eye fixed on the same point. Therefore I must insist upon it, the interposing other books between these till you have read them through is not good husbandry. It is not making your time and pains go so far as they might go. If you want more books, let me recommend more, who best understand my own scheme. And do not ramble, however learned the persons may be that advise you so to do. This does indulge curiosity, but does not minister to real improvement, as a stricter method would do. No; you would gain more clearness and strength of judgement by reading those Latin and Greek books (compared with which most of the English are whipped syllabub) than by fourscore modern books. I have seen the proof, as none of your Bristol friends have done or can do. Therefore I advise you again, keep to your plan (though this implies continual self-denial) if you would improve your understanding to the highest degree of which it is capable.--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother.

But the difficulty with me lies here. I am not persuaded, that the Romish Missionaries (very few excepted) either know, or teach, true, genuine religion. And of all their Missionaries, generally speaking, the Jesuits are the worst. They teach nothing less than the true genuine religion of Jesus Christ. They spend their main strength in teaching their converts, so called, the opinions and usages of their Church. Perhaps the most religious that ever was among them, was their 'East Indian Apostle,' Francis Xavier. And from his own Letters (four volumes of which I had) it plainly appears, that (whether he knew it himself or no) he never taught one tittle of the religion of the heart, but barely opinions and externals. Now what virtue, what happiness can possibly spring from such a root as this Allowing then, that the Paraguay converts have peace and plenty, allowing they have moral honesty, allowing they have an outward form of religion (and thus far I know not but their guides may bring them), I cannot believe they have gone one step farther, or that they know what True Religion is. Do their instructors experience the inward Kingdom of God Righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And if not, are they likely to lead others, any farther than they have gone themselves Can they point out The Eternal Sunshine of the spotless Mind, Each Prayer accepted, and each Wish resigned 7 Desires composed, Affections ever even; Tears that delight, and Sighs that waft to Heaven [Pope, Eloisa and Abelard, p. 207, quoted in Earnest Appeal, 3.] And without this, who can be happy Who can avoid feeling many dull, heavy hours Let the Indians eat, drink, dance, play: all this will not fill up the blanks of life. Their highest enjoyments will carry them no farther than 'Sauntring Jack and Idle Joan' [An Epitaph, 1. 2: 'Without love, hatred, joy, or fear, They led-a kind of-as it were.'] in Prior. What can carry them any farther but heart-religion, 'Fellowship with the Father and with the Son'! O may you and yours always experience this better part, which alone takes away the weariness of life, which alone gives that heart-felt, that unceasing joy, the pledge and earnest of Life Eternal!--I am, sir, Your very humble servant.

To Edward Bolton Date: LONDON, February 12, 1769. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1769) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--A preaching-house can't be too light or too airy. Therefore your windows must be large. And let them be sashes, opening downward; otherwise the air coming in would give the people cold. I do not know but it might be best to have either a paved or a boarded floor. And see that whatever is done be done neat and strong. It is the Lord's work, and He will provide. I will give you ten pounds towards it; for which you may draw upon Mr. Franks when you please. [See Journal, v. 345.] I hope my dear Nancy is recovered from her cold. Don't let her omit riding. [See letters of Feb. 4, 1769, and Jan. 25, 1770.] And make the best use of both her advice and example; for you know not how soon she may be taken away.--I am Your affectionate brother.

I conjecture (to tell you just what rises in my heart) that this change was owing to several causes. Some admired and commended you as a person of uncommon sense and uncommon attainments in religion. Others told you at large from time to time all the real or supposed faults of the Methodists, in particular the jars which had lately been in Dublin on account of Mr. Morgan and Olivers. This naturally tended to breed and increase pride on the one hand and prejudice on the other. Riches increased; which not only led you step by step into more conformity to the world, but insensibly instilled self-importance, unwillingness to be contradicted, and an overbearing temper. And hence you was of course disgusted at those who did not yield to this temper and blamed that conformity. Perhaps some of these professed or expected to be perfected in love; they at least believed perfection. Now, this you seemed to hate with a perfect hatred; and on that account disliked them the more. Permit me to add a few words on each of these heads. And first, would it not be well if you started back from every appearance of admiration (which you know is deadly poison), whether on account of your sense or piety and if you utterly discountenanced all who directly or indirectly commended you to your face yea, and all who told you of the jars or faults of the Methodists, or indeed of any absent person Should you not earnestly strive and pray against thinking highly of your own understanding or attainments in religion Otherwise this, by grieving the Holy Spirit, would expose you to still more prejudice; especially towards those who might seem to vie with you in religion, if not in understanding. Can you be too sensible how hardly they that have riches enter into the kingdom of heaven Yea, or into the kingdom of an inward heaven into the whole spirit of the gospel How hard is it for these (whether you do or no) not to conform too much to the world! how hard not to be a little overbearing, especially to inferiors! Is it right to be disgusted at those who fear you conform too far, who do not sink down before you--nay, perhaps oppose your judgement or blame your practice

To Mrs. Bennis Date: DUBLIN, July 24, 1769. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1769) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--If the reading over your papers has no other effect, this it certainly has--it makes me love you abundantly better than I did before: I have now a more intimate knowledge of you; I enter more into your spirit, your tempers and hopes and fears and desires, all which tends to endear you to me. It is plain one of your constant enemies, and the most dangerous of all, is evil reasoning. Accordingly the thing which you chiefly want is Christian simplicity. Brother Bourke [The Assistant at Limerick.] and you should carefully watch over each other in that respect, and let each deal faithfully with the other; let there be no reserve between you; encourage one another also to pray for and expect the continual and direct witness of the Spirit. They are by no means the best part of our preachers in any sense who doubt of this. I know but of one who had experienced the work that doubted concerning the witness-- namely, James Oddie [See letter of March 29, 1766.]; and I am afraid that for some time he has experienced neither the one nor the other. Two of your written books I send back by that lovely woman Jenny Moore [Mrs. Moore, of Augher. She received these safely after some delay. See Crookshank's Methodism in Ireland, i. 200.]; the third I must borrow a little longer. My dear friend, remember Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Barton Date: BRISTOL, September 9, 1769. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1769) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Now I understand you well; but I did not understand you before. I thought you meant that you had not now the love that you had once. [See letter of Aug. 6.] I am glad to find that I was mistaken, and that you still retain that precious gift of God. Undoubtedly you may retain it always; yea, and with a continual increase. You may have a deeper and deeper fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. You may have more and more of the mind which was in Him and be more fully renewed in His likeness. You should send me word from time to time what your present experience and your present trials are. Peace be with your spirits!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Hannah Ball Date: November 5, 1769. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1769) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Need I tell you that I found a particular satisfaction in my late conversations with you Perhaps you observed such a freedom in my behaviour as I never showed to you before. Indeed, it seemed to me as if I had just recovered a dear friend whom I had been in fear of losing. But you sweetly relieved me from that fear and showed me that your heart is as my heart. Do you still find a clear deliverance from pride, from anger, from your own will, and from the love of earthly things Have you an uninterrupted sense of the presence of God as a loving and gracious Father Do you find your heart is continually ascending to Him And are you still enabled in everything to give thanks You must expect various trials. We know nature is variable as the wind. But go on. Be never weary of well doing; in due time you shall reap if you faint not.--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Crosby Date: LONDON, January 1, 1770. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1770) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Whereunto you have attained hold fast. You never need let it go. Nothing is more certain than that God is willing to give always what He gives once. If, therefore, He now gives you power to yield Him your whole heart, you may confidently expect the continuance of that power till your spirit returns to God, provided you continue watching unto prayer, denying yourself, and taking up your cross daily. Only beware of evil reasoning! Hang upon Him that loves you as a little child; living to-day, and trusting Him for to-morrow.[See letter of Jan. 2.]--I am, dear Sally, Your affectionate brother. To a Nobleman: The Earl of Dartmouth (?) [2] [January 1], 1770. DEAR SIR,--I bless God that you are not disgusted at the great plainness with which I wrote. Indeed, I know not but it might be termed roughness; which was owing partly to the pressure of mind I then felt, and partly to my being straitened for time: otherwise I might have found softer expressions. I am thankful likewise for your openness; which obliges me to be open and unreserved, and to say all I mean, and that in the most simple manner, on each of the articles that lie before us. I must do this even with regard to my fellow labourers, lest I should seem to mean more than I do. But I am sensible this is a tender point, and one so extremely difficult to treat upon that I should not venture to say one word did I not know to whom I speak. What I mean is this: From many little circumstances which have occurred, I have been afraid (just so far it went) that those clergymen with whom you are most acquainted were jealous of your being acquainted with me. I was the more afraid when I heard the sudden exclamation of one whom you well know, 'Good God! Mr. Wesley is always speaking well of these gentlemen, and they can never speak well of him.' But I am entirely satisfied by that full declaration which you make: 'I do not know of any impression that has been made upon me to your disadvantage.'

To Miss March Date: BRISTOL, September 15, 1770. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1770) Author: John Wesley --- To use the grace given is the certain way to obtain more grace. To use all the faith you have will bring an increase of faith. But this word is of very wide extent: it takes in the full exercise of every talent wherewith we are entrusted. This comprises the whole compass both of inward and outward religion. That you may be able steadily and effectually to attend to this you have need of that prayer, 'Give me understanding, that I may keep Thy law; yea, that I may keep it with my whole heart.' This is to 'make the best of life,' which cannot be done without growing in grace. I believe it would help you to read and consider the sermon on Self-Denial in the fourth volume, [See Works, vi. 103--14.] and that on Universal Conscientiousness in the Christian Library. A sense of wants and weaknesses, with various trials and temptations, will do you no real hurt, though they occasion heaviness for a time and abate your joy in the Lord. It is wrong so to attend to this as to weaken your faith; and yet in the general it is not wrong 'to form your estimate of the state of your soul from your sensations'--not, indeed, from these alone, but from these in conjunction with your words and actions. It is true we cannot judge of ourselves by the measure of our joy, the most variable of all our sensations, and frequently depending in a great degree on the state of our blood and spirits. But if you take love, joy, peace, meekness, gentleness, and resignation together, I know no surer rule whereby to judge of your state to Godward.

What is the difference between 'the frame of my mind and the state of my soul'? Is there the difference of an hair's breadth? I will not affirm it. If there be any at all, perhaps it is this: the frame may mean a single, transient sensation; the state, a more complicated and lasting sensation, something which we habitually feel. By frame some may mean fleeting passions; by state, rooted tempers. But I do not know that we have any authority to use the terms thus or to distinguish one from the other. He whose mind is in a good frame is certainly a good man as long as it so continues. I would therefore no more require you to cease from judging of your state by your frame of mind than I would require you to cease from breathing. Unless you deal very closely with those committed to your care, you will not give an account of them with joy. Advices and admonitions at a distance will do little harm or good. To those who give in to dress you might read or recommend the Advice to the Methodists on that head. It would be proper to go to the root of the matter once or twice; then to let it sleep, and after a few weeks try again. A Methodist using fine or gay apparel must suffer loss in her soul, although she may retain a little life; but she never will attain an high degree either of holiness or happiness. [See Works, xi. 466-77; and letter of Feb. 26, 1776.]

To Joseph Benson Date: LONDON, November 30, 1770. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1770) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH,--For several years I had been deeply convinced that I had not done my duty with regard to that valuable woman; that I had not told her what I was throughly assured no one else would dare to do, and what I knew she would bear from no other person, but possibly might bear from me. But, being unwilling to give her pain, I put it off from time to time. At length I did not dare to delay any longer, lest death should call one of us hence. So I at once delivered my own soul, by telling her all that was in my heart. It was my business, my proper business, so to do, as none else either could or would do it. Neither did I take at all too much upon me; I know the office of a Christian minister. If she is not profited, it is her own fault, not mine; I have done my duty. I do not know there is one charge in that letter which was either unjust, unimportant, or aggravated, any more than that against the doggerel hymns which are equally an insult upon poetry and common sense. We had a good time both at the Tabernacle and Tottenham Court Chapel. The congregations were immense. Perhaps not a third part could come within hearing; and they were more quiet than could well have been expected. The sermon will be published on Monday and sent down to Bristol. Mr. Keen and Hardy, his executors, have, I apprehend, the whole and sole disposal of the Tabernacle, Tottenham Court Chapel, and all the other houses which were occupied by Mr. Whitefield. The Chapel and Tabernacle are supplied by Mr. Joss and Brooksbank, and Mr. Neale administers the sacrament there.

To Mrs. Marston Date: LONDON, December 14, 1770. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1770) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--If I live till spring, and should have a clear, pressing call, I am as ready to embark for America [See letters of Feb. 21, 1770 (to Whitefield), and July 13, 1771 (to Miss March).] as for Ireland. All places are alike to me; I am attached to none in particular. Wherever the work of our Lord is to be carried on, that is my place for to-day. And we live only for to-day; it is not our part to take thought for to-morrow. You expect to fight your way through. But I think the preachers understand you and can receive your report; and so do most of your sisters. What forces, then, can Satan raise up against you? You can speak to me without reserve; for you know I love you much. Abundance of deficiencies must remain as long as the soul remains in this house of clay. So long the corruptible body will more or less darken and press down the soul. But still your heart may be all love, and love is the fulfilling of our law. Still you may rejoice evermore; you may pray without ceasing and in everything give thanks. Peace be multiplied unto you!--I am, dear Molly, Your affectionate brother.

To Philothea Briggs Date: LONDON, January 25, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR PHILLY,--As you desire a few directions with regard to the improvement of your mind, I will set down just what occur to me at present. Only, as my business is great and my time is short, I cannot stay to explain them at large. All the knowledge you want is comprised in one book--the Bible. When you understand this, you will know enough. I advise you, therefore, to begin every day (before or after private prayer) with reading a portion more or less of the Old or New Testament, or of both if you have time, together with the Notes, which may lead you by the hand into suitable meditation. After breakfast you may read in order the volumes of Sermons and the other practical books which we have published, more or less at a time (as other business permits) with meditation and prayer. Young, Milton, and the Moral and Sacred Poems you may read chiefly in the afternoons. Whatever you write, you should write in the forenoons. But learn to write sloping, not leaning upon your breast. Take care never to read or write too long a time. That is not conducive either to bodily or spiritual health. If I can be of use to you in anything else, tell me; you know you may speak freely to, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

To Mrs. Pywell Date: KILKENNY, April 23, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I hardly knew whether you were dead or alive, having not heard from you for so long a season. Yesterday I received yours of March 28, and am glad to hear you are not moved from your steadfastness. Certainly it is not the will of our Lord that you should; His gifts are without repentance. Do you find no decay in faith Do you as clearly as ever see Him who is invisible Is your hope as lively as at first Do you still taste of the powers of the world to come And can you say in as strong a sense as ever, I nothing want beneath, above, Happy in a Saviour's love Do you feel no anger at any time no pride no will but what is subordinate to the will of God And have you the witness in yourself that all your ways please Him Then expect to see greater things than these, for there is no end of His goodness; and do not forget, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

The general rule, not to correspond but with those who have both grace and understanding,' admits of several exceptions, in favour of a few who want one of them or the other or both. [See letter of May 28.] While I am in Ireland you may direct to me at Dublin. Be not afraid of writing too long letters. The longer the more agreeable to, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

5. These are well styled by Christ "ravening wolves," by St. Paul "grievous wolves," from the mischiefs they do, rending the Church of Christ, and perverting the true sense of the gospel for their own private ends. They ever did, and to this day do, pretend to extraordinary inspiration.' (Page 8.) Round assertions! Let us consider them one by one. (1) These are styled by Christ "ravening wolves," by St. Paul "grievous wolves."' True; but how does it appear that these names are applicable to the Methodists Why, they rend the Church of Christ.' What is the Church of Christ According to our Article, a Church is a company of faithful people,' of true believers, who have the mind that was in Christ,' and walk as Christ walked.' Who, then, are the Church of Christ in Waterford Point them out, sir, if you know them; and then be pleased to show how the Methodists rend this Church of Christ. You may as justly say they rend the walls or the steeple of the cathedral church. However, they pervert the true sense of the gospel for their own private ends.' Wherein do they pervert the true sense of the gospel I have published Notes both on the Gospels and the other Scriptures. But wherein do those Notes pervert the sense None has yet attempted to show. But for what private ends should I pervert it for ease or honour Then I should be sadly disappointed. Or for money This is the silliest tale of all. You may easily know, if you are willing to know it, that I did not leave Waterford without being some pounds lighter than I was when I came thither.

To Mary Bishop Date: GALWAY, May 27. 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Perhaps we may see a new accomplishment of Solomon's words, 'He that reproveth a man shall afterward find more favour than he who flattereth with his tongue. But, be that as it may, I have done my duty; I could no otherwise have delivered my own soul. And no offence at all would have been given thereby had not pride stifled both religion and generosity. [See letter of March 8.] But the letter is now out of date; it is mentioned no more: there is a more plausible occasion found-- namely, those eight terrible propositions which conclude the Minutes of our Conference. [The Minutes for 1770, which gave occasion to Fletcher to write his Checks to Antinomianism.] At the instance of some who were sadly frightened thereby, I have revised them over and over; I have considered them in every point of view; and truly, the more I consider them, the more I like them, the more fully I am convinced, not only that they are true, agreeable both to Scripture and to sound experience, but that they contain truths of the deepest importance, and such as ought to be continually inculcated by those who would be pure from the blood of all men. Joseph Benson is a good man and a good preacher. But he is by no means clear in his judgement. The imagination which he has borrowed from another good man, 'that he is not a believer who has any sin remaining in him,' is not only an error, but a very dangerous one, of which I have seen fatal effects. Herein we divided from the Germans near thirty years ago; and the falseness and absurdity of it is shown in the Second Journal and in my sermon on that subject. [The Lord our Righteousness. See Works, v. 234-46.] Your experience reminds me of these lines: So many tender joys and woes Have o'er my quivering soul had power! Plain life with heightening passions rose, The boast or burthen of an hour. [Gambold, in Poetical Works of J. and C. Wesley, i. 8.]

They who feel less, certainly suffer less; but the more we suffer, the more we may improve; the more obedience, the more holiness, we may learn by the things we suffer. So that, upon the whole, I do not know if the insensible ones have the advantage over us. If you wrote more than once in three months, it would not be amiss. Few are more tenderly concerned for you than, my dear Miss Bishop, Your affectionate brother. PS.--You need only direct to Dr. C-- To Miss Bishop, Near Lady Huntingdon's Chapel, In Bath.

To Thomas Mason Date: CASTLEBAR, May 30, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY,--A conversation I had yesterday with Brother Proctor determined me to write immediately. The person at Birr will not do: not only as she is far too young, little more than a child; but as she has only little if any Christian experience. You want a woman of middle age, well tried, of good sense, and of deep experience. Such an one in every respect is Molly Penington; but whether she is willing to marry or no, I cannot tell. If she is, I hardly know her fellow in the kingdom. If I meet with any, I will send you word. I hope you speak to Jonathan How with all freedom and tell him whatever you think amiss in him, especially encouraging him to press all believers to go on to perfection, and to expect it now! Peace with all your spirits!--I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate brother.

What you feel is certainly a degree of anger, but not of sinful anger. There ought to be in us (as there was in our Lord) not barely a perception in the understanding that this or that is evil, but also an emotion of mind, a sensation or passion suitable thereto. This anger at sin, accompanied with love and compassion to the sinner, is so far from being itself a sin, that it is rather a duty. St. Paul's word is, 'not easily provoked' to any paroxysm of anger: neither are you; nevertheless, I suppose there is in you, when you feel a proper anger at sin, an hurrying motion of the blood and spirits, which is an imperfection, and will be done away.

To Mrs. Bennis Date: DUBLIN, July 20, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I am much pleased to hear so good an account of John Christian. If I was resolved to understand all God's dispensations, I should embrace his opinion; because it in a manner accounts for some things which otherwise are unaccountable. But this I do not expect; I am content to understand exceeding little while I am in the body. What He does I know not now; it is enough that I shall know hereafter. Our business now is to love and obey; knowledge is reserved for eternity. My chief objection to Milton's doctrine of Election is that I cannot reconcile it to the words of St. Peter, which manifestly refer to the eternal state of men: 'God is no respecter of persons.' Now, how can we allow this, if we believe He places one man, as it were, suspended between heaven and hell, while He fixes another, ere ever he is born, under an absolute impossibility of missing heaven I am well pleased you see some reason to hope well of Mr. Thompson. Speak closely to him. He has a strong, cultivated understanding, and would make a shining Christian. If he continues serious, he will not long be pleased with his former company; they will grow tasteless, nay irksome. It is not material whether this or that infirmity or defect be consistent with this or that gift of God. Without reasoning about this, it is your part simply to spread all your wants before Him who loves you; and He will richly supply them all! Your ever affectionate brother.

To Mary Bishop Date: DUBLIN, July 20, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--For your own satisfaction I send you this [See letter of July 10.]; but I wish you would not show it before the Conference. If the Calvinists do not or will not understand me, I understand myself. And I do not contradict anything which I have written within these thirty years. You understand me right, and express more at large the very thing I mean. I know not that any one could express it more justly in the same number of words. Poor Mr. Shirley's triumph will be short. Peace be with your spirit!--My dear sister, adieu!

To his Brother Charles Date: KINGSWOOD, August 3, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--I will not throw away T. Rankin on the people of London. He shall go where they know the value of him. [Rankin had been in London; he now went to Cornwall West.] We cannot put out what we never put in. I do not use the word merit. [See sect. 6 in letter of July 10.] I never did. I never did, neither do now, contend for the use of it. But I ask you or any other a plain question; and do not cry 'Murder,' but give me an answer: What is the difference between merere and 'to deserve' or between 'deserving' and meritum I say still, I cannot tell. Can you Can Mr. Shirley or any man living In asking this question, I neither plead for merit nor against it. I have nothing to do with it. I have declared a thousand times there is no goodness in man till he is justified; no merit either before or after: that is, taking the word in its proper sense; for in a loose sense meritorious means no more than rewardable. As to Reprobation, seeing they have drawn the sword, I throw away the scabbard. I send you a specimen. Let fifteen hundred of them be printed as soon as you please. [A Defence of the Minute of Conference (1770) relating to Calvinism. See Green's Bibliography, No. 273; and letters of July 10 and 20. ] Nothing was ever yet expended out of the Yearly Subscription without being immediately set down by the secretary. I never took a shilling from that fund yet. What you advise with regard to our behaviour toward opposers exactly agrees with my sentiments. My wife, I find, is on the high ropes still. I am full of business, as you may suppose. So adieu!

To Mrs. Savage Date: BRISTOL, September 19, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--A report was spread abroad of my coming to Broadmarston and several other places; but I know not what was the occasion of it. I am now expected in the southern parts of the kingdom, and my course has been for several years as fixed as that of the sun. Mr. Ellis is a steady, experienced man, and a sound preacher. Wherever he is the work of our Lord prospers in his hand; and the more so as he is a lover of discipline, without which the best preaching is of little use. I advise you to speak to him as freely as possible, and he will be made profitable to your soul. Your late trials were intended to give you a deeper sense of your poverty and helplessness. But see that you cast not away that confidence which hath great recompense of reward. Cleave to Him with your whole heart, and all is well.--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Philothea Briggs Date: LONDON, October 6, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR PHILLY,--I commend you for not meddling with medicines, [See letter of Sept. 13.] except some of those simple ones in the Primitive Physick. Perhaps youth, with abstinence from tea and whatever else you feel hurts you, may restore your health. And, while it continues, this weakness may be of excellent use by weaning you from the love of present things. The first Appeal is a complete treatise of itself independent on the rest. This, therefore, may be given to any one without the others, which makes the expense easy. But to your friend you might give or lend them all. And if she has sense enough to read them impartially, she will learn to speak and write without ambiguity, just according to common sense. You may tell her, 'If you was doing those works, thinking to merit salvation thereby, you was quite wrong. But if you was doing them because they are the appointed way wherein we wait for free salvation, you was quite right.' But you need only send her Mr. Fletcher's Letters, and they will clear up the point sufficiently.--I always am, dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

To Philothea Briggs Date: LONDON, November 3, 1771. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1771) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR PHILLY,--I am always well pleased to see and hear from you. I answer you, more or less fully, as I have time. Neither do I know how to advise Nancy Greenwood; although I think he is free to marry. Rollin was a pious man and a fine historian. If you read one volume, you would feel whether it enlivened or deadened your soul. The same trial you may make as to serious poetry. Very probably this would enliven your soul; and certainly the volumes of Philosophy may, as Galen entitles his description of the human body, 'An Hymn to the Creator.' Temporal business need not interrupt your communion with God, though it varies the manner of it. It is certain every promise has a condition; yet that does not make the promise of none effect, but by the promise you are encouraged and enabled to fulfil the condition. You might like it better were there no condition; but that would not answer the design of Him that makes it. It is certain there are times of nearer access to God, and that it nearly imports us to improve those precious seasons. But we may find plausible objections against this, and indeed against anything. The more free you are with me, the more you oblige, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

To Walter Sellon Date: LONDON, February 1, 1772. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1772) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR WALTER,--You do not understand your information right. Observe, 'I am going to America to turn bishop.' [See letter of Aug. 14, 1771, to Philothea Briggs.] You are to understand it in sensu composito. ['In the sense agreed.'] I am not to be a bishop till I am in America. While I am in Europe, therefore, you have nothing to fear. But as soon as ever you hear of my being landed at Philadelphia, it will be time for your apprehensions to revive. It is true some of our preachers would not have me stay so long; but I keep my old rule, Festina lente. ['Make haste slowly.']--I am, dear Walter, Your affectionate brother.

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON, February 29, 1772. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1772) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--All your letters are exceedingly pleasing to me and give me a peculiar satisfaction; but your last in particular. I know not how to repress the emotion I felt when I read it. I rejoice over others, but over you above all. How unspeakably near are you to me! Since the time that I mourned with you at London and was a partaker of your sorrow, you have given me more and more excuse to rejoice over you; though now and then with a jealous fear lest in anything you should suffer loss or be slackened in running the race set before you. I shall not ride any long journeys on horseback. [See letter of March 4.] But you must needs meet me either at Stroud or Broadmarston; else I shall almost think you do not love me. On Monday, March 9, I hope to be at Stroud; the Saturday following at Broadmarston. How do you know whether you shall see me any more in the body My dear Nancy, my friend, adieu!

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDONDERRY, May 27, 1772. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1772) Author: John Wesley --- Do you find as much inward life as ever as close and steady communion with God Do you rejoice evermore In what sense do you pray without ceasing Is your peace constant and unshaken Does nothing ruffle you Do you feel no anger no pride no will of your own contrary to the will of God Do you feel no bent to backsliding in your heart You may find and indeed expect temptations innumerable, even to seek happiness in this or that creature. But is every fiery dart repelled, so as to have no place in you With regard to your question, it is only (in other words), Is there any sin in a believer or, Are we not sanctified throughout when we are justified You have a full answer to this question, which has perplexed so many upright souls, in those two sermons wrote expressly on the head, The Repentance of Believers and Sin in Believers. [See Works, v. 144-70.] Read them carefully, and I believe you will want nothing more to confirm you in the truth. Nevertheless you do well in exhorting all that are justified to hold fast all they have received. And it is certain they need never lose either their love or peace or power till they are fully sanctified. Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Savage Date: GRIMSBY, July 22, 1772. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1772) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--It is easy to see the difference between those two things, sinfulness and helplessness. The former you need feel no more; the latter you will feel as long as you live. And, indeed, the nearer you draw to God, the more sensible of it you will be. But beware this does not bring you into the least doubt of what God has done for your soul. And beware it does not make you a jot the less forward to speak of it with all simplicity. Do you still feel an entire deliverance from pride, anger, and every desire that does not centre in God Do you trust Him both with soul and body Have you learned to cast all your care upon Him Are you always happy in Him In what sense do you pray without ceasing Expect all the promises!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. In about a fortnight I am to be at Mr. Glynne's, Shrewsbury [Edward Glynne's mother was cousin to Lord Hereford, and wrote to him in defence of the Methodists. See Journal, iv. 491; Wesley's Veterans, i. 219-22; W.H.S. iv. 217 - 20.]

To Mary Bishop Date: PEMBROKE, August 22, 1772. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1772) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MISS BISHOP,--Such a degree of sickness or pain as does not affect the understanding I have often found to be a great help. It is an admirable help against levity as well as against foolish desires; and nothing more directly tends to teach us that great lesson, to write upon our heart, 'Not as I will, but as Thou wilt.' Mr. Baxter well observes (or, indeed, Archbishop Usher, to whom he refers, had done before him), 'that whoever attempt to profit children will find need of all the understanding God has given them.' But, indeed, natural understanding will go but a little way. It is a peculiar gift of God. I believe He has given you a measure of it already, and you may ask and expect an increase of it. Our dear sisters at Publow [Mrs. Owen and her daughters. See letter of Nov. 22, 1769.] enjoy it in as high a degree as any young women I know. It certainly must be an inordinate affection which creates so many jealousies and misunderstandings. I should think it would be absolutely needful, the very next time that you observe anything of that kind, to come to a full explanation with the parties concerned; to tell them calmly and roundly, 'I must and I will choose for myself whom I will converse with, and when and how; and if any one of you take upon you to be offended at me on this account, you will make it necessary for me to be more shy and reserved to you than ever I was before.' If you steadily take up this cross, if you speak thus once or twice in the band or class in a cool but peremptory manner, I am much inclined to think it will save both you and others a good deal of uneasiness. When you see those ladies (with whom I have no acquaintance), you would do well to speak exceeding plain. I am afraid they are still entire strangers to the religion of the heart. On Saturday, the 29th instant, I hope to be at Bristol, and on the Wednesday evening following at Bath. Let notice be given of this.--I am, dear Miss Bishop, Your affectionate brother.

To Christopher Hopper Date: LONDON, February 6, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I agreed last year (though contrary to my judgement that we would have no more weekly subscriptions. I purposed likewise in my own mind to concern myself with the debt no more. But upon reflection it seemed to me there was one way still -- namely, not to apply to the poor at all (though I would not reject any that offered), but to take the burthen on myself and try my personal interest with the rich. I began at London, where about five hundred pounds are subscribed. Afterwards I wrote to many in the country. Liverpool Circuit has subscribed about an hundred pounds; Bradford Circuit an hundred and thirty. It must be now or never. I do not know that I shall concern myself with this matter any more. Till now we have never had a rational prospect of clearing the whole debt in one year [See letter of Jan. 29 to Samuel Bardsley]. Now it may be done. It certainly will if our brethren in other circuits do as those above mentioned have done. What I desire of you is to second the letters I have wrote, encouraging each man of property in your circuit to exert himself--at least, to send me an answer; this, you know, is but common civility. Now do what you can; and show that you, my old friend are not last and least in love towards Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Woodhouse Date: DUBLIN, April 1, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--In such a case as you describe I do not see how you could well leave your brother. Where there is sickness, and especially an apprehension of death, we do not know how to break away from a friend. If the house is not built at Misterton [Six miles south of Epworth, and frequently visited by Wesley] as I directed, the people there must not expect to see me any more. I shall take it as both an instance of injustice and of personal disrespect to myself. Mr. Fletcher [See letter of July 30], of Gainsborough (if I understand the thing), refused to receive our preachers any longer. If so, they were not to blame in quitting the place; for they could do no otherwise. I believe my wife is still at Bristol, where I left her when I set out for Ireland. The preaching-house at Bradford in Yorkshire brings in, one way or other, near fifty pounds a year. The debt upon it is not much above five hundred pounds; so that in a few years it may clear its own debt [See letter of March 21]. But I know of no such other instance in England. I know not of one house beside that can even clear its own current expenses, much less yield an overplus to pay debt. If any preacher talks thus, he is either a fool or a knave: he has lost either his wits or his honesty. Besides, what must such an one think of me Does he think I am such a blockhead as to take all these pains for nothing to pay debts which would shortly pay themselves And how came any single preacher to know the state of all the houses in Great Britain so much better than I do I hope John Peacock [Peacock, the second preacher in Lincolnshire West, became an itinerant in 1767; after a useful and diligent ministry, he retired in 1796, and died at Burlington (Bridlington) in 1803] does not talk after this rate. Mr. Lee has raised near an hundred pounds in Leeds Circuit. He has common sense, and feels the burthen of Your affectionate brother.

To Ann Bolton Date: LIVERPOOL, July 7, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--You will not be sorry to hear that God has once more brought me safe to England, and that I hope to be with you at Witney (coming from Birmingham) on Thursday, the 15th instant. Probably I shall preach abroad at half-hour after six. You know I am, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother.

To Philothea Briggs Date: BRISTOL, September 8, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR PHILLY,--We have the clearest proof, when we have to do with children, that 'the help which is done upon earth God doeth it Himself.' All our wisdom will not even make them understand, much less feel the things of God. The Instructions for Children [See letter of Feb. 23] contain the best matter that we can possibly teach them. But nothing less than the finger of God can write it on their hearts. On Saturday night He sent another shower of grace upon our children at Kingswood [See Journal, v. 525]. Sixteen of them were deeply affected, and I think thirteen found peace with God. Four or five of them were some of the smallest we had, not above seven or eight years old. Although there may be some use in teaching even very young children to 'say their prayers daily,' yet I judge it to be utterly impossible to teach any to 'practice prayer' till they are awakened. For what is prayer but the desire of the soul expressed in words to God, either inwardly or outwardly How, then, will you teach them to express a desire who feel no desire at all When, therefore, Madame Guyon talks in that manner, it often makes me afraid that both she and her teacher, Archbishop Fenelon, talked by rote of the things they knew not. Both of them had an amazing genius, but I doubt full little experience. It is exceeding certain neither his nor her writings are likely to do us any solid service. We have all the gold that is in them without the dross, which is often not only useless but dangerous. Let you and I keep the good old way: In doing and bearing The will of our Lord, We still are preparing To meet our reward. Go on steadily in this path: there is none better. By patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and honor and immortality. You shall reap if you faint not.--I am, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

To Philothea Briggs Date: BRISTOL, September 29, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR PHILLY,--Your own experience may give an answer to your question. You did yourself enjoy a foretaste of that constant communion with God, though it did not continue long [See letter of May 8, 1780]. And you know it was given you in a moment. It was the same case with Sally Ryan, with Nancy Bolton, and with all those whom I have known that are now enabled to pray without ceasing. To every one of them that blessing was given in an instant. So it will be given to you again; although probably you will find a strong hope first which will incite you to cry out, Big with earnest expectation, See me sit at Thy feet, Longing for salvation. Grace in one sense will make an things new. And I have sometimes known this done to such a degree that there has been no trace of the natural temper remaining. But generally the innocent natural temper does remain, only refined, softened, and cast into the mould of love. I make no doubt but Charles Perronet would be as well as me in six months if he would punctually follow Dr. Cadogan’s rule [William Cadogan (1711-97), physician to London Founding Hospital 1754]. But without steady, unintermitted exercise he never can have health. On Saturday se'nnight I hope to be in London.--I am, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately.

To Mary Bishop Date: LONDON, October 31,1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I have laid your letter so carefully by that I cannot find it. But as I am going into Norfolk early in the morning, I will not stay till I come back before I write. There is upon the whole nothing new under the sun. But that violent jealousy among your young women is utterly a new thing among the Methodists; I have known nothing like it in the three kingdoms. And yet I do not know that they have either less sense or less grace than others of their age or sex. But this is one proof among a thousand that if God leave us for a moment to ourselves, there is no folly into which our subtle adversary may not drive the wisest of the human race. Yet I do not see that you are at liberty to give up your charge on this account. It seems you should simply lay the whole affair before Mr. Pawson and Allen [John Pawson was a Supernumerary in Bristol; John Allen, who became an itinerant in 1766 and died in 1810, was Wesley’s Assistant]. They are candid and impartial judges, prejudiced neither on one side nor the other; and I believe they will be able to judge on every emergence what steps are the most proper to be taken. One reason, it may be, why this was permitted, was to confound the pride of your understanding. You had been accounted a woman of sense and commended for it. And our nature readily receives such commendation. But see how little your sense avails! You can do no more herein than if you was an idiot. ' The help that is done upon earth He doeth it Himself,' whether with or without instruments. Let your whole soul be stayed upon Him for time and eternity. I am always wen pleased to hear from you. And you can speak freely to, my dear Miss Bishop, Yours affectionately.

To Mrs. Savage Date: LONDON, December 11, 1773. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1773) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Whatever was reported concerning Brother Wolfe [Francis Wolfe had removed from Gloucestershire to Bristol] it did not come to my ears. I never heard anything of him but good; nor do I know of anything laid to his charge. I advise you to speak very freely to Mr. Collins [William Collins, Assistant in Wiltshire South. See letter of May 6, 1774, to her]. He has much experience in the things of God, and has likewise seen so much of trouble and temptation that he knows how to sympathize with those that are tempted. By stirring up the gift of God that is in you, you will find a constant increase of inward life. Labor to be more and more active, more and more devoted to Him. Be ready to do and suffer His whole will; then will He Sink you to perfection’s height, The depth of humble love. --I am, dear Molly, Your affectionate brother.

To Mary Bishop Date: LONDON, January 26, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--When I observe anything amiss in your temper or behavior, I shall hardly fail to tell you of it; for I am persuaded you would not only suffer it but profit by advice or reproof. I have been sometimes afraid you did not deal plainly enough with the young women under your care. There needs much courage and faithfulness, that you may do all that in you ties to present them faultless before the throne. I do not know whether there is any other outward employ which would be so proper for you as that you are now engaged in. You have scope to use all the talents which God has given you, and that is the most excellent way. You have likewise a most admirable exercise for your patience, either in the dullness or forwardness of your little ones. And some of these will learn from you, what is of the greatest importance, to know themselves and to know God. You must not, therefore, relinquish this station lightly--not without full and clear proof that God calls you so to do. Meantime bear your cross, and it will bear you. Seek an inward, not an outward change. What you want is only inward liberty, the glorious liberty of the children of God. And how soon may you enjoy this! Who knows what a day, an hour, a moment may bring forth How soon may you hear 'the voice that speaks Jehovah near'! Why should it not be to-day--I am, my dear sister, Yours affectionately. Miss Bishop, Near the Cross Bath, In Bath.

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON, February 17, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--As our friends who write to me from Witney observe, Mr. Saunderson might be useful if he continued with you. But I have promised, not only to him but also to several at Edinburgh, that he should come with me when I came into Scotland [See letter of Feb. 27]. Joseph Bradford, who succeeds him for the present, is much devoted to God, and he is active and laborious. Tell him if you think anything wanting. I doubt not he will take it well. The manner wherein you receive advice encourages me to give it you freely [See letter of Jan. 20]. I am fully persuaded that is not the person. He has neither such a measure of understanding nor of spiritual experience as to advance you either in divine knowledge or in the life of God. Therefore yield to no importunity, and be as peremptory as you can consistent with civility. This is the wisest way with regard for you and the kindest with regard to him. I should have desired you to meet me at Stroud, March 14; but on this account [Probably the gentleman lived at Stroud] it seems not expedient. I have often examined myself (to speak without any reserve) with respect to you, and I find ' no fever’s heat, no fluttering spirits dance,' but a steady rational affection, ' calm as the warmth of life.’ [Probably based on Young’s Night Thoughts, viii.] March 2, 1774. I found the above (which I thought had been finished and sent) among my papers this morning. I hope you did not think you were forgotten by, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother.

To Ann Bolton Date: WHITEHAVEN, May 8, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Have you quite forgotten me It would not be strange if you had, but rather if you had not, considering the many things you have to think of, your much business, and your many correspondents. But it would be strange if I were to forget you. I could as soon forget myself. I know not how it is that you have for some time past seemed nearer to me than ever. I think ever since I saw you last I have indulged a pleasing expectation that there will be a more free and open intercourse between us than there has been yet. Is your heart as my heart Do you desire there should Or are you indifferent about it Nay, I think you are not, and I think I may judge of you by what I feel in myself. And if so, Who shall our souls disjoin Souls that Himself vouchsafed to unite In fellowship divine.

I want to hear how you go in your new way of life. Is it likely to answer your brother’s expectations with regard to temporal affairs In so short a time you cannot know much, but you may form some little conjecture. Do you give attention enough and not too much to the various businesses that lie upon you I know you will be diligent therein. But are you too diligent, so as to engage too much of your time and thoughts to entrench upon things of an higher nature To deprive yourself of sufficient time for exercises of a nobler kind If you should intermit these on account of any business whatever, I doubt you would suffer loss. There would be a danger that the tenor of your spirit should cool by imperceptible degrees, and that your mind should be too much engaged in the things of this world. For many years my mother was employed in abundance of temporal business while my father, who meddled with no temporals, had his living in his own hands. Yet she never suffered anything to break in upon her stated hours of retirement, which she sacredly observed from the age of seventeen or eighteen to seventy-two. Let my friend tread in the steps of my mother. Follow her as she followed Christ. Do not delay to write and tell me just how you are and what you do. Everything that concerns you very nearly concerns me, my dear Nancy, Your friend and brother. Any time this month direct to me at Edinburgh.

To Elizabeth Ritchie Date: WHITEHAVEN, May 8, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BETSY,--It is not common for me to write to any one first; I only answer those that write to me. But I willingly make an exception with regard to you; for it is not a common concern that I feel for you. You are just rising into life; and I would fain have you not almost but altogether a Christian. I would have you just such an one as Miranda. And you cannot be content with less: you cannot be satisfied with right notions; neither with harmlessness; no, nor yet with barely external religion, how exact so ever it be. Nay, you will not be content with a taste of inward religion. This it has pleased God to give you already. You know in whom you have believed; you have tasted of the powers of the word to come; but A taste of love cannot suffice; Your soul for all His fullness cries! Cry on, and never cease! Mind not those who rebuke you that you should hold your peace. Cry so much the more, 'Jesus of Nazareth, take away all my sins! Leave none remaining! Speak the word only, and I shall be healed!' Write freely to Yours affectionately.

There have undoubtedly been instances of real friendship among Jews, yea and among heathens, who were susceptible of it: but they were by no means wicked men; they were men fearing God and working righteousness according to the dispensation they were under. I apprehend wicked men, under whatever dispensation, to be absolutely incapable of true friendship. By wicked men I mean either men openly profane or men void of justice, mercy, and truth. There may be a shadow of friendship between those, whether of the same or of different sexes. But surely the substance is wanting; in all my experience I have found no exception to this rule. After an acquaintance of four-and-thirty years, I myself cannot have freedom with Miss Johnson. Yet I know not but you may. In most respects she judges truly, although her natural understanding is not strong. Miss Newman's is: the more you know her the more you will taste her spirit. The others you mention want a little more age and experience; then they might make companions for you.

To Joseph Benson Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 28, 1774. DEAR JOSEPH,--You fell upon Hugh Saunderson without rhyme or reason for contriving to supplant you at Edinburgh; whereas his staying there was not his choice but his cross: he must be there from the 24th instant to the 5th of July. During that time you may make an excursion either north, west, or south. Afterwards you will be fight welcome at Edinburgh. And seeing the people desire it, I cheerfully consent to your staying in that circuit another year. The following year, if you and I live, you may spend in London. Your congregations in Edinburgh are large: Hugh Saunderson’s are larger still. Your preaching, and perhaps mine, has stirred up a sleepy people: his preaching has stirred them up still more. Our conversation has often quickened them: his has quickened them much more. 'But why does God work more by him that has far less sense than we' To stain the pride of our wisdom. And hence not 'five or six girls' but 'the generality of the congregation' prefer his preaching to either yours or mine. They feel therein more of the power of God, though it has less of the wisdom of man. Now, I see more than any single preacher can see, which of the preachers do most good, who have most fruit; and according to this, I form my estimate of them. Pray tell Sister Gow I have her letter, and that both Mr. Thompson and I wholly acquit her. She has neither done nor said anything amiss. Mr. Broadbent blamed her without cause.--I am, dear Joseph, Yours affectionately.

To Henry Brooke Date: HULL, July 8, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR HARRY,--When I read over in Ireland The Fool of Quality, I could not but observe the deign of it, to promote the religion of the heart, and that it was well calculated to answer that design; the same thing I observed a week or two ago concerning Juliet Grenville. Yet there seemed to me to be a few passages both in the one and the other which might be altered to the better; I do not mean so much with regard to the sentiments, which are generally very just, as with regard to the structure of the story, which seemed here and there to be not quite clear. I had at first a thought of writing to Mr. Brooke himself, but I did not know whether I might take the liberty. Few authors will thank you for imagining you are able to correct their works. But if he could bear it and thinks it would be of any use, I would give another reading to both these works, and send him my thoughts without reserve just as they occur. I admired Miss Brooke for her silence; her look spake, though not her tongue. If we should live to meet again, I should be glad to hear as well as see her--I am Yours.

To Thomas Wride Date: TAUNTON, August 29, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- Alas! Alas! You have now confirmed beyond all contradiction what many of our preachers, as many as have had any intercourse with you, alleged concerning you. I am persuaded, had I read your last letter (that of the 17th instant) at the Conference, condemning, with such exquisite bitterness and self-sufficiency, men so many degrees better than yourself, the whole Conference as one man would have disclaimed all connection with you. I know not what to do. You know not what spirit you are of. Therefore there is small hope of cure. I have no heart to send you anywhere. You have neither lowliness nor love. What can I say or do more

To Miss March Date: BRISTOL, September 16, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- I believe my displeasure at you is not likely to rise to any great height. It will hardly have time; for I should tell you very soon of anything which I did not like. You want more simplicity. I will give you the first instance that occurs of that simplicity which I mean. Some years since, a woman sitting by me fell into strong convulsions, and presently began to speak as in the name of God. Both her look, motions, and tone of voice were peculiarly shocking. Yet I found my mind as ready to receive what she said, as if she had spoken with the look, motion, and accent of Cicero. 'Unprofitable; far from edifying.' Nay; but this does not go to the bottom of the matter. Why is that unprofitable to me which is edifying to others Remember that remark in the Thoughts on Christian Perfection: If one grain of prejudice be in my mind, I can receive no profit from the preacher. Neither in this case can I form a fight judgement of anything a person says or does. And yet it is possible this prejudice may be innocent, as springing from the unavoidable weakness of human understanding. I doubt not Mr. Murlin will be of use to many. He has much sense and much grace, together with uncommon activity and patience; and wherever he goes the work of God prospers in his hand.

To Miss March Date: REIGATE, November 30, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- You are in the safer extreme. When I formerly removed from one college to another, I fixed my resolution not to be hastily acquainted with any one; indeed, not to return any visit unless I had a reasonable hope of receiving or doing good therein. This my new neighbors generally imputed to pride; and I was willing to suffer the imputation. I 'sum up the experience' of persons, too, in order to form their general character. But in doing this we take a different way of making our estimate. It may be you chiefly regard (as my brother does) the length of their experience. Now, this I make little account of; I measure the depth and breadth of it. Does it sink deep in humble, gentle love Does it extend wide in all inward and outward holiness If so, I do not care whether they are of five or five-and-thirty years’ standing. Nay, when I look at Miss Betsy Briggs or Miss Philly Briggs, I am ready to hide my face: I am ashamed of having set out before they were born. Undoubtedly Miss Johnson is deep in grace, and lives like an angel here below. Yet some things in her character I do not admire; I impute them to human frailty. Many years ago I might have said, but I do not now, Give me a woman made of stone, A widow of Pygmalion. And just such a Christian one of the Fathers, Clemens Alexandrinus describes; but I do not admire that description now as I did formerly. I now see a Stoic and a Christian are different characters; and at some times I have been a good deal disgusted at Miss Johnson's apathy. When God restores our friends to us, we ought to rejoice; it is a defect if we do not. In that and several other instances I take knowledge of Sarah Ryan's littleness of understanding: and this, as well as our temper, we ought to improve to the utmost of our power; which can no otherwise be done than by reading authors of various kinds as well as by thinking and conversation. If we read nothing but the Bible, we should hear nothing but the Bible; and then what becomes of preaching

To Christopher Hopper Date: LONDON, December 3, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--The case of Liverpool house has puzzled us all. But I know you have a little common sense. Therefore I give you a carte blanche. Settle it how you please, and I will subscribe to it. I know no married preacher that [was] sent from Liverpool into the North of Ireland. I suppose Brother Sweeny is in the South; but on that express condition that neither his wife nor children shall be any expense to us at all. But still there will be growing families, unless we forbid to marry. Five-and-twenty years ago ten pounds a year was more than twelve now. We are really a company of poor gentlemen. But we have food and raiment and content.--I am, with love to Sister Hopper, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Miss March Date: LONDON, December 27, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- A few minutes I spent with Miss M---- when she was in town two or three years ago. She seemed to be of a soft, flexible temper, and a good deal awakened. From her letters I should judge that she had still many convictions and strong desires to be a real Christian. At the same time it is plain she is surrounded with hindrances and is sometimes persuaded to act contrary to her conscience. It is extremely difficult to advise a person in such circumstances what to do. Methinks the first thing I would advise her to, at all events, is, 'Do nothing against your conscience. 2. At a proper opportunity, after praying for courage, tell your lady you scruple such and such things. And I doubt not but she will take effectual care that no one shall press you on those heads.' Leaving her place is the last step to be taken if she finds she cannot save her soul therein. You know it is very natural for me to estimate wisdom and goodness by years, and to suppose the longest experience must be the best. But, although there is much advantage in long experience and we may trust an old soldier more than a novice, yet God is tied down to no rules; He frequently works a great work in a little time. He makes young men and women wiser than the aged; and gives to many in a very shorn time a closer and deeper communion with Himself than others attain in a long course of years. Betsy and Philly Briggs are witnesses. They have borne huge contradiction; and Philly has stood such shocks as might have overset some of the most established souls we have in London. There is a great calmness and meekness in Betty Johnson; but I want more softness and tenderness; I want more of human mingled with the divine. Nay, sometimes I want it in Miss March too. But I do not call that warmth anger--at least, not sinful anger; perhaps it would be culpable to be without it. I desire no apathy in religion; a Christian is very far from a Stoic.

To Mary Bishop Date: LONDON, February 11, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--To be enabled to relieve those that are in want is one excellent fruit of this self-denial. But you must not imagine this will be the only one. No: you have a message from God to some of those to whom no one dare speak the plain truth; and He will confirm the word of His messenger, especially to those that are in weakness or pain or under any kind of affliction. At such a time greatness stands aloof, and they are as accessible as common persons. In religion as well as in all things else it is 'use that brings perfectness.' I have long labored under the same infirmity with you; and I find but one way to conquer. Take up your cross; when the occasion offers, break through: speak, though it is pain and grief unto you. And it will be easier and easier, till you resemble an eminent surgeon, who once told my brother, ' Mr. Wesley, you know I would not hurt a fly, I would not give pain to any living thing. But if it was necessary I could scrape all the flesh off of a man's bones and never turn my head aside.' A clear conviction of the superior advantages of a single life certainly implies a call from God to abide therein, supposing a person has received that gift from God. But we know all cannot receive this saying; and I think none ought to make any vows concerning it, because, although we know what we are and what we can do nova, yet we do not know what we shall be. The spiritual advantages of that state are set down in the little tract on that subject, together with the means which are proper to be used by those who desire to retain those advantages. If at any time Providence should seem to call any person to relinquish these advantages, I would earnestly advise her not to lean to her own understanding (less in this case than any other), but to consult one or more spiritual friends, and resolutely stand to their award. There is much good in Miss Bosanquet; and you may do her good, for she loves and will bear plain dealing.--I am, my dear Miss Bishop, Yours affectionately.

To Ann Bolton Date: WORCESTER, March 15, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--If I could have seen you, though it had been only for an hour, it would have given me a very sensible satisfaction. I cannot easily express that union of spirit which I feel whenever I think of you. There is I know not what in your whole spirit and behavior which has always given me unspeakable pleasure; and when I look upon you (you know to whom the glory is due!), I am often ready to cry out, 'Thou perfect pattern of true womanhood!' But I know good is the will of the Lord; therefore I am content. If it is best, I shall see my dear friend again before I take my long journey; and if I do not see you till we meet in a better world, Surely our disembodied souls shall join, Surely my friendly shade shall mix with thine. To die is not to be lost; but our union will be more complete in the world of spirits than it can be while we dwell in tenements of clay. Certainly till persons experience something of the second awakening, till they are feelingly convinced of inbred sin so as earnestly to groan for deliverance from it, we need not speak to them of present sanctification. We should first labor to work that conviction in them. When they feel it and hunger and thirst after full salvation, then is the time to show them it is nigh at hand, it may be received just now by simple faith. I can now hardly expect (if I should live to return to England) to see you before next autumn. Let me, however, have the pleasure of hearing from you; and give a place in your memory and your prayers to, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother. Direct to me at Dublin.

To Richard Morgan Date: WATERFORD, April 28, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR,--I am now going to give you one of the greatest yet most thankless instances of friendship. Prudence (so called) would restrain me from it. But love is stronger than prudence. Great was the concern which I felt when I conversed with Miss Morgan, a child so spoiled to all intents and purposes I have not seen in the course of fifty years either in Europe or America. I know not what she is fit for. Does she regard the reproof of either father or mother Have not you humored her out of all her sense, all her good nature, and even good breeding What behavior was that which I saw with my own eyes What words which I heard with my own ears No weakness, no pain could excuse these. Pain should soften, not roughen our temper. And what a wife must a woman of such a temper make! what a torment must she be to any man of feeling! Happy would it be both [for] her and you if God would speedily take her to Himself! I could not but be concerned for you likewise. You have often desires to be a Christian: an inward Christian, a Bible Christian, a man happy in God. What hinders Scraping up more money Cui bono Have you not already more than does you good ' What, would you have me be idle ' No. Am I idle But I labor for eternity, for treasure in heaven, for satisfying riches. Go thou and do likewise! If you receive this in love, you may profit thereby. If you show it to your wife and daughter, you will not hurt me, but you will thereby renounce all future intercourse with Your truly affectionate servant.

To Mary Bosanquet Date: CLONES, May 29, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I was particularly glad to hear from you at this time, as I wanted to know how you was going on and whether you was the person concerning whom one of our preachers warily asked my advice. Whether you should part with your house and things pertaining to it is a very important question. The answering of this depends upon many circumstances which I am not yet acquainted with. But necessity has no law. It must be done, if your income will not otherwise answer the expenses. The last day of June I hope to be in Dublin, and the end of July in England. If I have a ready passage, probably I may have an opportunity of hiding myself a day or two with you '; but I do not desire any of the preachers to come to me till I send for them. If they do, I shall run away. I will not be in a crowd. Probably you know whether Mr. Saunderson is at Knares-borough. If he is, pray take up a cross for me. Write to him in my name, and tell him I desire him without delay or excuse to return to Bristol; otherwise he will disoblige me for ever.--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Miss March Date: CHARLEMONT, June 9, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- Very possibly, if I should live seven years longer, we should be acquainted with each other. I verily think your reserve wears off, though only by an hair's breadth at a time. Quicken your pace. What you do, do quickly. 'Scarce anything important enough to write upon'! Why, could you not say something about yourself And is there anything relating to your welfare which is not important to me Am not I concerned in everything which concerns you which either lessens or increases your happiness I want you to be as happy and (in order thereto) as holy as an angel, that you may do the will of God on earth as angels do in heaven. I am less careful about your increase in knowledge any farther than it tends to love. There is a danger of your laying more stress on this than sound reason requires. Otherwise you would reap much profit from sermons, which do not improve your knowledge--which do not apply to the understanding so directly as to the heart. I feel more want of heat than light. I value light; but it is nothing compared to love. Aim at this, my dear friend, in all public exercises, and then you will seldom be disappointed. Then you will not stop on the threshold of perfection (I trust you do not now), but will press on to the mark, to the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus, till you experimentally know all that love of God which passeth all (speculative) knowledge. The lengthening of your life and the restoring your health are invaluable blessings. But do you ask how you shall improve them to the glory of the Giver And are you willing to know Then I will tell you how. Go and see the poor and sick in their own poor little hovels. Take up your cross, woman! Remember the faith! Jesus went before you, and will go with you. Put off the gentlewoman; you bear an higher character. You are an heir of God and joint-heir with Christ ! Are you not going to meet Him in the air with ten thousand of His saints O be ready!

But waiving this, waiving all considerations of right and wrong, I ask, Is it common sense to use force toward the Americans A letter now before me says, 'Four hundred of the Regulars and forty of the Militia were killed in the last skirmish.' What a disproportion! And this is the first essay of raw men against regular troops! You see, my Lord, whatever has been affirmed, these men will not be frightened. And it seems they will not be conquered so easily as was at first imagined. They will probably dispute every inch of ground, and, if they die, die sword in hand. Indeed, some of our valiant officers say, 'Two thousand men will clear America of these rebels.' No, nor twenty thousand, nor perhaps treble that number, be they rebels or not. They are as strong men as you; they are as valiant as you, if not abundantly more valiant. For they are one and all enthusiasts --enthusiasts for liberty. They are calm, deliberate enthusiasts. And we know how this principle Breathes into softest souls stem love of war, And thirst of vengeance, and contempt of death. We know men animated with this will leap into a fire or rush upon a cannon's mouth. 'But they have no experience of war.' And how much more have our troops How few of them ever saw a battle! 'But they have no discipline.' That is an entire mistake. Already they have near as much as our army. And they will learn more of it every day. So that in a short time they will understand it as well as their assailants.

To his Brother Charles Date: NEWBURY, October 19, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--Last night I received a curious anecdote from Mr. Merchant, the Independent minister here. He told me, 'Mr. Evans of Bristol (the elder) informed me that he dined with you (J. W.) at a merchant's house in Bristol; that he asked you how you was affected when you read the answer to your late tract: and you answered, Not at all; for you had never read it, and never would: to which he replied, That was not fair.' Where lies the mistake The answer to my late tract is dated October 2. But I left Bristol October 1. Consequently no such conversation could exist. I fancy I have caught hold of the thread, and can unravel the whole. Last year a gentleman I did not know (who I suppose was Mr. Evans) dined with me at Mr. Wraxall’s; and probably he might speak to me (though I do not remember it) of some tract which I had then published. If so, there is only an harmless mistake of Mr. Merchant's, who misunderstood what Mr. Evans said. But this makes it still more probable that his son is the author of the letter to me. 'Tis pity! Some of our friends at Bristol should tell him that he has quite lost himself; that he has forgotten all decency and good manners, and writes like a pert, self-conceited young man. I think a man of sense that could command his temper would make him a little ashamed. Adieu!

To his Brother Charles Date: LONDON, October 28, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--I am just returned from Bedford. I have not seen the King these dozen years. I don't know what you mean by Dr. Smyth's book. It was best to take no notice of the angry ones. At Ramsbury Park, about a mile to the left of the high road, lives James Nind, local preacher, and general steward for the circuit, on a farm of five hundred pounds a year. His wife, Sally Nind, is one of the most amiable women I know. They mightily desire that you would spend a few nights with them. I am just putting into the press 'a new edition of the Address, corrected'; in which my change is accounted for, and two of the questions fully answered To the third, ' Why did not the Parliament tax them before' Mr. Madan answers, ' Because they were wiser; they knew the mischief that would ensue.' Dr. Johnson is in France. I have not heard lately from Shoreham. If the worst comes, you must make shift at the Foundery for a week or two. I can put up another bed in that which was Jenny's room. I do not think you are wise in destroying those papers. Some of them might have been useful to many. When I was in Bristol, I ordered that Hugh Saunderson should preach on Thursday night. None but you should take his place. Joseph Pilmoor may preach on Friday or Monday. Some much like, others much dislike, H. Saunderson; but his audience generally is not small. However, I will refer him to you; but I wish you would fix Thursday. Mr. Fletcher would not be safe without you or me. I should like a conference with Mr. Madan. I have a second friendly letter from him to-day. Peace be with you and yours! Adieu! Pray give my love to T. Lewis, and tell him I thank him for his letter. If the persons now taken up are hanged, it may be the saving of the nation.

To Mary Bosanquet Date: WESTMINSTER, November 15, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I cannot immediately give an answer to your question, because we have not yet received an answer from the Committee for letting the City lands. If they grant our petition and allow us a piece of ground to build on (as it is most probable they will), there will be no time for any one to come to London in hope of procuring money for other buildings. Our friends will certainly give all that they can spare toward erecting a new Foundery, and all will be little enough. One great difference between the outward and inward work of God is, inward holiness is mostly instantaneous, given in a large degree at the moment when we are justified, or when we are sanctified or saved from inbred sin; but outward holiness is mostly gradual--wrought by little and little while we deny ourselves and take up our cross and work together with Him. I think you would do well to have a thorough consultation with two or three of our friends that understand the world. Certainly these might be found in or near Leeds. And whatever was then judged best should be speedily and rigorously put in execution.--I am, my dear sister, Your ever affectionate brother.

took no notice. A second passed near: We made signals and called; but they would not stay for us. Athird put out their boat, took us up, and set us safe on shore." 6 REV.J WESLEY'S [Jan. 1774. Fri. 17.-Meeting with a celebrated book, avolume of Cap- tain Cook's Voyages, I sat down to read it with huge expectation. But how was I disappointed ! I observed, 1. Things absolutely incredible : " A nation without any curiosity ;" and, what is stranger still, (I fear related with no good design,) "without any sense ofshame ! Menandwomen coupling together in the face ofthesun, and in the sightof scores of people ! Men whose skin, cheeks, and lips are white as milk." Hume or Voltaire might believe this ; but I cannot. I observed, 2. Things absolutely impossible. To instance in one, for aspecimen. Anative of Otaheite is said to understand the language of an island eleven hundred degrees distant from it in latitude; besides I know not how many hundreds in longitude ! So that I cannot but rank this narrativewith that of Robinson Crusoe ; and accountTupia to be, in several respects, akin to his man Friday. Saturday, 25, and on the following days, we had many happy opportunities of celebrating the solemn Feast-days, according to the design of their institution. We concluded the year with a Fast-day, closed with a solemn watch-night. Tues. JANUARY 4, 1774.-Three or four years ago, a stum- bling horse threw me forward on the pommel of the saddle. I felt a good deal ofpain ; but it soon went off, and I thought of it no more. Some months after I observed, testiculum alterum altero duplo majorem esse. I consulted a Physician : He told me it was acommon case, and did not imply any disease at all. In May twelvemonth it was grown near as large as a hen's egg. Being then at Edinburgh, Dr. Hamilton insisted on my having the advice of Drs. Gregory and Munro. They immediately saw it was a Hydrocele, and advised me, as soon as I came to London, to aim at a radical cure, which they judged might be effected in about sixteen days: When I came to London, I consulted Mr. Wathen. He advised me, 1. Not to think of a radical cure, which could not be hoped for, without my lying in

ber, whom I besought in strong terms not to receive " the grace ofGod invain." On Monday and Tuesday I preached at Otley and Pateley- Bridge. Wednesday, 4. I went on to Ambleside ; and on Thursday to Whitehaven. Monday, 9. I set out for Scotland. At eight I preached in the Castle-yard at Cockermouth, to abundance ofcareless people, on , " Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." In the evening I preached at Carlisle. On Tuesday I went on to Selkirk, and on Wednes- day to Edinburgh ; which is distant from Carlisle ninety-five miles, and no more. Thursday, 12. I went in the stage-coach to Glasgow ; and on Friday and Saturday, preached on the old Green, to a people, the greatest part ofwhom hear much, know every thing, and feel nothing. Sun. 15. My spirit was moved within me at the sermons I heard both morning and afternoon. They contained much truth, but were no more likely to awaken one soul than an Italian Opera. In the evening a multitude of people assembled onthe Green, to whom I earnestly applied these words, " Though I have all knowledge, though I have all faith,-though I give all my goods to feed the poor," &c., " and have not love, I am nothing." Mon. 16. In the afternoon, as also at seven in themorning, I preached in the kirk at Port-Glasgow. My subjects were Death and Judgment, and I spoke as homeas I possibly could. The evening congregation at Greenock was exceeding large. I opened and enforced these awful words, " Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, that leadeth unto life." I know not that ever I spoke more strongly. And some fruit of it quickly appeared; for the House, twice as large as that at Glasgow, was throughly filled at five in the morning. In the evening, [May, 1774. Tuesday, 17, I preached on the Green at Glasgow once more, although the north windwas piercing cold. At five in the morn- ing I commended our friends to God. How is it that there is no increase in this society ? It is exceeding easy to answer. One Preacher stays here two or three months at a time, preaching on Sunday mornings, and three or four evenings in a week. Can a Methodist Preacher preserve

" You affirm, 2. That I declared,' (last year,) ' the Ameri- cans were an oppressed, injured people.' I do not remember that I did ; but very possibly I might. " You affirm, 3. That I then ' strongly recommended an argument for the exclusive right of the colonies to tax them- selves. ' I believe I did; but I am now of another mind. "You affirm, 4. You say in the Preface, I never saw that book.' I did say so. The plain case was, I had so entirely forgotten it, that evenwhen I saw it again, I recollected nothing of it, till I had read several pages. If I had, I might have observed that you borrowed more from Mr. P. than I did from Dec.1775.1 Dr. Johnson. Though I know not whether I should have observed it, as it does not affect the merits of the cause. "You affirm , 5. ' You say, But I really believe he was told 80; ' and add, ' Supposing what I asserted was false, it is not easy to conceive what reason you could have for believing I was told so.' My reason was, I believed you feared God, and therefore would not tell awilful untruth; so I made the best excuse for you which I thought the nature of the thing would admit of. Had you not some reasons to believe this of me ; and therefore to say, (at least,) ' I hope he forgot it ? ' " " But at this time I was perfectly unknown to you.' No, at this time I knew you wrote that tract ; but had I not, char- itywouldhave induced me to hope this, even ofan entire stranger. "You now have my ' feeble reply; and if you please to advance any new argument, (personal reflections I let go,) you may perhaps receive a farther reply from Your humble servant, " London, December 9 . " I did not see your letter till this morning." Mon. 11. I began a little journey into Kent. In the even- ing I preached at Chatham, the next evening at Canterbury. I know not that ever I saw such a congregation there before. Tuesday, 12. I preached at Dover. As many as could, squeezed into the House, and the rest went quietly away.

his heart. Wednesday, 28. I looked over a volume of Lord Lyttelton's Works. He is really a fine writer, both in verse and prose, though he believed the Bible ; yea, and fearedGod! Inmy scraps of time I likewise read over Miss Talbot's Essays ; equal to any thing of the kind I ever saw. She was a woman of admirable sense and piety, and a far better poet than the celebrated Mrs. Rowe. But here too Heaven its choicest gold by torture tried ! After suffering much, she died of a cancer in her breast. Fri. MARCH 1.-As we cannot depend on having the Foun- dery long, we met to consult about building a new chapel. Our petition to the City for a piece of ground lies before their Com- mittee; but when we shall get any farther, I know not : So I determined to begin my circuit as usual; but promised to retur whenever I should receive notice that our petition was granted On Sunday evening I set out, and on Tuesday reached March, 1776. ] Bristol. In theway I read over Mr. Boëhm's Sermons, Chap- lain to Prince George of Denmark, husband to Queen Anne. Hewas a person ofvery strong sense, and, in general, sound in his judgment. I remember hearing avery remarkable circum- stance concerning him, from Mr. Fraser, then Chaplain to St. George'sHospital. " One day," said he," I asked Mr. Boëhm, withwhom I was intimately acquainted, 'Sir, when you are sur- rounded by various persons, listening to one, and dictating to another, does not that vast hurry of business hinder your com- munion with God ?" He replied, ' I bless God, I have just then as full communionwith him, as if I was kneeling alone at the altar.'" Wed. 6.-I went down to Taunton, and at three in the after- noon opened the new preaching-house. The people showed great eagerness to hear. Will they at length know the day of their visitation ? Thursday, 7. I returned to Bristol ; which I left onMonday, 11 ; and having visited Stroud, Painswick, and Tewkesbury, on Wednesday, 20, came to Worcester. Thurs- day, 21. I was much refreshed among this loving people ; espe- cially by the select society, the far greater part of whom could still witness that God had saved them from inward as well as outward sin.

Are the societies in general more dead, or more alive to God, than they were some years ago ? " The almost universal answer [Aug. 1777. was, " Ifwe must know them by their fruits, there is no decay in the work of God, among the people in general. The societies are not dead to God: They are as much alive as they have been for many years. And we look onthis report as a mere device of Satan, to make our hands hang down." "But how can this question be decided ?" You, and you, can judge no farther thanyou see. You cannotjudge of one part by another ; of the people of London, suppose,by those of Bristol. And none but myself has an opportunity of seeing them throughout the three kingdoms. But to come to a short issue. Inmost places, the Methodists are still a poor, despised people, labouring under reproach, and many inconveniences ; therefore, wherever the power of Godis not, they decrease. By this, then, you may form a surejudgment. Do the Methodists in general decrease in number ? Then they decrease in grace ; they are a fallen, or, at least, a falling people. But theydonot decrease in number ; they con- tinually increase : Therefore, they are not a fallen people. The Conference concluded on Friday, as it began, in much love. But there was one jarring string : John Hilton told us, he must withdraw from our Connexion, because he saw the Methodists were a fallen people. Some would have reasoned with him, but it was lost labour ; so we let him go in peace. Mon. 11.-I returned to London. Thursday, 14. I drew up proposals for the " Arminian Magazine." Friday, 15. The Committee for the buildingmet, which is now readyfor the roof. Hitherto God has helped us ! Sun. 17.-In the calm, fair evening, I took the opportunity to preach in Moorfields. The congregation was at least as large as I ever saw there. As yet I do not see any sign ofthe decay of the work ofGod in England. Mon. 18. I went down to Bristol again, and read in the way Dr. M'Bride's " Practice of Physic." Undoubtedly it is an ingenious book ; yet it did not answer my expectation. Several things I could contradictfrom my own experience ; e. g., he says,

They are said to take up four hundred acres, and are admirably well laid out. They far exceed the celebrated gardens at Stow ; and that in several respects :-1. In situation ; lying onamuch higher hill, and having a finer prospect from the house. 2. In having a natural river, clear as crystal, running beneath and through them. 3. In the buildings therein ; which are fewer indeed, but far more elegant ; yea, and far better kept, being nicely clean, which is sadly wanting at Stow. And, lastly, In the rock-work ; to which nothing of the kind at Stow is to be compared. This night I lodged in the new house at London. How manymore nights have I to spend there ? Mon. 11.-I began my little tour into Northamptonshire. In the evening I preached at Stony-Stratford ; the next day at Honslip, and at Morton, a little mile from Buckingham. Wed- nesday, 13. Having so lately seen Stourhead and Cobham gardens, I was now desired to take a view of the much more celebrated gardens at Stow. The first thing I observed was the beautiful water which runs through the gardens, to the front of the house. The tufts of trees, placed on each side of this, are wonderfully pleasant ; and so are many of the walks and glades through the woods, which are disposed with a fine Oct. 1779.] 169 variety. The large pieces of water interspersed give a fresh beauty to the whole. Yet there are several things which must give disgust to any person ofcommon sense :-1. The buildings, called Temples, are most miserable, many of them both within andwithout. Sir John Vanbrugh's is an ugly, clumsy lump, hardly fit for a gentleman's stable. 2. The temples of Venus and Bacchus, though large, havenothing elegant in the struc- ture; and the paintings inthe former, representing a lewd story, are neither well designed nor executed. Those in the latter are quite faded, and most of the inscriptions vanished away. 3. The statues are full as coarse as the paintings ; particularly thoseof Apollo and the Muses, whom a person, not otherwise informed, might take to be nine cook-maids. 4. Most of the water in the ponds is dirty, and thick as puddle. 5. It is childish affectation to call things here by Greek or Latin names, as Styx, and the

Wed. 3-. Judging it impracticable to pass the mountains in a carriage, I sent my chaise round, and took horse. At twelve I preached at Swaledale, to a loving people, increasing both in grace and number. Thence we crossed over another range of dreary mountains, and in the evening reached Barnard-Castle. Not being yet inured to riding, I now felt something like weari- ness. But I forgot it in the lively congregation, and in the morning it was gone. Thur. 4.-About eight I preached to a serious congregation at Cuthbedson ; and about one at Newbiggin, in Teesdale. We doubtedhow we should get over the next mountain, the famous Pikelow, after so long and heavy rains ; but I scarce ever remem- 180 [May, 1780. ber us getting over it so well. We found the people in Wear- dale, as usual, some of the liveliest in the kingdom ; knowing nothing, and desiring to know nothing, save Jesus Christ and him crucified. Fri. 5.-Noticehaving been given, without my knowledge, of my preaching at Ninthead, all the lead-miners that could, got together ; and I declared to them, " All things are ready." After riding over another enormous mountain, I preached at Gam- blesby (as I did about thirty years ago) to a large congregation of rich and poor. The chief man of the town was formerly a Local Preacher, but now keeps his carriage. Has he increased in holiness as well as in wealth ? If not, he has made a poor exchange. In the evening, a large upper room, designed for an assembly, was procured for me at Penrith ; but several of the poor people were struck with apanic, for fear the room should fall. Finding there was no remedy, I went down into the court below, and preached in great peace to a multitude of well-behaved people. The rain was suspended while I preached, but afterwards returned, and continued most of the night. Saturday, 6. Iwent on to Whitehaven ; and, in the evening, exhorted all who knew in whom they had believed, to " walk worthy of the Lord in allwell pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increas- ing in the knowledge of God." Sun. 8.-I preached at eight, at two, and at five ; but could not preach abroad because of the rain. We were in hopes of

town, who has laid out walks hanging over the sea, and winding among the rocks. One of them leads to the Castle, wherein that poor injured woman, Mary Queen of Scots, was confined. But time has well nigh devoured it : Only a few ruinous walls are now standing. Thur. 25. We went on to Berwick. Friday, 26. In return- ing to Alnwick we spent an hour at H., an ancient monastery. Part of it the Duke of Northumberland has repaired, furnished it in a plainmanner, and surrounded it with a little garden. An old inscription bears date 1404,when partof it was built by the fourth Earl of Northumberland. How many generations have had their day since that time, andthen passed away like a dream ! Wehad ahappy season at Alnwick with a large and deeply attentive congregation. Sat. 27. At noon I preached in the Town-Hall at Morpeth ; and God applied his word to many hearts. In the afternoon I preached to the loving colliers at Placey, and then went on to Newcastle. Sun. 28.-Between eight and nine in the morning I preached at Gateshead-Fell, on Fellowship withGod; a subject which not a few of them understand by heart-felt experience. The con- gregation at Sheephill about noon was far too large for any House to contain. Such was the power of God that I almost June, 1780.1 183 wondered any couldhelp believing. At five I preached at the Garth-Heads, to a still more numerous congregation ; but there were few among them who remembered my first preaching near that place in the Keelman's Hospital. For what reason the wise managers of that place forbade my preaching there any more, I am yet still to learn. Wed. 31.-Taking my leave of this affectionate people, I went to Mr. Parker's, at Shincliff, near Durham. The congre- gation being far too large to get into the House, I stood near his door. It seemed as if the whole village were ready to receive the truth in the love thereof. Perhaps their earnestness may provoke the people ofDurham to jealousy. In the afternoon we took a view of the Castle at Durham, the residence of the Bishop. The situation is wonderfully fine, surrounded by the river, and commanding all the country ; and many of the apartments are large and stately ; but the furniture

Thur. 28. I preached at eleven in the main street at Selby, to alarge and quiet congregation ; and in the evening at Thorne. This day I entered my seventy-ninth year ; and, by the grace of God, I feel no more of the infirmities of old age, than I did at twenty-nine. Friday, 29. I preached at Crowle and at Epworth. Ihave now preached thrice aday for seven days following ; but it is just the same as if it had been but once. Sat. 30-. I went over to Owstone, and found the whole town was moved. One of the chief men of the town had been just buried, and his wife a few days before. In a course of nature they might have lived many years, being only middle-aged. He had known the love of God, but had choked the good seed by hastening to be rich. But Providence disappointed all his schemes ; and it was thought he died of a broken heart. I took that opportunity of enforcing, " Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might, for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, norwisdom, inthe grave, whither thou goest." Sun. JULY 1.-I preached, as usual, at Misterton, at Over- thorpe, and at Epworth. Monday, 2. I preached at Scotter about eight ; at Brigg, at noon ; and in the evening, in the old church-yard, at Grimsby, to almost all the people of the town, on, " Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord." The late proof of it is in the glorious death of Robert Wilkinson ; and the behaviour of his widow, So firm, yet soft, so strong, yet so resign'd, I believe, will hardly be forgotten by any that were witnesses ofit. Tues. 3.-I preached at Claythorp, three miles from Grimsby. Here, likewise, there has been an outpouring of the Spirit. I was reminded here of what I saw at Cardiff almost forty years ago. I could not go into any of the little houses, but presently itwas filled with people ; and I was constrained to pray with them in every house, or they would not be satisfied. Several of these are clearly renewed in love, and give a plain, scriptural account of their experience ; and there is scarce a house in the [July, 1781 .

quence of which, they all fell in together. The young one fell under the bucket, and stirred no more; the others held for awhile by the side of the well, and then sunk into the water, where it was supposed they lay half an hour. One coming to tell me, I advised,immediately to rub them with salt, and to breathe strongly into their mouths. They did so, but the young one was past help ; the others in two or three hours, were as well as ever. Wed. 28. I entered into the eighty-third year of my age. I am a wonder to myself. It is now twelve years since I have felt any such sensation as weariness. I am never tired, (such is the goodness of God! ) either with writing, preaching, or travelling. One natural cause undoubtedly is, my continual exercise and change of air. How the latter contributes to health Iknow not ; but certainly it does. This morning, Abigail Pilsworth, aged fourteen, was born into the world of spirits. I talked with her the evening before, and found her ready for the Bridegroom. A few hours after, she quietly fell asleep. Whenwe went into the room where her remains lay, we were surprised. Amore beautiful corpse I never saw : We all sung, Ah, lovely appearance of death ! What sight upon earth is so fair ? Not all the gay pageants that breathe Canwith a deadbodycompare ! All the company were in tears ; and in all, except her mother, who sorrowed, (but not as one without hope,) theywere tears of joy. " O Death, where is thy sting ? " LONDON, Jan. 20, 1789. i 1, Thur. JUNE 29, 1786.-I took a cheerful leave ofmy affec- tionate friends at Epworth, leaving them much more alive than I found them. About one I preached at Thorne, now one of the liveliest places in the Circuit, to a numerous congregation ; and in the evening at Doncaster. I know not that ever I saw this preaching-house filled before ; and many of them seemed to feel, as well as hear. It may be, some will bring forth fruit withpatience. Fri. 30. I turned aside to Barnsley, formerly famous for all manner of wickedness. They were then ready to tear any Methodist Preacher in pieces. Now not a dog wagged his

to more than their preaching-house could contain ; and all of them appeared as serious and attentive as the congregation at Yarmouth. In the evening there seemed to be a considerable shaking even among the dry bones at Loddon ; and such acom- pany attended at Mr. Crisp's in the morning, as I never saw there before. Sat. 2.-I returned to Harwich, andwas much pleased in the evening with the largeness and seriousness of the congregation. Sunday, 3. I administered the Lord's Supper at eight, and afterwards attended our parish church. Besides the little com- panythat went with me, and the Clerk and Minister, I think we had fivemenand six women : And this is a Christian country ! Our House could in nowise contain the congregation, either in the afternoon or in the evening ; and at both times, greatwas : [Dec. 1786. the power of God in the midst of them. I have not seen, for many years, such a prospect of doing good in this city. Mon. 4. I was strongly importuned byour friends at Long- Stratton, to give them a sermon there. I heard of a young : woman in that countrywhohad uncommon fits, and of one that had lately preached ; but I did not know that itwas oneand the i same person. I found her in the very house to which I went, and went and talked with her at large. I was surprised. Sarah : Mallett, two or three and twenty years old, is of the same size that Jane Cooperwas; and is, I think, full as much devoted to God, and of as strong an understanding. But she is not likely to live; having aspecies of consumptionwhich I believe is never cured. Ofthe following relation,which she gave me, there are numberless witnesses :- ! Some years since itwas strongly impressed upon her, that she ought to call sinners to repentance. This impression she vehemently resisted, believing herselfquite unqualified, both by her sin, and her ignorance, till it was suggested," Ifyou do it not willingly, you shall do it whether you will or no." She fell into a fit ; and while utterly senseless, thought she was in the preaching-house in Lowestoft, where she prayed and preached for near an hour, to a numerous congregation. She then opened her eyes, and recovered her senses. In ayear or two she had

Sun. 31. From those words of Isaiah to Hezekiah, “ Set thy house in order," I strongly exhorted all who had not done it already, to settle their temporal affairs without delay. It is a strange madness which still possesses many, that are in other respects men of understanding, who put this off from day to day, till death comes in an hour when they looked not for it. Mon. JANUARY 1, 1787.-We began the service at four in the morning, to an unusually large congregation. We had another comfortable opportunity at the new chapel at the usual hour, and a third in the evening at West-Street. Tuesday, 2. Iwent over to Deptford; but it seemed, I was got into a den of lions. Most of the leading men of the society were mad for separating from the Church. I endeavoured to reason withthem, but in vain ; they had neither sense nor even good manners left. At length, after meeting the whole society, I told them, " If you are resolved, you may have your service in church-hours ; ” but, remember, from that time you will see my face no more. This struck deep; and from that hour I have heard no more of separating from the Church. Friday, 5, and in the vacant hours of the following days, I read Dr. Hunter's Lectures. They are very lively and ingenious. The language is good, and the thoughts generally just. 358 REV. J. WESLEY'S [Feb. 1787. But they do not at all suit my taste. I do not admire that florid way ofwriting. Good sense does not need to be so studiously adorned. I love St. John's style, as well as matter. Sun. 7-. At the desire ofmany of our friends, we began that : solemn work of renewing our covenant with God at three in the afternoon, two hours earlier than usual. Monday, 8, and the four following days, I went a begging for the poor. I hoped to be able to provide food and raiment for those of the society whowere in pressingwant,yet hadnoweekly allowance : These were about two hundred: But I was much disappointed. Six or seven, indeed, of our brethren, gave ten pounds apiece. If forty or fifty had done this, I could have carried my design into execution. However, much good was done with two hundred pounds, and many sorrowful hearts madeglad.

Sun. 2. Knowing the church would not contain half of our congregation added to its own, we began at our Room, at half an hour past nine. After preaching, with the assistance of three other Clergymen, I administered the sacrament to fifteen or sixteen hundred persons ; I hope, all desirous to be inward Christians. Tuesday, 4. Having before preached to the people Aug. 1789.1 467 at large, I now spoke directly to the Preachers, on, " If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God ; " and, I am persuaded, God applied his word to many of their hearts. Wed. 5.-About noon we left Leeds; and that evening went to Newark, about seventy miles. Thursday, 6. We set out early, and between four and five reached Hinxworth. I was now pretty well inclined to rest; but a congregation soon get- ting together, I would not disappoint them, but preached on, " We love him becausehe first loved us;" and after preaching, and travelling fourscore miles, I was no more tired than when I set out in the morning. Fri. 7. We reached London between one and two; and found great reason to praisethe Gracious Power, which had pre- served us by sea andby land, in allknown and unknown dan- gers, unto the present hour. Sat. 8-. I settled allmytemporal business, and, in particular, chose a new person to prepare the Arminian Magazine ; being obliged, however unwillingly, to dropMr. O , for only these two reasons : 1. The errata are unsufferable ; Ihave borne them for these twelve years, but can bearthem no longer. 2. Several pieces are inserted without my knowledge, both in prose and verse. I must try whether these things cannot be amended for the short residue of my life. Sun. 9. The new chapel was sufficiently crowded, both in the morning and at four in the afternoon. At seven we set out, and about noon, on Monday, 10, reached Bristol. Finding all things here in a flourishing state, I set out for the west early on Tuesday morning, and had an exceeding pleasantjourney to Taunton ; where we had afull and serious congregation in the evening. Wednesday, 12. I had no thought of preaching at Collumpton, though we were to pass through it ; but I yielded to importunity, and preached at one to a numerous audience.

Sunday, 27. I preached in St. Luke's, our parish church, in the afternoon, to a very numerous congregation, on, "The Spirit and the Bride say, Come." So are the tables turned, that I havenow more invitations to preach in churches than I can accept of. Mon. 28.-I retired to Peckham ; and at leisure hours read part ofa very pretty trifle,-the Life of Mrs. Bellamy. Surely never did any, since John Dryden, study more Tomake vice pleasing, and damnation shine, than this lively and elegant writer. She has a fine imagination ; a strong understanding ; an easy style, improved by much read- ing; a fine, benevolent temper ; and every qualification that could consist with a total ignorance ofGod. But God was not in all her thoughts. Abundance of anecdotes she inserts , which may be true or false. One of them, concerning Mr. Garrick, is curious. She says, " When he was taking ship for England, a (Jan. 1790. lady presented him with a parcel, which she desired him not to open till he was at sea. When he did, he found Wesley's Hymns, which he immediately threw overboard." I cannot believe it. I think Mr. G. had more sense. He knew my brother well ; and he knew him to be not only far superior in learning, but in poetry, to Mr. Thomson, and all his theatrical writers put together: None of them can equal him, either in strong, nervous sense, or purity and elegance oflanguage. The musical compositions of his sons are not more excellent than the poetical ones of their father. In the evening I preached to a crowded congregation, some of whom seemed a good deal affected. Thursday, 31. I preached at the new chapel ; but, to avoid the cramp, wentto bed at ten o'clock. I was well served. I know not that I ever before felt so much ofit in one night. Fri. JANUARY 1, 1790.-I am now an old man, decayed from head to foot. My eyes are dim ; my right hand shakes much ; my mouth is hot and dry every morning ; I have a lingering fever almost every day; my motion is weak and slow. However, blessed be God, I do not slack my labour : I can preach and write still. Sat. 2-. I preached at Snowsfields, to the largest congrega-

three times adayby the same Preacher, to the same congrega- tion ; enough to weary out both the bodies and minds of the speaker, as well as his hearers. Surely God is returning to this society ! They are now in earnest to make their calling and election sure. Mon. 6. This evening the congregation was almost as large as it was the night before ; and the power of God was mightily present : And so it was on Tuesday and Wednesday evening at Bristol. Thursday, 9. I read over the experience of Joseph Humphrys ; the first Lay Preacher that assistedme inEngland, in the year 1738. From his own mouth I learn, that he was perfected in love, and so continued for at least a twelvemonth. Afterwards he turned Calvinist, andjoinedMr. Whitefield, and published an invective against my brother and me in the news- paper. In a while he renounced Mr. Whitefield, and was ordained a Presbyterian Minister. At lasthe received Episco- pal ordination. He then scoffed at inward religion ; and when reminded of hisown experience, replied, " That was one of the foolish things which I wrote in the time ofmy madness !" Fri. 10. I preached to a large congregation at Chew-Stoke, nine miles from Bristol on those words in the Second Lesson, " Come unto me,all ye that are weary and heavy laden;" and in the evening at Mrs. Griffith's house. Sun. 12.-I intended to preach abroad ; but the weather would not permit. Monday, 13, andthe three following days, I met the classes of the society, which contains nine hundred and forty-four members. Still I complain offalse musters. It was told in London that this society contained above a thousand members ; and yet it falls so far short of a thousand. There is altogether a fault in this matter. Thur. 16. I was desired to see amonster properly speaking. Hewas as large as the largest lion in the tower ; but covered with rough hair, ofabrown colour ; has the head ofa swine, and feet like a mole. It is plain to me, it was begotten between a bear and a wild boar. He lives on fruit andbread, chiefly the latter. The keeper handles him as he pleases, puttinghis hand in his mouth, and taking hold ofhis tongue ; but he has a horri- ble roar, between that ofa lion and ofabull.

To Miss J. C. March Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1776) Author: John Wesley --- ALNWICK, [May 30, 1776]. Sometimes I have been afraid lest you should sustain loss for want of some reproach or disgrace. Your being young and a woman of fortune, and not wanting in understanding, were circumstances which, according to the ordinary course of Providence, keep reproach at a distance. However, you shall not escape it if our blessed Lord sees it to be the best means of purifying your soul. You shall have it just in due measure and in due time; for He will withhold from you no manner of thing that is good. There is one with me here who seems as yet to be under a peculiar dispensation--to be wholly screened from the reproach of Christ. There is something in the natural temper, the understanding, the person, and the behavior of Lady Maxwell which has hitherto prevented reproach, although she is much devoted to God and in many things quite singular. But she is not careful about it; being wining, whenever He shall see it best', and in whatever measure He shall choose, to share the portion of her Lord. The knowledge of ourselves is true humility; and without this we cannot be freed from vanity, a desire of praise being inseparably connected with every degree of pride. Continual watchfulness is absolutely necessary to hinder this from stealing in upon us. But as long as we steadily watch and pray we shall not enter into temptation. It may and will assault us on every side; but it cannot prevail.

To Mrs. Woodhouse Date: LONDON, January 21, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, There is something exceedingly remarkable in the case of Mr. Dixon. To be snatched away just at the time that he was set above the world! But He with whom we have to do best understands what will be for our real advantage. Probably He saw that prosperity would hurt his soul, and so took him away from the evil to come. I should have great hope that sickness or bodily weakness would be of use to your neighbors. When we feel pain, or when death looks us in the face, what do riches avail? In such circumstances you are richer than them all. You know in whom you have believed. You know that, if all these things pass away, you have in heaven a better and a more enduring substance. You may profit much by Richard Condy. [Condy was stationed at Epworth.] He is a valuable man. I seldom converse with him but he does me good. I wish you would tell him I desire he would send me a full account of his experience. Still be ready to do and to suffer the whole will of God.--My dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Mr. Hopper, At the Preaching-house, Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- In Manchester. Hester Ann Roe LONDON, February 11, 1777. MY DEAR HETTY,--The papers of one [Charles Perronet, who died on Aug. 12, 1776. See Atmore's Memorial, pp. 327-35; and letter of April 26.] who lately went to God are fallen into my hands. I will transcribe a few particulars. His experience is uncommon; and you may simply tell me how far your experience does or does not agree with it. But beware of hurting yourself upon the occasion, beware of unprofitable reasonings. God may have wrought the same work in you, though not in the same manner.

To Joseph Benson Date: LEWISHAM, March 5, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH,--The death of John Annet was very remarkable. Such individuals ought to be had in remembrance. Publish the account of Sister Hutton's death just as you please, either at my expense or your own. [See letter of Oct. 22 to him.] There are two ways to ease the expense of the Philosophy either two or three may join for a set, for which, after all of them have read it, they may cast lots; or they may give sixpence or a shilling weekly to Matthew Errington. And nine-tenths of the book any sensible tradesman, yea woman, may understand. But John Reed! [See letter of Feb. 15.] Where is John Reed's account? It is high time I should have it.--I am, dear Joseph, Yours affectionately.

To Ann Bolton Date: NEAR LONDON, April 24, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--Your state of mind for some time has been that which the Papists very improperly term a state of Desertion; wherein they suppose God deserts or forsakes the soul only for His own will and pleasure ! But this is absolutely impossible: I deny that such a state ever existed under the sun. As I observed before, the trouble you feel is in the very root and ground of it, a natural effect of disordered liver, of the corruptible body pressing down the soul. But you must likewise take into the account preternatural influence. For you may be assured your grand adversary will not be forgetful to avail himself of the opportunity, sometimes by plausible suggestions, sometimes by horrid and grievous injections. But blessed is the soul that endureth temptation. The Lord shall deliver you out of his hand. Doth not He know the way wherein you go? And when you have been tried you shall come forth as gold! I feel much sympathy with you in your troubles, which endear you to me exceedingly. But though I grieve with you, [I joy] over you; for I can easily see ' the end of the Lord.' The fire your graces shall refine, Till, molded from above, You bear the character divine, The stamp of perfect love I I am glad you are to spend a few days with my dear friends at Publow. And when you are happy in each other, do not forget, my dear Nancy, Yours most affectionately.

To his Wife Date: GWENNAP, September 1, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR,--I sincerely wish a reunion with you if it could be upon good terms. Otherwise it would not continue; and then the last error would be worse than the first. But what are those terms on which it probably would continue? In order to know we must state the case; which I will do as briefly as I can, leaving out all unnecessary circumstances. [See letters of July 15, 1774, and Oct. 2, 1778.] Some years since, without my consent or knowledge, you left me and settled at Newcastle. I received you again without any terms--nay, without any acknowledgement that you had done wrong. Two years ago you left me again without my consent or knowledge. A few days since, I met you, and (to my great surprise) you seemed willing to return. I was willing to receive you upon these terms: (1) restore my papers; (2) promise to take no more. But upon reflection I see I was too hasty. For you have given copies of my papers, and these you cannot recall. Likewise you have spoken all manner of evil against me, particularly to my enemies and the enemies of the cause I live to support. Hereby many bad men have triumphed and been confirmed in their evil ways; and many good but weak men have been stumbled, and some have drawn back to perdition. A sword has been put into-the hands of the enemies of God, and the children of God have been armed against one another. Things standing thus, if I was to receive you just now without any acknowledgement or reparation of these wrongs, it would be esteemed by all reasonable men a confirmation of all you have said. But it may be asked, 'What reparation are you either able or willing to make? ' I know not if you are willing to make any. If you are, what reparation are you able to make? Very little indeed; for the water is sprit, and cannot be gathered up again.

To Joseph Benson Date: WITNEY, October 22, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH,--I do not wonder you do not conceive what Grotius meant by that odd sentence; for I doubt whether he conceived it himself. I can translate it, but I cannot understand it; it is well if any one can. 'Everything exists necessarily or of itself; not as it is considered in a general view, but as it actually exists. But individual things' (only) 'exist actually.' There is a good English translation of this book, published some years since by Dr. John Clarke, Dean of Sarum. [John Clarke (1682-1757) was Dean of Salisbury in 1728. For Samuel Clarke, see letter of Sept. 24, 1753.] He was (I think younger) brother to Dr. Samuel Clarke. I have no objection to your printing a thousand or two of the account of Mrs. Hutton's death. It may be of use for you to visit Manchester again when opportunity serves. Only do everything in full concurrence with the Assistant.--I am, dear Joseph, Yours affectionately.

To Mary Bishop Date: NEAR OXFORD, October 22, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR MISS BISHOP,--By long experience I am convinced that natural strength of understanding is no defense against the most absurd errors; more especially if we lean to it ever so little, if we are not deeply conscious of our own weakness. I am therefore jealous of you also: I am afraid lest you too 'fall where many mightier have been slain.' Indeed, some have not scrupled to say already, 'Oh, Miss Bishop will soon be enlightened as well as Miss Flower. [ See letters of Sept. 15 (to her) and Nov. 16.] She has such a regard for Mr. Hilton, that he will soon open her eyes.' As yet I cannot believe he will; yet I do not say there is no danger. Has he opened the cause? Has he spoke o wrote to you upon the favorite subject? Has he talked you about 'being still, ceasing from your own works, and from crying, Lo here and lo there'? If he has, what impression did that smooth and plausible conversation make upon your mind Was you almost persuaded it was right? or did you stand unmoved? If you was moved, if you too should leave 'the fallen Methodists,' and join 'the Friends, the only living people in the world '; still, I do not find myself inclined to bring am heavy indictment against you. I should not be angry; though I should grieve, for I cannot easily part with those I love. I am inclined to think your friend of Bath made a mistake with regard to the person. I did receive ' a letter which I knew-not what to make of.' But it was from Miss Flower, not Miss Bishop. I do not remember that ever I received a letter from you which I did not understand. I know few people who write or speak more intelligibly than you do; and I hope you will soon give a fresh proof of it to, my dear Miss Bishop, Yours affectionately

To Thomas Rutherford Date: LONDON, December 20, 1777. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1777) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY,--You gave me an agreeable account of the progress of the work of God in the island. I apprehend you will meet with no hindrance from men in power. They know the mind of the King. You cannot with a good conscience receive that froward man either as a leader or a member of the Society unless he acknowledges his fault. Otherwise he would do more hurt in the Society than out of it.--I am, dear Tommy, Yours affectionately. I fix no journeys till after Christmas.

To Mrs. Johnston, Annandde, Listeen. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - I do not remember the receiving any letter from you, either at Dublin or since I left it. Neither have I received any fresh complaint concerning you. [See letter of Feb. 14 to her.] What I formerly heard I gave you an account of, to which you gave me a distinct answer, and I was fully satisfied. I am relieved to think someone talked of making a fresh complaint. But it is very probable his heart failed, and so the child was strangled in the birth. Indeed, I do not wonder if people are not forward to complain of you to me. Because they know I am a prejudicial person: they know the tender regard I have you and yours, and consequently how hard it is for me: to blame you in anything. That God may give you many happy is the prayer of, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

As to Writing and Publishing, the deadly poison has for many years been spread through England, chiefly by means of those pestilent declamations the Gospel and the Spiritual Magazine. Whatever is designed for an antidote to this poison must be spread in the same manner. Thousands have been thereby poisoned already, and are now twice dead. To guard those who are not poisoned yet (not to get money), I fight them at their own weapons. I oppose magazine to magazine, though of a totally different kind. But it seems you know nothing at all of the matter. You do not appear to have even read the Proposals. This Magazine not only contains no railing, but (properly speaking) no controversy. It proves one point: 'God willeth all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.' It goes straight forward, taking notice of no opponent, but invariably pursuing the one point. And this is the only way to preserve Methodists and to make the Calvinists quiet. Meantime the Letters and the Lives, which will make a considerable part of every number, contain the marrow of experimental and practical religion; so that nothing of the kind has appeared before. Therefore a magazine of this kind is a new thing in the land; and those who formerly spoke against magazines may with a good grace recommend this as being quite another thing and published upon other motives. I do not desire any Calvinist to read it. I publish it not to convince but preserve. I know by long experience they will never bend but when the war is carried into their own quarters. This I will do, as long as God spares my life, in love and in meekness of wisdom. This is the way, and the only way, to establish a lasting peace. But is it not odd that a Methodist preacher, an Assistant, should be the only one who sees my brother and me, and the bulk of the preachers, and the body of the people to be wrong Tommy, distrust yourself. Do not lean much to your own understanding. 'Tis possible they may be right and you wrong. You do not at all understand the affair. We are well rid of those turbulent men. With love to Nancy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

But it is certain, had God never been angry, He could never have been reconciled. So that, in affirming this, Mr. Law strikes at the very root of the Atonement, and finds a very short method of converting Deists. [He is evidently thinking of Charles Leslie (1650-1722), Nonjuror and his A Short and Easy Method with the Deists.] Although, therefore, I do not term God, as Mr. Law supposes, ' a wrathful Being,' which conveys a wrong idea; yet I firmly believe He was angry with all mankind, and that He was reconciled to them by the death of His Son. And I know He was angry with me till I believed in the Son of His love; and yet this is no impeachment to His mercy, that He is just as well as merciful. But undoubtedly, as long as the world stands, there will be a thousand objections to this scriptural doctrine. For still the preaching of Christ crucified will be foolishness to the wise men of the world. Hovever let us hold the precious truth fast in our hearts as well as in our understanding; and we shall find by happy experience that this is to us the wisdom of God and power of God. I do not doubt but your health will be so far re-established that you may either teach school or live in Bath. But I do not know whether you will be able to do both together, to teach school in Bath. A little time will determine. And meanwhile we know that will be which is best. - I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Johnston, Annandale, Lisleen Date: LONDON, February 14, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - The fact was true. And there was a grievous mistake with regard to the time of it for that letter (which was wrote, I suppose, a year and a half ago); since that time I have had no complaint of the kind. [See letter of Jan. 8.] If I had, I should have let you know. But you need not be under any apprehension of my being offended at you either on this or any other account. I am not easily offended at those I love, and I have loved you ever since I saw you for your artlessness and sincerity; and I believe you will never quit that character, though it be ever so much out of fashion. I cannot doubt but Robert Swindells' stay at Lisleen was of use to others as well as himself. As Shakespear's 'the man of exceeding honesty,' one may take his word. Therefore I am strongly persuaded he is no Calvinist; yet I do not wonder that it should be imputed to him, for he was leaning toward it for many years. This all our preachers know; but they did not all know that he now sees more clearly. In about a fortnight I purpose to set out from London, and probably about the end of next month I shall be in Dublin. I intend with God's help to visit the South of Ireland first start, make Londonderry beginning of June. If so, I will have the pleasure of seeing you and your dear family before the end of May. Peace be with all your spirits,-I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Alexander Knox Date: DUBLIN, April 2, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR ALLECK, - I came hither this morning, after a rough passage, from Liverpool; and purpose (if God continue my life and health) to be with you at Londonderry on Friday, May 28. It is right to know ourselves, but not to stop there, as you are apt to do. This is only of use if it leads us to know Him that loves and saves sinners; and, I doubt not, He will save you. Trust Him, and you shall praise Him. I hope my dear Sally has not forgotten me. Peace be with all your spirits! - I am, dear Alleck, Yours affectionately.

To Alexander Knox Date: DUBLIN, July 11, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR ALLECK, - It is a natural effect of your bodily weakness and of the turn of your mind that you are continually inclined to write bitter things against yourself. Hence you are easily persuaded to believe him that tells you that you 'are void of every degree of saving faith.' No; that is not the case. For salvation is only by faith; and you have received a degree of salvation. You are saved from many outward sins - from the corruption that overspreads the land as a flood. You are saved in a degree from inward sin; from impenitence, for you know and feel yourself a sinner. You are saved in a degree from pride; for you begin to know yourself poor and helpless. You are saved from seeking happiness in the world: this is not a small thing. O praise God for all you have, and trust Him for all you want ! Peace be with your spirits! - I am, dear Alleck, Yours affectionately.

To Kitty Warren Date: SHAFTESBURY, September 8, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - It is true that some of our friends of Brecon have intimated to me that they feared a prophet would not be honored in his own country, and that Billy Church [He was the younger son of John Church, of Brecon, and grandfather of the Rev. H. L. Church, Wesleyan minister 1844-93. See Young's Methodism in Wales, p. 136; and letter of Oct. 13.] might do more good elsewhere. But they did not mention his changing with Brother Pescod. And I should have a particular objection to it - namely, that he would not have those opportunities of preaching in Welsh which he has now. There is therefore no danger of Joseph Pescod's [Pescod, now at Pembroke, died in 1805, aged fifty-four, after serving twenty-eight years as a preacher, with unblemished character and sound judgment. His preaching was pleasing and profitable.] quitting his circuit before the end of the year. Let all of you now make the full use of the advantages which you enjoy; especially of meeting in band, which I hope none of you neglect who have tasted that the Lord is gracious. I am glad you feel the want of a deeper change. Whereunto you have attained hold fast; but rest not till you experience the full rest that remaineth for the people of God. You will never weary me with your letters. The oftener you write the more I love you. Peace be with all your spirits! - I am, my dear Kitty, Yours affectionately.

To Mrs. Barton Date: LONDON, November 13, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - I am glad Sister Crosby has been at Beverley and that you had an opportunity of hearing her. She is useful wheresoever she goes, particularly in exciting believers to go on to perfection. There is frequently something very mysterious in the ways of divine Providence. A little of them we may understand; but much more is beyond our comprehension, and we must be content to say, 'What Thou doest I know not now, but I shall know hereafter.' At present it is sufficient for me to know that all His ways are mercy and truth to them that love Him. Even in these troublous times there is a very considerable increase of the work of God. Cleave to Him with your whole heart, and you will have more and more' reason to praise Him.-I am, my dear Jenny, Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Woodhouse Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- LONDON, November, 18, 1778. MY DEAR SISTER, - I have no intimacy with Lord North. I never saw him. I never wrote to him; very probably I never shall. I never asked any favor of him. I would not on any consideration whatever. It is a saying, You do not know what kind of animals great men are. They will not move an hair's breadth out of their line. They will on no account interfere in each other's province. Now, I told you before, only the Commissioners at the Customs dispose of Custom House places. And I know not one of those Commissioners. Therefore I can do nothing in this matter. [Compare letter of Dec. 26.] I am not sparing of my pains; but I know what I can do and what I cannot. If I could do it, you would not need to ask anything twice of Your affectionate brother.

To Hannah Ball Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- [ROBERTSBRIDGE], December 2, 1778. MY DEAR SISTER, - Little things contrary to our will may be great blessings. We have need to apply the general word, 'Take up thy cross, and follow Me,' to a thousand little particulars: a smoky room, a cold morning, a rainy day, the dullness or perverseness of those we are with-these and innumerable little crosses will help us onward to the kingdom. But the most profitable of all crosses to your own soul may be the unfaithfulness or unfruitfulness of your sisters, without one or other of which they never could have lost any blessing which God had given them. Nothing can exercise and therefore increase your faith and love like the seeming to spend all your strength for naught. Oh how this increases, my dear Hannah, my love to you! How much more does it increase His love for whom you labor! We do not thoroughly understand the meaning of that word, 'The times anti seasons God hath reserved in His own power.' Undoubtedly He has wise reasons for pouring out His Spirit at one time rather than another; but they lie abundantly too deep for human understanding to fathom. To us He says, 'What I do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter!' - I am, my dear Hannah, Your affectionate brother.

To John Toocks Date: NEAR LONDON, December 26, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- Never was there a time (at least in my remembrance) when employments of this kind were so difficult to be procured. I know several young persons who are well qualified for any such place; but they cannot get any, and are almost perishing for want. So that what I can do for you I know not. [Compare letter of Nov. 18.] - I am Yours affectionately.

To Elizabeth Padbury Date: LONDON, February 10, 1779. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1779) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BETSY, - A letter from you is always agreeable. I feel a sincere affection for you; so much the more because you are free and unreserved, both when you write and when we converse together. I am glad you think of me when you do not see me. Distance need not be any bar to affection. It is good that you should be tenderly concerned for those of your own household; but so as always to hold that anchor fast, 'Not as I will, but as Thou wilt.' And you have great reason to hope that sooner or later prayer will prevail for them. But the time God has reserved in His own hand, and we know 'His manner and His time are best.' Whether you have a longer or a shorter time to praise Him on earth is of no great moment. It is enough that you shall have an eternity to praise Him in heaven! Let this be ever in our eye! And never forget, my dear Betsy, Yours most affectionately.

To James Creighton Date: BRISTOL, September 29, 1779. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1779) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, - If you are inclined to remove to England, I think you have a very fair opportunity. A curate is wanted for Madeley, Mr. Fletcher's parish, who has desired me to procure him one that can be depended on. For a change Dr. Coke would go down to Madeley at any time, and you might be a while with us in Bristol or London. You would have a large convenient house with a pleasant and fruitful garden. What the salary is I do not exactly know; but you shall not have less than sixty guineas a year. If you are inclined to accept of this, be pleased to send a line to, dear sir, Your affectionate friend and brother. Pray direct to London.

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON, January 14, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- If I could be angry at my dear Nancy for anything, I should be so for your not using me as a friend. If you believe me to be so, why do you not tell me without reserve when there is anything in which I can serve you You may judge by yourself whether this must not give me a particular satisfaction. So it always will if you suffer me to give you any assistance that is in my power. What you speak of feeling the peace of God in the midst of the most exquisite sufferings does not surprise me at all. [See letter of Feb. 26 to her.] 'I feel my pains,' says Mr. De Renty, 'in all their extremity. But by the grace of God I give myself up to Him and not to them.' And again: 'I cannot say but my soul is deeply grieved at the sense of so great a loss; yet I feel such joy in that the will of the Lord is done, not that of a poor sinner, that, were it not for giving offence, I could dance and sing.' I saw a stranger instance than either of these a few years ago. I saw exactly such distress in an human countenance as appears in the waxwork taken from the face of Cartouche [Louis Dominique Cartouche, head of a Paris band of robbers, broken on the wheel in 1721.] while he was breaking upon the wheel. In the morning I asked her, 'Was not you in great distress when I saw you last night' She answered, 'I was in such distress as was ready to tear my soul and body asunder; and yet at that very time I was as happy as I could well be out of heaven.' I do not wonder, therefore, that all the trials you feel do not interrupt the peace of God. They never need. His grace is sufficient to keep you in and to deliver you out of all temptations. And the unction of the Holy One which abideth with you shall guide you from time to time and enable you to east back upon his own head all the fiery darts of the wicked one.

Love me still, my dear Nancy, and know me to be Yours invariably.

To Lancelot Harrison Date: LONDON, January 16, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I perceive many in your circuit do not know our Rules. You should immediately read them in every Society, and receive no new member till he has read them. Let all know what they are about. A Plan of a Circuit should contain (1) the several Societies, (2) the number of members in each, (3) the new members, (4) the backsliders, (5) the persons in band. Then the conversions, deaths, marriages, removes, with the total number at the foot of each column. Let me have such a plan next quarter. [See letter of Feb. 16.] You did well to recommend the Hymn-Books, and you will do still better in taking every opportunity of recommending the Magazine. [See letter of Jan. 29.] Be zealous! Be active! Stir up the gift of God that is in you! - I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Penelope Newman Date: LONDON, February 2, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - Honest Richard Condy was frightened out of his senses; and it is no wonder that he frightened others. There was just as much danger of our clergymen overbearing the laymen as of their eating them up. But all this hurry sprang from Alexander M'Nab. He let out the water; and who shall gather it up Take care you do not kill John Valton [Valton was at Bristol. See Wesley's Veterans, vi. 78; and for M'Nab, letter of Jan. 18.] I You know he is continually striving to do more than he can do. I suppose he is somewhere in your circuit; but he did not tell me where: so that I do not know how to direct to him. I am a letter in his debt. You forgot I do not visit our Societies this year. I only touch here and there on my way to Ireland. On Monday, March 13, I hope to be at Stroud, and afterwards to call at Tewkesbury, Worcester, Evesham, and Broadmarston. This is all I can do at present. - I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To Christopher Hopper Date: NEAR LONDON, February 16, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I do not know that there is any matter of dispute between us, unless it be whether you should do what I desire or no. You are Assistant in Colne Circuit. I desire you to send me a plan of the circuit: you send me an answer, but without the plan. I write again: you send a second answer, telling me you have been very diligent for many years; and that you was the very person who introduced plans among us. Very good; but you send me no plan still, and till this comes everything else is wide of the mark. [See letters of Jan. 16 (to Lancelot Harrison) and Dec. 31.] - I am Your affectionate friend and brother. Why should not you write an account of your life [Hopper lost no time. His autobiography appeared in the Arminian Mag. for Jan.-March 1781. See Wesley's Veterans, i. 107-74.] Isaac Waldron, T. Lee, W. Brammah, &c. &c., were not 'strong and able men.' When any such obtrude themselves for easy circuits, speak at that time, and you do something. Mr. Hopper, At the Preaching-house, In Colne, Lancashire.

To Elizabeth Morgan Date: LONDON, February 20, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR MISS MORGAN, - As I know not when you have been so much upon my mind as for a day or two past, I was agreeably surprised last night at opening a letter and seeing your name. [See letters of Jan. x7, 1779, and March 13, 1781.] It is on Monday the 28th instant I purpose, if God permit, to set out from here. One day I expect to spend at Bath; and on Thursday, March z, to be at Bristol. The next morning, at eleven, if it be convenient for you, I will wait upon you. On Monday, March 13, I am to set out for Ireland. Before that time, as you are a ready learner, I may probably be able to give you all the assistance you will want in order to the understanding that little tract. And I am persuaded, whatever knowledge you acquire, you will endeavor to apply it to the noblest purposes. O let this be your continual care, to grow in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ and to recover that whole image of God wherein you was created! If I can in any degree assist you in this, it will be an unspeakable pleasure to, my dear Miss Morgan, Yours most affectionately. Miss Morgan, At Waiter King's, Esq., At Marsh, near Bristol.

To Penelope Newman Date: BRISTOL, July 31, 1780. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1780) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--A letter directed to me in London will find me at any time. I trust you will never sink into Quietism (or Quakerism, which is only one mode of it). For then you would soon sink into lukewarmness; and what would come next who can tell I have not known ten Quakers in my life whose experience went so far as justification. I never knew one who clearly experienced what we term 'sanctification.' But, indeed, their language is so dark and equivocal that one scarce knows what they do experience and what they do not. If it may be a probable means of doing good either to others or to your own soul, I think you need not scruple making an excursion of a few days for fear of giving offence. Our Conference this year will last till Friday, the 11th instant. And for the time to come (at least while I live) will always continue ten days. [Conference began in Bristol on Aug. 1. Wesley says that it was resolved to 'allow nine or ten days for each Conference' (Journal, vi. 290).] No less time will suffice for sifting to the bottom the various points of importance that are to be considered. The hand of the Lord is not shortened either in Great Britain or Ireland. He still carries on His own work and shows Himself mighty to save.--I am, my dear Penny, Yours affectionately.

Give me leave, my Lord, to speak more freely still: perhaps it is the last time I shall trouble your Lordship. I know your Lordship's abilities and extensive learning; I believe, what is far more, that your Lordship fears God. I have heard that your Lordship is unfashionably diligent in examining the candidates for Holy Orders--yea, that your Lordship is generally at the pains of examining them yourself. Examining them! In what respects Why, whether they understand a little Latin and Greek and can answer a few trite questions in the science of divinity l Alas, how little does this avail! Does your Lordship examine whether they serve Christ or Belial whether they love God or the world whether they ever had any serious thoughts about heaven or hell whether they have any real desire to save their own souls or the souls of others If not, what have they to do with Holy Orders and what will become of the souls committed to their care My Lord, I do by no means despise learning; I know the value of it too well. But what is this, particularly in a Christian minister, compared to piety What is it in a man that has no religion ' As a jewel in a swine's snout.' Some time since, I recommended to your Lordship a plain man, whom I had known above twenty years as a person of deep, genuine piety and of unblameable conversation. But he neither understood Greek nor Latin; and he affirmed in so many words that he believed it was his duty to preach whether he was ordained or no. I believe so too. What became of him since, I know not; but I suppose he received Presbyterian ordination, and I cannot blame him if he did. He might think any ordination better than none. I do not know that Mr. Hoskins had any favour to ask of the Society. He asked the favour of your Lordship to ordain him that he might minister to a little flock in America. But your Lordship did not see good to ordain him; but your Lordship did see good to ordain and send into America other persons who knew something of Greek and Latin, but who knew no more of saving souls than of catching whales.

To Brian Bury Collins Date: LONDON, January 3, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- I had no great desire to see Lord George Gordon, [Wesley visited him at the Tower on Dec. 19, 1780. See Journal, vi. 301, for another account of their conversation.] fearing he wanted to talk to me about political matters; but when he sent a second and a third time, I wrote a line to Lord North, asking whether he had any objection to my seeing him. He answered immediately, ‘None in the world; but it lies properly with the Secretary of State.’ I then enclosed Lord North's letter in a line to Lord Stormont, who the next day sent me a warrant to see him. In our whole conversation I did not observe that he had the least anger or resentment to any one. He appeared to be in a very desirable spirit, entirely calm and composed. He seemed to be much acquainted with the Scripture both as to the letter and the sense of it. Our conversation turned first upon Popery, and then upon experimental religion. I am in great hopes this affliction will be sanctified to him as a means of bringing him nearer to God. The theory of religion he certainly has. May God give him the living experience of it! I hope you do not drop your correspondence with Mr. Brackenbury, Perhaps he never had greater need of you. I did not expect he would receive any more good from me. I can only commend him to God. I am glad you are so agreeably situated at Macclesfield. Mr. Simpson is indeed an agreeable man. [See letter of Aug. 1, 1780.] And I know very few young women in England who are equal to Hetty Roe. Peace be with you and yours! -- I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate servant.

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON. February 20, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR NANCY, -- Yesterday I returned from a little tour through Norfolk, and had the pleasure of finding your letter. You know I feel with you and for you. But I am almost at a loss to understand what trials can sit so heavy upon you! You are with those whom you love and who love you. You have in general tolerable health. You have no husband, no children to perplex you. How came you to be so weighted down with care Think aloud, my dear, my much-loved friend. Explain yourself. Be as particular as you please. You need not fear my telling others. You have known me since you were little more than a child. Has Neddy [Her brother. See letters of May 8, 1774, and Sept. 9, 1781, to her.] no hope of getting out of his trouble Is his farm rented above its value Is it on his sake only that you grieve Or are other trials added to this By all means accept the providential invitation to Bristol. My dear Nancy, adieu. On Monday se’nnight I set out for Bath and Bristol. On Monday, March 8 [5], I hope to be at Newbury; on Monday, 15th, [Monday was March 19, and that evening he preached at Stroud, and on the 20th at Worcester. See next letter.] at Stroud; on Tuesday the x6th at Worcester. You will contrive to be with me where you can. I do not find any fault with you at present. Only I am afraid you are not careful enough of your health. Otherwise I rejoice that I have confidence in you in all things. -- I am, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: MANCHESTER, March 31, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY, -- The expression of ‘eating and drinking unworthily’ has one, and only one, meaning affixed to it by St. Paul, who is the only inspired writer that uses that expression. He means by it that particular sin of which the Corinthians were then guilty -- the snatching one before another his own supper, so that one was hungry and another was drunken. Now, it is certain you are in no danger of this any more than of committing murder. Deadness, coldness, wandering thoughts of various kinds are totally distinct from it. And now, when the worst of these occur, you may answer with pious Kempis, ‘Go, go, thou unclean spirit. These are not my thoughts but thine, and thou shalt answer for them to God.’ [Imitation, 111. vi.] God is now aiming, in all His dealings with you, to bring you to a knowledge of yourself as one in whom by nature dwells no good thing. And this He is particularly pursuing when you approach His Table. Were He to give you at that time remarkable joy or sweetness, it would not answer His design; neither were He to give you much contrition and brokenness of heart. Therefore He leaves you in great measure to your own dull, unfeeling heart, that you may know yourself in order to know Him. But nevertheless this is the way; walk thou in it, and in due time you shall reap if you faint not. But you must needs have some companions in the way; for how can one be warm alone [See letter of Nov. 15, 1780.] I wish you to be acquainted with Miss Johnson, [ Mary Johnson. See Stevenson’s City Road Chapel, p. 504; and letter of April 12.]’ who lodges in Oxford Street at No. 368, and meets in Mrs. Thackeray’s class. She is deeply mourning after God, whom she once knew and loved. She is of a tender, sensible temper; and I am certain your spirits would quickly take acquaintance with each other. You want a friend of your own sex and nearly your own age, and I know not one in London that would fit you better. I pray God that you may resolutely choose Him for your portion; and am, my dear Sally,

To Ann Loxdale Date: CHESTER, April 15, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- I snatch a few moments to write to my dear Miss Loxdale, although I have not time to write as I would. [See letter of March 27.] The trials which you have lately undergone were all instances of the goodness of God, who permitted them merely for your profit, that you might be the more largely the partaker of His holiness. You know our blessed Lord Himself as man ‘learned obedience by the things that He suffered’; and the last lesson which He learned upon earth was that ‘Father, not as I will, but as Thou wilt.’ Never imagine, my dear friend, that your letters to me can be too frequent or too long -- I may add, or too free. Nothing endears you to me so much as your artless simplicity. I beg you would always write just what you feel without disguise, without reserve. Your heart seems to be just as my heart. I cannot tell that I ever before felt so close an attachment to a person I had never seen. Surely it is the will of our gracious Lord that there should be a closer union between you and Yours in tender affection.

To Thomas Rutherford Date: LOUTH, July 4, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, -- I got half-way again, as far as the Isle of Man; but I could get no farther. What He doth we know not now, but we shall know hereafter. I wish Isabella and you much happiness, which you cannot fail of if you have much holiness. Therefore the certain way to make each other happy is to strengthen each other's hands in God. Some time since, I desired Brother Moore [Henry Moore was his colleague at Lisburn, and their wives were sisters. He had just removed from Tanderagee. See Crookshank’s Methodism in Ireland, i. 345; and letter of Feb. 23, 1783.] to procure and send me as particular account as possible of that odd affair near Tanderagee; I mean with regard to the house which was so strangely disturbed. I wish he would do it without delay. -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Hannah Ball Date: SHEFFIELD, July 12, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I cannot at all understand George Story’s [George Story was Assistant in Oxfordshire. The new preachers were Richard Rodda and Thomas Warwick. See letter of Nov. 17.] behavior. He seems prejudiced against you; and I cannot devise for what. But your business is to go straight forward. And let both Nancy and you do all the good you can. Surely you should take an opportunity to warn Jo. Accutt [John Accutt was the second preacher. He desisted from work in 1785.] of his danger. I shall appoint two new preachers for the Oxford Circuit next year. Jasper Winscom [See letter of Oct. 20, 1775, to him.] is a good man and a local preacher. But I am glad you are not minded to leave Wycombe. The longer your letters are the more welcome they are to, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: BRISTOL, September 8, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY, -- It is certain the Author of our nature designed that we should not destroy but regulate our desire for knowledge. What course you may take in order to this I will now briefly point out. [See letter in June 1764 to Margaret Lewen.] 1. You want to know God, in order to enjoy Him in time and eternity. 2. All you want to know of Him is contained in one book, the Bible. And all you learn is to be referred to this, either directly or remotely. 3. Would it not be well, then, to spend at least an hour a day in reading and meditating on the Bible reading every morning and evening a portion of the Old and New Testament with the Explanatory Notes 4. Might you not read two or three hours in the morning and one or two in the afternoon When you are tired of severer studies, you may relax your mind by history or poetry. 5. The first thing you should understand a little of is Grammar. You may read first the Kingswood English Grammar, and then Bishop Lowth’s Introduction. 6. You should acquire (if you have not already) some knowledge of Arithmetic. Dilworth’s Arithmetic would suffice. 7. For Geography I think you need only read over Randal’s or Guthrie’s Geographical Grammar. 8. Watts's Logic is not a very good one; but I believe you cannot find a better. 9. In Natural Philosophy you have all that you need to know in the Survey of the Wisdom of God in Creation. But you may add the Glasgow [Edinburgh] abridgement of Mr. Hutchinson’s Works. 10. With any or all of the foregoing studies you may intermix that of History. You may begin with Rollin’s Ancient History; and afterwards read in order the Concise History of the Church, Burnet’s History of the Reformation, the Concise History of England, Clarendon’s History of the Rebellion, Neal’s History of the Puritans, his History of New England, and Robertson's History of America. 11. In Metaphysics you may read Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding and Malebranche’s Search after Truth.

To Elijah Bush Date: COLEFORD, September 11, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I was much concerned yesterday when I heard you were likely to marry a woman against the consent of your parents. I have never in an observation of fifty years known such a marriage attended with a blessing. I know not how it should be, since it is flatly contrary to the fifth commandment. I told my own mother, when pressing me to marry, ‘I dare not allow you a positive voice herein; I dare not marry a person because you bid me. But I must allow you a negative voice: I will marry no person if you forbid. I know it would be a sin against God.’ Take care what you do. Mr. S----- is not a proper judge; he hopes to separate you from the Methodists; and I expect, if you take this step, that will be the end. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Hall Date: BATH, September 15, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR PATTY, -- But when will the hundred pounds come I hear nothing about that. But fifty pounds of it were bespoke by him that sent me the first notice, and what could be done less For, you know, the messenger of good news should always be rewarded. However, if we live to meet again, probably something may be done without waiting for the legacy; and it is not impossible that you should procure half an hour's very private conversation into the bargain. I say still, you are one of the youngest women of your years that I know, [See letter of May 28 to her.] and perhaps it is your fervor that keeps you alive as well as keeps you from the gout and stone, to which you know we have an hereditary right. God does all things well. -- I am, dear Patty, Your affectionate friend and Brother.

To James ------ Date: LONDON, January 6, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JAMES, -- You may meet with Brother Alderman, Highland, or any other leader you choose. But I am willing to hear what objection you have to James Dewey and the two other leaders you refer to. You may know them better than I do. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

To Hester Anne Roe Date: LONDON, January 7, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- My DEAR HETTY, -- You should always have in readiness that little tract The Plain Account of Christian Perfection. There is nothing that would so effectually stop the mouths of those who call this ‘a new doctrine.’ All who thus object are really (though they suspect nothing less) seeking sanctification by works. If it be by works, then certainly these will need time in order to the doing of these works. But if it is by faith, it is plain a moment is as a thousand years. Then God says (in the spiritual as in the outward world), Let there be light, and there is light. I am in great hopes, as John Sellars [See letter of Jan. 18.] got his own soul much quickened in Macdesfield, he will now be a blessing to many at Chester. A few witnesses of pure love remain there still; but several are gone to Abraham's bosom. Encourage those in Macclesfield who enjoy it to speak explicitly what they do experience, and to go on till they know all that ‘love of God that pusseth knowledge.’ Give all the help you can, my dear Hetty, to them, and to Yours most affectionately.

To Thomas Davenport Date: LONDON, January 19, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- Many years ago I saw a condemned person in the Castle at Oxford two or three hours before his execution. When I asked him, ‘Whither are you going’ he said, ‘To hell, to be sure.’ And on my remarking, ‘But you seem to have no fear, no sorrow, no concern,’ he coolly replied, ‘I have none at all. And why should I tell a lie’ I said, ‘I cannot understand this.’ He said, ‘I will tell you how to understand it. Some told me five months ago, “Mr. Pope, make the best of your time; for the day of grace may end, before the day of life ends.” And so it is with me.’ But it is not so with you. If it was, you would have no fear, no trouble, no uneasiness, but would be just as easy and careless and unconcerned as that poor creature was. It is, I believe, near forty years ago that a friend recommended to me Mr. Marshall's Gospel Mystery of Sanctification. [See Journal. v. 239-40.] A few passages I found scattered up and down which I thought leaned towards Antinomianism. But in general I approved of it well, and judged it to be an excellent book. The main proposition, that inward and outward holiness flow from a consciousness of the favor of God, is undoubtedly true. And it is a truth that should always be before our eyes. I commend you to Him that loves you more than you are sensible of; and am, dear sir, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Francis Wrigley Date: MANCHESTER, April 4, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I have no objection to the judgment of the rector of Trowbridge; and it seems this would stand between you and blame, as no one could condemn you without first condemning him. I do not know anything that is amiss in the behavior either of Brother Fowler or his wife. But I do not know that he is called to preach. Certainly he should not go where they are not willing to hear him. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Thomas Taylor Date: LIVERPOOL, April 12, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, -- I find the difference between us is very small, for most of what you say I subscribe to. That ‘the war has been ill-conducted,’ that ‘millions of money and thousands of lives have been thrown away,’ that ‘numerous families have been ruined, trade much hurt,’ that we are ‘in danger of losing all North America, if not the East Indies too,’ ‘that our commanders both by sea and land love robbing and plundering far better than fighting,’ are melancholy truths which no man that has any knowledge of public affairs can deny. But you do not know half yet. If we live to meet, I can tell you stranger things than all these. I have changed the plan of my journeys: from Leeds I go to Lincolnshire, and thence by Hull and Scarborough to Newcastle. So that I shall not be at York [Taylor was Assistant there.] till the latter end of June. -- I am, with love to Sister Taylor, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To John Bredin Date: BIRMINGHAM, July 9, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Your letter reached me this morning. I know not whether it would not be best for you to spend the ensuing year in London. There you might have the best medical advice, and might preach more or less as your strength allowed. [See letters of Oct. 19, 1781, and Aug. 4, 1782, to him.] Adam Clarke may easily get over to Liverpool or Chester; but ships sometimes go from Newry to Bristol, and very frequently from Dublin, especially at this time of the year. My kind love to Alleck Knox. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Ann Loxdale Date: LONDON, July 24, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR MISS LOXDALE, -- Two or three years ago, when the Frenchmen expected to land, I made an offer to the Government. It was not accepted; so I thought of it no more. But some months since, Captain Webb renewed it to Colonel Barr I knew nothing of the matter. But I would not oppose it, as neither did I forward it. I barely gave him leave to inquire what number of the Methodists were willing to embark with him. But I suppose the whole is now at an end, as Colonel Barr is out of place. [See letters of May 25 (to Captain Webb) and Aug. 3 (to Joseph Benson).] I wish you to retain a close acquaintance with Mr. -----. He is an upright man. And I am in hopes we may now set his head right [See letters of July 12, 1782, and Nov. 21, 1783, to her.]; as he that confounded his interests is gone to another world. There is no danger of your taking any step that is materially wrong if you continue instant in prayer. But I know so little of the thing you refer to that I can say little about it. Only do not expect that any creature will increase your happiness any farther than it increases your knowledge and love of God. -- I am, my dear Nancy, Yours affectionately.

To Kitty Warren Date: LONDON, July 31, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- It pleases God to give me much better health in general than I had at five-and-twenty. For many years also I was frequently weary; but I know not now what weariness means. I have just strength enough for what I am called to do; and at the end of my work I feel just the Same as at the beginning. Till very lately I had hopes of paying you a short visit after the Conference. But I find it cannot be. I must see them in the West of Cornwall, where there is a great revival of the work of God. And before I can return thence there will hardly so much time remain as will be due to the Bristol Circuit. [He finished the Conference in London on Aug. 13, and set out by coach the same afternoon for the West of England.] T. Tennant [The preachers at Pembroke were Samuel Randall, Thomas Tennant, and James Hall. Tennant stayed another year.] writes to me and desires he may not continue any longer in Pembrokeshire. However, I will tell him the desire of his friends in Wales, and then leave him to his choice. Mr. Randall has been there two years already. So it is time for him to remove. You are exactly in your place. If you desire it, you shall have more employment [See letters of Oct. 19, 1779, and June 8, 1786.]; but you would be a loser if you had less. Peace be with all your spirits! -- I am, my dear Kitty, Your ever affectionate brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: NEAR LONDON, August 3, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH, -- Do not you know that all the preachers cannot leave a circuit at once Therefore, if you left it, Brother Hopper could not. Perhaps, likewise, I can depend upon your judgment more than that of another man. Two or three years ago, when the kingdom was in imminent danger, I made an offer to the Government of raising some men. The Secretary of War (by the King's order) wrote me word that ‘it was not necessary; but if it ever should be necessary, His Majesty would let me know.’ I never renewed the offer, and never intended it. But Captain Webb, without my knowing anything of the matter, went to Colonel Barr, the new Secretary of War, and renewed that offer. [Colonel Barr became Paymaster of the Forces in July. See letter of July 24.] The Colonel (I verily believe, to avoid his importunity) asked him how many men we could raise. But the Colonel is out of place. So the thing is at an end. I read over both the sermons; but I did not see anything materially wrong in either. -- I am, with love to Sister Benson, Your affectionate brother. We will consider what you propose.

To Ann Bolton Date: NEAR LONDON, August 3, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR NANCY, -- I thought you had known the truth of the old saying, ‘A Friend is made for adversity.’ Very probably you have suffered more by keeping your sufferings to yourself. But still we know the Lord is King and ruleth all things both in heaven and earth. I am glad your brother's distresses are a little relieved. I shall not be sorry when he is entirely quit of Finstock. I never expected great things from it; but I thought he knew better than me. [See letters of Sept. 9, 1781, and Jan. 5, 1783.] I believe, if you feed the poor man three or four weeks with absolutely nothing but bread and milk, it will totally restore his senses. I have known it tried here, and the patient recovered entirely. Miss Ritchie is just alive; she is still hovering between life and death. I have divided Nottingham Circuit into two, and stationed Brother Warwick [Thomas Warwick (1778-1809), who appears in the Minutes for Leicestershire, was a laborious and successful preacher. See letter of March 6, 1788.] in the Derby part of it. Do not, my dear Nancy, again delay so long writing to Yours most affectionately.

To John Bredin Date: LONDON. August 4, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- In your present state you must not attempt to travel. It is as much as your life is worth. [See letters of July 9 and Nov. 30 to him.] You may be a supernumerary in whatever place you judge most advisable; and the little salary, the 12, we will allow from hence. I do not understand what is the accusation against Hugh Moore. [Moore moved from Londonderry to Aberdeen, See letter of April 10.] Simply administering an oath is a folly; but I know not that it is contrary to any law. If he is afraid of staying at Coleraine (although I know not why), let him change with a Sligo or Castlebar preacher. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To William Robarts Date: BRISTOL, September 19, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- Strange! Have you not an estate Does it bring you in nothing Have you not a large trade Do you gain nothing thereby Then how can you avoid ‘laying up treasures on earth’ I want to know: I desire to justify you. To this Robarts replies: REVERAND SIR, -- In this respect I know nobody but you that condemns me; my heart, my God does not. I therefore need no justification. I have already spoke and wrote, but to no avail; therefore desire to be silent till you can cast one glance of charity, at least of candor, though I am not worthy of your address or subscription. I hope you will for this once admit the name of your once esteemed W. R. [See letter of Aug. 3, 1783.]

To his Brother Charles Date: NOTTINGHAM, April 4, 1783. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1783) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, -- Yesterday my second disorder left me, and I seem now to be recovering strength. [See previous letter.] On Monday next I hope to be at Derby; on Tuesday at Blewcastle-under-Lyme; on Wednesday at Chester; and at Holyhead as soon as God permits. I have no desire to stay above three weeks in Ireland, and hope to be in England again before the end of May. On the day appointed, March 25, I went from Birmingham to Hilton Park. [See Journal, vi.. 401; W.H.S. v. 170n.; and letter of April 25 to his brother.] A little before we reached the Park gate Miss Freeman met us in Sir Philip Gibbes’s chaise. After staring awhile, she came into my chaise, and she was convinced that I was alive. That afternoon and the next day I gathered strength apace. The place was agreeable, and much more the company. Lady Gibbes put me in mind of one of Queen Elizabeth's dames of honour. Her daughters are exceeding amiable, but sink under Miss Freeman's superior sense, and begin to feel that they are not Christians. She has been of great service to them, and hies at them day and night to show them what is real religion. On Wednesday night they were much struck; the younger sister could not contain herself, but burst out into a passion of tears. M. F. herself seems to be utterly disconcerted, seeking rest, but finding none. If Sally is not hurt by her, she (Sally [Charles Wesley’s daughter.]) will help her much. She now feels her want of help. I wish King George (like Louis XIV) would be his own Prime Minister. The nation would soon feel the difference. All these things will work together for good. Let us work while the day is! I take no thought for the morrow. Peace be with you all. Adieu. Revd. Mr. C. Wesley, Marybone, London.

To his Brother Charles Date: DUBLIN, April 25, 1783. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1783) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, -- How extremely odd is the affair of Mr. Abraham! [See letters of Feb. 20, 1782, and May 2, 1783 (to his brother).] I scarce ever remember the like. It really seems to be a providential incident which fairly acquits us of one that would have been no honor to us. But how odd also is this affair of Miss Freeman! [See letters of April 4 and May 2 to his brother.] Since I left her at Sir Philip Gibbes’s preparing for her journey to Bath, I have not had so much as one line from her. Yesterday I had a letter from Miss Gibbes and another from her sister; but she is not even mentioned either in one or the other. Do you know what is become of her Is she ill Surely she is not slipped back to Paris! All is quiet here. God has made our enemies to be at peace with us. In about ten days I hope to be at Chester. Peace be with you and yours!

To Captain Richard Williams Date: LONDON, December 10, 1783. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1783) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I have directed your lines to the editor of the General Post. But both he and Mr. Pine will insert in their papers only what they believe will promote the sale of them. You send me an agreeable account of the work of God in Cornwall and in some places that I do not know. I know nothing of Wheal Rose, nor of the Copper House at Hayle: I hope Mr. Edwards will continue in the same state he is now. I thought the Calvinists were resolved to run away with the Society at Kirly. But the Universal Lover of Souls is stronger than them! He hath said, ‘Hitherto shall you come, and no farther!’ The work of God (Brother Asbury sends me word) goes on both steadily and swiftly in America. -- I am Your affectionate brother.

To John Valton Date: LONDON, January 6, 1784. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1784) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I do not suppose Bristol water would have done you much good; but exercise and change of air would. I do not know Dr. Davison [See letter of Oct. 13 to Valton.]; but I have seen (perhaps thrice) more patients than he has done. And I know many that have perished by swallowing large quantities of powdered wood. Beware of this, and you may live and do good. I shall have no objection to Mr. Taylor if he does not baptize children; but this I dare not suffer. I shall shortly be obliged to drop all the preachers who will not drop this. Christ has sent them not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. [See letters of May 19, 1783, and March 4, 1784 (to Percival).] I wonder any of them are so unkind as to attempt it, when they know my sentiments. We have heard twice from Dr. Coke. They all go on well. - I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Richard Rodda Date: LONDON, October 13, 1784. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1784) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I have no objection to your having a third preacher in the circuit. [Birmingham had three preachers next Conference.] But what to say of John Oliver I know not. [Oliver married Elizabeth Booth. See Journal, iv. 70-1; and letter of Oct. 25, 1780.] He has been greatly to blame. But who can tell whether he be inwardly changed or not Your proposal of building a new preaching-house I like well, provided it can be done without bringing any burthen upon the Conference. Complaint is made to me that the preaching is taken from Stourshead. If so, I am sorry for it. Peace be with you and yours! - I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Freeman Date: LONDON, February 1, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, - So strange things come to pass I I did not expect to hear of Mr. Smyth's 'living in lodgings.' I do not remember the person who is so kind as to offer me a lodging; and I know no reason why I should not accept of it if I live to see Dublin again.' It gives me pleasure to hear that the work of God flourishes among you. I did not doubt but it would when He sent that earnest couple [Mr. and Mrs. James Rogers.] to Dublin. He will send a blessing with them wherever they go. And that you and yours may partake of it more and more is the wish of, my dear sister, Yours affectionately.

To Samuel Bardsley Date: LONDON, February 12, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, - Mr. Wesley desires me to inform you that he is glad to find that you go on so well in your circuit, and hopes that the work of the Lord will prosper more and more. Mr. Wesley cannot say anything positive respecting his coming into your circuit, but does intend to contrive to pay you a visit, though his usual way, you know, is but once in two years. I suppose you will know in time before he comes. Peace be with your spirit! - I am Yours affectionately,

To his Brother Charles Date: DUBLIN, June 19, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,-I came hither (as I proposed when I set out) yesterday. This week I am to meet the classes. Next week we have our little Conference. The week following I hope to cross the Channel. The work of God, almost in every part of the kingdom, is in a prosperous state. Here is a set of excellent young preachers. Nine in ten of them are much devoted to God. I think, number for number, they exceed their fellow laborers in England. These in Dublin particularly are burning and shining lights. [James Rogers and Andrew Blair. See letters of Feb. 1 and June 26 (to Elizabeth Ritchie).] I am glad you have paid them one more visit at Shoreham. What the poor people will do now I know not; but the Great Shepherd knows, and will order all things well. But what becomes of Betsy Briggs [Miss Briggs stayed at Shoreham for a time, where she was very useful. She then moved to Hoxton Square, and married Peard Dickinson on April 30, 1788. See letter of Sept. 24, 1786; also letters of March 1771, and June 2, 1785.] Would not her shortest way be to marry him But I doubt he hangs back. The letter from Rome is curious enough. Fine words! And you know the Italians are famous for sincerity. I should be sorry indeed if Sammy Tooth [See letter of Sept. 27, 1778.] were a sufferer; but surely he knows his own business. Many here know and love you well. My love to all. Adieu!

To Ann Bolton Date: DUBLIN, July 8, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR NANCY, - It is undoubtedly expedient for you to have a friend in whom you can fully confide that may be always near you or at a small distance, and ready to be consulted on all occasions. The time was when you took ma to be your friend; and (to speak freely) I have loved you with no common affection. I 'have loved you' - nay, I do still; my heart warms to you while I am writing. But I am generally at too great a distance, so that you cannot converse with me when you would. I am glad, therefore, that a good Providence has given you one whom you can more easily see and correspond with. [Probably Hannah Ball.] You may certainly trust her in every instance; and she has both understanding, piety and experience. She may therefore perform those offices of friendship which I should rejoice to perform were I near you. But wherever you can, give me the pleasure of seeing you. You know, while I have an house, you will always be welcome to it. I desire Brother Day [Simon Day, then in the Oxfordshire Circuit. The Conference opened that day in London.] to meet me in London, on the 16th instant. I do not know how you can have more preaching by the traveling preachers unless you had more preachers; which, indeed, might easily be if your moneyed men did not love their money more than they do their souls. I hope neither marriage nor business makes Neddy [Edward Bolton, her brother, whose daughter, Mrs. Marriott, gave the letter to Miss J. Ayliff at Witney in 1861.] less zealous for God or less active in his work. Peace be with all your spirits! - I am, my dear Nancy, Ever yours.

To Richard Locke Date: BRISTOL, September 19, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - The matter of Shepton Mallet is at an end. But I should have been glad to see you on other accounts. I wanted to know what was become of you Now you in some measure inform me. Pity but you had informed me before. Then much evil might have been either prevented or remedied. Instead of hiding everything you ought to have hid nothing from me. But tell me all or nothing. I will never bring your name into question, if you tell me who those four blessed preachers are. It is good for them that I should know them. [Wesley was with Locke at Almondsbury on Sept. 18. This letter throws light on their 'talk.' See Journal, vii, 117d.] Any service that is in my power you may expect from Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Winscom Date: NEAR LONDON, December 10, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MRS. WINSCOM, - When Mr. Winscom went up into the chamber with me, he told me with tears in his eyes that although he had no enmity to you, yet he did not dare to invite you to his house, because he was afraid it might be an encouragement to his other children to act as their brother had done; and who can convince him that this is a needless fear I am not able to do it. But as long as this remains I do not see how he can act otherwise than he does. I know no way you have to take but this: behave as obligingly to him as you can; never speaking against him, for whatever you say will come round to him again. Then you will gain him by little and little. - I am, dear Jenny, Yours affectionately.

To Thomas Tattershall Date: March 20, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, - I expect to be at Macclesfield, April 1; Manchester, Wednesday, 4; Warrington, Saturday, 15; Halifax, Monday, 24; York, Thursday, May 4; Newcastle, Friday, 12; at Newcastle again June 3; at Nottingham, Saturday, July 8. Then I am to visit Derby, Hinckley, and Birmingham. I allow two nights for Derby. Dispose of them in the manner you think best. But I am apt to imagine it would be most advisable to preach at Belper about noon. [Tattershall was Assistant at Derby. See Journal, vii. 185, for the arrangement as to Belper made without Wesley's knowledge.] But is it not best to take Derby in my way from Sheffield to Nottingham - I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. PS.-Blessed is the man that endureth temptation.

While I live Dr. Coke and I shall go through Ireland by turns. He will have work enough this year with gentle Edward Smyth. [Smyth opened Bethesda Chapel, Dublin, on June 25.] I doubt Edward 'needs a bridle'; but who can put the bit into his mouth I am not sorry your concerts are come to an end. [The concerts given by his sons in their father's house; Wesley attended one on Jan. 25, 1781. Samuel had become a Roman Catholic; his father's dream probably had been on this subject, and the text points to Wesley's hope of a coming restoration. See Journal, vi. 303; and letters of Aug. 19, 1784, and March 18, 1788, to his nephew.] Remember 'your dream concerning Sammy! 'The damsel is not dead, but sleepeth!' Mr. Pennant's I know, and Dr. Johnson's I know; but I know nothing of Mr. Boswell's Tour to the Hebrides. [Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides was published in 1786.] I should imagine it was worth reading. Peace be with all your spirits! Adieu!

To Jasper Winscom Date: EPWORTH, June 17, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JASPER, - I am afraid your attorney at the Assizes was greatly wanting either in skill or honesty. Otherwise why did he not move the court for costs of suit. These ought to be borne by those that are cast in any trial. As to commencing another prosecution, I know not what to say. I can neither advise one way nor the other. [See letters of May 9, 1785, and Sept. 30, 1788.] --I am Your affectionate brother.

To Mary Cooke Date: BATH, September 9, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- It gives me much satisfaction, my dear friend, to observe you are happier than when you wrote last. I do not doubt but you have at some times a rich foretaste of the state which your soul pants after. And even These wandering gleams of light And gentle ardors from above Have made you sit, like seraph bright, Some moments on a throne of love. But you know you are not to rest here; this is but a drop out of the ocean. Only this has been known again and again, that one of those happy moments has been the prelude of pure love. It has opened into the full liberty of the children of God. Who knows but this may be your happy experience - but the next time your soul is so caught up He that loves you may touch your nature clean, and so take you into the holiest, that You may never leave the skies, Never stoop to earth again I am now intent upon my own work, finishing the Life of Mr. Fletcher. This requires all the time I have to spare; so that, as far as it is possible, I must for two or three months shut myself up. Two weeks I give to Bristol; after that time I return to London. I cannot, therefore, have the happiness of seeing Trowbridge this autumn. But might I not see you or your sisters at Bristol If I am invisible to others, I would not be so to you. You may always command everything that is in the power of, my very dear friend, Yours in life and in death.

To Walter Churchey Date: BRISTOL, September 20, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - At length Jenny has broke through, and given me the satisfaction of exchanging a few words with her. You send us strange news that the lions of Wales are become lambs! I really think a spirit of humanity and benevolence is gone forth upon the earth, perhaps intimating that the time is drawing near when men shall not know war any more. Mr. Wrigley has been detained here by a sore face ever since the Conference; but is now also on the mending hand, though he is not yet able to go abroad. [Francis Wrigley, Assistant at Redruth.] I am glad to hear that Dr. Powell, of Brecon, continues in the good way. He seems to be of a frank, open temper, and to be skilful in his profession. I am rather gaining than losing ground as to my health. I think Mr. Cowper has done as much as is possible to be done with his lamentable story. I can only wish he had a better subject. [The Task was published in June 1785. See letter of July 22, 1788, to Churchey.] Peace be with you and yours! - I am Your affectionate brother. I set out for London on Monday.

To Elizabeth Briggs Date: BRISTOL, September 24, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BETSY, - I thank you for the letters which you sent, and shall be glad to see those which you mention. There is no doubt but Shoreham is the place which God at present points out for your residence, and it is well that you have such an assistant there as honest Sampson Staniforth. Great care should be taken to preserve a perfect good understanding between him and the traveling preachers. I know not who in Shoreham is able to give me a night's lodging now. Tomorrow I expect to set out for London. - I am, my dear Betsy, Yours affectionately.

Suffer me now to speak a word between you and me. Is not the reason of your preaching so languidly and coldly, that you do not feel what you say And why not Because your soul is not alive to God! Do you know that your sins are forgiven I fear not. Can you say, 'I know that my Redeemer liveth' I doubt, if you did know it once, whether you know it now Have you fellowship with the Father and the Son Alas! 'tis well if you know what it means! And are you content to have your portion in this world Do you favor only earthly things Then I do not wonder that you are shy to the Methodists; for they are not to your taste! O think and pray to-day! For I do not promise you that you shall live another year! I now give you a full proof that I am Your truly affectionate.

To Thomas Wride Date: LONDON, October 29, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, - I am entirely of your mind. If any man (to waive everything else) can make me sleep without touching me, he may call the matter what he pleases; I know it is not magnetism, but magic. Mr. Mears did not tell me (that I know) anything about letters one, two, three. Women told me at Chatham. 'We called on Mrs. Wride and offered her any service in our power; but she was so sullen and surly, we had not the heart to go again.' But is it true, Tommy, that you have an estate left you I fear it is not so large as the Duke of Bedford's! I should be glad to bring you all to a good agreement. If I knew how. - I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To the Society at Epworth Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- LONDON, Nouernber 5, 1785. MY DEAR BRETHREN, - You did not well understand the case of John Fenwick; though I got down the name of James Watson before his. Yet I told him, 'You are to act as Assistant and to change the stewards in every place.' This deeply resented, and set himself to blacken him in every place and to prejudice the people against him; in which he has been but too successful. The fault of John Fenwick was the doing the right thing in the wrong manner. And I know not but when he was hunted like an hare he might be hurried to say something that was not strictly true. But what then In every circuit where he has been he has been one of the most useful assistants in England. I can remove him. But I have no preacher to send in his place. Therefore I would advise you for a time to make the best of him. But I desire those stewards may stand whom I appointed. - I am, my dear brethren, Your affectionate brother. Till that man who shut the preaching door owns his fault I desire none of our preachers will preach at Crowle. I dare not submit in such a case.

To Adam Clarke Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1787) Author: John Wesley --- MANCHESTER, Saturday, July 28, 1787. DEAR ADAM,--On Monday fortnight, if God permit, Dr. Coke, Mr. Brackenbury, and I shall set out for Southampton in order to embark for Jersey, on board the first packet. I do not know but we shall bring your friend John King [King did not go with them, but to Thirsk. See letters of April 21 and Oct. 31, 1787, to him.] with us. -- I am, dear Adam, Yours affectionately.

To Henry Moore Date: BRISTOL, September 30, 1787. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1787) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR HENRY, -- I know you are a man of feeling. You can sympathize with the afflicted. Therefore I employ you in a labor of love. Dear John Bull [See letter of July 1, 1789.] is now in the Marshalsea Prison. How far he was formerly to blame is not now the question. But what can be done for him now for one who through a course of many years deserved well of the Methodists We cannot deliver him from his confinement. That is too hard for us. But possibly something might be done to make it a little easier to him. I desire you would go and talk with him. You will find acceptable words. Tell him I desired you to call upon him in consequence of his letter, and try to make him sensible of the hand of God in all this. Now especially he stands in need of such a friend. -- I am, dear Henry, with kind love to Nancy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Pray give him a guinea on my account, and another whenever you see proper.

To Mrs. Tighe Date: BRISTOL, October 2, 1787. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1787) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MADAM, -- I have no doubt at all of the uprightness of Mr. Tozer and his wife: but I have more acquaintance with Mr. Harper. He is a truly good man, and has a considerable share of knowledge; so that if he was willing to take the charge of this little school. [Was this John Harper who had been a preacher Mrs. Tighe lived at Rosanna, near Wicklow. See letter of Feb. 7, 1789, to her.] I know of no one that is more likely to promote the design of it. -- I am, dear madam, Your very affectionate servant. Next week I expect to be in London.

To Robert Carr Brackenbury Date: LONDON, October 20, 1787. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1787) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SIR, -- Mr. De Queteville is undoubtedly a good young man, and has a tolerably good understanding. But he thinks it better than it is, and in consequence is apt to put himself in your or my place. For these fifty years, if any one said, ‘If you do not put such an one out of Society, I will go out of it,’ I have said, ‘Pray go; I, not you, are to judge who shall stay.’ I therefore greatly approve of your purpose to give Mr. Walker [See letter of Dec. 18.] full hearing in the presence of all the preachers. I have often repented of judging too severely, but very seldom of being too merciful. As the point is undoubtedly of very great importance, it deserved serious consideration; and I am glad you took the pains to consider it, and discussed it so admirably well according to Scripture and sound reason. I enclose a few lines for Mrs. ----, for whom I feel an affectionate concern. The God whom you serve will shortly deliver you from the heaviness you feel.--I ever am, dear sir, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Jane Bisson Date: LONDON, December 17, 1787. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1787) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- I have a great union of spirit with you. I love to hear from you, especially when you send me that good news that you still stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made you free. I have a good hope that you will never lose any of the things which He has wrought in you, but that you will receive a full reward! Do you always find a clear sense of the presence of the ever-blessed Trinity [See letter of Oct. 6.] Are you enabled to rejoice evermore In what sense do you pray without ceasing And can you in everything give thanks, seeing it is the will of God concerning you in Christ Jesus What you speak of your communion with Him comforts and warms my heart. I love to read or to hear any part of your experience. If I doubted of anything you say, I would tell you so. I want to be more acquainted with you and to know everything wherein I can serve you. My dear Jenny, do not forget to pray for Yours in tender affection.

To Mrs. Barton Date: LONDON, January 11, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- You have indeed had a series of trials one upon the back of another. It is well you know in whom you have believed; otherwise you would have been weary and faint in your mind. For it is not an easy thing always to remember (then especially when we have most need of it) that 'the Lord loveth whom He chasteneth and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.' Who could believe it, if He had not told us so Himself It is well that He never fails to give us strength according to our day; and that we know these 'light afflictions, which are but for a moment, work for us a more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.' -- I am Your affectionate brother.

However, you have one Friend that never fails and that is always near. What a comfort it is that He is about your bed and about your path, still laying His hand upon you! Does He speak to you in dreams and visions of the night or wholly in your waking hours I love to hear and to read your experience of His goodness. As soon as you have opportunity, write without reserve to, my very dear sister, Yours most affectionately.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: BRISTOL, March 7, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY, -- When my appetite was entirely gone, so that all I could take at dinner was a roasted turnip, it was restored in a few days by riding out daily, after taking ten drops of elixir of vitriol in a glass of water. It is highly probable this would have the same effect in my brother's case. But in the meantime I wish he would see Dr. Whitehead. [John Whitehead. See letter of Oct. 15, 1766.] I am persuaded there is not such another physician in England; although (to confound human wisdom) he does not know how to cure his own wife. He must lie in bed as little as possible in the daytime; otherwise it will hinder his sleeping at night. Now, Sally, tell your brothers from me [See letter of March 5.] that their tenderly respectful behavior to their father (even asking his pardon if in anything they have offended him) will be the best cordial for him under heaven. I know not but they may save his life thereby. To know nothing will be wanting on your part gives great satisfaction to, my dear Sally, Yours very affectionately.

To Sarah Mallet Date: BATH, March 11, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- I should have been exceedingly glad to see you; for I have a tender affection for you, and I shall always be well pleased to hear from you and to know how your soul prospers. I do not wonder you should have trials: you may expect them from every quarter. You tread daily on dangers, snares, and death. But they cannot hurt you whilst your heart cleaves to God. Beware of pride! Beware of flatterers! Beware of dejections! But above all beware of inordinate affection! Those who profit by you will be apt to love you more than enough; and will not this naturally lead you into the same temptation Nay, Sally, is not this the case already Is your heart filled wholly with God Is it clear of idols I think you can speak to me freely, though on so delicate a subject you can hardly speak to anyone else. Is He still the sole object of your desire, the treasure and joy of your heart Considering your age and sex and situation, what but Omnipotence can keep you in the midst of the fire You will not take it amiss if I ask you another question. I know that neither your father nor uncle is rich; and in traveling up and down you will want a little money. Are you not sometimes straitened Only let me know, and you shall want nothing that is in the power of, my dear Sally, Yours affectionately.

To Mrs. Charles Wesley Date: BLACKBURN, April 21, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- You will excuse me, my dear sister, for troubling you with so many letters, for I know not how to help it. I had you and your family so much upon my heart, both for your own sake and for the sake of my brother. But I am much easier now that I find you are joined with honest John Collinson, whom I know to be not only a man of probity, but likewise a man of diligence and understanding. I am therefore persuaded he will spare no pains in doing what you wish to be done. So that I shall [not] be wanted you, as he will fully supply my lack of service. [On his return to London Wesley had breakfast with Charles Wesley's family. See letter of July 6, 1788; and for Collinson, that of May 20, 1769.] I only both Charles and Sammy may follow your example and advice [See letter of April 12 to her.] in keeping little company, and those of the best sort, men sound understanding and solid piety; for such only are for the acquaintance of men of sense. I commit you all to Him that loves you, and am, my dear Sister, Ever yours.

To Mrs. Cock (Jane Bisson) Date: EDINBURGH, May 20, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- From my long delay to answer, you might conclude I had forgotten you; but that is impossible. I shall not easily forget the agreeable conversations I had with you at Mont Plaisir and the plain and artless account which from time to time you have given me of your experience. I shall be glad to know how you have found your soul since you altered your condition. You must needs have abundantly more care now than you had in a single life. And are you able still, among all these cares, to attend upon the Lord without distraction Does nothing make you unattentive to His presence Is there no intermission of your communion with the Father and the Son When you have leisure, you will send an answer to, [See letters of April 17 and June 26 to Adam Clarke.] my dear sister, Yours very affectionately. You may direct to London.

To Peard Dickinson Date: THIRSK, June 24, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I do not know any little piece of news which has given me more satisfaction than this, that my Sister Hall has taken a lodging in Th. Philip's house. I hope to see her and you in about a fortnight, that I may have time to prepare for the Conference. [Held at London on July 29.] You do well not to indulge your thirst after books, but to confine yourself to a very few. I know no commentator on the Bible equal to Bengal. His Gnomon is a jewel; so is his Ordo Temp [His Gnomon 'as a brief and suggestive commentary on the New Testament remains unrivalled.' McClintock and Strong's Cyclopodia. Ordo temporum a principio per periodos conomio, divino, 1753.]: the finest system of chronology that ever appeared in the world. Now consider with yourself and [set] down whatever relates to the Conference. Peace be with both your spirits I -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Walter Churchey Date: NEAR LONDON, July 22, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- My DEAR BROTHER, -- I am glad you spoke to Mr. Cowper. What pity is it that such talents as his should be employed in so useless a manner! [The reference is to The Task. See letters of Sept. 20, 1786, and Sept. 27, 1788.] Mr. Bradburn delivered your papers to me a few days ago. [See letters of June 26 and Aug. 8 to Churchey.] But this is so busy a time that I had not time to go through them till to-day. In the translation of The Art of Painting [This poem, translated from the Latin of Alphonse du Fresnoy, with notes by R. Graham, fills 98 pages. See letter of Aug. 8.] there are many very good lines; but there are some that want a good deal of filing, and many that are obscure. This is the general fault. The sense is so much crowded that it is not easy to be understood. For many years I have not had any bookseller but Mr. Atlay, and my Assistants. I doubt whether any bookseller will buy Fresnoy. Some of the shorter copies are good sense and good poetry. My brother has left a translation of the Book of Psalms, and verses enough to make up at least six volumes in duodecimo. [He left three small 4to volumes of hymns and poems, a poetic version of a considerable part of the Book of Psalms (afterwards inserted with short notes in the Arminian Magazine), and five 4to volumes of hymns on the Four Gospels and the Acts. See Poetical Works of J. and C. Wesley; Jackson's Charles Wesley, ii. 451.] I could but ill spare him now I am myself so far declined into the vale of years. But it is the Lord; let Him do what seemeth Him good. Our time is now short. Let my dear Sister Churchey and you and I make the best of it. -- I am Your affectionate brother. To W. H. Kilburn LONDON, July 22, 1788.

To Mrs. Charles Wesley Date: CITY ROAD, July 25, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- You know well what a regard I had for Miss Gwynne before she was Mrs. Wesley; and it has not ceased from that time till now. I am persuaded it never will. I find you and your family much upon my heart, both for your own sakes and the sake of my brother. Therefore I will speak without reserve just what comes into my mind. I have sometimes thought you are a little like me. My wife used to tell me, 'My dear, you are too generous. You don't know the value of money.' I could not wholly deny the charge. Possibly you may sometimes lean to the same extreme. I know, you are of a generous spirit. You have an open heart and an open hand. But may it not sometimes be too open, more so than your circumstances will allow. Is it not an instance of Christian (as well as worldly) prudence, 'To cut our coat according to our cloth' If your circumstances are a little narrower, should you not contract your expenses too I need but just give you this hint, which I doubt not you will take kindly from, my dear Sally, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Ann Taylor Date: LONDON, August 2, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR NANCY,--I was well pleased when I heard you were gone to spend a little time in Cork, [See letter of June 7.] where you will have an opportunity of conversing familiarly with Sister Ward [See letters of July 16 and Aug. 2 to her.] and with that blessed woman Sister Rogers. I do not doubt but you will make the best use of these blessed opportunities. Now, my dear maid, is the time when you may improve your understanding and (what is far better) your heart. Now pray earnestly that you may be enabled to give your whole heart to Him who alone is worthy of it. -- I am, my dear Nancy, Yours affectionately.

To Frances Godfrey Date: LONDON, August 5, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- YOU have indeed escaped as a bird out of the snare of the fowler; the snare is broken, and you are delivered. Certainly you have great reason to praise Him who has brought you to the knowledge of His truth; and not only given you to know but to experience the truth as it is in Jesus. I felt a love for you from the first time I saw you, when you was under those grievous trials. [See letters of July 31, 1784, and Aug. 2, 1789.] Now that you have recovered some measure of health and strength, employ it all to the glory of Him that gave it. Now go on to perfection! Hunger and thirst after righteousness, till you are satisfied therewith; then you will be more and more near to, my dear Fanny, Yours affectionately. My love to your mother.

To Walter Churchey Date: LONDON, August 8, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTER, -- I think you know that I love you and that I should rejoice to do anything for you that is in my power. And one allowed proof of love is plain dealing. Therefore I will speak to you without any reserve. There are many good lines, and some very good, both in the ode and in the translation of The Art of Painting. And I really think you improve in versifying: you write a good deal better than you did some years ago. You express your sense with more perspicuity than you used to do, and appear to have greater variety of words as well as more strength. But there is nothing (to use the modern cant word) sentimental in either the ode or the translation. There is nothing of tender or pathetic, nothing that touches the passions. Therefore no bookseller would venture to buy them, as knowing they will not sell. And they lie utterly out of the way of the Methodists, who do not care to buy or even to read (at least the generality of them) any but religious books. I do not believe all my influence would induce them to buy as many copies as would suffice to pay for the printing. I have not yet seen my brother's translation of the Psalms. Neither, indeed, could I as yet have time to read it, were it put into my hands. If any had asked my advice, they would not have thrust out the account of George Lukins [Lukins had been exorcised in the Vestry of Temple Church, Bristol. See Journal, vii. 362.] into the world so prematurely. It should have been fully authenticated first. I am, with love to Sister Churchey, Your affectionate brother. I expect to be at Brecon on Sunday se'nnight.

To Elizabeth Baker Date: CARMARTHEN, August 26, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BETSY, -- Since I had the pleasure of seeing you I have been thinking much on what you said concerning your loving others too much. In one sense this cannot be; you cannot have too much benevolence for the whole human race: but in another sense you may; you may grieve too much for the distresses of others, even so much as to make you incapable of giving them the relief which otherwise you should give them. So I know one that, when he sees any one in strong pain, directly faints away. [See letter of Aug. 8 to Lady Maxwell.] It is something like this which you mean by feeling too much for others You can give me two or three instances of it, and then I shall be better able to judge. Have you a constant witness of the pardoning love of God And do you find an abiding love to Him Have you yet been enabled to give Him your whole heart If so, at what time and in what manner did you receive this blessing I think you can speak with all freedom to Yours very affectionately.

To Mrs. Charles Wesley Date: BRISTOL, September 22, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SISTER, -- As John Atlay has deserted me and George Whitfield is but just come into his place, I do not yet know anything of my own circumstances. But I hope to be in town on Monday; and, either for the sake of you or my dear Sally, I shall certainly do anything that is in the power of, dear sister, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Walter Churchey Date: BRISTOL, September 27, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- To-morrow evening I am to set out for London. So I still creep up and down, as I would fain do a little work before the night cometh wherein no man can work. I commend you much for not suffering your daughter to go you know not where. What would it profit her to gain a thousand pounds and then lose her soul which could scarce fail to be the consequence of placing her in an ungodly family. I do not know anything in Bristol that would suit; but very probably I may find something in London. I should be glad if I could have a conversation with Mr. Cowper. I verily think there would be no great difference between us. [See letters of July 22 and Dec. 6 to Churchey.] September 27, LONDON. I think it is a pity to burn the poems. There are many good lines in them. [See letter of Aug. 8 to him.] So there are in the Dedication, which I thought I had sent you with the rest. I will send two of the Prayer-Books by the first opportunity. Peace be with you and yours.--I am Your affectionate brother.

To John Blunt Date: CITY ROAD, November 7, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- BROTHER BLUNT, -- I am constrained to tell you you use me ill. Be you ever so great a man and I ever so little, you owe it to me to give me an account at the stated times of those souls I have entrusted you with, for whom I am to give an account to God. Now I am speaking (perhaps the last time), friendship compels me to speak plain. Of all the men I have conversed with in London or in England, I think you have the most pride, you are above measure self-conceited and full of yourself. Whereas you are by no means equal even in sense to those whom you despise -- Mr. Bradbum, Moore and John Edwards, for instance. Their natural understanding is stronger than yours, and is likewise far better improved. O humble yourself before God and man! Despise no man but yourself! Learn to say from your heart, 'Lord, I am not high-minded! I have no proud looks!' Then you will give as much pleasure as you have frequently given pain to Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Cock Date: LONDON, December 27, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- I was glad to receive a few lines from you. From the time I saw you first, and indeed before I saw you, I could not but feel a strong affection for you. And I pray that nothing may abate our affection for each other till we meet in a better world. When I heard of your marriage it gave me pain. I was afraid least you should have suffered loss. [See letter of Oct. 12.] Do you feel as much union with God as ever As close fellowship with the Father and the Son And is it as constant as ever Are you as happy as you was once And do you ever think of, my dear Jenny, Your affectionate brother

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON, January 9, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- 'Sir, you are troubled,' said Mr. Law to me, 'because you do not understand how God is dealing with you. Perhaps if you. did, it would not so well answer His design. He is teaching you to trust Him further than you can see Him.' He is now teaching you the same lesson. Hitherto you cannot understand His ways. But they are all mercy and truth. And though you do not know now what He does you shall know hereafter. I am acquainted with several persons whom I believed to be saved from sin. But there is great variety in the manner wherein God is pleased to lead them. Some of them are called to act much for God, some to rejoice much, some to suffer much. All of these shall receive their crown. But when the Son of Man shall come in His glory, the brightest crown will be given to the sufferers. Look up, thou blessed one l the time is at hand! -- I am Ever yours.

To Walter Churchey Date: CORK, May 4. 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- My DEAR BROTHER, -- I am afraid Henry Floyd's estate is unsaleable, unless he can find the writing, for I cannot. I shall not be in London before October at soonest; but if Henry Moore will revise the copy, [Moore was at City Road, near to the printer of Churchey's Poems. See letters of March 3 and May 25 to him.] he will do almost as well as me. I hope the beginning of the work is in the press, else the book will not be printed off before Michaelmas. I wonder you do not understand mankind better, especially those wretches the great vulgar. If two in three of your subscribers stand to their word, it will be strange indeed. It was a deadly step not to secure half the money at the time of subscription. I receive the whole. I have now about sixty guineas, and hope to receive as many more. But where have you lived that you have found so many generous men It is strange that you should know more of them than I do. I am utterly against printing above five hundred copies. [Wesley's prudence and business sagacity contrast favorably with the lawyer's. See letters of Jan. 27 and May 25 to him.] If you and I between us can procure four hundred subscriptions, it is all we can expect. -- I am, in haste, Your affectionate brother.

To Zachariah Yewdull Date: DUBLIN, June 20, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR ZACHARY, -- You have chose an admirably good advocate in honest Alexander Mather. I shall blame you if you cannot plead your own cause when you have him at your elbows, especially when you know you have another friend standing behind the curtain. For with regard to circuits to be assigned, or any other assistance you may be assured of anything that is in the power of Your affectionate brother.

To Freeborn Garrettson Date: CHESTER, July 15, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- You are entirely in the right. There can be no manner of doubt that it was the enemy of souls that hindered your sending me your experience. Many parts both of your inward and outward experience ought by no means to be suppressed. But if you are minded to send anything to me, you have no time to lose. [See letters of Jan. 24, 1789, and Feb. 3, 1790, to him.] Whatever you do for me you must do quickly, lest death have quicker wings than love. A great man observes that there is a threefold leading of the Spirit: some He leads by giving them on every occasion apposite texts of Scripture; some by suggesting reasons for every step they take -- the way by which He chiefly leads me; and some by impressions. But He judges the last to be the least desirable way, as it is often impossible to distinguish dark impressions from divine or even diabolical. I hope you will not long delay to write more particularly to Your affectionate friend and brother.

4. But may it not be asked 'whether this is not a change for the better, seeing hops are so exceeding wholesome a plant' Are they so Why, then, do physicians almost with one voice forbid their patients the use of malt drink, particularly all that are infected with the scurvy or any distemper related to it Do not they know there is not a more powerful anti-scorbutic in the world than wort -- that is, unhopped decoction of malt What a demonstration is this that it is the addition of hops which turns this excellent medicine into poison! And who does not know that wort, unhopped malt drink, is an excellent medicine both for the gout and stone But will any physician in his senses recommend the common malt drink to one that is ill of or subject to those diseases Why not Because there is no drink that more directly tends to breed and increase both one and the other.

To the Printer of the 'Bristol Gazette' [See letters of Sept. 25 and Oct. 12 (to Adam Clarke).] Date: BRISTOL, October 3, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- I am much obliged to your last correspondent also for the candor with which he writes. 'Mr. Wesley,' he observes, 'had cautioned us against the use of hops on account of its poisonous quality. But the authority on which he grounds this is only an old obsolete Act of Parliament. He has not informed us of its mode of operation on the animal frame.' 'Tis very true. I leave that to the gentlemen of the Faculty, for many of whom I have an high respect. Meantime I declare my own judgment, grounded not only on the Act of Parliament, but first on my own experience with regard to the gravel or stone, and secondly on the opinion of all the physicians I have heard or read that spoke on the subject. I do not apprehend that we need recur either to 'the Elements of Chemistry' or to the College of Physicians on the head. I urge a plain matter of fact - 'that hops are pernicious.' I did not say to all (though perhaps they may more or less) but to those that are inclined to stone, gout, or scurvy. So I judge, because I feel it to myself if I drink it two or three days together; and because so I hear from many skillful physicians; and I read in their works. I cannot but return thanks to both your correspondents for their manner of writing, worthy of gentlemen. As to the gentleman brewer of Bath that challenges me to engage him for five hundred pounds, I presume he had taken a draught of his well-hopped beverage, or he would not have been so valiant. So I wish him well; and am, sir, Your humble servant.

To Elizabeth Baker Date: SARUM, October 5, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BETSY, -- Frequently I have been thinking of you and I thought it a long time since I heard from you. [See letters of Sept. 16, 1788, and Oct. 29, 1789.] This is always very agreeable to me, as I found much union with you ever since I saw you. I then took knowledge that you had been with Jesus and had drunk into His spirit. Ne'er let your faith forsake its hold, Nor hope decline, nor love grow cold, both in the case of Robert Humphrey and that of the poor woman you mention. You will do well to [note] everything of this kind that came [within] your notice. The merciful Lord has so done His marvelous works that they ought to be had in remembrance. These instances should certainly quicken your zeal and increase your expectation of seeing good days at Monmouth. When Dr. [Papar] came to see his friend Dr. Curtis, he found mortification on his instep, where was a black spot as large as a crown piece. The mortification was likewise begun under his knee, where was a circle .... and adjoining to it a circle as [red] as scarlet. He ordered me to rub this with a warm hand.. The parts were steeped half an hour with boiled camo[mile].. After one with a warm hand rubbed a mixture.. This was [done] twice a day. In two or three days Dr. Curtis was [well]. [Some part of the letter is missing, so that the sense is not clear.] Pray send me your Receipt for the Hyaran... Behavior to me from, my dear Betsy, Yours very affectionately. I am going to London.

To Thomas Stedman Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- December 1789. REVEREND AND DEAR SIR, -- I will desire a friend to look over my letters in a day or two, and see if any [are] from Dr. Doddridge. I know one or two of these are printed in my Journal, the originals of which are burnt. Possibly two or three more may remain. If they are to be found, you [they] shall be at your service. How one generation goes and another comes I My grandmother Annesley lived forty years with her husband, who never was seen to smile after her death, though he lived six or seven years. [See letter of Aug. 13, 1774.] -- I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant.

To Thomas Tattershall Date: NEAR LONDON, January 6, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, -- Because you desire some word I write, although I have no tidings ready. I know of no preacher that is now ready to go out; and you know we can neither buy nor hire preachers. Yet I am not sorry that your small friend [William Green, his colleague. See letter of Oct. 25, 1789, to him.] has taken himself away; for he was really a dangerous man. His bitter enmity against the Church made him utterly unfit to be a Methodist preacher; and his elaborate Discourse against Going to Church was enough to confound any one that was not used to controversy. Yet I did not dare to put him away; but I am not at all sorry that he is gone away. I shall not be forward to take him again; but in any other way I would be glad to help him. I would not scruple giving him a few pounds if it would do him any good. -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Cock Date: LONDON, February 13, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, The tender affection which I bear you makes me love to see your name at the bottom of a letter; but especially when it brings me the good news that your spirit is still rejoicing in God your Savior. My sight is so far decayed that I cannot well read a small print by candlelight; but I can write almost as well as ever I could: and it does me no harm but rather good to preach once or twice a day. I love to hear the particulars of your experience, and I had a letter a few days ago from one of our sisters in Scotland whose experience agrees much with yours; only she goes further. She speaks of being 'taken up into heaven, surrounded with the blessed Trinity, and let into God the Father.' I commend you to His care; and am Yours most affectionately.

To Dr. Pretyman Tomline, Bishop of Lincoln () Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- [March 1790.] MY LORD, -- I am a dying man, having already one foot in the grave. Humanly speaking, I cannot long creep upon the earth, being now nearer ninety than eighty years of age. But I cannot die in peace before I have discharged this office of Christian love to your Lordship. I write without ceremony, as neither hoping nor fearing anything from your Lordship or from any man living. And I ask, in the name and in the presence of Him to whom both you and I are shortly to give an account, why do you trouble those that are quiet in the land those that fear God and work righteousness Does your Lordship know what the Methodists are that many thousands of them are zealous members of the Church of England, and strongly attached not only to His Majesty but to his present Ministry Why should your Lordship, setting religion out of the question, throw away such a body of respectable friends Is it for their religious sentiments Alas, my Lord! is this a time to persecute any man for conscience' sake I beseech you, my Lord, do as you would be done to. You are a man of sense; you are a man of learning; nay, I verily believe (what is of infinitely more value), you are a man of piety. Then think, and let think. I pray God to bless you with the choicest of His blessings. -- I am, my Lord, &c.

To Anne Cutler Date: WALTON, April 15, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- There is something in the dealings of God with your soul which is out of the common way. But I have known several whom he has been pleased to lead exactly in the same way, and particularly in manifesting to them distinctly the three Persons of the ever-blessed Trinity. You may tell all your experience to me at any time; but you will need to be cautious in speaking to others, for they would not understand what you say. Go on in the name of God and the power of His might. Pray for the whole spirit of humility; and I beg you would write and speak without reserve to, dear Nanny, Yours affectionately.

To Mrs. Cock Date: NEWCASTLE, June 6, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- My DEAR SISTER, -- To hear from you is always a pleasure to me; though it is a pleasure mixed with concern when I hear of your weakness or sickness. Only I know the Lord loveth whom He chasteneth. But of what kind is your illness Perhaps I might be enabled to tell you how to remove it. And if you can recover your health, you ought; for health is a great blessing. In August last my strength failed almost at once, and my sight in a great measure went from me. But all is well: I can still write almost as easily as ever, and I can read in a clear fight; and I think, if I could not read or write at all, I could still say something for God. [See letter of July 3 to Mr. Heath.] When you have more strength, tell me more of the work of God, whether in yourself or those round about you. And ought you not to let me know if you are in any temporal distress For everything that concerns you, concerns, my dear Jenny, Yours most affectionately. First addressed--

To John Dickins Date: WHITBY, June 19, I790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- This morning I received yours of April 9, with Mr. Asbury's bill enclosed. I was surprised when Lady Huntingdon absolutely forbade any preacher in her Connection to marry. All can say in that respect is, 'If thou mayst be free, use it rather.' I married because I needed a home, in order to recover my health; and I did recover it. But I did not seek happiness thereby, and I did not find it. We know this may be found in the knowledge and enjoyment and service of God, whether in a married or Single state. But whenever we deny ourselves and take up the cross for His sake, the happier we shall be both here and in eternity. Let us work on likewise, and in His time He will give us a full reward. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Cock Date: NEAR BRISTOL, July 22, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- I have reason to bless God that I can still see a little; so that I can as yet go on in my business: and it is enough if we are enabled either to do or to suffer His holy and acceptable will. It is no wonder if among yourselves there arise men speaking perverse things. Wherever our Lord sows His good seed Satan will endeavor to sow his tares also; and they are suffered, the tares and the wheat, to grow up together for a season, to exercise our faith and patience. I hope Mr. Stevens will be more and more useful among you, as his eye is single; therefore there can be no objection to his continuing with you a little longer. [William Stevens was appointed to Portsmouth in 1790; he died in 1813.] I am always glad to hear a little of your experience; and, indeed, the more the better. Wishing you and yours every blessing, I remain, Yours most affectionately.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: NEAR COWBRIDGE, August 18, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY,--I always mildly reprove the profane person or (what is worse) the profane gentlemen; and many of them will receive it civilly if not thankfully. They all know (captains as well as common men) that swearing is not necessary; and even now we have captains of our men-of-war who do not swear at all. The captain of the ship ['The Samuel, Captain Percy' (Journal, i. 413).] wherein I came from America did not swear at all; and never was man better obeyed. You have certainly need for thankfulness as well as patience, and you should be sure to take as much exercise every day as you can bear. I wish you would desire George Whitfield to send you the chamber-horse [For indoor exercise. See letters of July 17, 1785, and March 13, 1788.] out of my dining-room, which you should use half an hour at least daily. If I live to see London, I think I must take you to Twicken-ham. Surely Mr. Galloway owes to the world a true account of the American revolution. All the question is whether it should be published during his life. What says my brother - When loss of friends ordained to know, Next pain and guilt the sorest ill below. [S. Wesley, Jun., on Dr. Gastrell.] But this you did not take into the question. Neither that-- Let each his friendly aid afford, And feel his brother's care. Perpetual cheerfulness is the temper of a Christian, which is far enough from Stoicism. Real Christians know it is their duty to maintain this, which .is in one sense to rejoice evermore. I think Sammy and you should converse frequently and freely together. He might help you, and you might help him. I take him to have a mind capable of friendship, and hope if I live to be more acquainted with him. The gentleman you mention just called upon me, but did not stay, as I had company with me. To-morrow I hope to be at Bristol. -- I am, my dear Sally, Most affectionately yours.

To Jasper Winscom Date: BRISTOL, August 28, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JASPER, -- I do not see how you can be spared from your own circuit till another is procured to take your place. [Winstom had been Assistant in the Isle of Wight, and was now appointed to Oxfordshire.] Neither do I conceive how Sarum Circuit can bear the expense of another preacher. I am wellnigh tired of it. I have had more trouble with this circuit than with ten circuits besides. You did exceeding well in adjusting matters at Whitchurch; but I am sorry for poor Sister Haime. [John Haime, Wesley's soldier preacher, died at Whirchurch on Aug. 18, 1784. See letter in March 1744 to him.] I am sure she was a good woman once. I do not understand what you mean as to Winton. How did William Thom raise them eight pounds [William Thom had been Assistant at Saturn.] And on what account did you pay six pounds -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mr. York Date: LONDON, October 22, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I think you know I would refuse you nothing which I could allow with a clear conscience. But I cannot, I dare not consent to the violation of that rule which was fixed in the late Conference: 'No preacher is to preach three times in a day to the same congregation.' It is neither good for his body nor soul. -- I am, my dear brother, Your affectionate brother.

To John Valton Date: LONDON, November 6, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- When you went into the West I was fully persuaded our Lord would go with you and prosper your labor. And I make no doubt He will fulfill in you all the good pleasure of His goodness and all the work of God with power. You do not know the Cornish yet. Many of them have little sense and a great inclination to criticize. Rob. Empringham is a sound though not a bright preacher. Brother Leggat's far from a contemptible one. If they use the preachers I send thus, they shall. If Jno. Bredin goes for some months, who will keep him I will have no demand made on the Conference. -- I am, with kind love to Sister Valton, Ever yours.

To Thomas Taylor Date: LONDON, February 13, 1791. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1791) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, -- The doubt is whether the remedy would not propagate the diseases by making many people curious to understand it who never thought of it before. Remember the madman's words, Kill your enemies Kill a fool's head of your own. They will die of themselves if you let them alone. I take knowledge that you have been Dissenter. Several clergymen at this day do good both to the cause of God in general and to the Methodist in particular -- and they that hurt us do it not as clergymen but as Calvinist clergymen. I will not blame any of my preachers for mildly warning our people of them. Unstable Methodists will always be subject to the temptation of sermon-hunting. I do not advise our people to go to the Low Church. [The Low Church in Hull.] I shall write no plan till I know how my strength turns out; perhaps I may do it when I come to Bristol. [This letter was dictated. See letter of Feb. 18.] Peace be with you and yours! -- I am, dear Tommy, Yours affectionately.

But ‘the Methodist proclaims he can bring into the field twenty-five thousand men.” What Methodist? Where and when P Prove this fact, and I will allow you, I am a Turk. “‘But it is said they are all good subjects. Perhaps they are; because under a Protestant government they have all the indulgence they can wish for.” And do you seriously wish for a Popish government to abridge them of that indulgence? “But has not a bad use been made of this? Has not the decency of religion been perverted?” Not in the least: The decency of religion is never so well advanced, as by advancing inward and outward religion together. 2. ‘Have not the minds of the vulgar been darkened to a total neglect of their civil and social duties?” Just the contrary: Thousands in London, as well as elsewhere, have been enlightened to under stand, and prevailed on to practise, those duties, as they never did before. 3. ‘Has not the peace of many families been ruined?’ The lost peace of many families has been restored. In others, a furious opposition to true religion has occasioned division, as our Lord foretold it would. 4. ‘Have not the 36 REv. J. wesLEY’s [Jan. 1761. circumstances of many industrious tradesmen been hurt?’ I believe not. I know no instance; but I know an hundred tradesmen in London who began to be industrious since they began to fear God, and their circumstances, low enough till then, are now easy and affluent. “I am almost ashamed to spend time upon these thread bare objections, which have been answered over and over. But if they are advanced again, they must be answered again, lest silence should pass for guilt. “‘But how can the government distinguish between tender ness of conscience, and schemes of interest?” Nothing more easy. “They may withdraw the licenses of such.” Sir, you have forgot the question. Before they withdraw them, they are to distinguish whether they are such or no. And how are they to do this? ‘O, it is very easy!” So you leave them as wise as they were before. “But, ‘the Methodist who pretends to be of the Church of England in forms of worship, and differs from her in point of doctrine, is not, let his pretences be what they will, a member of that Church. Alas, Sir!

If not, you may happen to be no Priest, and so all your ministry is nothing worth : Nay, by the same rule, he may happen to be no Bishop. And who can tell how often this has been the case? But if there has been only one instance in a thousand years, what becomes of your uninterrupted succession? “This ad hominem. But I have a word more ad rem. Can a man teach what he does not know? Is it possible a man should teach others what he does not know himself? Certainly it is not. Can a Priest then teach his hearers the way to heaven, marked out in our Lord's Sermon on the Mount, if he does not know or understand the way himself? Nothing is more impossible. But how many of your Priests know nothing about it ! What avails then their commission to teach what they cannot teach, because they know it not? Did God then send these men on a fool’s errand? send them to do what they cannot do? O say not so ! And what will be the event of their attempting to teach they know not what? Why, ‘if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the pit.’” Sat. 21.--I spent some hours with Mr. L. and Mr. I'Anson, in order to prevent another Chancery suit. And though the matter could not then be fully adjusted, yet the suit did not go on. Tues. 24.--I retired to Lewisham, and transcribed the list of the society. About an hundred and sixty I left out, to whom I can do no good at present. The number of those which now remain, is two thousand three hundred and seventy-five. 46 REv. J. WESLEY’s [March, 1761. Fri. 27.--At twelve I met about thirty persons who had experienced a deep work of God; and I appointed an hour for meeting them every week. Whether they are saved from sin or no, they are certainly full of faith and love, and peculiarly helpful to my soul. Sun. MARCH 1.--We had a happy love-feast at the chapel. Many of our brethren spoke plainly and artlessly what God had done for their souls. I think none were offended; but many were strengthened and comforted. Wed.

But there cannot be much done here, till we preach abroad, or at least in the heart of the town. We are now quite at one end; and people will not come from the other till they have first “tasted the good word.” Thur. 21.--I rode to Colchester, and found a quiet, loving, regular society. After spending a day with them, on Saturday, 23, I cheerfully returned to London. Wed. 27.--I had a striking proof that God can teach by whom he will teach. A man full of words, but not of understanding, convinced me of what I could never see before, that anima est ex traduce; that all the souls of his posterity, as well as their bodies, were in our first parent. Fri. FEBRUARY 5.--I met at noon, as usual, those who believe they are saved from sin, and warned them of the enthusiasm which was breaking in, by means of two or three weak though good men, who, from a misconstrued text in the Revelation, inferred that they should not die. They received the warning in much love. However, this gave great occasion of triumph to those who sought occasion, so that they rejoiced, as though they had found great spoil. After preaching at Deptford, Welling, and Sevenoaks, on Tuesday and Wednesday I rode on to Sir Thomas I’Anson’s, near Tunbridge, and, between six and seven, preached in his large parlour, which opens likewise into the hall. The plain people were all attention. If the seed be watered, surely there will be some fruit. Sun. 14.--I buried the remains of Thomas Salmon, a good and useful man. What was peculiar in his experience was, he did not know when he was justified; but he did know when he March, 1762.] JOURNAL. 81 was renewed in love, that work being wrought in a most distinct manner. After this he continued about a year in constant love, joy, and peace; then, after an illness of a few days, he cheerfully went to God. Monday, 15, and the following days, I spent in tran scribing the list of the society. It never came up before to two thousand four hundred: Now it contains above two thousand seven hundred members. Sun.

That many things related therein are highly improbable. I fear the relators did not scruple lying for the Church, or for the credit of their Order: 2. That many of their reputed virtues were really no virtues at all; being no fruits of the love of God or man, and no part of the mind which was in Christ Jesus: 3. That many of their applauded actions were neither commendable nor imitable: 4. That what was really good, in their tempers or lives, was so deeply tinctured with enthusiasm, that most readers would be far more likely to receive hurt than good from these accounts of them. Sat. DEc. 4.--At the desire of Mr. Maxfield, and the seeming desire of themselves, I baptized two foreigners, (one of them in a Turkish habit,) who professed themselves to have been Turks. On this I then remarked, “They may be what they profess, but I wait for farther evidence. Their story is extremely plausible; it may be true, or it may not.” Sun. 5.--To take away one ground of contention from many well-meaning people, in preaching on, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard-seed,” I endeavoured to show at large, in what sense sanctification is gradual, and in what sense it is instantaneous: And (for the present, at least) many were delivered from vain reasonings and disputings. Monday, 6, and the following days, I corrected the notes upon the Revelation. O, how little do we know of this deep book At least, how little do I know ! I can barely conjecture, not affirm any one point concerning that part of it which is yet unfulfilled. Wed. 8.--I had a second opportunity of hearing George Bell. I believe part of what he said was from God, (this was my reflection at that time,) part from an heated imagination. But as he did not scream, and there was nothing dangerously wrong, I did not yet see cause to hinder him. All this time I observed a few of our brethren were diligently propagating that principle, that none can teach those who are renewed in love, unless he be in the state himself. I saw the tendency of this; but I saw that violent remedies would not avail. Mon. 13.--I mentioned this to some of my friends, and told 124 REv. J. WESLEY’s [Dec. 1762. them what would be the consequence.

But when we had rode three or four miles, I recollected that I had heard speak of a ford, which would save us some miles’ riding. We inquired of an old man, who soon mounted his horse, showed us the way, and rode through the river before us. Soon after my mare dropped a shoe, which occasioned so much loss of time, that we could not ride the sands, but were obliged to go round, through a miserable road, to Llanellos. To mend the matter, our guide lost his way, both before we came to Llanellos and after; so that it was as much as we could do, to reach Bocher-Ferry, a little after sunset. Knowing it was impossible then to reach Penreese, as we designed, we went on straight to Swansea. Sat. 27.--I preached at seven to one or two hundred people, many of whom seemed full of good desires. But as there is no society, I expect no deep or lasting work. Mr. Evans now gave me an account from his own knowledge, of what has made a great noise in Wales:--“It is common in the congregations, attended by Mr. W. W., and one or two other Clergymen, after the preaching is over, for any one that has a mind, to give out a verse of an hymn. This they sing over and over with all their might, perhaps above thirty, yea, forty times. Meanwhile the bodies of two or three, sometimes ten or Aug. 1763.] JOURNAL. 145 twelve are violently agitated; and they leap up and down, in all manner of postures, frequently for hours together.” I think, there needs no great penetration to understand this. They are honest, upright men, who really feel the love of God in their hearts. But they have little experience, either of the ways of God, or the devices of Satan. So he serves himself of their simplicity, in order to wear them out, and to bring a discredit on the work of God. About two I preached at Cowbridge, in the Assembly room, and then went on to Llandaff. The congregation was waiting; so I began without delay, explaining to them the righteousness of faith.

came to see her. He asked, “Do you know me?” She said, ‘No, you all appear to me like Blackamoors.” “But do not you know my voice?’ ‘No; I know no one's voice, except Molly L--’s.’ “Do you pray God to help you?’ ‘No, I can’t pray. God will never help me. I belong to the devil; and he will have me: He will take me, body and soul, on Monday.’ ‘Would you have me pray for you?” “No indeed : For when people pray, he torments me worse than ever. In her fits she was first convulsed all over, seeming in an agony of pain, and screaming terribly. Then she began cursing, swearing, and blaspheming in the most horrid manner. Then she burst into vehement fits of laughter; then sunk down as dead. All this time she was quite senseless; I50 REv. J. WESLEY’s [Oct. 1763. then she fetched a deep sigh, and recovered her sense and understanding, but was so weak that she could not speak to be heard, unless you put your ear almost close to her mouth. “When Mr. W. began praying, she began screaming, so that a mob quickly gathered about the house. However, he prayed on, till the convulsions and screaming ceased, and she came to her senses much sooner than usual. What most surprised us was, that she continued in her senses, and soon after began to pray herself. “On Sunday evening Mr. W. came again, asked her many questions, pressed her to call upon God for power to believe, and then prayed with her. She then began to pray again, and continued in her senses longer than she had dome for a month before; but still insisted, the devil would come the next day, between two and three, and take her away. “She begged me to sit up with her that night, which I willingly did. About four in the morning, she burst out into a flood of tears, crying, ‘What shall I do? What shall I do? I cannot stand this day. This day I shall be lost. I went to prayer with her, and exhorted her to pray for faith, and her agony ceased. “About half-hour after ten, ten of us came together, as we had agreed the day before.

1764.] JOURNAL, 159 water was like a sea on both sides. I asked the ferryman, “Can we ride the causeway?” He said, “Yes, Sir; if you keep in the middle.” But this was the difficulty, as the whole causeway was covered with water to a considerable depth. And this in many parts ran over the causeway with the swift ness and violence of a sluice. Once my mare lost both her fore feet, but she gave a spring, and recovered the causeway: Otherwise we must have taken a swim; for the water on either side was ten or twelve feet deep. However, after one or two plunges more, we got through, and came safe to Witney. The congregation in the evening, as well as the next day, was both large and deeply attentive. This is such a people as I have not seen,--so remarkably diligent in business, and, at the same time, of so quiet a spirit, and so calm and civil in their behaviour. Thur. 19.--I rode through Oxford to Henley. The people here bear no resemblance to those of Witney. I found a wild, staring congregation, many of them void both of common sense and common decency. I spoke exceeding plain to them all, and reproved some of them sharply. Friday, 20. I took (probably my final) leave of Henley, and returned to London. Mon. 23.--I rode to Sundon, and preached in the evening to a very quiet and very stupid people. How plain is it, that even to enlighten the understanding is beyond the power of man After all our preaching here, even those who have constantly attended no more understand us than if we had preached in Greek. Thur. 26.--Returning from Bedford, I tried another way to reach them. I preached on, “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched;” and set before them the terrors of the Lord, in the strongest manner I was able. It seemed to be the very thing they wanted. They not only listened with the deepest attention, but appeared to be more affected than I had ever seen them by any discourse whatever. IVed. FEBRUARY 1.--I buried the remains of William Hurd, a son of affliction for many years, continually struggling with inward and outward trials. But his end was peace. Thur. 2.--I preached again in the Foundery, which had been repairing for several weeks.

The young woman was the only person of them all, who used to keep her senses during the fit. In answer to many questions, she said, “I first feel a pain in my left foot, 180 REv. J. wesley’s [June, 1764. then in my head; then my hands and feet shake, and I cannot speak; and quickly I begin to jump or run.” While we were talking, she cried out, “O, I have a pain in my foot: It is in my hand: It is here, at the bending of my arm. O, my head my head my head !” Immediately her arms were stretched out, and were as an iron bar: I could not bend one of her fingers; and her body was bent backward; the lower part remaining quite erect, while her back formed exactly a half circle,--her head hanging even with her hips. I was going to catch her; but one said, “Sir, you may let her alone, for they never fall.” But I defy all mankind to account for her not falling, when the trunk of her body hung in that manner. In many circumstances this case goes far beyond the famous one mentioned by Boerhaave; particularly in that,-- their telling before, when and how they should be taken again. Whoever can account for this upon natural principles, has my free leave : I cannot. I therefore believe, if this be in part a natural distemper, there is something preternatural too. Yet supposing this, I can easily conceive, Satan will so dis guise his part therein, that we cannot precisely determine, which part of the disorder is natural, and which preternatural. Sat. 2.--I rode to Aberdeen, and preached in the evening in the College-Hall, and at seven in the morning, Sunday, 3. At four in the afternoon I preached to a crowded audience in the College kirk, at Old-Aberdeen. At seven I preached in the College close, at New-Aberdeen. But the congregation was so exceeding large, that many were not able to hear. However, many did hear, and I think feel, the application of, “Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” We want nothing here but a larger House. And the foundation of one is laid already. It is true, we have little money, and the society is poor; but we know in whom we have believed. Thur.

There is something not easily explained in the fellowship of the Spirit, which we enjoy with a society of living Christians. You have no need to give up your share therein, and in the various blessings that result from it. You have no need to exclude yourself from the benefit of the advice and exhortations given from time to time. These are by no means to be despised, even supposing you have yourself more understanding than him that gives them. You need not lose the benefit of those prayers which experience shows are attended with a peculiar blessing. “But I do not care to meet a class; I find no good in it.’ Suppose you find even a dislike, a loathing of it; may not this be natural, or even diabolical? In spite of this, break through, make a fair trial. It is but a lion in the way. Meet only six times, (with previous prayer) and see if it do not vanish away. But if it be a cross, still bear it for the sake of your brethren. “But I want to gain my friends and relations. If so, stand firm. If you give way, you hurt them, and they will press upon you the more. If you do not, you will probably gain them; otherwise you confirm both their wrong notions and wrong tempers. Because I love you I have spoken fully and freely; to know that I have not spoken in vain, will be a great satisfaction to “Your affectionate brother, fg J. W.” In the evening I preached at Liverpool, and the next day, Sunday, 15, the House was full enough. Many of the rich and fashionable were there, and behaved with decency. Indeed, I have always observed more courtesy and humanity at Liverpool, than at most sea-ports in England. Mon. 16.--In the evening the House was fuller, if possible, than the night before. I preached on the “one thing needful;” and the rich behaved as seriously as the poor. Only one young gentlewoman (I heard) laughed much. Poor thing! Doubtless she thought, “I laugh prettily.” Tues. 17.--I preached at Warrington. But what a change | No opposer, nor any trifler now !

Wed. AUGUST 1.--It was with difficulty I reached Cowbridge about one, where the congregation was waiting. I found they had had heavy rain great part of the day; but very little fell upon us. Nor do I remember that from the beginning of March till now we have been in more than one heavy shower of rain, either in England, Scotland, or Wales. I preached in the evening at Llandaff, and on Thursday, 2, in the Town-Hall at Cardiff. Saturday, 4. We crossed at the New-Passage, and rode on to Bristol. Sun. 5.--I preached in Prince’s Street at eight; at two, under the sycamore-tree at Kingswood; and at five, near King’s Square in Bristol. How many thousands in this city do see in this “their day, the things that belong to their peace l’’ On Monday, the 6th, our Conference began. The great point I now laboured for was a good understanding with all our brethren of the Clergy who are heartily engaged in propagating vital religion. Saturday, 11. I took chaise early in the morning, and at night came safe to London. Sun. 12.--In the afternoon I preached in Moorfields on those comfortable words, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” Thousands heard with calm and deep attention. This also hath God wrought! Mon. 13.--I was again as fully employed as at the Confer ence, in visiting classes from morning till night. Saturday, 18. I preached, for the first time, in our new chapel at Snows fields, on, “O, how amiable are thy tabernacles, thou Lord of hosts l” Sun. 19.--Meeting with a pious and sensible man, who was born in the Isle of Skye, I said, “Tell me freely, did you yourself ever know a second-sighted man?” He answered, after a little pause, “I have known more than one or two.” I said, “But were they not deceivers?--How do you know they were really such?” He replied, “I have been in company with them, when they dropped down as dead. Sept. 1764.] JOURNAL. 195 Coming to themselves, they looked utterly amazed, and said, ‘I have been in such a place, and I saw such and such persons (perhaps fifty miles off) die in such a manner;’ and when inquiry was made, I never could find that they were mistaken in one circumstance.

I found a neighbouring gentleman had been there, moving every stone, to prevent my preaching. I was informed, his first design was to raise a mob; then he would have had the Churchwardens inter pose: Whether they intended it or no, I cannot tell; but they neither did nor said any thing. The congregation filled a great part of the church, and were all deeply attentive Surely good will be done in this place, if it be not prevented by a mixture of various doctrines. Wed, 3.--I rode to Salisbury, and, going slowly forward, on Saturday, 6, came to London. Sun. 7.--I preached in the morning at Snowsfields, and afterwards at West-Street. We had a glorious opportunity at the Lord’s Supper; the rocks were broken in pieces. At five I preached in Moorfields to a huge multitude, on, “Ye are saved through faith.” A little before twelve I took the machine for Norwich. Monday, 8. We dined at Bury, where a gentlewoman came into the coach, with whom I spent most of the afternoon in close conversation and singing praises to God. Tues. 9.--I was desired to meet Mr. B., and we had a good deal of conversation together. He seems to be a person of middling sense, but a most unpleasing address. I would hope he has some little experience of religion; but it does Oct. 1764.] JOURNAL, 199 not appear to advantage, as he is extremely hot, impetuous, overbearing, and impatient of contradiction. He hooked me, unawares, into a little dispute; but I cut it short as soon as possible, knowing neither was likely to convince the other. So we met and parted in peace. Wed. 10.--I went to Yarmouth, where the earnest congre gation was gathered at short warning. Thursday, 11. I was desired to go to Lowestoft, in Suffolk, nine miles south-east of Yarmouth. The use of a large place had been offered, which would contain abundance of people: But when I was come, Mr. Romaine had changed his mind; so I preached in the open air. A wilder congregation I have not seen; but the bridle was in their teeth. All attended, and a considerable part seemed to understand something of what was spoken; nor did any behave uncivilly when I had done; and I believe a few did not lose their labour.

“But the main point between you and me is Perfection. ‘This, you say, ‘has no prevalence in these parts; otherwise I should think it my duty to oppose it with my whole strength; not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundation of Christian experience; and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.’ “Just so my brother and I reasoned thirty years ago, “as thinking it our duty to oppose Predestination with our whole strength; not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundation of Christian experience; and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.’ “That it has given occasion to such offences, I know; I can name time, place, and persons. But still another fact stares me in the face. Mr. H and Mr. N hold this, and yet I believe these have real Christian experience. But if so, this is only an opinion : It is not ‘subversive ’ (here is clear proof to the contrary) ‘of the very foundation of Christian experience.’ It is ‘compatible with love to Christ, and a genuine work of grace.” Yea, many hold it, at whose feet I desire to be found in the day of the Lord Jesus. If, then, I ‘oppose this with my whole strength,” I am a mere bigot still. I leave you in your calm and retired moments to make the application. “But how came this opinion into my mind? I will tell you with all simplicity. In 1725 I met with Bishop Taylor's “Rules of Holy Living and Dying. I was struck particularly with the chapter upon intention, and felt a fixed intention May, 1765.] JOURNAL, 213 ‘to give myself up to God.” In this I was much confirmed soon after by the ‘Christian Pattern, and longed to give God all my heart. This is just what I mean by Perfection now : I sought after it from that hour. “In 1727 I read Mr. Law’s ‘Christian Perfection, and ‘Serious Call, and more explicitly resolved to be all devoted to God, in body, soul, and spirit. In 1730 I began to be Jhomo unius libri; * to study (comparatively) no book but the Bible.

Sun. 11.--The weather not permitting me to preach abroad, I preached in the Room, morning and evening, and about eleven in Monkwearmouth church. In the evening some hundreds of us solemnly renewed our covenant with God, and he answered many in the joy of their hearts. Monday, 12. After preaching at South-Shields about noon, and at North-Shields in the even ing, I returned to Newcastle. In the following days I preached at as many of the neighbouring places as I could; and on Monday, 19, set out northward. About two I preached to the honest colliers at Placey, and in the evening at Morpeth. Tuesday, 20. About noon I preached at Felton. There were many hearers, though the wind was extremely sharp; and most of them were attentive; but very few seemed to understand 250 REv. J. wesley's [June, 1766. anything of the matter. I preached at Alnwick in the evening. Wednesday, 21. We spent an hour in the Castle and the gardens, which the Duke is enlarging and improving daily, and turning into a little paradise. What pity, that he must leave all these, and die like a common man | Thur. 22.--At eleven I preached in the street at Belford, fifteen miles beyond Alnwick. The hearers were seriously attentive, and a few seemed to understand what was spoken. Between six and seven I preached in the Town-hall at Berwick. I had an uncommon liberty in speaking, and a solemn awe sat on the faces of all the hearers. visiting this poor, barren place? Is God again Fri. 23.--When I came to Old-Camus, I found notice had been given of my preaching about a mile off. So I took horse without delay, and rode to Coppersmith, where the congregation was waiting. I spoke as plain as I possibly could; but very few appeared to be at all affected. It seems to be with them, as with most in the north : They know everything, and feel nothing. I had designed to preach abroad at Dunbar in the evening; but the rain drove us into the House. It was for good. I now had a full stroke at their hearts, and I think some felt themselves sinners. Sat. 24.--In the afternoon, notice having been given a week before, I went to the Room at Preston-Pans.

These are divided into small tenements, forty, fifty, or sixty in a ship, with little chimneys and win dows; and each of these contains a family. In one of them, where we called, a man and his wife and six little children lived. And yet all the ship was sweet and tolerably clean; sweeter than most sailing ships I have been in. Saturday, 19. I returned to London. Sat. 26.--I visited poor Mrs. H., whose wild husband has very near murdered her, by vehemently affirming, it was revealed to him that she should die before such a day. Indeed the day is past; but her weak, nervous constitution is so deeply shocked by it, that she still keeps her bed, and perhaps will feel it all the days of her life. Sat. JANUARY 2, 1768.--I called on a poor man in the Marshalsea, whose case appeared to be uncommon. He is by birth a Dutchman, a Chemist by profession. Being but half employed at home, he was advised to come to London, where he doubted not of having full employment. He was recom mended to a countryman of his to lodge, who after six weeks arrested him for much more than he owed, and hurried him away to prison, having a wife near her time, without money, Feb. 1768.] JOURNAL, 311 friend, or a word of English to speak. I wrote the case to Mr. T , who immediately gave fifteen pounds; by means of which, with a little addition, he was set at liberty, and put in a way of living. But I never saw him since: And reason good; for he could now live without me. Mon. 4.--At my leisure hours this week, I read Dr. Priestley’s ingenious book on Electricity. He seems to have accurately collected and well digested all that is known on that curious subject. But how little is that all ! Indeed the use of it we know; at least, in some good degree. We know it is a thousand medicines in one: In particular, that it is the most efficacious medicine, in nervous disorders of every kind, which has ever yet been discovered. But if we aim at theory, we know nothing. We are soon Lost and bewilder'd in the fruitless search. Mon. 11.--This week I spent my scraps of time in reading Mr.

Wed. 16.--About nine I preached at Cheltenham,-a quiet, comfortable place; though it would not have been so, if either the Rector or the Anabaptist Minister could have prevented it. Both these have blown the trumpet with their might; but the people had no ears to hear. In the afternoon I preached at Upton, and then rode on to Worcester. But the difficulty was, where to preach. No room was large enough to contain the people; and it was too cold for them to stand abroad. At length we went to a friend’s, near the town, whose barn was larger than many churches. Here a numerous congregation soon assembled; and again at five, and at ten in the morning. Nothing is wanting here but a commodious House: And will not God provide this also? In the afternoon we rode to Evesham. As all was hurry and confusion on account of the election, I was glad Mr. D. asked me to preach in his church, where we had a large and exceeding quiet congregation. How long a winter has been at this place | Will not the spring at length return ? Fri. 18.--The Vicar of Pebworth had given notice in the church on Sunday, that I was to preach there on Friday. But the Squire of the parish said, “It is contrary to the Canons,” (wise Squire !) “and it shall not be.” So I preached about a mile from it, at Broadmarston, by the side of Mr. Eden’s house. The congregation was exceeding large, and remarkably attentive. In the morning, the chapel (so it anciently was) was well filled at five. The simplicity and earnestness of the people promise a glorious harvest. Sat. 19.--We rode to Birmingham. The tumults which subsisted here so many years are now wholly suppressed by a resolute Magistrate. After preaching, I was pleased to see a venerable monument of antiquity, George Bridgins, in the one hundred and seventh year of his age. He can still walk to the preaching, and retains his senses and understanding tolerably 314 REv. J. wesLEY’s [March, 1768. well. But what a dream will even a life of a hundred years appear to him, the moment he awakes in eternity | Sun. 20.--About one I preached on West-Bromwich Heath; in the evening, near the preaching-house in Wednes bury.

But the largest of all attended at the Garth-Heads in the evening; and great part of them were not curious hearers, but well acquainted with the things of the kingdom of God. Wednesday, 25, and the two following days, being at Sunderland, I took down, from one who had feared God from her infancy, one of the strangest accounts I ever read; and yet I can find no pretence to disbelieve it. The well known character of the person excludes all suspicion of fraud; and the nature of the circumstances themselves excludes the possibility of a delusion. It is true there are several of them which I do not comprehend; but this is, with me, a very slender objection : For what is it which I do comprehend, even of the things I see daily? Truly not The smallest grain of sand, or spire of grass. I know not how the one grows, or how the particles of the other cohere together. What pretence have I then to deny well-attested facts, because I cannot comprehend them? It is true, likewise, that the English in general, and indeed most of the men of learning in Europe, have given up all accounts of witches and apparitions, as mere old wives’ fables. I am sorry for it; and I willingly take this opportunity of entering my solemn protest against this violent compliment which so many that believe the Bible pay to those who do not believe it. I owe them no such service. I take knowledge, these are at the bottom of the outcry which has been raised, and with such insolence spread throughout the nation, in direct opposition not only to the Bible, but to the suffrage of the wisest and best of men in all ages and nations. They well May, 1768.] JOURNAL, 325 know, (whether Christians know it, or not,) that the giving up witchcraft is, in effect, giving up the Bible; and they know, on the other hand, that if but one account of the intercourse of men with separate spirits be admitted, their whole castle in the air (Deism, Atheism, Materialism) falls to the ground. I know no reason, therefore, why we should suffer even this weapon to be wrested out of our hands. Indeed there are numerous arguments besides, which abun dantly confute their vain imaginations.

As I was looking for an handkerchief, he walked to the table, took one up,§§ brought and dropped it upon the bed. After this, he came three or four nights and pulled the clothes off, throwing them on the other side of the bed. “17. Two nights after, he came as I was sitting on the bed side, and, after walking to and fro, snatched the handkerchief from my neck. I fell into a swoon. When I came to myself he was standing just before me. Presently he came close to me, dropped it on the bed, and went away. * How often are spirits present when we do not think of it! + Why not ? What had he to do with the things under the sun ? : Did he then know Mr. Dunn's thoughts P § Was he sure of this ? Or did he only conjecture? | What a picture! Far beyond her invention : "I That he might not fright her, by vanishing away. ** Surely God saw this was as much as she could bear. ++. At her not speaking. But why could not he speak first P Is this contrary to a law of the invisible world P + Poor ghost ! Did this divert thee for a moment from attending to the worm that never dieth ? $$ So, he saw her thought ! But did he not pity her too? 332 REv. J. wesLEY’s [May, 1768. “18. Having had a long illness the year before, having taken much cold by his frequent pulling off the clothes, and being worn out by these appearances, I was now mostly confined to my bed. The next night, soon after eleven, he came again: I asked, ‘In God’s name, why do you torment me thus? You know it is impossible for me to go to Durham now. But I have a fear that you are not happy, and beg to know whether you are, or not.’ He answered, after a little pause, “That is a bold question for you to ask. So far as you knew me to do amiss in my lifetime, do you take care to do better.” I said, ‘It is a shocking affair to live and die after that manner.

O how do these Heathens shame us! Their very comedies contain both excellent sense, the liveliest pictures of men and manners, and so fine strokes of genuine morality, as are seldom found in the writings of Christians. Mon. 19.--I spent an hour with B a I n. If the account she gives is true, what blessed creatures are both those gentlemen and their wives that would use the most scurrilous language, yea, strike and drive out of their house, and that in a rainy night, a young gentlewoman, a stranger, far from home, for joining with the Methodists Do these call them selves Christians? Nay, and Protestants? Call them Turks. Papist is too good a name. Tues. 20.--I went to Shoreham. Here I read Mr. Arch deacon Blackburne’s “Considerations on the Penal Laws against Papists.” In the Appendix, p. 198, to my no small surprise, I read these words, said to be wrote by a gentleman at Paris: “The Popish party boast much of the increase of the Methodists, and talk of that sect with rapture. How far the Methodists and Papists stand connected in principles I know not; but I believe, it is beyond a doubt, that they are in constant correspondence with each other.” It seems this letter was published in the “St. James's Chronicle.” But I never saw or heard of it, till these words were printed in the “Canterbury Journal,” as Mr. Blackburne’s own. And he has nearly made them his own, by his faint note upon them, “I would willingly hope some doubt may be made of this.” Indeed he adds, “Mr. Whitefield took timely care to preclude all suspicions of his having any connexions with Popery.” Yea, and Mr. Wesley much more, even as early as Aug. 31, 1738. Again, in my Journal, Aug. 27, 1739, I published the only letter which I ever wrote to a Popish Priest. And it is in proof of this proposi 350 REv. J. wesLEY’s [Jan. 1769.

I will tell you what I conjecture, and I do it in writing because I may not have an opportunity of talking with you; because I can write more freely than I could speak; because I can now say all I have to say at once; whereas, if we were talking together, I might probably forget some part; and because you may by this means have the better opportunity of calmly considering it. “I conjecture (to tell you just what rises in my heart) that this change was owing to several causes. Some admired and commended you as a person of uncommon sense and uncommon attainments in religion. Others told you at large, from time to time, all the real or supposed faults of the Methodists. In particular the jars which had lately been in Dublin, on account of Mr. Morgan and Olivers. This naturally tended to breed and increase pride on the one hand, and prejudice on the other. Riches increased; which not only led you, step by step, into more conformity to the world, but insensibly instilled self-importance, unwillingness to be contradicted, and an overbearing temper. And hence you was, of course, disgusted at those who did not yield to this temper, and blamed that conformity. Perhaps some of these professed or expected to be perfected in love; they at least believed Perfection. Now this you seemed to hate with a perfect hatred; and on that account disliked them the more. “Permit me to add a few words on each of these heads. And June, 1769.] JOURNAL. 369 first, would it not be well, if you started back from every appearance of admiration, (which you know is deadly poison,) whether on account of your sense or piety? And if you utterly discountenanced all who directly or indirectly commended you to your face? Yea, and all who told you of the jars or faults of the Methodists, or indeed of any absent person? “Should you not earnestly strive and pray against thinking highly of your own understanding, or attainments in religion? Otherwise, this, by grieving the Holy Spirit, would expose you to still more prejudice; especially towards those who might seem to vie with you in religion, if not in understanding. “Can you be too sensible, how hardly they that have riches enter into the kingdom of heaven? Yea, or into the kingdom of an inward heaven?

Rowe's “Devout Exercises of the Heart.” It is far superior to anything of hers which I ever read, in style as well as in sense. Her experience is plain, sound, and scriptural, no way whimsical or mystical; and her language is clear, strong, and simple, without any of that July, 1769.] JOURNAL. 371 affected floridness which offends all who have a tolerable ear, or any judgment in good writing. At nine we had a serious congregation, to whom I could speak of the deep things of God; and the new House held them tolerably well; but in the evening it was far too small; so I stood in a little ground adjoining to the House. Many tender ones sat within, but the bulk of the congregation stood in the meadow, and the gardens on each side. I have not seen, in all the world, a people so easy to be convinced or persuaded as the Irish. What pity that these excellent propensities should not always be applied to the most excellent purposes! Mon. 3.--I rode to Coolylough, (where was the Quarterly Meeting,) and preached at eleven, and in the evening. While we were singing, I was surprised to see the horses from all parts of the ground gathering about us. Is it true then that horses, as well as lions and tigers, have an ear for music? Wed, 5.--I went on to Tyrrel's Pass. Thursday, 6. At eleven I preached in the Court-House, at Molingar, to a very genteel, and yet serious, audience. In the evening I preached at Tyrrel’s Pass again; and on Friday, 7, at Edinderry. Here I received from Joseph Fry a particular account of his late wife, an Israelite indeed. He said, “She was a strict attendant on all the means of grace, and a sincere lover of the people of God. She had a remarkably good understanding, and much knowledge of the things of God. Though she was of an exceeding bashful temper, yet she was valiant for the truth; not sparing to speak very plain in defence of it, before persons of all conditions. Two years ago she began to lose her health, and grew worse and worse, till September 29th. On that day she was very restless. Observing her to have an unusual colour, I judged she could not continue long.

Saturday, 23. I rode to Pill, and preached in the street, (the only way to do much good there,) to a more numerous and more attentive congregation than I have seen there for many years. Thur. OCTOBER 5.--I had the satisfaction to find, that two of our brethren, with whom I had taken much pains, had at length put an end to their Chancery suit, and closed their debate by a reference. Sun. 8.--I permitted all of Mr. Whitefield's society that desired it, to be present at our love-feast. I suppose there were a thousand of us in all. And we were not sent empty away. Mon. 9.--I preached at Bristol, Pensford, Shepton Mallet; and in the evening at Wincanton. The people here had just as much feeling as the benches on which they sat. Tuesday, 10. I preached in Shaftesbury at noon; and in the evening at Salisbury. Here I was as in a new world. The congregation was alive, and much more the society. How pleasing would it be, to be always with such ! But this is not our calling. Wed. 11.--I preached in Romsey, at noon: In the evening at Winchester. Thursday, 12. I preached at Fareham about one; and at Portsmouth Common in the evening. Friday, 13. I very narrowly missed meeting the great Pascal Paoli. He landed in the dock but a very few minutes after Ileft the water side. Surely He who hath been with him from his youth up, hath not sent him into England for nothing. Lord, show Oct. 1769.] JOURNAL. 381 him what is thy will concerning him, and give him a kingdom that cannot be moved ! Sat. 14.--Setting out at two in the morning, I came to London in the afternoon. Sunday, 15. My brother and I had such a congregation at Spitalfields, as has not been there since the covenant-night. The Foundery was equally crowded in the evening: Is God about to work here, as he did some years ago? If so, having learned experience by the things we have suffered, I trust we shall not quench the Spirit as we did before. Mon. 16.--I began my journey into Oxfordshire, and in the evening preached at Henley. A great part of the congregation was perfectly void both of sense and modesty.

17.--In a little journey, which I took into Bedford shire, I finished Dr. Burnet’s “Theory of the Earth.” He is doubtless one of the first-rate writers, both as to sense and style; his language is remarkably clear, unaffected, nervous, and elegant. And as to his theory, none can deny that it is ingenious, and consistent with itself. And it is highly probable, 1. That the earth arose out of the chaos in some such manner as he describes: 2. That the antediluvian earth 386 REv. J. weslBY’s [Feb. 1770. was without high or abrupt mountains, and without sea, being one uniform crust, inclosing the great abyss: 3. That the flood was caused by the breaking of this crust, and its sinking into the abyss of waters: And, 4. That the present state of the earth, both internal and external, shows it to be the ruins of the former earth. This is the substance of his two former books, and thus far I can go with him. I have no objection to the substance of his third book upon the General Conflagration, but think it one of the noblest tracts which is extant in our language. And I do not much object to the fourth, concerning the new heavens and the new earth. The substance of it is highly probable. Tues. 30.--One informed me that Mrs. Kitely, at Lambeth, not expected to live many hours, had a great desire to see me before she died. I went as quick as possible; but when I came she seemed senseless, as well as speechless. I regarded not this, but spoke to her immediately; and immediately both her understanding and her speech returned, to testify an hope full of immortality. Having had her desire, she fell asleep, two days before her husband, A perfect pattern of true womanhood. A good wife, a good parent, a good mistress; and “her works shall praise her in the gates.” How suitable was her death to her life! After many years spent in doing good, she redeemed a poor, friendless youth out of prison, took the gaol-distemper, and died. Sat. FEBRUARY 3, and at my leisure moments on several of the following days, I read with much expectation, a celebrated book,-Rousseau upon Education. But how was I disappointed ! Sure a more consummate coxcomo never saw the sun How amazingly full of himself!

That he had not the least conception, much less experience, of inward religion: 2. That an ingenious man may prove just what he pleases, by well devised scriptural etymologies; especially if he be in the fashion, if he affects to read the Hebrew without vowels. And, 3. That his whole hypothesis, philosophical and theological, is unsupported by any solid proof. Fri. 23.--I was desired to hear Mr. Leoni sing at the Jewish synagogue. I never before saw a Jewish congregation behave so decently. Indeed the place itself is so solemn, that it might strike an awe upon those who have any thought of God. Wed. 28.--I sat down to read and seriously consider some of the writings of Baron Swedenborg. I began with huge prejudice in his favour, knowing him to be a pious man, one of a strong understanding, of much learning, and one who thoroughly believed himself. But I could not hold out long. Any one of his visions puts his real character out of doubt. He is one of the most ingenious, lively, entertaining madmen 388 REv. J. WESLEY’s [March, 1770. that ever set pen to paper. But his waking dreams are so wild, so far remote both from Scripture and common sense, that one might as easily swallow the stories of “Tom Thumb,” or “Jack the Giant-Killer.” Mon. MARCH 5-1 came to Newbury, where I had been much importuned to preach. But where? The Dissenters would not permit me to preachin their meeting-house. Some were then desirous to hire the old playhouse; but the good Mayor would not suffer it to be so profaned ! So I made use of a workshop,-a large, commodious place. But it would by no means contain the congregation. All that could hear behaved well; and I was in hopes God would have a people in this place also. The next evening I preached at Bristol, and spent the rest of the week there. Monday, 12. I went to Stroud, where the House was filled as usual. Tuesday, 13. I went by Painswick and Gloucester to Tewkesbury. Wednesday, 14. I preached in the new Room, which is just finished, at Upton; and thence rode on to Worcester, where I preached in a large, old, awkward place, to a crowded and much-affected audience.

I got a few of them together; but did not find so much as one, who had not given up his confidence. At nine I renewed the meeting of the children, which had also been given up for a long season. But so dead a company have I seldom seen. I found scarce one spark of even the fear of God among them. In the evening I preached before the House at St. Just, on, “I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God.” It was a glorious hour. The same spirit breathed upon us, at the meeting of the society. At such a season, who does not feel that nothing is too hard for God? Aug. 1770.] JOURNAL. 409 On Tuesday and Wednesday I preached at Newlyn, Gold sithney and St. John's. Thursday, 30. I rode to Falmouth; and preached at two in the afternoon near the church, to a greater number of people than I ever saw there before, except the mob, five-and-twenty years ago. I preached at Penryn in the evening; Friday noon in Crowan; in the evening at Treworgey, near Redruth. Here I met with an ingenious book, the late Lord Lyttleton's “Dialogues of the Dead.” A great part of it I could heartily subscribe to, though not to every word. I believe Madam Guion was in several mistakes, speculative and practical too: Yet I would no more dare to call her, than her friend, Archbishop Fenelon, “a distracted enthusiast.” She was undoubtedly a woman of a very uncommon understanding, and of excellent piety. Nor was she any more “a lunatic,” than she was an heretic. Another of this lively writer's assertions is, “Martin has spawned a strange brood of fellows, called Methodists, Moravians, Hutchinsonians, who are madder than Jack was in his worst days.” I would ask any one who knows what good breeding means, is this language for a nobleman or a porter? But let the language be as it may, is the sentiment just? To say nothing of the Methodists, (although some of them too are not quite out of their senses,) could his Lordship show me in England many more sensible men than Mr. Gambold and Mr. Okely? And yet both of these were called Moravians. Or could he point out many men of stronger and deeper understanding than Dr. Horne and Mr. William Jones?

William Jones? (if he could pardon them for believing the Trinity 1) And yet both of those are Hutchinsonians. What pity is it, that so ingenious a man, like many others gone before him, should pass so peremptory a sentence in a cause which he does not understand Indeed, how could he understand it? How much has he read upon the question? What sensible Methodist, Moravian, or Hutchinsonian did he ever calmly converse with? What does he know of them, but from the caricaturas drawn by Bishop Lavington, or Bishop Warbur ton? And did he ever give himself the trouble of reading the answers to those warm, lively men? Why should a good-natured and a thinking man thus condemn whole bodies of men by the lump? In this I can neither read the gentleman, the scholar, nor the Christian. 410 REv. J. weslEY’s JournAL. [Sept. 1770. Since the writing of this, Lord Lyttleton is no more; he is mingled with common dust. But as his book survives, there still needs an answer to the unjust reflections contained therein. Sat. SEPTEMBER 1.--I took a walk to the top of that celebrated hill, Carn-Brae. Here are many monuments of remote antiquity, scarce to be found in any other part of Europe: Druid altars of enormous size, being only huge rocks, strangely suspended one upon the other; and rock basins, hollowed on the surface of the rock, it is supposed, to contain the holy water. It is probable these are at least co-eval with Pompey's Theatre, if not with the Pyramids of Egypt. And what are they the better for this? Of what consequence is it either to the dead or the living, whether they have withstood the wastes of time for three thousand, or three hundred years? Sun. SEPTEMBER 2.--At five in the evening I preached in the natural amphitheatre at Gwennap. The people covered a circle of near fourscore yards’ diameter, and could not be fewer than twenty thousand. Yet, upon inquiry, I found they could all hear distinctly, it being a calm, still evening. Mon. 3.--Between eight and nine, while I was preaching at Truro, we had only a few light showers; although, a few miles off, there was impetuous rain, with violent thunder and lightning.

At one I preached in Warrington. I believe all the young gentlemen of the academy were there; to whom I stated and proved the use of reason, from those words of St. Paul, “In wickedness be ye children, but in understanding be ye men.” I had very large and very serious congregations at Liver pool, morning and evening, on Monday, Tuesday, Wednes day, and Thursday. Friday, APRIL 3. I set out for Wigan; but before we came to Ashton, I was glad to use my own feet, and leave the poor horses to drag the chaise as they could. I preached at Wigan about twelve, and in the evening at Bolton. How wonderfully has God wrought in this place ! John Bennet, some years ago, reduced this society from sevenscore to twelve; and they are now risen to an hundred and seventy. Sun. 5.--I preached at eight to as many as the House would contain; but at noon I was obliged to stand in the street, and explain the one thing needful. I preached at Manchester in the evening; but the House was far too small: Crowds were obliged to go away. The speculative knowledge of the truth has ascended here from the least to the greatest. But how far short is this of experimental knowledge | Yet it is a step toward it not to be despised. Mon. 6.-In the afternoon I drank tea at Am. O. But how was I shocked ! The children that used to cling about me, and drink in every word, had been at a boarding-school. There they had unlearned all religion, and even seriousness; and had learned pride, vanity, affectation, and whatever could guard them against the knowledge and love of God. Methodist parents, who would send your girls headlong to hell, send them to a fashionable boarding-school | Tues. 7.--I went to New-Mills. Notwithstanding all the rain, the House was well filled; for nothing can hinder this lively, earnest people. Wednesday, 8. I returned to Man chester, and, in the evening, fully delivered my own soul. Thursday, 9. Mr. Bruce offering to accompany me into Scotland, I took him and Mr. E. too: And it was well I did; for Mr. E.'s horse quickly fell, and so disabled himself that I was obliged to leave him behind. God grant that he may not 458 REv. J. Wesley’s [April, 1772.

Before two we reached Longner. After we had dimed, a poor woman came in, and another, and another, till we had seven teen or eighteen men and women, with whom we spent a little time very comfortably in prayer and praise. At the end of the town the chaise broke down. We had two-and-twenty miles to Burslem; so I took horse, and, making haste, came thither a little before preaching time. Wednesday, 12. I preached at Salop, and spake strong words, to the amazement of many notional believers. Thursday, 13. I preached at the Hay. Friday, 14. About noon, at the request of my old friend Howell Harris, I preached at Trevecka, on the strait gate; and we found our hearts knit together as at the beginning. He said, “I have borne with those pert, ignorant young men, vulgarly called students, till I cannot in con science bear any longer. They preach bare-faced Reprobation, and so broad Antinomianism, that I have been constrained to oppose them to the face, even in the public congregation.” It is no wonder they should preach thus. What better can be expected from raw lads of little understanding, little learning, and no experience? After spending a day or two very comfortably at Brecknock, on Monday, 17, I preached in the Castle at Carmarthen; and on Tuesday, 18, in the new House at Haverfordwest, far the neatest in Wales. There is a considerable increase in this society, and not in number only. After preaching on Wednes day evening, we had such a meeting as I have seldom known. Almost every one spoke, as well as they could for tears, and with the utmost simplicity; and many of them appeared to know “the great salvation,” to love God with all their heart. Thur. 20.--I rode over to Mr. Bowen’s, at Llanguire; an agreeable place, and an agreeable family. Here I rejoiced to meet with Mr. Pugh, whose living is within a mile of Llanguire. In the evening he read Prayers at Newport, and preached to a deeply serious congregation. I trust his lot is cast for good among a people both desirous and capable of instruction. Friday, 21. I preached again about eight, and then rode back to Harford.

Who can wonder, that a man of such a complexion should be an Infidel? I returned to London, Friday, 10, with Captain Hinderson, of Chatham, who informed us, “Being off the Kentish coast, on Wednesday morning last, I found my ship had been so damaged by the storm, which still continued, that she could not long keep above water; so we got into the boat, twelve in all, though with little hope of making the shore. A ship passing by, we made all the signals we could ; but they took no notice. A second passed near: We made signals and called; but they would not stay for us. A third put out their boat, took us up, and set us safe on shore.” 6 REv. J. WESLEY’s [Jan. 1774. o Fri. 17.--Meeting with a celebrated book, a volume of Cap tain Cook's Voyages, I sat downto read it with huge expectation. But how was I disappointed I observed, 1. Things absolutely incredible: “A nation without any curiosity;” and, what is stranger still, (I fear related with no good design,) “without any sense of shame! Men and women coupling together in the face of the sun, and in the sight of scores of people ! Men whose skin, cheeks, and lips are white as milk.” Hume or Wol taire might believe this; but I cannot. I observed, 2. Things absolutely impossible. To instance in one, for a specimen. A native of Otaheite is said to understand the language of an island eleven hundred degrees [query, miles] distant from it in latitude; besides I know not how many hundreds in longitude ' So that I cannot but rank this narrative with that of Robinson Crusoe ; and account Tupia to be, in several respects, akin to his man Friday. Saturday, 25, and on the following days, we had many happy opportunities of celebrating the solemn Feast-days, according to the design of their institution. We concluded the year with a Fast-day, closed with a solemn watch-night. Tues. JANUARY 4, 1774.--Three or four years ago, a stum bling horse threw me forward on the pommel of the saddle. I felt a good deal of pain; but it soon went off, and I thought of it no more. Some months after I observed, testiculum alterum altero duplo majorem esse.

Some months after I observed, testiculum alterum altero duplo majorem esse. I consulted a Physician: He told me it was a common case, and did not imply any disease at all. In May twelvemonth it was grown near as large as a hen’s egg. Being then at Edinburgh, Dr. Hamilton insisted on my having the advice of Drs. Gregory and Munro. They immediately saw it was a Hydrocele, and advised me, as soon as I came to London, to aim at a radical cure, which they judged might be effected in about sixteen days: When I came to London, I consulted Mr. Wathem. He advised me, 1. Not to think of a radical cure, which could not be hoped for, without my lying in one posture fifteen or sixteen days. And he did not know whether this might not give a wound to my constitution, which I should never recover. 2. To do nothing while I continued easy. And this advice I was determined to take. Last month the swelling was often painful. So on this day, Mr. Wathen performed the operation, and drew off something more than half a pint of a thin, yellow, transparent water. With this came out (to his no small surprise) a pearl of the Feb. 1774.] JOURNAL, 7 size of a small shot; which he supposed might be one cause of the disorder, by occasioning a conflux of humours to the part. Wednesday, 5. I was as perfectly easy, as if no operation had been performed. Tues. 11.-I began at the east end of the town to visit the society from house to house. I know no branch of the pas toral office, which is of greater importance than this. But it is so grievous to flesh and blood, that I can prevail on few, even of our Preachers, to undertake it. Sun. 23.−Mr. Pentycross assisted me at the chapel. O what a curse upon the poor sons of men is the confusion of opinions ! Worse by many degrees than the curse of Babel, the confusion of tongues. What but this could prevent this amiable young man from joining heart and hand with us? Mon. 24.--I was desired by Mrs. Wright, of New-York, to let her take my effigy in wax-work. She has that of Mr. Whitefield and many others; but none of them, I think, comes up to a well-drawn picture. Fri.

And I was throughly convinced,--l. From the utter impro bability, if one should not rather say, absurdity, of the King's account, the greater part of which rests entirely on his own single word; 2. From the many contradictions in the deposi tions which were made to confirm some parts of it; and, 3. From the various collateral circumstances, related by con temporary writers, that the whole was a piece of king craft; the clumsy invention of a covetous and blood-thirsty tyrant to destroy two innocent men, that he might kill and also take possession of their large fortunes. In the evening I preached at Dundee, and on Tuesday, 24, went on to Arbroath. In the way I read Lord K--'s plausible “Essays on Morality and Natural Religion.” Did ever man take so much pains to so little purpose, as he does in his Essay on Liberty and Necessity ? Cui bono 2 What good would it do to mankind, if he could convince them that they are a mere piece of clock-work? that they have no more share in directing their own actions, than in directing the sea or the north wind? He owns, that “if men saw themselves in this light, all sense of moral obligation, of right and wrong, of good or ill desert, would immediately cease.” Well, my Lord sees himself in this light; consequently, if his own doctrine is true, he has no “sense of moral obligation, of right and wrong, of good or ill desert.” Is he not then excellently well-qualified for a Judge? Will he condemn a man for not “holding the wind in his fist” The high and piercing wind made it impracticable to preach abroad in the evening. But the House contained the people tolerably well, as plain and simple as those at Rait. I set out early in the morning; but, not being able to ford the North Esk, swollen with the late rains, was obliged to go round some miles. However, I reached Aberdeen in the evening. Here I met with another curious book, “Sketches of the 16 REv. J. weslEY’s [June, 1774. History of Man.” Undoubtedly, the author is a man of strong understanding, lively imagination, and considerable learning; and his book contains some useful truths. Yet some things in it gave me pain : 1.

I thought, “However, the gate which is on the other side of the yard, and is shut, will stop them:” But they rushed through it as if it had been a cobweb, and galloped on through the corn-field. The little girls cried out, “Grandpapa, save us!” I told them, “Nothing will hurt you : Do not be afraid;” feeling no more fear or care, (blessed be God 1) than if I had been sitting in my study. The horses ran on, till they came to the edge of a steep precipice. Just then Mr. Smith, who could not overtake us before, galloped in between. They stopped in a moment. Had they gone on ever so little, he and we must have gone down together' I am persuaded both evil and good angels had a large share in this transaction : How large we do not know now ; but we shall know hereafter. I think some of the most remarkable circumstances were, 1. Both the horses, which were tame and quiet as could be, starting out in a moment just at the top of the hill, and running down full speed. 2. The coachman’s being thrown on his head with such violence, and yet not hurt at all. 3. The chaise running again and again to the edge of each ditch, and yet not into it. 4. The avoiding the cart. 5. The keeping just the middle of the bridge. 6. The turning short through the first gate, in a manner that no coachman in England could have turned them, when in full gallop. 7. The going through the second gate as if it had been but smoke, without slackening their pace at all. This would have been impossible, had not the end of the chariot pole struck exactly on the centre of the gate; whence the whole, by the sudden impetuous shock, was broke into small pieces. 8. That the little girl, who used to have fits, on my saying, “No thing will hurt you,” ceased crying, and was quite composed. June, 1774.] JOURNAL. 21 Lastly, That Mr. Smith struck in just then : In a minute more we had been down the precipice; and had not the horses then stopped at once, they must have carried him and us down together.

29.--I found the venerable old man at Cubert pale, * The following is Dryden's translation of these lines :- The first thus rent, a second will arise: And the same metal the same room supplies.--EDIT. Sept. 1778.] JOURNAL, 135 thin, and scarce half alive. However, he made shift to go in a chaise to the preaching, and, deaf as he was, to hear almost every word. He had such a night's rest as he had not had for many, months, and in the morning seemed hardly the same person. It may be God will give him a little longer life, for the good of many. Sun. 30.--About five I preached in the amphitheatre at Gwennap, it was believed, to four-and-twenty thousand. After wards I spent a solemn hour with the society, and slept in peace. Mon. 31.--About eleven I preached to a large and serious congregation, near the Town-Hall, in Bodmin; and about six in the evening at Launceston; a town as little troubled with religion as most in Cornwall. Tues. SEPTEMBER 1.--I went to Tiverton. I was musing here on what I heard a good man say long since,--“Once in seven years I burn all my sermons; for it is a shame if I can not write better sermons now than I could seven years ago.” Whatever others can do, I really cannot. I cannot write a better sermon on the Good Steward, than I did seven years ago: I cannot write a better on the Great Assize, than I did twenty years ago: I cannot write a better on the Use of Mouey, than I did near thirty years ago: Nay, I know not that I can write a better on the Circumcision of the Heart, than I lid five and-forty years ago. Perhaps, indeed I may have read five or six hundred books more than I had then, and may know a little more History, or Natural Philosophy, than I did; but I am not sensible that this has made any essential addition to my knowledge in Divinity. Forty years ago I knew and preached every Christian doctrine which I preach now. Thur. 3.--About noon I preached at Cathanger, about eight miles from Taunton.

Having so lately seen Stourhead and Cobham gardens, I was now desired to take a view of the much more celebrated gardens at Stow. The first thing I observed was the beautiful water which runs through the gardens, to the front of the house. The tufts of trees, placed on each side of this, are wonderfully pleasant; and so are many of the walks and glades through the woods, which are disposed with a fine Oct. 1779.] JOURNAL. 169 variety. The large pieces of water interspersed give a fresh beauty to the whole. Yet there are several things which must give disgust to any person of common sense:--1. The build ings, called Temples, are most miserable, many of them both within and without. Sir John Vanbrugh's is an ugly, clumsy lump, hardly fit for a gentleman’s stable. 2. The temples of Venus and Bacchus, though large, have nothing elegant in the structure; and the paintings in the former, representing a lewd story, are neither well designed nor executed. Those in the latterare quite faded, and most of theinscriptions vanishedaway. 3. The statues are full as coarse as the paintings, particularly those of Apollo and the Muses, whom a person, not otherwise informed, might take to be nine cook-maids. 4. Most of the water in the ponds is dirty, and thick as puddle. 5. It is childish affectation to call things here by Greek or Latin names, as Styx, and the Elysian Fields. 6. It was ominous for My Lord to entertain himself and his noble company in a grotto built on the bank of Styx; that is, on the brink of hell. 7. The river on which it stands is a black, filthy puddle, exactly resembling a common sewer. 8. One of the stateliest monuments is taken down, the Egyptian Pyramid; and no wonder, considering the two inscriptions, which are still legible; the one,-- Linquenda tellus, et domus, et placems Uror : Neque harum, quas colus, arborum Te praeter invisas cupressos, Ulla brevem dominum sequetur ! The other, I,usisti satis, edisti satis, atque bibisti : Tempus abire tibi est: Ne potum largius acquo Rideat, et pulset lasciva decentius attas. * Upon the whole, I cannot but prefer Cobham gardens to those at Stow : For, 1.

The immense ruins of Garvaix Abbey show what a stately pile it was once. Though we were at a lone house, a numerous congregation assembled in the evening; on whom I enforced, “This is life eternal, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” Wed. 3.-Judging it impracticable to pass the mountains in a carriage, I sent my chaise round, and took horse. At twelve I preached at Swaledale, to a loving people, increasing both in grace and number. Thence we crossed over another range of dreary mountains, and in the evening reached Barnard Castle. Not being yet inured to riding, I now felt something like weariness. But I forgot it in the lively congregation, and in the morning it was gone. Thur. 4.--About eight I preached to a serious congregation at Cuthbedson; and about one at Newbiggin, in Teesdale. We doubted how we should get over the next mountain, the famous Pikelow, after so long and heavy rains; but I scarce 180 REv. J. WESLEY’s [May, 1780. ever remember us getting over it so well. We found the people in Weardale, as usual, some of the liveliest in the kingdom; knowing nothing, and desiring to know nothing, save Jesus Christ and him crucified. Fri. 5.--Notice having been given, without my knowledge, of my preaching at Ninthead, all the lead-miners that could, got together; and I declared to them, “All things are ready.” After riding over another enormous mountain, I preached at Gamblesby (as I did about thirty years ago) to a large congregation of rich and poor. The chief man of the town was formerly a Local Preacher, but now keeps his carriage. Has he increased in holiness as well as in wealth 2 If not, he has made a poor exchange. In the evening, a large upper room, designed for an assembly, was procured for me at Penrith; but several of the poor people were struck with a panic, for fear the room should fall. Finding there was no remedy, I went down into the court below, and preached in great peace to a multitude of well behaved people. The rain was suspended while I preached, but afterwards returned, and continued most of the night. Saturday, 6.

Sunday, 24. I preached in the morning at Gateshead-Fell; about noon, at a village called Greenside, ten miles west of Newcastle, to the largest congregation I have seen in the north ; many of whom were Roman Catholics. In the evening I preached once more at the Garth-Heads, (some thought to the largest congregation that had ever been there,) on those words in the Service, “Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.” After preaching at many places in the way, on Wednesday, July, 1781.] JOURNAL. 209 27, I preached at York. Many of our friends met me here, so that in the evening the House would ill contain the congregation. And I know not when I have found such a spirit among them; they seemed to be all hungering and thirsting after righteousness. Thur. 28.--I preached at eleven in the main street at Selby, to a large and quiet congregation; and in the evening at Thorne. This day I entered my seventy-ninth year; and, by the grace of God, I feel no more of the infirmities of old age, than I did at twenty-nine. Friday, 29. I preached at Crowle and at Epworth. I have now preached thrice a day for seven days following; but it is just the same as if it had been but once. Sat. 30.-I went over to Owstone, and found the whole town was moved. One of the chief men of the town had been just buried, and his wife a few days before. In a course of nature they might have lived many years, being only middle-aged. He had known the love of God, but had choked the good seed by hastening to be rich. But Providence disappointed all his schemes; and it was thought he died of a broken heart. I took that opportunity of enforcing, “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” Sun. JULY 1.--I preached, as usual, at Misterton, at Over thorpe, and at Epworth. Monday, 2.

6.--I could procure no other conveyance to St. Alban’s but in an open chaise; and hence, (the frost being very sharp,) I contracted a severe cold. Monday,9. I had a better convey ance into Kent. In the evening I preached at Canterbury; on Tuesday at Dover; the next day at Canterbury again. On Thursday, 12, and on Friday morning, I preached at Chatham; and in the afternoon returned to London. Sat.14.--I found the cold which I had contracted in the way 242 REv. J. wesley’s ' [Feb. 1783. to St. Alban’s exceedingly increased, having a deep and violent cough, which continued at intervals till spring. Mon. 16.-I retired to Hoxton for a few days. Thursday, 19. About eleven at night, a gun was fired at our chamber window, and at the same time a large stone thrown through it. (Probably in sport, by some that had been drinking.) I presently went to sleep again. Sat. 21.-I visited Mr. Maxfield, struck with a violent stroke of palsy. He was senseless, and seemed near death; but we besought God for him, and his spirit revived, I cannot but think, in answer to prayer. Sunday, 29. I buried the remains of Thomas Forfit, a rich, and yet a generous man. He was unwearied in well doing; and in a good old age, without any pain or struggle, fell asleep. Tuesday, 31. We concluded the year with a solemn watch-night. Wed. JANUARY 1, 1783.−May I begin to live to-day ! Sunday, 5. We met to renew our covenant with God. We never meet on this occasion without a blessing; but I do not know that we had ever so large a congregation before. Fri. 10.--I paid one more visit to Mr. Perronet, now in his ninetieth year. I do not know so venerable a man. His understanding is little, if at all, impaired; and his heart seems to be all love. A little longer I hope he will remain here, to be a blessing to all that see and hear him. Sun. 19.--I preached at St. Thomas's church in the after noon, and at St. Swithin's in the evening. The tide is now turned; so that I have more invitations to preach in churches than I can accept of. Sat. FEBRUARY 1.-I drank tea at Mr. A--’s, in the Maze-pond, Southwark; but both Mr.

The young one fell under the bucket, and stirred no more; the others held for a while by the side of the well, and then sunk into the water, where it was supposed they lay half an hour. One coming to tell me, I advised, immediately to rub them with salt, and to breathe strongly into their mouths. They did so, but the young one was past help; the others in two or three hours were as well as ever. Wed. 28.--I entered into the eighty-third year of my age. I am a wonder to myself. It is now twelve years since I have felt any such sensation as weariness. I am never tired, (such is the goodness of God!) either with writing, preaching, or travelling. One natural cause undoubtedly is, my continual exercise and change of air. How the latter contributes to health I know not; but certainly it does. This morning, Abigail Pilsworth, aged fourteen, was born into the world of spirits. I talked with her the evening before, and found her ready for the Bridegroom. A few hours after, she quietly fell asleep. When we went into the room where her remains lay, we were surprised. A more beautiful corpse I never saw : We all sung, Ah, lovely appearance of death ! What sight upon earth is so fair? Not all the gay pageants that breathe Can with a dead body compare All the company were in tears; and in all, except her mother, who sorrowed, (but not as one without hope,) they were tears of joy. “O Death, where is thy sting?” LoNDoN, Jan. 20, 1789. J Olj R N A L Thur. JUNE 29, 1786.-I took a cheerful leave of my affectionate friends at Epworth, leaving them much more alive than I found them. About one I preached at Thorne, now one of the liveliest places in the Circuit, to a numerous congregation; and in the evening at Doncaster. I know not that ever I saw this preaching-house filled before; and many of them seemed to feel, as well as hear. It may be, some will bring forth fruit with patience. Fri. 30.--I turned aside to Barnsley, formerly famous for all manner of wickedness. They were then ready to tear any Methodist Preacher in pieces. Now not a dog wagged his tongue.

I heard of a young woman in that country who had uncommon fits, arid of one that had lately preached; but I did not know that it was one and the same person. I found her in the very house to which I went, and went and talked with her at large. I was sur prised. Sarah Mallet, two or three and twenty years old, is of the same size that Jane Cooper was; and is, I think, full as much devoted to God, and of as strong an understanding. But she is not likely to live; having a species of consumption which I believe is never cured. Of the following relation, which she gave me, there are numberless witnesses:- Some years since it was strongly impressed upon her, that she ought to call sinners to repentance. This impression she vehemently resisted, believing herself quite unqualified, both by her sin, and her ignorance, till it was suggested, “If you do it not willingly, you shall do it whether you will or no.” She fell into a fit; and while utterly senseless, thought she was in the preaching-house in Lowestoft, where she prayed and preached for near an hour, to a numerous congregation. She then opened her eyes, and recovered her senses. In a year or two she had eighteen of these fits; in every one of which she imagined herself to be preaching in one or another congrega tion. She then cried out, “Lord, I will obey thee; I will call sinners to repentance.” She has done so occasionally from that time; and her fits returned no more. I preached at one to as many as the House could contain, of people that seemed ready prepared for the Lord. In the evening the hearts of the whole congregation at Norwich seemed to be bowed as the heart of one man. I scarce ever saw them so moved. Surely God will revive his work in this place, and we shall not always find it so cold and comfortless as it has long been. Tues. 5.--In the afternoon I took coach again, and returned to London at eight on Wednesday morning. All the time I could save to the end of the week I spent in transcribing the society; a dull, but necessary, work, which I have taken upon myself once a year for near these fifty years. Wed.

How little have I suffered yet by “the rush of numerous years l’” It is true, I am not so agile as I was in times past. I do not run or walk so fast as I did ; my sight is a little decayed; my left eye is grown dim, and hardly serves me to read; I have daily some pain in the ball of my right eye, as also in my right temple, (occasioned by a blow received some months since,) and in my right shoulder and arm, which I impute partly to a sprain, and partly to the rheumatism. I find likewise some decay in my memory, with regard to names and things lately passed; but not at all with regard to what I have read or heard, twenty, forty, or sixty years ago; neither do I find any decay in my hearing, smell, taste, or appetite; (though I want but a third part of the food I did once;) nor do I feel any such thing as weariness, either intravelling or preach ing: And I am not conscious of any decay in writing sermons; which I do as readily, and I believe as correctly, as ever. To what cause can I impute this, that I am as I am? First, doubtless, to the power of God, fitting me for the work to which I am called, as long as He pleases to continue me therein; and, next, subordinately to this, to the prayers of his children. May we not impute it, as inferior means, 1. To my constant exercise and change of air? 2. To my never having lost a night's sleep, sick or well, at land or at sea, since I was born ? 3. To my having sleep at command; so that whenever I feel myself almost worn out, I call it, and it comes, day or night? 4. To my having constantly, for above sixty years, risen at four in the morning? 5. To my constant preaching at five in the morning, for above fifty years? 428 REv. J. W.ESLEY’s [June, 1788. 6. To my having had so little pain in my life; and so little sorrow, or anxious care? Even now, though I find pain daily in my eye, or temple, or arm; yet it is never violent, and seldom lasts many minutes at a time.

How does this agree with Scripture? “All my delight is in the saints that are on the earth, and with them that excel in virtue!” How far was the experience of Jane Cooper, or Elizabeth Harper, preferable to that of such a solitary ! Sat. 4.--I went on to Bath, and preached in the evening to a serious, but small congregation, for want of notice. Sunday, 5. At ten we had a numerous congregation, and Sept. 1790.] JOURNAL. 493 more communicants than ever I saw here before. This day I cut off that vile custom, I know not when or how it began, of preaching three times a day by the same Preacher, to the same congregation; enough to weary out both the bodies and minds of the speaker, as well as his hearers. Surely God is returning to this society | They are now in earnest to make their calling and election sure. Mon. 6.--This evening the congregation was almost as large as it was the night before; and the power of God was mightily present: And so it was on Tuesday and Wednesday evening at Bristol. Thursday, 9. I read over the experience of Joseph Humphrys; the first Lay Preacher that assisted me in England, in the year 1738. From his own mouth I learn, that he was perfected in love, and so continued for at least a twelvemonth. Afterwards he turned Calvinist, and joined Mr. Whitefield, and published an invective against my brother and me in the newspaper. In a while he renounced Mr. Whitefield, and was ordained a Presbyterian Minister. At last he received Episcopal ordination. He then scoffed at inward religion; and when reminded of his own experience, replied, “That was one of the foolish things which I wrote in the time of my madness l’” Fri. 10.--I preached to a large congregation at Chew-Stoke, nine miles from Bristol on those words in the Second Lesson, “Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden;” and in the evening at Mrs. Griffith's house. Sun. 12.-I intended to preach abroad ; but the weather would not permit. Monday, 13, and the three following days, I met the classes of the society, which contains nine hundred and forty-four members. Still I complain of false musters.

Preface to the Old Testament Notes ABOUT ten years ago I was prevailed upon to publish Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament. When that work was begun, and indeed when it was finished, I had no design to attempt any thing farther of the kind. Nay, I had a full determination, Not to do it, being throughly fatigued with the immense labour (had it been only this; tho' this indeed was but a small part of it,) of writing twice over a Quarto book containing seven or eight hundred pages. 2. But this was scarce published before I was importuned to write Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament. This importunity I have withstood for many years. Over and above the deep conviction I had, of my insufficiency for such a work, of my want of learning, of understanding, of spiritual experience, for an undertaking more difficult by many degrees, than even writing on the New Testament, I objected, That there were many passages in the Old, which I did not understand myself, and consequently could not explain to others, either to their satisfaction, or my own. Above all, I objected the want of time: Not only as I have a thousand other employments, but as my Day is near spent, as I am declined into the vale of years. And to this day it appears to me as a dream, a thing almost incredible, that I should be entering upon a work of this kind, when I am entering into the sixty - third year of my age.

8. But I apprehend this valuable work may be made more valuable still, by making it plainer as well as shorter. Accordingly what is here extracted from it, (which indeed makes but a small part of the following volumes) is considerably plainer than the original. In order to this not only all the Latin sentences occasionally interspersed are omitted, but whatever phrases or words are not so intelligible to persons of no education. Those only who frequently and familiarly converse with men that are wholly uneducated, can conceive how many expressions are mere Greek to them, which are quite natural to those who have any share of learning. It is not by reading, much less by musing alone, that we are enabled to suit our discourse to common capacities. It is only by actually talking with the vulgar, that we learn to talk in a manner they can understand. And unless we do this, what do we profit them Do we not lose all our labour Should we speak as angels, we should be of no more use to them, than sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. 9. Nay I apprehend what is extracted from Mr. Henry's work, may in some sense be more sound than the original. Understand me right: I mean more conformable to that glorious declaration, God willeth all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of his truth. And let it not be objected, That the making any alteration with regard to a point of doctrine, is a misrepresentation of the author's sense, and consequently an injury done to him. It would so, is an alteration were made of his words, so as to make them bear a different meaning; or if any words were recited as His, which he did not write. But neither of these is the case. Nothing is recited here as written by him which he did not write. Neither is any construction put upon his words, different from his own. But what he wrote in favour of Particular Redemption, is totally left out. And of this I here give express notice to the reader once for all.

10. Again. It certainly possible that a work abundantly shorter than Mr. Henry's may nevertheless be considerably fuller, in some particulars. There are many words which he passes over without any explanation at all; as taking it for granted that the reader already knows the meaning of them. But this is a supposition not to be made; it is an entire mistake. For instance: What does a common man know of an Omer, or a Hin "Why Moses explains his own meaning: "An Omer is the tenth part of an Ephah." True; but what does the honest man know of an Ephah Just as much as of an Omer. I suppose that which led Mr. Henry into these omissions, which otherwise are unaccountable, was the desire of not saying what others had said before, Mr. Pool in particular. This is easily gathered from his own words, "Mr. Pool's English Annotations are of admirable use; especially for "the explaining of scripture phrases, opening the sense and clearing "of difficulties. I have industriously declined as much as I could what "is to be found there." I wish he had not. Or at least that he had given us the same sense in other words. Indeed he adds, "Those "and other annotations are most easy to be consulted upon occasion." Yes by those that have them: but that is not the case with the generality of Mr. Henry's readers. And besides they may justly expect that so large a comment will leave them no occasion to consult others. 11. It is possible likewise to penetrate deeper into the meaning of some scriptures than Mr. Henry has done. Altho' in general he is far from being a superficial writer, yet he is not always the same. Indeed if he had, he must have been more than man, considering the vastness of his work. It was scarce possible for any human understanding, to furnish out such a number of folios, without sinking sometimes into trite reflections and observations, rather lively than deep. A stream that runs wide and covers a large tract of land, will be shallow in some places. If it had been confined within a moderate channel, it might have flowed deep all along.

(3.) The situation of this garden was extremely sweet; it was in Eden, which signifies delight and pleasure. The place is here particularly pointed out by such marks and bounds as were sufficient when Moses wrote, to specify the place to those who knew that country; but now it seems the curious cannot satisfy themselves concerning it. Let it be our care to make sure a place in the heavenly paradise, and then we need not perplex ourselves with a search after the place of the earthly paradise. (4.) The trees wherewith this garden was planted. [1.] It had all the best and choicest trees in common with the rest of the ground. It was beautified with every tree that was pleasant to the sight - It was enriched with every tree that yielded fruit grateful to the taste, and useful to the body. But, [2.] It had two extraordinary trees peculiar to itself, on earth there were not their like. 1. There was the tree of life in the midst of the garden - Which was not so much a natural means to preserve or prolong life; but was chiefly intended to be a sign to Adam, assuring him of the continuance of life and happiness upon condition of his perseverance in innocency and obedience. 2. There was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - So called, not because it had any virtue to beget useful knowledge, but because there was an express revelation of the will of God concerning this tree, so that by it he might know good and evil. What is good It is good not to eat of this tree: what is evil To eat of this tree. The distinction between all other moral good and evil was written in the heart of man; but this, which resulted from a positive law, was written upon this tree. And in the event it proved to give Adam an experimental knowledge of good by the loss of it, and of evil by the sense of it. (5.) The rivers wherewith this garden was watered, Ge 2:10 - 14. These four rivers, (or one river branched into four streams) contributed much both to the pleasantness and the fruitfulness of this garden. Hiddekel and Euphrates are rivers of Babylon.

As to the advantage, he suits the temptation to the pure state they were now in, proposing to them not any carnal pleasure, but intellectual delights. Your eyes shall be opened - You shall have much more of the power and pleasure of contemplation than now you have; you shall fetch a larger compass in your intellectual views, and see farther into things than now you do. You shall be as gods - As Elohim, mighty gods, not only omniscient but omnipotent too: You shall know good and evil - That is, everything that is desirable to be known. To support this part of the temptation, he abuseth the name given to this tree. 'Twas intended to teach the practical knowledge of good and evil, that is, of duty and disobedience, and it would prove the experimental knowledge of good and evil, that is, of happiness and misery. But he perverts the sense of it, and wrests it to their destruction, as if this tree would give them a speculative notional knowledge of the natures, kinds, and originals of good and evil. And, All this presently, In the day you eat thereof - You will find a sudden and immediate change for the better. See note at "Ge 3:1 See note at "Ge 3:1 See note at "Ge 3:1 See note at "Ge 3:1 6, 7, 8 Here we see what Eve's parley with the tempter ended in: Satan at length gains his point. God tried the obedience of our first parents by forbidding them the tree of knowledge, and Satan doth as it were join issue with God, and in that very thing undertakes to seduce them into a transgression; and here we find how he prevailed, God permitting it for wise and holy ends.

Chapter XII From henceforward Abram and his seed are almost the only subject of the sacred history. In this chapter we have, God's call of Abram to the land of Canaan ver. 1, 2, 3. Abram's obedience to this call, ver. 4, 5. His welcome to the land of Canaan, ver. 6 - 9. His occasional remove into Egypt, with an account of what happened to him there. Abram's flight and fault, ver. 10 - 13. Sarai's danger and deliverance, ver. 14 - 20. We have here the call by which Abram was removed out of the land of his nativity into the land of promise, which was designed both to try his faith and obedience, and also to set him apart for God. The circumstances of this call we may be somewhat helped to the knowledge of, from Stephen's speech, Acts 7:2, where we are told, That the God of glory appeared to him to give him this call, appeared in such displays of his glory as left Abram no room to doubt. God spake to him after in divers manners: but this first time, when the correspondence was to be settled, he appeared to him as the God of glory, and spake to him. That this call was given him in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and in obedience to this call, he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran or Haran about five years, and from thence, when his father was dead, by a fresh command, he removed him into the land of Canaan. Some think Haran was in Chaldea, and so was still a part of Abram's country; or he having staid there five years, began to call it his country, and to take root there, till God let him know this was not the place he was intended for. Get thee out of thy country - Now, By this precept he was tried whether he loved God better than he loved his native soil, and dearest friends, and whether he could willingly leave all to go along with God.

The great objection which Sarah could not get over was her age. I am waxed old, and past child - bearing in a course of nature, especially having been hitherto barren, and which magnifies the difficulty, My lord is old also. Observe here, That Sarah calls Abraham her lord, and the Holy Ghost takes notice of it to her honour, and recommends it to the imitation of all Christian wives, 1Pe 3:6. Sarah obeyed Abraham calling him lord, in token of respect and subjection. Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do - Thus doth God in his councils express himself after the manner of men, with deliberation. The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him. Those that by faith live a life of communion with God, cannot but know more of his mind than other people. They have a better insight into what is present, and a better foresight of what is to come. I know Abraham that he will command his children, and his household after him - This is a bright part of Abraham's character. He not only prayed with his family, but he taught them, as a man of knowledge; nay, he commanded them as a man in authority, and was prophet and king, as well as priest, in his own house. And he not only took care of his children, but of his household: his servants were catechized servants. Masters of families should instruct, and inspect the manners of all under their roof. And this is given as the reason why God would make known to him his purpose concerning Sodom; because he was communicative of his knowledge, and improved it for the benefit of those that were under his charge. I will go down now and see - Not as if there were any thing concerning which God is in doubt; but he is pleased thus to express himself after the manner of men. Abraham drew near - This expression intimates, A holy concern. A holy confidence; he drew near with an assurance of faith, drew near as a prince, Job 31:37.

It was an instance of the equity of our law, that if an alien be tried for any crime except treason, the one half of his jury, if he desire it, shall be foreigners; a kind provision that strangers may not be oppressed. For ye know the heart of a stranger - You know something of the griefs and fears of a stranger by sad experience. The institution of the sabbatical year was designed,

According to their families - Dividing the inheritance into as many parts as they had families; but this is only spoken of the greater families; for the lesser distributions to the several small families was done by inferior officers, according to the rules which Moses gave them. In the mount of the valley - In the mountain bordering upon that valley, which then was famous among the Israelites; whether that where Moses was buried, which was near to Beth - peor, Deut 34:1,6, or some other. And this clause is thought to belong to all the cities now mentioned. Cities of the plain - Opposed to the cities of the mountain of the valley. All the kingdom of Sihon - A great part of it; in which sense we read of all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, Mat 3:5, and all Galilee, Mat 4:23. Whom Moses smote - Not in the same time or battle, as appears by comparing Num 21:23,24, with Num 31:8, but in the same manner. And they are here mentioned, partly because they were slain not long after, and upon the same occasion, even their enmity against Israel; and partly because of their relation and subjection to Sihon. Dukes of Sihon - But how could they be so, when they were kings of Midian Numb 31:8. There were divers petty kings in those parts, who were subject to greater kings; and such these were, but are here called dukes or princes of Sihon, because they were subject and tributaries to him, and therefore did one way or other assist Sihon in this war, though they were not killed at this time. It is probable, that when Sihon destroyed those Moabites which dwelt in these parts, he frighted the rest of them, and with them their neighbours and confederates, the Midianites, into some kind of homage, which they were willing to pay him. Dwelling in the country - Heb. inhabiting that land, namely Midian, last mentioned; whereby he signifies, that tho' they were subject to Sihon, yet they did not dwell in his land, but in another.

The Lord said - In general, the promise he made us of possessing this land; and for my part, that which is expressed here, ver.9. As it was in mine heart - I spake my opinion sincerely, without flattery and fear, when the other spies were biased by their own fears, and the dread of the people, to speak otherwise than in their consciences they believed. I wholly followed the Lord - Which self - commendation is justifiable, because it was necessary, as being the ground of his petition. Therefore it was not vain glory in him to speak it: no more than it is for those, who have God's spirit witnessing with their spirits, that they are the children of God, humbly and thankfully to tell others, for their encouragement, what God hath done for their souls. Forty - five years - Whereof thirty - eight years were spent in the wilderness, and seven since they came into Canaan. The longer we live the more sensible we should be, of God's goodness to us in keeping us alive! Of his care in prolonging our frail lives, his patience in prolonging our forfeited lives! And shall not the life thus kept by his providence, be devoted to his praise For war - Not only for counsel, but for action; for marching and fighting. And therefore this gift will not be cast away upon an unprofitable and unserviceable person. To go out, and to come in - To perform all the duties belonging to my place. Moses had said, that at eighty years old, even our strength is labour and sorrow. But Caleb was an exception to this rule: At eighty - five years old, his strength was still ease and joy. This he got by following the Lord fully. This mountain - That is, this mountainous country. He names the country rather than the cities, because the cities were given to the Levites, chap.21:11,13. Thou heardest - Didst understand, both by the reports of others, and by thy own observation. Hearing, the sense by which we get knowledge, is often put for knowing or understanding.

Hearing, the sense by which we get knowledge, is often put for knowing or understanding. If the Lord will be with me - A modest and pious expression, signifying both the absolute necessity of God's help, and his godly fear, lest God for his sins should deny his assistance to him; for although he was well assured in general, that God would crown his people with success in this war, yet he might doubt of his particular success in this or that enterprize. To drive them out - Out of their fastnesses where they yet remain, Caleb desires this difficult work as a testimony of his own faith, and as a motive to quicken his brethren to the like attempts. Blessed him - Prayed to God to bless and help him according to his own desire. A great man - In stature, and strength, and dignity, and authority, as being the progenitor of Anak, the father of those famous giants called Anakims.

Chapter III A general account of Israel's enemies, ver. 1 - 7. A particular account of Othniel, ver. 8 - 11, Of Ehud, ver. 12 - 30. and of Shamgar, ver. 31. Had not known - That is, such as had no experience of those wars, nor of God's extraordinary power and providence manifested in them. Teach them war - That by the neighbourhood of such warlike enemies, they might be purged from sloth and security, and obliged them to innure themselves to martial exercises, and to stand continually upon their guard, and consequently to keep close to that God whose assistance they had so great and constant need of. Five lords - Whereof three had been in some sort subdued, chap.1:18. but afterwards recovered their strength. Canaanites - Properly so called, who were very numerous, and dispersed through several parts of the land, whence they gave denomination to all the rest of the people. Zidonions - The people living near Zidon, and subject to its jurisdiction. Baal - hermon - Which was the eastern part about Lebanon. To know - That is, that they and others might know by experience. Served their gods - Were drawn to idolatry by the persuasions and examples of their yoke - fellows. And the groves - That is, in the groves, in which the Heathens usually worshipped their Baalim or idols. Served - That is, were made subject to him. Mesopotamia was that part of Syria which lay between the two great rivers, Tigris and Euphrates. This lay at such a distance, that one would not have thought Israel's trouble should have come from such a far country: which shews so much the more of the hand of God in it. Cried - That is, prayed fervently for deliverance. Came upon him - With extraordinary influence, endowing him with singular wisdom and courage, and stirring him up to this great undertaking. Judged Israel - That is, pleaded and avenged the cause of Israel against their oppressors. Forty years - It rested about forty years, or the greatest part of forty years: it being most frequent in scripture to use numbers in such a latitude. Nor is it unusual either in scripture, or in other authors, for things to be denominated from the greater part; especially, when they enjoyed some degrees of rest and peace even in their times of slavery.

Increase thine army - I desire not to surprise thee at any disadvantage; strengthen thyself as much as thou canst, and come out into the open field, that thou and I may decide it by our arms. And stood - To put his army in order, and to conduct them against Abimelech, whom he supposed to be at a great distance. To Zebul - Who concealed the anger which he had conceived, ver.30, and pretended compliance with him in this expedition, that he might draw him forth into the field where Abimelech might have the opportunity of fighting with him, and overthrowing him. The shadow - For in the morning, as this was, and in the evening, the shadows are longest, and move quickest. Where is now, &c. - Now shew thyself a man, and fight valiantly for thyself and people. He fled - Being surprised by the unexpected coming of Abimelech, and probably not fully prepared for the encounter. Dwelt at Arumah - He did not prosecute his victory, but retreated to Arumah, to see whether the Shechemites would not of themselves return to his government, or else, that being hereby grown secure, he might have the greater advantage against them. Thrust out - It seems the same night. Probably the multitude, which is generally light and unstable, were now enraged against Gaal, suspecting him of cowardice or ill - conduct. Zebul's interest was not so considerable with them, that he could prevail with them either to kill Gaal and his brethren, or to yield themselves to Abimelech; and therefore he still complies with the people, and waits for a fairer opportunity. Went out - to their usual employments about their land. Three companies - Whereof he kept one with himself, ver.44, and put the rest under other commanders. Entering of the gate - To prevent their retreat into the city, and give the other two companies opportunity to cut them off. With salt - In token of his desire of their utter and irrecoverable destruction. The tower - A strong place belonging to the city of Shechem, made for its defence without the city. Berith - Or, Baal - berith, ver.4.

Thus doth God often do great things for his people by the weak things of the world. A youth - Not above 20 years old; and a novice, a raw and unexperienced soldier. The Lord, &c. - The lion and the bear were only enemies to me and my sheep, and it was in defence of them I attacked them. But this Philistine is an enemy to my God and his people, and it is for their honour that I attack him. Armour - With armour taken out of his armoury. He seems to speak of some military vestments which were then used in war, and were contrived for defence; such as buff - coats are now. Proved them - I have no skill or experience in the managements of this kind of arms. Staff - His shepherd's staff. These arms in themselves were contemptible, yet chosen by David; because he had no skill to use other arms; because he had inward assurance of the victory, even by these weapons; and because such a conquest would be more honourable to God, and most shameful, and discouraging to the Philistines. Drew near - Probably a signal was made, that his challenge was accepted. Fair - Not having so much as the countenance of a martial person. Dog - Dost thou think to beat me as easily as thou wouldst thy dog A God - Heb. that God, the only true God, is for Israel; or on Israel's side, and against you. Or, that Israel hath a God, a God indeed, one who is able to help them; and not such an impotent idol as you serve. Saveth - That is, that he can save without these arms, and with the most contemptible weapons. The battle - That is, the events of war are wholly in his power. He will - David speaks thus confidently, because he was assured of it by a particular inspiration. Drew nigh - Like a stalking mountain. Ran - So far was he from fear! Forehead - Probably the proud giant had lift up that part of his helmet which covered his fore - head; in contempt of David and his weapons, and by the singular direction of providence.

Forehead - Probably the proud giant had lift up that part of his helmet which covered his fore - head; in contempt of David and his weapons, and by the singular direction of providence. David took - Hence it appears, that David was not a little man, as many fancy; but a man of considerable bulk and strength, because he was able to manage a giant's sword. The stone threw him down to the earth, and bereaved him of sense and motion; but there remained some life in him, which the sword took away, and so compleated the work. God is greatly glorified, when his proud enemies are cut off with their own sword. Whose son - David had been some considerable time dismissed from Saul's court, and was returned home. And therefore it is not strange, if Saul for the present had forgot David. Besides the distemper of Saul's mind might make him forgetful; and that David might be now much changed, both in his countenance and in his habit. I cannot tell - Abner's employment was generally in the camp, when David was at the court; and when Abner was there, he took little notice of a person so much inferior to him as David was. Chapter XVIII

Thy voice - He knew his voice, though being at a great distance from him, he could not discern his face. Wept - From the sense of his sin against God, and his base carriage to David. He speaks as one quite overcome with David's kindness, and as one that relents at the sight of his own folly and ingratitude. More righteous than I - He ingenuously acknowledges David's integrity, and his own iniquity. The Lord reward thee - Because he thought himself not able to recompense so great a favour, he prays God to recompense it. Unto the hold - Of En - gedi, ver.1, for having had by frequent experience of Saul's inconstancy, he would trust him no more. Chapter XXV

But you must not understand this word of fasting strictly, as if they eat nothing for seven whole days; but in a more large sense, as it is used both in sacred and profane writers; that they did eat but little, and that but mean food, and drank only water for that time. This book began with the birth of Samuel, and ends with the death of Saul: The comparing these together will teach us to prefer the honour that comes from God, before all the honours of the world. This book is the history of the reign of David. It gives us an account of his triumphs and of his troubles. His triumphs, over the house of Saul, chap. 1 - 4. Over the Jebusites and Philistines, chap. 5. In the bringing up of the ark, chap. 6, 7. Over the neighbouring nations, chap. 8 - 10. His troubles; the cause of them, his sin in the matter of Uriah, chap. 11 - 12. The troubles themselves, from the sin of Amnon, chap. 13. The rebellion of Absolom, chap. 14 - 19. And of Sheba, chap. 20. From the famine, chap. 21. And the pestilence, for his numbering the people, chap. 24. His song we have, chap. 22. And his words and worthies, chap. 23. In many instances throughout this book, he appears as a great and a good man. Yet it must be confessed he had great vices: So that his honour shines brighter in his psalms than in his annals.

Over the gate - Retiring himself from all men and business, that he might wholly give up himself to lamentation. My son - This he might speak from a deep sense of his eternal state, because he died in his sins, and because David himself had by his own sins been the occasion of his death. But it seems rather to be the effect of strong passion, causing him to speak unadvisedly with his lips.

So truth here contains all duties to God, as righteousness doth his duties to men, and uprightness the right manner of performing both sorts of duties. With thee - That is, in thy judgment, to whom he often appealed as the witness of his integrity. Child - So he was in years: not above twenty years old; and withal (which he principally intends) he was raw and unexperienced, as a child, in state affairs. Go out, &c. - To govern my people, and manage affairs. In the midst - Is set over them to rule and guide them. A metaphor from the overseer of divers workmen, who usually is in the midst of them, that he may the better observe how each of them discharges his office. Chosen - Thy peculiar people, whom thou takest special care of, and therefore wilt expect a more punctual account of my government of them. An understanding heart - Whereby I may both clearly discern, and faithfully perform all the parts of my duty: for both these are spoken of in scripture, as the effects of a good understanding; and he that lives in the neglect of his duties, or the practice of wickedness, is called a fool, and one void of understanding. Discern - Namely in causes and controversies among my people; that I may not through mistake, or prejudice, or passion, give wrong sentences, and call evil good, or good evil. Absalom, that was a fool, wished himself a judge: Solomon, that was a wise man, trembles at the undertaking. The more knowing and considerate men are, the more jealous they are of themselves. All thy days - Whereby he signifies that these gifts of God were not transient, as they were in Saul, but such as should abide with him whilst he lived. And if - This caution God gives him, lest his wisdom should make him proud, careless, or presumptuous. A dream - Not a vain dream, wherewith men are commonly deluded; but a divine dream, assuring him of the thing: which he knew, by a divine impression after he was awakened: and by the vast alteration which he presently found within himself in point of wisdom and knowledge. The ark - Which was there in the city of David, 2Sam 6:17, before which he presented himself in a way of holy adoration.

Under these two trees, which were most used and cultivated by the Israelites, he understands all other fruit - bearing trees, and all other comforts. And they are brought in as fitting or dwelling under these trees, partly for recreation or delight in the shade; and partly, for the comfort or advantage of the fruit; and withal, to note their great security, not only in their strong cities, but even in the country, where the vines and fig - trees grew, which was most open to the incursions of their enemies. Forty thousand - In 2Chron 9:25, it is but four thousand. But it is not exactly the same Hebrew word which is here and there, though we translate both stalls; and therefore there may well be allowed some difference in the signification, the one signifying properly stables, of which there were four thousand, the other stalls or partitions for each horse, which were forty thousand. Chariots - Both for his military chariots, which seem to be those fourteen hundred, chap.10:26, and for divers other uses, as about his great and various buildings, and merchandises, and other occasions, which might require some thousands of other chariots. Horsemen - Appointed partly for the defence of his people in peace; and partly for attendance upon his person, and for the splendor of his government. The officers - Named above. They lacked - Or rather, they suffered nothing to be lacking to any man that came thither, but plentifully provided all things necessary. Largeness of heart - Vastness of understanding, a most comprehensive knowledge of all things both Divine and human. East country - The Chaldeans, Persians, and Arabians, who all lay eastward from Canaan, and were famous in ancient times for their wisdom and learning. Egypt - The Egyptians, whose fame was then great for their skill in the arts and sciences, which made them despise the Grecians as children in knowledge. All men - Either of his nation; or, of his time: or, of all times and nations, whether of the east or any other country excepting only the first and second Adam. Ethan, &c. - Israelites of eminent wisdom, probably the same mentioned, 1Chron 2:6 15:19 25:4 Psal 88:1(title,) Ps 89:1(title). Chalcol, &c. - Of whom see 1Chron 2:6.

And they double the words, to note their abundant satisfaction and assurance of the truth of their assertion. Elijah said - He takes the opportunity, whilst the peoples hearts were warm with the fresh sense of this great miracle. The brook Kishon - That their blood might be poured into that river, and thence conveyed into the sea, and might not defile the holy land. Slew them - As these idolatrous priests were manifestly under a sentence of death, passed upon such by the sovereign Lord of life and death, so Elijah had authority to execute it, being a prophet, and an extraordinary minister of God's vengeance. The four hundred prophets of the groves, it seems, did not attend, and so escaped, which perhaps Ahab rejoiced in. But it proved, they were reserved to be the instruments of his destruction, by encouraging him to go up to Ramoth - Gilead. Get up - From the river, where he had been present at the slaughter of Baal's priests, to thy tent: which probably was pitched on the side of Carmel. Eat, &c. - Take comfort, and refresh thyself: for neither the king, nor any of the people could have leisure to eat, being wholly intent upon the decision of the great controversy. For there is, &c. - The rain is as certainly coming, as if you heard the noise which it makes. The top of Carmel - Where he might pour out his prayers unto God; and whence he might look towards the sea. He had a large prospect of the sea from hence. The sailors at this day call it cape Carmel. Between his knees - That is, bowed his head so low, that it touched his knees; thus abasing himself in the sense of his own meanness, now God had thus honoured him. Go - While I continue praying. Elijah desired to have timely notice of the first appearance of rain, that Ahab and the people might know that it was obtained from Jehovah by the prophet's prayers, and thereby be confirmed in the true religion. Like a man's hand - Great blessings often rise from small beginnings, and showers of plenty from a cloud of a span long. Let us therefore never despise the day of small things, but hope and wait for greater things from it. The hand, &c.

Chapter IX The people keep a solemn fast, ver. 1 - 3. The Levites bless God for his goodness to them and their fathers, ver. 4 - 8. In Egypt and in their journey out of it, ver. 9 - 12. On mount Sinai, ver. 13, 14. And their journey toward Canaan, ver. 15 - 18. In the wilderness, ver. 19 - 21. In driving out the Canaanites, ver. 22 - 26. In hearing their prayer when in trouble, ver. 27 - 31. They confess their sin, ver. 32 - 37. And seal a covenant with God, ver. 38. Now - The next day, but one after the feast of tabernacles, which begun on the fourteenth day, and ended on the twenty second, for their consciences having been fully awakened and their hearts filled with grief for their sins, which they were not allowed to express in that time of publick joy; now they resume their former thoughts, and recalling their sins to mind, set apart a day for solemn fasting and humiliation. Separated - From all unnecessary society with the Heathens, and particularly from those strange women whom some of them had married. For though Ezra had done this formerly, yet, it seems, there were some criminals, without his knowledge, or, these were some new delinquents, that since that time had fallen into the same error, and shewed the truth of their repentance by forsaking their beloved sins, and dearest relations. Book of the law - As they did before, giving them the sense of what they read. Fourth part - For three hours; there were twelve hours in their day, probably they began after the morning sacrifice, and continued their work till the evening sacrifice. The work of a fast - day is good work. We should endeavour to make a day's work, a good day's work of it. Stairs - Upon such stairs, or pulpits, as the Levites used to stand upon, when they taught the people. But they stood upon several pulpits, each of them teaching that part of the congregation which was allotted him, or praying, or blessing God with them. Loud voice - Thereby testifying their deep sense of their sins and miseries, and their servant, and importunate desire of God's mercy. Good statutes - The moral and judicial precepts were all founded on natural equity.

- God's usual method is, first to humble, and then to exalt. And he never makes a wound too great, too deep for his own cure. Deliver - If thou seekest to him by prayer and repentance. Here he applies himself to Job directly. Six - Manifold and repeated. Touch - So as to destroy thee. Thou shalt have a good issue out of all thy troubles, though they are both great and many. He shall - These things he utters with more confidence, because the rewards or punishments of this life, were more constantly distributed to men in the Old Testament according to their good or bad behaviour, than they are now: and because it was his opinion, that great afflictions were the certain evidences of wickedness; and consequently, that great deliverances would infallibly follow upon true repentance. Laugh - With a laughter of joy and triumph, arising from a just security and confidence in God's watchful and gracious providence. League - Thou shalt be free from annoyance thereby, as if they had made an inviolable league with thee. This is a bold metaphor, but such as are frequent both in scripture and other authors. This is an addition to the former privilege; they shall not hurt thee, ver.22, nay, they shall befriend thee, as being at peace with thee. Our covenant with God is a covenant with all the creatures, that they shall do us no hurt, but serve and be ready to do us good. Know - By certain experience. Know - By assurance from God's promises, and the impressions of his Spirit; and by experience in due time. Full age - In a mature and old, but vigorous age, as the word implies. It is a great blessing, to live to a full age, and not to have the number of our years cut short. Much more, to be willing to die, to come chearfully to the grave: and to die seasonably, just in the bed - time, when our souls are ripe for God. Searched - This is no rash or hasty conceit, but what both I and my brethren have learned by deep consideration, long experience, and diligent observation. Know thou - Know it for thyself; (So the word is) with application to thy own case. That which we thus hear and know for ourselves, we hear and know for our good.

Harden - I would bear up with courage under all my torments, with the hopes of death, and blessedness after death. Spare - Not suffer me to live any longer. Concealed - As I have steadfastly believed them, and not wilfully departed from them, so I have not been ashamed, nor afraid, boldly to profess and preach the true religion in the midst of Heathens. And therefore I know if God doth cut me off, I shall be a gainer by it. Strength - My strength is so spent, that it is vain for me to hope for such restitution as thou hast promised me, chap.5:22. End - What is death to me It is not terrible, but comfortable. That - Then why should I desire to prolong my life. But as desirous of death as Job was, yet he never offered to put an end to his own life. Such a thought will never be entertained by any, that have the least regard to the law of God and nature. How uneasy soever the soul's confinement in the body may be, it must by no means break the prison, but wait for a fair discharge. Is, &c. - I am not made of stone or brass, but of flesh and blood, as others are, therefore I am unable to endure these miseries longer, and can neither hope for. nor desire the continuance of my life. What, &c. - If my outward condition be helpless and hopeless Have I therefore lost my understanding, cannot I judge whether it is more desirable for me to live or to die, whether I be an hypocrite or no, whether your words have truth and weight in them; whether you take the right method in dealing with me To him - Heb. to him that is melted or dissolved with affections. But. &c. - But thou hast no pity for thy friend; a plain evidence that thou art guilty of what thou didst charge me with, even of the want of the fear of God. The least which those that are at ease can do for them that are pained, is to pity them, to feel a tender concern for them, and to sympathize with them. Brethren - Friends; for though Eliphaz only had spoken, the other two shewed their approbation of his discourse.

- What is there in that poor, mean, creature called man, miserable man, as this word signifies, which can induce thee to take any notice of him, or to make such account of him Man is not worthy of thy favour, and he is below thy anger; that thou shouldest concern thyself so much about him, as one near and dear to thee And try, &c. - What is man that vain, foolish creature, that thou shouldest magnify or regard, or visit him, (with thy mercy and blessings, that thou shouldest so far honour and regard him, as by thy visitation to preserve his spirit, or hold his soul in life) and try him, which God doth not only by afflictions, but also by prosperity and both inward and outward blessings That thou shouldst observe his motions every moment, as in care for him, and jealous over him How long - How long will it be ere thou withdraw thy afflicting hand Swallow - That I may have a breathing time: a proverbial expression. Sinned - Although I am free from those crying sins, for which my friends suppose thou hast sent this judgment upon me, yet, I freely confess I am a sinner, and therefore obnoxious to thy justice. What, &c. - To satisfy thy justice, or regain thy favour Who dost know and diligently observe all mens inward motions, and outward actions; and therefore, if thou shalt be severe to mark mine iniquities, I have not what to say or do unto thee. My case is singular, none is shot at as I am. Pardon - Seeing thou art so gracious to others, why may not I hope for the same favour from thee Dust - If thou dost not speedily help me, it will be too late. But I shall not be - It will be to late to shew me favour.

Chapter VIII Bildad affirms, that Job had spoken amiss, ver. 1 - 3. That if he would sincerely seek to God, God would help him, ver. 4 - 7. That it is usual with God, to destroy the hypocrite, ver. 8 - 19. The joy of the upright, ver. 20 - 22. Strong wind - Boisterous and violent. Doth God - Heb. The might God, as this word signifies, the Almighty, or All - sufficient God, as the next name of God implies. These names are emphatically used, to prove that God cannot deal unjustly or falsely with men, because he hath no need of it, nor temptation to it, being self - sufficient for his own happiness, and being able by his own invincible power to do whatsoever pleaseth him. Pervert - Judge unrighteously No, this is inconsistent with God's nature, and with his office of governor of the world. If - If thou wast innocent, thy children, upon whom a great part of these calamities fell, might be guilty; and therefore God is not unrighteous in these proceedings. Betimes - Heb. rise early to seek him, if thou wouldest seek him speedily, early and diligently. Habitation - The concerns of thy house and family; which thou hast got and managed with righteousness. Search - Seriously and industriously search the ancient records. We, &c. - But lately born, and therefore have but little knowledge and experience. We live not so long as they did, to make observations on the methods of Divine Providence. Utter - Not partially, but sincerely, speaking their inward thoughts; not rashly, but from deep consideration; not by hearsay, but their own knowledge. Can, &c. - The hypocrite cannot build his hope, without some false, rotten ground or other, any more than the rush can grow without mire, or the flag without water. Greenness - Whereby it promises long continuance. Tho' no man cut it down, it withers of itself, sooner than other herbs. Paths - Of wicked men. By their paths he doth not understand their manner of living, but the events which befall them, God's manner of dealing with them. Hope - Whose wealth and outward glory, the matter of his hope, and trust, shall be cut off suddenly and violently taken away from him.

Chapter IX God's justice, wisdom, power and sovereignty, ver. 1 - 13. Job condemns himself, as not able to contend with God, ver. 14 - 21. Shews that we cannot judge men by their outward condition, ver. 22 - 24. And complains of the greatness of his troubles, and the loss he was at, what to say or do, ver. 25 - 35. I know - That God is just in all his ways, that he doth ordinarily bless the righteous, and punish the wicked. Before God - And I know that no man is absolutely just, if God be severe to mark what is amiss in him. One - One accusation among a thousand which God shall produce against him. He - He is infinitely wise, and searcheth all mens hearts and ways, and discovers a multitude of sins which mens short sighted - eyes cannot see; and therefore can charge them with innumerable evils, where they thought themselves innocent, and sees far more malignity than men could discern in their sins. Mighty - So that whether men contend with God by wisdom or by strength: God will be conqueror. Hardened himself - Obstinately contended with him. The devil promised himself that Job in the day of his affliction, would curse and speak ill of God. But instead of that, he sets himself to honour God, and speak highly of him. As ill pained as he is, and as much as he is taken up with his own miseries, when he has occasion to mention the wisdom and power of God, he forgets his complaints and expatiates with a flood of eloquence on that glorious subject. Who - He proceeds to give evidence of the Divine power and wisdom. Removeth - Suddenly and unexpectedly. They - The mountains, to which he ascribes sense and knowledge figuratively. In anger - In token of his displeasure with the men that live upon them. The earth - Great portions of it, by earthquakes, or by removing islands. Pillars - The deep and inward parts of it, which like pillars supported those parts that appear to our view. Who. &c. - A farther description of a black and tempestuous season, wherein the heavens seem to be brought down nearer to the earth.

- A farther description of a black and tempestuous season, wherein the heavens seem to be brought down nearer to the earth. Treadeth - Represseth and ruleth them when they rage and are tempestuous: for treading upon any thing, signifies in scripture using power and dominion over it. Ordereth - Disposeth them, governeth their rising and setting, and all their influences. These he names as constellations of greatest eminency; but under them he seems to comprehend all the stars, which as they were created by God, so are under his government. Arcturus is a northern constellation, near that called the Bear. Orion is a more southerly constellation, that rises to us in December. The Pleiades is a constellation not far from Orion, which we call the seven stars: by the chambers, (or inmost chambers, as the word signifies) of the south, he seems to understand those stars and constellations which are toward the southern pole, which are called inward chambers, because they are for the most part hid and shut up from these parts of the world. Doth great things, &c. - Job here says the same that Eliphaz had said, chap.5:9, and in the original, in the very same words, with design to shew his full agreement with him, touching the Divine perfections. Goeth - He works by his providence in ways of mercy or judgment. Passeth - He goeth from place to place: from one action to another: he speaks of God after the manner of men. Taketh - If he determines to take away from any man his children or servants, or estate, who is able to restrain him from doing it Or who dare presume to reprove him for it And therefore far be it from me to quarrel with God, whereof you untruly accuse me. Helpers - Those who undertake to uphold and defend one another against him. Stoop - Fall and are crushed by him. How shall I - Since no creature can resist his power, and no man can comprehend his counsels and ways; how can I contend with him Answer his allegations and arguments, produced against me. Tho' - Though I were not conscious to myself of any sin. Would not - I durst not undertake to plead my cause against him; or maintain my integrity before him, because he knows me better than I know myself.

A metaphor from princes or judges, who anciently used to write their sentences. He - He speaks of himself in the third person, as is usual in this and other sacred books. So the sense is, he, this poor frail creature, this body of mine; which possibly he pointed at with his finger, consumeth or pineth away.

Hath - The earth continueth. Dust - Distinct from that gold which is found in the mass, both sorts of gold being found in the earth. A path - In the bowels of the earth. Vulture's eye - Whose eye is very quick, and strong, and searcheth all places for its prey. Lion - Which rangeth all places for prey. The birds and beasts have often led men to such places as otherwise they should never have found out; but they could not lead them to these mines, the finding out of them is a special gift of God. He, &c. - This and the two next verses mention other eminent works of God, who overturneth rocks, and produceth new rivers. Seeth - Even those which no human art or industry was ever able to discover. That wisdom - Man hath one kind of wisdom, to discover the works of nature, and to perform the operations of art; but as for that sublime wisdom which consists in the knowledge of God and ourselves, no man can discover this, but by the special gift of Cod. Found - Among men upon earth, but only among those blessed spirits that dwell above. The depth - This is not to he found in any part of the sea, though a man may dig or dive ever so deep to find it, nor to be learned from any creature. Whence, &c. - By a diligent inquiry, we find at length, that there is a twofold wisdom; one hid in God, which belongs not to us, the other revealed to man, which belongs to us and to our children. Hid - The line and plummet of human reason, can never fathom the abyss of the Divine counsels. Who can account for the maxims, measures and methods of God's government Let us then be content, not to know the future events of providence, 'till time discover them: and not to know the secret reasons of providence, 'till eternity brings them to light. Death - The grave, the place of the dead, to 'which these things are here ascribed, as they are to the depths, and to the sea, by a common figure. Though they cannot give an account of it themselves yet there is a world, on which these dark regions border, where we shall see it clearly.

Since - Since thou wast born: this work was done long before thou wast born. To know - To observe the punctual time when, and the point of the heavens where it should arise; which varies every day. That - That this morning light should in a moment spread itself, from one end of the hemisphere to the other. Shaken - From the face of the earth. And this effect the morning - light hath upon the wicked, because it discovers them, whereas darkness hides them; and because it brings them to condign punishment, the morning being the usual time for executing judgment. It - The earth. Turned - Is changed in its appearance. By the seal - The seal makes a beautiful impression upon the clay, which in itself hath no form, or comeliness. So the earth, which in the darkness of night lies like a confused heap without either form or beauty, when the light arises and shines upon it, appears in excellent order and glory. They - The men and things of the earth, whether natural, as living creatures, herbs and trees; or artificial, as houses or other buildings. Stand - Present themselves to our view. Garment - Wherewith the earth is in a manner clothed and adorned. Withheld - That light which enjoyed by others is withholden from them, either by their own choice, because they chuse darkness rather than light; or by the judgment of God, or the magistrate, by whom they are cut off from the light of the living. Arms - Their great strength which they used to the oppression of others. Springs - Heb. the tears; the several springs out of which the waters of the sea flow as tears do from the eyes. Walked - Hast thou found out the utmost depth of the sea, which in divers places could never be reached by the wisest mariner And how then canst thou fathom the depths of my counsels Death - Hast thou seen, or dost thou know the place and state of the dead; the depths and bowels of that earth in which the generality of dead men are buried. Death is a grand secret We know not when or by what means we shall be brought to death: by what road we must go the way, whence we shall not return.

Death is a grand secret We know not when or by what means we shall be brought to death: by what road we must go the way, whence we shall not return. We cannot describe what death is; how the knot is untied between soul and body, or how the spirit goes "To be we know not what, and live we know not how." With what dreadful curiosity does the soul launch out into an untried abyss We have no correspondence with separate souls, nor any acquaintance with their state. It is an unknown, undiscovered region, to which they are removed. While we are here in a world of sense, we speak of the world of spirits, as blind men do of colours, and when we remove thither, shall be amazed to find how much we were mistaken. Breadth - The whole compass and all the parts of it Dwelleth - Hath its constant and settled abode. Whether goes the sun when it departs from this hemisphere Where is the tabernacle and the chamber in which he is supposed to rest And seeing there was a time when there was nothing but gross darkness upon the face of the earth, what way came light into the world Which was the place where light dwelt at that time, and whence was it fetched And whence came that orderly constitution and constant succession of light and darkness Was this thy work Or wast thou privy to it, or a counsellor, or assistant in it Take it - Bring or lead it: and this it refers principally to the light, and to darkness, as the consequent of the other. Bound - Its whole course from the place of its abode whence it is supposed to come, to the end of its journey. Know - Where thou mayst find it, and whence thou mayst fetch it. Treasures - Dost thou know where I have laid up those vast quantities of snow and hail which I draw forth when I see fit Trouble - When I intend to bring trouble upon any people for their sins. Distributed - In the air, and upon the face of the earth. This is variously distributed in the world, shining in one place and time, when it doth not shine in another, or for a longer time, or with greater brightness and power than it doth in another.

Chapter XLII Job throughly humbles himself before God, ver. 1 - 6. God reproves his friends, for whom Job intercedes, and God accepts them, ver. 7 - 9. God blesses and restores Job to his prosperity, ver. 10 - 15. His age and death, ver. 16,17 Thou canst, &c. - Job here subscribes to God's unlimited power, knowledge and dominion, to prove which was the scope of God's discourse out of the whirlwind. And his judgment being convinced of these, his conscience also was convinced, of his own folly in speaking so irreverently concerning him. No thought can be withholden from thee - No thought of ours can be withholden from thy knowledge. And there is no thought of thine, which thou canst be hindered from bringing into execution. Who - What am I that I should be guilty of such madness! Therefore - Because my mind was without knowledge. Knew not - I have spoken foolishly and unadvisedly of all things far above my reach. Hear - Hear and accept my humble confession. Enquire - I will no more dispute the matter with thee, but beg information from thee. The words which God had uttered to Job by way of challenge, Job returns to him in way of submission. Seeth thee - The knowledge which I had of thy nature, perfections and counsels, was hitherto grounded chiefly, upon the instructions of men; but now it is clear and certain, as being immediately inspired into my mind by this thy glorious apparition and revelation, and by the operation of thy holy spirit; which makes these things as evident to me, as if I saw them with my bodily eyes. When the mind is enlightened by the spirit of God, our knowledge of Divine things as far exceeds what we had before, as knowledge by ocular demonstration, exceeds, that by common fame. Eliphaz - As the eldest of the three, and because he spoke first, and by his example led the rest into the same miscarriages. Two friends - Elihu is not here reproved, because he dealt more mercifully with Job, and did not condemn his person, but only rebuked his sinful expressions. Ye have not, &c. - This is not to be understood absolutely, but comparatively.

Chapter I The title of the book, shewing the general design of it, ver. 1 - 6. The first principle of it recommended, ver. 7 - 9. A caution against bad company, ver. 10 - 19. Wisdom's reasonings with the sons of men, and the certain ruin of those who will not hearken unto them, ver. 20 - 33. To know - Written to help men to know throughly and practically. Both human wisdom to conduct our affairs in this life, and Divine wisdom. Instruction - The instructions delivered either by God, or men, in order to the attainment of wisdom. To perceive - Which teach a man true understanding. To receive - Willing to receive the counsels of others. Such as makes men wise and prudent, and to teach just judgments or equity. Simple - Such as want wisdom. Young man - Who wants both experience and self - government. Will hear - Is willing to learn. Attain to - The art of governing himself or others. The fear - Reverence and obedience to God. Beginning - The foundation without which all other knowledge is vain. Fools - That is, wicked men, are so far from attaining true wisdom, that they despise it, and all the means of getting it. My son - He speaks to his scholars with paternal authority and affection. Of thy mother - Those pious instructions, which thy mother instilled into thee in thy tender years. In vain - The fowler who spreads, his net in the sight of the bird looseth his labour. But these, are more foolish than the silly birds, and though they are not ignorant of the mischief which these evil courses will bring upon themselves, yet they will not take warning. Their own blood - The destruction which they design to others, fall upon themselves. Greedy - That seeks gain by wicked practices. Wisdom - Having expressed the counsels of wicked men, he now declares the voice of wisdom. By wisdom he understands the wisdom of God revealed to men in his word. And this is said to cry with a loud voice, to intimate God's earnestness in inviting sinners to repentance. Abroad - Or, in the streets or open places. Not in corners, but openly before all the world. Gates - Where magistrates sit in judgment, and people are assembled.

Chapter X Here the Proverbs, properly so called, begin. They are short, but weighty sentences, most of which are two sentences in one verse, illustrating each other. But it is seldom there is any coherence between the verses, much less any thread of discourse. Of wickedness - Such as are got by any sort of wicked practices. Death - Often from temporal, and always from eternal death. Gathereth - The fruits of his field. In summer - In harvest. He that improved the opportunities of doing good to himself and others. Violence - Their own violence or injustice. This may be an allusion to the ancient custom of covering the mouths and faces of condemned malefactors. Who receive - Is ready to hear and obey the precepts of God and men. Fall - Into mischief. Surely - Or, securely, or confidently, as the word properly signifies; quietly resting upon God's favour and gracious providence for his protections. Known - His wickedness shall be publickly discovered. Winketh - That secretly designs mischief against others, as this phrase is used, Psal 35:19. Wisdom - This wisdom shews itself in his speech. A rod - Rebukes from God and men. Lay up - In their minds, to be brought forth upon fit occasions. Knowledge - Whereby they may be enabled to speak both what, and when it is seasonable. But - Fools are more forward to lay out than to lay up, and for want of knowledge speak much and foolishly, whereby they frequently bring destruction upon themselves. Wealth - It often redeems him from dangers and calamities. Poverty - Is the cause of their ruin. The labour - The fruit of his labour, to the preservation of this life, and obtaining eternal life. Fruit - The fruit of all their labour tends to sin, and serves only for fuel to mens pride and luxury. Lying lips - With flattering words. He here condemns two opposite vices, secret hatred, and manifest slander. Is - Of great worth and use. Heart - And consequently the tongue. Feed - By their wise discourses and counsels. Die - They have not wisdom to preserve themselves, much less to feed others. So - Unserviceable and vexatious. Gladness - Shall be accomplished, and turned into enjoyment. The way - The way of God's precepts. Strength - Gives strength, support, and protection.

Chapter XIV Buildeth - Maintains and improves her family and estate. Her hands - By her idleness or sin. A rod - His insolent speeches as they are like a rod, offensive to others, so, they make a rod for their own backs. The crib - The stable is empty of food for cattle, and much more for man. In the same sense cleanness of teeth is put for famine, Amos 4:6. The strength - By their labours, or by diligence in husbandry, which then was principally managed by oxen. Findeth it not - Because he doth not seek it aright. That understandeth - That is honest and pious. His way - Consists not in vain speculations, but in a diligent study of his duty, and of the way to eternal happiness. The folly - The wit of ungodly men, which is really their folly, is employed only in finding out ways of deceiving. Favour - They find favour both with God and men. Bitterness - The inward griefs and joys of mens hearts, are not known to any but a man's self. Right - There are some evil courses which men may think to be lawful and good. The end - The event shews that they were sinful and destructive. In laughter - The outward signs of joy are often mixed with real sorrow. In heart - He who departs from God inwardly. Filled - With the fruit of his ways, the punishment of his sins. Satisfied - From the pious temper of his own heart, which cleaves to the Lord, he shall receive unspeakable comfort. The simple - A foolish man. Looketh - He orders his dealings in the world with due circumspection, not considering so much what other men say as what he ought to do. Feareth - Trembles at God's judgments when they are either inflicted or threatened. Rageth - Frets against God; or is enraged against his messengers. Confident - Secure and insensible of his danger. Foolishly - His passion hurries him into foolish speeches and actions. Wicked devices - One who suppresses his passion, but meditates revenge. Hated - Both by God and men. Inherit - They possess it as their inheritance, holding it fast, and glorying in it. Knowledge - The saving knowledge of God and of their own duty.

Chapter XVIII Desire - Thro' desire of wisdom, a man having separated himself from the company, and noise, and business of the world, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom, uses all diligence, that he may search and find out all solid knowledge and true wisdom. Understanding - In getting sound and saving, knowledge. The discovery - In uttering that folly and wickedness which is in his heart. Cometh - Into any place or company. Contempt - He despiseth all instruction and reproof. Reproach - And he shews his contempt by ignominious and reproachful expressions. A man's - A wise man's. As a brook - That wisdom which is in his heart is continually pouring forth wise and good counsels. They go - They wound mortally. Is brother - Though they take several paths, yet both come to one end. The name - The Lord, as he hath revealed himself in his works, and in his word by his promises. Sustain - Will easily support him under any outward troubles. Wounded - Dejected with the sense of its own guilt and misery. Parteth - Gives to every one what is right or meet. Satisfied - Wise discourses tend to the satisfaction of the speaker, as well as to the good of the hearers. Death and life - Are brought upon men by, the good or bad use of their tongues. Lovest - That love much talking. A wise - A good wife; one that deserves the name, and performs the duty of that relation. Favour - Obtains her not by his own diligence, but by God's good providence. A man - Heb. A man of friends; who desires the friendship of others.

The belly - Of the heart. Grievous wounds or stripes cleanse not only the outward man by keeping it from evil actions, but even the inward man, by expelling or subduing vile affections: which is a great and blessed benefit of afflictions.

Chapter XXII Favour - A good report among men, especially good men, and that hearty kindness which attends it. Meet - They live together, and need one another. The maker - Not only as they are men, but as they are poor or rich, which difference comes from God's providence. They have one common creator, and Lord, and judge, and the one cannot despise nor grudge at the other without reflecting upon God. The evil - The judgment of God threatened, and approaching. Hideth - Retires to his strong tower, by prayer and repentance, puts himself under the protection of the almighty. Pass on - Carefully and securely. Depart - Not easily and ordinarily. Is servant - Is at his mercy, and forced to comply with his pleasure. The rod - That power which he used with fury shall be taken from him. He - Who looks upon the wants and miseries of others with compassion. Preserve - God by the watchful eye of his providence maintains and defends. Knowledge - Men of knowledge, knowing and good men. The matters - All his hopes, enterprizes, and concerns. The mouth - Her fair and flattering speeches. Bound - Is fixed and settled there, as being born with him, and rooted in his very nature. That giveth - That prodigally casts away his estate upon those who do not need it. My knowledge - The knowledge of God, which I am here delivering. Fitted - Fitly expressed: thou wilt be able to discourse profitably of them. In counsels and knowledge - In counsels which proceed from found knowledge. Answer - That thou mayst be able to give solid, and satisfactory answers. In the gate - Under pretence of justice. Spoil the soul - Take away not only their goods but their lives too. Before kings - He is fit to be employed in the affairs of princes.

Chapter XXIV Destruction - How they may oppress and destroy others. Through wisdom - There is no need that thou shouldest raise thy family by ruining others, which thou mayest more effectually do by wisdom. By knowledge - Which in scripture phrase includes the love and practice of what we know. Is strong - Is courageous and resolute, and able by wisdom to do greater things than others can accomplish by strength. Thy war - War is better managed by wisdom than by strength. A fool - For a wicked man, whose sins enfeeble his mind, and make it incapable of wisdom. Openeth not - He knows not how to speak acceptably, and profitably in the publick assembly. Shall be called - Though he cover his wicked devices with fair pretences, he shall be branded with that infamy which is due to him. The thought - The very inward thought or contrivance of evil, is a sin in God's sight. Deliver - When it is in thy power. Drawn - By the violence of lawless men. Consider - That this is only a frivolous excuse. Eat - This is not a command, but a concession, and is only here expressed to illustrate the following verse. Honey in those parts was an usual food. A reward - It is not only sweet for the present, but brings a sure and everlasting reward. Falleth - Into calamities, of which he evidently speaks both in the foregoing verse, and in the following branch of this verse. Fall - Frequently into irrecoverable destruction. Falleth - Into mischief. From him - Understand, upon thee, which is implied in the Hebrew phrase. No reward - All his happiness shall quickly and eternally perish. The candle - All their comfort and glory shall cease. To change - That are unstable in their obedience to God or to the king. Who knoweth - Who can conceive how sore and sudden will be the ruin of them that fear not God, and the king. These - The counsels following, to the end of the chapter, no less than those hitherto mentioned, are worthy of their consideration. Rebuke - That publickly and judicially rebuke and condemn the wicked. Delight - The peace of a good conscience. Shall kiss - Shall respect him. A right answer - That speaks pertinently and plainly, and truly.

Vanity - Not only unsatisfying, but also an affliction or breaking to a man's spirit. Crooked - All our knowledge serves only to discover our miseries, but is utterly insufficient to remove them; it cannot rectify those disorders which are either in our own hearts and lives, or in the men and things of the world. Wanting - In our knowledge. Or, counted out to us from the treasures of human learning. But what is wanting, will still be so. And that which is wanting in our own knowledge, is so much that it cannot be numbered. The more we know, the more we see of our own ignorance. Communed - I considered within myself. Great - In wisdom. Have gotten - As I had a large stock of wisdom infused into me by God, so I have greatly improved it by conversation, and study, and experience. Than all - Whether governors, or priests, or private persons. In Jerusalem - Which was then the most eminent place in the world for wisdom. To know - That I might throughly understand the nature and difference of truth and error, of virtue and vice. Grief - Or, displeasure within himself, and against his present condition. Sorrow - Which he does many ways, because he gets his knowledge with hard and wearisome labour, both of mind and body, with the consumption of his spirits, and shortening of his life; because he is often deceived with knowledge falsely so called, and often mistakes error for truth, and is perplexed with manifold doubts, from which ignorant men are wholly free; because he hath the clearer prospect into, and quicker sense of his own ignorance, and infirmities, and disorders, and withal how vain and ineffectual all his knowledge is for the prevention or removal of them; and because his knowledge is very imperfect and unsatisfying, yet increasing his thirst after more knowledge; lastly, because his knowledge quickly fades and dies with him, and then leaves him in no better, and possibly in a much worse condition than the meanest and most unlearned man in the world.

Chapter II Solomon shews, that there is no true happiness to be had in mirth and the pleasures of sense, ver. 1 - 11. He considers wisdom again, and owns it to be an excellent thing, and yet insufficient to give happiness, ver. 12 - 16. He shews that business and wealth are only vanity and vexation of spirit, ver. 17 - 23. And that if there be any good therein, it is only to these who sit loose to them, ver. 24 - 26. I said - Being disappointed of my hopes from knowledge, I resolved to try another course. Go to - O my soul! I will try whether I cannot make thee happy, by the enjoyment of sensual delights. Vanity - Is vain, and unable to make men happy. It is mad - This is an act of madness, more fit for fools who know nothing, than for wise men in this sinful, and dangerous, and deplorable state of mankind. What doth it - What good doth it Or how can it make men happy I challenge all the Epicures in the world to give me a solid answer. To wine - To gratify myself with delicious meats and drinks. Yet - Yet resolving to use my wisdom, that I might try whether I could not arrive at satisfaction, by mixing wine and wisdom together. To lay hold - To pursue sensual pleasures, which was my folly. 'Till - 'Till I might find out the true way to contentment and satisfaction, during this mortal life. The wood - The nurseries of young trees, which for the multitude of them were like a wood or forest. Peculiar treasure - The greatest jewels and rarities of other kings, which they gave to me, either as a tribute, or by way of present. Of provinces - Which were imposed upon or presented by all the provinces of my dominions. Great - In riches, and power, and glory. My wisdom remained - As yet I was not wholly seduced from God. And - Whatsoever was grateful to my senses. Rejoiced - I had the comfort of all my labours, and was not hindered from the full enjoyment of them by sickness or war, or any other calamity. My portion - This present enjoyment of them, was all the benefit which I could expect from all my labours.

Chapter VII Solomon here recommends seriousness, ver. 1 - 6 Calmness of spirit, ver. 7 - 10. Wisdom, ver. 11, 12. Suiting ourselves to every condition, ver. 13, 14. The advice of an infidel answered, ver. 15 - 18. The praise of wisdom, ver. 19. All men are sinners, ver. 20. Mind not the censures of others, ver. 21, 22. Solomon's experience of men and women, ver. 23 - 29. Of death - Seeing this life is so full of vanity, and vexation, and misery, it is more desirable for a man to go out of it, than to come into it. The house - Where mourners meet to celebrate the funeral of a deceased friend. That - Death. The living - Will be seriously affected with it, whereas feasting is commonly attended with levity, and manifold temptations. The wise - Are constantly meditating upon serious things. Thorns - Which for a time make a great noise and blaze, but presently go out. A gift - A bribe given to a wise man, deprives him of the use of his understanding. So this verse discovers two ways whereby a wise man may be made mad, by suffering oppression from others, or by receiving bribes to oppress others. And this also is an argument of the vanity of worldly wisdom that is so easily corrupted and lost. The end - The good or evil of things is better known by their end, than by their beginning. The patient - Who quietly waits for the issue of things. The proud - Which he puts instead of hasty or impatient, because pride is the chief cause of impatience. Better - More quiet and comfortable. For this is an argument of a mind unthankful for the many mercies, which men enjoy even in evil times. For - This question shews thy folly in contending with thy Lord and governor, in opposing thy shallow wit to his unsearchable wisdom. Good - When wisdom and riches meet in one man, it is an happy conjunction. By it - By wisdom joined with riches there comes great benefit. To them - Not only to a man's self, but many others in this world. Life - But herein knowledge of wisdom excels riches, that whereas riches frequently expose men to destruction, true wisdom doth often preserve a man from temporal, and always from eternal ruin.

None - None shall have so much respect to them, as to afford burial. Knoweth - Whether we make any curious distinction between understanding God, as if that be more speculative, whereby we rightly apprehend his nature; and knowing God, as if that be more practical, as directing the conversation, we need not here enquire; yet certainly both center in this, that we so know and understand God as to trust in him, and depend on him alone in all conditions. Exercise - Kindness, as it relates to his own people; judgment, in punishing the wicked; righteousness, as he deals justly and uprightly with both.

Chapter XII The prophet complains of the prosperity of the wicked: by faith sees their ruin, ver. 1 - 4. God admonishes him of his brethren's treachery against him, and laments his heritage, ver. 5 - 13. A return from captivity promised to the penitent, ver. 14 - 17. Talk with thee - Not by way of accusing thee, but for my own satisfaction concerning thy judicial dispensations in the government of the world. Wherefore - I know thy ways are just and righteous, but they are dark; I cannot understand why thou doest this. Far - Thou art far from their inward parts, they neither fear thee, nor love thee. He - They were bold to say, neither the prophet nor any other should see their last end. If - If thou art not able to encounter lesser dangers, how wilt thou be able to overcome greater I have greater dangers for thee to encounter than those at Anathoth; if thou art so disturbed with them, how wilt thou be able to grapple with those at Jerusalem. Jordan - Anathoth seems to be understood by the land of thy peace, that is, the land of thy friends wherein thou hadst a confidence: if thy enemies there tire thee, what wilt thou do in the swellings of Jordan In a place in which thou art like to meet with greater troubles, like the swelling of Jordan (which in harvest used to overflow its banks). For even - The men of Anathoth, thine own town and country, and those of thy own family have conspired evil against thee secretly. A multitude - They have exposed thee to the rage of a multitude. Though - Tho' therefore they give thee fair words, yet repose no confidence in them. My house - God by his house here understands the temple. Heritage - The whole body of the Israelites, whom God threatens to leave with respect to his special providence. As a lion - Those that were my sheep, are become like lions. The birds round about - It is usual for other birds to flock about a strange coloured bird, such as they have not been used to see. A wilderness - They have caused God to turn the country which he had chosen for his portion, into a wilderness. They - Heb.

Detestable - Unclean beasts offered to their idols, or innocent persons slain by them. Therefore - Because all the mercy I have shewed them, will not learn them to know my might, I will once for all make them to understand it, by the dreadful strokes of my vengeance. And - They shall know that my name is Jehovah; that I am not such a one as their idols, but one who have my being from myself, and give life and being to all other things, and have all might and power in my hand, and can do whatsoever I please.

Chapter XVII The captivity of Judah for her sin, ver. 1 - 4. Trust in man cursed: in God, blessed, ver. 5 - 8. The deceitful heart and most secret practices are known to God, ver. 9 - 11. The salvation of God, ver. 12 - 14. The prophet complains of the mockers of his prophecies, ver. 15 - 18. Of keeping the sabbath, ver. 19 - 27. Graven - Nor is it a thing done in secret, but it is engraven upon the horns of their altars. God's altar was four - square, and at each corner there was a rising part made of brass, these were called the horns of the altar. Now their sin is said to be engraven upon the horns of the altar, because the blood of the sacrifices which they offered to idols was sprinkled there, or because their altars had some inscription upon them, declaring to what idol that altar was consecrated. Their children - This shewed how inveterate they were in this sin of idolatry, that they taught it their children. My mountain - Jerusalem stood at the foot of an hill, and part of it on the side of it, upon the top of which hills, were many pleasant fields. For ever - For a long time; so the word ever is often taken. The heart - There is nothing so false and deceitful as the heart of man; deceitful in its apprehensions of things, in the hopes and promises which it nourishes, in the assurances that it gives us; unsearchable by others, deceitful with reference to ourselves, and abominably wicked, so that neither can a man know his own heart, nor can any other know that of his neighbour's. Hatcheth them not - Having lost them, either by some man that has taken them from her, or by some vermin or wild beast. A fool - Shall lose it again before he dies, and then shall understand what a fool he was. Depart - From what I have revealed to them as thy will, shall have no portion beyond the earth. For thou art - He whom alone I have reason to praise for mercies already received. Where - Daring the vengeance of God.

Kedar - Was one of the sons of Ishmael, whose posterity inhabited part of Arabia Petraea. Hazor was the head city to several kingdoms in Joshua's time. They - The Chaldeans. Flee - These seem to be the prophet's words. Arise - The result of Nebuchadrezzar's counsels, giving charge to his armies to march against the Kedarens, who lived at ease and took no care, nor had any neighbours that could assist them. Against Elam - Probably the Persians. My throne - God calls the throne of Cyrus or Alexander his throne; because he gave it the conqueror. But - We had the like promise as to Moab, chap.48:47, and as to Ammon, ver.49:6, the same latter days either signify after many days, or in the time of the Messiah. In the former sense it may refer to Cyrus, who conquered Persia. In the latter sense it refers to the spiritual liberty which some of these poor Heathens were brought into by the gospel. We read Acts 2:9, that some of the Elamites were at Jerusalem at pentecost, and were some of those converted to Christ.

Chapter XXV A prophesy against the Ammonites, ver. 1 - 7. The Moabites, ver. 8 - 11. The Edomites, ver. 12 - 14. And the Philistines, ver. 15 - 17. Aha - When thou shouldest have pitied, thou didst proudly insult over my people. The men of the east - The Arabians, associates of Nebuchadnezzar, who recompensed their service, with giving them this country when it was conquered, as it was five years after the desolation of Jerusalem. Rabbah - The royal city, called since Philadelphia from the king of Egypt who built it. The Ammonites - The land they dwelt in. Know - Thus God will bring those that were strangers to him into an acquaintance with him, and it will be a blessed effect of their calamities. How much better is it, to be poor and know God, than to be rich, and ignorant of him Seir - The seed of Esau, the Edomites. Seir was the mountain where they first planted themselves. Is like - Are no more a select people than others. The side - That part of his country which was best fortified. Bethjeshimoth - An ancient city; it was a fortress toward the desert, which watched lest any should make an inroad on the country. With the Ammonites - As I have given Ammon, so I will with them give Moab to the Chaldeans, who will give it to the Arabians. Teman - A country in the southern coast of Edom. Dedan - Adjoining to Edom. It - Israel. The Cherethim - The bowmen, the strength of Philistia. The remnant - Who had escaped the sword of Samuel, David, Hezekiah, and of Psammetichus king of Egypt.

A measuring reed - Or cane, for this measuring rod was of those canes growing in that country, long, and light, which architects made use of. Six cubits long - Each cubit consisting of eighteen inches in our common account. An hand breadth - Added to each six cubits. The breadth - The thickness of the walls, which were one reed, and one hand's breadth, or three yards, and three inches thick. Height - And the height equal, taking the measure from the floor on the inside of the wall. The east - Either of one of the inner walls, or of the temple itself. Went up - 'Till he was got up, he could not measure the threshold, which was at the top of the stairs, and these were ten, if the measurer be supposed in the gate of the house; or eight, if in the gate of the court of the priests; or seven, if in the court of Israel; and each stair was half a cubit in height, too high for him to take the measure of the threshold, if he did not go up the stairs. The threshold - It is probable he measured the lower threshold first, as next at hand. The other threshold - The upper threshold, or lintel of the gate, which was of equal dimensions with the lower, three yards and three inches broad, or thick. Chamber - Along the wall of the porch were chambers, three on one side, and three on the other, each one reed square. Five cubits - A space of two yards and one half between each chamber, either filled with some neat posts or pillars, or it may be quite void. Within - The inward and outward threshold, were of the same measures, and curiously arched over head from side to side, and end to end, which was from east to west. The porch - The posts which were joined together at the top by an arch, and so made the portico. The porch - Probably another porch, or another gate distinct from that, ver. 6. The posts - These were half columns, that from the floor to the height of the wall jetted out, as if one half of the column were in the wall, and the other without, and the protuberance of this half column, was one cubit.

Unto the post - These high columns, on the inner front of this gate were so disposed, that the last on each side was very near the first post, or pillar of the court on either side of the gate, and so the posts and buildings laid on those posts joined on each side of this gate. And - This verse seems to sum up all the dimensions; this gate, its porch, and thickness of its walls, and so sum the cubits, six in the thickness of the outer wall, eighteen in the three chambers, twenty in the spaces between the chambers, and six cubits in the thickness in the inner wall of the porch. Narrow windows - Windows narrowed inward to the middle. Their posts - The upper lintel of each door over which was a window. To the arches - Windows under the arches between post and post, to give light to the five cubits space between chamber and chamber. Round about - These were on both sides of the porch within the gate, exactly alike. The outward court - So called in regard of the more inward court, between that where he was, and the temple itself; this court, was the second about the temple. Chambers - Not only lodging rooms for the priests, but also store - houses for tithes and offerings. A pavement - A beautiful floor laid with checker works. The whole floor of this court was thus paved. Thirty chambers - That is, fifteen on the south side of the gate, and fifteen on the north side, built over the pavement. The pavement - That mentioned, ver.17. By the side - That part which lay on each side of the gate, and from thence spread itself toward the chambers, leaving a space of pavement of equal breadth with the porch, or gate in the middle. The length - The length was measured fifty cubits. The inner pavement - The side pavement was laid somewhat lower than this middle pavement, not only for state, but for the more convenient, keeping it clean; so the middle pavement rose with a little convex surface. The breadth - Of the whole ground between the inner front of one gate and porch, to the outer front of the next gate more inward to the temple.

The breadth - Of the whole ground between the inner front of one gate and porch, to the outer front of the next gate more inward to the temple. The lower gate - Called so in respect to the next gate, which was on the higher ground. The forefront - To the outside front of the gate of the priests court, which was next to this gate now measured, that is from the west front of the lower to the east front of the upper gate. The inner court - This court from the west front of the lower gate, was one hundred cubits in length to the east front of the gate of the inner court. East - ward and north - ward - And so was the space from the south front of the court to the north front. So the court was exactly square. Divers courts are here spoken of, which may put us in mind, of the diversity of gifts, graces and offices in the church: as also of the several degrees of glory in the courts and mansions of heaven. Before them - Within the steps or gate. Toward the east - The east gate of the inner court was directly over against the east gate of the outer court, and equally distant from each other. To it - The floor, or square court. Brought me - From the south - gate of the outer court through the porch, and over the hundred cubit pavement, to the south - gate of the inner court. The inner court - The court of the priests, which was next to the temple. Within - Within the porch, where these tables stood. Hooks - Hooks on which the slaughtered sacrifice might be hanged, while they prepared it farther. Fastened - To walls no doubt, near these tables. The keepers - While, according to their courses, they had the charge of the house of God, and attended on the service of it. The keepers - To preserve the fire perpetually on the altar. The breadth - The whole breadth was eleven cubits, but the breadth of each leaf of this folding - gate was three cubits, and they met, or shut on an upright post, set in the middle of the gate space, and this was one cubit broad.

And seeing our ideas are not innate, but must all originally come from our senses, it is certainly necessary that you have senses capable of discerning objects of this kind: Not those only which are called natural senses, which in this respect profit nothing, as being altogether incapable of discerning objects of a spiritual kind; but spiritual senses, exercised to discern spiritual good and evil. It is necessary that you have the hear ting ear, and the seeing eye, emphatically so called; that you have a new class of senses opened in your soul, not depending on organs of flesh and blood, to be “the evidence of things not seen,” as your bodily senses are of visible things; to be the avenues to the invisible world, to discern spiritual objects, and to furnish you with ideas of what the outward “eye hath not seen, neither the ear heard.” 33. And till you have these internal senses, till the eyes of your understanding are opened, you can have no apprehension of divine things, no idea of them at all. Nor, consequently, till then, can you either judge truly, or reason justly, concern ing them; seeing your reason has no ground whereon to stand, no materials to work upon. 34. To use the trite instance: As you cannot reason con cerning colours, if you have no natural sight, because all the ideas received by your other senses are of a different kind; so that neither your hearing, nor any other sense, can supply your want of sight, or furnish your reason in this respect with matter to work upon: Soyou cannot reason concerning spiritual things, if you have no spiritual sight; because all your ideas received by your outward senses are of a different kind; yea, far more different from those received by faith or internal sensation, than the idea of colour from that of sound. These are only different species of one genus, namely, sensible ideas, received by exter nal sensation; whereas the ideas of faith differ toto genere from those of external sensation. So that it is not conceivable, that external sensation should supply the want of internal senses; or furnish your reason in this respect with matter to work upon. 35. What then will your reason do here?

And yet I allow you this, that although both repent ance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary be fore justification, yet neither the one nor the other is neces sary in the same sense, or in the same degree, with faith. Not in the same degree; for in whatever moment a man believes (in the Christian sense of the word) he is justified, his sins are blotted out, “his faith is counted to him for right eousness.” But it is not so at whatever moment he repents, or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Faith alone, therefore, justifies; which repentance alone does not, much less any outward work. And, consequently, none of these are necessary to justification, in the same degree with faith. Nor in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith. This is proxi mately necessary thereto; repentance, remotely, as it is neces sary to the increase or continuance of faith. And even in this sense these are only necessary on supposition,--if there be time and opportunity for them; for in many instances there is not; but God cuts short his work, and faith prevents the fruits of repentance. So that the general proposition is not overthrown, but clearly established by these concessions; and we conclude still, both on the authority of Scripture and the Church, that faith alone is the proximate condition of justification. III. l. Iwasonceinclined to believe that none would openly object against what I had anywhere said of the nature of salva tion. How greatly, then was I surprised some months ago, when I was shown a kind of circular letter, which one of those whom “the Holy Ghost hath made overseers” of his Church,” I was informed, had sent to all the Clergy of his diocese ! Past of it ran (nearly, if not exactly) thus:-- “There is great indiscretion in preaching up a sort of religion, as the true and only Christianity, which, in their own account of it, consists in an enthusiastic ardour, to be understood or attained by very few, and not to be practised without breaking in upon the common duties of life.” O, my Lord, what manner of words are these ! Supposing candour and love out of the question, are they the words of truth?

Are the feelings now in question “properties peculiar to matter?” the feeling of peace, joy, love, or any feelings at all? I can no more understand the philosophy than the divinity of this. (3.) “That the Scriptures declare the operations of the Spirit are not subject to any sensi ble feelings.” You are here disproving, as you suppose, a propo sition of mine. But are you sure you understand it? By feel ing, I mean, being inwardly conscious of. By the operations of the Spirit, I do not mean the manner in which he operates, but the graces which he operates in a Christian. Now, be pleased to produce those scriptures which declare that a Christian cannot feel or perceive these operations. 3. Are you not convinced, Sir, that you have laid to my charge things which I know not? I do not gravely tell you (as much an enthusiast as you over and over affirm me to be) that I sensibly feel (in your sense) the motions of the Holy Spirit. Much less do I make this, any more than “convulsions, agonies, howlings, roarings, and violent contortions of the body,” either “certain signs of men’s being in a state of sal vation,” or “necessary in order thereunto.” You might with equal justice and truth inform the world, and the worshipful the magistrates of Newcastle, that I make seeing the wind, or feeling the light, necessary to salvation. Neither do I confound the extraordinary with the ordinary operations of the Spirit. And as to your last inquiry, “What is the best proof of our being led by the Spirit P” I have no exception to that just and scriptural answer which you your self have given,-“A thorough change and renovation of mind and heart, and the leading a new and holy life.” 4. That I confound the extraordinary with the ordinary operations of the Spirit, and therefore am an enthusiast, is also strongly urged, in a charge delivered to his Clergy, and lately published, by the Lord Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. An extract of the former part of this I subjoin, in his Lord ship’s words: “I cannot think it improper to obviate the contagion of those enthusiastical pretensions, that have lately betrayed whole mul titudes either into presumption or melancholy.

“If we feel our conscience at peace with God, through remission of our sin,--all is of God.” Homily on Rogation, Week, Part III.) “If you feel such a faith in you, rejoice in it, and let it be daily increasing by well-working.” (Homily on Faith, Part III.) “The faithful may feel wrought tranquillity of conscience, the increase of faith and hope, with many other graces of God.” (Homily on the Sacrament, Part I.) “Godly men feel inwardly God's Holy Spirit, inflaming their hearts with love.” (Homily on certain places of Scrip ture, Part I.) “God give us grace to know these things, and to feel them in our hearts | This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with his presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For without his lively inspiration, can we not so much as speak the name of the Mediator. “No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost; much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. “But we have received, saith St. Paul, ‘not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God;’ for this purpose, ‘that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God.” In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God, and to please him. It is he that purifieth the mind by his secret working. He enlighteneth the heart, to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth in the tongue of man, to stir him to speak his honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and the self-same Spirit.” (Homily for Rogation Week, Part III.) 27. Every proposition which I have anywhere advanced concerning those operations of the Holy Ghost, which, I believe, are common to all Christians in all ages, is here clearly maintained by our own Church. Under a full sense of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was, that on the mentioning any of thesegreat truths,even among men of education, the cryimmediately arose, “An enthusiast!

Under a full sense of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was, that on the mentioning any of thesegreat truths,even among men of education, the cryimmediately arose, “An enthusiast! An enthusiast !” But I now plainly perceive this is only an old fallacy in a new shape. To object enthu siasm to any person or doctrine is but a decent method of beg £ing thequestion. It generally spares the objector the trouble of reasoning, and is a shorter and easier way of carrying his cause. For instance, I assert that “till a man “receives the Holy Ghost, he is without God in the world; that he cannot know the things of God, unless God reveal them unto him by the Spirit; no, nor have even one holy or heavenly temper, without the inspiration of the Holy One.” Now, should one who is conscious to himself that he has experienced none of these things, attempt to confute these propositions, either from Scrip ture or antiquity, it might prove a difficult task. What then shall he do? Why, cry out, “Enthusiasm ! Enthusiasm !” and the work is done. But what does he mean by enthusiasm 2 Perhaps nothing at all: Few have any distinct idea of its meaning. Perhaps “something very bad,” or, “something I never experienced and do not understand.” Shall I tell you then what that “terrible something” is ? I believe, thinking men mean by enthusiasm, a sort of religious madness; a false imagination of being inspired by God: And by an enthusiast, one that fancics himself under the influence of the Holy Ghost, when, in fact, he is not. Let him prove me guilty of this who can. I will tell you once more the whole of my belief on these heads: And if any man will show me (by arguments, not hard names) what is wrong, I will thank God and him. 28. Every good gift is from God, and is given to man by the Holy Ghost. By nature there is in us no good thing; and there can be none, but so far as it is wrought in us by that good Spirit. Have we any true knowledge of what is good? This is not the result of our matural understanding.

17. And it must be owned, a confinement of such a sort is as fit to cause as to cure distraction: For what scene of distress is to be compared to it?--To be separated at once from all who are near and dear to you; to be cut off from all reasonable con versation; to be secluded from all business, from all reading, from every innocent entertainment of the mind, which is left to prey wholly upon itself, and day and night to pore over your misfortunes; to be shut up day by day in a gloomy cell, with only the walls to employ your heavy eyes, in the midst either of melancholy silence, or horrid cries, groans and laughter inter mixed; to be forced by the main strength of those Who laugh at human nature and compassion, to take drenches of nauseous, perhaps torturing, medicines, which you know you have no need of now, but know not how soon you may, possibly by the operation of these very drugs on a weak and tender constitution: Here is distress It is an astonishing thing, a signal proof of the power of God, if any creature who has his senses when the confinement begins, does not lose them before it is at an end | How must it heighten the distress, if such a poor wretch, being deeply convinced of sin, and growing worse and worse, (as he probably will, seeing there is no medicine here for his sick ness, no such Physician as his case requires,) be soon placed among the incurables! Can imagination itself paint such a hell upon earth? where even “hope never comes, that comes to all!”--For, what remedy? If a man of sense and humanity should happen to visit that house of woe, would he give the hearing to a madman’s tale? Or if he did, would he credit it? “Do we not know,” might he say, “how well any of these will talk in their lucid intervals P” So that a thousand to one he would concern himself no more about it, but leave the weary to wait for rest in the grave 18. I have now answered most of the current objections, par ticularly such as have appeared of weight to religious or reason able men.

The same oath binds him both to one and the other, laying an equal obligation on his conscience. Howa Magistrate who neglects topunish excess, profaneness, and impiety, can excuse himself from the guilt of perjury, I do not pretend to know. If he reasons fairly, he will find himself as much forsworn, as an evidence who being upon his oath to declare the whole truth, nevertheless conceals the most considerable part of it. And his perjury is so much the more infamous, as the ill example and effects of it will be mis chievous.” (Mr. Disney's First Essay, Page 30.) 7. The same author (in the preface to his Second Essay) goes on : “You, gentlemen of the Grand Juries, take a solemn oath, that “you will diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all such articles, matters, and things as shall be given you in charge: As also, that you will (not only present no person for envy, hatred, or malice, but) not leave any unpresented, for fear, favour, or affection.” Now, are not the laws against immorality and profaneness given you in charge, as well as those against riots, felony, and treason P Are not presentment and indict ment one method expressly appointed by the statutes, for the punishment of drunkenness and tippling? Are not houses of bawdry and gaming punishable in the same courts, and, conse quently, presentable by you? Is not the proclamation for the punishing of vice, profaneness, and immorality always read before you as soon as you are sworn? And does not the Judge of Assize, or Chairman of the Bench, in the charge given imme diately after the reading it, either recite to you the particular laws against such offences, or refer you for them to that procla mation? It is plain from all this, that you are bound upon your oaths to present all vice and immorality, as well as other crimes, that fall within your knowledge, because they are expressly given you in charge.

It is plain from all this, that you are bound upon your oaths to present all vice and immorality, as well as other crimes, that fall within your knowledge, because they are expressly given you in charge. And this you are to do, not only when evidence isoffered before you by the information of others, but with regard to all such offences as you or any of you are able, of your own personal knowledge, to present; all which you have sworn to do impartially, without fear, favour, or affection.” I leave it now with all reasonable men to consider, how few Grand Jurors perform this; and, consequently, what multi tudes of them, throughout the nation, fall under the guilt of wilful perjury ! 8. The author proceeds: “I shall next address myself to you that are Constables. And to you I must needs say, that if you know your duty, it is no thanks to us that are Justices. For the oath we usually give you is so short, and in such general terms, that it leaves with you no manner of instruction in the par ticulars of the office to which you are sworn. But that which ought to be given you, recites part of your duty in the following words:-- “You shall do your best endeavour, that rogues, vagabonds, and night-walkers be apprehended; and that the statutes made for their punishment be duly put in execution. You shall have a watchful eye to such as shall keep any house or place where any unlawful game is used; as also to such as shall frequent such places, or shall use any unlawful game there or elsewhere. You shall present all and every the offences contrary to the sta tutes made to restrain the tippling in inns, alehouses, and other victualling houses, and for repressing of drunkenness. You shall once in the year, during your office, present all Popish recusants. You shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed.

You shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed. And you shall well and duly, accord ing to your knowledge, power, and ability, do and execute all other things belonging to the office of a Constable, so long as you shall continue therein.” (Page 8.) “Upon this, I would observe, first, that actors of plays are expressed by name within the statute, to be taken up for vaga bonds, and punished accordingly; and that though a statute of Queen Elizabeth’s excepts such companies as have a license under the hand and seal of a Nobleman, yet a later statute in the reign of King James the First has taken away that protec tion from them, by declaring, that ‘from thenceforth no autho rity to be given by any Peer of the realm shall be available to free or discharge them from the pains and punishments of that former statute. Every Constable, therefore, in those parishes where any of these strolling players come, is bound by his oath, to seize upon, correct, and send them packing without delay. “The next part of your oath obliges you to keep a watchful eye on such houses as keep, and such persons as use, unlawful gaming. The statute directs you weekly, or at least monthly, to search within your liberties all houses or places suspected of this offence, and, upon discovering, to bring them to punish ment. Upon this article, I would observe, (1.) That the law makes some allowance for artificers, husbandmen, apprentices, labourers, and servants, to play in Christmas, but at no other time of the year; and, (2.) That all sports and pastimes what soever are made unlawful upon the Lord’s day, by a statute of King Charles II. You are therefore bound upon oath, to bring to punishment such as are guilty of profaning that day by any sports or pastimes whatsoever. “The following parts of your oath are, (1.) That you shall present all and every the offences of tippling and drunkenness that come to your knowledge. (2.) That you shall once in the year present all Popish recusants; nay, and by the statute on which your oath is grounded, you are obliged once a year to present in Session all those within your parishes who (not being Dissenters) come not once in a month, at least, to church.

(2.) That you shall once in the year present all Popish recusants; nay, and by the statute on which your oath is grounded, you are obliged once a year to present in Session all those within your parishes who (not being Dissenters) come not once in a month, at least, to church. And, (3.) That you shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed. I believe no Constable will pre tend to be ignorant of this. How is it then, that when we send out warrants, to levy on offenders for swearing, drunkenness, and the like, those warrants are so ill obeyed? Are you not sworn to execute these as well as any other, and that duly too, according to the tenor of your precept 7 Your precept tells you, You shall demand such a sum; and if the offender will not pay, you shall levy it by distress of his goods; and if no distress can be taken, you are then only to set him in the stocks; otherwise you have no authority so to do; nor is the setting him in the stocks, when you might have distrained, any execution of your precept. “The last part of your oath is in general terms: That you shall well and duly, according to your knowledge, power, and ability, do and execute all other things belonging to the office of a Constable. I shall instance in some things which certainly belong to your office, because you, and none else, can do them. (1.) A Constable may, without a warrant, apprehend any per sons, and carry them before a Justice, who are driving carts, horses, or cattle on the Lord’s day. (2.) Such as he shall find at sports and pastimes on that day. (3.) Such as he shall find tippling in public houses. (4.) Shopkeepers selling, or exposing goods to sale, on the Lord’s day. And, Lastly, such as he shall find drunk or blaspheming, or profanely swearing or cursing. “Thus I have shown you, in part, what belongs to your office: It is well, if, according to the tenor of your oath, you duly, according to your knowledge and ability, do and execute all these things.

“Thus I have shown you, in part, what belongs to your office: It is well, if, according to the tenor of your oath, you duly, according to your knowledge and ability, do and execute all these things. But remember, that, if you do not, if you neglect any of them, you are forsworn.” Now let all men judge, how many Constables in England are clear of wilful perjury ! 9. “I will now,” he goes on, “address myself to Church wardens. Your oath is, ‘that you shall well and truly execute the office of a Churchwarden, for the ensuing year; and, to the best of your skill and knowledge, present such persons and things as are presentable by the ecclesiastical laws of this realm.’ I shall set down only a few of these. “The statute of King James I. obliges you to present, once a year, all monthly absenters from church. “The ninetieth Canon enjoins you, first to admonish, and then, if they reform not, to present, all your parishioners who do not duly resort to church on Sundays, and there continue the whole time of divine service. On this article observe, (1.) That a person’s being absent from church, is ground sufficient for you to proceed. (2.) That you are not only to present those who do not come to church, but also those that behave irreverently or indecently there, either walking about or talking; all who do not abide there, orderly and soberly, the whole time of service and sermon, and all that loiter away any part of that time in the churchyard or in the fields. “The one hundred and twelfth Canon enjoins you, within forty days after Easter, to exhibit to the Bishop, or his Chan cellor, the names of all above the age of sixteen, within your parish, that did not receive the communion. “Other statutes oblige you to present drunkenness, tippling, and public houses suffering persons to tipple in them. “And the one hundred and ninth Canon binds you to pre sent all manner of vice, profaneness, and debauchery, requiring you faithfully to present all and every the offenders in adul tery, whoredom, drunkenness, profane swearing, or any other uncleanness and wickedness of life.

But inasmuch as I am a debtor also to those who do not, my design is now, to apply to them also; and briefly to show, wherein (I fear) they are severally inconsistent with their own principles. I begin with those who are at the smallest distance from us, whether they are termed Presbyterians or Independents: Of whom in general I cannot but have a widely different opinion, from that I entertained some years ago; as having since then conversed with many among them, “in whom the root of the matter is’ undeniably found; and who labour “to keep a con science void of offence, both toward God and toward men.” I cannot, therefore, doubt, but every serious man, of either one or the other denomination, does utterly condemn all that inward as well as outward unholiness which has been above described. But do you, as a people, avoid what you condemn? Are mo whoremongers or adulterers found among you; no children disobedient to their parents; no servants that are slothful or careless, that answer again, that do not “honour their masters as is meet in the Lord?” Are there none among you that censure or “speak evil of the ruler of their people?” Are there no drunkards, no gluttons, no luxurious men, no regular epicures, none “whose belly is their God,” who, as their for tune permits, “fare sumptuously every day?” Have you no dishonest dealers, no unfair traders, no usurers, or extortion ers? Have you no liars, either for gain, or for good man ners, so called ? Are you clear of ceremony and compli ment? Alas, you are sensible, in most (if not all) these respects, you have now small pre-eminence over us. How much more sensible must you be of this, if you do not rest on the surface, but inquire into the bottom of reli gion, the religion of the heart | For, what inward unholiness, what evil tempers, are among us, which have not a place among you also ?

He wants more room. AEstuat infelix angusto limite mundi, Ut brevibus clausus Gyaris, parváque Seripho." He has already travelled through all which is called pleasure; diversions and entertainments of every kind. But among these he can find no enjoyment of any depth; they are empty, shal low, superficial things: They pleased for a while; but the gloss. is gone, and now they are dull and tasteless. And what has he next? Only the same things again; for this world affords nothing more. It can supply him with no change. Go, feed again; but it is upon one dish still. Thus Occidit miseros crambe repetita.t Yet what remedy under the sun? 16. The sounder judgment, the stronger understanding you have, the sooner are you sated with the world; and the more deeply convinced, all that cometh is vanity, foolish, insipid, nauseous. You see the foibles of men in so much clearer a light, and have the keener sense of the emptiness of life. Here you are, a poor, unsatisfied inhabitant of an unquiet world; turning your weary eyes on this side and on that side; seeking rest, but finding none. You seem to be out of your place: Neither the persons nor things that surround you are such as you want. You have a confused idea of something better than all this; but you know not where to find it. You * Frets at the narrow limits of the world, As in a prison pent. + They are surfeited with the dull repetition. are always gasping for something which you cannot attain, no, not if you range to the uttermost parts of the earth. But this is not all. You are not only negatively unhappy, as finding nothing whereon to stay the weight of your soul; but positively so, because you are unholy: You are miserable, because you are vicious. Are you not vicious? Are you then full of gratitude to Him who giveth you life, and breath, and all things? Not so; you rather spurn his gifts, and murmur at Him that gave them. How often has your heart said, God did not use you well? How often have you questioned either his wisdom or goodness? Was this well done? What kind of gratitude is this? It is the best you are master of Then take knowledge of yourself. Black ingratitude is rooted in your inmost frame.

Well may you shudder at the thought ! more especially when you are about to enter on that untried state of existence. For what a prospect is this, when you stand on the verge of life, ready to launch out into etermity! What can you then think? You see nothing before you. All is dark and dreary. On the very best supposition, how well may you address your parting soul in the words of dying Adrian: Poor, little, pretty, fluttering thing, Must we no longer live together? And dost thou prune thy trembling wing, To take thy flight thou know'st not whither?' Thy pleasing vein, thy humorous folly Is all neglected, all forgot; And pensive, wavering, melancholy, Thou hop'st and fear'st thou know'st not what. “Thou know'st not what l” Here is the sting, suppose there were no other. To be “thou know'st not what !” not for a month, or a year, but through the countless ages of eternity What a tormenting uncertainty must this be What racking unwillingness must it occasion, to exchange even this known vale of tears for the unknown valley of the shadow of death ! And is there no cure for this? Indeed there is an effectual cure; even the knowledge and love of God. There is a know ledge of God which unveils etermity, and a love of God which endears it. That knowledge makes the great abyss visible; and all uncertainty vanishes away. That love makes it amiable to the soul, so that fear has no more place | But the moment God says, by the welcome angel of death, “Come thou up hither l’” she Claps the glad wing, and towers away, And mingles with the blaze of day. 20. See ye not what advantage every way a Christian has * Some to the piercing winds are stretch'd abroad; Some plunged beneath the watery gulf: The fire In some burns out the deep-imprinted stain, Till the long course of slowly-rolling years Has purged out every spot, and pure remains The ethereal spirit, and simple heavenly fire. over you? Probably the reason you saw it not before was, because you knew none but nominal Christians; men who professed to believe more, (in their way of believing,) but had no more of the knowledge or love of God than yourselves: So that with regard to real, inward religion, you stood upon even ground.

Probably the reason you saw it not before was, because you knew none but nominal Christians; men who professed to believe more, (in their way of believing,) but had no more of the knowledge or love of God than yourselves: So that with regard to real, inward religion, you stood upon even ground. And perhaps in many branches of outward .religion the advantage was on your side. May the Lord, the God of the Christians, either reform these wretches, or take them away from the earth, that lay this grand stumbling-block in the way of those who desire to know the will of God! O ye who desire to know his will, regard them not! If it be possible, blot them out of your remembrance. They neither can nor will do you any good. O, suffer them not to do you harm ! Be not prejudiced against Christianity ‘by those who know nothing at all of it: Nay, they condemn it, all real substantial Christianity; they speak evil of the thing they know not; they have a kind of cant word for the whole religion of the heart; they call it enthusiasm. I will briefly lay before you the ground of the matter, and appeal to you yourselves for the reasonableness of it. 21. What a miserable drudgery is the service of God, unless I love the God whom I serve | But I cannot love one whom I know not. How then can I love God till I know him? And how is it possible I should know God, unless he make .himself known unto me? By analogy or proportion? Very good. But where is that proportion to be found? What proportion does a creature bear to its Creator? What is .the proportion between finite and infinite? I grant, the existence of the creatures demonstratively shows the existence of their Creator. The whole creation speaks that there is a God. But that is not the point in question. I know there is a God. Thus far is clear. But who will show ·me what that God is?

O leave that to those blind zealots who tack together a set of opinions and an outside worship, and call this poor, dull, lifeless thing by the sacred name of Chris tianity | Well might you account such Christianity as this a mere piece of empty pageantry, fit indeed to keep the vulgar in awe, but beneath the regard of a man of understanding. But in how different a light does it now appear ! If there be such a religion as I have sketched out, must not every reasonable man see there is nothing on earth to be desired in comparison of it? But if any man desire this, let him ask of God; he giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not. 24. May you not ask, quite consistently with your principles, in some manner resembling this? “O thou Being of beings, thou cause of all, thou seest my heart; thou understandest all my thoughts: But how small a part of thy ways do I understand l I know not what is above, beneath, on every side; I know not my own soul. Only this I know, I am not what I ought to be. I see and approve the virtue which I have not. I do not, love thee, neither am I thankful. I commend the love of mankind; but I feel it not. Thou hast seen hatred, malice, envy in my heart; thou hast seen anger, murmuring, discontent. These uneasy passions harrow up my soul. I cannot rest while I am under this yoke; nor am I able to shake it off; I am unhappy, and that thou knowest. “Have compassion upon me, thou whose years do not fail! on me who have but a short time to live. I rise up, and am cut down as a flower. I flee as it were a shadow. Yet a little while and I return to dust, and have no more place under the sun. “Yet I know thou hast made my soul to live for ever; but I know not where, and I am unwilling to try. I tremble, I am afraid to go thither, whence I shall not return. I stand quivering on the edge of the gulf; for clouds and darkness rest upon it. O God!

Very few, I grant, are the instru ments now employed; yet a great work is wrought already. And the fewer they are by whom this large harvest hath hitherto been gathered in, the more evident must it appear to unprejudiced minds that the work is not of man, but of God. 8. “But they are not only few, but unlearned also.” This is a grievous offence, and is by many csteemed a sufficient excuse for not acknowledging the work to be of God. The ground of this offence is partly true. Some of those who now preach are unlearned. They neither understand the ancient languages, nor any of the branches of philosophy. And yet this objection might have been spared by many of those who have frequently made it; because they are un learned too, though accounted otherwise. They have not themselves the very thing they require in others. Men in general are under a great mistake with regard to what is called the learned world. They do not know, they cannot easily imagine, how little learning there is among them. I do not speak of abstruse learning; but of what all Divines, at least, of any note, are supposed to have, namely, the knowledge of the tongues, at least, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and of the common arts and sciences. How few men of learning, so called, understand Hebrew ; cven so far as to read a plain chapter in Genesis ! Nay, how few understand Greek! Make an easy experiment. Desire that grave man, who is urging this objection, only to tell you the English of the first paragraph that occurs in one of Plato's Dialogues. I am afraid we may go farther still. How few understand Latin Give one of them an Epistle of Tully, and see how readily he will explain it without his dictionary. If he can hobble through that, it is odds but a Georgic in Virgil, or a Satire of Persius, sets him fast.

If he can hobble through that, it is odds but a Georgic in Virgil, or a Satire of Persius, sets him fast. And with regard to the arts and sciences; how few under stand so much as the general principles of logic l Can one in ten of the Clergy, (O grief of heart!) or of the Masters of Arts in either University, when an argument is brought, tell you even the mood and figure wherein it is proposed; or complete an enthy meme * Perhaps you do not so much as understand the term;--supply the premiss which is wanting, in order to make it a full categorical syllogism. Can one in ten of them demonstrate a Problem or theorem in Euclid's Elements, or define the common terms used in Metaphysics, or intelligibly explain the first principles of it? Why then will they pretend to that learning which they are conscious to themselves they have not? nay, and censure others who have it not, and do not pretend to it? Where are sincerity and candour fled? It will easily be observed, that I do not depreciate learning of any kind. The knowledge of the languages is a valuable talent; so is the knowledge of the arts and sciences. Both the one and the other may be employed to the glory of God and the good of men. But yet I ask, Where hath God declared in his word, that he cannot, or will not, make use of men that have it not? Has Moses or any of the Prophets affirmed this? or our Lord, or any of his Apostles? You are sensible all these are against you: You know the Apostles themselves, all except St. Paul, were avópes atypa/puatot cat w8total, “common, unphilosophical, unlettered men.” 9. “What! Then you make yourselves like the Apostles.” Because this silly objection has so often been urged, I will for once spend a few words upon it, though it does not deserve that honour. Why, must not every man, whether Clergyman or layman, be in some respects like the Apostles, or go to hell? Can any man be saved if he be not holy, like the Apostles; a follower of them, as they were of Christ?

You dare not; because you have respect of persons. You fear the faces of men. You cannot; because you have not overcome the world. You are not above the desire of earthly things. And it is impossible you should ever have any true order, or exercise any Christian discipline, till you are wholly crucified to the world, till you desire nothing more but God. Consider this matter, I entreat you, a little farther. Herc are thirty thousand persons” (perhaps somewhat more) of whom * In the year 1772.-EDIT. I take care, watching over their souls as he that must give account. In order hereto it lies upon me, (so I judge,) at the peril of my own salvation, to know, not only their names, but their outward and inward states, their difficulties and dangers. Otherwise, how can I know either how to guide them aright, or to commend them to God in prayer? Now, if I am willing tomake these over to you, will you watch over them in the same manner? Will you take the same care (or as much more as you please) of each soul as I have hitherto done? Not such curam animarum” as you have taken these ten years in your own parish. Poor empty name ! Has not your parish been, in fact, as much a sinecure to you as your prebend ? O what an account have you to give to the Great Shepherd and Bishop of souls ! 18. There is one more excuse for denying this work of God, taken from the instruments employed therein; that is, “that they are wicked men.” And a thousand stories have been handed about to prove it. But you may observe, their wickedness was not heard of till after they “went about doing good.” Their reputation for honesty was till then unblemished. But it was impossible it should continue so, when they were publicly employed in “tes tifying of the world, that its deeds were evil.” It could not be but the Scriptures should be fulfilled: “The servant is not above his Master. If they have called thc Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of his household !” Yet I cannot but remind considerate men, in how remarkable a manner the wisdom of God has for many years guarded against this pretence, with respect to my brother and me in particular.

c. cern was, the case of abundance of children. Some their parents could not afford to put to school: So they remained like “a wild ass’s colt.” Others were sent to school, and learned, at least, to read and write; but they learned all kind of vice at the same time: So that it had been better for them to have been without their knowledge, than to have bought it at so dear a price. 2. At length I determined to have them taught in my own house, that they might have an opportunity of learning to read, write, and cast accounts, (if no more,) without being under almost a necessity of learning Heathenism at the same time: And after several unsuccessful trials, I found two such School masters as I wanted; men of honesty and of sufficient know ledge, who had talents for, and their hearts in, the work. 3. They have now under their care near sixty children: The parents of some pay for their schooling; but the greater part, being very poor, do not; so that the expense is chiefly defrayed by voluntary contributions. We have of late clothed them too, as many as wanted. The rules of the school are these that follow:--* First. No child is admitted under six years of age. Secondly. All the children are to be present at the morning sermon. Thirdly. They are at school from six to twelve, and from one to five. Fourthly. They have no play-days. Fifthly. No child is to speak in school, but to the masters. Sixthly. The child who misses two days in one week, without leave, is excluded the school. 4. We appointed two Stewards for the school also. The busi ness of these is, to receive the school subscriptions, and expend what is needful; to talk with each of the masters weekly; to pray with and exhort the children twice a-week; to inquire diligently, whether they grow in grace and in learning, and whether the rules are punctually observed; every Tuesday morning, in conjunction with the masters, to exclude those children that do not observe the rules; every Wednesday morn ing to meet with and exhort their parents, to train them up at home in the ways of God. 5. A happy change was soon observed in the children, both with regard to their tempers and behaviour.

We ought not so to do. Let them all their life long rejoice unto God, so it be with reverence. And even if light ness or pride should mix with their joy, let us not strike at the joy itself, (this is the gift of God,) but at that lightness or pride, that the evil may cease and the good remain. Q. 19. Ought we to be anxiously careful about perfection, lest we should die before we have attained ? A. In nowise. We ought to be thus careful for nothing, neither spiritual mor temporal. Q. 20. But ought we not to be troubled on account of the sinful nature which still remains in us? A. It is good for us to have a deep sense of this, and to be much ashamed before the Lord: But this should only incite us the more earnestly to turn unto Christ every moment, and to draw light, and life, and strength from him, that we may go on conquering and to conquer. And, therefore, when the sense of our sin most abounds, the sense of his love should much more abound. Q. 21. Will our joy or our trouble increase as we grow in grace? A. Perhaps both. But without doubt our joy in the Lord will increase as our love increases. Q. 22. Is not the teaching believers to be continually poring upon their inbred sin, the ready way to make them forget that they were purged from their former sins? A. We find by experience it is; or to make them under value and account it a little thing : whereas, indeed, (though there are still greater gifts behind,) this is inexpressibly great

But they should consider, the laying the foundation skilfully, as it is of the greatest importance, so it is the masterpiece of the wisest builder. And let the wisest of us all try, whenever we please, we shall find, that to lay this ground-work rightly, to make the ignorant understand the grounds of religion, will put us to the trial of all our skill.” Perhaps in doing this it may be well, (1.) After a few loving words spoken to all in the house, to take each person singly into another room, where you may deal closely with him, about his sin, and misery, and duty. Set these home, or you lose all your labour. (At least, let none be present but those who are familiar with each other.) (2.) Hear what the children have learned by heart. (3) Choose some of the weightiest points, and try if they understand them. As, “Do you believe you have sin in you? What does sin deserve? What remedy has God provided for guilty, helpless sinners?” (4.) Often with the question suggest the answer. As, “What is repentance? Sorrow for sin, or a conviction that we are guilty, helpless sinners.” “What is faith? A divine convic tion of things not seen.” (5.) Where you perceive they do not understand the stress of your question, lead them into it by other questions. For instance, you ask, “How do you think your sins will be par doned?” They answer, “By repenting and amending my life.” You ask farther, “But will your amendment make satisfac tion for your past sins?” They will answer, “I hope so, or I know not what will.” One would think, these had no know ledge of Christ at all. And some have not. But others have ; and give such answers, only because they do not understand the scope of the question. Ask them farther, “Can you be saved without the death of Christ?” They immediately say, “No.” And if you ask, “What has he suffered for you?” they will say, “He shed his blood for us.” But many cannot express even what they have some conception of; no, not even when expressions are put into their mouths. With these you are to deal exceeding tenderly, lest they be discouraged.

With these you are to deal exceeding tenderly, lest they be discouraged. (6.) If you perceive them troubled, that they cannot answer, step in yourself, and take the burden off them; answering the question yourself. And do it thoroughly and plainly, making a full explication of the whole business to them. (7.) When you have tried their knowledge, proceed to in struct them, according to their several capacities. If a man understand the fundamentals, speak what you perceive he most needs, either explaining farther some doctrines, or some duty, or showing him the necessity of something which he neglects. If he still understands not, go over it again till he does. (8.) Next inquire into his state, whether convinced or uncon vinced, converted or unconverted. Tell him, if need be, what conversion is; and then renew and enforce the inquiry. (9.) If unconverted, labour with all your power to bring his heart to a sense of his condition. Set this home with a more earnest voice than you spoke before. Get to the heart, or you do nothing. (10.) Conclude all with a strong exhortation, which should enforce, (1.) The duty of the heart, in order to receive Christ. (2.) The avoiding former sins, and constantly using the out ward means. And be sure, if you can, to get their promise, to forsake sin, change their company, and use the means. And do this solemnly, reminding them of the presence of God, who hears their promises, and expects the performance. (11.) Before you leave them, engage the head of each family to call all his family together every Sunday before they go to bed, and hear what they can repeat, and so continue, till they have learned the “Instructions” perfectly; and afterwards let him take care that they do not forget what they have learned. Do this in earnest, and you will soon find what a work you take in hand, in undertaking to be a Travelling Preacher! Q. 14. How shall we prevent improper persons from insinuating into the society? A. (1.) Give tickets to none till they are recommended by a Leader, with whom they have met at least two months on trial. (2.) Give notes to none but those who are recommended by one you know, or till they have met three or four times in a class.

To men of reason you will give offence, by talking of inspiration and receiving the Holy Ghost; to drunkards, Sabbath-breakers, common swearers, and other open sinners, by refraining from their company, as well as by that disapprobation of their behaviour which you will often be obliged to express. And indeed your life must give them con tinual offence: Your sobriety is grievously offensive to a drunk ard; your serious conversation is equally intolerable to a gay impertinent: and, in general, that “you are grown so precise and singular, so monstrously strict, beyond all sense and reason, that you scruple so many harmless things, and fancy you are obliged to do so many others which you need not,” cannot but be an offence to abundance of people, your friends and relations in particular. Either, therefore, you must consent to give up your principles, or your fond hope of pleasing men. What makes even your principles more offensive is, this uniting of yourselves together: Because this union renders you more conspicuous, placing you more in the eye of men; more suspicious,--I mean, liable to be suspected of carrying on some sinister design (especially by those who do not, or will not, know your inviolable attachment to His present Majesty); more dreadful, to those of a fearful temper, who imagine you have any such design; and more odious to men of zeal, if their zeal be any other than fervent love to God and man. This offence will sink the deeper, because you are gathered out of so many other congregations: For the warm men in each will not easily be convinced, that you do not despise either them or their teachers; nay, will probably imagine, that you utterly condemn them, as though they could not be saved. And this occasion of offence is now at the height, because you are just gathered, or gathering rather, so that they know not where it will end; but the fear of losing (so they account it) more of their members, gives an edge to their zeal, and keeps all their anger and resentment in its strength. Add to this, that you do not leave them quite, you still rank yourselves among their members; which, to those who knownot that you do it for conscience’ sake, is also a provoking circum stance.

The justness of some of your remarks, if I mistake not, has been pretty fully disproved. As to what you speak of my art, sub tlety, and so on, in this and many other places, I look upon it as neither better nor worse than a civil way of calling names. “‘To this multitude of crimes I am also an utter stranger.’ Then you have charged them wrongfully. What do you account guile?” &c. (Second Letter, p. 84.) I account guile, despising self-denial even in the smallest points, and teaching that those who have not the assurance of faith may not use the ordinances of God, the Lord's Supper in particular, (this is the real, un aggravated charge,) to be faults which cannot be excused. But I do not account them all together “a multitude of crimes.” I conceive this is a vehement hyperbole. “The honour of religion,” said you, “and virtue trampled apon:” I answered, “By whom ? Not by the Moravians.” You reply, “And yet you have accused some of these as decry ing all the means of grace.” No. What I accused them of, was, teaching that an unbeliever (in their sense) ought to abstain from them. “Neither did I know, or think, or say, they were desperately wicked people.’ Your Journal is before the world; to whom I appeal whether this has not so repre sented them.” But how do you here represent your remark, and my answer? My paragraph runs thus:-- “You go on, “How could you so long, and so intimately, converse with such desperately wicked people as the Moravians, according to your own account, were known by you to be?” O Sir, what another assertion is this ! “The Moravians, ac cording to your own account, were known by you to be desperately wicked people, while you intimately conversed with them !’ Utterly false and injurious! I never gave any such account. I conversed with them intimately both at Savannah and Hernhuth. But neither then, nor at any other time, did I know, or think, or say, they were desperately wicked people: I think and say just the reverse; viz., that though I soon ‘found among them a few things which I could not ap prove, yet I believe they are, in the main, some of the best Chris tians in the world.

I must therefore explain myself upon it a little farther You said, “An enthusiast accounts whatever he does to be the work of God.” I should have said, “But I do not account whatever I do to be the work of God.” What that is which I do account his work will be considered by and by. You remark, (11.) “He talks in the style of inspired persons.” I answered, “No otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.” You reply, “The point was not, whether you are actu ally inspired, but whether you have talked in the style of those who were so.” (Page 126.) That was so much the point, that if it were allowed, it would overturn your whole argument. For if I was inspired, (in your sense,) you could not term that inspi ration enthusiasm without blasphemy; but you again mistake my words. The plain meaning of them is, that I talk in the style of those persons who are “no otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.” You remark, (12.) “He applies Scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning, or once consider ing the difference of times and circumstances.” (Page 62.) I answered “ am not conscious of anything like this. I apply no Scripture phrase either to myself or any other, without care fully considering both the original meaning, and the secondary sense, wherein, allowing for different times and circumstances, it may be applied to ordinary Christians.” (Page 407.) You reply, “This also you deny to have done; holding, however, some secondary sense, (what it is you have not told us,) in which Scripture phrases may be applied to ordinary Christians.” I have largely told you what I mean by a secondary sense, in the First Part of the “Farther Appeal.” You add: “Many things which were truly written of the preaching of Christianity at first, you have vainly applied to yourselves.” Sir, I am to answer only for myself; as I will for that expression, “Behold the day of the Lord is come; he is again visiting and redeem ing his people !” 3. I come now to what you expatiate upon at large, as the two grand instances of my enthusiasm.

The next ran thus: “Again, you say, “I expounded out of the fulness that was given me.’” (Remarks, p. 64.) I answered, “I mean, I had then a fuller, deeper sense of what I spoke than I ordinarily have.” (Page 409.) But if you still think, “it would have been more decent to have said, ‘According to the best of my power and ability, with God’s assistance, I expounded;’” I will say so another time. With regard to the third instance of enthusiasm, youremarked, “If you would not have us look on this as miraculous, there is nothing in it worthy of being related.” (Remarks, p. 64.) I answered, “It may be so. Let it pass, then, as a trifle not worth relating; but still it is no proof of enthusiasm. For I would not have you look upon it as miraculous, but as a signal instance of God’s particular providence.” (Page 409.) How friendly and generous is your reply l--“You seem ashamed of it. I am glad you give this fooling up, and hope for the future you will treat your readers better.” (Second Letter, p. 131.) Sir, I am not ashamed of it; nor shall I ever give this fooling up, till I give up the Bible. I still look upon this “as a signal instance of God’s particular providence.” But “how is this con sistent with yielding it to be a trifle?” (Ibid. p. 132.) My words do not imply, that I yield it so to be. Being urged with the dilemma, “Either this is related as miraculous,” (and then it is enthusiasm,) “ or it is not worth relating; ” I answered, (to avoid drawing the saw of controversy,) “Let it pass, then, as a trifle not worth relating. But still” (if it be a trifle, which I suppose, not grant) “it is no proof of enthusiasm. For I would not have you look upon it as miraculous.” And yet I believe I yielded too much, and what might too much favour your assertion, that “there is a great difference between particular providences and such extraordinary interpo sitions.” Pray, Sir, show me what this difference is. It is a subject that deserves your coolest thoughts. “I know no ground to hope or pray for such immediate reliefs. These things must be represented either as common accidents or as miracles.” I do not throughly understand your terms.

Not that all the Methodists (so called) “were very wicked people before they followed us.” There are those among them, and not a few, who are able to stop the boasting of those that despise them, and to say, “Whereinsoever any of you is bold, I am bold also:” Only they “count all these things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus.” But these we found, as it were, when we sought them not. We went forth to “seek that which was lost;” (more eminently lost;) “to call” the most flagrant, hardened, desperate “sinners to repentance.” To this end we preached in the Horsefair at Bristol, in Kings wood, in Newcastle; among the colliers in Staffordshire, and the tinners in Cornwall; in Southwark, Wapping, Moorfields, Drury-Lane, at London. Did any man ever pick out such places as these, in order to find “serious, regular, well-disposed peo ple?” How many such might then be in any of them I know not. But this I know, that four in five of those who are now with us were not of that number, but were wallowing in their blood, till God by us said unto them, “Live.” Sir, I willingly put the whole cause on this issue: What are the general consequences of this preaching? Are there more tares or wheat? more “good men destroyed,” (that is the pro per question,) or “wicked men saved?” The last place where we began constant preaching is a part of Wiltshire and Somerset shire, near Bath. Now, let any man inquire at Rhode, Brad ford, Wrexall, or among the colliers at Coleford, (1.) What kind of people were those “before they followed these men?” (2.) What are the main doctrines they have been teaching for this twelvemonth? (3.) What effect have these doctrines upon their followers? What manner of lives do they lead now?

I must not neglect a scriptural advice, because such an one is offended at my following it. Your “friendly advice to avoid spiritual selfishness,” I will endeavour to follow as soon as I understand it. At present, I do not; neither do I well understand how any “sober Christian should think me guilty of arrogance or self conceit,” because I relate a fact in which I had no share at all; namely, that other men “prayed for one another, that they might be healed of the faults they had confessed; and it was so.” You add, “Dr. Middleton absolves you from all boasting, in relation to the miracle you worked upon Kirkman.” Dr. Middleton does me too much honour, in taking any notice of so inconsiderable a person. But, miracle or no miracle, the fact is plain: William Kirkman is, I apprehend, yet alive, and able to certify for himself, that he had that cough threescore years, and that since that time it has not yet returned. I do not know that any “one patient yet has died under my hands.” If any person does, let him declare it, with the time and circumstances. You conclude: “Let me beg of you, as a fellow-Christian, to remove that great load of scandal that now lies upon your sect; and that you will not, by a careless or premeditated silence, bring yourself and your followers under a just suspi cion of not being enemies to certain vices which you seem afraid even to name.” Alas, Sir, is your “hearty wish for my success” dwindled down to this? and your “sorrow for any oversight that should afford ground of cavil to those who are disposed to think unfavourably of me?” Sir, I take knowledge of you. I no longer wonder at your so readily answering for Dr. Middleton. I am persuaded none has a better right so to do: No, not the gentleman who lately printed in the public papers a letter to the Lord Bishop of Exeter. Well,"Sir, you may now lay aside the mask. I do not require you to style yourself my “fellow-Christian.” But we are fellow creatures, at least fellow-servants of the great Lord of heaven and earth ! May we both serve him faithfully ! For his sake, I remain, Sir, Your obedient servant, P. S.--I did not receive yours till last night.

“Many of those who are perhaps as zealous of good works as you, think I have allowed you too much. Nay, my brethren, but how can we help allowing it, if we allow the Scriptures to be from God? For is it not written, and do not you yourselves believe, ‘Without holiness no man shall see the Lord?’ And how then, without fighting about words, can we deny, that holi ness is a condition of final acceptance? And as to the first acceptance or pardon, does not all experience as well as Scrip ture prove, that no man ever yet truly believed the gospel who did not first repent? Repentance therefore we cannot deny to be necessarily previous to faith. Is it not equally undeniable, that the running back into wilful, known sin (suppose it were drunkenness or uncleanness) stifles that repentance or convic tion? And can that repentance come to any good issue in his soul, who resolves not to forgive his brother? or who obsti nately refrains from what God convinces him is right, whether it be prayer or hearing his word? Would you scruple your self to tell one of these, “Unto him that hath shall be given; but from him that hath not,’ that is, uses it not, “shall be taken even that which he hath?’ Would you scruple to say this? But in saying this, you allow all which I have said, viz., that previous to justifying faith, there must be repentance, and, if opportunity permit, “fruits meet for repentance.” “And yet I allow you this, that although both repentance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary before justification, yet neither the one nor the other is necessary in the same sense, or in the same degree, with faith. Not in the same degree. For in whatever moment a man believes, (in the Christian sense of the word,) he is justified, his sins are blotted out, “his faith is counted to him for righteousness. But it is not so, at whatever moment he repents, or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Faith alone therefore justifies; which repentance alone does not; much less any outward work. And consequently, none of these are necessary to jus tification, in the same degree with faith. “No in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith.

To the first of these propositions you object, “that justi fication is not only two-fold, but manifold. For a man may possibly sin many times, and as many times be justified or for given.” (Remarks, pp. 37-39.) I grant it. I grant also, that justification sometimes means a state of acceptance with God. But all this does not in the least affect my assertion, that “that justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and by our Church in the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth Articles, is not our acquittal at the last day, but the present remission of our sins.” You add, “You write in other places so variously about this matter, that I despair to find any consistency. Once you held ‘a degree of justifying faith short of the full assurance of faitk, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him;’ and yet you afterwards “warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assur ance, that God had forgiven their sins. What difference there is between this clear assurance, and the former full assurance and clear perception, I know not.” (Page 40.) Let us go on step by step, and you will know. “Once you held ‘a degree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him.’” And so I hold still, and have done for some years. “And yet you afterwards warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assurance that God had forgiven their sins.” I did so. “What difference there is between this clear assurance, and that full assurance and clear perception, Iknow not.” Sir, I will tell you. The one is an assurance that my sins are forgiven, clear at first, but soon clouded with doubt or fear. The other is such a plero phory or full assurance that I am forgiven, and so clear a per ception that Christ abideth in me, as utterly excludes all doubt and fear, and leaves them no place, no, not for an hour. So that the difference between them is as great as the difference be tween the light of the morning and that of the mid-day sun. 9.

I have declared them on hat head again and again; particularly in the sermon on “Christian Perfection.” 3. Into this fallacy you plunge from the beginning to the end of what you speak on my third error, (so you term it,) relating to the Lord’s supper; confuting, as mine, notions which I know not. (Pages 56, 57.) I cannot think any farther answer is needful here, than the bare recital of my own words:-- “Friday, June 27. I preached on, “Do this in remembrance of me.’ “It has been diligently taught among us, that none but those who are converted, who ‘have received the Holy Ghost,’ who are believers in the full sense, ought to communicate. “But experience shows the gross falsehood of that assertion, that the Lord's supper is not a converting ordinance. Ye are witnesses: For many now present know, the very beginning of your conversion to God (perhaps in some the first deep convic tion) was wrought at the Lord's supper. Now, one single instance of this kind overthrows that whole assertion. “The falsehood of the other assertion appears both from Scripture precept and example. Our Lord commanded those very men who were then unconverted, who had not yet received the Holy Ghost, who, in the full sense of the word, were not believers, to do this in remembrance of him. Here the pre cept is clear. And to these he delivered the elements with his own hands. Here is example equally indisputable. “Sat. 28.--I showed at large, (1.) That the Lord’s supper was ordained by God to be a means of conveying to men either preventing, or justifying, or sanctifying grace, according to their several necessities. (2.) That the persons for whom it was ordained, are all those who know and feel that they want the grace of God, either to restrain them from sin, or to show their sins forgiven, or to renew their souls in the image of God. (3.) That, inasmuch as we come to his table, not to give him anything, but to receive whatsoever he sees best for us, there is no previous preparation indispensably necessary, but a desire to receive whatsoever he pleases to give.

(A term, indeed, which I very rarely use, because it rarely occurs in the New Testament.) “Yes; it is to “start up perfect men at once.’” (Page 41.) Indeed, Sir, it is not. A man is usually converted long before he is a perfect man. It is probable most of those Ephesians to whom St. Paul directed his Epistle were converted. Yet they were not “come” (few, if any) “to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” 20. I do not, Sir, indeed, I do not undertake to make you understand these things. I am not so vain as to think it is in my power. It is the utmost of my hope to convince you, or, at least, those who read your works, that you understand just nothing about them. To put this out of dispute, you go on : “Thus faith and being born of God are said to be an instantaneous work, at once, and in a moment, as lightning. Justification, the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith, this always in a moment.” (Ibid.) I know not which to admire most, the English or the sense, which you here father upon me; but, in truth, it is all your own; I do not thus confound faith and Seing born of God. I always speak of them as different things; it is you that thus jumble them together. It is you who dis cover justification also to be the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith. I take them to be three different things; so different as not ever to come under one genus. And yet it is true, that each of these, “as far as I know,” is at first experienced suddenly; although two of them (I leave you to find out which) gradually increase from that hour. 21. “After these sudden conversions,” say you, “they receive their assurances of salvation.” (Page 43.) Sir, Mr. Bedford's ignorance in charging this doctrine upon me might be involun tary, and I am persuaded was real. But yours cannot be so. It must be voluntary; if it is not rather affected. For you had before you, while you wrote, the very tract wherein I corrected Mr.

W. had repelled Sophy out of revenge, because he had made proposals of marriage to her, which she * The one thing needful.--EDIT. rejected. Tuesday, 16. Mrs. W. made affidavit of it. Thurs day, September 1. A Grand Jury, prepared by Mr. Causton, found, that ‘John Wesley had broken the laws of the realm, by speaking and writing to Mrs. W. against her husband’s con sent, and by repelling her from the communion.’ “Friday, 2, was the third court-day at which I appeared, since my being required so to do by Mr. Parker. I moved for an immediate hearing, but was put off till the next court-day. On the next court-day I appeared again, as also at the two courts following; but could not be heard. Thursday, Novem ber 3, I appeared in court again; and yet again on Tuesday, November 22, on which day Mr. C. desired to speak with me, and read me an affidavit, in which it was affirmed, that I ‘ abused Mr. C. in his own house, calling him liar, villain, and so on.’ It was likewise repeated, that I had been repri manded at the last court, by Mr. C., as an enemy to, and hin derer of, the public peace. “My friends agreed with me, that the time we looked for was now come. And the next morning, calling on Mr. C., I told him, I designed to set out for England immediately. “Friday, December 2. I proposed to set out for Carolina about noon. But about ten, the Magistrates sent for me, and told me, I must not go out of the province; for I had not answered the allegations laid against me. I replied, ‘I have appeared at six or seven courts, in order to answer them. But I was not suffered so to do. After a few more words, I said, ‘You use me very ill. And so you do the Trustees. You know your business, and I know mine.’ “In the afternoon, they published an order, forbidding any to assist me in going out of the province. But I knew I had no more business there. So as soon as Evening Prayer was over, the tide then serving, I took boat at the Bluff, for Carolina.” This is the plain account of the matter. I need only add a remark or two on the pleasantry of my censurer.

Were the Apostles but infants to us?) “he illustrates the case by an elegant similitude: ‘When I was a child, I spake as a child;--but when I became a man, I put away childish things.’ His next remark, concerning the defects of human knowledge, is only an occasional answer to an objec tion. And the last verse shows that the superior duration of charity refers to the present life only: “Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three: But the greatest of these is charity.’ That is, you may perhaps object, Faith and hope will likewise remain in the Church, when prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are ceased: They will so; but still charity is the greatest, because of its excellent qualities.” (Page 107.) The last verse shows Is not this begging the question? How forced is all this ! The plain natural meaning of the pas sage is, love (the absolute necessity and the nature of which is shown in the foregoing verses) has another commendation,-it “never faileth; ” it accompanies and adorns us to eternity. “But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail,” when all things are fulfilled, and God is all in all: “Whether there be tongues, they shall cease.” One language shall prevail among all the inhabitants of heaven, while the low, imperfect languages of earth are forgotten. The “knowledge,” likewise, we now so eagerly pursue, shall then “vanish away.” As star-light is lost in that of the mid-day sun, so our present knowledge in the light of eternity. “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.” We have here but short, narrow, imperfect conceptions, even of the things round about us, and much more of the deep things of God. And even the prophecies which men deliver from God are far from taking in the whole of future events. “But when that which is perfect is come,” at death, and in the last day, “that which is in part shall be done away.” Both that low, imperfect, glimmering light, which is all the knowledge we can now attain to; and these slow and unsatisfactory methods of attaining, as well as of imparting it to others. “When I was a child, I talked as a child, I understood as a child, I reasoned as a child.” As if he had said, In our present state, we are mere infants, compared to what we shall be hereafter.

Part I.) “God give us grace to know these things, and feel them in our hearts I This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with his presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For with out his lively inspiration we cannot so much as speak the name of the Mediator: “No man can say, Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. “But we have received, saith St. Paul, ‘not the Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God;’ for this purpose, ‘that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God.” In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God, and to please him. It is He that purifieth the mind by his secret working. He enlighteneth the heart to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth on the tongue of man, to stir him to speak his honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and selfsame Spirit.” (Homily for Roga tion Week. Part III.) Every proposition which I have anywhere advanced con cerning those operations of the Holy Ghost, which I believe are common to all Christians in all ages, is here clearly main tained by our own Church. Being fully convinced of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was that on the mentioning any of these great truths, even among men of education, the cry immedi ately arose, “An enthusiast, an enthusiast !” But I now plainly perceive, this is only an old fallacy in a new shape. To object enthusiasm to any person or doctrine, is but a de cent method of begging the question. It generally spares the objector the trouble of reasoning, and is a shorter and easier way of carrying his cause.

At present you know not the men, or their communication. You are as wholly unacquainted both with them and their doctrines, as if you had lived all your days in the islands of Japan, or the deserts of Arabia. You have given a furious assault to you know not whom ; and you have done it, you know not why. You have not hurt me thereby; but you have hurt yourself, perhaps in your cha racter, certainly in your conscience. For this is not doing to others “as you would they should do unto you.” When you grow cool, I trust you will see this clearly; and will no more accuse, in a manner so remote from fairness and candour, Reverend Sir, Your servant for Christ’s sake,

(3.) Here the “faith” by which, in St. Paul's sense, he was justified long before, “wrought together with his works;” and he was justified in St. James’s sense, that is, (as the Apostle explains his own meaning,) “by works his faith was made perfect.” God confirmed, increased, and perfected the principle from which those works sprang. 9. Drawing to a conclusion, you say, “What pity, so many volumes should have been written upon the question,--whether a man be justified by faith or works, seeing they are two essen tial parts of the same thing!” (Page 25.) If by works you understand inward and outward holiness, both faith and works are essential parts of Christianity; and yet they are essentially different, and by God himself contradistinguished from each other; and that in the very question before us: “Him that worketh not, but believeth.” Therefore, whether a man be jus tified by faith or works, is a point of the last importance; other wise, our Reformers could not have answered to God their spend ing so much time upon it. Indeed, they were both too wise and too good men to have wrote so many volumes on a trifling or needless question. 10. If in speaking on this important point, (such at least it appears to me,) I have said any thing offensive, any that im plies the least degree of anger or disrespect, it was entirely foreign to my intention; nor indeed have I any provocation: I have no room to be angry at your maintaining what you believe to be the truth of the gospel; even though I might wish you had omitted a few expressions, Quas aut incuria fudit, Aut humana parum cavit natura." In the general, from all I have heard concerning you, I cannot but very highly esteem you in love. And that God may give you both “a right judgment in all things, and evermore to rejoice in his holy comfort,” is the prayer of, Reverend Sir, Your affectionate brother and servant,

Of all these, Mr. Williams, Cownly, Reeves, Haughton, Larwood, Skelton, Swindells, Tucker, and Wheatly, you pro nounce in the lump, that they are “a parcel of vagabond, illi terate babblers;” (pages 3,4;) of whom “every body that has the least share of reason must know,” that, though “they amuse the populace with nonsense, ribaldry, and blasphemy, they are not capable of writing orthography or good sense.” Sir, that is not an adjudged case. Some who have a little share of reason, think they are capable both of speaking and writing good sense. But if they are not, if they cannot write or read, they can save souls from death; they can, by the grace of God, bring sinners from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God. 7. But they “made a woman plunder her poor old husband, and another absent herself from her husband and children.” (Pages 24, 25.) Pray, what are their names; where do they live; and how may one come to the speech of them? I have heard so many plausible tales of this kind, which on examina tion vanished away, that I cannot believe one word of this till I have more proof than your bare assertion. 8. So far I have been pleading for others. But I am now called to answer for myself. For “Theophilus and John Wes ley,” say you, “seem to me the same individual person.” (Page 4.) They may seem so to you; but not to any who knows either my style or manner of writing. Besides, if it had been mine, it would have borne my name: For I do not love fight ing in the dark. But were not “a great number ’’ of those books “brought from Dublin, to be dispersed throughout the city?” Not by me; not by my order, nor to my knowledge. However, I thank you again for dispersing them. 9. But “while charity stands in the front of Christian graces, the author of such a book can have none of that grace. For you must allow the vulgar to think.” (Page 26.) Mal-a propos enough, a lively saying; but for any use it is of, it may stand either in the front or rear of the sentence. The argument itself is something new. A man knocks me down: I cry, “Help! help!

For myself, for my own use, I raise no contributions, either great or small. The weekly contributions of our community, (which are freely given, not squeezed out of any,) as well as the gifts and offer ings at the Lord’s table, never come into my hands. I have no concern with them, not so much as the beholding them with my eyes. They are received every week by the Stewards of the society, men of well-known character in the world; and by them constantly distributed, within the week, to those whom they know to be in real necessity. As to the “very large oblations wherewith I am favoured by persons of better figure and fortune,” I know nothing of them. Be so kind as to refresh my memory by mentioning a few of their names. I have the happiness of knowing some of great figure and fortune; some right honourable persons. But if I were to say, that all of them together had given me seven pounds in seven years, I should say...more than I could make good. And yet I doubt not, but they would freely give me anything I wanted; but, by the blessing of God, I want nothing that they can give. I want only more of the Spirit of love and power, and of an healthful mind. As to those “many be lieving wives who practise pious frauds on their unbelieving husbands,” I know them not, no, not one of that kind; there fore I doubt the fact. If you know any such, be pleased to give us their names and places of abode. Otherwise you must bear the blame of being the lover, if not the maker, of a lie. Perhaps you will say, “Why, a great man said the same thing but a few years ago.” What, if he did? Let the frog swell as long as he can, he will not equal the ox. He might say many things, all circumstances considered, which will not come well from you, as you have neither his wit, nor sense, nor learning, nor age, nor dignity. Tibi parvula res est: Metiri se quemque suo modulo ac pede verum est." If you fall upon people that meddle not with you, without either fear or wit, you may possibly find they have a little more to say for themselves than you was aware of.

“These are well styled by Christ, ‘ravening wolves;” by St. Paul, “grievous wolves, from the mischiefs they do, rending the Church of Christ, and perverting the true sense of the gospel, for their own private ends. They ever did, and to this day do, pretend to extraordinary inspiration.” (Page 8.) Round assertions! Let us consider them one by one: (1.) “These are styled by Christ ‘ravening wolves; by St. Paul, “grievous wolves.’” True; but how does it appear that these names are applicable to the Methodists? Why, they * rend the Church of Christ.” What is the Church of Christ? According to our Article, a Church is “a company of faithful people,” of true believers, who have “the mind that was in Christ,” and “walk as Christ walked.” Who then are the Church of Christ in Waterford? Point them out, Sir, if you know them; and then be pleased to show how the Methodists rend this Church of Christ. You may as justly say they rend the walls or the steeple of the cathedral church. “How ever, they pervert the true sense of the gospel, for their own private ends.” Wherein do they pervert the true sense of the gospel? I have published Notes both on the Gospels and the other Scriptures. But wherein do those Notes pervert the sense? None has yet attempted to show. But for what private ends should I pervert it? For ease or honour? Then I should be sadly disappointed. Or for money? This is the silliest tale of all. You may easily know, if you are willing to know it, that I did not leave Waterford without being some pounds lighter than I was when I came thither. 6. “But they pretend to extraordinary inspiration.” They do not: They expressly disclaim it. I have declared an hun dred times, I suppose ten times in print, that I pretend to no other inspiration than that which is common to all real Chris tians, without which no one can be a Christian at all. “They denounce hell and damnation to all that reject their pretences.” (Page 9.) This is another charge; but it is as groundless as the former; it is without all shadow of truth. You may as well say, The Methodists denounce hell and damnation to all that reject Mahometanism.

Morgan's, at Mitchel. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the “honest, sensible woman.” I imme diately asked, “Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me?” (So the story ran in the first part of the “Comparison; ” it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) “Or did you or he ever affirm,” (another circumstance related at Truro,) “that I was rude with your maid?” She replied, vehemently, “Sir, I never said you was, or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbours.” She added, “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word that he would dine at our house; but he did not, being invited to a neighbouring gentle man's. He sent for me thither, and said, ‘Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down? Do you know Mr. Wesley? Did not he tell you, you would be damned if you took any money of him? And did not he offer rudeness to your maid?' I told him, ‘No, my Lord; he never said any such thing to me, nor to my husband that I know of He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him: But a man told me once (who I was told was a Methodist Preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.’” 4. This is her own account given to me. And an account it is, irreconcilably different (notwithstanding some small resemblance in the last circumstance) from that she is affirmed to have given your Lordship. Whether she did give that account to your Lordship or no, your Lordship knows best. That the Comparer affirms it, is no proof at all; since he will affirm any thing that suits his purpose. 5.

Had we been Dissenters of any kind, or even Low-Churchmen (so called), it would have been a greatstumbling-block in the way of those who are zealous for the Church. And yet had we continued in the impetuosity of our High-Church zeal, neither should we have been willing to converse with Dissenters, nor they to receive any good at our hands.” Sir, why did you break off your quotation in the middle of this paragraph, just at, “more unexceptionable on all accounts?” Was it not on purpose to give a wrong turn to the whole? to conceal the real and obvious meaning of my words, and put one upon them that never entered into my thoughts? 5. You have reserved your strong reason for the last, namely, my own confession: “Mr. Wesley says himself, ‘By the most infallible of proofs, inward feeling, I am convinced of pride, &c.’” Sir, be pleased to decipher that &c. Or I will spare you the pains, and do it myself, by reciting the whole sentence : “By the most infallible of proofs, inward feeling, I am con vinced, “(1.) Of unbelief, having no such faith in Christ as will prevent my heart from being troubled, which it could not be, if I believed in God, and rightly believed also in him. “(2.) Of pride throughout my life past, inasmuch as I thought I had what I find I have not.” (Vol. I. p. 72.) Now, Sir, you have my whole confession. I entreat you to make the best of it. But I myself “acknowledge three Methodists to have fallen into pride.” Sir, I can tell you of three more. And yet it will not follow, that the doctrines I teach “lead men into horrid pride and blasphemy.” 6. In the close of your fourth section, you charge me with “shuffling and prevaricating with regard to extraordinary gifts and miraculous powers.” Of these I shall have occasion to speak by and by. At present I need only return the compli ment, by charging you with gross, wilful prevarication, from the beginning of your book to the end. Some instances of this have appeared already. Many more will appear in due time. 7. Your fifth charges me with an “affectation of prophesy ing.” Your first proof of it is this:-- “It was about this time that the soldier was executed.

His own disciples among the Methodists go over to them in crowds. But still Methodism is the strongest barrier against the Moravian doctrines and principles.” Sir, I bear you witness you have learned one principle, at least, from those with whom you have lately conversed; namely, that no faith is to be kept with heretics; of which you have given us abundant proof. For you know I have fully answered every article of this charge; which you repeat, as if I had not opened my lips about it. You know that there is not one grain of truth in several things which you here positively assert. For instance: “His love and esteem of them increases more and more.” Not so; no more than my love and esteem for you. I love you both; but I do not much esteem either. Again: “His own disciples among the Methodists go over to them in crowds.” When? Where? I know.not that ten of my disciples, as you call them, have gone over to them for twice ten months. O Sir, consider ! How do you know but some of your disciples may tell your name? 17. With the same veracity you go on: “In “The Character of a Methodist,’ those of the sect are described as having all the virtues that can adorn the Christian profession. But in their ‘Journals’ you find them waspish, condemning all the world, except themselves; and among themselves perpetual broils and confusions, with various other irregularities and vices.” I answer, (1.) The tract you refer to (as is expressly declared in the preface) does not describe what the Methodists are already; but what they desire to be, and what they will be then when they fully practise the doctrine they hear. (2.) Be pleased to point the pages in my Journals which mention those “various irregularities and vices.” Of their “perpetual broils and confusions.” I shall speak under their proper head. You add: “Sometimes they are so far from fearing death, that they wish it: But the keenness of the edge is soon . blunted. They are full of dreadful apprehensions that the Clergy intend to murder them.” Do you mean me, Sir? I plead, Not Guilty. I never had any such apprehension. Yet I suppose you designed the compliment for me, by your dragging in two or three broken sentences from my First Journal.

Who fanaticized his own followers, and de prived them of their senses? Whose societies (by his own con fession) run over in shoals to Moravianism forty or fifty at a time? Would they have split upon this rock, if they had not been first Methodists? Lastly: Where is the spawn of Mora vianism so strongly working as in the children of Methodism?” Sir, you run very fast. And yet I hope to overtake you by and by. “Mr. Wesley,” you say, “has preached against the Moravians, since he quarrelled with them.” Sir, I never quarrelled with their persons yet: I did with some of their tenets long ago. He “gives them a box on the ear with the one hand, and embraces them with the other.” That is, I embrace what is good among them, and at the same time re prove what is evil. “Who first brought over this wicked generation?” Not I, whether they be wicked or not. I once thought I did; but have since then seen and acknow ledged my mistake. “Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide?” Not I; though I have occasionally consulted several. “Who fanaticized his own followers, and deprived them of their senses?” Not I. Prove it upon me if you can. “Whose societies (by his own confession) run over in shoals to Mora vianism, forty or fifty at a time?” Truly, not mine. Two and-fifty of Kingswood society ran over to Calvinism, and, a year before, part of Fetter-Lane society gradually went over to the Moravians. But I know none of ours that went over “in shoals.” They never, that I remember, gained five at a time; nor fifty in all, to the best of my knowledge, for these last ten years. “Would they” (of Fetter-Lane) “have split on this rock, if they had not first been Methodists?” Undoubtedly they would; for several of them had not first been Methodists. Mr. Viney, for instance, (as well as several others,) was with the Germans before ever he saw me. “Lastly: Where is the spawn of Moravianism working so strongly as in the children of Methodism?” If you mean the errors of Moravianism, they are not working at all in the generality of the children of Methodism; the Methodists in general being thoroughly apprized of, and fully guarded against, them.

What your Lordship mentions “by the way,” I will now consider: “Some of your western correspondents imposed upon the leaders of Methodism, by transmitting to London a notoriously false account of my Charge to the Clergy. After wards the Methodists confessed themselves to have been deceived; yet some time after, the Methodists at Cork, in Ireland, your own brother at the head of them, reprinted the same lying pamphlet, as my performance.” (Pages 4, 5.) My Lord, I know not who are your Lordship's Irish cor respondents; but here are almost as many mistakes as lines. For, (1.) They were none of my correspondents who sent that account to London. (2.) It was sent, not to the leaders of Methodism, but to one who was no Methodist at all. (3.) That it was a false account, I do not know: But your Lordship may easily put it out of dispute. And many have wondered, that your Lordship did not do so long ago, by printing the Charge in question. (4.) I did never confess it was a false account; nor any person by my consent, or with my knowledge. (5.) That account was never reprinted at Cork at all. (6.) When it was reprinted at Dublin, your Lordship had not disowned it. (7.) My brother was not in Dublin, when it was done; nor did either he or I know of it till long after. Therefore, when my brother was asked, how he could re print such an account, after your Lordship had publicly disowned it, I do not at all wonder, that “he did not offer a single word in answer.” Whether this, as well as my former Letter, be “mere rant and declamation,” or plain and sober reason, I must refer to the world, and your Lordship's own conscience. I am, My Lord, Your Lordship’s most obedient servant,

If then you have no more than this to advance in support of your first charge, you have alleged what you are not able to prove. And the more heavy that allegation is, the more unkind, the more unjust, the more unchristian, the more inhuman, it is to bring it without proof. In support of the Second charge, you say, “Our Saviour declares our works to be the object of hisjudgment. But the Methodist, for the perdition of the souls of his followers, says our works are of no consideration at all.” Who says so? Mr. Whitefield, or my brother, or I? We say the direct contrary. But one of my “anonymous corre spondents says so.” Who is he? How do you know he is a Methodist? For aught appears, he may be another of your allies, a brother to Roger Balls. Three or threescore anonymous correspondents cannot yield one grain of proof, any more than an hundred anonymous remarkers on Theron and Aspasio. Before these can prove what the Methodists hold, you must prove that these are Methodists; either that they are original Methodists, or in connexion with them. Will you say, “If these were not Methodists themselves, they would not defend the Methodists?” I deny the consequence: Men may be far from being Methodists, and yet willing to do the Methodists justice. I have known a Clergyman of note say to another, who had just been preaching a very warm sermon, “Sir, I do not thank you at all for this. I have no acquaint ance with Mr. Whitefield or Mr. Wesley; and I do not agree with them in opinion; but I will have no more railing in my pulpit.” From the principles of the Methodists, you proceed to their practice: “They hunt,” say you, “for extraordinary marks and revelations, whereby to know the state of the soul.” The marks by which I know the state of any soul, are the inward fruit of the Spirit,-love, joy, peace, and meekness, gentleness, good ness, longsuffering, temperance, patience; shown, not by words only, but by the genuine fruit of outward holiness. Again : “They magnify their office beyond the truth, by high pretences to miraculous inspiration.” To this assertion, we have answered over and over, We pretend to no other inspi ration than that which, not only every true gospel Minister, but every real Christian, enjoys.

The Doctrine of Original Sin Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 9 (Zondervan) Year: 1757 Author: John Wesley --- 1. A FEw years ago, a friend put into my hands Dr. Taylor's “Doctrine of Original Sin,” which I read carefully over and partly transcribed, and have many times since diligently considered. The author is doubtless a person of sense, nay, of unusu ally strong understanding, joined with no small liveliness of imagination, and a good degree of various learning. He has likewise an admirable command of temper, so that he almost everywhere speaks as one in good humour. Add to this, that he has a smooth and pleasing, yet a manly and nervous, style. And all these talents he exerts to the uttermost, on a favourite subject, in the Trea tise before us; which he has had leisure for many years to revise, file, correct, and strengthen against all objections. 2. So finished a piece surely deserves the consider ation of all those masters of reason which the age has produced. And I have long hoped that some of those would attempt to show how far the doctrine there laid down is true; and what weight there is in the arguments which are produced in confirmation of it. I know not how to believe that all the Clergy in England are of the same opinion with this author. And certainly there are some whom all his skill in Greek, and even in Hebrew, does not make afraid. I should rejoice had any of these undertaken the task, who are, in many respects, better qualified for it; particularly in this, that they have time upon their hands; they have full leisure for such an employment. But since none else will,” I cannot but speak, though lying under many peculiar disad vantages. I dare not be silent any longer: Necessity is laid upon me to provide those who desire to know the truth with some antidote against that deadly poison which has been diffusing itself for several years through our nation, our Church, and even our Universities. Nay, one (I hope, only one) Father of the Church has declared that he knows no book more proper than this to settle the principles of a young Clergyman. Is it not time, then, for “the very stones to cry out P” 3.

1. Such is the state with regard to knowledge and virtue, wherein, according to the most authentic accounts, mankind was from earliest times, for above four thousand years. Such nearly did it continue, during the decline, and since the destruction, of the Roman empire. But we will wave all that is past, if it only appears that mankind is virtuous and wise at this day. This, then, is the point we are at present to consi der: Are-men in general now wise and virtuous? Our ingenious countryman, Mr. Brerewood, after his most careful and laborious inquiries, computes, that, supposing that part of the earth which we know to be inhabited were divided into thirty equal parts, nineteen of these are Heathen still; and of the remaining eleven, six are Mahometan, and only five Christian. Let us take as fair and impartial a survey as we can of the Heathens first, and then of the Mahometans and Christians. 2. And, First, of the Heathens. What manner of men are these, as to virtue and knowledge, at this day? Many of late, who still bear the Christian name, have entertained very honourable thoughts of the old Heathens. They cannot be lieve them to have been so stupid and senseless as they have been represented to be; particularly with regard to idolatry, in worshipping birds, beasts, and creeping things; much less can they credit the stories told of many nations, the Egyp tians in particular, Who are said to Have set the leek they after pray'd to. But if they do not consider who they are that transmit to us these accounts, namely, both those writers who, they profess to believe, spake “as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” and those whom perhaps they value more, the most credible of their contemporary Heathens; if, I say, they forget this, do they not consider the present state of the heathen world? Now, allowing the bulk of the ancient Heathens (which itself is not easily proved) to have had as much understanding as the modern, we have no pretence to suppose they had more. What therefore they were, we may safely gather from what they are; we may judge of the past by the present.

What therefore they were, we may safely gather from what they are; we may judge of the past by the present. Would we know, then, (to begin with a part of the world known to very early antiquity,) what manner of men the Heathens in Africa were two or three thousand years ago? Inquire what they are now, who are genuine Pagans still, not tainted either with Mahometanism or Christianity. They are to be found in abundance, either in Negroland, or round the Cape of Good Hope. Now, what measure of knowledge have the natives of these countries? I do not say in metaphysics, mathematics, or astronomy. Of these it is plain they know just as much as their four-footed brethren; the lion and the man are equally accomplished with regard to this knowledge. I will not ask what they know of the nature of government, of the respective rights of Kings and various orders of subjects: In this re gard, a herd of men are manifestly inferior to a herd of ele phants. But let us view them with respect to common life. What do they know of the things they continually stand in need of? How do they build habitations for themselves and their families; how select and prepare their food; clothe and adorn their persons? As to their habitations, it is certain, I will not say, our horses, (particularly those belonging to the Nobility and Gentry,) but an English peasant's dogs, nay, his very swine, are more commodiously lodged; and as to their food, apparel, and ornaments, they are just suitable to their edifices: Your nicer Hottentots think meet With guts and tripe to deck their feet. With downcast eyes on Totta's legs, The love-sick youth most humbly begs, She would not from his sight remove At once his breakfast and his love. Such is the knowledge of these accomplished animals, in things which cannot but daily employ their thoughts; and wherein, consequently, they cannot avoid exerting, to the uttermost, both their natural and acquired understanding. And what are their present attainments in virtue? Are they not, one and all, “without God in the world?” having either no knowledge of him at all; no conception of anything he has to do with them, or they with him; or such concep tions as are far worse than none, as make him such a one as themselves.

They speak much of their beloved ones ; with whom they say they converse both day and night. But their beloved ones teach them to eat and drink from morning to night, and, in a manner, from night to morning; for they rise at any hour of the night when they wake, and eat and drink as much as they can, and sleep again. Their beloved ones likewise expressly command them to torture and burn all their prisoners. Their manner of doing it is this: They hold lighted canes to their arms and legs, and several parts of their body, for some time, and then for a while take them away. They also stick burning pieces of wood in their flesh; in which condition they keep them from morning to evening. Such are at present the knowledge and virtue of the native Heathens, over another fourth of the known world. 4. In Asia, however, we are informed that the case is widely different. For although the Heathens bordering on Europe, the thousands and myriads of Tartars, have not much to boast either as to knowledge or virtue; and although the numerous little nations under the Mogul, who retain their original Hea thenism, are nearly on a level with them, as are the inhabitants of the many large and populous islands in the eastern seas; yet we hear high encomiums of the Chinese, who are as numer ous as all these together; some late travellers assuring us, that China alone has fifty-eight million of inhabitants. Now, these have been described as men of the deepest penetration, the highest learning, and the strictest integrity; and such doubtless they are, at least with regard to their understanding, if we will believe their own proverb: “The Chinese have two eyes, the Europeans one, and other men none at all.” And one circumstance, it must be owned, is much in their favour, -they live some thousand miles off; so that if it were affirmed, that every Chinese had literally three eyes, it would be difficult for us to disprove it. Nevertheless, there is room to doubt even of their understanding; nay, one of the arguments often brought to prove the greatness, to me clearly demon strates the littleness, of it; namely, the thirty thousand letters of their alphabet.

Nevertheless, there is room to doubt even of their understanding; nay, one of the arguments often brought to prove the greatness, to me clearly demon strates the littleness, of it; namely, the thirty thousand letters of their alphabet. To keep an alphabet of thirty hundred letters could never be reconciled to common sense; since every alphabet ought to be as short, simple, and easy as possible. No more can we reconcile to any degree of common sense, their crippling all the women in the empire, by a silly, senseless affectation of squeezing their feet till they bear no proportion to their bodies; so that the feet of a woman at thirty must still be as small as they would be naturally when four years old. But in order to see the true measure of their understanding in the clearest light, let us look, not at women, or the vulgar, but at the Nobility, the wisest, the politest part of the nation. Look at the Mandarins, the glory of the empire, and see any, every one of them at his meals, not deigning to use his own hands, but having his meat put into his mouth by two servants, planted for that purpose, one on his right hand, the other on his left | O the deep understanding of the noble lubber that sits in the midst, and Hiat, ceu pullus hirundinis / “Gapes, as the young swallow, for his food.” Surely an English ploughman, or a Dutch sailor, would have too much sense to endure it. If you say, “Nay, the Mandarin would not endure it, but that it is a custom ;” I answer, Undoubtedly it is; but how came it to be a custom? Such a custom could not have begun, much less have become gene ral, but through a general and marvellous want of common Sense. What their learning is now, I know not; but notwithstand ing their boast of its antiquity, it was certainly very low and contemptible in the last century, when they were so astonished at the skill of the French Jesuits, and honoured them as almost more than human, for calculating eclipses !

We are under an excellent constitution, which secures both our reli gious and civil liberty. We have religion taught in its primitive purity, its genuine, native simplicity. And how it prospers among us, we may know with great ease and certainty; for we depend not on hearsay, on the report of others, or on subtle and uncertain reasonings; but may see everything with our own eyes, and hear it with our own ears. Well, then, to make all the allowance possible, we will suppose mankind in general to be on a level, with regard to knowledge and virtue, even with the inhabitants of our fortunateislands; and take our measure of them from the present undeniable state of our own countrymen. In order to take a thorough survey of these, let us begin with the lowest, and proceed upward. The bulk of the natives of Ireland are to be found in or near their little cabins. throughout the kingdom, most of which are their own work manship, consisting of four earthen walls, covered with straw, or sods, with one opening in the side wall, which serves at once for door, window, and chimney. Here, in one room, are the cow and pig, the woman with her children, and the master of the family. Now, what knowledge have these rational animals? They know to plant and boil their potatoes, to milk their cow, and put their clothes on and off. if they have any besides a blanket; but other knowledge they have none, unless in religion. And how much do they know of this? A little more than the Hottentots, and not much. They know the names of God, and Christ, and the Virgin Mary. They know a little of St. Patrick, the Pope, and the Priest; how to tell their beads, to say Ave Maria and Pater Noster; to do what penance they are bid, to hear mass, confess, and pay so much for the pardon of their sins. But as to the nature of religion, the life of God in the soul, they know no more (I will not say, than the Priest, but) than the beasts of the field.

But as to the nature of religion, the life of God in the soul, they know no more (I will not say, than the Priest, but) than the beasts of the field. And how very little above these are the numerous inhabit ants of the northern parts of Scotland, or of the islands which lie either on the west or the north side of that kingdom I What knowledge have these, and what religion? Their re ligion usually lies in a single point, in implicitly believing the head of their clan, and implicitly doing what he bids.” Meantime they are, one and all, as ignorant of rational, scriptural religion, as of Algebra; and altogether as far from the practice as from the theory of it. “But it is not so in England: The very lowest of the peo ple are here better instructed.” I should be right glad to find it so; but I doubt a fair trial will show the contrary. I am afraid we may still say of thousands, myriads of peasants, men, women, and children, throughout our nation, “Wild as the untaught Indian's brood, The Christian savages remain; Strangers, yea, enemies to God, They make thee spill thy blood in vain.” The generality of English peasants are not only grossly, stupidly, I had almost said, brutishly ignorant as to all the arts of this life, but eminently so with regard to religion and the life to come. Ask a countryman, What is faith? What is repentance? What is holiness? What is true religion? and he is no more able to give you an intelligible answer, than if you were to ask him about the north-east passage. Is there, then, any possibility that they should practise what they know nothing of? If religion is not even in their heads, can it be in their hearts or lives? It cannot. Nor is there the least savour thereof, either in their tempers or conversation. Neither in the one, nor the other, do they rise one jot above the pitch of a Turk or a Heathen. Perhaps it will be said, “Whatever the clowns in the midland counties are, the people near the sea-coasts are more civilized.” Yes; great numbers of them are, in and near all our ports; many thousands there are civilized by smuggling.

“But if, after all, you will adhere to the literal sense of thi text, why do you not adhere to the literal sense of that text ‘This is my body, and believe transubstantiation ?” (Ibid. For those very reasons which you suggest: (1.) Because it i grossly absurd, to suppose that Christ speaks of what he the held in his hands, as his real, natural body. But it is nowa, absurd, to suppose the Psalmist was “conceived in sin.” (2. The sense of, “This is my body,” may be clearly explained b. other scriptures, where the like forms of speech are used; bu there are no other scriptures where the like forms with thi of David are used in any other sense. (3.) Transubstantia tion is attended with consequences hurtful to piety; but th doctrine of original sin, and faith grounded thereon, is th only foundation of true piety. 14. The next proof is, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” (Job xiv. 4.) On this you observe: “Job is here speaking of the weak ness of our nature; not with regard to sin, but to the short ness and afflictions of life.” (Page 139.) Certainly, with regard both to the one and the other. For though, in the first and second verses, he mentions the shortness and troubles of life, yet even these are mentioned with a manifest regard to sin. This appears from the very next verse: (Page 140:) “And dost thou open thy eyes upon such a one;” to punish one already so wretched? “And bringest me into judgment with thee;” by chastising me still more? It then immediately follows, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” It does therefore by no means appear, that “Job is here speaking only with regard to the shortness and troubles of life.” Part of the following verses too run thus: “Now thou numberest my steps: Dost thou not watch over my sin?

“However, this text gives no intimation that Adam’s posterity lost communion with God for his sin.” It shows that Adam did so; and all his posterity has done the same. Whence is this, unless from his sin P “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden, Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” (Gen. iii. 24.) Although God is equally present in every place, yet this was a clear token that man had not now that near communion with him which he had enjoyed before his sin. 18. Proposition. “The fall brought upon mankind God’s displeasure and curse, so as we are “by nature the children of wrath.” “The text on which this is grounded, (Eph. ii. 2, 3,) we have considered before.” (Page 150.) And those considera tions have been answered at large. You add: “How mankind could be justly brought under God’s displeasure for Adam’s sin, we cannot understand: On the contrary, we do understand, it is unjust. And therefore, unless our understanding or perception of truth be false, it must be unjust. But understanding must be the same in all beings, as far as they do understand. Therefore, if we understand that it is unjust, God understands it to be so too.” (Page 151.) Plausible enough. But let us take the argument in pieces: “How mankind could be justly brought under God’s displea sure for Adam’s sin, we cannot understand.” I allow it. Icannot understand, that is, clearly or fully comprehend, the deep of the divine judgment therein; no more than I can, how “the whole” brute “creation,” through his sin, should have been “made subject to vanity,” and should “groan together,” in weakness, in various pain, in death, “until this day.” “On the con trary, we do understand, it is unjust.” I do not understand it is. It is quite beyond my understanding. It is a depth which I cannot fathom. “Therefore, unless our understanding or perception of truth be false, it must be unjust.” Here lies the deceit. You shift the terms, and place as equivalent those which are not equivalent. Our perception of truth cannot be false; our understanding or apprehension of things may.

Our perception of truth cannot be false; our understanding or apprehension of things may. “But understanding must be the same in all beings.” Yes, in the former sense of the word, but not the latter. “There fore, if we understand (apprehend) it is unjust, God under stands it so too.” Nay, verily: “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are his thoughts higher than our thoughts.” “What a God must he be, who can curse his innocent creatures before they have a being ! Is this thy God, O Christian?” Bold enough ! So Lord B , “Is Moses's God your God?” He is mine, although he said, “Cursed be Canaan,” including his posterity before they had a being; and although he now permits millions to come into a world which everywhere bears the marks of his displeasure. And he permits human souls to exist in bodies which are (how we know not, but the fact we know) “conceived and born in sin; ” by reason whereof, all men coming into the world are “children of wrath.” But he has provided a Saviour for them all; and this fully acquits both his justice and mercy. 19. “So as we are by nature bond-slaves to Satan: “And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive at his will. (2 Tim. ii. 26.)” (Page 152.) But you say, “The Apostle speaks this of the unconverted Gentiles, who were slaves to Satan, not through Adam, but through their own fault.” Both one and the other. But how does it appear, that he speaks this of the Gentiles only? Without offering at any proof of this, you go on : “The clause, ‘Taken captive by him, is spoken, not of the devil, but of ‘the servant of the Lord; for thus the place should be rendered: ‘That they may awake out of the snare of the devil, being revived by him,” that is, the servant of the Lord, ‘to his, that is, God’s, “will.’” (Page 153.) Well, the proof. “The word £oypeo signifies, to revive; and so here, to restore men to life and salvation.” As a proof of this sense of the word, you cite Luke v. 10. But this rather proves the contrary; for there it has nothing to do with reviving.

Our apprehension is indis tinct, our judgment false, our reasoning wrong in a thousand instances. So it always was; and so it is still, after all the care we can possibly take: Therefore, “our faculties are not a sound and fit for right action as Adam’s were before he sinned.’ “But any man of common understanding might havedressed and kept the garden as well as he.” I can neither affirm no deny this; for we know not how he dressed and kept it. “Nor doth it appear, that in giving names to all the crea. tures, he showed any extraordinary penetration into thei natures; for that the names he gave truly expressed the several qualities of them is a mere fiction, without any foun. dation in Scripture history, or the names of animals in the original Hebrew.” (Page 171.) This is really strange that any man of learning should be so hardy as to affirm this, after the numberless instances which have been produced of Hebrew names expressing the most essential property of each animal. And is this supposition likewise “without any foundation in Scripture history?” What is that? “And the Lord God brought every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, unto Adam, to see what he would call them;” to make proof of his understanding. “And whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.” (Gen. ii. 19.) Now, whether those names were Hebrew or no, (which you affect to doubt,) can it be supposed that God would have permitted them to stand, if they had not suited the nature of each creature? It is bold therefore to affirm, that “many of his posterity could have given names to them as well as he ; and that therefore this is not a proof that he had any capacity superior to us.” (Page 172.) You proceed: “Surely his eating the forbidden fruit is no evidence of superior abilities.” (Page 173.) And it is no evidence of the contrary; “seeing,” as you yourself observe, “what his special temptation was, we do not know.” There fore, neither do we know whether any of his posterity could have overcome it; much less, that “many of his posterity have over.

After repeating the intermediate verses, you yourself add, “He subjoins a reason, which demonstrates the error of trust ing in man: ‘The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?’ (Verse 9.) This text, therefore, does not mean, Who can know his own heart, but another's?” Whether it means one or both, it positively asserts, that “the heart” of man, of men in general, of every man, is “desperately wicked.” Therefore, as to the main point contained therein, “Christians do not understand it wrong; ” (page 224;) neither misapply it at all. When I say, “I feel I have a ‘wicked heart,’” (another thing which you do not understand,) “I mean this: I feel much pride remaining in my heart, much self-will, much un belief.” (Page 225.) Now, I really believe pride, and self will, and unbelief to be essentially wicked tempers. There fore, in whatever heart they remain, (and they remain in yours as well as mine,) that is a “wicked heart.” After a long. pause, you return to the seventh of the Romans, and affirm: “We cannot, from anything in that chapter, infer, that we came into the world with sinful dispo sitions derived from Adam; for the Apostle says nothing about Adam.” (Page 229.) He had said enough in the fifth chapter of the cause: Here he only describes the effect; the state of those who are now “brought to the birth; ” but “there is not ” yet “strength to bring forth.” “Nor can we infer from hence, that any man sins through a principle which it was never in his power to command; for then it would be no sin.” Upon this I would only ask, Are you assured that no man transgresses God’s law (whether you will call it sin or not) through a principle which it was never in his power to command; at least, not for any time to gether? Every passionate man can confute you in this. He has sad experience of the contrary. To those objections which you have, in some sort, answered, you subjoin the following questions:-- “1. Is not the doctrine of original sin necessary to account for the being of so much wickedness in the world?” You answer, “Adam’s nature, it is allowed, was not sinful; and yet he sinned.

“By nature” all are “children of wrath, without hope, without God in the world.” 10. Doth that man write the sincere sense of his own mind and conscience, who charges the expression, “Adam was on trial for us all,” with this inference, “That we are none of us in a state of trial now, but Adam alone was upon trial for us all ?” We have owned and granted, that men are now in a state of trial; but this is upon the foot of a new covenant. You answer, “What can be more evident, than that, accord ing to this scheme, Adam alone was to be upon trial for us all, and that none of Adam’s posterity are upon personal trial?” (Page 209.) Do you not see the ambiguity in the word alone? Or do you see and dissemble it? Dr. Watts sup poses, that Adam alone, that is, this single person, was on trial for all men. Does it follow from hence, that Adam alone, that is, no other person, was ever in a state of trial? Again: If no person but Adam was upon trial for all men, will it follow, “No person but Adam was upon trial at all?” It is really hard to think, that you here “speak the sincere sense of your own mind and conscience.” You go on: “He supposes all mankind are still under the original covenant with Adam, according to which he alone was upon trial for us all, and none of his posterity are upon per sonal trial.” He does not suppose any man to be so under that covenant, as to supersede his being upon personal trial. Yourself add: “I knew he owned we are upon personal trial, and that all mankind are now under the covenant of grace; but how can either of these consist with the scheme?” Both of them consist with it perfectly well. (1) Adam alone, or single, was, in some sense, on trial for all mankind, according to the tenor of the oid covenant, “Do this and live.” (2.) Adam fell, and hereby the sentence of death came on him and all his posterity. (3.) The new covenant was given, whereby all mankind were put into a state of personal trial; yet, still, (4.) Death, the penalty of the old covenant, came (more or less) on all mankind.

But still the creature which was designed to bear the nearest likeness of his Maker in this lower world must have powers perfectly sufficient for his present well being and acting in that station wherein God had placed him. All his senses must be clear and strong, his limbs vigorous and active, his body healthy in all the inward and outward parts of it, and every natural power in its proper order.” (Page 3.) “For God would surely form such a creature in a state of perfect ease, without any original malady of nature, to give him pain or sorrow. Nor could there be any ten dency in his body to pain or disease while he remained with out sin.” (Page 4.) “And as the powers of his body must be thus perfect, so the faculties of his soul must have their perfection too. “His understanding must have that knowledge both of God and his creatures, which was needful for his happiness. Not that he was formed with all knowledge in arts and sciences, but such as was requisite to his peace and welfare. His reason must be clear, his judgment uncorrupted, and his conscience upright and sensible. “This leads me to speak of his moral perfection. A rational creature thus made must not only be innocent, as a tree, but must be formed holy. His will must have an inward bias to virtue; he must have an inclination to please that God who made him, a supreme love to his Creator, a zeal to serve him, and a tender fear of offending him.” (Page 5.) “For either the new-created man loved God supremely, or not; if he did not, he was not innocent, since the law of nature requires a supreme love to God; if he did, he stood ready for every act of obedience: And this is true holiness of heart. And, indeed, without this, how could a God of holiness love the work of his own hands? “There must be also in this creature a regular objection of the inferior powers to the superior. Sense, and appetite, and passion, must be subject to reason. The mind must have a power to govern these lower faculties, that he might not offend against the law of his creation.

It is absurd to imagine this of a God so wise, so righteous, and so merciful!” (Page20.) “2. Let us take a survey of the vegetables which grow out of the earth, with the brute animals which are found on the surface of it; and we shall find more reasons to conclude that man, the chief inhabitant, is not such as he came first out of his Maker's hand. “It must be granted here again, that the wisdom and good ness of the Creator are amazingly displayed in the animal and the vegetable world, beyond the utmost reach of our thoughts or praises. But still we may have leave to inquire, whether, if man had continued innocent, among the numerous herbs and flowers fitted for his support and delight, any plants or fruits of a malignant, mortal nature would have grown out of the earth, without some plain mark or caution set upon them.” (Page 21.) “Can we suppose that among the roots, herbs, and trees, good for food, the great God would have suffered mischief, malady, and deadly poison, to spring up here and there, without any sufficient distinction, that man might know how to avoid them? This is the case in our present world; disease, anguish, and death, have entered into the bowels and veins of multitudes by an innocent and fatal mistake of these pernicious things for proper food. “There was indeed ‘the tree of knowledge’ in Paradise; but man was expressly cautioned against it. And certainly had he continued holy, no poisonous plant would have been suffered to grow on the earth, without either some natural mark set upon it, or some divine caution to avoid it. (Page 22.) “Proceed to the animal world: There are many creatures, indeed, which serve the use or pleasure of man. But are there not many other sorts which he is neither able to govern nor to resist; and by which all his race are exposed, whenever they meet them, to wounds, and anguish, and death?” (Page 23.) “If man had not sinned, would there have been in the world any such creatures as bears and tigers, wolves and lions, animated with such fierceness and rage, and armed with such destructive teeth and talons? Would the innocent children of men have ever been formed to be the living prey of these devourers?

And not only they of riper age, but even those of ten der years, discover the principles of iniquity and seeds of sin. What young ferments of spite and envy, what native wrath and rage, are found in the little hearts of infants, and sufficiently discovered by their hands, and eyes, and countenances, before they can speak, or know good from evil ! What additional crimes of lying and deceit, obstinacy and perverseness proceed to blemish their younger years!” (Pages 39, 41.) “How little knowledge or thought of God, their Creator and Governor, is found in children when they can distinguish good and evil!” (Page 42.) “What an utter disregard of Him that made them, and of the duties they owe to him And when they * These quotations from Juvenal are thus translated by Gifford : “What day so sacred, which no guilt profanes?” ------“Nature still, Incapable of change, and fix’d in ill, Recurs to her old habits:-never yet Could sinner to his sin a period set. When did the flush of modest blood inflame The cheek once harden'd to the sense of shame? Or when the offender, since the birth of time, Retire, contented with a single crime?” “For youth is facile, and its yielding will Receives, with fatal ease, the print of ill.”-EDIT. begin to act according to their childish age, how little sense have they of what is morally right and good How do evil passions or irregular appetites continually prevail in them ! Even from their first capacity of acting as moral creatures, how are they led away to practise falsehood and injury to their play-fellows, perhaps with cruelty or revenge How often are they engaged in bold disobedience to their parents or teachers | And whence does this arise ? What is the root, that brings forth such early bitter fruit?” (Page 43.) “It cannot be imputed to custom, education, or example; for many of these things appear in children before they can take any notice of ill examples, or are capable of imitating them. And even where there are only good examples about them, and where the best and earliest instructions are given them, and inculcated with the utmost care, yet their hearts run astray from God.

Add to this the common calamities in which infants are involved by fire, earthquake, pestilence. And there are a thousand other acci dents which attend them, whereby their members, their natural powers, receive dismal injuries; so that, perhaps, they drag on life with blindness, deafness, lameness, or distortion of body or limbs. Sometimes they languish on to manhood, or even old age, under sore calamities, which began almost as soon as their being, and which are only ended by death.” (Page 68.) “Now, as these sufferings cannot be sent upon them to cor rect their personal sins, so neither are they sent as a trial of their virtue; for they have no knowledge of good or evil. Yet we see multitudes of these little, miserable beings. And are these treated as innocent creatures; or rather, as under some gene ral curse, involved in some general punishment?” (Page 69.) “‘But may not these sufferings of children be for the punishment of the sins of their parents?” “Not with any justice or equity, unless the sins of the parents are imputed to their children. Besides, many of the parents of these suffering children are dead or absent, so as never to know it. And how in these cases can it be a punishment for their parents’ sin, any otherwise than as it is a general punish ment for the sin of their first parent?” (Page 71.) “But God recompenses them for these sufferings hereafter.’ Where does the Scripture affirm this? Besides, many of them grow up to manhood. And if they prove wicked, and are sent to hell at last, what recompence have they for their infant suffer ings? Or will you say, God punished them before they had sinned, because he knew beforehand they would sin? Yet far ther: What wise or good design can this their punishment answer, when no creature can know what they are punished for, if it be not for that which affects all mankind? “‘But how are such miseries reigning among his creatures consistent with the goodness of God?” Perfectly well, if we consider mankind as a sinful, degenerate part of God’s creation. It is most abundant goodness that they have any comforts left, and that their miseries are not doubled.

It is the pain of hunger which makes food so relishing; the pain of weariness that renders sleep so refreshing. And as for the blessings of love and friendship, among neighbours and kindred, do they not often produce as much vexationassatisfaction; not, indeed, of themselves, but by reason of the endless humours and follies, errors and passions, of mankind?” (Page 373.) “Again: Do not the very pleasures of the body prove the ruin of ten thousand souls? They may be used with innocence and wisdom; but the unruly appetites and passions of men continually turn into a curse what God originally designed for a blessing.” (Page 374.) “Think again how short and transient are the pleasures of life in comparison of the pains of it! How vanishing the sweetest sensations of delight! But, in many persons and families, how many are the days, the months, the years, of fatigue, or pain, or bitter sorrow ! What pleasure of the animal frame is either as lasting, or as intense, as the pain of the gout or stone? How small is the proportion of sensible pleasure to that of pain, or trouble, or uneasiness! And how far is it over-balanced by the maladies or miseries, the fears or sorrows, of the greatest part of mankind | “As for intellectual pleasures, how few are there in the world who have any capacity for them ! and among those few, how many differences and contentions! How many crossing objections, bewildered inquiries, and unhappy mistakes, are mingled with the enjoyment so that ‘He who increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow,” saith the wisest of men; and upon the whole computation, he writes on this also, “Vanity and vexation of spirit.” “To talk, then, of real happiness to be enjoyed in this life, (abstracted from the foretaste of another,) is contrary to all the common sense and experience of everythinking man. Without this ‘taste of the powers of the world to come,” I know not what wise man would willingly come into these scenes of mortality, or go through them with any patience.” (Pages 376, 377.) “What, to be trained up from infancy under so many una voidable follies, prejudices, and wretched delusions, through the power of flesh and sense! to be sunk into such gross ignorance both of our souls, our better selves, and of the glorious Being that made us!

These are still ‘children of wrath: ’ But whatever difference there is between us and them, we were once what they are now. “(6.) He expressly says, “We were children of wrath even as others, by nature,” or, from our birth. He does not say, We became so by education, or by imitation, or by cus tom in sinning; but, to show us when it is that we commence sinners, by what means we become ‘children of wrath, whence it is that we are so prone to evil from our infancy and to imitate bad rather than good examples, he says, “We were children of wrath by nature; we were born fallen crea tures; we came into the world sinners, and, as such, liable to wrath, in consequence of the fall of our first father. “But, it is affirmed, (i.) That “by nature means, by habit or custom.’ I answer, Though the term, nature, with some qualifying expression annexed, is sometimes taken for in veterate custom, yet it is never so taken when put singly, without any such qualifying expression. When, therefore, the Apostle says absolutely, ‘We are children of wrath by nature, this, according to the constant sense of the words, must mean, We were so from our birth.” (Page 31.) “It is affirmed, (ii.) That “because the original words stand thus, tekwa buoet opyms, children by nature of wrath; there fore, children by nature means only truly and really children of wrath. I answer, The consequence is good for nothing: For let the words stand as they will, it is evident that recwa. $vae are, children by birth ; or, such as are born so, in dis tinction from those who became such afterward. “It is affirmed, (iii.) ‘That buoet, by nature, signifies no more than truly or really.” I answer, First, It is not allowed, that any good Greek writers ever use the word in this sense. Secondly, Whatever others do, the writers of the New Testa ment always use it in another sense. So Galatians ii. 15: “We who are Jews by nature,’ buoet Iovôatou that is, We who are born Jews, in contradistinction to proselytes. ‘Ye did service to them which by nature are no gods; ” (Gal. iv.8;) um bvaret ovat Seous, persons or things which are partakers of no divine nature.

A denial of original sin contradicts the main design of the gospel, which is to humble vain man, and to ascribe to God’s free grace, not man’s free will, the whole of his salvation. Nor, indeed, can we let this doctrine go with out giving up, at the same time, the greatest part, if not all, of the essential articles of the Christian faith. If we give up this, we cannot defend either justification by the merits of Christ, or the renewal of our natures by his Spirit. Dr. Taylor’s book is not, therefore, subversive of a particular branch, but of the whole scheme, of Christianity. “WI. The doctrine, therefore, of original sin is not only a truth agreeable to Scripture and reason, but a truth of the utmost importance. And it is a truth to which the Churches of Christ, from the beginning, have borne a clear testimony. “Few truths, if any, are more necessary to be known, be lieved, and thoroughly considered. For if we are not ac quainted with this, we do not know ourselves; and if we do not know ourselves, we cannot rightly know Christ and the grace of God. And on this knowledge of Christ and the grace of God depends the whole of our salvation. St. Augustine, therefore, well remarks, ‘Christianity lies properly in the knowledge of what concerns, Adam and Christ. For, certainly, if we do not know Christ, we know nothing to any purpose; and we cannot know Christ, without some knowledge of what relates to Adam, who was ‘the figure of Him that was to come.’ “‘But if this doctrine is so important, why is so little said of it in Scripture, and in the writings of the ancients?” “This is a grand mistake. We totally deny that the Scrip ture says little of it. Dr. Taylor, indeed, affirms, ‘There are but five passages of Scripture that plainly relate to the effects of Adam’s fall.” Not so: Many Scriptures, as has been shown, plainly and directly teach us this doctrine; and many others deliver that from which it may be rationally and easily de duced. Indeed, the whole doctrine of salvation by Christ, and divine grace, implies this; and each of its main branches --justification and regeneration--directly leads to it.

But who can take the exact dimensions of it, in its breadth, length, height, and depth? ‘The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: Who can know it?” However, we may quickly perceive so much of it as may show the absolute necessity of regeneration. Man, in his natural state, is altogether corrupt, through all the faculties of his soul: Corrupt in his understanding, his will, his affections, his conscience, and his memory. “1. The understanding is despoiled of its primitive glory, and covered over with confusion. We are fallen into the hands of our grand adversary, and are deprived of our two eyes. ‘There is none that understandeth;’ the very mind and conscience of the natural man are defiled or spoiled. But to point out this corruption of the understanding more parti cularly, let the following things be considered:-- “First. There is a natural weakness in the minds of men, with respect to spiritual things. How hard is it to teach them the common principles of religion; to make truths so plain, that they may understand them I Try the same persons in other things, speak of the things of this world, and they will under stand quickly; but it is hard to make them know how their souls may be saved, or how their hearts may find rest in Christ. Consider even those who have many advantages above the common run of mankind: Yet how small is their knowledge of divine things! What confusion still remains in their minds! How often are they mired, and ‘speak as a child, even in the matter of practical truths ! It is a pitiable weakness, that we cannot perceive the things which God has revealed. And it must needs be a sinful weakness, since the law of God requires us to know and believe them. “Secondly. Man's understanding is naturally overwhelmed with gross “darkness’ in spiritual things. Man, at the instiga tion of the devil, attempting to break out a new light in his mind, instead of that, broke up the doors of the bottomless pit, by the smoke whereof he was covered with darkness. When God at first made man, his mind was a lamp of light; but sin has now turned it into darkness. Sin has closed the window of the soul.

is no salvation without regeneration? and no regeneration, but what makes man ‘a new creature?’ O no! If ye did, ye could not live in your sins, live out of Christ, and yet hope for mercy. “Fifthly. Man is naturally high-minded. Lowliness is not a flower which grows in the field of nature. It is natural to man to think highly of himself and what is his own. ‘Vain man would be wise;” so he accounts himself, and so he would be accounted by others. His way is right, because it is ‘his own;’ ‘for every way of man is right in his own eyes. He is ‘alive without the law;’ and therefore his hope is strong, and his confidence firm. It is another tower of Babel; the word batters it, yet it stands. One while breaches are made in it, but they are quickly repaired. At another time, it is all made to shake; but it is still kept up; till God's Spirit raise an heartquake within the man, which tumbles it down, and leaves not one stone upon another. “Thus much of the corruption of the understanding. Call the understanding, “Ichabod; for the glory is departed from it.” Consider this, ye that are yet in the state of nature, and groan ye out your case before the Lord, that the Sun of Righteous ness may arise upon you, before ye be shut up in everlasting darkness. What avails your worldly wisdom? What do all your attainments in religion avail, while your understanding lies wrapped up in darkness and confusion, utterly void of the light of life? “2. Nor is the will less corrupted than the understanding. It was at first faithful, and ruled with God; but now it is turned traitor against God, and rules with and for the devil. To open this plague of the heart, let the following thingsbe considered:- “First. There is in the unrenewed will an utter inability for what is truly good in the sight of God. Indeed a natural man has a power to choose and do what is materially good; but though he can will what is good and right, he can do nothing aright and well. “Without me,’ that is, separate from me, ‘ye can do nothing; nothing truly and spiritually good.

Are they not ‘as bullocks unaccus tomed to the yoke ’’ Yea, it is far easier to tame young bullocks to the yoke, than to bring young children under dis cipline. Every man may see in this, as in a glass, that man is naturally wild and wilful; that, according to Zophar’s observ ation, he ‘is born a wild ass’s colt. What can be said more? He is like a ‘colt, the colt of an “ass, the colt of a ‘wild ass; a wild ass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure; in her occasion who can turn her away?’ “2. What pain and difficulty do men find in bringing their hearts to religious duties ! And what a task is it to the natural man to abide at them to leave the world but a little, and converse with God! When they are engaged in worldly business or company, time seems to fly, and is gone before they are aware. But how heavily does it drive, while a prayer, a sermon, or a Sabbath lasts | With many the Lord’s day is the longest day in the week; and therefore they must sleep longer that morning, and go sooner to bed that night, than ordinarily they do, that the day may be of a tolerable length. And still their hearts say, ‘When will the Sabbath be gone?” “3. Consider how the will of the natural man “rebels against the light. Sometimes he is not able to keep it out; but he “loves darkness rather than light. The outer door of the understanding is broken open, but the inner door of the will remains shut. Corruption and conscience then encounter; till conscience is forced to give back; convictions are murdered, and truth is made and “held prisoner “in righteousness.” “4. When the Spirit of the Lord is working a deeper work, yet what “resistance’ does the soul make | When he connes, he finds the ‘strong man keeping the house, while the soul is fast asleep in the devil’s arms, till the Lord awakens in the sinner, opens his eyes, and strikes him with terror, while the clouds are black above his head, and the sword of vengeance is held to his breast. But what pains is he at to put a fair face on a black heart!

Has he told us, or can he tell us, any thing more? No, nor all the angels in heaven. We knew before that the foundation and the superstruc ture of religion are comprised in those words, “We love him because he first loved us.” Does he teach us anything higher or deeper? In a word, does he teach any single point, either of inward or outward holiness, which we did not know before ? If he does, what is it? I cannot find out one in all his writings. 3. But if his matter is not new, if this is nothing uncom mon, his manner of speaking is new indeed ! His language is utterly new ; it was never used since the world began. And this is the very reason for which he is so admired,-- because he speaks (which cannot be denied) as never man spake. Indeed, I hardly know for which he is most admired,--the novelty, or the obscurity, of his language. But I cannot admire it at all; because it is quite unscrip tural. There is no trace of it to be found in any part either of the Old or New Testament. Therefore, I cannot recon cile it to that express command, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.” I cannot admire it, because, Secondly, it is barbarous in the highest degree : Whatever is peculiar in his phraseology, is not authorized by any good writer whatever. It is queer ness itself. It is mere dog-Latin. It is an insult upon the ear and the understanding of all mankind. One allows, “None can understand it without much pains; perhaps not without reading him thrice over.” I would not read him thrice over on any consideration. (1.) Because it would be enough to crack any man's brain to brood so long over such unintelligible nonsense; and, (2.) Because such a waste of time might provoke God to give me up to a strong delusion, to believe a lie. But I doubt whether any man understands it at all: For it is so dark and indeterminate, that I have not found any two persons in England who understand it alike. I thought, if any man living understood Behmen, Mr. Law did. “No,” says one who has been studying him these forty years, “Mr. Law never understood a page of him.” 4.

“62. Un: With this syllable the soul goes into the internal wisdom, wherein, before the creation in the seed, it was discerned in the eternal will. Ser: With this syllable it takes the original of nature in the will, where one form in the original penetrates, fills, and preserves the other. And that is the bond of the soul, whereby it eternally subsists. And that the will of the soul desires; else it would be dissolved. “63. This is the true “doctorship of the Holy Ghost.” The outward is but foppery. “64. Tag : With this syllable the heavenly number is understood, as wherein the spirit on the cross in the holy matrix comprehends the genitive in the multiplication. Lich : In this syllable the soul quickens and strengthens itself with the heavenly number, which springs up out of the Divine Majesty infinitely; and herein the soul is acknow ledged for an angel.” Whoever desires it, may read the rest of this explanation at his leisure. I will only add the conclusion of it:-- “Amen : “95. A is the first letter, and presses forth out of the heart, and has no nature; but we clearly understand herein, the seeking, longing, or attracting of the eternal will, with out nature, wherein nature is generated, which has been from eternity. “96. Now, as the A is generated out of the heart, that is, out of the eternal will, so out of A afterwards comes the whole alphabet with four-and-twenty numbers; for the A begins to number, and comprises the whole number in the syllable men.” (Behmen's Works, Vol. II., p. 165, &c.) Now, here I fix my foot. Upon this ground I join issue with every admirer of Jacob Behmen in England. I appeal to every candid man, every man of piety and common sense, whether this explanation deserves those violent encomiums contained in the Advertisement. I ask any person of understanding, First, whether any man in his senses, from the beginning of the world, ever thought of explaining any treatise, divine or human, syllable by syllable. Did a more absurd imagination ever enter into a madman's brain? Is it possible by this means to make sense of any text from Genesis to the Revelation? Must there not be a very high degree of lunacy before any such design could be formed ?

1. You begin your preface by observing, that the “Inquiry” was intended to have been published some time ago; but, upon reflection, you resolved to “give out, first, some sketch of what you was projecting;” (page l;) and accordingly “published the ‘Introductory Discourse,’” by itself, though “foreseeing it would encounter all the opposition that prejudice, bigotry, and superstition are ever prepared to give to all inquiries” of this nature. (Page 2.) But it was your “comfort, that this would excite candid inquirers to weigh the merit and conse quences of it.” (Page 3.) 2. The consequences of it are tolerably plain, even to free the good people of England from all that prejudice, bigotry, and superstition, vulgarly called Christianity. But it is not so plain, that “this is the sole expedient which can secure the Protestant religion against the efforts of Rome.” (Ibid.) It may be doubted, whether Deism is the sole expedient to secure us against Popery. For some are of opinion, there are persons in the world who are neither Deists nor Papists. 3. You open the cause artfully enough, by a quotation from Mr. Locke. (Page 4.) But we are agreed to build our faith on no man’s authority. His reasons will be considered in their place. “Those who have written against his and your opinion,” you say, “have shown great eagerness, but little knowledge of the question: Urged by the hopes of honours, and prepared to fight for every establishment that offers such pay to its defenders.” (Page 5.) I have not read one of these; yet I would fain believe, that neither the hope of honour, nor the desire of pay, was the sole, or indeed the main, motive that urged either them or you to engage in writing. But I grant they are overseen, if they argue against you by citing “the testimonies of the ancient Fathers;” (page 6;) seeing they might easily perceive you pay no more regard to these than to the Evangelists or Apostles. Neither do I commend them if they “insinuate jealousies of consequences dangerous to Christianity.” (Ibid.) Why they should insinuate these, I cannot conceive: I need not insinuate that the sun shines at noon-day. You have “opened too great a glare to the public,” (page 7) to leave them any room for such insinu ation.

Thus, Justin himself was imposed upon by those of Alexandria, who showed him some old ruins under the name of cells. And so he was by those who told him, there was a statue at Rome, inscribed, Simoni Deo Sancto; whereas it was really inscribed, Semoni Sanco Deo; to an old deity of the Sabines. Now,” say you, “if he was deceived in such obvious facts, how much more easily would he be deceived by subtle and crafty impostors!” (Pages 40, 41.) Far less easily. A man of good judgment may be deceived in the inscriptions of statues, and points of ancient history. But, if he has only eyes and ears, and a small degree of common sense, he cannot be deceived in facts where he is both an eye and ear witness. 10. For a parting blow, you endeavour to prove, Sixthly, that Justin was a knave, as well as a fool. To this end you remark, that “he charges the Jews with erasing three passages out of the Greek Bible; one whereof stands there still, and the other two were not expunged by some Jew, but added by some Christian. Nay, that able critic and Divine, John Croius,” (you know when to bestow honourable appel lations,) “says Justin forged and published this passage for the confirmation of the Christian doctrine, as well as the greatest part of the Sibylline oracles, and the sentences of Mercurius.” (Page 42.) With far greater probability than John Croius asserts that Justin forged these passages, a man of candour would hope that he read them in his copy (though incorrect) of the Greek Bible. And till you disprove this, or prove the assertion of Croius, you are got not a jot farther still. But, notwith standing you have taken true pains to blacken him, both with regard to his morals and understanding, he may still be an honest man, and an unexceptionable witness, as to plain facts done before his face. 11. You fall upon Irenaeus next, and carefully enumerate all the mistakes in his writings. As, First, that he held the doctrine of the millennium, and related a weak fancy of Tapias concerning it. Secondly: That he believed our Saviour to have lived fifty years. Thirdly: That he believed Enoch and Elias were translated, and St. Paul caught up to that very paradise from which Adam was expelled.

But hold. You are going to prove it too: “For,” say you, “should the like case happen now, that any Methodist, Moravian, or French prophet,” (right skilfully put together,) “should publish an apology for his brethren, addressed to the King and Parliament; is it not wholly improbable, that the Government would pay any regard to it?” You should add, (to make the parallel complete,) “ or know that any such was addressed to them.” No: I conceive the improbability supposed lies wholly on the other side. Whatever the Government of heathen Rome was, (which I presume you will not depreciate,) the Govern ment of England is remarkable for tenderness to the very meanest subject. It is therefore not improbable in the least, that an address from some thousands of those subjects, how contemptible soever they were generally esteemed, would not be totally disregarded by such a Government. But that they should “not know that any such had been addressed to them,” is not only improbable, but morally impossible. If therefore it were possible for the Heathens to “have a worse opinion of the ancient Christians than we,” you say, “have of our modern fanatics,” still it is utterly incredible that the Roman Government should, not only “take no notice of their apologies,” but “not even know that any such were addressed to them.” 4. “But the publishing books was more expensive then than it is now; and therefore we cannot think the Christians of those days were able to provide such a number of them as was sufficient for the information of the public.” (Pages 198, 199.) Nay, if they were not able to provide themselves food and raiment, they would be sure to provide a sufficient number of these; sufficient, at least, for the information of the Emperor and Senate, to whom those apologies were addressed. And how great a number, do you suppose, might suffice for them? How many hundred or thousand copies? I apprehend the Emperor would be content with one; and one more would be needful for the Senate. Now, I really believe the Christians of those days were able to provide both these copies; nay, and even two more; if it should have fallen out, that two or three Emperors were on the throne; even though we should suppose that in Tertullian’s time there were but forty thousand of them in all Rome. 5.

That these have feeling, as well as other men, plainly appeared, in the case of Bishop Ridley, crying out, “I cannot burn, I cannot burn l” when his lower parts were consumed. Do you think the fear of shame, or the desire of praise, was the motive on which these acted? Or have you reason to believe it was mere obstinacy that hindered them from accepting deliverance? Sir, since “human nature has always been the same, so that our experience of what now passes in our own soul will be the best comment on what is delivered to us concerning others,” let me entreat you to make the case your own. You must not say, “I am not one of the ignorant vulgar: I am a man of sense and learning.” So were many of them; not inferior even to you, either in natural or acquired endowments. I ask, then, Would any of these motives suffice to induce you to burn at a stake? I beseech you, lay your hand on your heart, and answer between God and your own soul, what motive could incite you to walk into a fire, but an hope full of immortality. When you mention this motive, you speak to the point. And yet even with regard to this, both you and I should find, did it come to a trial, that the hope of a fool, or the hope of an hypocrite, would stand us in no stead. We should find, nothing else would sustain usin that hour, but a well-grounded confidence of a better resurrection; nothing less than the “steadfastly looking up to heaven, and beholding the glory which shall be revealed.” 8. “But heretics,” you say, “have been Martyrs.” I will answer more particularly, when you specify who and when. It may suffice to say now, whosoever he be, that, rather than he will offend God, calmly and deliberately chooses to suffer death, I cannot lightly speak evil of him. But Cyprian says, “Some who had suffered tortures for Christ, yet afterwards fell into gross, open sin.” It may be so; but it is nothing to the question. It does not prove, in the least, what you brought it to prove; namely, “that bad men have endured martyrdom.” Do not evade, Sir, and say, “Yes, torments are a kind of martyrdom.” True; but not the martyrdom of which we speak. 9.

Sir, this is not the cant of zealots: You must not escape so: It is plain, sober reason. If the credibility of witnesses, of all witnesses, (for you make na distinction,) depends, as you peremptorily affirm, on a variety of principles wholly concealed from us, and, consequently, though it may be presumed in many cases, yet can be certainly known in none; then it is plain, all history, sacred or profane, is utterly precarious and uncertain. Then I may indeed presume, but I cannot certainly know, that Julius Caesar was killed in the Senate-house; then I cannot certainly know that there was an Emperor in Germany, called Charles the Fifth; that Leo the Tenth ever sat in the See of Rome, or Lewis the Fourteenth on the throne of France. Now, let any man of common understanding judge, whether this objection has any sense in it, or no. 12. Under this same head, you fall again upon the case of witchcraft, and say, “There is not in all history any one mira culous fact so authentically attested as the existence of witches. All Christian ” (yea, and all heathen) “nations whatsoever have consented in the belief of them. Now, to deny the reality of facts so solemnly attested, and so universally believed, seems to give the lie to the sense and experience of all Christendom; to the wisest and best of every nation, and to public monu ments subsisting to our own times.” (Page 221.) What obliges you, then, to deny it? You answer: “The incredibility of the thing.” (Page 223.) O Sir, never strain at the incredibility of this, after you have swallowed an hundred people talking without tongues! 13. What you aim at in this also is plain, as well as in your account of the Abbé de Paris. The point of your argument is, “If you cannot believe these, then you ought not to believe the Bible: The incredibility of the things related ought to overrule all testimony whatsoever.” Your argument, at length, would run thus: “If things be incredible in themselves, then this incredibi lity ought to overrule all testimony concerning them. “But the gospel miracles are incredible in themselves.” Sir, that proposition I deny. You have not proved it yet. You have only now and then, as it were by the by, made any attempt to prove it.

with all his wisdom and philosophy, . What points of knowledge did he gain * That life is sacred all,--and vain : Sacred, how high, and vain, how low, [e could not tell; but died to know. 9. “He died to know !” and so must you, unless you are now a partaker of Christian faith. O consider this ! Nay, and consider, not only how little you know of the immensity of the things that are beyond sense and time, but how uncer tainly do you know even that little ! How faintly glimmering a light is that you have ! Can you properly be said to know any of these things? Is that knowledge any more than bare conjecture? And the reason is plain. You have no senses suitable to invisible or eternal objects. What desiderata then, especially to the rational, the reflecting, part of man kind are these? A more extensive knowledge of things invisible and eternal; a greater certainty in whatever know ledge of them we have; and, in order to both, faculties capable of discerning things invisible. 10. Is it not so? Let impartial reason speak. Does not every thinking man want a window, not so much in his neighbour's, as in his own, breast? He wants an opening there, of whatever kind, that might let in light from eternity. He is pained to be thus feeling after God so darkly, so uncertainly; to know so little of God, and indeed so little of any beside material objects. He is concerned, that he must see even that little, not directly, but in the dim, sullied glass * of sense; and consequently so imperfectly and obscurely, that it is all a mere enigma still. 11. Now, these very desiderata faith supplies. It gives a more extensive knowledge of things invisible, showing what eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither could it before enter into our heart to conceive. And all these it shows in the clear est light, with the fullest certainty and evidence. For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible.

For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible. O who would not wish for such a faith, were it only on these accounts How much more, if by this I may receive the promise, I may attain all that holiness and happiness ! 12. So Christianity tells me; and so I find it, may every real Christian say. I now am assured that these things are so: I experience them in my own breast. What Christianity (considered as a doctrine) promised, is accomplished in my soul. And Christianity, considered as an inward principle, is the completion of all those promises. It is holiness and hap piness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit; a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life. Section III. 1. And this I conceive to be the strongest evidence of the truth of Christianity. I do not undervalue traditional evidence. Let it have its place and its due honour. It is highly serviceable in its kind, and in its degree. And yet I cannot set it on a level with this. It is generally supposed, that traditional evidence is weak ened by length of time; as it must necessarily pass through so many hands, in a continued succession of ages. But no length of time can possibly affect the strength of this internal evidence. It is equally strong, equally new, through the course of seventeen hundred years. It passes now, even as it has done from the beginning, directly from God into the believing soul. Do you suppose time will ever, dry up this stream ? O no ! It shall never be cut off: Labitur et labetur in omne volubilis avum.* 2. Traditional evidence is of an extremely complicated nature, necessarily including so many and so various consi derations, that only men of a strong and clear understanding can be sensible of its full force. On the contrary, how plain * It flows on, and will for ever flow. and simple is this; and how level to the lowest capacity!

Reason, rally, laugh them out of their dead, empty forms, void of spirit, of faith, of love. Convince them, that such mean pageantry (for such it manifestly is, if there is nothing in the heart correspondent with the outward show) is absolutely unworthy, you need not say of God, but even of any man that is endued with common understanding. Show them, that while they are endeavouring to please God thus, they are only beating the air. Know your time; press on; push your victories, till you have conquered all that know not God. And then He, whom neither they nor you know now, shall rise and gird himself with strength, and go forth in his almighty love, and sweetly conquer you all together. 9. O that the time were come ! How do I long for you to be partakers of the exceeding great and precious promise ! How am I pained when I hear any of you using those silly terms, which the men of form have taught you, calling the mention of the only thing you want, cant 1 the deepest wisdom, the highest happiness, enthusiasm What ignorance is this ! How extremely despicable would it make you in the eyes of any but a Christian | But he cannot despise you, who loves you as his own soul, who is ready to lay down his life for your sake. 10. Perhaps you will say, “But this internal evidence of Christianity affects only those in whom the promise is fulfilled. It is no evidence to me.” There is truth in this objection. It does affect them chiefly, but it does not affect them only. It cannot, in the nature of things, be so strong an evidence to others as it is to them. And yet it may bring a degree of evidence, it may reflect some light on you also. For, First, you see the beauty and loveliness of Christianity, when it is rightly understood; and you are sure there is nothing to be desired in comparison of it. Secondly. You know the Scripture promises this, and says, it is attained by faith, and by no other way. Thirdly. You see clearly how desirable Christian faith is, even on account of its own intrinsic value. Fourthly. You are a witness, that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way.

You are a witness, that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way. The more you have laboured after virtue and happiness, the more convinced you are of this. Thus far then you need not lean upon other men; thus far you have personal experience. Fifthly. What reasonable assurance can you have of things whereof you have not personal experience? Suppose the question were, Can the blind be restored to sight? This you have not yourself experienced. How then will you know that such a thing ever was? Can there be an easier or surer way than to talk with one or some number of men who were blind, but are now restored to sight? They cannot be deceived as to the fact in question; the nature of the thing leaves no room for this. And if they are honest men, (which you may learn from other circumstances,) they will not deceive you. Now, transfer this to the case before us: And those who were blind, but now see, -those who were sick many years, but now are healed,--those who were miserable, but now are happy, -will afford you also a very strong evidence of the truth of Christianity; as strong as can be in the nature of things, till you experience it in your own soul: And this, though it be allowed they are but plain men, and, in general, of weak understanding; nay, though some of them should be mistaken in other points, and hold opinions which cannot be defended. 11. All this may be allowed concerning the primitive Fathers', I mean particularly Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian; to whom I would add Macarius and Ephraim Syrus. I allow that some of these had not strong natural sense, that few of them had much learning, and none the assistances which our age enjoys in some respects above all that went before. Hence I doubt not but whoever will be at the pains of reading over their writings for that poor end, will find many mistakes, many weak suppositions, and many ill-drawn conclusions. 12. And yet I exceedingly reverence them, as well as their writings, and esteem them very highly in love. I reverence them, because they were Christians, such Christians as are above described.

But this no Romanist can do, not only while he holds that “no faith is to be kept with heretics;” but so long as he acknowledges either priestly absolution, or the spiritual power of the Pope. “But the late Act,” you say, “does not either tolerate or encourage Roman Catholics.” I appeal to matter of fact. Do not the Romanists themselves understand it as a toleration? You know they do. And does it not already (let alone what it may do by and by) encourage them to preach openly, to build chapels, (at Bath and elsewhere,) to raise seminaries, and to make numerous converts day by day to their intolerant, persecuting principles? I can point out, if need be, several of the persons. And they are increasing daily. But “nothing dangerous to English liberty is to be appre hended from them.” I am not certain of that. Some time since, a Romish Priest came to one I knew, and, after talking with her largely, broke out, “You are no heretic; you have the experience of a real Christian l’” “And would you,” she asked, “burn me alive?” He said, “God forbid!--unless it were for the good of the Church !” Now, what security could she have had for her life, if it had depended on that man? The good of the Church would have burst all the ties of truth, justice, and mercy; especially when seconded by the absolution of a Priest, or (if need were) a Papal pardon. If any one please to answer this, and to set his name, I shall probably reply.--But the productions of anonymous writers, I do not promise to take any notice of. I am, Sir, Your humble servant, CITY-RoAD, JOHN WESLEY. January 21, 1780. To THE EDITORS OF THE FREEMAN's JOURNAL, SEv ERAL months since, Father O'Leary, a Capuchin Friar in Dublin, published Remarks upon this Letter in the Freeman's Journal. As soon as these were sent to me, I published a Reply in the same Paper. When I read more of his Remarks, printed in five succeeding Journals, I wrote a second Reply; but did not think it worth while to follow, step by step, so wild, rambling a writer. Mr. O'Leary has now'put his six Letters into one, which are reprinted in London, with this title, “Mr. O'Leary's remarks on the Rev. Mr.

Go on. Friend.--You said next, “Was this our faith, it would be requisite to seek after this sort of sanctification.” From your own words it appears, that this is your faith, if you have any true faith at all. See then that you “seek after this sort of sanctification,” viz., the love of God and of your neighbour. For if you can be at rest, though you feel nothing of it, it is plain your heart is not clean, but hardened. Ant.--You may say what you please. You know no better. Friend.--You went on: “On the contrary, we believe that the blood shed upon the cross has put away and blotted out all our sins.” Why, who believes otherwise? If you mean only, that Christ then put away the punishment of all our sins, who believe in him; what a marvellous discovery is this ! I pray, whom doth this arguing reprove? Ant.--It reproves you, who deny that “an everlasting righteousness was then brought in.” Friend.--I do not deny it: No more than you understand it. But I ask, in what sense was it “brought in ?” What was it brought into? Was it then first brought into the world? You cannot say this, without saying that all who went out of the world before that hour were lost. Or was it brought into the souls of believers? Then believers have an inward or inherent righteousness. You had better, therefore, let this text alone. It will do no service at all to your cause. Ant.--I see plain you are as blind as a beetle still. I am afraid your head-knowledge will destroy you. Did not I tell you, “Our hearts and consciences are made perfectly clean by our believing; and that in this consists true purity of soul, and not in habitual qualities? Thus we are made per fectly holy.” And though “the vile, sinful body continually disposes the mind to evil,” yet “the blood of Christ makes us free from sin, and, as it were, destroys the connexion.” Friend.--Destroys the connexion of what? I doubt you have stumbled upon another word which you do not under stand. But whether you understand yourself or no, it is sure I do not understand you.

But whether you understand yourself or no, it is sure I do not understand you. How can my mind at the same time it is “continually disposed to evil,” be “free from sin, perfectly clean, perfectly holy?” Ant.--O the dulness of some men ' I do not mean really holy, but holy by imputation. I told you plainly, the holi ness of which we speak is not in us, but in Christ. “The fruits of the Spirit, (commonly called sanctification,) such as love, gentleness, longsuffering, goodness, meekness, temper ance, neither make us holy before God, nor in our own consciences.” Friend.--I know these cannot atone for one sin. This is done by the blood of Christ alone: For the sake of which, God forgives, and works these in us by faith. Do I reach your meaning now? Ant.-No, no; I wonder at your ignorance. I mean, “we are not made good or holy by any inward qualities or dispo sitions: But being made pure and holy in our consciences, by believing in Christ, we bear forth, inwardly and outwardly, the fruits of holiness.” Now, I hope, you understand me. Friend.--I hope not. For, if I do, you talk as gross nonsense and contradiction as ever came out of the mouth of man. Ant.--How so? Friend.--You say, “We are not made good or holy by any inward qualities or dispositions.” No | are we not made good by inward goodness? (observe, we are not speaking of justification, but sanctification;) holy, by inward holiness? meek, by inward meekness? gentle, by inward gentleness? And are not all these, if they are anything at all, “inward qualities or dispositions?” Again: Just after denying that we have any inward holi ness, you say, “We are made holy in our consciences, and bear forth, inwardly and outwardly, the fruits of holiness.” What heaps of self-contradictions are here ! Ant.--You do not take me right. I mean, these inward dispositions “are not our holiness. For we are not more holy, if we have more love to God and man, nor less holy, if we have less.” Friend.--No ! Does not a believer increase in holiness, as he increases in the love of God and man? Ant.--I say, No. “The very moment he is justified, he is wholly sanctified. And he is neither more nor less holy, from that hour, to the day of his death.

W. 21. Fifthly. Those who so effectually know Christ, as by that knowledge to have escaped the pollutions of the world, may yet fall back into those pollutions, and perish everlastingly. For thus saith the Apostle Peter, “If after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” (the only possible way of escaping them,) “they are again entangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.” (2 Peter ii. 20, 21.) That the knowledge of the way of righteousness, which they had attained, was an inward, experimental knowledge, is evident from that other expression,-they had “escaped the pollutions of the world;” an expression parallel to that in the preceding chapter, verse 4: “Having escaped the corruption which is in the world.” And in both chapters, this effect is ascribed to the same cause; termed in the first, “the knowledge of Him who hath called us to glory and virtue;” in the second, more explicitly, “the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” And yet they lost that experimental knowledge of Christ and the way of righteousness; they fell back into the same pollutions they had escaped, and were “again entangled therein and overcome.” They “turned from the holy com mandment delivered to them,” so that their “latter end was worse than their beginning.” Therefore, those who so effectually know Christ, as by that knowledge to have escaped the pollutions of the world, may yet fall back into those pollutions, and perish everlastingly. 22. And this is perfectly consistent with St. Peter's words, in the first chapter of his former Epistle: “Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.” Undoubtedly, so are all they who ever attain eternal salva tion. It is the power of God only, and not our own, by which we are kept one day or one hour. VI. 23. Sixthly. Those who see the light of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, and who have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, of the witness and the fruits of the Spirit, may nevertheless so fall from God as to perish everlastingly.

It is not true even with regard to your faith, a belief of the Bible. For I know Deists at this day, who have often wished they could believe the Bible, and owned, “it was happy for them that could.” 2. You vehemently contradict yourself, and do the very thing which you charge upon others. “If we imagine we possess or desire to attain any requisite to our acceptance with God, beside or in connexion with the bare work of Christ, Christ shall profit us nothing.” (Page 96.) Again: “What is required of us in order to our acceptance with God? Nothing. The least attempt to do anything is damnably criminal.” Very good. Now for self-consistency: “What Christ has done is that which quiets the conscience of man as soon as he knows it. So that he need ask no more than, ‘Is it true or not?” If he finds it true, he is happy. If he does not, he can reap no comfort from it. Our comfort arises from the persuasion of this.” (Page 12.) Again: “Men are justified by a knowledge of the righte ousness of Christ.” (Page 406.) And yet again: “The sole requisite to acceptance is, divine righteousness brought to view.” (Page 291.) So you have brought matters to a fine conclusion; confut ing an hundred of your own assertions, and doing the very thing for which you have been all along so unmercifully con demning others. You yourself here teach another “requisite to our acceptance, beside the bare work of Christ,” viz., the knowing that work, the finding it true. Therefore, by your own word, “Christ shall profit you nothing.” In one page you say, “Nothing is required in order to our acceptance with God;” in another, “Divine righteousness brought to view is requisite to our acceptance.” Brought to view / What self-righteousness is this? Which of “the popular Preachers” could have done worse? “Men are justified by a knowledge of the righteousness of Christ.” Knowledge / What ! our own knowledge ! Knowledge in us! Why, this is the very thing which we call faith. So you have fairly given up the whole question, justified your opponents, and condemned yourself as “damnably criminal !” I object, Fourthly, that you have no charity, and that you know not what charity is.

His very words are, “If you have not these, to pretend to any other feelings is vain and delusive.” I say so too. Meantime, he is undoubtedly sensible, that there is a “consolation in love;” a “peace that passeth all under standing,” and a “joy that is unspeakable and full of glory.” Nor can we imagine him to deny, that these must be felt, inwardly felt, wherever they exist. Upon the whole, I cannot but observe, how extremely difficult it is, even for men who have an upright intention, and are not wanting either in natural or acquired abilities, to understand one another: And how hard it is to do even justice to those whom we do not throughly understand; much more to treat them with that gentleness, tenderness, and brotherly kindness, with which, upon a change of circumstances, we might reasonably desire to be treated ourselves. O when shall men know whose disciples we are, by our “loving one another, as He hath loved us!” The God of love hasten the time ! I am, Dear Sir, Your affectionate servant,

The Question: What Is an Arminian? Answered Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 10 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. To say, “This man is an Arminian,” has the same effect on many hearers, as to say, “This is a mad dog.” It puts them into a fright at once: They run away from him with all speed and diligence; and will hardly stop, unless it be to throw a stone at the dreadful and mischievous animal. 2. The more unintelligible the word is, the better it answers the purpose. Those on whom it is fixed know not what to do: Not understanding what it means, they cannot tell what defence to make, or how to clear themselves from the charge. And it is not easy to remove the prejudice which others have imbibed, who know no more of it, than that it is “something very bad,” if not “all that is bad!”. 3. To clear the meaning, therefore, of this ambiguous term, may be of use to many: To those who so freely pin this name upon others, that they may not say what they do not under stand; to those that hear them, that they may be no longer abused by men saying they know not what; and to those upon whom the name is fixed, that they may know how to answer for themselves. 4. It may be necessary to observe, First, that many con found Arminians with Arians. But this is entirely a different thing; the one has no resemblance to the other. An Arian is one who denies the Godhead of Christ; we scarce need say, the supreme, eternal Godhead; because there can be no God but the supreme, eternal God, unless we will make two Gods, a great God and a little one. Now, none have ever more firmly believed, or more strongly asserted, the Godhead of whAT Is AN ARMINIAN ? 359 Christ, than many of the (so called) Arminians have done; yea, and do at this day. Arminianism therefore (whatever it be) is totally different from Arianism. 5. The rise of the word was this: JAMEs HARMENs, in Latin, Jacobus Arminius, was first one of the Ministers of Amsterdam, and afterwards Professor of Divinity at Leyden. He was educated at Geneva; but in the year 1591 began to doubt of the principles which he had till then received.

Some Remarks on Mr. Hill's Farrago Double Distilled Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 10 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. IT is far from my design to give a particular answer to everything contained in Mr. Hill’s late treatise. I intend only to offer to the impartial reader a few cursory remarks, which may partly explain and partly confirm what I have already said upon the subject. 2. “Poor Mr. Wesley,” says Mr. Hill, opening his cause with native eloquence, “has published various tracts, out of which Mr. Hill collects above an hundred gross contradictions. At this Mr. W.’s temper is much ruffled; ” (I believe not; I am not sensible of it;) “he primes, cocks, and fires at Calvinism; and there is smoke and fire in plenty. But if you can bear the stench, (which indeed is very nauseous,) there is no danger of being wounded. He calls this last cannon, or pop-gun, “Remarks’ on my Review. Men of sense say, it is quite unfit for duty; men of grace compas sionate the caster of it; men of pleasantry laugh heartily at it; but some good old women speak highly of it.” (Pages 3--5.) I give this passage at some length, as a genuine specimen of Mr. Hill's manner of writing. 3. But as Mr. Hill did not “choose to prefix his name, it argued no great proof of Mr. W.’s politeness, to address him in the personal manner he has done.” Which of us began? Was it not Mr. Hill? Did not he address me in a personal manner first? And some, beside the old women, are of opinion, he did not do it in the politest manner in the world. 4. “Mr. W. would have us know, that his piece is written in much love. But what love? Love to his own incon sistencies; love of scolding, love of abuse. Let the reader find out any other sort of love through the whole performance.” In order to judge whether I wrote in love or no, let any one read the words he has picked out of fifty-four pages, just as they stand connected with others in each page; it will then appear they are not contrary either to love or meekness. 5. But Mr. W. says, Mr. Hill “is unworthy the name either of the gentleman or the Christian; and is amazed that Mr.

I must not let it pass quite unnoticed. (1.) He “justly censures the enthu siasm and credulity of Mr. Wesley in paying so much atten tion to Bell’s ridiculous reveries.” Nay, so very little, that I checked them strongly, as soon as ever they came to my know ledge; particularly his whim about the end of the world, which I earnestly opposed, both in private and public. (2) “Bragging of the many miraculous cures he had wrought.” I bragged of--that is, simply related, the case of Mary Special, and no other; in the close of which I said, “Here are three plain facts,--She was ill; she is well; she became so in a moment. Which of these can with any modesty be denied?” I still ask the same question. (3.) That I ever called him “a sensible man,” is altogether false. A man of faith and love I then knew him to be; but I never thought him a man of sense. (4.) That I “entreated him to continue in the society,” is likewise totally false. (5.) Nor did I ever tell him, on that or any other occasion, of “the great good” he did. I know he was an instrument in God’s hands of convincing and converting many sinners. But though I speak this now to all the world, I never spoke it to himself. (6.) Neither did he ever refuse, what never was asked, “to remain in connexion with me.” (7.) Least of all did he refuse it because of my “double-dealings or unfaithful proceedings.” He never mentioned to me any such thing, nor had he any pretence so to do. (8.) Nay, but you “was at some times full of Bell's praises.” Very moderately full. “At other times,” that is, after he ran mad, “you warned the people against him.” I warned them not to regard his prophecies, particularly with regard to the 28th of February. (Journal, Vol. III., p. 130.) 20. “He also gives us a particular narration of what he rightly calls the comet-enthusiasm. Mr. John preached more than ten times about the comet he supposed was to appear in 1758, and to consume the globe.” This is a foolish slander, as it is so easily confuted.

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. 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. W., by this looser merit, mean a merit that does not merit?” Yes; by terming a work meritorious in this improper sense, I do not mean, that it merits or deserves a reward in the proper sense of the word. Instances of the word taken in this improper sense occur all over the Bible. “This is shamefully evasive.” No more than it is Greek. It is a plain, rational, solid distinction; and it holds with regard to numberless words in all languages, which may be taken cither in a proper or improper sense. When I say, “I do not grant that works are meritorious, even when accompanied by faith,” I take that word in a proper sense.

W. esteems the Minutes the standard of orthodoxy. In 1771, he signs a paper, owning them to be unguarded. In 1772, he tells us, he does not know but it would have been better, not to have signed that paper at all !” (Page 13.) Suppose all this true, what will it prove? Only that I made a concession which was made an ill use of. But “Mr. F.’s defence makes poor Mr. W. appear more and more inconsistent. Mr. W. declares the Minutes to be unguarded:” (That is, “not enough guarded” against cavil lers:) “Mr. F. defends them, and strives to reconcile them with the Declaration. But then comes Mr. W., and tells us, he does not know, but it had been better not to have signed it at all.” And what then? Why, “hereby he intimates, that he has fixed a different sense upon the Minutes from that which they originally bore.” No such thing; he intimates this and no more, that by that well-intended concession, he had given occasion, to those who sought occasion, of offence against him. So all this laboured charge vanishes into air; and no more proves inconsistency than high-treason. 42. We come now to the main point, perfection; the objections to which spread almost throughout the book. But the question is not, whether the doctrine be true or false; but whether I contradict myself concerning it. As to what occurs in the fourth and fifth pages, it may therefore suffice to say, I do believe (as you observe) that real Christians (meaning those that are “perfected in love”) are freed from evil or sinful thoughts. And where do I contradict this? “You say, I cannot prove the facts alleged against some professors of perfection. Indeed I can.” (Page 10.) If you could, that would not prove that I contradict myself on this head. “But one at Worcester writes, ‘I can send you an account of two or three shocking instances of bad behaviour among the professors of perfection here.’” Perhaps so. But will that prove my inconsistency? 43. Awhile since, Mr. Ma--d related to me the whole story of Samuel Wi-n. I know not that I ever heard of it before, but only some imperfect fragments of it.

I know not that I ever heard of it before, but only some imperfect fragments of it. The other story, of “a Preacher of perfection who said, the Holy Ghost visibly descended on all true converts,” may be true for aught I know; but I question much, whether that madman was a Preacher. It may likewise be true, that several wild expres sions were uttered at West-street chapel. Yet I think, all these put together will not prove, that I contradict myself. However, I am glad to read, “If I publish another edition of the Review, these instances shall all be omitted; and personal vilifications shall be left to the sole pen of Mr. W.” Then you will reduce your Farrago to a page, and your Review to a penny pamphlet. But still “personal vilification” will not suit my pen. I have better employment for it. 44. You say, “Let us now proceed to Mr. W.’s assertions on sinless perfection.” (Page 26.) As I observed before, I am not now to dispute whether they are right or wrong. I keep therefore to that single point, Do I herein contradict myself, or not? When I said, “If some of our hymns contradict others,” I did not allow they do. I meant only, if it were so, this would not prove that I contradict myself. “But still it proves, the people must sing contradictions.” Observe, that is, if--. In your account of perfection, blot out “no wandering thoughts.” None in the body are exempt from these. This we have declared over and over; particularly in the sermon wrote upon that subject. If in the sermon on Ephesians ii. 8, (not xi. 5, as your blunderer prints it,) the words which I had struck out in the preceding edition, are inserted again, what will this prove? Only that the printer, in my absence, printed, not from the last, but from an uncorrected, copy. However, you are hereby excused from unfairness, as to that quotation. But what excuse have you in the other instance, with regard to Enoch and Elijah? On which I asked, “Why is Mr. Hill so careful to name the first edition? Because in the second the mistake is corrected. Did he know this? And could he avail himself of a mistake which he knew was removed before he wrote?” (Remarks, p. 395.) It is now plain he could !

vi. 13, is a war with principalities and powers, but not with flesh and blood.” “But either way, Mr. John is stuck fast in the mire. For in his “Remarks,’ he contradicts his brother; in his Annotations, he contradicts himself; and in his Hymn, he contradicts both bis brother and himself.” Mr. John is not quite stuck fast yet; for this is a mistake from beginning to end. (1) I do not contradict my brother in my “Remarks.” In saying, “I do not subscribe to that expression,” I mean, I do not make it my own; I do not undertake to defend it. Yet neither do I enter the lists against it; it is capable of a sound meaning. (2.) I do not contradict myself in the note; let him prove it that can. (3.) I contradict nobody in the hymn; for it is not mine. Again: “I never said, While one evil thought can rise, I am not born again.” My brother said so once; but he took the words in too high a sense.” I add, and in a sense not warranted by the Bible. And yet I believe, that “real Christians, I mean those perfected in love, are freed from evil or sinful thoughts.” “But is not a babe in Christ born again? Is he not a real Christian?” He is doubtless born again; and in some sense he is a real Christian; but not in the sense above defined. 47. We come now to the additional contradictions whiêh Mr. Hill undertakes to find in my writings. They are already dwindled into one; and I hope to show quickly, this one is none at all. It stands thus:-- “Most express are the words of St. John : “We know, that whosoever is born of God sinneth not.’” “Indeed, it is said, This means only, he doth not commit sin wilfully or habitually.” (Observe. I do not deny the text to mean this; but I deny that it means this only.) As a contradiction to this, Mr. Hill places these words in the opposite column:-- “The Apostle John declares, ‘Whosoever is born of God sinneth not,’ (1.) By any habitual sin; nor, (2.) By any wilful sin.” True; but do I say, the Apostle means this only? Otherwise, here is no contradiction. So, although you have got the gallows ready, you have not turned off old Mordecai yet.

So, although you have got the gallows ready, you have not turned off old Mordecai yet. As you so frequently give me that appellation, I for once accept of your favour. 48. “Before I quit this subject,” (of perfection,) “I cannot help expressing my astonishment, that Mr. Wesley should deny that his tenets on that point exactly harmonize with those of the Popish Church; since all the decrees and books that have been published by the Roman Clergy prove this matter beyond a doubt.” I believe you have been told so. But you should not assert it, unless from personal knowledge. “Alexander Ross says so.” What is Alexander Ross? See with your own eyes. “Mr. Hervey too gives an account of Lindenus and Andradius.” Second-hand evidence still. Have you seen them yourself? Otherwise, you ought not to allow their testimony. As to that “most excellent and evangelical work,” as you term it, the Eleven Letters ascribed to Mr. Hervey, Mr. Sellon has abundantly shown, that they are most excellently virulent, scurrilous, and abusive; and full as far from the evangelical spirit, as the Koran of Mahomet. “But Bishop Cowper”--I object to him, beside his being a hot, bitter Calvinist, that he is a dull, heavy, shallow writer. And let him be what he may, all you cite from him is but second-hand authority. “Nay, I refer to the Bishop's own words.” But still, you have only the words at second-hand. In order to know the tenets of the Church of Rome, you must read the Romish authors themselves. Nay, it does not suffice to read their own private authors. They will disown anything we charge them with, unless we can prove it by recurring to their public and authentic records. Such are the “Canones et Decreta Concilii Tridentini.” Such the “Catechismus ad Parochos.” Till you have read these at least, you should never undertake to determine what is, or what is not, Popery. 49. “But as I am now on the subject of Popery, I must make a few animadversions on what Mr. Wesley affirms, ‘I always thought the tenets of the Church of Rome were nearer by half to Mr. Hill's tenets, than to Mr. Wesley’s.” (Page 33.) Nay, give the honour of this to its true author: Mr.

I believe he will not affirm it. So any man of understanding may judge, before he opens his book, what manner of review it is likely to contain However, it must be owned that he and his faithful allies have been at the pains of looking into many of my writings. I say many; for I apprehend there are many more, which they have not so much as looked into; nor does it appear that they have seriously looked through any, so as to observe the scope and tenor of them. However, from those which he or they have, after a fashion, reviewed, abundance of objections are extracted. It is true, none of them (one only excepted) are new, and there is hardly one that has not been answered again and again. Yet since they are proposed in a new form, they may seem to demand a new answer. 10. The grand objection is, that I am inconsistent with myself. This, therefore, I shall particularly consider. The others, which flutter up and down the whole work, I can but just touch upon. Mr. H. opens the charge thus: “Saying and unsaying is nothing new with Mr. W., who has only shown himself consistent, by a regular series of inconsistencies.” (Page 3.) “How full are you of contradictions to yourself! how full of contrary purposes! How often do you chide with yourself! How oft do you fight with yourself!” (Title-page.) “Mr. W. seems well contented you should settle his creed. If you can, you will do in a few months what he himself has not been able to effect in near forty years.” “On this fluctuating ocean he has been tossed for so many years together.” (Page 20.) “All his Journals and Tracts are replete with proofs of his having been tossed from one system to another, and from one opinion to another, from the time of his ordniation to this present moment.” (Page 143.) “The most ignorant collier can immediately see his inconsistency with himself.” (Page 145.) He sums up the whole charge in the lively words of Mr. Cudworth, graced with the name of Mr. Hervey: “Contradic tion, didst thou ever know so trusty a friend, so faithful a devotee? Many people are ready enough to contradict others; but it seems all one to this gentleman whether it be another or himself, so he may but contradict.” 11.

Fletcher's Letters?” Because I judged it would be an effectual means of undoing the mischief which Mr. Shirley had done: Not that I am now sorry (though I was) for what he has done, for his publication of that bitter Circular Letter: For 1 now clearly discern the hand of God throughout that whole affair. Both my brother and I still indulged the fond hope of living in peace with our warm Calvinist brethren; but we now give it up; our eyes are open; we see what we have to expect. We look for neither mercy nor justice at their hands; if we find any, it will be clear gains. 23. The Second objection is, “Mr. Wesley acknowledged the unguarded manner in which the Minutes were drawn up; and yet immediately after defended them.” I answer, How did I “acknowledge the unguarded manner?” The plain case was this: I seek peace, and would do anything for it, which I can with a safe conscience. On this principle it was, that when Mr. Shirley read over his Declaration, (I say his; for it was he drew it up, not I,) and asked, if we agreed thereto, I was heartily desirous to agree with him as far as possible. In order to this, after altering some words, I asked our brethren, if they were willing to sign it. One immediately said, “The Minutes are not unguarded; they are guarded enough.” I said, “They are guarded enough for you; but not for those who seek occasion against us.” And observe, it is only in this sense, that I subscribed to that expression. But I will not affirm, that my love of peace did not carry me a little too far. I know not but it would have been better, not to have signed the paper at all. 24. So much for the Minutes. Perhaps it may be expected, that I should also take some notice of what Mr. Hill says concerning perfection. All his arguments indeed, and ten times more, I have answered over and over. But if it is required, I will answer once more; only premising, by that perfection, to which St. Paul directs Mr. Hill and me to go on, (Heb. vi. 1) I understand meither more nor less, than what St. John terms “perfect love;” (1 John iv.

Bernard or Ambrose, we must consult the authors themselves, and tell our readers what edition we use, with the page where the words are found; otherwise they cannot form a judgment either of the fairness of the quota tion, or of the sense and weight of it. Hitherto, then, we have not one tittle of proof, that this is a Popish doctrine; that it ever was, or is now, “almost generally received in the Church of Rome;” (although, if it had, this would be no conclusive argument against it, as neither is it conclusive against the doctrine of the blessed Trinity;) I do not know that it ever was: But this I know; it has been solemnly condemned by the Church of Rome. It has been condemned by the Pope and his whole conclave, even in this present century. In the famous bull Unigenitus, (so called from the first words, Unigenitus Dei filius,') they utterly condemn the uninterrupted act (of faith and love, which some then talked of, of continually rejoicing, praying, and giving thanks) as dreadful heresy Now, in what public act of the Church of Rome is the doctrine of perfection maintained? Till this is produced, I pray let us hear no more, that perfection is a Popish doctrine. 25. However, “the distinction between sins and innocent infirmities is derived from the Romish Church.” (Page 56.) How does this appear? Thus: “Two of her devoted cham pions, Lindenus and Andradius, distinguish between infirmi ties and sins.” Lindenus and Andradius / Who are they? From what country did they come? I do not know the men. One of them, for aught I know, might serve as an interpreter at the Council of Trent? What then? Was he an autho rized interpreter of the doctrines of the Church? Nay, and how do you know that they did speak of “little, trifling faults,” or of “minute and trivial sins?” Did you ever read them? Pray, what edition of their works do you use? and in what page do these words occur? Till we know this, that there may be an opportunity of examining the books, (though I fear scarce worth examining,) it is doing too much honour to such quotations, to take any notice of them at all. 26. Well, now for the buskins !

And do they exist without us? Certainly, as much as the sun does. And are the consti tuent parts of those objects real? Nobody questions it. But are they really of such a size, and arranged in such a manner? They are; and what will you infer from that? I infer, that colour is just as real as size or figure; and that all colours do as really exist without us, as trees, or corn, or heaven, or earth. “But what do you mean by colour?” When I say, “That cloth is of a red colour,” I mean its surface is so dis posed as to reflect the red (that is, the largest) rays of light. When I say, “The sky is blue,” I mean, it is so disposed as to reflect the blue (that is, the smallest) rays of light. And where is the delusion here? Does not that disposition, do not those rays, as really exist, as either the cloth or the sky? And are they not as really reflected, as the ball in a tennis court? It is true, that, when they strike upon my eye, a particular sensation follows in my soul. But that sensation is not colour; I know no one that calls it so. Colour therefore is a real material thing. There is no illusion in the case, unless you confound the perception with the thing perceived. And all other secondary qualities are just as real as figure or any other primary one. So you have no illusion in the natural world to countenance that you imagine to be in the moral. Wherever, therefore, this argument occurs, (and it occurs ten times over,)--“The natural world is all illusion; therefore, so is the moral,”--it is just good for nothing. But, take it all together, and what a supposition is this ! Is it not enough to make one's blood run cold 2 “The great God, the Creator of heaven and earth, the Father of the spirits of all flesh, the God of truth, has encompassed with falsehood every soul that he has made I has given up all mankind ‘to a strong delusion, to believe a lie!

You cannot deal with them thus. They scorn being convinced; nor can they be silenced, but in their own way. Thirdly. To a sound understanding, and a lively turn of thought, should be joined a good memory; if it may be, ready, that you may make whatever occurs in reading or conversation your own; but, however, retentive, lest we be “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” On the contrary, “every scribe instructed unto the kingdom of heaven,” every Teacher fitted for his work, “is like an house holder who bringeth out of his treasures things new and old.” 2. And as to acquired endowments, can he take one step aright, without first a competent share of knowledge? a knowledge, First, of his own office; of the high trust in which he stands, the important work to which he is called? Is there any hope that a man should discharge his office well, if he knows not what it is? that he should acquit himself faithfully of a trust, the very nature whereof he does not understand? Nay, if he knows not the work God has given him to do, he cannot finish it. Secondly. No less necessary is a knowledge of the Scrip tures, which teach us how to teach others; yea, a knowledge of all the Scriptures; seeing scripture interprets scripture; one part fixing the sense of another. So that, whether it be true or not, that every good textuary is a good Divine, it is certain none can be a good Divine who is not a good textuary. None else can be mighty in the Scriptures; able both to instruct and to stop the mouths of gainsayers. In order to do this accurately, ought he not to know the literal meaning of every word, verse, and chapter; without which there can be no firm foundation on which the spiritual meaning can be built? Should he not likewise be able to deduce the proper corollaries, speculative and practical, from each text; to solve the difficulties which arise, and answer the objections which are or may be raised against it; and to make a suitable application of all to the consciences of his hearers? Thirdly. But can he do this, in the most effectual manner, without a knowledge of the original tongues?

But can he do this, in the most effectual manner, without a knowledge of the original tongues? Without this, will he not frequently be at a stand, even as to texts which regard practice only ? But he will be under still greater difficulties, with respect to controverted scriptures. He will be ill able to rescue these out of the hands of any man of learning that would pervert them: For whenever an appeal is made to the original, his n:outh is stopped at once. Fourthly. Is not a knowledge of profane history, likewise, of ancient customs, of chronology and geography, though not absolutely necessary, yet highly expedient, for him that would throughly understand the Scriptures? since the want even of this knowledge is but poorly supplied by reading the comments of other men. Fifthly. Some knowledge of the sciences also, is, to say the least, equally expedient. Nay, may we not say, that the knowledge of one, (whether art or science,) although now quite unfashionable, is even necessary next, and in order to, the knowledge of the Scripture itself? I mean logic. For what is this, if rightly understood, but the art of good sense? of apprehending things clearly, judging truly, and reasoning conclusively? What is it, viewed in another light, but the art of learning and teaching; whether by convincing or persuading? What is there, then, in the whole compass of science, to be desired in comparison of it? Is not some acquaintance with what has been termed the second part of logic, (metaphysics,) if not so necessary as this,. yet highly expedient, (1.) In order to clear our apprehension, (without which it is impossible either to judge correctly, or to reason closely or conclusively,) by ranging our ideas under general heads? And, (2.) In order to understand many useful writers, who can very hardly be understood without it? Should not a Minister be acquainted too with at least the general grounds of natural philosophy? Is not this a great help to the accurate understanding several passages of Scrip ture?

Is not this a great help to the accurate understanding several passages of Scrip ture? Assisted by this, he may himself comprehend, and on proper occasions explain to others, how the invisible things of God are seen from the creation of the world; how “the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork;” till they cry out, “O Lord, how manifold are thy works | In wisdom hast thou made them all.” But how far can he go in this, without some knowledge of geometry? which is likewise useful, not barely on this account, but to give clearness of apprehension, and an habit of thinking closely and connectedly. It must be allowed, indeed, that some of these branches of knowledge are not so indispensably necessary as the rest; and therefore no thinking man will condemn the Fathers of the Church, for having, in all ages and nations, appointed some to the ministry, who, suppose they had the capacity, yet had not had the opportunity of attaining them. But what excuse is this for one who has the opportunity, and makes no use of it? What can be urged for a person who has had an University education, if he does not understand them all? Certainly, supposing him to have any capacity, to have common understanding, he is inexcusable before God and man. Sixthly. Can any who spend several years in those seats of learning, be excused, if they do not add to that of the languages and sciences, the knowledge of the Fathers? the most authentic commentators on Scripture, as being both nearest the fountain, and eminently endued with that Spirit by whom all Scripture was given. It will be easily perceived, I speak chiefly of those who wrote before the Council of Nice. But who would not likewise desire to have some acquaintance with those that followed them? with St. Chrysostom, Basil, Jerome, Austin; and, above all, the man of a broken heart, Ephraim Syrus? Seventhly. There is yet another branch of knowledge highly necessary for a Clergyman, and that is, knowledge of the world; a knowledge of men, of their maxims, tempers, and manners, such as they occur in real life.

There is yet another branch of knowledge highly necessary for a Clergyman, and that is, knowledge of the world; a knowledge of men, of their maxims, tempers, and manners, such as they occur in real life. Without this he will be liable to receive much hurt, and capable of doing little good; as he will not know, either how to deal with men according to the vast variety of their characters, or to preserve himself from those who almost in every place lie in wait to deceive. How nearly allied to this is the discernment of spirits so far as it may be acquired by diligent observation. And can a guide of souls be without it? If he is, is he not liable to stumble at every step? Eighthly. Can he be without an eminent share of prudence? that most uncommon thing which is usually called common sense? But how shall we define it? Shall we say, with the Schools, that it is recta ratio rerum agibilium particu larium ?* Or is it an habitual consideration of all the circumstances of a thing, Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando 2 + and a facility of adapting our behaviour to the various combinations of them? However it be defined, should it not be studied with all care, and pursued with all earnestness of application ? For what terrible inconveniences ensue, when ever it is remarkably wanting ! Ninthly. Next to prudence or common sense, (if it be not included therein,) a Clergyman ought certainly to have some degree of good breeding; I mean address, easiness and propriety of behaviour, wherever his lot is cast: Perhaps one might add, he should have (though not the stateliness; for he is “the servant of all,” yet) all the courtesy of a gentleman, joined with the correctness of a scholar. Do we want a pattern of this? We have one in St. Paul, even before Felix, Festus, King Agrippa. One can scarce help thinking he was one of the best bred men, one of the finest gentlemen in the world. O that we likewise had the skill to “please all men for their good unto edification l’’ In order to this, especially in our public ministrations, would not one wish for a strong, clear, musical voice, and a good delivery, both with regard to pronunciation and action?

It is true, many have wrote upon this subject; and some of them admirably well: Yet few, if any, at least in our nation, have carried their inquiry through all these particulars. Neither have they always spoken su plain and home as the nature of the thing required. But why did they not? Was it because they were unwilling to give pain to those whom they loved? Or were they hindered by fear of disobliging, or of incurring any temporal inconvenience? Miserable fear ! Is any temporal inconvenience whatever to be laid in the balance with the souls of our brethren? Or were they prevented by shame, arising from a consciousness of their own many and great defects? Undoubtedly this might extenuate the fault, but not altogether remove it. For is it not a wise advice, “Be not ashamed when it concerneth thy soul?” especially when it concerns the souls of thousands also? In such a case may God Set as a flint our steady face, Harden to adamant our brow ! But is there not another hinderance? Should not compas sion, should not tenderness, hinder us from giving pain? Yes, from giving unnecessary pain. But what manner of tenderness is this? It is like that of a surgeon who lets his patient be lost because he is too compassionate to probe his wounds. Cruel compassion | Let me give pain, so I may save life. Let me probe, that God may heal. 1. Are we then such as we are sensible we should be, First, with regard to natural endowments? I am afraid not. If we were, how many stumbling-blosks would be removed out of the way of serious Infidels? Alas, what terrible effects do we continually see of that common though sense less imagination, “The boy, if he is fit for nothing else, will do well enough for a Parson 1” Hence it is, that we see (I would to God there were no such instance in all Great Britain, or Ireland 1) dull, heavy, blockish Ministers; men of no life, no spirit, no readiness of thought; who are consequently the jest of every pert fool, every lively, airy coxcomb they meet. We see others whose memory can retain nothing; therefore they can never be men of considerable knowledge; they can never know much even of those things which they are most nearly concerned to know.

We see others whose memory can retain nothing; therefore they can never be men of considerable knowledge; they can never know much even of those things which they are most nearly concerned to know. Alas, they are pouring the water into a leaky vessel; and the broken cistern can hold no water ! I do not say, with Plato, that “all human know ledge is nothing but remembering.” Yet certain it is, that, without remembering, we can have but a small share of knowledge. And even those who enjoy the most retentive memory, find great reason still to complain, Skill comes so slow, and life so fast does fly; We learn so little, and forget so much ! And yet we see and bewail a still greater defect in some that are in the ministry. They want sense, they are defective in understanding, their capacity is low and shallow, their apprehension is muddy and confused; of consequence, they are utterly incapable either of forming a true judgment of things, or of reasoning justly upon anything. O how can these who themselves know nothing aright, impart knowledge to others? how instruct them in all the variety of duty, to God, their neighbour, and themselves? How will they guide them through all the mazes of error, through all the intanglements of sin and temptation? How will they apprize them of the devices of Satan, and guard them against all the wisdom of the world? It is easy to perceive, I do not speak this for their sake; (for they are incorrigible;) but for the sake of parents, that they may open their eyes and see, a blockhead can never “do well enough for a Parson.” He may do well enough for a tradesman; so well as to gain fifty or an hundred thousand pounds. He may do well enough for a soldier; nay, (if you pay well for it,) for a very well-dressed and well mounted officer. He may do well enough for a sailor, and may shine on the quarter-deck of a man-of-war. He may do so well, in the capacity of a lawyer or physician, as to ride in his gilt chariot. But O ! think not of his being a Minister, unless you would bring a blot upon your family, a scandal upon our Church, and a reproach on the gospel, which he may murder, but cannot teach.

think not of his being a Minister, unless you would bring a blot upon your family, a scandal upon our Church, and a reproach on the gospel, which he may murder, but cannot teach. Are we such as we are sensible we should be, Secondly, with regard to acquired endowments? Here the matter (suppose we have common understanding) lies more directly within our own power. But under this, as well as the following heads, methinks I would not consider at all, how many or how few are either excellent or defective. I would only desire every person who reads this to apply it to himself. Certainly some one in the nation is defective. Am not I the man? Let us each seriously examine himself. Have I, (1.) Such a knowledge of Scripture, as becomes him who undertakes so to explain it to others, that it may be a light in all their paths? Have I a full and clear view of the analogy of faith, which is the clue to guide me through the whole? Am I acquainted with the several parts of Scripture; with all parts of the Old Testament and the New Upon the mention of any text, do I know the context, and the parallel places? Have I that point at least of a good Divine, the being a good textuary? Do I know the grammatical construction of the four Gospels; of the Acts; of the Epistles; and am I a master of the spiritual sense (as well as the literal) of what I read? Do I understand the scope of each book, and how every part of it tends thereto? Have I skill to draw the natural inferences deducible from each text? Do I know the objections raised to them or from them by Jews, Deists, Papists, Arians, Socinians, and all other sectaries, who more or less corrupt or cauponize the word of God? Am I ready to give a satisfactory answer to each of these objections? And have I learned to apply every part of the sacred writings, as the various states of my hearers require? (2.) Do I understand Greek and Hebrew Otherwise, how can I undertake, (as every Minister does,) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents?

(2.) Do I understand Greek and Hebrew Otherwise, how can I undertake, (as every Minister does,) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents? Am I not at the mercy of every one who does understand, or even pretends to understand, the original? For which way can I confute his pretence? Do I under stand the language of the Old Testament? critically? at all? Can I read into English one of David's Psalms; or even the first chapter of Genesis? Do I understand the language of the New Testament ? Am I a critical master of it? Have I enough of it even to read into English the first chapter of St. Luke 2 If not, how many years did I spend at school? How many at the University? And what was I doing all those years? Ought not shame to cover my face? (3) Do I understand my own office? Have I deeply considered before God the character which I bear? What is it to be an Ambassador of Christ, an Envoy from the King of heaven? And do I know and feel what is implied in “watching over the souls” of men “as he that must give account ?” (4) Do I understand so much of profane history as tends to confirm and illustrate the sacred? Am I acquainted with the ancient customs of the Jews and other nations mentioned in Scripture? Have I a competent knowledge of chrono logy, that at least which refers to the sacred writings? And am I so far (if no farther) skilled in geography, as to know the situation, and give some account, of all the considerable places mentioned therein 7 (5.) Am I a tolerable master of the sciences? Have I gone through the very gate of them, logic? If not, I am not likely to go much farther, when I stumble at the threshold. Do I understand it so as to be ever the better for it? to have it always ready for use; so as to apply every rule of it, when occasion is, almost as naturally as I turn my hand? Do I understand it at all? Are not even the moods and figures above my comprehension?

Are not even the moods and figures above my comprehension? Do not I poorly endeavour to cover my ignorance, by affecting to laugh at their barbarous names P Can I even reduce an indirect mood to a direct; an hypothetic to a categorical syllogism ? Rather, have not my stupid indolence and laziness made me very ready to believe, what the little wits and pretty gentlemen affirm, “that logic is good for nothing?” It is good for this at least, (wherever it is understood,) to make people talk less; by showing them both what is, and what is not, to the point; and how extremely hard it is to prove anything. Do I under stand metaphysics; if not the depths of the Schoolmen, the subtleties of Scotus or Aquinas, yet the first rudiments, the general principles, of that useful science? Have I conquered so much of it, as to clear my apprehension and range my ideas under proper heads; so much as enables me to read with ease and pleasure, as well as profit, Dr. Henry More's Works, Malebranche’s “Search after Truth,” and Dr. Clarke's “Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God?” Do I understand natural philosophy? If I have not gone deep therein, have I digested the general grounds of it? Have I mastered Gravesande, Keill, Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, with his “Theory of Light and Colours?” In order thereto, have I laid in some stock of mathematical knowledge? Am I master of the mathematical A B C of Euclid's Elements? If I have not gone thus far, if I am such a novice still, what have I been about ever since I came from school? (6.) Am I acquainted with the Fathers; at least with those venerable men who lived in the earliest ages of the Church? Have I read over and over the golden remains of Clemens Romanus, of Ignatius and Polycarp; and have I given one reading, at least, to the works of Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Cyprian 2 (7.) Have I any knowledge of the world? Have I studied men, (as well as books,) and observed their tempers, maxims, and manners? Have I learned to beware of men; to add the wisdom of the serpent to the innocence of the dove?

It is as natural for us to talk politics as to breathe; we can instruct both the King and his Council. We can in a trice reform the State, point out every blunder of this or that Minister, and tell every step they ought to take to be arbiters of all Europe.” I grant, every cobbler, tinker, porter, and hackney-coachman can do this; but I am not so deep learned: While they are sure of everything, I am in a manner sure of nothing; except of that very little which I see with my own eyes, or hear with my own ears. However, since you desire me to tell you what I think, I will do it with all openness. Only please to remember, I do not take upon me to dictate eithcr to you or to any one. I only use the privilege of an English man, to speak my naked thoughts; setting down just what appears to me to be the truth, till I have better information. At present, indeed, I have not much information, having read little upon this head but the public papers; and you know these arc mostly on one side; in them little is to be seen on the other side; and that little is seldom wrote by masterly writers. How few of them have such a pen as Junius ! But supposing we have cver so much information, how little can one rely on it! on the information given by either party For is not onc as warm as the other? And who does mot know how impossible it is for a man to sce things right when he is angry? Does not passion blind the eyes of the understanding, as smoke does the bodily eyes? And how little of the truth can we learn from those who sec nothing but through a cloud 7 This advantage then I have over both parties,--the being angry at neither. So that if I have a little understanding from nature or experience, it is (in this instance at least) unclouded by passion. I wish the same happiness which I wish to myself, to those on one side and on the other. I would not hurt either in the lcast degree; I would not willingly give them any pain. I have likewise another advantage, that of having no bias one way or the other.

One not greatly prejudiced in his favour does not charge him with want of virtue, (of this he judges him to have more than enough,) but with wanting those royal vices, which (with Machiavel and the ingenious Doctor Mandeville) he supposes would be public benefits. “But does he not likewise want understanding?” So it has been boldly affirmed. And it must be acknowledged, this charge is supported by facts which cannot be denied. The First is, he believes the Bible; the Second, he fears God; the Third, he loves the Queen. Now, suppose the First of these, considering the prejudice of education, might consist with some share of understanding, yet how can this be allowed with regard to the Second? For although, in the times of igno rance and barbarism men imagined, “the fear of God” was “the beginning of wisdom,” our enlightened age has discovered it is the end of it; that whenever the fear of God begins, wisdom is at an end. And with regard to the Third, for a man to love his wife, unless perhaps for a month or two, must argue such utter want of sense, as most men of rank are now ashamed of. But, after all, there are some who, allowing the facts, deny the consequence; who still believe, and that after the most accurate inquiry, from such as have had the best means of information, that there are few noblemen or gentle men in the nation, (and we have many not inferior to most in Europe,) who have either so good a natural understanding, or so general a knowledge of all the valuable parts of learning. “But suppose something might be said for His Majesty's understanding, what can be said in excuse of his bad actions; as, First, his pardoning a murderer?” I really think some thing may be said on this head also. Can you or I believe that the King knew him to be such? understood him to be a wilful murderer? I am not sure of it at all; neither have you any rational proof, even supposing this to have been the case, which is far from being clear. And if he did not know or believe him to be such, how can he be blamed for pardon ing him ? Not to have pardoned him in this case would have been inexcusable before God and man.

But this is quite the reverse of what is commonly objected,--inflexible stubbornness. “Nay, what else could occasion the settled disregard of so many petitions and remonstrances, signed by so many thousand hands, and declaring the sense of the nation?” The sense of the nation / Who can imagine this that knows the manner wherein nine in ten, I might say ninety-nine in an hundred, of those petitions are procured ? A Lord or Squire (sometimes two or more) goes, or sends his steward, round the town where his seat is, with a paper, which he tells the homest men is for the good of their King and country. He desires each to set his name or mark to this. And who has the hardiness to gainsay; especially if my Lord keeps open house? Mean time, the contents of it they know nothing about. I was not long since at a town in Kent, when one of these petitions was carrying about. I asked one and another, “Have you signed the petition?” and found none that had refused it. And yet not one single person to whom I spoke had either read it, or heard it read. Now, I would ask any man of common sense, what stress is to be laid on these petitions; and how they do declare “the sense of the nation;” nay, of the very persons that have signed them? What a shocking insult is it then on the whole kingdom, to palm these petitions upon us, of which the very subscribers have not read three lines, as the general “sense of the nation l” But suppose they had read all that they have subscribed, what judges are they of these matters? To put this beyond dispute, let us only propose one case out of a thousand. Step back a few years, and suppose Mr. Pitt at the head of the administration. Here comes up a petition from New castle-upon-Tyne, signed by five hundred hands, begging His Majesty to dismiss that corrupt Minister, who was taking such measures as tended to the utter ruin of the nation. What would Mr. Pitt say to this? Would he not ask, “How came these colliers and keelmen to be so well acquainted with affairs of State? How long have they been judges of public administration ? of naval and military operations?

of naval and military operations? How came they to understand the propriety or impropriety of the measures I take? Do they comprehend the balance of Europe? Do they know the weakness and strength of its several kingdoms; the characters of the Monarchs and their Ministers; the springs of this and that public motion? Else, why do they take upon them to scan my conduct? Ne sutor ultra crepidam / ‘Let them mind their own work, keep to their pits and keels, and leave State affairs to me.” “But surely you do not place the citizens of London on a level with the colliers of Newcastle !” I do not. And yet I suppose they were equally incompetent judges of the measures which Mr. Pitt took. And I doubt they are full as incom petent judges of the measures taken by the present ministry. To form a tolerable judgment of them requires, not only a good understanding, but more time than common tradesmen can spare, and better information than they can possibly procure. I think, therefore, that the encouraging them to pass their verdict on Ministers of State, yea, on King, Lords, and Commons, is not only putting them out of their way, but doing them more mischief than you are aware of. “But the remonstrance I Surely the King ought to have paid more regard to the remonstrance of the city of London.” Consider the case: The city had presented a petition which he could by no means approve of, as he judged it was designed not so much to inform him as to inflame his subjects. After he had rejected this, as mildly as could be done, whilst he viewed it in this light, they present a remonstrance to the same effect, and (as he judged) with the same design. What then could he do less than he did? Could he seem to approve what he did not approve? If not, how could he testify his full disapprobation in more inoffensive terms? As to the idle, shameless tale of his bursting out into laughter at the Magistrates, any who know His Majesty's temper would as soon believe that he spit in their faces, or struck them a box on the ear.

What an insult upon common sense is this wild way of talking ! If Middlesex is wronged (put it so) in this instance, how is Yorkshire or Cumberland affected by it; or twenty counties and forty boroughs besides; much less all the nation? “O, but they may be affected by and by.” Very true ! And the sky may fall ! To see this whole matter in the clearest light, let any one read and consider the speech of Lord Chief Justice Mansfield, on a motion, made by Lord Chatham, “to repeal and rescind the Resolutions of the House of Commons, in regard to the expulsion and incapacitation of Mr. Wilkes:”-- “In this debate, though it has been already spoken to. with great eloquence and perspicuity, I cannot content myself with only giving a single vote; I feel myself under a strong necessity of saying something more. The subject requires it; and though the hour is late,” (it being then near ten o’clock,) “I shall demand your indulgence, while I offer. my sentiments on this motion. “I am sure, my Lords, many of you must remember, from your reading and experience, several persons expelled the House of Commons, without ever this House once pretending: to interfere or call in question by what authority they did so I remember several myself;” (here his Lordship quoted several cases;) “in all which, though most of the candidates were sure to be re-chosen, they never once applied, resting contented with the expulsatory power of the House, as the. only self-sufficient, dernier resort of application. “It has been echoed on all sides, from the partisans of this motion, that the House of Commons acted illegally, in accept ing Colonel Luttrel, who had but two hundred and ninety six votes, in preference to Mr. Wilkes, who had one thousand. one hundred and forty-three. But this is a mistake of the grossest nature imaginable, and which nothing but the intem-. perature of people's zeal could possibly transport them to, as Mr. Wilkes had been previously considered by the laws as an unqualified person to represent the people in Parliament;. therefore it appears very plainly, that Colonel Luttrel had a. very great majority, not less than two hundred and ninety six, Mr. Wilkes being considered as nobody in the eye of the law; consequently, Colonel Luttrel had no legal opposition.

In the name of wonder, what religious liberty can you desire, or even conceive, which you have not already? Where is there a nation in Europe, in the habitable world, which * See Wodrow’s “History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland.” ThouGIITS UPON LIBERTY. 4l enjoys such liberty of conscience as the English? I will be bold to say there is nothing like it in Holland, in Germany, (Protestant or Popish,) in either the Protestant or Popish cantons of Switzerland; no, nor in any country under the sun. Have we not in England full liberty to choose any religion, yea, or no religion at all? to have no more religion than a Hottentot, shall I say? nay, no more than a bull or a swine? Whoever therefore in England stretches his throat, and bawls for more religious liberty, must be totally void of shame, and can have no excuse but want of understanding. 21. But is not the ground of this vehement outcry, that we are deprived of our civil liberty? What is civil liberty? A liberty to enjoy our lives and fortunes in our own way; to use our property, whatever is legally our own, according to our own choice. And can you deny, “that we are robbed of this liberty?” Who are? Certainly I am not. I pray, do not face me down that I am. Do not argue me out of my senses. If the Great Turk, or the King of France, wills that a man should die, with or without cause, die he must. And instances of the kind continually occur; but no such instances occur in England. I am in no more danger of death from King George, than from the Queen of Hungary. And if I study to be quiet and mind my own business, I am in no more danger of losing my liberty than my life. No, nor my property; I mean, by any act of the King. If this is in any degree invaded, it is not by the King, or his Parliament, or army, but by the good patriots. Hark! Is hell or Bedlam broke loose? What roaring is that, loud as the waves of the sea? “It is the patriot mob.” What do they want with me? Why do they flock about my house? “Make haste illuminate your windows in honour of Mr.

Why are you thus wringing your hands, and screaming, to the terror of your quiet neighbours, “Destruction | slavery 1 bondage ' Help, countrymen | Our liberty is destroyed! Weare ruined, chained, fettered, undone!” Fettered ! How? Where are the fetters, but in your own imagination? There are none, either on your hands or mine: Neither you nor I can show to any man in his senses, that we have one chain upon us, even so big as a knitting-needle. 23. I do not say, that the ministry are without fault; or that they have done all things well. But still I ask, What is the liberty which we want? It is not civil or religious liberty. These we have in such a degree as was never known before, not from the times of William the Conqueror.” But all this is nothing; this will never satisfy the bellua multorum capitum. That “many-headed beast,” the people, roars for liberty of another kind. Many want Indian liberty, the liberty of cutting throats, or of driving a brace of balls * If the famous Middlesex election was an exception to this, yet observe, one Swallow makes no summer. through the head of those ugly-looking fellows, whom they cannot abide the sight of Many more want the old High land liberty, the convenient liberty of plundering. Many others there are who want the liberty of war, of borrowing their neighbours' wives or daughters; and not a few, though they do not always avow it, the liberty of murdering their Prince. 24. If you are a reasonable man, a man of real honour, and consequently want none of these, I beg to know what would you have? Considering the thing calmly, what liberty can you reasonably desire which you do not already enjoy? What is the matter with you, and with multitudes of the good people, both in England and Ireland, that they are crying and groaning as if they were chained to an oar, or barred up in the dungeons of the Inquisition? The plain. melancholy truth is this: There is a general infatuation, which spreads, like an overflowing stream, from one end of the land to the other; and a man must have great wisdom and great strength, or he will be carried away by the torrent. But how can we account for this epidemic madness? for it deserves no better name.

will first despise and then abhor the King? What can we expect, but that by the repeated doses of this poison they will be perfectly intoxicated, and only wait for a con venient season to tear in pieces the royal monster, as they think him, and all his adherents? 25. At present there are hinderances in the way, so that they cannot use their teeth as they would. One is an untoward Parliament, who will not look upon the King with the same eyes that they do; but still think he has no more design or desire to enslave the nation, than to burn the city of London. A still greater hinderance is the army; even lions and bears do not choose to encounter them, so that these men of war do really at this time preserve the peace of ithe nation. What then can be done before the people cools, that this precious opportunity be not lost? What indeed, but to prevail upon the King to dissolve his Parliament and disband his army? Nay, let the Parliament stay as it is, it will suffice to disband the army. If these red-coats were but out of the way, the mob would soon deal with the Parliament. Probatum est: * Nothing is more easy than to keep malignant members from the House. Remember Lord North not long ago;t this was a taste, a specimen, of their activity. What then would they not do if they were masters of the field, if none were left to oppose them? Would not the * This has already been put to the proof-EDIT. + Rudely insulted by a turbulent mob, as he was going into the House. Titou GHTS UPON LIBERTY. 45. avenues of both Houses be so well guarded, that none but patriots would dare to approach? 26. But (as often as you have heard the contrary affirmed) King George has too much understanding, to throw himself into the hands of those men who have given full proof that they bear him no great good-will. Nor has he reason to believe that they are much more fond of his office than of his person. They are not vehemently fond of monarchy itself, whoever the Monarch be. Therefore neither their good nor ill words will induce him, in haste, to leap into the fire with his eyes open. 27.

By one stroke, by taking to himself that Prince whom we know not how to value, He might change the scene, and put an end to our civil as well as religious liberty. Then would be seen who were patriots and who were not; who were real lovers of liberty and their country. The God of love remove that day far from us! Deal not with us according to our deservings; but let us know, at least in this our day, the things which make for our peace! February 24, 1772.

Thoughts on the Present Scarcity of Provisions Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- MANY excellent things have been lately published con cerning the present scarcity of provisions; and many causes have been assigned for it, by men of experience and reflec tion. But may it not be observed, there is something wanting still, in most of those publications? One writer assigns and insists on one cause, another on one or two more. But who assigns all the causes that manifestly concur to produce this melancholy effect? at the same time pointing out, how each particular cause affects the price of each particular sort of provision? I would willingly offer to candid and benevolent men a few hints on this important subject; proposing a few questions, and subjoining to each what seems to be the plain and direct anSWer. I. 1. I ask, First, Why are thousands of people starving, perishing for want, in every part of the nation? The fact I know; I have seen it with my eyes, in every corner of the land. I have known those who could only afford to eat a little coarse food once every other day. I have known one in London (and one that a few years before had all the conveniencies of life) picking up from a dunghill stinking sprats, and carrying them home for herself and her children. I have known another gathering the bones which the dogs. had left in the streets, and making broth of them, to prolong a wretched life I I have heard a third artlessly declare, “Indeed I was very faint, and so weak I could hardly walk, until my dog, finding nothing at home, went out, and brought in a good sort of bone, which I took out of his mouth, and made a pure dinner !” Such is the case at this day of multitudes of people, in a land flowing, as it were, with milk and honey! abounding with all the necessaries, the conveniencies, the superfluities of life Now, why is this? Why have all these nothing to eat? Because they have nothing to do. The plain reason why they have no meat is, because they have no work. 2. But why have they no work?

But you well know how populous, how fruitful, how pleasant it was a few years ago. You know, the people were not stupid, not wanting in sense, considering the few means of improvement they enjoyed. Neither did you find them savage, fierce, cruel, treacherous, or unkind to strangers. On the contrary, they were, in most parts, a sensible and ingenious people. They were kind and friendly, courteous and obliging, and remarkably fair and just in their dealings. Such are the men whom you hire their own countrymen to tear away from this lovely country; part by stealth, part by force, part made captives in those wars which you raise or foment on purpose. You have seen them torn away,+children from their parents, parents from their children; husbands from their wives, wives from their beloved husbands, brethren and sisters from each other. You have dragged them who had never done you any wrong, perhaps in chains, from their native shore. You have forced them into your ships like an herd of swine,--them who had souls immortal as your own; only some of them leaped into the sea, and resolutely stayed under water, till they could suffer no more from you. You have stowed them together as close as ever they could lie, without any regard either to decency or convenience. And when many of them had been poisoned by foul air, or had sunk under various hardships, you have seen their remains delivered to the deep, till the sea should give up his dead. You have carried the survivors into the vilest slavery, never to end but with life; such slavery as is not found among the Turks at Algiers, no, nor among the Heathens in America. 3. May I speak plainly to you? I must. Love constrains me; love to you, as well as to those you are concerned with. Is there a God? You know there is. Is he a just God? Then there must be a state of retribution; a state wherein +he just God will reward every man according to his works. Then what reward will he render to you? O think betimes ! before you drop into eternity | Think now, “He shall have judgment without mercy that showed no mercy.” Are you a man? Then you should have an human heart. But have you indeed? What is your heart made of?

What is your heart made of? Is there no such principle as compassion there? Do you never feel another’s pain? Have you no sympathy, no sense of human woe, no pity for the miserable? When you saw the flowing eyes, the heaving breasts, or the bleeding sides and tortured limbs of your fellow-creatures, was you a stone, or a brute? Did you look upon them with the eyes of a tiger? When you squeezed the agonizing creatures down in the ship, or when you threw their poor mangled remains into the sea, had you no relenting? Did not one tear drop from your eye, one sigh escape from your breast? Do you feel no relenting now? If you do not, you must go on, till the measure of your iniquities is full. Then will the great God deal with you as you have dealt with them, and require all their blood at your hands. And at “that day it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for you!” But if your heart does relent, though in a small degree, know it is a call from the God of love. And “to-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your heart.” To-day resolve, God being your helper, to escape for your life. Regard not money ! All that a man hath will he give for his life : Whatever you lose, lose not your soul: Nothing can countervail that loss. Immediately quit the horrid trade: At all events, be an honest man. 4. This equally concerns every merchant who is engaged in the slave-trade. It is you that induce the African villain to sell his countrymen; and in order thereto, to steal, rob, murder men, women, and children without number, by enabling the English villain to pay him for so doing, whom you overpay for his execrable labour. It is your money that is the spring of all, that empowers him to go on: So that whatever he or the African does in this matter is all your act and deed. And is your conscience quite reconciled to this? Does it never reproach you at all? Has gold entirely blinded your eyes, and stupified your heart? Can you see, can you feel, no harm therein? Is it doing as you would be done to? Make the case your own.

It is evident from the Acts of Parlia ment now in being, that this was never granted, and never claimed till now : On the contrary, the English Government has ever claimed the right of taxing them, even in virtue of those very charters. But you ask, “Can there be an English man who would not sooner lose his heart’s blood, than yield to such claims?” (Page 47.) A decent question for a subject of England to ask Just of a piece with your assertions, that “our constitution is almost lost;” that the claims of the Crown have “stabbed our liberty;” and that “a free Government loses its nature, the moment it becomes liable to be commanded by any superior power.” (Page 49.) From the moment it Becomes liable / This is not the case with the colonies; they do not become liable to be commanded by the King and Parliament; they always were so, from their first institution. 43. “The fundamental principle of our Government is, the right of the people to grant their own money.” No.; if you understand the word people, according to your own definition, for all the individuals that compose the state, this is not the fundamental principle of our Government, nor any principle of it at all. It is not the principle even of the Government of Holland, nor of any Government in Europe. “It was an attempt to encroach upon this right in a trifling instance, that produced the civil war in the reign of King Charles the First.” Ono' it was the actual encroaching, not on this right only, but on the feligious as well as civil rights of the subject; and that, not in one trifling instance only, but in a thousand instances of the highest importance. “Therefore, this is a war undertaken, not only against our own constitution, but on purpose to destroy other similar constitutions in America, and to substitute in their room a military force.” (Page 50.) Is it possible that a man of sense should believe this? Did the King and Parliament undertake this war, on purpose to overturn a castle in the air, to destroy a constitution that never existed ?

A Seasonable Address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- UNHAPPY, very unhappy for us, we are a kingdom divided against itself; and, without a miracle, fall we must ! What a fall will there then be, when such “distress is upon the land, aud wrath upon the people !” And is this a little thing, brethren? Is it what any of us either desire or promote? God forbid! A kingdom divided against itself is an evil, of all others, the most dreadful; inasmuch as an innumerable train of evils necessarily follow; no inconsiderable part of which are the sword, fire, plunder, and famine. This our forefathers unhappily felt, and to our inexpressible sorrow we may feel. And is this an unlikely thing? Is it altogether impro bable? Surely no ! But that small cloud which arose some few years since, has, to discerning minds, been gathering blackness, and spreading itself well-nigh over the whole land. And is it any marvel if, by and by, it should burst upon us, as it has done upon America? Let him that has wisdom understand this. Then who that has any understanding, any bowels of mercy and compassion, would not do the utmost, that either human or divine prudence can suggest, to prevent it? For who knows, when the sword is once drawn, where it may stop? Who can command it to be put up into its scabbard, and it will obey him? Such power is not in man; it is only in Him Who rides upon the stormy sky, And calms the roaring seas. Again: If the sword should be drawn, upon whom may it light? This we know not. But supposing it should be on yourself, or a beloved wife, an aged parent, a tender child, a dear relative, what recompence can be found for such a loss? What, O ! what would the whole world then be, if it might be gained? Alas! what a poor trifle ! But, suppose you escape with your life, and the lives of those that are near and dear to you, there is yet another dreadful evil to fear, and which has been the case; plunder, lawless plunder, may deprive you of your little all. Now, who can insure another?

What an amazing way of deciding controversies ! But so it is; and O what horrors attend on it ! At what a price is the decision made | By the blood and wounds of thousands; the burning cities, ravaging and laying waste the country.” Now, who that seriously considers this awful contest, can help lamenting the astonishing want of wisdom in our brethren to decide the matter without bloodshed? What, are there no wise men amongst us? none that are able to judge between brethren? But brother goeth to war against brother; and that in the very sight of the Heathen. Surely this is a sore evil amongst us. O how are the mighty fallent How is wisdom perished from the wise ! What a flood of folly and madness has broke in upon us! But do you farther ask me, Who was first in the transgres sion? Who began the dreadful strife? I must beg your pardon for not touching this subject now. Excuse my saying any thing of the second cause, as I mean only to inquire into the first. I fear doing harm, and this is far from my design. Another great reason for my avoiding any reflections of this sort, on this delicate subject, is, that it has been already done by some of the most able hands, and to very little purpose. Argument seems lost in clamour, in confusion of passion and party rage; and the satanic dust of prejudice seems to have put out the eyes of our understanding. But thus much I might venture to say,-the case is rendered very complicated, and must in general remain unintelligible, unless to those who thoroughly understand the constitution of each party, and then have wisdom enough to weigh it in an unprejudiced balance. To be plain, the present melancholy dispute either is, or is not, founded in a constitutional right on the one part, and a constitutional opposition on the other. So far is certain. Therefore, till the entire nature of both constitutions is well and fully understood, it is utterly impossible to decide thereon. I speak as to the matter of the dispute only; the manner of it is another point. Now, how many understand, or ever properly consider, either the one or the other? I fear but few.

The inquirers jumped into the middle of it at once, in defiance of all logic and common sense. “The state of the nation” is a very vague and indeterminate expression; so indeterminate, that, if the meaning of the phrase be not fixed before the inquiry concerning it is begun, men of elo quence may make vehement speeches, of two or three hours long, while neither the speakers nor the hearers know what they are talking about. And speeches of this kind tend to inflame, not to inform, our homest countrymen. They are calculated, not to bring light, but fire; to raise the nation into a flame. But to come to the point: You are desirous to inquire concerning the state of the nation. But what is it you would know concerning it? “Certainly, whether it be prosperous or not?” In what respects? It may be prosperous in one respect, and not so in another. Tell us coolly and distinctly, what is the question? And what is it you would prove? It is this: “Is not the nation ruined?” Ruined / What can you mean? The great men of another nation asked the King, “Knowest thou not that Egypt is destroyed?” How was it destroyed? Why, all the cattle of Egypt were killed by the murrain. And not only all the flax and corn, all the wheat and barley were consumed, but the locusts had devoured every herb and leaf, and left no green thing in the land. Countrymen, judge | Is England thus destroyed? Are all our cattle killed? Have you no oxen, or cows, or sheep, or swine?--no horses, mules, asses left? Whatever be the case elsewhere, are not a few of them left alive in London? Is all your corn destroyed? Look round upon the fields; is there no green thing left? See with your own eyes. You do see, that there is as fair a prospect, as has been for many years. I can testify, that for more than half a century, there has not been greater plenty, either of cattle or vegetables of every kind, than there is at this day. England therefore is not destroyed. “But is it not in the high road to destruction? What is its present state? good or bad? increasing or decreasing?” Increasing or decreasing, in what respects?

or fewer for distant voyages? Nay, have we fewer ship-carpenters, or fewer sail makers at work? And do we build fewer or smaller ships for merchants’ service than formerly?” The more particu larly you inquire, the more clearly you will see how immensely the nation has improved in this article. But it is objected, “We have lost eight hundred of our ships since the beginning of the war.” Perhaps so; although you have no proof of this; for Lloyd's Catalogue is no sufficient evidence. But how many have we taken? This it is absolutely needful you should know, or you cannot know whether we have lost or gained upon the whole. We have taken above nine hundred. And the evidence of our gain is at least as good as that of our loss. “Nay, but we have also lost our Negro trade.” I would to God it may never be found more ! that we may never more steal and sell our brethren like beasts; never murder them by thousands and tens of thousands ! O may this worse than Mahometan, worse than Pagan, abomination, be removed from us for ever ! Never was anything such a reproach to England since it was a nation, as the having any hand in this execrable traffic. 6. “The state of our fisheries at home and abroad forms another important article of comparison. For as our ships of war are our bulwarks, and our sailors are the proper guards for defending such works, so it is of the utmost importance to have always ready, for manning our fleets, a number of able seamen. Now, these are most readily supplied by our fisheries. And when were these in their most flourishing state? in 1759, or 1777? Were more British ships employed in the fisheries on the banks of Newfoundland, or in the gulf of St. Lawrence, or on the coasts of Labrador, then, than there are now 7 Were there half as many? Again: Were there more employed in the fisheries for whales, and fish to make oil? Were there even half as many? As to the fisheries on our own coasts, and on the coasts of Scotland and Ireland, can any man deny that they have hugely increased during these eighteen years?

“We have lost--near as many ships as we have taken | We have been disturbed on the banks of Newfoundland; and we can no longer sell our brethren like sheep, and pour out their blood like water; therefore the nation is in a desperate state; therefore we are on the brink of ruin l’’ And are these the best arguments that can be found to support the lamentable conclusion | Now, my friends, give me leave to sum up briefly what has been offered on the other side. And, I pray, observe the difference; mark the firm and solid foundation whereon the conclusion is built. The prosperous or adverse state of the nation is to be judged of from the state of its population, its agriculture, its manufactures, its land and fresh-water carriage of goods, its salt-water carriage of goods, its fisheries, the tendency of its taxes, its annual revenue, and the national debt. But you have seen, that, in each of these particulars, considered one by one, England is not in a worse but in a far better state than it was eighteen years ago; so far from being on the brink of ruin, that it is in a state of eminent prosperity. Let none then deceive you with vain words ! Let none by subtle reasonings, or by artful, elaborate harangues, persuade you out of your senses. Let no sweet-tongued orator, by his smooth periods, steal away your understanding; no thunder ing talker fill you with vain fears of evils that have no being. Be aware of all who (perhaps sincerely) strive to terrify you with creatures of their own imagination. You are encom passed with liberty, peace, and plenty: You see them on the right hand and on the left. Let no man then cast a mist before your eyes, and face you down that they are poverty and slavery. Know the public as well as private blessings: which you enjoy, and be thankful to God and man. There is only one reason why we should fear: There is a God that judgeth the earth. And as none can harm us if we have Him for our friend, so none can help us if we have Him for our enemy. Is it not wise then seriously to consider this, Is God our friend or our enemy? But who thinks or cares about it?

A Word to a Protestant Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. Do not you call yourself a Protestant? Why so? Do you know what the word means? What is a Protestant? I suppose you mean one that is not a Papist. But what is a Papist? If you do not know, say so; acknowledge you cannot tell. Is not this the case? You call yourself a Protestant; but you do not know what a Protestant is. You talk against Papists; and yet neither do you know what a Papist is. Why do you pretend, then, to the knowledge which you have not? Why do you use words which you do not understand? 2. Are you desirous to know what these words, Papist and Protestant, mean? A Papist is one who holds the Pope or Bishop of Rome (the name papa, that is, father, was formerly given to all Bishops) to be head of the whole Christian Church; and the Church of Rome, or that which owns the Pope as their head, to be the only Christian Church. 3. In a course of years, many errors crept into this Church, of which good men complained from time to time. At last, about two hundred years ago, the Pope appointed many Bishops and others to meet at a town in Germany, called Trent. But these, instead of amending those errors, established them all by a law, and so delivered them down to all succeeding generations. 4. Among these errors may be numbered, their doctrine of seven sacraments; of transubstantiation; of communion in one kind only; of purgatory, and praying for the dead therein; of veneration of relics; and of indulgences, or pardons granted by the Pope, and to be bought for money. It is thought by some, that these errors, great as they are, do only defile the purity of Christianity; but it is sure, the following strike at its very root, and tend to banish true religion out of the world:-- 5. First. The doctrine of merit. The very foundation of Christianity is, that a man can merit nothing of God; that we are “justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ;” not for any of our works or of our deservings, but by faith in the blood of the covenant.

Suffer me not to remain in darkness concerning anything that is needful for me to know in order to my present peace and my eternal glory. O Lord, incline mine ears to wisdom, and my heart. to understanding, that I may follow on to know the Lord, and increase in the knowledge and love of God. Give me, O. Lord, that highest learning, to know thee; and that best. wisdom, to know myself. Command a blessing on my studies. and endeavours; and bless me, and help me, Lord, in my learning all such things as shall stand me in stead, and do me good. Let my soul and body, and all their powers, be under thy conduct, and employed to thy glory. Show me thy ways, O Lord, and lead me into truth; and whatever I am ignorant of, unto me let it be given to know the mysteries. of thy kingdom; and let me count all things but dung and dross for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord; to whom, with thee and the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. Vouchsafe, O. Lord, to keep me this day from all sin. Bless my going out. and coming in, now and for evermore. Amen. “Our Father,” &c. O MY heavenly Father, who tookest me out of my mother's. womb, who wast my hope when Ihanged yet upon my mother's breast, I have been preserved by thee ever since I was born; Ogo not from me in this my youth, but send out thy light and thy truth, that they may lead me, and bring me to thy holy hill, and to thy dwelling-place. Teach me thy way, O Lord, and enable me to walk in thy truth. O knit my heart unto. thee, that I may fear thy name; and give me understanding in the way of godliness. Lord, I am young, and cannot dis cern between good and evil: O let me not go out of the way of thy commandments. Learn me true understanding and knowledge. Teach me to do the thing that pleaseth thee; for thou art my God. Let thy loving Spirit lead me forth into all the paths of righteousness. Let my study day and night be in thy word, that I may become wise unto salvation.

With much difficulty I got near the shore; but the rocks were so ragged and sharp, that I saw, if I attempted to land there, I should be torn in pieces; so I was constrained to turn again to the mid stream. At last, despairing of life, I was cheered by the sight of a fine smooth creek, into which I was swiftly carried by a violent stream. A building stood directly across it, which I did not then know to be a powder-mill. The last thing I can remem ber was, the striking of my breast against one of the piles whereon it stood. I then lost my senses, and knew nothing more, till I rose on the other side of the mill. When I came to myself, I was in a calm, safe place, perfectly well, without any soreness or weariness at all. Nothing was amiss but the distance of my clothes, the stream having driven me five miles from the place where I left them. Many persons gladly welcomed me on shore; one gentleman in particular, who said, ‘I looked when you went under the mill, and again when you rose on the other side; and the time of your being immerged among the piles, was exactly twenty minutes.’” But some will say, “Why, this was a miracle !” Undoubt edly it was. It was not a natural event; but a work wrought above the power of nature, probably by the ministry of angels. 8. When he was yet very young, his father sent him to the University of Geneva. After he had gone through the usual course of study, it was the desire of his parents that he should be a Clergyman. But it was his own desire and resolution to be an Officer in the army. Not being able to gain their consent to this, he, without their consent, went away to Lisbon. Here he gathered a company of his own countrymen, accepted of a Captain’s commission, and engaged to serve the King of Portugal, on board a man-of-war, which was just then getting ready with all speed in order to sail to Brazil. He then wrote to his parents, begging them to send him a considerable sum of money. Of this he expected to make a vast advantage.

Whatever he believed to be the will of God, he resolutely performed, though it were to pluck out a right eye, to lay his Isaac on the altar. When it appeared that God called him to any journey, he immediately prepared for it, without the least hesitation; although, for the last years of his life, he hardly ever travelled to any consider able distance, without feeling some tendency to a relapse into his former distemper; and it was usually some weeks after his return, before he recovered his usual strength.” Humility continually produces meekness, and the latter bears an exact proportion to the former. I received a letter on this head but a few days since, which it may not be improper to subjoin : “Rev. SIR, “I was yesterday in company with several Clergymen, who, among other things, mentioned Mr. Fletcher, and seemed particularly anxious that in the account of his life a proper degree of caution should be observed in the panegyric that may be applied to his character. They say he was extremely passionate; and that there was in many instances an austere severity and rigour in his conduct to the young people under his care, particularly at Trevecka. As this information comes from a gentleman eminent for his knowledge of mankind, and universally esteemed as one of the greatest geniuses of the age, and one whose veracity has never been questioned, it will have no small weight in the learned world.” 7. I am glad this information came to my hands in time, as it may now receive so sufficient an answer as will probably satisfy every candid and impartial reader. Two things are here asserted concerning Mr. Fletcher: The First, that he was extremely passionate: The Second, that there was an austere severity and rigour in his conduct toward the young persons under his care, particularly at Trevecka. The former assertion is unquestionably true; such he was by nature. The latter I question much, with regard to his con duct at Tern, as well as at Trevecka. None can be a more competent witness of his conduct at Tern, than Mr. Vaughan, who lived so long in the same house; and whose testimony concerning him has been so largely given in the preceding pages. But, waving this, can it possibly be supposed, that either Mr.

from levity of every kind. Though he was constantly cheer ful, as rejoicing in hope of his heavenly inheritance, yet had he too deep a sense of his own wants, and the wants of the Church of God, as also of the sins and miseries of mankind, to be at any time light or trifling. I have a letter before me, dated December, 1771, which at once gives us a picture of his seriousness, watchfulness, and earnestness; and contains advices well deserving the consideration of all that fear God. ‘There is undoubtedly, said he, “such a thing as the full assurance of faith. Be not discouraged on account of thou sands who stop short of it: It is our own fault if we do not attain. God would give us ample satisfaction if we did but deeply feel our wants. Both you and I want a deeper awakening, which will produce a death to outward things and speculative knowledge. Let us shut our eyes to the gilded clouds without us; let us draw inward, and search after God, if haply we may find him. Let us hold our confidence, though we are often constrained against hope to believe in hope. But let us not rest in our confidence, as thousands do; let it help us to struggle and wait till he come. Let us habituate our selves to live inwardly. This will solemnize us, and prevent our trifling with the things of God. We may be thankful for what we have, without resting in it. We may strive, and yet not trust in our striving; but expect all from divine grace.” “Four or five years after, he says, “I send this to inquire after your welfare, and to let you know, that though I am pretty well in body, yet I breakfast. But I want to break faster in my spirit than I do. Yet, blessed be God, I have been in such pinching, grinding circumstances, for near a year, by a series of providential and domestic trials, as have given me some deadly blows. I am not without hope of setting my eyes on you once more. Mr. Wesley kindly invites me to travel with nim, and visit some of the societies. I feel an inclination to break one of my chains, parochial retirement, which may be a nest for self-indulgence.

But now the sun of my earthly joys is set for ever, and my soul filled with an anguish which only finds its consolation in a total resignation to the will of God. When I was asking the Lord, if he pleased, to spare him to me a little longer, the following promise was impressed on my mind: ‘Where I am, there shall my servants be, that they may behold my glory.” Lord, hasten the time !” 18. There is little need of adding any farther character of this man of God to the foregoing account, given by one who wrote out of the fulness of her heart. I would only observe, that for many years I despaired of finding any inhabitant of Great Britain, that could stand in any degree of comparison with Gregory Lopez, or Monsieur de Renty. But let any impartial person judge if Mr. Fletcher was at all inferior to them. Did he not experience as deep communion with God, and as high a measure of inward holiness, as was experienced by either one or the other of those burning and shining lights? And it is certain, his outward light shone before men with full as bright a lustre as theirs. But if any would draw a parallel between them, there are two circumstances which should be well observed. One is, we are not assured that the writers of their lives did not extenuate, if not suppress, their faults. And some faults we are assured there were; namely, some touches of superstition, and some of idolatry, as the worship of images, angels, and saints; the Virgin Mary in particular. But I have not suppressed, or even extenuated, anything in Mr. Fletcher's life. Indeed, I know nothing that needed to be extenuated, much less to be suppressed. A second circumstance is, that the writers of their lives could not have so full a knowledge of them as I, and much more Mrs. Fletcher, had; being eye and ear witnesses of his whole conduct. Consequently, we knew that his life was not sullied with any taint of idolatry or superstition. I was intimately acquainted with him for thirty years. I conversed with him morning, moon, and night, without the least reserve, during a journey of many hundred miles; and in all that time I never heard him speak an improper word, or saw him do an improper action.

He asked me what I meant by perfection. I told him without any disguise or reserve. When I ceased speaking, he said, “Mr. Wesley, if this be all you mean, publish it to all the world. If any one then can confute what you say, he may have free leave.” I answered, “My Lord, I will; ” and accordingly wrote and published the sermon on Christian perfection. In this I endeavoured to show, (1.) In what sense Christians are not, (2.) In what sense they are, perfect. “(1.) In what sense they are not. They are not perfect in knowledge. They are not free from ignorance, no, nor from mistake. We are no more to expect any living man to be infallible, than to be omniscient. They are not free from. infirmities, such as weakness or slowness of understanding, irregular quickness or heaviness of imagination. Such in another kind are impropriety of language, ungracefulness of pronunciation; to which one might add a thousand nameless defects, either in conversation or behaviour. From such infirmities as these none are perfectly freed till their spirits return to God; neither can we expect till then to be wholly freed from temptation; for ‘the servant is not above his master.” But neither in this sense is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees, none which does not admit of a continual increase. “(2.) In what sense then are they perfect? Observe, we are not now speaking of babes in Christ, but adult Christians. But even babes in Christ are so far perfect as not to commit sin. This St. John affirms expressly; and it cannot be disproved by the examples of the Old Testament. For what, if the holiest of the ancient Jews did sometimes commit sin? We cannot infer from hence, that “all Christians do and must commit sin as long as they live.’ “But does not the Scripture say, ‘A just man sinneth seven times a day?’ It does not. Indeed it says, “A just man falleth seven times. But this is quite another thing; for, First, the words, a day, are not in the text. Secondly, here is no mention of falling into sin at all. What is here mentioned, is, falling into temporal affliction. “But elsewhere Solomon says, “There is no man that sinneth not.

I endeavoured to pray, and could not. I went to Mrs. D., who prayed for me, and told me it was the death of nature. I opened the Bible, on, ‘The fearful and unbelieving shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.’ I could not bear it. I opened again, on Mark xvi. 6, 7: ‘Be not affrighted; ye seek Jesus of Nazareth. Go your way; tell his disciples he goeth before you into Galilee; there ye shall see him.’ I was encouraged, and enabled to pray, believing I should see Jesus at home. I returned that night, and found Mrs. G. She prayed for me; and the Predestinarian had no plea, but, ‘Lord, thou art no respecter of persons.’ He proved he was not, by blessing me. I was in a moment enabled to lay hold on Jesus Christ, and found salvation by simple faith. He assured me, the Lord, the King, was in the midst of me, and that I should see evil no more. I now blessed Him who had visited and redeemed me, and was become my “wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” I saw Jesus altogether lovely; and knew he was mine in all his offices. And, glory be to Him, He now reigns in my heart without a rival. I find no will but his. I feel no pride; nor any affec tion but what is placed on Him. I know it is by faith Istand; and that watching unto prayer must be the guard of faith. I am happy in God this moment, and I believe for the next. I have often read the chapter you mention, (1 Cor. xiii.,) and compared my heart and life with it. In so doing, I feel my shortcomings, and the need I have of the atoning blood. Yet I dare not say, I do not feel a measure of the love there described, though I am not all I shall be. I desire to be lost in that ‘love which passeth knowledge.’ I see ‘the just shall live by faith;’ and unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given.

You have always preached the strictest doctrine; and I loved to follow it. Do so still, whoever is pleased or displeased.’ He asked, “Do you now believe you are saved from sin 7” She said, ‘Yes; I have had no doubt of it for many months. That I ever had, was, because I did not abide in the faith. I now feel I have kept the faith; and perfect love casteth out all fear. As to you, the Lord promised me, your latter works should exceed your former, though I do not live to see it. I have been a great enthusiast, as they term it, these six months; but never lived so near the heart of Christ in my life. You, Sir, desire to comfort the hearts of hundreds by following that simplicity your soul loves.” “(9.) To one who had received the love of God under her prayer, she said, ‘I feel I have not followed a cunningly-devised fable; for I am as happy as I can live. Do you press on, and stop not short of the mark. To Miss M s she said, ‘Love Christ; he loves you. I believe I shall see you at the right hand of God: But as one star differs from another star in glory, so shall it be in the resurrection. I charge you, in the presence of God, meet me in that day all-glorious within. Avoid all conformity to the world. You are robbed of many of your privileges. I know I shall be found blameless. Do you labour to be found of him in peace, without spot.’ “(10.) Saturday morning, she prayed nearly as follows: ‘I know, my Lord, my life is prolonged only to do thy will. And though I should never eat or drink more,” (she had not swallowed anything for near eight-and-twenty hours,) ‘thy will be done. I am willing to be kept so a twelvemonth: Man liveth not by bread alone. I praise thee that there is not a shadow of complaining in our streets. In that sense we know not what sickness means. Indeed, Lord, neither life, nor death, nor things present, nor things to come, no, nor any creature, shall separate us from thy love one moment. Bless these, that there may be no lack in their souls. I believe there shall not.

13. But if Christ has put an end to that law, what need of any atonement for their transgressing it? “A. Observe in what sense he has put an end to it, and the difficulty vanishes. Were it not for the abiding merit of his death, and his continual intercession for us, that law would condemn us still. These, therefore, we still need for every transgression of it. “Q. 14. But can one that is saved from sin be tempted? “A. Yes; for Christ was tempted. “Q. 15. However, what you call temptation, I call the corruption of my heart. And how will you distinguish one from the other? “A. In some cases it is impossible to distinguish, without the direct witness of the Spirit. But in general one may distinguish thus: “One commends me. Here is a temptation to pride. But instantly my soul is humbled before God. And I feel no pride; of which I am as sure, as that pride is not humility. “A man strikes me. Here is a temptation to anger. But my heart overflows with love. And I feel no anger at all; of which I can be as sure, as that love and anger are not the same. “A woman solicits me. Here is a temptation to lust. But in the instant I shrink back. And I feel no desire or lust at all; of which I can be as sure, as that my hand is cold or hot. “Thus it is, if I am tempted by a present object; and it is just the same, if, when it is absent, the devil recals a commenda tion, an injury, or a woman, to my mind. In the instant the soul repels the temptation, and remains filled with pure love. * “And the difference is still plainer, when I compare my present state with my past, wherein I felt temptation and corruption too. “Q. 16. But how do you know, that you are sanctified, saved from your inbred corruption? “A. I can know it no otherwise than I know that I am justified. ‘Hereby know we that we are of God,” in either sense, ‘by the Spirit that he hath given us.” “We know it by the witness and by the fruit of the Spirit. And, First, by the witness.

That scripture, ‘We have received, not the spirit that is of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we may know the things which are freely given us of God.” (1 Corinthians ii. 12.) “Now surely sanctification is one of ‘the things which are freely given us of God.’ And no possible reason can be assigned why this should be excepted, when the Apostle says, “We receive the Spirit” for this very end, ‘that we may know the things which are’ thus ‘freely given us.” “Is not the same thing implied in that well-known scripture, “The Spirit itself witnesseth with our spirit, that we are the children of God?’ (Romans viii. 16.) Does he witness this only to those who are children of God in the lowest sense? Nay, but to those also who are such in the highest sense. And does he not witness, that they are such in the highest sense ? What reason have we to doubt it? “What, if a man were to affirm, (as indeed many do,) that this witness belongs only to the highest class of Christians? Would not you answer, “The Apostle makes no restriction; therefore doubtless it belongs to all the children of God?” And will not the same answer hold, if any affirm, that it belongs only to the lowest class? “Consider likewise 1 John v. 19: ‘We know that we are of God. How? ‘By the Spirit that he hath given us.” Nay, “hereby we know that He abideth in us.” And what ground have we, either from Scripture or reason, to exclude the witness, any more than the fruit, of the Spirit, from being here intended? By this then also ‘we know that we are of God,” and in what sense we are so; whether we are babes, young men, or fathers, we know in the same manner. “Not that I affirm that all young men, or even fathers, have this testimony every moment. There may be inter missions of the direct testimony that they are thus born of God; but those intermissions are fewer and shorter as they grow up in Christ; and some have the testimony both of their justification and sanctification, without any intermission at all; which I presume more might have, did they walk humbly and closely with God. “Q. 20.

It is not worth while to contend for a term. It is “ salvation from sin.” “(7.) It is ‘perfect love.” (1 John iv. 18.) This is the essence of it; its properties, or inseparable fruits, are, rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in every thing giving thanks. (1 Thess. v. 16, &c.) “(8.) It is improvable. It is so far from lying in an indivisible point, from being incapable of increase, that one perfected in love may grow in grace far swifter than he did before. “(9.) It is amissible, capable of being lost; of which we have numerous instances. But we were not thoroughly convinced of this, till five or six years ago. “(10.) It is constantly both preceded and followed by a gradual work. “(11.) But is it in itself instantaneous or not? In examining this, let us go on step by step. “An instantaneous change has been wrought in some believers: None can deny this. “Since that change, they enjoy perfect love; they feel this, and this alone; they ‘rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks. Now, this is all that I mean by perfection; therefore, these are witnesses of the perfec tion which I preach. “‘But in some this change was not instantaneous.” They did not perceive the instant when it was wrought. It is often difficult to perceive the instant when a man dies; yet there is an instant in which life ceases. And if ever sin ceases, there must be a last moment of its existence, and a first moment of our deliverance from it. “‘But if they have this love now, they will lose it. They may; but they need not. And whether they do or no, they have it now; they now experience what we teach. They now are all love; they now rejoice, pray, and praise without ceasing. “‘However, sin is only suspended in them; it is not destroyed. Call it which you please. They are all love to-day; and they take no thought for the morrow. “‘But this doctrine has been much abused.’ So has that of justification by faith. But that is no reason for giving up either this or any other scriptural doctrine.

A Thought upon Marriage Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. I AM not now about to speak to men of the world, or to them that have only the form of religion; but to you who have experienced, if you do not now, the “faith which worketh by love:” And, in speaking to you, I do not peremptorily assert anything. I barely propose a thought that rises in my mind, and beg you to consider it. 2. You have some thoughts of altering your condition; and we know, “marriage is honourable in all men.” But is your eye single herein? This is worthy your most serious consideration. Retire a little into yourself, and ask your own heart : “What is it moves me to think of this?” 3. I will tell you how it was with me: Though I do not know I was ever low-spirited, (my spirits being always the same, whether in sickness or in health,) yet I was often uneasy. Even in vigorous health, in plenty, and in the midst of my friends, I wanted something; I was not satisfied. I looked about for happiness, but could not find it. Then I thought, “O, if I had but such a person with me, I should surely be happy.” I mused with myself, “How lovely is her look How agreeably she talks !” I thought of Sappho’s words:-- “Bless'd as the immortal gods is he, The youth that fondly sits by thee; And hears and sees thee all the while Softly speak and sweetly smile.” “Surely, this is the very thing I want; and could I attain it, I should then no more be solitary ! For,-- Thou from all shades the darkness wouldst exclude, And from a desert banish solitude : Therefore, with her I can be happy; without her I never can.” 4. Perhaps your case is something like mine. Let me then ask you a few questions. Were you ever convinced of sin? of your lost, undone state? Did you feel the wrath of God abiding on you? If so, what did you then want to make you happy? “To know, my God is reconciled.” You had your wish. You were enabled to say boldly, “I know that my Redeemer liveth.” And were not you then happy? “Indeed I was.” In what?

As to the fruit of this new manner of preaching, (entirely new to the Methodists) speaking much of the promises, little of the commands; (even to unbelievers, and still less to believers;) you think it has done great good; I think it has done great harm. I think it has done great harm to the Preachers; not only to James Wheatly himself, but to those who have learned of him,-David Trathen, Thomas Webb, Robert Swindells, and John Maddern: I fear to others also; all of whom are but shadows of what they were; most of them have exalted themselves above measure, as if they only “preached Christ, preached the gospel.” And as highly as they have exalted themselves, so deeply have they despised their brethren ; calling them “legal Preachers, legal wretches;” and (by a cant name) “Doctors,” or “Doctors of Divinity.” They have not a little despised their Ministers also, for “counte nancing the Doctors,” as they termed them. They have made their faults (real or supposed) common topics of con versation; hereby cherishing in themselves the very spirit of Ham; yea, of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. I think it has likewise done great harm to their hearers; diffusing among them their own prejudice against the other Preachers; against their Ministers, me in particular, (of which you have been an undeniable instance,) against the scriptural, Methodist manner of preaching Christ, so that they could no longer bear sound doctrine; they could no *- - -- longer hear the plain old truth with profit or pleasure, nay, hardly with patience. After hearing such Preachers for a time, you yourself (need we further witnesses?) could find in my preaching no food for your soul; nothing to strengthen you in the way; no inward experience of a believer; it was all barren and dry; that is, you had no taste for mine or John Nelson's preaching; it neither refreshed nor nourished you. Why, this is the very thing I assert: That the gospel Preachers, so called, corrupt their hearers; they vitiate their taste, so that they cannot relish sound doctrine; and spoil their appetite, so that they cannot turn it into nourishment; they, as it were, feed them with sweetmeats, till the genuine wine of the kingdom seems quite insipid to them.

Thoughts on Nervous Disorders Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. WHEN Physicians meet with disorders which they do not understand, they commonly term them nervous ; a word that conveys to us no determinate idea, but it is a good cover for learned ignorance. But these are often no natural disorder of the body, but the hand of God upon the soul, being a dull consciousness of the want of God, and the unsatisfactoriness of everything here below. At other times it is conviction of sin, either in a higher or a lower degree. It is no wonder that those who are strangers to religion should not know what to make of this; and that, conse quently, all their prescriptions should be useless, seeing they quite mistake the case. 2. But undoubtedly there are nervous disorders which are purely natural. Many of these are connected with other diseases, whether acute or chronical. Many are the fore runners of various distempers, and many the consequences of then. But there arc those which are not connected with others, being themselves a distinct, original distemper. And this frequently ariscs to such a height, that it seems to be one species of madness. So, one man imagines himself to be made of glass; another thinks he is too tall to go in at the door. This is often termed the spleen, or vapours; often, lowness of spirits; a phrase that, having scarce any meaning, is so much the fitter to be given to this unintelligible disorder. It seems to have taken its risc from hence: We sometimes say, “A man is in high spirits;” and the proper opposite to this is, “He is low-spirited.” Does not this imply, that a kind of faintness, wearincss, and listlessness affects the whole body, so that he is disinclined to any motion, and hardly cares to move hand or foot? But the mind seems chiefly to be affected, having lost its relish of everything, and being no longer capable of enjoying the things it once delighted in most. Nay, everything round about is not only flat and insipid, but dreary and uncomfortable.

Some Account of an Eminent Man Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- PHILIP VERHEYEN, Doctor of Physic, in the University of Louvain, and Royal Professor of Anatomy and Surgery, was, towards the end of the last and in the beginning of the present century, one of the most eminent Physicians in Europe. He died at Louvain on the 28th of February, 1710, aged sixty-two. He was a man of eminent piety, wholly detached both from the goods and glory of this world. He gave orders not to bury him in the church, but in the churchyard; all the will which he left being in the following words : Philippus Verheyen, Medicinae Doctor et Professor, partem sui materialem hoc in caemeterio condi voluit, ne templum dehonestaret, aut nocivis halitibus inficeret. Requiescat in Apace. That is,--“Philip Verheyen, Doctor and Professor of Physic, ordered his body to be buried in this churchyard, that he might not lessen the honour of the church, or infect it with unwholesome vapours.” What pity it is, that so few persons, even of sense and piety, feel the force of these considerations ! I am so sensible of their weight, that I have likewise left orders to bury my remains, not in the New Chapel, but in the burying-ground adjoining to it. * 3: 460

1724 To his Brother Samuel [1] OXON, June 17, 1724. DEAR BROTHER, -- I believe I need not use many arguments to show I am sorry for your misfortune, though at the same time I am glad you are in a fair way of recovery. If I had heard of it from any one else, I might probably have pleased you with some impertinent consolations; but the way of your relating it is a sufficient proof that they are what you don’t stand in need of. And indeed, if I understand you rightly, you have more reason to thank God that you did not break both, than to repine because you have broke one leg. You have undoubtedly heard the story of the Dutch seaman who having broke one of his legs by a fall from the main-mast instead of condoling himself, thanked God that he had not broke his neck. [See Spectator, No. 574.] I scarce know whether your first news vexed me, or your last news pleased me, more; but I can assure you that, though I did not cry for grief at the former, I did for joy at the latter part of your letter. The two things that I most wished for of almost anything in the world were to see my mother and Westminster once again; 'and to see them both together was so far above my expectations that I almost looked upon it as next to an impossibility. I have been so very frequently disappointed when I had set my heart on any pleasure, that I will never again depend on any before it comes. However, I shall be obliged to you if you will tell me as near as you can how soon my uncle is expected in England and my mother in London. I hope my sister is pretty well recovered by this time, and that all at Westminster are in as good health as Your loving Brother. PS.--Pray give my service to Mrs. Harris, and as many as ask after me. Since you have a mind to see some of my verses, I have sent you some, which employed me above an hour yesterday in the afternoon. There is one, and I am afraid but one, good thing in them--that is, they are short. As o'er fair Cloe’s rosy cheek, Careless, a little vagrant passed, With artful hand around his neck

DEAR MOTHER--I am very much surprised at my sister's behavior towards my brother Charles, [Mrs. Samuel Wesley, jun., had evidently been vexed with Charles at Wroot. She had been a kind friend to John when he was at Charterhouse, and she was a young wife at Westminster. Charles told his brother in 1727 that he had cautioned Hetty “never to contraict my sister, whom she knows,’ and who. had been very kind to her (Stevenson's Wesley Family, p. 304).] and wish it is not in some measure of his own procuring. She was always, as far as I could perceive, apt to resent an affront, and I am afraid some reflection or other upon her, of which I have formerly heard him make several, has by accident come to her knowledge. If so, I don't at all wonder at anything which might follow; for though I believe she does not want piety, I am not of opinion she abounds in charity; having observed her sometimes to retaliate with great bitterness, on imagined contempt or slighting expression. She has always been particularly civil to me, ever since I was fifteen or sixteen years old; nor do I ever remember to have received an ill word from her, even to the time of her last being at Oxford. We had then a pretty deal of talk together, frequently by ourselves, and sometimes about my brother Charles, and I don't know that she once intimated anything to his disadvantage, so that either she must be a very skilful dissembler or the misunderstanding between them has took its rise very lately.

We have so invincible an attachment to truth already perceived, that it is impossible for us to disbelieve it. A distinct perception commands our assent, and the will is under a moral necessity of yielding to it. It is not, therefore, in every case a matter of choice whether we will believe ourselves worse than our neighbor or no; since we may distinctly perceive the truth of this proposition, He is worse than me; and then the judgment is not free. One, for instance, who is in company with a free-thinker, or other person signally debauched in faith and practice, can't avoid knowing himself to be the better of the two; these' propositions extorting our assent, --An Atheist is worse than a Believer; A man who endeavors to please God is better than he who defies Him. If a true knowledge of God be necessary to absolute humility, a true knowledge of our neighbor should be necessary to comparative. But to judge oneself the worst of all men implies a want of such knowledge. No knowledge can be, where there is not certain evidence; which we have not, whether we compare ourselves with acquaintance or strangers. In the one case we have only imperfect evidence, unless we can see through the heart and reins; in the other we have none at all. So that the best can be said of us in this particular, allowing the truth of the premises, is that we have been in a pious error, if at least we may yield so great a point to free-thinkers as to own any part of piety to be grounded on a mistake. Again, this kind of humility can never be well-pleasing to God, since it does not flow from faith, without which it impossible to please Him. Faith is a species of belief, and belief is defined 'an assent to a proposition upon rational grounds.' Without rational grounds there is therefore no belief, and consequently no faith.

1727 To his Mother LINCOLN COLLEGE, January 25, 1727. DEAR MOTHER, -- I am shortly to take my Master's degree. [He took his M.A. on Feb. 14, gaining considerable reputation by his disputation for the degree. He told Henry Moore that he delivered three lectures: De Anima Brutorum, on Natural Philosophy; De Julio Caesare, on Moral Philosophy; and De Amore Dei, on Religion.] As I shall from that time be less interrupted by business not of my own choosing, I have drawn up for myself a scheme of studies from, which I do not intend, for some years at least, to very. I am perfectly come over to your opinion that there are many truths it is not worth while to know. Curiosity, indeed, might be a sufficient plea for our laying out some time upon them, if we had half a dozen centuries of life to come; but methinks it is great ill-husbandry to spend a considerable part of the small pittance now allowed us in what makes us neither a quick nor a sure return.

Your knowledge would swiftly (though insensibly) improve, not so swiftly as your happiness. You would then find less pain from every accident; even from the absence of Aspasia. A treasure doubtless she is, the value of which nothing can teach so well as experience; every additional degree of intimacy with her may questionless enhance her value. Nor would it be human to be unconcerned at a separation from such a friend. Yet the time may come when that concern, though equally tender, shall not be equally painful to you: when you shall be as much pleased as ever with her presence, and yet not so much displeased at her absence. For there is a way (though it is a way which the world knows not) of dividing friendship from pain. It is called charity, or the love of God. The more acquainted we are with rids, the less anxiety shall we receive from the sharpest trial that can befall us. This, while it enlivens every virtuous affection of our souls, adds calmness to their strength; at the same time that it swells their stream, this makes it flow smooth and even. Soft peace she breathes wherever she arrives, She builds our quiet as she forms our lives, Leaves the rough paths of nature even, And opens in each breast a little heaven. [Prior's Charity, where it is brings,' not ' breathes,' in line I; 'heart,' in line 4; line 3, 'Lays the rough paths of peevish nature even.'] O Selima, never complain that it is not in your power to repay your friends much more than by receiving from them at least; don't complain with regard to me: any one of those! obliging things you have said is vastly more than a return for all the little service that is in my power to do you. I am amazed more and more, each time I reflect on those strange instances of your condescension, and feel how much I am overpaid, in (what I can never think of with due esteem and gratitude) the regard you show for Selima's Ever obliged friend and faithful servant, CYRUS. Araspes joins me in wishing he could make any return to Mrs. Granville's and Selima's goodness. I beg you to correct what you see wrong in the enclosed, and to send it when you write. Adieu. Mrs. Pendarves replies [4] GLOUCESTER, October 12, 1730.

SIR, -- I am almost afraid to own my having had both your letters, lest I should forfeit that good opinion that I extremely desire Cyrus should always have of Aspasia. I must farther confess that, had I not received the second letter, I should not have had courage to have wrote. I am but too sensible how unequal I am to the task. Could I, like our inimitable dear Varanese, express my sentiments, with what pleasure should I agree to the obliging request you make! But why should I be afraid of your superior understanding when I know at the same time the delight you take in not only entertaining but improving all those you converse with Then take me into your protection. Look on me as one surrounded with infirmities and imperfections, who flies to you for assistance against the assaults of vanity and passion. If you are desirous I should think you my friend, let this be the trial of it, not to leave any of my follies unreproved. I shall not scruple to discover to you those many defects which on a longer acquaintance with me your own observation must have pointed out to you; and it is no small argument of the great desire I have of improvement that I will run so great a hazard, for certainly you will value me less when you know how weak I am. You have no reason to make an apology for recommending the book you mention (which I suppose was the Bishop of Cork's). I have not yet read it; but I shall wait with impatience for the Abstract [See previous letter and that of Feb. 13, 1731.] you promise me, which I am sure will very well deserve the time I shall bestow in reading of it. My stay in Gloucester is uncertain; but when we go to town we shall call at Oxford, where we shall not fail of inquiring after Cyrus and Araspes. Selima adds: Aspasia is called away before she has finished her letter, and has not said one word for Selima, who thinks of Cyrus and Araspes with that esteem their merit justly claims, desires always to be thought their friend, and wishes Selima was worthy of it. When we go to Oxford, we don't know at what college to inquire after our agreeable friends. Mrs. Pendarves writes: GLOUCASTETR, October 26 [1730].

Had I not been engaged almost every hour in an employment which set Aspasia continually before my eyes, [His MS., finished on Christmas Eve: see letter of Feb. 13, 1731.] I could by no means have satisfied myself so long without saying anything of my obligations to her; I could not have been easy without repeating my acknowledgements for them, particularly for the last, that lovely instance of your condescension, which so opportunely relieved me from the perplexity I was in. Every pleasing reflection it has given me since was a farther reason for me to thank you again; and I have been sometimes afraid that my omitting it so long might give you hard thoughts of my gratitude. But I sincerely ask pardon for that fear, so injurious both to Aspasia and Selima; with whom I should 'by no means presume to converse at all, had I not so often experienced that candor which was ever as unwilling to observe a fault as willing to excuse it when observed. Do not think, good Aspasia, I am yet so vain as to dare to maintain any intercourse with you but upon a full conviction that you are 'always ready to forgive me both when I say amiss, and when I do not so, what your goodness requires. While I am reflecting on this I can't but often observe with pleasure the great resemblance between the emotion I then feel, and that with which my heart frequently overflowed, in the beginning of my intercourse with our dear Varanese. Yet is there a sort of soft melancholy mixed with it, when I perceive that I am making another avenue for grief, that I am laying open another part of my soul, at which the arrows of fortune may enter. Nay, but here will I hold: since the Christian name for fortune is providence, or the hand of God, should it wound me even in the person of my friend there would be goodness in the severity. Should one to whom I was united by the tenderest tie, who was as my own soul, be torn from me, it would be best for me; to me, too, it would, be the stroke of mercy. Though, were it a less good to myself,

WESTMINSTER, January 27 [1731]. 'Tis with a great deal of pleasure as well as fear that I take the liberty to acquaint you we have been in town some hours, and attend your commands as to the time when we may have the happiness of waiting upon you. To-morrow, indeed, we are obliged to give to the Westminster Feast. If you are pleased to fix on any day after that, it will be ever owned as a fresh instance of your goodness by Your most obliged and most obedient servants. To Mrs. Pendarves February 4 [1731]. I should have been exceedingly pleased could I have read over these papers with Aspasia and Selima: both because I should have hoped to have confirmed or altered my own judgment in several particulars, and because longer experience in things of this nature might perhaps have enabled me to be of some use toward fixing theirs. But 'tis well; I leave you in His hands, 'who shall lead into all truth.' To Mrs. Pendarves February 11 [1731]. 'Tis as impossible for us to remember as we ought our last obligation to Aspasia and Selima as it is to forget it; and that sure can never be--no, 'not in the land where all things are forgotten.' Even there we hope to remember, and with a more tender regard than we are here capable of, to whom we owe in great measure many changes in ourselves, of which we shall then feel the full advantage: who they were that so nobly assisted us in our great work in wearing off several stains from our nature; that so strongly recommended, by that irresistible argument example, whatsoever is honorable or lovely.

The few hours that Selima and Aspasia enjoyed the conversation of Cyrus and Araspes are too valuable to be forgot; which I should sooner have endeavored to convince you of if I could have found time: and the favor of the book is of so high a nature that we can never be so ungrateful as to look on it without the greatest thankfulness. How happy should we have been to have heard it read by one who so well knows to recommend everything he approves of! I am sensible there must be several things we shall not be able to comprehend in such a treatise; you must therefore give me leave to trouble you with my ignorance by desiring your explanation of what I may not understand. I hope we shall hear from you soon; I have not time now to enlarge my letter. I must again repeat my acknowledgements for the friendship you have shown us in many instances. Selima and Aspasia will always gratefully remember them. To Mrs. Pendarves February 19 [1731]. Yes, it is better to assure Aspasia now, though it be but in one line, that I am sensible of her strange goodness in thus preventing me a second time, than to put off still what, could it have been avoided, ought not to have been delayed a moment. But what can I do, thus hemmed in as I am with business over and above my own I am persuaded you would not condemn me, Aspasia, did you know how many days pass over my head in which I have not one poor hour from five to seven but what is engaged long before it comes. Yet never shall any engagement of any kind make me so false both to justice and friendship as to neglect any commands which I may have the pleasure of receiving from Aspasia or Selima. That particular .one which your last gives me leave to expect, I should earnestly have requested myself had not you mentioned it first. O Aspasia, how gladly should I receive into my soul your ignorance of some points in philosophy could ignorance of pride, ingratitude, and passion pass at the same time into (I dare hardly say) Your friend, CYRUS. When Aspasia or Selima is the theme', I speak the sense of Araspes in my own. Adieu. Mrs. Pendarves replies:

I had rather expose my own ignorance in writing than not hear from Cyrus and Araspes, whose letters give so much pleasure and improvement to your friends. Beside, at present I have my mother's commands to warrant my own inclination. She orders me to be very particular in her acknowledgements of the last letter she received from you. We were extremely vexed when we came [to Stanton] to find our agreeable friends had left it. [He was at Stanton on April 19.] Except that disappointment, our journey was as prosperous as we could wish. But my sister was not with us. The weakness we felt at parting we endeavored to correct by saying, Would not Cyrus blame us for this The reflection dried our tears; but, I must confess sincerely, it did not ease our pain. Is not this wrong in us Did I (for my sister has more fortitude) make a proper progress in Christianity, the things of this world would certainly be more indifferent to me than I find they are. How shall I learn the happiness of being above trifles Nobody can so well point out the way to me as yourself. But I could not make such a request did I not know how ready you are to do good. I have not had the pleasure of a letter since I came home from our valuable Sappho, [Miss Sally Kirkham (1699-1764), eldest daughter of the Rev. Lionel Kirkham, Rector of Stanton. In

It is easy to observe that almost every one thinks that rule totally needless which he does not need himself; and as to the Christian spirit itself, almost every one calls that degree of it which he does not himself aim at, enthusiasm. If, therefore, we plead for either (not as if we thought the former absolutely needful, neither as if we had attained the latter), it is no great wonder that they who are not for us in practice should be against us. If you, who are a less prejudiced judge, have perceived us faulty in this matter, too superstitious or enthusiastic, or whatever it is to be called, we earnestly desire to be speedily informed of our error, that we may no longer spend our strength on that which profiteth not. Or whatever there may be on the other hand, in which you have observed us to be too remiss, that likewise we desire to know as soon as possible. This is a subject which we would understand with as much accuracy as possible; it being hard to say which is of the worse consequence, -- the being too strict, the really carrying things too far, the wearying ourselves and spending our strength in burdens that are unnecessary; or the being frightened by those terrible words from what, if not directly necessary, would at least be useful. To Ann Granville [4] June 17 [1731]. In what words can I express my thanks to Selima for the favorable opinion she entertains of myself, of which she has given me so obliging a proof, as I extremely desired but knew not how to ask for

I have neither time nor skill to thank Selima as I would for her repeated condescension to me, which nothing can excel, and that for which I am so deeply indebted to good Mrs. Granville. Both hers and your partiality toward me I cannot but observe with wondering gratitude; and hope it will continue to plead in my behalf, and to excuse my many faults and infirmities: and my observing this makes me the less surprised that, notwithstanding all my failings, you still have so favorable an opinion of me as to think me worth your correspondence. Perhaps 'tis one of these failings that even now I intend to speak the plain sense of my [mind]. I do it in so unhappy a manner as to make even sincerity look like flattery: a fault I desire as carefully to avoid as stabbing my friend with a smile. For doubtless those words that inspire vanity, if they ' be smooth as oil, yet be very swords.' God forbid that mine should ever be such to Selima, or Selima's to me. I trust they will not, but that I shall always be enabled to consider them in the true light as a picture of what you are and what I perhaps shall be, if your friendship has its perfect work. What you write with so generous a view as this justly claims the best return I can make: especially when it informs me 'that there is one particular wherein I may possibly be of some service to Selima. I had, indeed, spent many thoughts on the necessity of method to a considerable progress either in knowledge or virtue, and am still persuaded that they who have but a day to live are not wise if they waste a moment, and are therefore concerned to take the shortest way to every' point they desire to arrive at.

The method of or shortest way to knowledge seems to be this: (1) to consider what knowledge you desire to attain to; (2) to read no book which does not some way tend to the attainment of that knowledge; {3) to read no book which does tend to the attainment of it, unless it be the best in its kind; (4) to finish one before you begin another; and (5) to read them all in such an order that every subsequent book may illustrate and confirm the preceding. The knowledge which you would probably desire to attain to is a knowledge of divinity, philosophy, history, and poetry. If you will be so good as to direct me how I can be of use to you in any of these, it will give me a very particular pleasure. [See letters of June 17 and Dec. 1.] I am glad you passed your time so agreeably in the country, [Mrs. Pendarves writes to her sister on Sept. 10: ' I suppose by this time you are returned from Stanton.] and doubt not but Sappho would have made it yet more agreeable. Surely you are very just in observing that a country life is in many respects preferable to any other; particularly in its abounding with those beauties of nature that so easily raise our thoughts to the Author of them. Methinks, whenever about us round we see Hill, dale, and shady wood and sunny plain, And liquid lapse of murm'ring stream, [Paradise Lost, viii. 261-3, v. 153.] 'tis scarce possible to stop that obvious reflection: These are Thy glorious works, Parent of good. [Paradise Lost, viii. 261-3, v. 153.] Nor is it hard here, where the busy varieties of a great town do not flutter about us and break our attention, to fix that reflection so deep upon our souls that it may not pass away, like the objects that occasioned it.

Is it not likely that it was the same cause that produced the same effects in both these persons If so, we are not far from finding what it is; for in one I knew it was chiefly vanity. Her sense of honor was not under due regulation; she was too fond of being admired, and therefore could ill bear to miss of this, but much worse to be contemned; and from too strong a desire of being approved and too great an aversion to being despised, which was her original distemper, wholly proceeded those painful symptoms. She seldom thought she met with respect enough, because she loved it too well; the least shadow of disrespect pained her, because she hated it too much. Hence, too, she dreaded whatever might expose her to it, and therefore was uneasy when less well dressed than her companions. Perhaps her taking their supposed unkindness so deeply might flow from a better fountain. Is too tender a sense of the loss of a friend's affection a necessary proof of vanity May we not put a milder interpretation, even upon an aptness to suspect it where there is no real ground of suspicion This is a weed; but is it not the weed of an excellent soil for Such flaws are found in the most noble natures. It seems probable that this is the disease of yours as well as of my acquaintance, namely vanity; which you justly distinguish from pride, though indeed they are nearly related, pride regarding (as you well observe) our opinion of ourselves, vanity the opinions of other men concerning us: the former being immoderate self-esteem, the latter immoderate desire of the esteem of others. The proper remedy for either of these distempers you rightly judge to be humility. But how to infuse this God knows. With men it is impossible.

If the wise and good will believe those falsehoods which the bad invent, because I endeavour to save myself and my friends from them, then I shall lose my reputation, even among them, for, though not perhaps good, yet the best actions I ever did in my life. This is the very case. I try to act as my Lord commands: ill men say all manner of evil of me, and good men believe them. There is a way, and there is but one, of making my peace: God forbid I should ever take it! I have as many pupils as I need, and as many friends; when more are better for me, I shall have more. If I have no more pupils after these are gone from me, I shall then be glad of a curacy near you: if I have, I shall take it as a signal that I am to remain here. Whether here or there, my desire is to know and feel that I am nothing, that I have nothing, and that I can do nothing. For whenever I am empty of myself, then know I of a surety that neither friends nor foes, nor any creature, can hinder me from being 'filled with all the fullness of God.' Let not my father's or your prayers be ever slack in behalf of Your affectionate Son. To Richard Morgan December 17, 1733.

1734 To Richard Morgan Oxon, January 15, 1734. SIR, -- Going yesterday into your son's room, I providentially cast my eyes upon a paper that lay upon the table, and, contrary to my custom, read a line or two of it, which soon determined me to read the rest. It was a copy of his last letter to you; whereby, by the signal blessing of God, I came to the knowledge of his real sentiments, both with regard to myself and to several other points of the highest importance.

Alas, Aspasia! are you, indeed, convinced that I can be of any service to you I fear you have not sufficient ground for such a conviction. Experience has shown how far my power is short of my will. For some time I flattered myself with the pleasing hope, but I grow more and more ashamed of having indulged it. You need not the support of so weak an hand. How can I possibly think you do (though that thought tries now and then still to obtrude itself) since you have so long and resolutely thrust it from you I dare not, therefore, blame you for so doing. Doubtless you acted upon cool reflection; you declined the trouble of writing, not because it was a trouble, but because it was a needless one. And if so, what injury have you done yourself As for me, you could do me no injury by your silence. It did, indeed, deprive me of much pleasure, and of a pleasure from which I ought to have received much improvement. But still, as it was one I had no title to but your goodness, to withdraw it was no iniustice. I sincerely thank you for what is past; and may the God of my salvation return it sevenfold into your bosom: and if ever you should please to add to those thousand obligations any new ones, I trust they shall neither be unrewarded by Him nor unworthily received by Aspasia's Faithful friend and servant, CYRUS. Araspes, too, hopes you will never have reason to tax him with ingratitude. Adieu!

15. But for the proof of every one of these weighty truths experience is worth a thousand reasons. I see, I feel them every day. Sometimes I cannot do good to others because I am unwilling to do it: shame or pain is in the way; and I do not desire to serve God at so dear a rate. Sometimes I cannot do the good I desire to do because I am in other respects too unholy. I know within myself, were I fit to be so employed, God would employ me in this work. But my heart is too unclean for such mighty works to be wrought by my hands. Sometimes I cannot accomplish the good I am employed in, because I do not pray more, and more fervently; and sometimes, even when I do pray, and that instantly, because I am not worthy that my prayer should be heard. Sometimes I dare not attempt to assist my neighbor, because I know the narrowness of my heart, that it cannot attend to many things without utter confusion and dissipation of thought. And a thousand times have I been mercifully withheld from success in the things I have attempted, because, were one so proud and vain enabled to gain others, he would lose his own soul.

This is the plain matter of fact. Now, as to matter of right, when twenty more reams of paper have been spent upon it, I cannot but think it must come to this short issue at last: (1) Are the Creeks, Cherokees, and Chicasaws within the bounds of Georgia or no (2) Is an Act of the King in Council, in pursuance of an Act of Parliament, of any force within these bounds or not That all other inquiries are absolutely foreign to the question a very little consideration will show. As to the former of these, the Georgian Charter, compared with any map of these parts which I have ever seen, determines it. The latter I never heard made a question of but in the neighborhood of Carolina. Mr. Johnson's brother has been with us some days. [Mr. Johnson is referred to in Journal, i. 250d. His brother had been on board the Simmonds, and complained that he was inconvenienced by the public prayers in the great cabin. Fortunately he left the ship at Cowes (ibid. i. 114, 124). The father had been Governor of South Carolina.] I have been twice in company with him at Mr. Oglethorpe's; and I hope there are in Carolina, though the present proceeding would almost make one doubt it, many such gentlemen as he seems to be--men of good nature, good manners, and understanding. I hope God will repay you sevenfold for the kindness you have shown to my poor mother, and in her to, sir, Your most obliged, most obedient servant. To James Vernon [7] SAVANNAH, July 23, 1736. As short a time as I have for writing, I could not pardon myself if I did not spend some part of it in acknowledging the continuance of your goodness to my mother; which, indeed, neither she nor I can ever lose the sense of.

If the sincerity of friendship is best to be known from the painful offices, then there could not be a stronger proof of mine than that I gave you on Sunday; except that which I am going to give you now, and which you may perhaps equally misinterpret. Would you know what I dislike in your past or present behavior You have always heard my thoughts as freely as you asked them. Nay, much more freely; you know it well, and so you shall do as long as I can speak or write. In your present behavior I dislike (1) your neglect of half the public service, which no man living can compel you to; (2) your neglect of fasting, which you once knew to be an help to the mind without any prejudice to the body; (3) your neglect of almost half the opportunity of communicating which you have lately had. But these things are small in comparison of what I dislike in your past behavior. For (1) You told me over and over you had entirely conquered your inclination for Mr. Mellichamp. Yet at that very time you had not conquered it. (2) You told me frequently you had no design to marry Mr. Williamson. Yet at the very time you spoke you had the design. (3) In order to conceal both these things from me, you went through a course of deliberate dissimulation. Oh how fallen! How changed! Surely there was a time when in Miss Sophy's life there was no guile. Own these facts and own your fault, and you will be in my thoughts as if they had never been. If you are otherwise-minded, I shall still be your friend, though I cannot expect you should be mine. To Dr. Humphreys, Secretary to the S.P.G. [11] SAVANNAH, July 12, 1737.

1738 An Unexpected Return [1] COLLEGE STREET, January 2, 1738. DEAR BROTHER, -- From my soul I congratulate you upon your latest glorious treatment; nor do I less envy you. It is now that you begin to be a disciple of Christ. I have just read over the returned papers without any emotion but that of joy. Had I even resolved to have set up my test, your present trial would have broken my resolution and forced me back to America, to partake with you in your sufferings for the Gospel. Such you may most assuredly reckon, what you now labor under (I should rather say, what you now rejoice and glory in), for it is not the mixture of infirmity that can prevent God's accepting you as endured for His sake. If you have the testimony of a good conscience, your sufferings are interpretatively His, and human wisdom can never dispute you out of it. We know that worldly and even partially good men, the strangers as well as the enemies to the cross of Christ, observing some fallings in God's children, ascribe the whole of their persecutions to those only. The scandal of the cross with them is ceased, the reproach of Christ no longer subsists, the contrariety betwixt His light and darkness, betwixt His spirit and the spirit of the world is at an end, and our conformity to our persecuted Master is all resolved into want of prudence. In vain do we press them with the plain words of Scripture, all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution; the disciple is not above His Master; if they have persecuted Me they will also persecute you,' and a thousand others. Experience only can convince them that the sense of these scriptures is literal and eternal. But this I need not tell you. You know the absolute impossibility of being inwardly conformed to Christ, without this outward conformity, this badge of discipleship, those marks of Christ. You marvel not, as if some new thing happened unto you, but rejoiced in tribulation, as knowing that hereunto you are called, and can only be made perfect through these sufferings.

181) of reading Drake's Anatomy with ‘John.’ Boltzius had told, Wesley of something he thought wrong in his conduct, and had been reproved for doing so by those who thought he had usurped the office of the monitors.] reproved me; for which (as he could not deny) he was roundly reproved himself. Lastly, a general monitor commissioned by God to reprove every one of his brethren you have so long as you have any priest or deacon among you. Therefore methinks this point might be reconsidered. ‘They that speak stand up’ I don't understand. If I do understand it; I doubt of the propriety of it. Is the book and letters sent to Mr. Rook I believe the letter mentions money to be received of him, and sent hither as soon as may be. Nothing is done here yet. We are only beginning to begin. All the Scriptures direct me to think of suffering. I fear not that, but my own heart. Be not in haste, my dear brethren. Determine few things at a time, and those with the deepest deliberation. You know, we are blind children; and if it is our Father who leads us by the hand, He leads gently. We all remember you, and much desire to be remembered by you all. Let my dear brother Ingham and you pray very much for Your affectionate brother. To James Hutton [22] OXON, November 27, 1738. Your scrip, Jemmy, comes next. As to the point of the women, we are agreed. As to the monitors, I have one more doubt. I believe bishops, priests, and deacons to be of divine appointment, though I think our brethren in Germany do not. Therefore I am tender of the first approach towards ‘pastors appointed by the congregation.’ And if we should begin with appointing fixed persons to execute pro officio one part of the pastoral office, I doubt it would not end there. My dear brother, this may seem of little weight to some of our brethren, especially when urged by one so weak as me; and they may think it deserves no other answer than ‘He hath not the Spirit.’ But our brother Bray hath. I refer you to him and all the brotherhood, or such a number of them as you judge proper.

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- ... I think Bishop Bull's sermon on the Witness of the Spirit (against the Witness of the Spirit it should rather be entitled) is full of gross perversions of Scripture and manifest contradictions both to Scripture and experience. I find more persons day by day who experience a clear evidence of their being in a state of salvation. But I never said this continues equally clear in all as long as they continue in a state of salvation. Some, indeed, have testified, and the whole tenor of their life made their testimony unexceptionable, that from that hour they have felt no agonies at all, no anxious fears, no sense of dereliction. Others have. But I much fear we begin our dispute at the wrong end. I fear you dissent from the fundamental Articles of the Church of England. I know Bishop Bull does. I doubt you do not hold justification by faith alone. If not, neither do you hold what our Articles teach concerning the extent and guilt of original sin; neither do you feel yourself a lost sinner: and if we begin not here, we are building on the sand. Oh may the God of love, if my sister or you are otherwise-minded, reveal even this unto you. Your affectionate Brother. To George Whitefield [3] LONDON, February 26, 1739.

To this hour you have pursued an ignoratio elenchi. Your assurance and mine are as different as light and darkness. I mean an assurance that I am now in a state of salvation; you an assurance that I shall persevere therein. The very definition of the term cuts off your second and third observation. As to the first, I would take notice: (1) No kind of assurance (that I know), or of faith, or repentance, is essential to their salvation who die infants. (2) I believe God is ready to give all true penitents who fly to His free grace in Christ a fuller sense of pardon than they had before they fell. I know this to be true of several; whether these are exempt cases, I know not. (3) Persons that were of a melancholy and gloomy constitution, even to some degree of madness, I have known in a moment (let it be called a miracle, I quarrel not) brought into a state of firm, lasting peace and joy.

We immediately began praying for him, and then for all the despisers. As we returned, they hollowed and hissed us along the streets; but when any of them asked, ‘Which is he’ and I answered, ‘I am he,’ they were immediately silent. Ten or twelve fine ladies followed me into the passage of Richard Merchant's [See letter of May 14.] house. I turned back to them, and told them I supposed what they wanted was to look at me, which they were very welcome to do. Perceiving them then to be more serious, I added: ‘I do not expect the rich of this world to hear me; for I speak plain truth -- a thing you know little of, and do not desire to know.’ A few words more passed between us, and, I hope, not in vain. Wednesday, 6th, two men and one woman were baptized. [Diary: ‘10.45 Newgate, three christened; ... 9.45 [p.m.] with Mrs. Cooper, she spoke; 11 at Mr. Labbe's! 11 supper; 12’ (Journal, ii. 213).] About two thousand five hundred were at Baptist Mills, to whom I explained the 9th of St. John. In the evening, after our meeting in Baldwin Street, I went (in obedience to God's command by lot) to the house of Mrs. Cooper, the supposed prophetess. Her agitations were nothing near so violent as those of Mary Piewit are. [See Journal, ii. 136n.] She prayed awhile (as under the hand of God), and then spoke to me for above half an hour. What spirit she spoke by I know not. The words were good. Some of them were these: ‘Thou art yet in darkness. But yet a little while and I will rend the veil, and thou shalt see the King in His beauty.’ I felt no power while she spoke. Appearances are against her; but I judge nothing before the time.

REVEREND SIR, -- 1. You charge me (for I am called a Methodist, and consequently included in your charge) with ‘vain and confident boastings; rash, uncharitable censures; damning all who do not feel what I feel; not allowing men to be in a salvable state unless they have experienced some sudden operation, which may be distinguished as the hand of God upon them, overpowering, as it were, the soul; with denying men the use of God's creatures, which He hath appointed to be received with thanksgiving, and encouraging abstinence, prayer, and other religious exercises, to the neglect of the duties of our station.’ O sir, can you prove this charge upon me The Lord shall judge in that day! 2. I do, indeed, go out into the highways and hedges to call poor sinners to Christ; but not in a tumultuous manner, not to the disturbance of the public peace or the prejudice of families. Neither herein do I break any law which I know; much less set at naught all rule and authority. Nor can I be said to intrude into the labors of those who do not labor at all but suffer thousands of those for whom Christ died to ‘perish for lack of knowledge.’

7. These are some of those inward fruits of the Spirit which must be felt wheresoever they are; and, without these, I cannot learn from Holy Writ that any man is ‘born of the Spirit.’ I beseech you, sir, by the mercies of God, that if as yet you know nothing of such inward feelings, if you do not ' feel in yourself these mighty workings of the Spirit of Christ,' at least you would not contradict and blaspheme. When the Holy Ghost hath fervently kindled your love towards God, you will know these to be very sensible operations. As you hear the wind, and feel it too, 'while it strikes upon your bodily organs, you will know you are under the guidance of God's Spirit the same way -- namely, by feeling it in your soul: by the present peace and joy and love which you feel within, as well as by its outward and more distant effects. -- I am, &c. To James Hutton [16] BRISTOL, August 3, 1739. I had opportunity to talk largely with our brother [Whitefield] concerning the outward signs which had here attended the work of God. But there was little need of disputing; for God answered for Himself. He had been told these things were owing to my encouraging them, and that if they were not encouraged no such thing would ever be. But the next day, no sooner had he himself begun to call all sinners to be in Christ, than four were seized before him in a moment. One of them dropped down and lay without motion; a second trembled exceeding; the third was in strong convulsions, but made no noise unless by groans; the fourth, equally convulsed, called upon God with strong cries and tears also. From this time I hope we shall all suffer God to carry on His own work His own way.

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I do not understand you. What doctrines do you mean that ‘Christ died for all’ or that ‘he that is born of God sinneth not’ These are not peculiar to me. The first is St. Paul’s, the second is St. John’s. What grievous temptation do you mean Let us deal openly with one another. But if any doubt arise, O fly to Christ, and confer not with flesh and blood! I least of all understand what you mean by ‘loving and respecting me.’ Ah, my brother, this will not hold for one month. You will in a very short time love and respect me just as poor Mr. Seward [See letter of March 20, 1739, to Whitefield.] did. Yet ‘gracious art Thou, O Lord, and true are Thy judgments.’ Adieu. To George Whitefield [3] LONDON, April 27, 1741. Would you have me deal plainly with you, my brother I believe you would: then, by the grace of God, I will. Of many things I find you are not rightly informed; of others you speak what you have not well weighed. ‘The Society room at Bristol,’ you say, ‘is adorned.’ How Why, with a piece of green cloth nailed to the desk, two sconces for eight candles each in the middle, and -- nay, I know no more. Now, which of these could be spared I cannot tell; nor would I desire either more adorning or less. But ‘lodgings are made for me or my brother.’ That is, in plain English, there is a little room by the school, where I speak with the people that come to me; and a garret, in which a bed is placed for me. And do you grudge me this Is this the voice of my brother, my son Whitefield

You say, farther, ‘that the children at Bristol are clothed as well as taught.’ I am sorry for it; for the cloth is not paid for yet, and was bought without my consent or knowledge. ‘But those of Kingswood have been neglected.’ This is not so, notwithstanding the heavy debt which lay upon it. One master and one mistress have been in the house ever since it has been capable of receiving them; a second master was placed there some months since; and I have long been seeking for two proper mistresses: so that as much has been done, as matters stand, if not more, than I can answer to God and man. Well, but ‘you sent down Brother Cennick to be schoolmaster, whom I have turned out.' What, from being schoolmaster You know he never was so at all. You know he now neither designs nor desires it. Hitherto, then, there is no ground for the heavy charge of ‘perverting your design for the poor colliers.’ Two years since, your design was to build them a school, that their children also might be taught to fear the Lord. To this end you collected some money more than once; how much I cannot say, till I have my papers. But this I know, it was not near one half of what has been expended on the work. This design you then recommended to me, and I pursued it with all my might, through such a train of difficulties as (I will be bold to say) you have not yet met with in your life. For many months I collected money wherever I was: in Kingswood for that house only; in Bristol for the schoolhouse to be built there; in other places generally for Bath. In June 1739, being able to procure none any other way, I bought a little piece of ground and began building thereon, though I had not then a quarter of the money requisite to finish. However, taking all the debt upon myself, the creditors were willing to stay: and then it was that I took possession of it in my own name -- viz. when the foundation was laid; and from that time to this only I immediately made my will, fixing my brother and you to succeed me therein.

Alas, my brother, in what manner are you proceeding now, in what manner have you been proceeding even since you unwisely put that weapon into the enemies’ hand Why, you have been continually gathering up all the improper expressions of those who were supposed to be (in some sense) perfect, and then retailing them in your public preaching to the scoffers of the world! Now, you well know that this was just the same thing (in effect), and made the same impression on your hearers, as if under every one of those pictures [you wrote], ‘John Wesley.’ Was this fair or upright dealing A Spaniard would have behaved more tenderly to his English prisoners. Put the case now that I should make reprisals, that I should deal with you as you have done with me, that I should publicly repeat all the wrong expressions Which I have heard from Predestinarians, what would follow Why, all that heard me would run from a Predestinarian as they would from a mad dog. But you are very safe; I cannot meet you here. This field you have all to yourself. I cannot dwell on those things, which have an immediate tendency to make you odious and contemptible. The general tenor both of my public and private exhortations, when I touch thereon at all (as even my enemies know if they would testify), is, ‘Spare the young man, even Absalom, for my sake.’ To Dr. Butler, Bishop of Bristol. [4] BRISTOL, October 13, 1741. MY LORD, -- Several persons have applied to flue for baptism. It has pleased God to make me instrumental in their conversion. This has given them such a prejudice for me, that they desire to be received into the Church by my ministry. They choose likewise to be baptized by immersion, and have engaged me to give your Lordship notice, as the Church requires. To his Brother Charles [5] BRISTOL, November 7, 1741.

2. To mercy. For where is your mercy in separating chief friends, in alluring from us to yourselves by oily words those who have grown up with us from the beginning, who have with us borne the burthen and heat of the day, and were till lately determined to live and die with us I mean (to mention no more) Mr. Gambold, Hutchings, Kinchin, and my brother Hall. What use are these of to you now you have them although, indeed, they are utterly useless to us. What possible end could the bereaving us of them answer, except it were this -- that, by necessitating us to undergo labours which our bodies could not bear, you might hasten our return to Him that sent us For my part, I cannot but declare my sense to be this--that, if I had now gone hence, I should have fallen in my uprightness, but my blood would God have required at your hands. 3. As to truth. How little have you regarded that golden rule ‘Let love be without dissimulation’! How much, very much, of reserve, darkness, and evasion has been in all your proceedings! so much that in very deed I know not now where to have you or how to understand what you say. I know not whether you receive the gospel as the adequate rule either of faith or practice. The good God have mercy upon you if you do or if you do not. To Him I commend my cause, and remain Your sincere friend. To Mr. James Hutton, Bookseller, In Little Wild Street, Near Clare Market, London. To a Clergyman [7] Sunday Morning, [ about 1741.] REVEREND SIR, -- A flying report which I heard last night occasions you this trouble. That I may not put you to any inconvenience (which I should be sorry to do; it would not be doing as I would be done to), I beg to know whether you have any scruples as to administering the Lord's Supper to, Reverend sir, Your brother and servant.

I am not surprised at all that upon such evidence you should advance such assertions. But I really am at what you afterwards assert as upon your own personal knowledge -- viz. that two Bills of Indictment being preferred against John Wesley and sent to the Grand Jury of Savannah (Bills of Indictment sent to a Grand Jury! What kind of proceeding is this), this deponent and the rest of the Grand Jury did UNANIMOUSLY agree to the said Bills. How dare you, sir, assert so gross a falsehood Have you no regard either for your reputation or your soul Do you think there is no God to judge the earth You know, you must know, how large a part of that Grand Jury did absolutely disagree to every Bill of the two presentments; and gave those reasons of their disagreement to the Trustees, which neither you nor any man has yet chose to answer. You assert, farther, that I was bailed by two freeholders of Savannah for my appearance at the then next Sessions. Here I charge you with a second gross, willful falsehood. You know I never was bailed at all. If I was, name the men (Henry Lloyd is ready to confront you) or produce an attested copy of the Record of Court. You assert, thirdly, that a little before the Sessions came on (viz. the next Sessions after the Bills were found) I deserted my bail. Here is another gross, willful, palpable untruth. For (1) no bail was ever given; (2) I appeared at seven Sessions successively after those Bills were found -- viz. on Thursday, Sept. 1, or Friday, Sept. 2; at three other Sessions held in September and October; on Thursday, Nov. 22 [3]; and lastly, on Thursday, Nov. 22 [24]. Your smaller falsehoods--as that I quitted the colony about the middle of the night, that from Purrysburg to Charlestown is about two hundred miles (you should have said about ninety), that I walked on foot from thence to Charlestown -- I pass over as not material. You, lastly, assert that the Justices threatened to prosecute and imprison my bail for such my desertion, who were in the utmost confusion concerning the same; but by the interposition of this deponent and several others on behalf of the said bail, and to prevent destruction to their several families, the Justices respited their recognizances during pleasure.

7. Let us now weigh these assertions. ‘They’ (that is, ‘the charms oftheir sour behavior’) ‘must be in your eye veryextraordinary.’ -- Do not you stumble at the threshold TheMoravians excel in sweetness of behavior. ‘As they can besufficient to cover such a multitude of errors and crimes.’ Such amultitude of errors and crimes! I believe, as to errors, they holduniversal salvation, and are partly Antinomians, (in opinion,) andpartly Quietists; and for this cause I cannot join with them. Butwhere is the multitude of errors Whosoever knows two or threehundred more, let him please to mention them. Such a multitude ofcrimes too! That some of them have used guile, and are of a closereserved behavior, I know. And I excuse them not. But to thismultitude of crimes I am an utter stranger. Let him prove thischarge upon them who can. For me, I declare I cannot. ‘To keep up the same regard and affection.’ -- Not so. I say, myaffection was not lessened, till after September, 1739, till I hadproof of what I had feared before. But I had not the same degree ofregard for them when I saw the dark as well as the bright side oftheir character. ‘I doubt your regard for them was not lessened tillthey began to interfere with what you thought your province.’ Ifthis were only a doubt, it were not much amiss; but it presentlyshoots up into an assertion, equally groundless: For my regard forthem lessened, even while I was in Georgia; but it increased again after my return from thence, especially while I was at Hernhuth;and it gradually lessened again for some years, as I saw more and more which I approved not. How then does it appear that ‘I wasinfluenced herein by a fear of losing my own authority; not by ajust resentment to see the honor of religion and virtue so scandalously trampled upon’ -- Trampled upon!By whom Not by the Moravians: I never sawany such thing among them. But what do you mean by ‘a just resentment’ I hope you do notmean what is commonly called zeal; a flame which often ‘sets onfire the whole course of nature, and is itself set on fire of hell!" "Rivers of water run from my eyes, because men keep not thy law.’ This resentment on such an occasion I understand. From all other may God deliver me!

I grant it. I grant also, that justification sometimes means a state of acceptance with God. But all this does not in the least affect my assertion, that ‘that justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and by our Church in the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth Articles, is not our acquittal at the last day, but the present remission of our sins.’ You add, ‘You write in other places so variously about this matter, that I despair to find any consistency. Once you held “a degree of justifying faith short of the full assurance of faith, theabiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him;” and yet you afterwards “warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assurance, that God had forgiven their sins.” What difference there is between this clearassurance, and the former full assurance and clear perception, Iknow not.’ (Page 40.) Let us go on step by step, and you will know. ‘Once you held “adegree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, theabiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christabideth in him.”’ And so I hold still, and have done for some years. ‘And yet you afterwards warned all not to think they werejustified before they had a clear assurance that God had forgiventheir sins.’ I did so. ‘What difference there is between this clear assurance, and that full assurance and clear perception, I knownot.’ Sir, I will tell you. The one is an assurance that my sins areforgiven, clear at first, but soon clouded with doubt or fear. Theother is such a plerophory or full assurance that I am forgiven, andso clear a perception that Christ abideth in me, as utterly excludesall doubt and fear, and leaves them no place, no, not for an hour. So that the difference between them is as great as the differencebetween the light of the morning and that of the midday sun.

Consider now (I would not speak, but I dare not refrain) what have been the consequences of even my preaching the other doctrine. By the fruits shall we know those of whom I speak; even the cloud of witnesses, who at this hour experience the gospel I preach to be the power of God unto salvation. The habitual drunkard, that was, is now temperate in all things. The whoremonger now flees fornication. He that stole, steals no more, but works with his hands. He that cursed or swore, perhaps at every sentence, has now learned to serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto him with reverence. Those formerly enslaved to various habits of sin, are now brought to uniform habits of holiness. These are demonstrable facts. I can name the men, with their several places of abode. One of them was an avowed Atheist for many years; some were Jews; a considerable number Papists; the greatest part of them as much strangers to the form, as to the power, of godliness. When you have weighed these things touching the consequences of my preaching, on the one hand, (somewhat different from those set down in your Remarks,) and of your preaching, on the other, I would earnestly recommend the following words to your deepest consideration: -- ‘Beware of false prophets; ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles Even so every good tree’ (every true Prophet or Teacher) ‘bringeth forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire’ (Matt. vii. 15-19). III. 1. Having spoken more largely than I designed on the principle I hold in common with the Moravians, I shall touch very briefly on those errors (so called) which you say I hold more than theirs. (Remarks, p. 55.) You name, as the first, my holding that ‘a man may have a degree of justifying faith before he has, in the full, proper sense, a new, a clean heart.’ (ibid.) I have so often explained this, that I cannot throw away time in adding any more now; only this, -- that the moment a sinner is justified, his heart is cleansed in a low degree. But yet he has not a clean heart, in the full, proper sense, till he is made perfect in love.

2. Another error you mention is this doctrine of perfection. (page 60.) To save you from a continual ignoratio elenchi, I wave disputing on this point also, till you are better acquainted with my real sentiments. I have declared them on that head again and again; particularly in the sermon on Christian Perfection. 3. Into this fallacy you plunge from the beginning to the end of what you speak on my third error, (so you term it,) relating to the Lord’s supper; confuting, as mine, notions which I know not (pages 56-7.) I cannot think any farther answer is needful here, than the bare recital of my own words: -- ‘Friday, June 27. I preached on, “Do this in remembrance of Me.” ‘It has been diligently taught among us, that none but those who are converted, who “have received the Holy Ghost,” who are believers in the full sense, ought to communicate. ‘But experience shows the gross falsehood of that assertion, that the Lord’s supper is not a converting ordinance. Ye are witnesses: For many now present know, the very beginning of your conversion to God (perhaps in some the first deep conviction) was wrought at the Lord's supper. Now, one single instance of this kind overthrows that whole assertion. ‘The falsehood of the other assertion appears both from Scripture precept and example. Our Lord commanded those very men who were then unconverted, who had not yet “received the Holy Ghost,” who, in the full sense of the word, were not believers, to do this in remembrance of him. Here the precept is clear. And to these he delivered the elements with his own hands. Here is example equally indisputable.

Agreeably to those ancient records, by ‘Christian’ or ‘justifying faith’ I always meant faith preceded by repentance and accompanied or followed by obedience. So I always preached; so I spoke and wrote. But my warm adversaries from the very beginning stopped their ears, cried out, ‘An heretic! An heretic!’ and so ran upon me at once. 21. But I let them alone: you are the person I want, and whom I have been seeking for many years. You have understanding to discern and mildness to repeat (what would otherwise be) unpleasing truths. Smite me friendly and reprove me: it shall be a precious balm; it shall not break my head. I am deeply convinced that I know nothing yet as I ought to know. Fourteen years ago I said (with Mr. Norris [Wesley read Norris on Faith and Practice in 1729 (Journal, i. 89n), and his Christian Prudence on the way to Georgia (ibid. i. 125, 126d). In the last paragraph of Reflections upon the Conduct of Human Life with reference to Learning and Knowledge. Extracted from Mr. Norris (1734), he speaks of reading books that ‘are rather persuasive than instructive; such as warm, kindle, and enlarge the affections, and awaken the divine sense in the soul; as being convinced, by every day's experience, that I have more need of heat than of light.’ See letter of March 14, 1756.]), ‘I want heat more than light’; but now I know not which I want most. Perhaps God will enlighten me by your words. O speak and spare not! At least, you will have the thanks and prayers of Your obliged and affectionate servant. To General Husk [14] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, October 8, 1745. A surly man came to me this evening, as he said, from you. He would not deign to come upstairs to me, nor so much as into the house; but stood still in the yard till I came, and then obliged me to go with him into the street, where he said, ‘You must pull down the battlements of your house, or to-morrow the General will pull them down for you.’ Sir, to me this is nothing. But I humbly conceive it would not be proper for this man, whoever he is, to behave in such a manner to any other of His Majesty's subjects at so critical a time as this.

7. ‘Infallible testimony’ was your word, not mine: I never use it; I do not like it. But I did not object to your using that phrase, because I would not fight about words. If, then, the question be repeated, ‘In what sense is that attestation of the Spirit infallible’ any one has my free leave to answer, In no sense at all. And yet, though I allow that some may fancy they have it when in truth they have it not, I cannot allow that any fancy they have it not at the time when they really have. I know no instance of this. When they have this faith, they cannot possibly doubt of their having it; although it is very possible, when they have it not, they may doubt whether ever they had it or no. This [See A Short Account of the Death of Mrs. Hannah Richardson, by Charles Wesley, 1741; or Jackson's Charles Wesley, i. 275-6.] was Hannah Richardson's case; and it is more or less the case with many of the children of God. 8. That logical evidence that we are the children of God I do not either exclude or despise. But it is far different from the direct witness of the Spirit: of which, I believe, St. Paul speaks in his Epistle to the Romans; and which, I doubt not, is given to many thousand souls who never saw my face. But I spoke only of those I personally knew, concerning whom, indeed, I find my transcriber has made a violent mistake, writing 13,000 instead of 1,300: I might add, those whom I also have known by their writings. But I cannot lay so much stress on their evidence. I cannot have so full and certain a knowledge of a writer as of one I talk with face to face; and therefore I think the experiences of this kind are not to be compared with those of the other.

17. We are at length come to the real state of the question between the Methodists (so called) and their opponents. ‘Is there perceptible inspiration, or is there not Is there such a thing (if we divide the question into its parts) as faith producing peace, and joy, and love, and inward (as well as outward) holiness Is that faith which is productive of these fruits wrought in us by the Holy Ghost, or not And is he in whom they are wrought necessarily conscious of them, or is he not’ These are the points on which I am ready to join issue with any serious and candid man. Such I believe you to be. If, therefore, I knew on which of those you desired my thoughts, I would give you them freely, such as they are; or (if you desire it) on any collateral question. The best light I have I am ready to impart; and am ready to receive farther light from you. My time, indeed, is so short that I cannot answer your letters so particularly or so correctly as I would. But I am persuaded you will excuse many defects where you believe the design is good. I want to know what, as yet, I know not. May God teach it me by you, or by whom He pleaseth! ‘Search me, O Lord, and prove me! Try out my reins and my heart! Look well if there be error or wickedness in me; and lead me in the way everlasting!’

‘Yet, although both repentance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary before justification, neither the one nor the other is necessary in the same sense or in the same degree with faith. Not in the same degree. For in whatever moment a man believes (in the Christian sense of the word) he is justified. But it is not so at whatever moment he repents or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Consequently none of these are necessary to justification in the same degree with faith. ‘Nor in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith. This is proximately necessary thereto; repentance remotely, as it is necessary to faith.’ (So the error of the press is to be corrected.) ‘And the fruits of repentance still more remotely, as they are necessary to the increase or continuance of repentance. And even in this sense they are only necessary on supposition--if there be time and opportunity for them: for in many instances there is not; but God cuts short his work, and faith prevents the fruits of repentance.’ 2. Thus far I believe we are nearly agreed. But on those words, -- ‘Far other qualifications are required in order to our standing before God in glory than were required in order to His giving us faith and pardon. In order to this, nothing is indispensably required but repentance or conviction of sin. But in order to the other it is indispensably required that we be fully cleansed from all sin,’ - you remark, ‘Here, I apprehend, are two great mistakes: (1) you make too little necessary before pardon; (2) too much afterward. You confine repentance within too narrow limits, and extend holiness beyond its just bounds. ‘(1) By repentance you mean only conviction of sin. But this is a very partial account of it. Every child that has learned his Catechism can tell, that forsaking of sin is included in it; living in obedience to God’s will, when there is opportunity; and, even when there is not, a sincere desire and purpose to do so, and a faith in God’s mercies through Christ Jesus.’ (Second Letter, p. 92.)

6. The next instance which you relate as an instance of despair is that of a young woman of Kingswood; which you break off with, ‘Take me away, &c.’ (page 112). But why did you not decipher that &c. Why did you not add the rest of the paragraph Because it would have spoiled your whole argument. It would have shown what the end of the Lord was in permitting that severe visitation. The words are: ‘We interrupted her by calling again upon God; on which she sunk down as before (as one asleep), and another young woman began to roar as loud as she had done. My brother now came in, it being about nine o'clock. We continued in prayer till past eleven; when God in a moment spoke peace into the soul, first of the first tormented, and then of the other. And they both joined in singing praise to Him who had “stilled the enemy and the avenger.”’ (Journal, ii. 298-9.) 7. I am sorry to find you still affirm that, with regard to the Lord’s Supper also, I ‘advance many injudicious, false, and dangerous things. Such as: (1) That “a man ought to communicate, without a sure trust in God's mercy through Christ.”’ (Second Letter, p. 117.) You mark these as my words; but I know them not. (2) ‘That there is no previous preparation indispensably necessary but a desire to receive whatsoever God pleases to give.’ But I include abundantly more in that desire than you seem to apprehend, even a willingness to know and do the whole will of God. (3) ‘That no fitness is required at the time of communicating’ (I recite the whole sentence) ‘but a sense of our state, of our utter sinfulness and helplessness; every one who knows he is fit for hell being just fit to come to Christ in this as well as in all other ways of His appointment.’ But neither can this sense of our utter sinfulness and helplessness subsist without earnest desires of universal holiness. ‘There was another passage,’ you say, ‘which you chose to omit’ (page 118). Which this was I do not understand. Nor do I perceive any one of these dreadful positions (as you style them) to be contrary to the Word of God.

You remark: (11) ‘He talks in the style of inspired persons.’ I answered, ‘No otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.’ You reply, ‘The point was not whether you are actually inspired, but whether you have talked in the style of those who were so’ (Second Letter, p. 126). That was so much the point that, if it were allowed, it would overturn your whole argument. For if I was inspired (in your sense), you could not term that inspiration enthusiasm without blasphemy; but you again mistake my words. The plain meaning of them is, that I talk in the style of those persons who are ‘no otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.’ You remark: (12) ‘He applies Scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning or once considering the difference of times and circumstances’ (page 62). I answered: ‘I am not conscious of anything like this. I apply no Scripture phrase either to myself or any other without carefully considering, both the original meaning and the secondary sense, wherein (allowing for different times and circumstances) it may be applied to ordinary Christians.’ [See letter of Feb. 2, 1745, sect.111, 5.] You reply: ‘This also you deny to have done; holding, however, some secondary sense (what it is you have not told us) in which Scripture phrases may be applied to ordinary Christians.’ I have largely told you what I mean by a secondary sense, in the First Part of the Farther Appeal. You add: ‘Many things which were truly written of the preaching of Christianity at first, you have vainly applied to yourselves.’ Sir, I am to answer only for myself; as I will for that expression, ‘Behold, the day of the Lord is come; He is again visiting and redeeming His people!’ 3. I come now to what you expatiate upon at large as the two grand instances of my enthusiasm. The first is plainly this: At some rare times, when I have been in great distress of soul, or in utter uncertainty how to act in an important case which required a speedy determination, after using all other means that occurred, I have cast lots or opened the Bible. And by this means I have been relieved from that distress or directed in that uncertainty.

Inquire, then, ‘Which are greater, the numbers of serious men perplexed and deluded by these teachers, or of notorious sinners brought to repentance and good life,’ within the forest of Kingswood Many, indeed, of the inhabitants are nearly as they were, are not much better or worse for their preaching, because the neighboring clergy and gentry have successfully labored to deter them from hearing it. But between three and four hundred of those who would not be deterred are now under the care of those preachers. Now, what number of these were serious Christians before Were fifty were twenty were ten Peradventure there might five such be found. But it is a question whether there could be or no. The remainder were gross, open sinners, common swearers, drunkards, Sabbath-breakers, whoremongers, plunderers, robbers, implacable, unmerciful, wolves and bears in the shape of men. Do you desire instances of more ‘notorious sinners’ than these I know not if Turkey or Japan can afford them. And what do you include in ‘repentance and good life’ Give the strictest definition thereof that you are able, and I will undertake these once notorious sinners shall be weighed in that balance and not found wanting. 8. Not that all the Methodists (so called) ‘were very wicked people before they followed us.’ There are those among them, and not a few, who are able to stop the boasting of those that despise them, and to say, ‘Whereinsoever any of you is bold, I am bold also’; only they ‘count all these things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus.’ But these we found, as it were, when we sought them not. We went forth to ‘seek that which was lost’ (more eminently lost); ‘to call’ the most flagrant, hardened, desperate ‘sinners to repentance.’ To this end we preached in the Horsefair at Bristol, in Kingswood, in Newcastle; among the colliers in Staffordshire and the tinners in Cornwall; in Southwark, Wapping, Moorfields, Drury Lane, at London. Did any man ever pick out such places as these in order to find ‘serious, regular, well-disposed people’ How many such might then be in any of them I know not. But this I know, that four in five of those who are now with us were not of that number, but were wallowing in their blood, till God by us said unto them, ‘Live.’

But to come closer yet, and weigh the point in debate in the balance of plain reason. You must allow there is a testimony of the Spirit with our spirit that we are the children of God. ‘But,’ you say, ‘it is not a perceptible one.’ How is this Let us examine it thoroughly. It is allowed (1) the Spirit of God (2) bears testimony to my spirit (3) that I am a child of God. But I am not to perceive it. Not to perceive what the first, second, or third particular Am I not to perceive what is testified -- that I am a child of God Then it is not testified at all. This is saying and unlaying in the same breath. Or am I not to perceive that it is testified to my spirit Yea, but I must perceive what passes in my own soul! Or, lastly, am I to perceive that I am a child of God, and that this is testified to my spirit, but not to perceive who it is that testifies not to know it is the Spirit of God O sir, if there really be a man in the world who hath this testimony in himself, can it be supposed that he does not know who it is that testifies who it is that speaks to his heart that speaks in his inmost soul as never man spake If he does not, he is ignorant of the whole affair. If you are in this state, I pray God you may say from the heart, ‘Lord, what I know not, teach Thou me.’ How much better were this than to canonize your own ignorance as the only knowledge and wisdom, and to condemn all the generation of God's children of ‘idiotism and madness’! 9. Under your last head you do not confine yourself now within the bounds you at first proposed, when you said, ‘I am not making conjectures of what may happen, but relating mischiefs which actually have happened.’ Take care you do not grow warm when I reply to this; you will have need of all your patience to bear it.

You ascribe it likewise in part to ‘a natural knack of persuasion.’ If either by a natural or an acquired power of persuasion I can prevail upon sinners to turn to God, am I to bury even that talent in the earth ‘No; but try if you cannot do more good in a college or in a parish.’ [See letter of March 20, 1739, to James Hervey.] I have tried both, and I could not do any substantial good, either to my pupils or my parishioners. Among my parishioners in Lincolnshire I tried for some years; but I am well assured I did far more good to them by preaching three days on my father's tomb than I did by preaching three years in his pulpit. But you ‘know no call I have to preach up and down, to play the part of an itinerant evangelist.’ Perhaps you do not. But I do: I know God hath required this at my hands. To me, His blessing my work is an abundant proof; although such a proof as often makes me tremble. But ‘is there not pride or vanity in my heart’ There is; yet this is not my motive to preaching. I know and feel that the spring of this is a deep conviction that it is the will of God, and that, were I to refrain, I should never hear that word, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant,’ but, ‘Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness, where is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.’ To Ebenezer Blackwell SHEFFIELD, May 14, 1747. DEAR SIR, -- Are you not getting weary and faint in your mind Do you continue to strive for the mastery It is a good though painful fight. I am sometimes afraid of your turning back before you conquer. Your enemies are many, and your strength is small. What an amazing thing it will be, if you should endure to the end!

This is there shown, both by Scripture, by reason, and by authority, particularly that of Origen and Chrysostom, whom his Lordship of Lichfield had cited in his Charge [Richard Smallbroke, Bishop of Lichfield 1730-49, published treatises against Whiston and Woolaston. In a Charge, delivered in 1741 and published in 1744, he set himself ‘to obviate the Contagion of those Enthusiastical Pretensions that in several parts of the nation have lately, as well as formerly, betrayed whole Multitudes either into an unreasonable Presumption of their Salvation, or into melancholy if not desponding Opinions about it.’ He attempted to prove, with the aid of Origen and Chrysostom’s homily on I Cor. ii. 4, that the ‘demonstration of the Spirit and power’ referred to the miracles of the apostolic age (pp. 15, 26, 31-2), and that the Testimony of the Spirit, in the Sense of the Holy Scriptures, is abusively pretended to by a new sect of Enthusiastical Seducers among us.’ Whitefield wrote Some Remarks upon a late Charge against Enthusiasm, and Wesley answered the Bishop in A Farther Appeal.] as asserting just the contrary. But, waiving authorities, I reasoned thus: ‘You allow there is a testimony of the Spirit with our spirit that we are the children of God. But you say it is not a perceptible one. How is this Let us examine it thoroughly. It is allowed (1) the Spirit of God (2) bears testimony to my spirit (3) that I am a child of God. But I am not to perceive it. Not to perceive what the first, second, or third particular Am I not to perceive what is testified -- that I am a child of God Then it is not testified at all. This is saying and unlaying in the same breath. Or am I not to perceive that it is testified to my spirit Yea, but I must perceive what passes in my own soul! Or, lastly, am I to perceive that I am a child of God, and that this is testified to my spirit, but not to perceive who it is that testifies not to know it is the Spirit of God O sir, if there be really a man in the world who hath this testimony in himself, can it be supposed that he does not know who it is that testifies who it is that speaks to his heart’

Some years ago we heard nothing about either justifying faith or a sense of pardon: so that, when we did hear of them, the theme was quite new to us; and we might easily, especially in the heat and hurry of controversy, lean too much either to the one hand or to the other. II. By justifying faith I mean that faith which whosoever hath not is under the wrath and curse of God. By a sense of pardon I mean a distinct, explicit assurance that my sins are forgiven. I allow (1) that there is such an explicit assurance; (2) that it is the common privilege of real Christians; (3) that it is the proper Christian faith, which purifieth the heart and overcometh the world. But I cannot allow that justifying faith is such an assurance, or necessarily connected therewith. III. Because, if justifying faith necessarily implies such an explicit sense of pardon, then every one who has it not, and every one so long as he has it not, is under the wrath and under the curse of God. But this is a supposition contrary to Scripture as well as to experience. Contrary to Scripture (Isa. l.10; Acts x. 34). Contrary to experience: for Jonathan Reeves, &c. &c., had peace with God, no fear, no doubt, before they had that sense of pardon; and so have I frequently had. Again, the assertion that justifying faith is a sense of pardon is contrary to reason; it is flatly absurd. For how can a sense of our having received pardon be the condition of our receiving it

You say: (1) 'Either that notification was not so distinct.' It was so distinct that she could not then doubt. 'Or (2) Was notified to her by one of suspected credit, whom she could not believe.' Yes; she then believed, and knew it was the voice of God. 'Or (3) She was not of sound understanding if she disbelieved it.' When she disbelieved it, she was not. For as the serpent deceived Eve, so he then deceived her, fqeivrwn toV novmma aujth'". [See 2 Cor. xi. 3.] 'But could she possibly deny a plain matter of fact' You add, as if I have said so, 'Yes, in process of time she might, particularly if she drew back to perdition '; and then subjoin, 'But what is this evasive answer to the case of Hannah Richardson' I think, nothing at all. I never applied it to her case. She never denied her having had such a testimony. But after a time she doubted (as I said before) whether that testimony was true. 16. I presume Eve in paradise was at least equal in understanding with any of her posterity. Now, unto her God said, 'In the day that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge thou shalt surely die.' And doubtless 'this notification was as distinct and perceptible to her as the sun at noonday.' Yet after a time (perhaps only a few days) she utterly disbelieved it. You exclaim, 'Absurd! Impossible! There could be no such thing; as I shall prove immediately.' 'Either this notification was not so distinct as is pretended, or, if distinct, was notified by one of suspected credit, whom she could not believe. Or else, if it was both distinct and credible, she was not of sound understanding if she disbelieved it, nor of sound memory if she doubted of it.' Therefore the whole story is absurd and a self-inconsistent (not a cunningly devised) fable.

SIR,--A warm letter, subscribed by Mr. Binns and you, was given me the evening before I left Dublin. The most material part of it ran thus: 'Why did you not settle that affair with Mr. Cennick before you preached in the house, which you could not preach in a fortnight ago for conscience' sake' Have patience: I will tell you why. I did not settle that affair with Mr. Cennick before he went away because I heard not one word of his going till he was agone. Otherwise it was my full design to have settled it then, which might have been done in a few hours' time. I did not preach in the house a fortnight before because I was determined not to preach there till I should have made Mr. Cennick one more offer, as I thought brotherly love required; but after I had done this and he appeared to me (comparing his behaviour to me with his words to others) to trifle and put me off, I could not in conscience delay preaching there any longer. The fault lay at his door, and I now conceived myself to be clear in the sight of God and man, even though I should never have made him another offer of the place at all. You go on: 'How can you venture to take God's name in your mouth, and to call upon God in an house, at which time your own conscience must tell you that you have taken the house over people's heads It is our opinion, if you had the least feeling of God's love in your heart, you could not do it.' I suppose it is your opinion. But I stand before an higher Judge. You entirely mistake my motive of acting. I never looked upon the taking this house as 'the taking it over people's heads.' For it was advertised; and you positively refused to take it. This was not the ground of my scruple. But I desired to do as I would be done to. And I have done so to the best of my knowledge. Lord, what I know not teach Thou me! That I added after all, I 'am still ready, if it shall be required, to relinquish it at a month's warning,' you ought to have acknowledged as a fresh and signal proof both of uprightness and brotherly kindness.

10. Another objection was: 'There is no scripture for this, for classes and I know not what.' I answer: (1) There is no scripture against it. You cannot show one text that forbids them. (2) There is much scripture for it, even all those texts which enjoin the substance of those various duties whereof this is only an indifferent circumstance, to be determined by reason and experience. (3) You seem not to have observed that the Scripture in most points gives only general rules, and leaves the particular circumstances to be adjusted by the common sense of mankind. The Scripture, for instance, gives that general rule, 'Let all things be done decently and in order.' But common sense is to determine on particular occasions what order and decency require. So in another instance the Scripture lays it down as a general, standing direction: 'Whether ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.' But it is common prudence which is to make the application of this in a thousand particular cases. 11. 'But these,' said another, 'are all man's inventions.' This is but the same objection in another form. And the same answer will suffice for any reasonable person. These are man's inventions. And what then That is, they are methods which men have found, by reason and common sense, for the more effectually applying several Scripture rules, couched in general terms, to particular occasions. 12. They spoke far more plausibly than these, who said: 'The thing is well enough in itself. But the Leaders are insufficient for the work; they have neither gifts nor graces for such an employment.' I answer: (1) Yet, such Leaders as they are, it is plain God has blessed their labour. (2) If any of these is remarkably wanting in gifts or grace, he is soon taken notice of and removed. (3) If you know any such, tell it to me, not to others, and I will endeavour to exchange him for a better. (4) It may be hoped they will all be better than they are, both by experience and observation, and by the advices given them by the Minister every Tuesday night, and the prayers (then in particular) offered up for them.

Might it not be well, sir, not to be quite so sure yet You may not always have the laugh on your side. You are not yet infallibly assured but that even Protestantism may produce something worth an answer. There may be some Protestants, for aught you know, who have a few grains of common sense left, and may find a way to defend, at least the Ante-Nicene Fathers, without 'disgracing their own character.' Even such an one as I have faintly attempted this; although I neither have, nor expect to have, any preferment, not even to be a Lambeth chaplain, which if Dr. Middleton is not, it is not his own fault. V. 1. The last thing you proposed was 'to refute some of the most plausible objections which have been hitherto made.' To what you have offered on this head I must likewise attempt a short reply. You say: 'It is objected, first, that, by the character I have given of the Fathers, the authority of the books of the New Testament, which were transmitted to us through their hands, will be rendered precarious and uncertain' (page 190). After a feint of confuting it, you frankly acknowledge the whole of this objection. 'I may venture,' you say, 'to declare that, if this objection be true, it cannot hurt my argument. For if it be natural and necessary that the craft and credulity of witnesses should always detract from the credit of their testimony, then who can help it And if this charge be proved on the Fathers, it must be admitted, how far soever the consequences may reach.' (Page 192.) 'If it be proved'! Very true. If that charge against the Fathers were really and substantially proved, the authority of the New Testament would be at an end so far as it depends on one kind of evidence. But that charge is not proved. Therefore even the traditional authority of the New Testament is as firm as ever. 2. 'It is objected,' you say, 'secondly, that all suspicion of fraud in the case of the primitive miracles is excluded by that public appeal and challenge which the Christian apologists make to their enemies the heathens to come and see with their own eyes the reality of the facts which they attest' (page 193).

No: I conceive the improbability supposed lies wholly on the other side. Whatever the Government of heathen Rome was (which I presume you will not depreciate), the Government of England is remarkable for tenderness to the very meanest subject. It is, therefore, not improbable in the least that an address from some thousands of those subjects, how contemptible soever they were generally esteemed, would not be totally disregarded by such a Government. But that they should 'not know that any such had been addressed to them' is not only improbable but morally impossible. If, therefore, it were possible for the heathens to 'have a worse opinion of the ancient Christians than we,' you say, 'have of our modern fanatics,' still it is utterly incredible that the Roman Government should, not only 'take no notice of their apologies,' but 'not even know that any such were addressed to them.' 4. 'But the publishing books was more expensive then than it is now; and therefore we cannot think the Christians of those days were able to provide such a number of them as was sufficient for the information of the public' (pages 198-9). Nay, if they were not able to provide themselves food and raiment, they would be sure to provide a sufficient number of these-sufficient, at least, for the information of the Emperor and Senate, to whom those apologies were addressed. And how great a number, do you suppose, might suffice for them How many hundred or thousand copies I apprehend the Emperor would be content with one; and one more would be needful for the Senate. Now, I really believe the Christians of those days were able to provide both these copies--nay, and even two more, if it should have fallen out that two or three Emperors were on the throne; even though we should suppose that in Tertullian's time there were but forty thousand of them in all Rome.

7. Have you considered, sir, how the case stood in our own country scarce two hundred years ago Not a multitude indeed, and yet not a few, of our own countrymen then expired in the flames. And it was not a general persuasion among them that martyrs feel no pain in death. That these have feeling as well as other men plainly appeared in the case of Bishop Ridley crying out, 'I cannot burn! I cannot burn!' when his lower parts were consumed. Do you think the fear of shame or the desire of praise was the motive on which these acted Or have you reason to believe it was mere obstinacy that hindered them from accepting deliverance Sir, since 'human nature has always been the same, so that our experience of what now passes in our own soul will be the best comment on what is delivered to us concerning others,' let me entreat you to make the case your own. You must not say, 'I am not one of the ignorant vulgar; I am a man of sense and learning.' So were many of them--not inferior even to you, either in natural or acquired endowments. I ask, then, Would any of these motives suffice to induce you to burn at a stake I beseech you, lay your hand on your heart, and answer between God and your own soul what motive could incite you to walk into a fire but an hope full of immortality. When you mention this motive, you speak to the point. And yet even with regard to this both you and I should find, did it come to a trial, that the hope of a fool or the hope of an hypocrite would stand us in no stead. We should find nothing else would sustain us in that hour but a well-grounded confidence of a better resurrection; nothing less than the 'steadfastly looking up to heaven, and beholding the glory which shall be revealed.' 8. 'But heretics,' you say, 'have been martyrs.' I will answer more particularly, when you specify who and when. It may suffice to say now, whosoever he be, that, rather than he will offend God, calmly and deliberately chooses to suffer death, I cannot lightly speak evil of him.

If this be as you assert (I repeat it again), then farewell the credit of all history. Sir, this is not the cant of zealots; you must not escape so: it is plain, sober reason. If the credibility of witnesses, of all witnesses (for you make no distinction), depends, as you peremptorily affirm, on a variety of principles wholly concealed from us, and consequently, though it may be presumed in many cases, yet can be certainly known in none, then it is plain all history, sacred or profane, is utterly precarious and uncertain. Then I may indeed presume, but I cannot certainly know, that Julius Caesar was killed in the Senate House; then I cannot certainly know that there was an Emperor in Germany called Charles V, that Leo X ever sat in the see of Rome, or Louis XIV on the throne of France. Now, let any man of common understanding judge whether this objection has any sense in it or no. 12. Under this same head you fall again upon the case of witchcraft, and say: 'There is not in all history any one miraculous fact so authentically attested as the existence of witches. All Christian' (yea, and all heathen) 'nations whatsoever have consented in the belief of them. Now, to deny the reality of facts so solemnly attested and so universally believed seems to give the lie to the sense and experience of all Christendom, to the wisest and best of every nation, and to public monuments subsisting to our own times.' (Page 221.) What obliges you, then, to deny it You answer: 'The incredibility of the thing' (page 223). O sir, never strain at the incredibility of this, after you have swallowed an hundred people talking without tongues! 13. What you aim at in this also is plain, as well as in your account of the Abbe de Paris. The point of your argument is: 'If you cannot believe these, then you ought not to believe the Bible; the incredibility of the things related ought to overrule all testimony whatsoever.' Your argument at length would run thus: 'If things be incredible in themselves, then this incredibility ought to overrule all testimony concerning them. 'But the Gospel miracles are incredible in themselves.'

8. Now, how highly desirable is such a faith, were it only on its own account! For how little does the wisest of men know of anything more than he can see with his eyes! What clouds and darkness cover the whole scene of things invisible and eternal! What does he know even of himself as to his invisible part what of his future manner of existence How melancholy an account does the prying, learned philosopher (perhaps the wisest and best of all heathens), the great, the venerable Marcus Antoninus, give of these things! What was the result of all his serious researches, of his high and deep contemplations 'Either dissipation, of the soul as well as the body, into the common, unthinking mass; or reabsorption into the universal fire, the unintelligent source of all things; or some unknown manner of conscious existence after the body sinks to rise no more.' One of these three he supposed must succeed death; but which he had no light to determine. Poor Antoninus! With all his wealth, his honour, his power; with all his wisdom and philosophy,-- What points of knowledge did he gain That life is sacred all-and vain: Sacred, how high, and vain, how low He could not tell, but died to know.' [Gambold's Epitaph: where in line 2 it is 'was,' not 'is'; and line 4 'He knew not here, but dy'd to know.'] 9. He 'died to know'! And so must you, unless you are now a partaker of Christian faith. O consider this! Nay, and consider, not only how little you know of the immensity of the things that are beyond sense and time, but how uncertainly do you know even that little! How faintly glimmering a light is that you have! Can you properly be said to know any of these things Is that knowledge any more than bare conjecture And the reason is plain. You have no senses suitable to invisible or eternal objects. What desiderata, then, especially to the rational, the reflecting part of mankind, are these,--a more extensive knowledge of things invisible and eternal, a greater certainty in whatever knowledge of them we have, and (in order to both) faculties capable of discerning things invisible!

10. Is it not so Let impartial reason speak. Does not every thinking man want a window, not so much in his neighbour's as in his own breast He wants an opening there, of whatever kind, that might let in light from eternity. He is pained to be thus feeling after God so darkly, so uncertainly; to know so little of God, and indeed so little of any beside material objects. He is concerned that he must see even that little, not directly, but in the dim, sullied glass of sense; and consequently so imperfectly and obscurely that it is all a mere enigma still. 11. Now, these very desiderata faith supplies. It gives a more extensive knowledge of things invisible, showing what eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither could it before enter into our heart to conceive. And all these it shows in the clearest light, with the fullest certainty and evidence. For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible. Oh who would not wish for such a faith, were it only on these accounts! How much more, if by this I may receive the promise, I may attain all that holiness and happiness! 12. So Christianity tells me; and So I find it, may every real Christian say. I now am assured that these things are so: I experience them in my own breast. What Christianity (considered as a doctrine) promised is accomplished in my soul. And Christianity, considered as an inward principle, is the completion of all those promises. It is holiness and happiness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit, a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life. Section III. 1. And this I conceive to be the strongest evidence of the truth of Christianity. I do not undervalue traditional evidence. Let it have its place and its due honour. It is highly serviceable in its kind and in its degree. And yet I cannot set it on a level with this.

9. Oh that the time were come! How do I long for you to be partakers of the exceeding great and precious promise! How am I pained when I hear any of you using those silly terms which the men of form have taught you, calling the mention of the only thing you want 'cant'! the deepest wisdom, the highest happiness 'enthusiasm'! What ignorance is this! How extremely despicable would it make you in the eyes of any but a Christian! But he cannot despise you who loves you as his own soul, who is ready to lay down his life for your sake. 10. Perhaps you will say, 'But this internal evidence of Christianity affects only those in whom the promise is fulfilled. It is no evidence to me.' There is truth in this objection. It does affect them chiefly, but it does not affect them only. It cannot in the nature of things be so strong an evidence to others as it is to them. And yet it may bring a degree of evidence, it may reflect some light on you also. For (1) You see the beauty and loveliness of Christianity when it is rightly understood, and you are sure there is nothing to be desired in comparison of it. (2) You know the Scripture promises this, and says it is attained by faith, and by no other way. (3) You see clearly how desirable Christian faith is even on account of its own intrinsic value. (4) You are a witness that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way. The more you have laboured after virtue and happiness, the more convinced you are of this. Thus far, then, you need not lean upon other men; thus far you have personal experience.

(5) What reasonable assurance can you have of things whereof you have not personal experience Suppose the question were, Can the blind be restored to sight This you have not yourself experienced. How, then, will you know that such a thing ever was Can there be an easier or surer way than to talk with one or some number of men who were blind but are now restored to sight They cannot be deceived as to the fact in question; the nature of the thing leaves no room for this. And if they are honest men (which you may learn from other circumstances), they will not deceive you. Now, transfer this to the case before us: and those who were blind, but now see--those who were sick many years, but now are healed--those who were miserable, but now are happy--will afford you also a very strong evidence of the truth of Christianity, as strong as can be in the nature of things, till you experience it in your own soul; and this, though it be allowed they are but plain men, and in general of weak understanding--nay, though some of them should be mistaken in other points, and hold opinions which cannot be defended. 11. All this may be allowed concerning the primitive Fathers; I mean particularly Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian; to whom I would add Macarius and Ephraim Syrus. I allow that some of these had not strong natural sense, that few of them had much learning, and none the assistances which our age enjoys in some respects above all that went before. Hence I doubt not but whoever will be at the pains of reading over their writings for that poor end will find many mistakes, many weak suppositions, and many ill-drawn conclusions. 12. And yet I exceedingly reverence them as well as their writings, and esteem them very highly in love. I reverence them, because they were Christians, such Christians as are above described. And I reverence their writings, because they describe true, genuine Christianity, and direct us to the strongest evidence of the Christian doctrine. Indeed, in addressing the heathens of those times, they intermix other arguments; particularly that drawn from the numerous miracles which were then performed in the Church, which they needed only to open their eyes and see daily wrought in the face of the sun.

18. You subjoin a truly surprising thought: ‘It may, moreover, be observed that both ancient and modern enthusiasts always take care to secure some advantage by their sufferings’ (page 40). Oh rare enthusiasts! So they are not such fools neither, as they are vulgarly supposed to be. This is just of a piece with the ‘cunning epileptic demoniacs’ in your other performance. And do not you think (if you would but speak all that is in your heart, and let us into the whole secret) that there was a compact likewise between Bishop Hooper and his executioner, as well as between the ventriloquist and the exorcist [See letter of Jan. 4, 1749, IV. sect. III. to Dr. Conyers Middleton.] But what ‘advantage do they take care to secure’ a good salary a handsome fortune No; quite another matter: ‘free communications with God and fuller manifestations of His goodness’ (ibid.). I dare say you do not envy them, no more than you do those ‘self-interested enthusiasts’ of old who, were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection.’ 19. You proceed to prove my enthusiasm from my notions of conversion. And here great allowances are to be made, because you are talking of things quite out of your sphere; you are got into an unknown world! Yet you still talk as magisterially as if you was only running down the Fathers of the primitive Church. And, first, you say I ‘represent conversion as sudden and instantaneous’ (ibid.). Soft and fair! Do you know what conversion is (A term, indeed, which I very rarely use, because it rarely occurs in the New Testament.) ‘Yes; it is to “start up perfect men at once”’ (page 41). Indeed, sir, it is not. A man is usually converted long before he is a perfect man. It is probable most of those Ephesians to whom St. Paul directed his Epistle were converted; yet they were not ‘come’ (few, if any) ‘to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.’ 20. I do not, sir, indeed I do not, undertake to make you understand these things. I am not so vain as to think it is in my power. It is the utmost of my hope to convince you, or at least those who read your works, that you understand just nothing about them.

To put this out of dispute, you go on: ‘Thus faith and being born of God are said to be an instantaneous work, at once, and in a moment, as lightning. Justification, the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith, this always in a moment.’ (Ibid.) I know not which to admire most, the English or the sense, which you here father upon me; but in truth it is all your own: I do not thus confound faith and being born of God. I always speak of them as different things; it is you that thus jumble them together. It is you who discover justification also to be the same as regeneration and having a lively faith. I take them to be three different things -- so different as not ever to come under one genus. And yet it is true that each of these, ‘as far as I know,’ is at first experienced suddenly; although two of them (I leave you to find out which) gradually increase from that hour. 21. ‘After these sudden conversions,’ say you, ‘they receive their assurances of salvation’ (page 43). Sir, Mr. Bedford’s [See letter of Sept. 28, 1738.] ignorance in charging this doctrine upon me might be involuntary, and I am persuaded was real. But yours cannot be so. It must be voluntary, if it is not rather affected. For you had before you while you wrote the very tract wherein I corrected Mr. Bedford's mistake and explicitly declared, ‘The assurance whereof I speak is not an assurance of salvation.’ And the very passages you cite from me prove the same; every one of which (as you yourself know in your own conscience) relates wholly and solely to present pardon, not to future salvation. Of Christian perfection (page 45) I shall not say anything to you, till you have learned a little heathen honesty. 22. That this is a lesson you have not yet learned appears also from your following section, wherein you roundly affirm, ‘Whatever they think, say, or do’ (that is, the Methodists, according to their own account) ‘is from God. And whatever opposeth is from the devil.’ I doubt not but Mr. Church believed this to be true when he asserted it. But this is no plea for you, who, having read the answer to Mr. Church, still assert what you know to be false.

Charles and you behave as I want you to do; but you cannot or will not preach where I desire. Others can and will preach where I desire; but they do not behave as I want them to do. I have a fine time between the one and the other. [And again in a third:] I think both Charles and you have in the general a right sense of what it is to serve as sons in the gospel; and if all our helpers had had the same, the work of God would have prospered better both in England and Ireland. [About a fortnight afterwards he writes thus on the same subject:] You put the thing right. I have not one preacher with me, and not six in England, whose wills are broken enough to serve me as sons in the gospel. Come on, now. you have broken the ice, and tell me the other half of your mind. I always blamed you for speaking too little, not too much. When you spoke most freely, as at Whitehaven, [In Sept. 1749 (Journal, iii 430.)] it was best for us both. I did not always disbelieve when I said nothing. But I would not attempt a thing till I could carry it. Tu qued scis, nescis is an useful rule, till I can remedy what I know. As you observe many things are remedied already; and many more will be. But you consider I have none to second me. They who should do it start aside as a broken bow. [For the letter of June 8,1750, to the Rev. John Baily, of Kilcully, Cork, see pp. 272-294.] To John Baily [11] LIMERICK, June 8, 1750.

You supply us yourself with one unexceptionable answer: ‘Those of the clergy with whom I have conversed freely own they have not learning sufficient to comprehend your scheme of religion’ (page 30). If they have not, I am sorry for them. My scheme of religion is this: Love is the fulfilling of the law. From the true love of God and man, directly flows every Christian grace, every holy and happy temper; and from these springs uniform holiness of conversation, in conformity to those great rules, ‘Whether ye eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God,’ and ‘Whatsoever you would that men should do unto you, even so do unto them.’ But this, you say, ‘those of the clergy with whom you converse have not learning enough to comprehend.’ Consequently their ignorance or not understanding our doctrine is the reason why they oppose us. 2. I learn from you that ignorance of another kind is a second reason why some of the clergy oppose us: they, like you, think us enemies to the Church. The natural consequence is that, in proportion to their zeal for the Church, their zeal against us will be. 3. The zeal which many of them have for orthodoxy, or right opinions, is a third reason for opposing us. For they judge us heterodox in several points, maintainers of strange opinions. And the truth is, the old doctrines of the Reformation are now quite new in the world. Hence those who revive them cannot fail to be opposed by those of the clergy who know them not. 4. Fourthly. Their honor is touched when others pretend to know what they do not know themselves, especially when unlearned and (otherwise) ignorant men lay claim to any such knowledge. ‘What is the tendency of all this,’ as you observe on another head, ‘but to work in men’s minds a mean opinion of the clergy’ But who can tamely suffer this None but those who have the mind that was in Christ Jesus.

3. In order to be more fully informed, on Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath of St. Gennys, Mr. Haime of Shaftesbury, and I called at Mr. Morgan's at Mitchell. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the ‘honest, sensible woman.’ I immediately asked, ‘Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me’ (So the story ran in the First Part of the Comparison; it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) ‘Or did you or he ever affirm’ (another circumstance related at Truro) ‘that I was rude with your maid’ She replied vehemently, ‘Sir, I never said you was or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbors.’ She added: ‘When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word that he would dine at our house; but he did not, being invited to a neighboring gentleman’s He sent for me thither and said, “Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down Do you know Mr. Wesley Did not he tell you you would be damned if you took any money of him And did not he offer rudeness to your maid” I told him, “No, my Lord; he never said any such thing to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him; but a man told me once (who, I was told, was a Methodist preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.”’ 4. This is her own account given to me. And an account it is irreconcilably different (notwithstanding some small resemblance in the last circumstance) from that she is affirmed to have given your Lordship. Whether she did give that account to your Lordship or no, your Lordship knows best. That the comparer affirms it is no proof at all, since he will affirm anything that suits his purpose.

DEAR SIR, -- Before I left London I wrote to Mr. Butterfield, [See letter of April 16, 1752.] informing him of two families which are in great distress. As I have heard nothing since, I suppose the letter miscarried; unless my ominous name prevented its meeting with success. However, I have done my part, and it is only a little labor lost. Nay, in one sense it is not lost; for if we only desire to help one another, the willing mind cannot lose its reward. My brother left us on Saturday. He designed to be at Worcester to-day, and then to proceed slowly towards Scotland. His mind seemed to be altogether changed before he went. He was quite free and open to us, and pressed us much to make use of his house in his absence, just as if it were our own. There is a fair prospect on every side. The people of Bristol in general are much alive to God and they are so united together that the men of false tongues can make no impression upon them. Do you know what is the mater with John Jones [See letter of April 16 1748.] I suppose he will speak freely to you. He seems to be much troubled at something, and I doubt, offended. I know, ff you can remove that trouble, it will be a pleasure to you to do it. We join in good wishes both to Mrs. Blackwell and you. --I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate servant. To Richard Bailey, Vicar of Wrangle [11] LONDON August 15, 1751.

There is another tender point which I would just touch on. The quarterly contribution of classes (something more than two hundred a year) is to keep the preachers and to defray all the expenses of the house. But for this it did never yet suffice. For you, therefore (who have an hundred and fifty pounds a year to maintain only two persons), [100 a year was guaranteed to Charles at his marriage. He had no child in 1751.] to take any part of this seems to me utterly unreasonable. I could not do it, if it were my own case: I should account it robbery -- yea, robbing the Spittle. [Spittle (or spital), hospital for ‘poor folks diseased’ or for lepers (Brewers Dic. Of Phrase and Fable).] I have often wondered how either your conscience or your sense of honor could bear it; especially as you know I am almost continually distressed for money, who am expected to make up the deficiencies of this as well as all the other funds. I am willing (if our judgments differ) to refer this or anything else, to Mr. Perronet or Mr. Blackwell. I desire only to spend and be spent in the work which God has given me to do. Adieu. To John Downes [15] LONDON, December 10, 1751. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I thank C. Herrington for his letter. [Is ‘C. Herrington’ Brother Errington See letter of Jan. 8, 1757.] He should not fail to write whenever he sees occasion. If you are straitened for preachers, could not you make use of George Atchinson from Stockton for a time I suppose James Tucker also is now with you. [From Whitehaven. See letter of Nov. 7.] He is, I verily believe, honest of heart; but a little too wise h his own eyes. Speak plainly to him, if you should ever hear that anything is amiss in his preaching or conversation. Brother Reeves will be here in a day or two. But he cannot return into the North yet.

Here end your labored attempts to show the ‘uncharitable spirit’ of the Methodists, who (for anything you have shown to the contrary) may be the most charitable people under the sun. 30. You charge the Methodists next with ‘violation and contempt of order and authority’ (sect. xviii. p. 124) -- namely, the authority of the governors of the Church. I have answered every article of this charge in the Second and Third Parts of the Farther Appeal and the letter to Mr. Church. When you have been so good as to reply to what is there advanced, I may possibly say something more. What you offer of your own upon this head I shall consider without delay. ‘Women and boys are actually employed in this ministry of public preaching.’ Please to tell me where. I know them not, nor ever heard of them before. You add, what is more marvelous still: ‘I speak from personal knowledge that sometimes, a little before delivering of the elements at the Communion, three or four Methodists together will take it into their heads to go away; that sometimes, while the sentences of the Offertory were reading, they have called out to the minister who carried the basin, reproaching him for asking alms of them; that sometimes, when the minister has delivered the bread into their hands, instead of eating it, they would slip it into their pockets.’ Sir, you must show your face before these stories will find credit on your bare asseveration. ‘Yet they are surprised,’ you say, ‘that every man in his senses does not without the least hesitation join them.’ Sir, I am surprised (unless you are not in your senses) at your advancing such a barefaced falsehood. 31. You go on: ‘Under this head may not improperly be considered their undutiful behavior to the civil powers.’ What proof have you of this Why, a single sentence, on which I laid so little stress myself that it is only inserted by way of parenthesis in the body of another sentence: ‘Ye learned in the law, what becomes of Magna Charta and of English liberty and property Are not these mere sounds while on any pretence there is such a thing as a press-gang suffered in the land’

Sir, you run very fast. And yet I hope to overtake you by-and-by. ‘Mr. Wesley,’ you say, ‘has preached against the Moravians since he quarreled with them.’ Sir, I never quarreled with their persons yet: I did with some of their tenets long ago. He ‘gives them a box on the ear with the one hand and embraces them with the other.’ That is, I embrace what is good among them, and at the same time reprove what is evil. ‘who first brought over this wicked generation’ Not I, whether they be wicked or not. I once thought I did; but have since then seen and acknowledged my mistake. ‘Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide’ Not I, though I have occasionally consulted several. ‘who fanaticized his own followers and deprived them of their senses’ Not I. Prove it upon me if you can. ‘whose Societies (by his own confession) run over in shoals to Moravianism, forty or fifty at a time’ Truly not mine. Two-and-fifty of Kingswood Society ran over to Calvinism; and, a year before, part of Fetter Lane Society gradually went over to the Moravians. But I know none of ours that went over ‘in shoals.’ They never, that I remember, gained five at a time; nor fifty in all, to the best of my knowledge, for these last ten years. ‘Would they’ (of Fetter Lane) ‘have split on this rock, if they had not first been Methodists’ Undoubtedly they would; for several of them had not first been Methodists. Mr. Viney, for instance (as well as several others), was with the Germans before ever he saw me. ‘Lastly: where is the spawn of Moravianism working so strongly as in the children of Methodism’ If you mean the errors of Moravianism, they are not working at all in the generality of the children of Methodism; the Methodists in general being thoroughly apprized of and fully guarded against them. So much for your modest assertion that the Methodists in general are ‘all together by the ears’; the very reverse of which is true. They are in general in perfect peace. They enjoy in themselves ‘the peace of God which passeth all understanding.’ They are at peace with each other; and, as much as lieth in them, they live peaceably with all men.

‘On Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath of St. Gennys, Mr. Haime of Shaftesbury, and I called at Mr. Morgan's at Mitchell. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the “honest, sensible woman.” I immediately asked, “Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me” (So the story ran in the First Part of the Comparison; it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) “Or did you or he ever affirm” (another circumstance related at Truro) “that I was rude with your maid” She replied vehemently, "Sir, I never said you was or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbors.” She added: “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word he would dine at our house; but he did not, bring invited to a neighboring gentleman’s. He sent for me thither, and said, Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down Do you know Mr. Wesley Did not he tell you you would be damned if you took any money of him And did not he offer rudeness to your maid I told him, No, my Lord; he never said any such thug to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him; but a man told me once (who, I was told was a Methodist preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.”’ Your Lordship replies: ‘I neither sent word that I would dine at their house, nor did I send for Mrs. Morgan; every word that passed between us was at her own house at Mitchell’ (page 7). I believe it; and consequently that the want of exactness in this print rests on Mrs. Morgan, not on your Lordship.

But she declared father (so Mr. Bennet writes, ‘That Mr. John Wesley some time ago said to a maid of hers such thugs as were not fit to be spoken’ (page 11); and Mr. Morgan declared that he ‘did or said such indecent things to the above-named maid’ (the same fact, I presume, only a little embellished) ‘in his chamber in the night, that she immediately ran downstairs, and protested she would not go near him or any of the Methodists~ more’ (page 12). To save trouble to your Lordship as well as to myself, I will put this cause upon a very short issue: If your Lordship will only prove that ever I lay one night in Mrs. Morgan's house, nay, that ever I was in the town of Mitchell after sunset, I will confess the whole charge. What your Lordship mentions ‘by the way’ I will now consider. “Some of your Western correspondents imposed on the leaders of Methodism by transmitting to London a notoriously false account of my Charge to the clergy. Afterwards the Methodists confessed themselves to have been deceived; yet some time after, the Methodists at Cork in Ireland your own brother at the head of them, reprinted the same lying pamphlet as my performance.’ (Pages 4-5.) My Lord, I know not who are your Lordship's Irish correspondents; but here are almost as many mistakes as lines. For (1) They were none of my correspondents who sent that account to London. (2) It was sent, not to the leaders of Methodism, but to one who was no Methodist at all. (3) That it was a false account I do not know; but your Lordship may early put it out of dispute. And many have wondered that your Lordship did not do so long ago by printing the Charge in question. (4) I did never confess it was a false account; nor any person by my consent or with my knowledge. (5) That account was never reprinted at Cork at all. (6) When it was reprinted at Dublin, your Lordship had not disowned it. (7) My brother was not in Dublin when it was done; nor did either he or I know of it till long after.

I do not recollect (for I kept no copy of my last) that I charged you with want of humility or meekness. Doubtless these may be found in the most splendid palaces. But did they ever move a man to build a splendid palace Upon what motive you did this I know not; but you are to answer it to God, not to me. If your soul is now as much alive to God, if your thirst after pardon and holiness is as strong, if you are as dead to the desire of the eye and the pride of life as you was six or seven years ago, I rejoice; if not, I pray God you may. And then you will know how to value a real friend. With regard to myself, you do well to warn me against ‘popularity, a thirst of power and of applause, against envy producing a seeming contempt for the conveniences or grandeur of this life, against an affected humility, against sparing from myself to give to others from no other motive than ostentation.’ I am not conscious to myself that this is my case. However, the warning is always friendly, and it is always seasonable, considering how deceitful my heart is and how many the enemies that surround me. What follows I do not understand. ‘Your beholding me in the ditch wherein you helped (though involuntarily) to cast me, and with a Levitical pity passing by on the other side’; ‘He (who) and you, sir, have not any merit; though Providence should permit all these sufferings to work together for my good.’ I do not comprehend one fine of this, and therefore cannot plead either guilty or not guilty.

Page 324: ‘Hence it is that the chaos mentioned in the 1st chapter of Genesis cannot be understood of the primitive state of nature.’ Why not, if God created the world gradually as we are assured He did In the fifth book (page 334) I read a more extraordinary assertion than any of the preceding: ‘The infusion of such supernatural habits by one instantaneous act is impossible. We cannot be confirmed in immutable babes of good but by a long-continued repetition of free acts.’ I dare not say so. I am persuaded God can this moment confirm me immutably good. Page 335: ‘Such is the nature of finite spirits that, after a certain degree of good habits contracted, they become unpervertible and immutable in the love of order.’ If so, ‘after a certain degree of evil habits contracted, must they not become unconvertible and immutable in the hatred of order’ And if Omnipotence cannot prevent the one, neither can it prevent the other. Page 343: ‘No creature can suffer but what has merited punishment.’ This is not true: for the man Christ Jesus was a creature. But He suffered; yet He had not merited punishment, unless our sins were imputed to Him. But if so, Adam's sin might be imputed to us; and on that account even an infant may suffer. Now, if these things are so, if a creature may suffer for the sin of another imputed to him, then the whole frame of reasoning for the pre-existence of souls, raised from the contrary supposition, falls to the ground. Page 347: ‘There are but three opinions concerning the transmission of original sin.’ That is, there are but three ways of accounting how it is transmitted. I care not if there were none. The fact I know, both by Scripture and by experience. I know it is transmitted; but how it is transmitted I nether know nor desire to know. Page 353: ‘By this insensibility and spiritual lethargy in which all souls remain, ere they awake into mortal bodies, the habits of evil in some are totally extinguished.’ Then it seems there is a third possible way of curing moral evil. And why may not all souls be cured this way without any pain or suffering at all ‘If any impurity remains in them, it is destroyed in a middle state after death’ (ibid.).

SIR, -- Partly business and partly illness prevented my acknowledging your favor of October the 11th. I have not yet had leisure to read the book. When I have, I will trouble you with a few lines more. I have always approved of the German method of practicing physic far beyond the English, which (so far as I can see) is in numberless respects contrary both to experience, common sense, and common honesty. -- I am, sir, Your obliged servant. A. B., At the Essex Coffee House, In Whitechappel To Mr. Gillespie LONDON, November 9 1753. I have never done so much for any of our preachers (except my brother) as for William Prior. [One of the preachers. See list Wesley had been at Newport on in Tyerman's Wesley, ii. 126-7. Oct. 3-5.] And one of my reasons for it was, that scarce any of our preachers had used me so ill. Therefore I was resolved to be more abundant in kindness toward him, if haply I might overcome evit with good. I am much in hopes I shall (by applying to a great man in town) set him and his family quite above want. His greatest temptation will then be removed, and I trust he will serve God with all his strength.

With regard to your studies, I know no better method you could pursue than to take the printed Ruins of Kingswood School, [Printed in 1749. See Green’s Bibliography, No. 127.] and to read all the authors therein mentioned in the same order as they occur there. The authors set down for those in the school you would probably read in about a twelve-month, and those afterwards named in a year or two more; and it will not be lost labor. I suppose you to rise not later than five, to allow an hour in the morning and another in the evening for private exercises, an hour before dinner, and one in the afternoon for walking; and to go to bed between nine and ten. I commend you to Him who is able to carry you through all dangers; and am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To Samuel Furly BRISTOL September 21, 1754. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- It is necessary for me, if I would have a dean conscience, not to omit anything which I find by experience to be profitable to my soul. Therefore, if I find any particular preacher to be so profitable, or any particular acquaintance, it is necessary for me to make use of them. Otherwise my conscience would not be clear. If this be your case, you cannot innocently neglect any of the few opportunities that remain. When you are at Cambridge, you cannot enjoy them if you would. There, therefore, few acquaintance will be best. And probably these you will not find but make profitable. Till then the less you speak (unless to God) the better. --I am Your affectionate brother. To Ebenezer Blackwell [3] BRISTOL September 24, 1754.

MY DEAR, -- I thank you for the good account you have given me of Mr. V.’s sermon; he himself called this afternoon. I read your letter to him, and he was highly pleased with the attention which he said you must have given to remember the heads of it so exactly. I think it was an excellent one, and doubt not but the grace of God accompanied words so sincerely spoken, as his are, to the hearts of the hearers; and I hope it was so to you in particular. I think you will be quite right to go to the --- now and then on a Sunday evening, when you can do it without danger of Mr.-- knowing it.... Do you know that your master has lately invited Mr.--- to dine with him Let us trust in God that something good may arise from this. Furly’s sister showed much kindness to Mary Bosanquet. ‘Indeed, I was in some sense commuted to her care by my parents, who have for years been acquainted with her family.’ See Moore’s Mrs. Fletcher, p. 3x; and for Mrs. Lefevre’s interest in Furly, letter of September 12, 1755, to Ebenezer Blackwell. John Thornton, of Clapham, presented Furly to the living of Roche in 1766. He died in 1795.

Cyprian is a terrible witness of the sense of the then Church. For he speaks it not as his own private sense, but as incontestable, allowed rule. And by Antistes [The passage of Cyprian, cited in the letter of June 23, 1739 is Populus a scelerato antistite separare se debet.] there I really believe he means the minister of a parish. That pinches me; nevertheless I think with you till I see more light, though I should be hard set to defend myself against a skilful adversary. When I am convinced it is my duty, I will follow Cyprian’s advice. The same say you, and no more. I do not fluctuate yet. But I can’t answer the arguments on that side the question. Jos. Cowley says, ‘For such and such reasons I dare not hear a drunkard preach or mad prayers.’ I answer, ‘I dare.’ But I can’t answer his reasons. Adieu! I can stay here four or five weeks. Then I purpose for Cornwall. Can you come hither when I go Or will you go into Cornwall for me My love to my sister. What could put it into your head to recommend (if you did recommend) that rude, boisterous clown to Mr. Lloyd [See letter of March 20.] To his Brother Charles [7] LONDON, June 23, I755. DEAR BROTHER -- A gentleman who keeps an academy at Brompton offers to take Westley Hall for nothing, to teach him the ancient and modern tongues, and when he has learnt them, to give him thirty pounds a year and his board if he will stay and assist him. His mother thinks (and I can’t say much to the contrary) that such an offer is not to be slighted. Send us your judgment upon the matter as soon as possible. [See letter of May 9. The boy is lovingly commemorated in Charles Wesley’s Funeral Hymns, published in 1759 (Poetical Works of J. and C. Wesley, vi. 234-5): Unspotted from the world and pure, And saved and sanctified by grace]

REVEREND DEAR SIR, -- 1. You greatly oblige me by speaking your thoughts so freely, and the more by giving me hopes of seeing your farther sentiments on so nice and important an affair. I did not delay one day to follow your advice with regard to Mr. Adam, but sent him by the very next post a copy of those papers; although I am satisfied already as to the publishing them, and have laid aside that design, the reasons you urge against the expediency of it being abundantly sufficient. But you seem a little to misapprehend what we speak of hearing predestinarian preachers. We find by long experience that this is ‘deadly poison,’ not in itself but to the members of our Societies. This we know to be unquestionable truth; and it is a truth necessary to be observed, nay, and strongly insisted on (though without any deign of bearing hard on any particular person), when many were enlarging on ‘the poisonous doctrines’ which they heard at many of their parish churches. 2. All that you say concerning the inexpediency of a separation from the Church I readily allow; as likewise that the first and main question must be, ‘Is it lawful to separate’ Accordingly this was debated first, and that at large, in seven or eight long conversations. And it was then only, when we could not agree concerning the, that we proceeded to weigh the expediency of it. 3. As to the grounds on which those who plead for separation from the Church proceed, some of them have weighed the point long and deeply. They have very particularly, and with earnest and continued prayer, considered the lawfulness of it. And they allow, ‘If it be lawful to abide therein, then it is not lawful to separate.’ But they aver, ‘It is not lawful to abide therein’; and that for the following reasons: --

My difficulty is very much increased by one of your observations. I know the original doctrines of the Church are sound; I know her worship is (in the main) pure and scriptural. But if ‘the essence of the Church of England considered as such, consists in her orders and laws’ (many of which I myself can say nothing for), ‘and not in her worship and doctrines’ those who separate from her have a far stronger plea than I was ever sensible of. 4. At present I apprehend those, and those only, to separate from the Church who either renounce her or refuse to join in her pubic worship. As yet we have done neither; nor have we taken one step farther than we were convinced was our bounden duty. It is from a full conviction of this that we have (1) preached abroad, (2) prayed extempore, (3) formed Societies, and (4) permitted preachers who were not episcopally ordained. And were we punished on this side, were there no alternative allowed, we should judge it our bounden duty rather wholly to separate from the Church than to give up any one of these points. Therefore, if we cannot stop a seperation without stopping lay preachers, the case is clear - we cannot stop it at all. 5. ‘But if we permit them, should we not do more Should we not appoint them rather Since our bare permission puts the matter quite out of our hands and deprives us of all our influence.’ In a great measure it does; therefore to appoint them is far more expedient, if it be lawful. But is it lawful for presbyters circumstanced as we are to appoint our ministers This is the very point wherein we desire advice, being unafraid of leaning to our own understanding. It is undoubtedly ‘needful,’ as you observe, to come to some resolution in this point’; and the sooner the better. I therefore rejoice to hear that you think ‘that this matter may be better and more inoffensively ordered; and that a method may be found which, conducted with prudence and patience, will reduce the constitution of Methodism to due order, and render the Methodists under God more instrumental to the ends of practical religion.'

Doubtless this eminent man (whose books on the Human Understanding and on Divine Analogy I would earnestly recommend to all who either in whole or in part deny the Christian Revelation) grounded his judgment both of the nature and duration of future punishments on these and the like passages of Scripture: -- ‘If we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge Of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins; but a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy: of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son of God! For we know Him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto Me, I will recompense. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.’ (Heb. x. 26-31.)

SIR, -- I was in Cornwall when your last was brought to the Foundry and delivered to my brother. When I returned, it was mislaid and could not be found; so that I did not receive it till some months after the date. You judge right with regard to the tract [The Address to the Clergy. Probably intended for the Rev. George Thompson Vicar of St. Gennys.] enclosed to you. It was sent to you by mistake for another that bears the same name. Christian perfection, we agree, may stand aside for the present. The point now to be considered is Christian faith. This, I apprehend, implies a divine evidence or conviction of our acceptance. You apprehend it does not. In debating this (or indeed any) point with you, I lie under a great disadvantage. (1) You know me; whereas I do not know you. (2) I am a very slow, you seem to be a very swift, writer. (3) My time is so taken up, from day to day and from week to week, that I can spare very little from my stated employments; so that I can neither write so largely nor so accurately as I might otherwise do. All, therefore, which you can expect from me is, not a close-wrought chain of connected arguments, but a short sketch of what I should deduce more at large if I had more leisure. I believe the ancient Fathers are far from being silent on our question; though none that I know have treated it professedly. But I have not leisure to wade through that sea. Only to the argument from the baptism of heretics I reply, If any had averred during that warm controversy, ‘I received a sense of pardon when I was baptized by such an heretic’ those on the other side would in no wise have believed him; so that the dispute would have remained as warm as ever. I know this from plain fact. Many have received a sense of pardon when I baptized them. But who will believe them when they assert it Who will put any dispute on this issue

It is a very little thing to excuse a warm expression [In his letter of Feb. 25 'P. V.' says: ‘I hope sir, that I have not (in the course of my papers) been wanting in respect towards you; willingly, I am sure I have not: you do indeed intimate something concerning a warm expression, which I am entirely ignorant of; so hope you will excuse it.’] (if you need any such excuse) while I am convinced of your real goodwill to, sir, Your servant for Christ’s sake. To Samuel Furly [7] LONDON, February 18, 1756. DEAR SAMMY, -- You are a very complaisant person. I know in my little circle of acquaintance more than twenty who have all the natural qualifications mentioned in the Address to the Clergy, and several others who have a~ the acquired ones, either by education or by grace; and I would engage to take any person of fourteen years of age who has good natural abilities and to teach him in seven years everything which is there required to a good degree of perfection. Ex pede Herculem. You may easily see what Latin I write by one of the Dissertations in Jobum, [By his father. See note to letter of Oct. 15, 1735.] or even by the short conversation with Count Zinzendorf which is printed in the Journal, [See Journal, ii. 488-90.] I do not know that I have any theme or declamation left. But why do you not talk Latin when you are with me Do this, and you will see the excellence of Terence’s language; whereas Tully would make you talk like a mere stiff pedant. Randal’s Geographical Grammar is far the best compendium of geography which I have seen; and you need nothing more on that subject, adding only the terrestrial globe.

If you are master of Hutcheson’s [Francis Hutcheson (1694-1764), Professor of Moral Philosophy at Glasgow x729-46. His System of Moral Philosophy was published by his son in 1755. See Journal, v. 492; and letter of March 14.] Metaphysicks and Clerc’s [Jean Le Clerc (1657-1736), professor in Amsterdam.] Ontologia, I advise you to look no farther that way; unless you would add Malebranche’s Search after Truth [Nicolas Malebranche (1658-1715). His De la Recherche de la Vrit, 1674, regards the intervention of God as necessary to bridge the gun between the human soul and body. It is mentioned in the Address among books to be read.] or the Bishop of Cork’s two books [In December of this year Wesley began reading with his preachers the Bishop of Cork's Procedure (or Progress), Extent and Limits of Human Understanding, which he thought superior to Locke’s treatise (see Journal, iv. 192; and for his earlier references, the letters of Oct. 3, 1730, and Feb. 13, 1731). Possibly the other book recommended was Dr. Browne’s Things Divine and Supernatural Conceived by Analogy with Things Natural and Human, 1733.] again. The main point is, with all and above all, study the Greek and Hebrew Bible, and the love of Christ. -- I am Yours affectionately. To Richard Tompson [8] LONDON, February 18, 1756. SIR, -- You ask, 1. ‘Can a man who has not a clear assurance that his sins are forgiven be in a state of justification’ I believe there are some instances of it. 2. ‘Can a person be in a state of justification who, being asked, “Do you know your sins are forgiven’ answers, “I am not certainly sure; but I do not entertain the least doubt of it”’ I believe he may. 3. ‘Can he who answer “I trust they are”’ It is very possible he may be in that state. 4. ‘Can any one know that his sins are forgiven while he doubts thereof’ Not at the instant when he doubts of it. But he may generally know it, though he doubts at some particular time. I answer as plainly and simply as I can, that, if I am in a mistake, I may the more easily be convinced of it. To Samuel Furly LONDON February 21, 1756.

But this is not all your crime. You have also drank into the spirit of James Wheatley; and you have adopted his very language: you are become, like him, an accuser of your brethren. O Charles, it was time you should separate from them; for your heart was gone from them before! ‘Whatever motives of another kind might be blended with those that really belonged to your conscience, in your rejecting what I laid before you’ (not consenting that I should administer), ‘God knows.’ I know of none. I have no other motive of acting than the glory of God and the good of souls. Here again you are become not only an accuser but a false accuser and an unjust judge of your brother. ‘You grant more to others. To my certain knowledge both of you have been told for more than two years that James Morris [James Morris left Wesley in 1756. See Myles’s Chronological History; and for his share in the conversion of Toplady this year, Journal, v. 327-8n; Wright’s Life of Toplady, p. 18.] administered.’ You may as well say, ‘To my certain knowledge black is white.’ I was never told it to this, unless by C. Perronet. But whether he does or no, it is nothing to me. He never was in close connexion with us; he is now in no connexion at all. We have totally renounced him. So here is another instance of accusing, yea falsely accusing, your brethren. ‘A man may be circumcised, count his beads, or adore a cross, and still be a member of your society.’ That is, may be Papist or a Jew. I know no such instance in England or Ireland. We have many members in Ireland that were Papists, but not one that continues so. ‘Other reasons than those that could possibly relate to conscience have borne too much share in the late affair.’ I say as before, I am not conscious of it. And who art thou that judgest another’s servant ‘You have allowed that we are called to this by the Holy Ghost and God was with us in what we did.’ I allow! No more than I allow you to be archangel. I allow neither the one nor the other. I believe you felt joy or power, so called; but I do not know that it was from God, and I said,

If I mistake not, there are now in the county of Cornwall about four-and-thirty of these little Societies, part of whom now experience the love of God, part are more or less earnestly seeking it. Four preachers-- Peter Jaco, Thomas Johnson, W. Crabb, and William Alwood [Peter Jaco was a Cornishman who became one of Wesley's preachers in 1754; his portrait and autobiography are given in the first volume of the Arminian Mag. 1778, p. 541 (See Wesley’s Veterans, ii. 7-17). Thomas Johnson was born at Wakefield in 1720, became an itinerant in 1752, and died in 1797; he was acceptable and useful wherever he went (Atmore’s Memorial, pp 220-3). William Crabb was amiable and devoted; but he suffered much from weakness, and died about 1764 (ibid. p. 94). William Alwood was seized by the press-gang at Stockton in 1759 (Journal, iv. 328-9): see W.H.S. iii. 182, and letter of March 6, 1759, to him.] -- design for the ensuing year, partly to call other sinners to repentance, but crafty to feed and guide those few feeble sheep, to forward them (as of the ability which God giveth) in vital, practical religion. Now, suppose we can effect that Peter Jaco and Thomas Johnson be ordained and settled in the curacies of Buryan and St. Just, and suppose William Crabb and William Alwood fix at Launceston and Plymouth Dock as readers and exhorters, will this answer the end which I have in view so well as traveling through the county It will not answer it so well even with regard to those Societies with whom Peter Jaco and Thomas Johnson have settled. Be their talents ever so great, they will ere long grow dead themselves, and so will most of those that hear them. I know, were I myself to preach one whole year in one place, I should preach both myself and most of my congregation asleep. Nor can I believe it was ever the will of our Lord that any congregation should have one teacher only. We have found by long and constant experience that a frequent change of teachers is best. This preacher has one talent, that another. No one whom I ever yet knew has all the talents which are needful for beginning continuing and perfecting the work of grace in an whole congregation.

5. How Phavorinus [Favorinus, so called from Favera, his birthplace, was a Benedictine, who in 1512 became librarian to the future Leo X. He was made Bishop of Nuceria in 1514, and died in 1537. He compiled a Greek Lexicon.] or many more may define heresy or schism I am not concerned to know. I well know heresy is vulgarly defined ‘a false opinion touching some necessary article of faith, and schism a causeless separation from a true Church.’ But I keep to my Bible, as our Church in her Sixth Article teaches me; therefore I cannot take schism for a separation from a Church, because I cannot find it so taken in Scripture. The first time I meet the term there is 1 Corinthians i. 10: I meet with it again, chap. xi. 18. But it is plain in both places by schism is meant not any separation from the Church but uncharitable divisions in it. For the Corinthians continued to be one Church, notwithstanding then strife and contention; there was no separation of one part from the other with regard to external communion. It is in the same sense the word is used chap. xii. 25. And these are the only places in the New Testament where the term occurs. Therefore the indulging any unkind temper towards our fellow Christians is the true scriptural schism. Indeed, both heresy and schism (which are works of the flesh, and consequently damnable if not repented) are here mentioned by the Apostle in very near the same sense; unless by schisms be meant rather those inward animosity which occasioned heresies -- that is, outward divisions and parties. So that while one said, ‘I am Paul; another, I am of Apollos,’ this implied both heresy and schism: so wonderfully have latter ages distorted the words ‘heresies’ and ‘schisms’ from their scriptural meaning! Heresy is not in all the Bible taken for an error in fundamentals, nor in anything ere; nor schism for any separation from the communion of others. Therefore heresy and schism in the modern sense of the words are sins that the Scriptures know nothing of.

I have lately been reading Mr. Hutchinson’s Works. And the more I read the less I tike them. I am fully convinced of one thing in particular, which I least of all expected: he did not understand Hebrew; not critically -- no, not tolerably. I verily believe T. Walsh [See Wesley’s Veterans, v. 68.] understands it far better at this day than he did to the day of his death. Let us understand the love of God, and it is enough. -- I am Your affectionate brother. To Samuel Furly LONDON, SNOWSFIELDS, December 4, 1756. DEAR SIR, -- I did not mention any particular book, because I did not recollect any that was particularly proper. But either Mr. Allen's Alarm in the Christian Library [Vol. xxiv. Joseph Allein’s An Alarm to Unconverted Sinners.] or Vindiciae Pietatis may do well. I saw nothing amiss in your meeting with Mr. Drake [See letters of Nov. 20, 1756, and July 12, 1757.] but that the time was too short. [See previous letter.] You should read the closest and most searching books you can, and apply them honestly to each other’s heart. As to yourself, principlis obsta: the first look or thought! Play not with the fire -- no, not a moment. Then it cannot hurt you. Mr. Drake must determine for himself as to conversing with those gentlemen. If he feels any hurt from it, he must abstain; if not, he may converse with them sparingly -- that is, if there be but a faint, distant prospect of doing them any good. I have no receipts or proposal; so they may be sent in my next. I have answered about an hundred and forty pages of John Taylor [See letter of June 18.]; but it has cost me above an hundred and twenty. Sammy, never trifle more! -- I am Yours affectionately. To Dorothy Furly [12] LONDON, December 22, 1756.

The great point is to pick out in Bristol (as in all places such acquaintance as have a deep fear of God, a continual consciousness of His presence, and a strong thirst after His whole image. [See letter of June 18.] Such I take most of the leaders of bands to be; and such are many of the poor in the Society, but extremely few of the rich or honorable Methodists are of that number. My dear sister, I have been in pain for you on their account. When I talked with You last, you could relish the simplicity of the gospel, you were athirst for all mankind that was in Christ and wanted to walk just as He walked. O let none persuade you, either by example or advice, to make any, the least, deviation from that good way. Make no abatement; do not soften the plain, rough gospel; do not Measure back your steps to earth again. Be not, either inwardly or outwardly, conformed to this world; but be a Christian altogether. Health you shall have if health be best. And He that gives it will give a blessing with it -- an increase of spiritual as well as of bodily strength, but it is strength to labor not to sit still. And this strength will either increase or decrease in the same proportion with your sense of His love. You may lose this sense either (1) by committing sin; or (2) by omitting duty; or (3) by giving way to pride, anger or any other inward sin; or (4) by not watching unto prayer, by yielding to indolence or spiritual sloth. But it is no more necessary that we should ever lose it than it is necessary we should omit duty or commit sin. Mr. Law, therefore, speaking on this head, betrays deep ignorance both of the Scripture and the inward work of God. You are more liable to receive hurt from his late writings than from any others which I know. I shall write to Sammy [Her brother at Cambridge.] in the morning: it would not have been amiss if you had spoken freely to me concerning him. Why should not you, now you have in some measure broke that natural shyness, speak all that is in your heart to, dear Miss Furly, Your truly affectionate friend and brother. To Ebezezer Blackwell [3]

DEAR SAMMY, -- In all my experience I never knew one so much altered for the worse as C. P. [Charles Perronet. See letters of Sept. 3, 1756 (to Nicholas Norton), and Dec. 14, 1757.] in so short a time. I am afraid that enemy is in real, actual possession of his understanding; though God, I hope, has still hold of his heart. Certainly the conversing with him at present would not be profitable to you. Nothing could be more seasonable than the notes you give me concerning M. B. [Miss Bosanquet and Mrs. Crosby.] I was just going to answer a letter from one who can say anything to her without offence. So that proper advice may now be conveyed to her with great probability of success. I hope you will write to Mr. Drake [See letter of Dec. 4, 1756.] without delay. He is in danger; for every possible snare is laid for him. His aunt here, Mrs. Dickson, [Dickens.] has been of great service to him. He was hurried hence by his mother (a woman bitter of spirit) to keep him out of my way. You may direct your next to me at Mr. Hutton's, [‘William Hutton mercer and grocer, a man in good repute in the town,’ with whom Wesley stayed when at Epworth. See Stevenson’s Wesley Family, p. 348; and letter of July 28 1775, to Mrs. Woodhouse.] in Epworth, Lincolnshire, by Thorne bag. Dear Sammy, fight on! Adieu. Miss Tancred, a gay, giddy girl, a mere coquette, is put in the way of Mr. Drake. Warn him earnestly to keep clear of her. To Dorothy Furly TREMENEARE, September 6, 1757.

Why you should be afraid on account of anything you said to me I do not know. Certainly, if you had said whatever was in your heart, it might have been a means of lessening your burthen and not of increasing it. I believe you have often a desire, and almost a resolution, of saying a great deal to me; but when you come to write or speak, your heart fails. Why should it Why should you repress yourself I should not despise but love you for your openness. It is the fruit and the proof of an honest heart. I know you are weak; I know a little of your particular weaknesses. But so much the more am I concerned for you as a tender, sickly flower. Away, then, with this reserve; it answers no end but to trouble and embarrass you. Tell me freely and plainly any difficulty you meet with, any enemy against whom you want help. Use me as a friend, as I hope you will use Sarah Crosby, and you will find it a blessing to your soul. It will again bring the promise of holiness near; which, indeed, always seems to be far off when we give way to any known sin, when we any way grieve the Spirit of God. There may be some rare cases wherein God has determined not to bestow His perfect love till a little before death; but this I believe is uncommon: He does not usually put off the fulfilling of His promises. Seek, and you shall find; seek earnestly, and you shall find speedily. Lift up the hands that hang down; deny yourself; take up your cross, whether that of meeting your class or any other. Fight on, and victory is at hand! -- I am, dear Miss Fury, Your affectionate servant. To Samuel Walker [5] PENRYN, September 19, 1757.

2. ‘If you beloved Mr. Vowler [Wesley heard Mr. Vowler preach two thundering sermons at St. Agnes on Sept. 4, 1757, and spent an afternoon with him. ‘He both preaches and lives the gospel.’ He died of fever on July 30, 1758. See Journal, iv. 234, 529.] to be a gracious person and a gospel minister, why, did you not in justice to your people leave them to him’ John Hingeston assured me that Mr. Vowler also had a dear conviction of his being reconciled to God. If so, I could not deny his being a gracious person; and I heard him preach the true though not the whole gospel. But had it been the whole, there are several reasons still why I did not give up the people to him. (1) No one mentioned or intimated any such thing, nor did it once enter into my thought. But if it had, (2) I do not know that every one who preaches the truth has wisdom and experience to guide and govern a flock. I do not know that Mr. Vowler in particular has. He may or he may not. (3) I do not know whether he could or would give that flock all the advantages for holiness which they now enjoy; and to leave them to him before I was assured of this would be neither justice nor mercy. (4) Unless they also were assured of the, they could not in conscience give up themselves to him; and I have nether right nor power to dispose of them contrary to their conscience.

But you say, ‘Really, before it can be effected, something must be done on your part.’ Tell me what, and I will do it without delay, however contrary it may be to my ease or intonation, provided only that it consist with my keeping a conscience void of offence toward God and toward man. It would not consist with this to give up the flock under my care to any other minister till I and they were convinced they would have the same advantages for holiness under him which they now enjoy. But ‘paying us visits can serve no other purpose than to bring us under needles difficulties.’ I will speak very freely on this head. Can our conversing together serve no other purpose You seem, then, not to have the least conception of your own wanting any such thing! But whether you do or not, I feel I do. I am not in memet torus totus teres atque rotundus. [Horace’s Satires, II vii. 86: ‘In myself completely smooth and rounded.’] I want more light, more strength, for my personal walking with God; and I know not but He may give it me through you. And (whether you do or no) I want more light and strength for guiding the flock committed to my charge. May not the Lord send this also by whom He will send and by you as probably as any other It is not improbable He may by you give me clearer light either as to doctrine or discipline. And even hereby how much comfort and profit might redound to thousands of those for whom Christ hath died! which, I apprehend would fully compensate any difficulties that might arise from such conversation.

A sad mistake this in point of fact. For whether they are of the world or no, it is certain the world, the generality of men, good or bad, doth not and never did hear them. At this day those who hear them are an exceeding small number in comparison of those who do not. And if the body of the people in any place do attend some of them, how do they attend Just as they would a mad dog, with sticks and stones and whatever comes to hand. And this you yourself account for extremely well. Sed oportet Palaemonem esse memorem. [‘But Palaemon ought to posses a good memory.’ Palaemon was the most famous grammarian in Rome and master of Quintillian.] ‘What a figure would a small number of ministers make in the Church either of England or Scotland who should agree to maintain the plain, obvious sense of their own public standards of doctrine, and insist upon an adherence to that sense as a term of holding communion with them in the sacred institutions! Their situation in the national Church would be very uncomfortable as well as extremely ridiculous. For many enemies would soon be awakened against them, to distress and misrepresent them in various respects.’ (Page 465.) Thus much as a specimen of your veracity. I object, secondly, that you know not what faith is. You talk about it, and labor and sweat, and at last come to a most lame and impotent conclusion. You say: ‘That Christ died for me is a point not easily settled, a point which the Scripture nowhere ascertains’ (the very thought, and nearly the words, of Cardinal Bellarmine, in his dispute with our forefathers): ‘so far from it, that it affirms the final. perdition of many who have great confidence of their interest in Christ’ (this only proves that many fancy they have what they have not, which I suppose nobody will deny); ‘yea, and declares that “wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction”’ (page 14). It is so; but this is nothing to the point -- the nature of true faith.

Again: ‘Men are justified by a knowledge of the righteousness of Christ' (page 406). And yet again: ‘The sole requisite to acceptance is divine righteousness brought to view’ (page 291). So you have brought matters to a fine conclusion; confuting an hundred of your own assertions, and doing the very thing for which you have been all along so unmercifully condemning other. You yourself here teach another ‘requisite to our acceptance beside the bare work of Christ’ -- namely, the knowing that work, the finding it true. Therefore by your own word ‘Christ shall profit you nothing.’ In one page you say, ‘Nothing is required in order to our acceptance with God’; in another, ‘Divine righteousness brought to view is requisite to our acceptance.’ ‘Brought to view’! What self-righteousness is this! Which of ‘the popular preachers’ could have done worse ‘Men are justified by a knowledge of the righteousness of Christ.’ ‘Knowledge’! What! our own knowledge! Knowledge in us! Why, this is the very thing which we call faith. So you have fairly given up the whole question, justified your opponents, and condemned yourself as ‘damnably criminal’! I object, fourthly, that you have no charity and that you know not what charity is. That you know not what it is manifestly appears from the wonderful definition you give of it. (1) ‘Charity,’ you say, ‘is fellowship with God in His blessedness’ (page 453). Muddy, confused, ut nihil sgpra! [“So as nothing can exceed it.] We know he that loveth hath fellowship with God. But yet the ideas of one and of the other are widely different. We know ‘God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him.’ But yet loving Him is not the same thing with dwelling in Him. If it were, the whole sentence would be flat tautology. You say (2): Charity is ‘the love of the truth’ (page 456). Not at all; no more than it is the love of the sun. It is the love of God, and of man for God’s sake; no more and no less. You say (3): ‘Christ is known to us only by report.’ That is not granted. ‘And charity is the love of that report’ (page 455). Every intelligent reader will want no farther proof that you know not what chatty is.

Upon the whole, I cannot but observe how extremely difficult it is, even for men who have an upright intention and are not wanting either in natural or acquired abilities, to understand one another; and how hard it is to do even justice to those whom we do not throughly understand; much more to treat them with that gentleness, tenderness, and brotherly kindness with which, upon a change of circumstances, we might reasonably desire to be treated ourselves. Oh when shall men know whose disciples we are by our ' loving one another as He hath loved us' I The God of love hasten the time! -- I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant. To Micaiah Towgood [2] BRISTOL, January 10, 1758. SIR,--If you fairly represent Mr. White’s arguments, they are liable to much exception. But whether they are or no, your answers to them are far from unexceptionable. To the manner of the whole I object, you are not serious; you do not write as did those excellent men, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Howe, Dr. Calamy, who seem always to speak, not laughing, but weeping. To the matter I object, that if your argument hold as it is proposed in your very title-page, if ‘a dissent from our Church be the genuine consequence of the allegiance due to Christ,’ then all who do not dissent have renounced that allegiance and are in a state of damnation! I have not leisure to consider all that you advance in proof of this severe sentence. I can only at present examine your main argument, which indeed contains the strength of your cause. ‘My separation from the Church of England,’ you say, ‘is a debt I owe to God, and an act of allegiance due to Christ, the only Lawgiver in the Church’ (page 2).

DEAR SIR,--When it is probable I may alter my judgement or practice, I am very willing to speak upon any head. But when I am clearly and fully fixed, then I do not speak; for it would be lost labour. For this reason I did not speak the other night; because I was fully fixed. My wife picks my lock and steals my papers. Afterwards she says, 'You cannot trust me.' I answer, 'I cannot, till you restore what you stole and promise to steal no more.' She replies, 'I will burn them, or lodge them with another, on such terms.' I answer nothing. Do you ask, Why so! I answer to you: (1) I will not consent my goods shall be burnt, much less accept it as a favour: I require her to restore them. (2) I will not thank her for lodging them with another: I require that they be restored to me. (3) I will not so much as consider the terms: I require the restitution of my own goods without any terms. And I know you would do so were it your case. And so would any man of common sense. 'But she will not restore them.' Then she must keep them. But let her not blame me because I cannot trust her. Permit me to add one word to you. You think yourself a match for her; but you are not. By her exquisite art she has already made you think ill of two very deserving women. [Mrs. Ryan and Mrs. Crosby. See next letter and that of July 12, 1758.] And you have been more than once much puzzled what to think of me! Nor could you help thinking me a little in the wrong. I am almost afraid she likewise entertains you with the faults of many in the Society; the knowing of which (be they real or feigned) does you no good at all. O sir, let us look inward; let us live at home! The more we know of our own faults and the less of other people's, the more will the work of God prosper in our hearts. Wishing all happiness to you and yours, I am, dear sir, -- Your affectionate servant From Ebenezer Blackwell Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [2]

DEAR SIR,--I this day received your favour of the 2nd inst. I am sensible of my incapacity either to speak or write in that lively, concise manner you do; but as well as I can I will paragraph by paragraph give a direct answer to your letter. And, first, I desire never to interfere between you and Mrs. Wesley, without there is at least a probability of my being of service to one, or (what I would much rather wish) to both of you; and I declare I have seldom if ever spoken of one to the other without being first desired either by yourself or Mrs. Wesley. Therefore you may be assured I will not in the least hinder your maintaining the authority of the husband in the greatest latitude that either myself or any man of common sense would wish. I likewise say that I do not think myself a match for Mrs. Wesley or any one that studies to deceive me; but I deny that by any exquisite art she has made me think ill of two very deserving women. I suppose you mean Mrs. Ryan and Mrs. Crosby. The first I know nothing of, having never seen her in my life, and hardly ever (for I won't say never) spoken of her to anybody but yourself. The latter I only know from the letter wrote by yourself, which she owned to me was her handwriting, and which I think will plainly prove to every one of common sense that she is not that very deserving woman you think her; and, permit me to add, I am afraid she has too much art for my dear friend.

I think my behaviour must fully convince you what my thoughts have been of yourself. When I have spoken to you, it has been without reserve; and if at any time I have expressed myself a little freer than many others would dare to do, do not think the harder of me, for indeed it has constantly been with a view if possible to have established peace between yourself and Mrs. W. And I seldom if ever see Mrs. Wesley from the time you leave London until you return, and would even then be glad to be excused that honour if it was not out of civility to yourself. Therefore she has no opportunity, or if she had I dare not give encouragement to her or any one, to entertain me with the faults of any either in your Society or not. Indeed, sir, I am sensible, if I did, it would very much hurt my soul. And yet, alas! I have been often much hurt, though I dare not blame my dear friend on that account, and yet must declare what you have said, and what I have seen of your brother, has very often much grieved and stumbled my poor soul. I feel I have an evil heart; I know I am not renewed; and I earnestly wish that my own faults were more and more engraver on my mind, that so I may never rest until I am born again and have the image of God stamped on my soul. I earnestly wish you all happiness, and pray that the peace and love of God may continually attend you.--I am, dear sir, Your very affectionate and much obliged servant, EBENEZER BLACKWELL. To William Alwood Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [3] NORWICH, March 6, 1759.

Hitherto you have been greatly superior to every delicacy in food; but even this may assault you now, and perhaps raise in you other desires which you are now a stranger to. At present you are above the follies of dress; but will you be so a twelvemonth hence! May you not easily slide into the pride of life, in this as well as other instances! especially considering how your vanity will be gratified thereby! For who will not admire and applaud your admirable taste! It will only remain for you to marry some agreeable person that has much wit and sense with little or no religion; then it is finished! Either you will be throughly miserable in this world or miserable to eternity. 'But what business is this of yours! Cannot you let me alone! What have I to do with you!' Believe me, I could very easily let you alone, if I had not a real and tender goodwill toward you, and if I did not know (what perhaps you do not) that you have need even of me. You want friends who understand you well, and who dare tell you the whole, plain truth; and yet not in a surly, imperious manner, for then you could not receive it. I have endeavoured to do this once more. Will not you forgive me! I cannot but think, if you do not thank, you will at least excuse Your affectionate servant. To William Alwood NORWICH, March 29, 1759. DEAR BILLY,--I believe each window may stand eight foot (the bottom of it) from the ground, [The preaching-house at York was being built. See letter of March 6 to Alwood.] and be four foot broad and six or seven high, arched at the top. If you think it would do good, I should have no objection to preaching at Selby about eleven o'clock, as I come from Epworth, on Wednesday, April 18.

Notwithstanding this, you wrote me two loving letters. (I hope, not with a design of reading them to other people; which I shall not suspect if you assure me you have not read or shown them in part or in whole to any one.) So that I was a little surprised when at our meeting in Colchester I found you throughly out of humour. It really seemed as if you was heartily vexed by the papers you had taken, and so were resolved to have it out with me. Accordingly you could not refrain from throwing squibs at me even in company, [He was at Colchester on March 19.] and from speaking with such keenness when we were alone, as I think no wife ought to speak to an husband--such as I apprehend you could not have used decently to any but Noah Vazeille. [Her first husband.] Perhaps you may now take the greater liberty, because, having stripped me of all my papers, you imagine it is now absolutely impossible for me to justify myself. But you are under a mistake. To all that know me my word is a sufficient justification. And if anything more is needful, I know One that is able to say to the Grave, 'Give back!' Yea, and if He say it to Jealousy, cruel as the Grave, it shall hear and obey His voice. Wishing you the blessing which you now want above any other--namely, unfeigned and deep repentance,--I remain Your much injured yet still affectionate Husband. To Mrs. Wesley, At the Foundery, London. To Sir James Lowther, afterwards Earl of Lonsdale Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [6] LONDON, May 16, 1759. DEAR SIR,--Since I received your favour I have had many thoughts on worldly and Christian prudence. What is the nature of each! How do they differ! How may we distinguish one from the other!

REVEREND SIR,--I esteem you as a person of uncommon sense and learning, but your doctrine I cannot esteem; and some time since, I believed it my duty to speak my sentiments at large concerning your doctrine of Original Sin. When Mr. Newton of Liverpool [Afterwards the Rev. John Newton of Olney. See letter of April 9, 1765.] mentioned this, and asked whether you designed to answer, you said you thought not, 'for it would only be a personal controversy between John Wesley and John Taylor.' How gladly, if I durst, would I accept of this discharge from so unequal contest! for I am throughly sensible, humanly speaking, it is formica contra leonem. ['An ant against a lion,'] How gladly, were it indeed no other than a personal controversy! But certainly it is not: it is a controversy de re, if ever there was one in this world; indeed, concerning a thing of the highest importance--nay, all the things that concern our eternal peace. It is Christianity or heathenism! for, take away the scriptural doctrine of Redemption or Justification, and that of the New Birth, the beginning of sanctification, or (which amounts to the same) explain them as you do, suitably to your doctrine of Original Sin, and what is Christianity better than heathenism! wherein, save in rectifying some of our notions, has the religion of St. Paul any pre-eminence over that of Socrates or Epictetus! This is, therefore, to my apprehension, the least a personal controversy of any in the world. Your person and mine are out of the question. The point is, Are those things that have been believed for many ages throughout the Christian world real, solid truths, or monkish dreams and vain imaginations! But farther: it is certain, between you and me there need be no personal controversy at all; for we may agree to leave each other's person and character absolutely untouched, while we sum up and answer the several arguments advanced as plainly and closely as we can. Either I or you mistake the whole of Christianity from the beginning to the end! Either my scheme or yours is as contrary to the scriptural as the Koran is. Is it mine, or yours! Yours has gone through all England and made numerous converts. I attack it from end to end. Let all England judge whether it can be defended or not!

Earnestly praying that God may give you and me a right understanding in all things, I am, reverend sir, Your servant for Christ's sake. To Samuel Furly Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [9] YARM, July 7, 1759. DEAR SAMMY,--Our Conference at Leeds is to begin on Wednesday, August 1. I hope to see you at it. If you are in Yorkshire some days sooner, we shall have more time together. Your present call to Kippax is clear: when you are called farther, that will be clear also. What avails all knowledge but that which ministers to the knowledge of Christ, and which qualifies us for saving our own souls and the souls of them that hear us! What knowledge you have of other things retain; but secure this in all and above all.--I am, with love to Nancy, dear Sammy, Yours affectionately. To the Revd. Mr. Furly, At Lakenheath, Near Brandon, Suffolk. To Miss C-- YORK, July 15, 1759. DEAR MISS C-- ,--Your letter gave me much satisfaction, though it was long before I received it. Now I find you can speak freely to me; and as you have found the way, I hope to hear from you a little oftener. In a few days I hope to be at Leeds. Why should you not give me the pleasure of hearing from you there!

Enjoy while you may the advantage which I had once, and shall have again when God sees best.--I am Your affectionate brother. Certainly you may say to me whatever you have a mind, either by writing or speaking. To Mr. Jones Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [12] LONDON, August 22, 1759. SIR,--Nothing is more certain than that the kingdom of God is not divided against itself; that peace and joy in the Holy Ghost are no ways obstructive of righteousness, even in the highest degree of it. Hold fast, therefore, that whereunto you have attained, and in peace and joy wait for perfect love. We know this is not of works, lest any man should boast; and it is no more of sufferings than it is of works. Nothing is absolutely pre-required but a sense of our want; and this may be a calm, peaceful, yet joyful sense of it. When I was lately in Rotherham, I talked with eleven persons who seem to be perfected in love. [Wesley says in the Journal for Aug. 2, 1759: 'Thence I went on to Rotherham, and talked with five men and six women (as I had done with many others before in various places) who believe they are saved from sin. And this fact I believe, that they "rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks." I believe they feel nothing but love now: what they will do, I leave to God.' ] Of these Jane Green (the wife of one of our preachers) was facile princeps--higher and deeper in experience than them all; and she never was in darkness or heaviness one hour during the second conviction. Only she felt in a manner not to be expressed her own foolishness, emptiness, and nothingness. And in this state she quietly continued till God said, 'Be thou clean.'

It seems to me that, of all the persons I ever knew save one, you are the hardest to be convinced. I have occasionally spoken to you on many heads; some of a speculative, others of a practical nature: but I do not know that you was ever convinced of one, whether of great importance or small. I believe you retained your own opinion in every one, and did not vary an hair's breadth. I have likewise doubted whether you was not full as hard to be persuaded as to be convinced'; whether your will do not adhere to its first bias, right or wrong, as strongly as your understanding. I mean with regard to any impression which another may make upon them. For perhaps you readily, too readily, change of your own mere motion; as I have frequently observed great fickleness and great stubbornness meet in the same mind. So that it is not easy to please you long, but exceeding easy to offend you. Does not this imply the thinking very highly of yourself particularly of your own understanding Does it not imply, what is always connected therewith, something of self sufficiency 'You can stand alone; you care for no man; you need no help from man.' It was not so with my brother and me when we were first employed in this great work. We were deeply conscious of our own insufficiency; and though in one sense we trusted in God alone, yet we sought His help from all His children, and were glad to be taught by any man. And this, although we were really alone in the work; for there were none that had gone before us therein, there were none then in England who had trod that path wherein God was leading us. Whereas you have the advantage which we had not: you tread in a beaten path; others have gone before you, and are going now in the same way, to the same point. Yet it seems you choose to stand alone; what was necessity with us is choice with you; you like to be unconnected with any, thereby tacitly condemning all.

DEAR BROTHER,--Where you are I know not, and how you are I know not; but I hope the best. Neither you nor John Jones [See letter of June 1.] has ever sent me your remarks upon that tract in the late volume of Sermons. [The fourth volume, which included six tracts. Thoughts on Christian Perfection is the fifth. The doctrine had been largely considered at the London Conference in Aug. 1759, and the tract was published soon after. The Preface to it is dated Bristol, Oct. 16, 1759. See letter of June 12, 1759.] You are not kind. Why will you not do all you can to make me wiser than I am Sam. Furly told me his objections at once; so we canvassed them without loss of time. [See previous letter.] Do you know what is done, anything or nothing, with regard to the small edition of the Notes [First edition, 4to, 1755. Third, corrected, Bristol; Grabham & Pine, 1760-2, 12mo, 3 vols, See letter of June 18, 1756.] Mr. I'Anson writes me a long account of the Sussex affair. It is of more consequence than our people seem to apprehend. If we do not exert ourselves, it may drive us to that bad dilemma--Leave preaching, or leave the Church. We have reason to thank God it is not come to this yet. Perhaps it never may. In this kingdom nothing is wanting but a few more zealous and active labourers. James Morgan, [See letter of April 26.] John Johnson, [John Johnson became an itinerant preacher in 1755, and after sixteen years settled at Lisburn. For some time he was General Superintendent in Ireland. He died on Dec. 29, 1803, at the age of seventy eight. See letter of Sept. 26, 1784, to him.] and two or three more do their best; the rest spare themselves. I hope Sally and your little ones are well. Where and how is my wife I wrote to her on Saturday last. Adieu! Where must the Conference be, at Leeds or Bristol If we could but chain or gag the blatant beast, there would be no difficulty. [12] To Miss March SLIGO, June 27, 1760. A day or two ago I was quite surprised to find among my papers a letter of yours, which I apprehend I have not answered.

He is so deeply displeased with the Address to the Clergy because it speaks strongly in favour of learning; but still, if this part of it is only 'fit for an old grammarian grown blear-eyed in mending dictionaries,' it will not follow that 'almost all of it is mere empty babble'; for a large part of it much more strongly insists on a single eye and a clean heart. Heathen philosophers may term this 'empty babble'; but let not Christians either account or call it so!--I am, sir, Your humble servant. To his Brother Charles REDRUTH September 21, 1760. DEAR BROTHER,--I do not apprehend that letter to be any proof of L. A.'s understanding. [Nehemiah Curnock thought this reference might be to Wesley's sister Anne. see Journal, iv. 413n.] I believe you had not time to consider it. Do you really think she was the inditer That she was the transcriber of it I allow; but is not the hand of Joab in this Did you not take knowledge not only of the sentiments but the very language of honest James Relly [See Tyerman's Wesley, ii. 400-1n. He was an Antinomian of bad repute. But see letter of July 7, 1761.] Your message by John Jones seems to supersede the necessity of my writing; yet I think of sending a few civil lines, without entering into the merits of the cause. Is it not an excellent copy of our friend's countenance to 'beg leave to live apart' Quis enim negat ['For who forbids this'] If the unbeliever will depart, let her depart. But she will as soon leap into the sea. [Our friend is his wife. Charles wrote on the letter: 'She asks to part.'] I speak everywhere of bribery and run goods. I suppose John Jones has sent you the Minutes of the Conference. [Held at Bristol in August.] On Friday se'nnight I hope to preach at Shepton Mallet at noon and at Bristol in the evening. [On Oct. 3 he preached at both places at the time mentioned.] Vive hodie! ['Live to-day', the motto on his seal.] Adieu.

(1) 'But it is said they are all good subjects. Perhaps they are; because under a Protestant Government they have all the indulgence they can wish for.' And do you seriously wish for a Popish Government to abridge them of that indulgence? 'But has not a bad use been made of this? Has not the decency of religion been perverted?' Not in the least: the decency of religion is never so well advanced as by advancing inward and outward religion together. (2) 'Have not the minds of the vulgar been darkened to a total neglect of their civil and social duties?' Just the contrary. Thousands in London as well as elsewhere have been enlightened to understand and prevailed on to practice those duties as they never did before. (3) 'Has not the peace of many families been ruined?' The lost peace of many families has been restored. In others a furious opposition to true religion has occasioned division, as our Lord foretold it would. (4) 'Have not the circumstances of many industrious tradesmen been hurt?' I believe not. I know no instance; but I know an hundred tradesmen in London who began to be industrious since they began to fear God, and their circumstances, low enough till then, are now easy and affluent. I am almost ashamed to spend time upon these threadbare objections, which have been answered over and over. But if they are advanced again, they must be answered again, lest silence should pass for guilt. 'But how can the Government distinguish between tenderness of conscience and schemes of interest?' Nothing more easy. 'They may withdraw the licenses of such.' Sir, you have forgot the question. Before they withdraw them they are to distinguish whether they are such or no. And how are they to do this? 'Oh, it is very easy'! So you leave them as wise as they were before.

Your fourth (for want of a better) is to serve for a reply to my answer. In this you stoutly say: 'Sir, your performance is frivolous and fallacious.' Very well; but others must judge of that. 'Shocks, sir, or violent operations of the Spirit are too fully evidenced by your trances, ecstasies, and I know not what.' I assure you, neither do I; but if you please to tell me, when you do know a little of the matter, I will give you what satisfaction I can. 'These appear in the practices of your followers, and as such must destroy free agency.' Nay, sir, you are now too severe, especially in that keen 'as such.' 'As you then assert such practices, you are (excuse the harshness of the expression) an enemy to religion and a deceiver of the people.' Sir, I do excuse you. I am pretty well used to such expressions: if they hurt not you, they hurt not me. 'Until you publish in plain, intelligible words your scheme of principles, it is impossible to say what you are.' I have done it ten times over, particularly in The Principles of a Methodist, the Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, and (what I am not without hope might be intelligible even to you) Instructions for Children. 'I must be plain with you: you seem, sir, to have as much knowledge of the Scriptures as a Mahometan.' Sir, I thank you; and I presume you do not expect any other answer to this. 'That you are an enthusiast, a very great enthusiast, not I, let your own Journals demonstrably prove.' Nay, why not you? I fear my Journals will not give such proof as will satisfy any impartial person. 'As to dogmas, I do not know that it is good English: I know it is false dog-Latin.' Now, I really thought it was neither Latin nor English: I took it to be mere heathen Greek. Whenever you please to favour the public with your name and place of abode, you may perhaps (if I have leisure) hear farther from Your humble servant and well-wisher. To the Editor of the 'London Chronicle' [3] LONDON, February 19, 1761.

But farther: it is a doctrine of your Church that the intention of the administrator is essential to the validity of the sacraments which are administered by him. Now, are you assured of the intention of every priest from whom you have received the Host? If not, you do not know but what you received as the sacrament of the altar was no sacrament at all. Are you assured of the intention of the priest who baptized you? If not, perhaps you are not baptized at all. To come close to the point in hand: if you pass for a priest, are you assured of the intention of the bishop that ordained you? If not, you may happen to be no priest, and so all your ministry is nothing worth: nay, by the same rule he may happen to be no bishop. And who can tell how often this has been the case? But if there has been only one instance in a thousand years, what becomes of your uninterrupted succession? This ad hominem. But I have a word more ad rem. Can a man teach what he does not know? Is it possible a man should teach others what he does not know himself? Certainly it is not. Can a priest, then, teach his hearers the way to heaven marked out in our Lord's Sermon on the Mount if he does not know or understand the way himself? Nothing is more impossible. But how many of your priests know nothing about it! What avails, then, their commission to teach what they cannot teach, because they know it not? Did God, then, send these men on a fool's errand? send them to do what they cannot do? O say not so! And what will be the event of their attempting to teach they know not what? Why, 'if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the pit.' To Sarah Moore LONDON, March 3, 1761.

WHITEHAVEN, April 25, 1761. MY DEAR BROTHER,--I have a desire to ask you some questions on two or three heads, which you may answer as particularly as you please. (1) Have you read over The Doctrine of Original Sin? I mean the book wrote in answer to Dr. Taylor? Have you read it with attention and prayer? Do you understand it? Have you seriously considered it? Is there anything in it which you think wrong? or does it express your own judgement? (2) Have you read over the sermons in the first and fourth volumes on Justification and the New Birth? Do you think you throughly understand them? Is there anything in them which you cannot agree to? (3) Have you read over the Thoughts upon Perfection in the fourth volume? Did you read them with humility and prayer? with calmness and deliberation? Have you considered them again and again, crying to God for help? Is there anything in them which you do not understand, or which you think is not right? On all these heads you may speak freely to, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Direct to Newcastle. To Mrs. Booth [9] SUNDERLAND, May 29, 1761. MY DEAR SISTER,--It is a long time to the 1st of August. Before that time many of us may be in Abraham's bosom. If I am at Sheffield that morning, very probably I may be at Woodseats the same day at noon. I do not know but George Tizard [Tizard became a preacher in 1759, and was afterwards a clergyman.] may be on that Round some time longer. Oh what cause have we to praise God for all the wonders He has wrought!--I am, with love to Brother Booth, Your affectionate brother. I return to Newcastle in a day or two. To John Hosmer [10] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 7, 1761.

I wish you would give us two or three invitatory hymns. We want such exceedingly. My love to Sally. My wife gains ground. Adieu! To Elizabeth Hardy LONDON, December 26, 1761. DEAR SISTER,--The path of controversy is a rough path. But it seems smoother while I am walking with you; so that I could follow you through all its windings, only my time will not permit. The plain fact is this: I know many who love God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength. He is their one desire, their one delight, and they are continually happy in Him. They love their neighbour as themselves. They feel as sincere, fervent, constant a desire for the happiness of every man, good or bad, friend or enemy, as for their own. They 'rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks.' Their souls are continually streaming up to God in holy joy, prayer, and praise. This is plain, sound, scriptural experience; and of this we have more and more living witnesses. But these souls dwell in a shattered, corruptible body, and are so pressed down thereby that they cannot exert their love as they would by always thinking, speaking, and acting precisely right. For want of better bodily organs, they sometimes inevitably think, speak, or act wrong. Yet I think they need the advocacy of Christ, even for these involuntary defects; although they do not imply a defect of love, but of understanding. However that be, I cannot doubt the fact. They are all love; yet they cannot walk as they desire. 'But are they all love while they grieve the Holy Spirit?' No, surely; they are then fallen from their steadfastness; and this they may do even after they are sealed. So that, even to such, strong cautions are needful. After the heart is cleansed from pride, anger, and desire, it may suffer them to re-enter; therefore I have long thought some expressions in the Hymns are abundantly too strong, as I cannot perceive any state mentioned in Scripture from which we may not, in a measure at least, fall.

I hope you and yours have escaped the general disorder or have found it a blessing. It little matters whether we escape pain or suffer it, so it be but sanctified. Without some suffering we should scarce remember that we are not proprietors here, but only tenants at will, liable to lose all we have at a moment's warning. Happy it were if we continually retained a lively impression of this on our minds; then should we more earnestly seek that portion which shall never be taken from us. In two or three days I am likely to embark in order to meet our brethren at Leeds. There I hope to have it under your own hand that both you, Mrs. Blackwell, Mrs. Dewal, and Miss Freeman are alive in the best sense.--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant. To Samuel Furly DUBLIN, July 30, 1762. DEAR SAMMY,--'If I am unanswered, then I am unanswerable.' Who can deny the consequence By such an argument you carry all before you and gain a complete victory. You put me in mind of the honest man who cried out while I was preaching, 'Quid est tibi nomen' and, upon my giving no answer, called out vehemently, 'I told you he did not understand Latin!' I do sometimes understand, though I do not answer. This is often the case between you and me. You love dispute, and I hate it. [See letter of Sept. 15 to him.] You have much time, and I have much work. Non sumus ergo pares. But if you will dispute the point with Nicholas Norton, he is your match. He has both leisure and love for the work.

Some thoughts occurred to my mind this morning, which I believe it may be useful to set down, the rather because it may be a means of our understanding each other clearly, that we may agree as far as ever we can and then let all the world know it. I was thinking on Christian perfection, with regard to the thing, the manner, and the time. 1. By perfection I mean the humble, gentle, patient love of God and man ruling all the tempers, words, and actions, the whole heart and the whole life. I do not include a possibility of falling from it, either in part or in whole. Therefore I retract several expressions in our hymns which partly express, partly imply, such an impossibility. And I do not contend for the term 'sinless,' though I do not object against it. Do we agree or differ here If we differ, wherein 2. As to the manner, I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by faith, by a simple act of faith; consequently in an instant. But I believe a gradual work both preceding and following that instant. Do we agree or differ here 3. As to the time, I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before death. Do we agree or differ here I believe it is usually many years after justification, but that it may be within five years or five months after it. I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. Do you If it must be many years after justification, I would be glad to know how many. Pretium quotus arrogat annus [Horace's Epistles, II. i. 35: How many years should claim the prize'] And how many days, or months, or even years can you allow to be between perfection and death How far from justification must it be and how near to death If it be possible, let you and me come to a good understanding, both for our own sakes and for the sake of the people. To Dorothy Furly ST. IVES, September 15, 1762.

If that fever continues in the country still, you may cure all that are taken ill near you. But it must be helped at the beginning. (1) No bleeding, no blistering: these are extremely hurtful. (2) Give the patient a pint of spring water sweetened with a large spoonful of treacle, lying down in bed. If this is taken at the beginning of the fever, I never once knew it fail. How does the work of God now go on round about you Is Brother Cotty [James Cotty was a preacher from 1767 to 1780.] able to preach And can John Manners [See letter of March 24, 1761.] do anything I want much to know the particulars of Miss Romaine's [Probably a relative of the Rev. William Romaine, who was born at Hartlepool in 1714.] experience. I wish she would write to me. Do you find a growth in grace in lowliness, meekness, patience May our Lord make all grace to abound in you!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Dr. Warburton, Bishop of Gloucester [10] To his Brother Charles LONDON, December 11, 1762. DEAR BROTHER,--For eighteen or twenty days I heard with both ears, but rarely opened my mouth. I think I now understand the affair at least as well as any person in England.

7. Next it would be worth your while to acquire a little knowledge in Arithmetic; and Dilworth's Arithmetic would give you full as much as you want. 8. You might proceed to Geography. But in this I would not advise you to encumber yourself with many books. You need only master one, Randal's Geographical Grammar; and then betake yourself to the Globes. I believe those of Mr. Adams are the best; to which you may add his little book of Instructions. 9. Logic naturally follows; and I really think it is worth all the rest put together. But here I am at a full stop; for I know no good treatise on the subject in English, except Aldrich's Logic, and that I am afraid you cannot understand without an instructor. I shall be glad to give you a little assistance in the short time we have together. 10. As to Ethics (or Moral Philosophy) there is full as much of it as you want in Langbain's Compendium. 11. In Natural Philosophy you have a larger field. You may begin with a Survey of the Wisdom of God in the Creation. This contains the substance of Ray, Derham, Niewentyt, Nature Displayed, and all the other celebrated books on the subject. You may add that fine book, Mr. Jones's Principles of Natural Philosophy. Thence you will easily pass to the Glasgow [Edinburgh] abridgement of Mr. Hutchinson's Works. [See letter of Nov. 26, 1756.] The abridgers give not only all his sense, but all his spirit. You may add to these the beautiful tracts of Lord Forbes; and, if you would go a little farther, Mr. Baker's ingenious Treatise on the Microscope. 12. With any or all of the foregoing studies you may intermix that of History. Geography and Chronology are termed the two eyes of history. Geography has been mentioned before; and I think all you want of Chronology may be learned from Marshall's Chronological Tables. 13. You may begin with Rollin's Ancient History; and afterwards read in order, Puffendorf's Introduction to the History of Europe, the Concise Church History, Burnet's History of the Reformation, the Concise History of England, Clarendon's History of the Great Rebellion, Neal's History of the Puritans, his History of New England, and Solis's History of the Conquest of Mexico.

14. Whitby's Compendium of Metaphysics will introduce you to that science. You may go on with Locke's Essay on Human Understanding; Bishop Browne on the Nature, Procedure, and Limits of Human Understanding; and Malebranche's Search after Truth. 15. For Poetry you may read Spenser's Faery Queen; Fairfax's or Hoole's Godfrey of Bulloigne; select parts of Shakespeare; Paradise Lost; the Night Thoughts; and Moral and Sacred Poems. 16. You are glad to begin and end with Divinity. But I must not expatiate here. I will only recommend to your careful perusal Bishop Pearson On the Creed, Mr. Nelson's Sermons, and the Christian Library. This course of study, if you have the resolution to go through it, will, I apprehend, take you up three, four, or five years, according to the degree of your health and of your application. And you will then have knowledge enough for any reasonable Christian. But remember, before all, in all, and above all, your great point is to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent.--I am, dear Miss Lewen, Your affectionate brother. To Lady Maxwell [14] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE June 20, 1764.

Will it be agreeable to my dear Lady Maxwell that I trouble her with a letter so soon and that I write with so little ceremony that I use no compliment, but all plainness of speech If it be not, you must tell me so, and I shall know better how to speak for the time to come. Indeed, it would be unpleasing to me to use reserve: the regard I feel for you strongly inclines me to 'think aloud,' to tell you every thought which rises in my heart. I think God has taken unusual pains, so to speak, to make you a Christian;-- a Christian indeed, not in name, worshipping God in spirit and in truth; having in you the mind that was in Christ, and walking as Christ also walked. He has given you affliction upon affliction; He has used every possible means to unhinge your soul from things of earth, that it might fix on Him alone. How far the design of His love has succeeded I could not well judge from a short conversation. Your Ladyship will therefore give me leave to inquire, Is the heaviness you frequently feel merely owing to weakness of body and the loss of near relations I will hope it is not. It might, indeed, at first spring from these outward pressures. But did not the gracious Spirit of God strike in, and take occasion from these to convince you of sin, of unbelief, of the want of Christ And is not the sense of this one great cause, if not the greatest, of your present distress If so, the greatest danger is, either that you should stifle that conviction, not suffering yourself to be convinced that you are all sin, the chief of sinners; or that you should heal the wound slightly, that you should rest before you know Christ is yours, before His Spirit witnesses with your spirit that you are a child of God. My dear Lady, be not afraid to know yourself--yea, to know yourself as you are known. How soon, then, will you know your Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous! And why not this day why not this hour If you feel your want, I beseech the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ to look upon you now! O give Thy servant power to believe!

The ordinary objections to such an union are of little weight with you. You are not afraid of the expense. You already give unto the Lord as much as you need do then; and you are not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, even in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. Perhaps you will say, 'I am joined in affection.' True; but not to so good effect. This joining half-way, this being a friend to but not a member of the Society is by no means so open a confession of the work and servants of God. Many go thus far who dare not go farther, who are ashamed to bear the reproach of an entire union. Either you are ashamed or you are not. If you are, break through at once; if you are not, come into the light and do what those well-meaning cowards dare not do. This imperfect union is not so encouraging to the people, not so strengthening to the preachers. Rather it is weakening their hands, hindering their work, and laying a stumblingblock in the way of others; for what can any man think who knows you are so well acquainted with them and yet do not join in their Society What can he think but that you know them too well to come any nearer to them, that you know that kind of union to be useless, if not hurtful And yet by this very union is the whole (external) work of God upheld throughout the nation, besides all the spiritual good which accrues to each member. O delay no longer, for the sake of the work, for the sake of the world, for the sake of your brethren! Join them inwardly and outwardly, heart and hand, for the sake of your own soul. There is something not easily explained in the fellowship of the Spirit which we enjoy with a society of living Christians. You have no need to give up your share therein and in the various blessings that result from it. You have no need to exclude yourself from the benefit of the advice and exhortations given from time to time. These are by no means to be despised, even supposing you have yourself more understanding than him that gives them. You need not lose the benefit of those prayers which experience shows are attended with a peculiar blessing.

You need not lose the benefit of those prayers which experience shows are attended with a peculiar blessing. 'But I do not care to meet a class; I find no good in it.' Suppose you find even a dislike, a loathing of it; may not this be natural, or even diabolical In spite of this, break through, make a fair trial. It is but a lion in the way. Meet only six times (with previous prayer), and see if it do not vanish away. But if it be a cross, still bear it for the sake of your brethren. 'But I want to gain my friends and relations.' If so, stand firm. If you give way, you hurt them and they will press upon you the more. If you do not, you will probably gain them; otherwise you confirm both their wrong notions and wrong tempers. Because I love you I have spoken fully and freely; to know that I have not spoken in vain will be a great satisfaction to Your affectionate brother. To Ebenezer Blackwell LIVERPOOL, July 14, 1764. DEAR SIR,--My brother informs me that you have been so extremely ill that your life was hardly expected. [Blackwell lived till 1782.] I really am under apprehensions lest that chariot should cost you your life. If, after having been accustomed to ride on horseback for many years, you should now exchange an horse for a carriage, it cannot be that you should have good health. It is a vain thing to expect it. I judge of your case by my own. I must be on horseback for life, if I would be healthy. Now and then, indeed, if I could afford it, I should rest myself for fifty miles in a chaise; but without riding near as much as I do now, I must never look for health. [In 1772 Wesley's friends bought him a carriage 'to prevent my riding on horseback, which I cannot do quite so well since an hurt which I got some months ago.' See Journal, v. 447.]

I was likewise grieved at the danger you was in of stopping short. Certainly you may attain that blessing soon. And I am throughly persuaded you did taste of it; though how you lost it I know not. It will be eternally true, 'If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.' Meanwhile faith is the voice of God in the heart proclaiming Himself. Have this faith, and you have salvation. And this is the very thing you want. When this is joined with a strong understanding, it is well; but it may exist with a very weak understanding. This is the case with Mrs. W., whose understanding is extremely weak. And yet she has strong faith, and such as exceedingly profits me; though I take knowledge the treasure is in an earthen vessel. I see all that is of nature; and this does not hinder my rejoicing in all that is of God. This is one branch of simplicity. While reason, assisted-- from above, enables me to discern the precious from the vile, I make my full use of the former without losing one moment in thinking upon the latter. Perhaps reason (enlightened) makes me simple. If I knew less of human nature (forgive me for talking so much of myself), I should be more apt to stumble at the weakness of it, and if I had not (by nature or by grace) some clearness of apprehension. It is owing to this (under God) that I never staggered at the reveries of George Bell. I saw it instantly, at the beginning and from the beginning, what was right and what was wrong. But I saw withal, 'I have many things to speak, but you cannot bear them now.' Hence many imagined I was imposed upon, and applauded themselves in their greater perspicacity; as they do at this day. 'But if you knew it, says his friend to Gregory Lopez, why did not you tell me' I answer with him, 'I do not speak all I know, but what I judge needful.' Still, I am persuaded there is no state under heaven from which it is not possible to fall. But I wish you was all love, and then you would not need to take any thought for the morrow.

The usual preaching may be at Combe on Saturday evening, and at the Grove on Sunday morning. I bear the rich, and love the poor; therefore I spend almost--all my time with them!--My dear sister, adieu! Write to me at London, and write freely. To Christopher Hopper BRISTOL, September 29, 1764. MY DEAR BROTHER,--My judgement is this,--that it is best for you to be at Edinburgh (but in a more airy lodging, if it can be had for love or money) before the end of next month, James Kershaw at Dundee, and Tommy Hanby at Aberdeen. If you have either love or pity for him, let him not stay too long at Dundee. His mind is by no means strong enough to bear that weight of applause. At any rate, take him out of the furnace, or he will be consumed. And you well know a change is best for the people as well as best for him. Is it not easiest for him and you to change at a day appointed, and then for you to stay at Dundee till you are relieved by James Kershaw Peace be with your spirits!--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. I hope you have been at Sir Archibald's. [Sir Archibald Grant. See Journal, iv. 451.] To Samuel Furly YARMOUTH, October II, 1764. DEAR SAMMY,--I have delayed writing thus long, [See letter of July 15. ] because I was not inclined to draw the saw of controversy, particularly on a subject not very important and with a person not very easy to be convinced. I simply told you my thoughts concerning style and concerning yourself. If you can profit by them, well; if not, there is no harm done. I wanted to have you write in the most excellent way; if you prefer any other, you may. I have no prejudice for or against any writer: but I may say, without much vanity, I know a good style from a bad one; and it would be a shame if I did not, after having spent five-and-forty years (with some natural understanding, much attention, and a free acquaintance with many eminent men) in reading the most celebrated writers in the English tongue.

The truth is, we are continually forming general rules from our own particular experience. Thus Sarah Ryan, [See letter of April 23.] having gone about and about herself, which took up a considerable time, might very naturally suppose all who are sanctified must stay for it near as long a time as she did. Again: if God has so rooted and grounded her in love (which I neither affirm nor deny) that she cannot now fall from Him, she very naturally thinks this is the case with all that are sanctified. Formerly Sarah Crosby [See letter of Oct. 5, 1765.] drew the same inference from her own experience, and was as positive that she could not fall from that state or sin as Sarah Ryan can be now. But 'none can be sanctified without a deep knowledge of themselves and of the devices of Satan.' They may without the latter, which God will give them in due time. And the former He can give in a moment, and frequently does, of which we have fresh instances almost every day. In the Thoughts on Perfection it is observed that, before any can be assured they are saved from sin, they must not only feel no sin but 'have a direct witness' of that salvation. And this several have had as clear as Sarah Ryan has, who afterwards fell from that salvation: although Sarah Ryan, to be consistent with her scheme, must deny they ever had it; yea, and must affirm that witness was either from nature or from the devil. If it was really from God, is He well pleased with this I know not how to reconcile speaking sharply or roughly, or even a seeming want of meekness, with perfection. And yet I am fearful of condemning whom God has not condemned. What I cannot understand I leave to Him. How is it that you make me write longer letters to you than I do almost to any one else I know not how, I find a greater concern for your welfare. I want you to be exactly right. This occasions my not thinking much of any pains that may give you help or satisfaction. The Lord touch your heart now, that all your tempers, thoughts, words, and works may be holiness unto our God.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Miss March NORWICH, October 13, 1764.

John Matthews [See letter of April 24, 1757.] sent for me between two and three on Friday morning. One had a little before asked him how he found himself; and he answered, 'The Lord protects, for ever near.' When I came, he was perfectly sensible. I began to pray at three, and before I had spoken many words his soul was set at liberty without a groan. Here is a subject for your pen. He has had 'the witness' in my sense for several months--that is, he knew he was in the favour of God, and had no doubt of going to heaven. I hope Goodwin is above three-quarters printed. [See letter of Dec. 15.] You know doctors differ. I could trust Dr. Turner as well as any. I shall say a word to the preachers in Ireland. I really thought Mark Davis had had more wit and more modesty. I do not yet find anything on the Atonement fit for a Deist. Pray inquire of your learned friends. My love to Sally. I have sent you by Miss Billo the Preface to Goodwin and the Appeals. You will English the Latin verses, and produce the neatest and correctest edition of them which has ever appeared. To the Editor of the 'London Magazine'

1765 LONDON, January 1, 1765. SIR,--If you please to insert in your Magazine my answer to a letter directed to me in November last, you will oblige Your humble servant. SIR,--I am obliged to you for your queries and remarks; and so I shall be to any who will point out anything wherein they think I have been mistaken. It would not be strange if there should be many mistakes in the Compendium of Natural Philosophy, as philosophy is what for many years I have only looked into at leisure hours. Accordingly in the Preface of that treatise I said, 'I am throughly sensible there are many who have more ability as well as leisure for such a work than me; but as none of them undertakes it, I have myself made some little attempt in the following volumes.' Q. 1. 'You say the Sun revolves upon his axis once in twenty-seven hours. Should it not be once in twenty-seven days nearly' Yes, it should. This was an error of the press. Q. 2. 'You say he is supposed to be abundantly larger than the Earth. Is it not demonstrable that he is so' I do not know whether it is or no. Q. 3. 'You tell us the Moon turns always the same side to the Earth. Should it not be nearly the same' Yes. Q. 4. 'You say it does not appear that she moves round her own axis. How, then, do you account for her turning always the same side to the Earth' I think, full as well without the supposition as with it. But I do not undertake to account for anything. Q. 5. 'Why do you say the Moon is supposed to be forty-five times smaller than the Earth when the Moon's bulk is nicely known' It is not known by me, nor, I doubt, by any man else. Q. 6. 'You say Jupiter is supposed to be twenty-five times larger than the Earth, and in the next page that his diameter is supposed to be 130,655 miles. If so, is he not 4,096 times larger than the Earth' Undoubtedly. But I do not undertake to defend either one supposition or the other. Q. 7. 'You inform us that even a good eye seldom sees more than an hundred stars at a time. Do you mean at one look' Yes.

1. None of those six persons lately ordained by a Greek bishop were ordained with my consent or knowledge. 2. I will not, cannot, own or receive them as clergymen. 3. I think an ordination performed in a language not understood by the persons ordained is not valid. 4. I think it is absolutely unlawful for any one to give money to the Bishop (or to any one for him) for ordaining him.--I am, sir, Your humble servant. To Thomas Rankin LONDON, February 9, 1765. DEAR TOMMY,--I have little more to add to my last but that I have wrote to Brother Jane and the leaders at the Dock to the same effect as I wrote to James Stevens and to you at St. Austell. You have only to go on steadily, and lovingly, and to overcome evil with good.--I am, dear Tommy, Yours affectionately. To Mr. Rankin, At Mr. Wood's, Shopkeeper, In Port Isaac, Near Camelford, Cornwall. To the Printer of the 'St. James's Chronicle' [LONDON, February 10, 1765.] SIR,--In the St. James's Chronicle published on Saturday last there was an innocent thing wrote by an hat-maker in Southwark. It may be proper to take a little more notice of it than it deserves, lest silence should appear to be an acknowledgement of the charge. I insert nothing in the public papers without my name. I know not the authors of what has been lately inserted; part of which I have not seen yet, nor did I see any part before it was printed. A year or two ago I found a stranger perishing for want and expecting daily to be thrown in prison. He told me he was a Greek bishop. I examined his credentials,, and was fully satisfied. After much conversation (in Latin and Greek, for he spoke no English at all) I determined to relieve him effectively; which I did without delay, and promised to send him back to Amsterdam, where he had several friends of his own nation. And this I did, without any farther view, merely upon motives of humanity. After this he ordained Mr. John Jones, a man well versed both in the languages and other parts of learning. When I was gone out of town, Bishop Erasmus was prevailed upon to ordain Lawrence Coughlan, a person who had no learning at all.

But the main point between you and me is Perfection. 'This,' you say, 'has no prevalence in these parts; otherwise I should think it my duty to oppose it with my whole strength-- not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.' Just so my brother and I reasoned thirty years ago. 'We think it our duty to oppose Predestination with our whole strength--not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion, to the most grievous offences.' That it has given occasion to such offences I know; I can name time, place, and persons. But still another fact stares me in the face. Mr. Haweis and Mr. Newton hold this, and yet I believe these have real Christian experience. But if so, this is only an opinion; it is not subversive (here is clear proof to the contrary) 'of the very foundations of Christian experience.' It is 'compatible with a love to Christ and a genuine work of grace.' Yea, many hold it at whose feet I desire to be found in the day of the Lord Jesus. If, then, I 'oppose this with my whole strength,' I am a mere bigot still. I leave you in your calm and retired moments to make the application. But how came this opinion into my mind I will tell you with all simplicity. In 1725 I met with Bishop Taylor's Rules of Holy Living and Dying. I was struck particularly with the chapter upon Intention, and felt a fixed intention to give myself up to God. In this I was much confirmed soon after by the Christian Pattern, and longed to give God all my heart. This is just what I mean by Perfection now: I sought after it from that hour.

I hope no inward or outward reasonings are able to move you from walking exactly according to the gospel. O beware of voluntary humility; of thinking, 'Such an one is better than me, and why should I pretend to be more strict than her' 'What is that to thee follow thou Me!' You have but one pattern: follow Him inwardly and outwardly. If other believers will go step for step with you, well; but if not, follow Him! Peace be with your spirit. To Miss March BRISTOL, August 31, 1765. You may be assured it is not a small degree of satisfaction to me to hear that your soul prospers. I cannot be indifferent to anything which concerns either your present or future welfare. As you covet, so I want you to enjoy, the most excellent gifts. To your outward walking I have no objection. But I want you to walk inwardly in the fullness of love, and in the broad light of God's countenance. What is requisite to this but to believe always now to believe with your whole heart, and to hold fast the beginning of this confidence steadfast unto the end And yet a self-complaisant thought, yea, or a blasphemous one, may steal across your spirit; but I will not say that is your own thought. Perhaps an enemy hath done this. Neither will I blame you for 'feeling deeply the perverseness of others,' or for 'feeling your spirit tried with it.' I do not wish that you should not feel it (while it remains), or that you should feel it otherwise than as a trial. But this does not prove that there is sin in your heart or that you are not a sacrifice to love. O my friend, do justice to the grace of God! Hold fast whereunto you have attained; and if you have not yet uninterrupted communion with Him, why not this moment, and from this moment If you have not, I incline to think it is occasioned by reasoning or by some inward or outward omission. To Richard Walsh [13] REDRUTH, September 9, 1765. MY DEAR BROTHER,--I doubt very much whether either Jeremy Coombs or Sister Weyworth spoke any such thing.

I want only more of the spirit of love and power and of an healthful mind. As to those 'many believing wives who practice pious frauds on their unbelieving husbands,' I know them not--no, not one of that kind; therefore I doubt the fact. If you know any such, be pleased to give us their names and places of abode. Otherwise you must bear the blame of being the lover if not the maker of a lie. Perhaps you will say, 'Why, a great man said the same thing but a few years ago.' What if he did Let the frog swell as long as he can, he will not equal the ox. He might say many things, all circumstances considered, which will not come well from you, as you have neither his wit, nor sense, nor learning nor age, nor dignity. Tibi parvula res est: Metiri se quemque suo modulo ac pede verum est. [Horace's Epistles, 1. vii. 98. Wesley here gives a free and edged translation: 'You are not upon a level with Bishop Warburton. Let every man know his own size.' See next letter.] If you fall upon people that meddle not with you, without either fear or wit, you may possibly find they have a little more to say for themselves than you was aware of. I 'follow peace with all men'; but if a man set upon me without either rhyme or reason, I think it my duty to defend myself so far as truth and justice permit. Yet still I am (if a poor enthusiast may not be so bold as to style himself your brother), reverend sir, Your servant for Christ's sake. [5] November 26, 1762.

But see 'the character he gives his own saints!" The more I converse with this people the more I am amazed. That God hath wrought a great work is manifest by saving many sinners from their sins. And yet the main of them are not able to give a rational account of the plainest principles of religion."' They were not able then, as there had not been time to instruct them. But the case is far different now. Again: Did I 'give this character,' even then, of the people called Methodists in general No, but of the people of a particular town in Ireland, where nine in ten of the inhabitants are Romanists. 'Nor is the observation confined to the people. He had made a proselyte of Mr. Drake, [See letter of Sept. 25, 1755.] Vicar of B[awtry]. And, to show he was no discredit to his master, he gives him this character: " He seemed to stagger at nothing, though as yet his understanding is not opened."' (Page 162.) Mr. Drake was never a proselyte of mine; nor did I ever see him before or since. I endeavoured to show him that we are justified by faith. And he did not object; though neither did he understand.

'To show that the loss of these will not be regretted when the Church has advanced from a state of infancy to manhood ' (alas the day! Were the Apostles but infants to us), 'he illustrates the case by an elegant similitude,--"When I was a child, I spake as a child; . . . but when I became a man, I put away childish things." His next remark, concerning the defects of human knowledge, is only an occasional answer to an objection. And the last verse shows that the superior duration of charity refers to the present life only,--"Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." That is, you may perhaps object, Faith and hope will likewise remain in the Church, when prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are ceased: they will so; but still charity is the greatest, because of its excellent qualities.' (Page 107.) 'The last verse shows'! Is not this begging the question How forced is all this! The plain natural meaning of the passage is, Love (the absolute necessity and the nature of which is shown in the foregoing verses) has another commendation--it 'never faileth,' it accompanies and adorns us to eternity. 'But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail,' when all things are fulfilled and God is all in all. 'Whether there be tongues, they shall cease': one language shall prevail among all the inhabitants of heaven, while the low, imperfect languages of earth are forgotten. The 'knowledge,' likewise, we now so eagerly pursue shall then 'vanish away.' As starlight is lost in that of the midday sun, so our present knowledge in the light of eternity. 'For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.' We have here but short, narrow, imperfect conceptions, even of the things round about us, and much more of the deep things of God; and even the prophecies which men deliver from God are far from taking in the whole of future events. 'But when that which is perfect is come,' at death and in the last day, 'that which is in part shall be done away.' Both that low, imperfect, glimmering light, which is all the knowledge we can now attain to; and these slow and unsatisfactory methods of attaining, as well as of imparting it to others.

'Human and worldly reason is not needful to the understanding the Scripture; but the "revelation of the Holy Ghost," who inspireth the true meaning unto them who with humility and diligence search for it' (Part II.). 'Make him know and feel that there is no other name given under heaven unto men whereby we can be saved.' 'If we feel our conscience at peace with God, through remission of our sins, all is of God.' (Homily on Rogation Week, Part III.) 'If you feel such a faith in you, rejoice in it, and let it be daily increasing by well working' (Homily on Faith, Part III.). 'The faithful may feel wrought, tranquillity of conscience, the increase of faith and hope, with many other graces of God' (Homily on the Sacrament, Part I.). 'Godly men feel inwardly God's Holy Spirit inflaming their hearts with love' (Homily on Certain Places of Scripture, Part I.). 'God give us grace to know these things, and feel them in our hearts! This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with His presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For without His lively inspiration we cannot so much as speak the name of the Mediator: "No man can say Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." Much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. "But we have received," saith St. Paul, "not the Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God"; for this purpose, "that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God." In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God and to please Him. It is He that purifieth the mind by His secret working. He enlighteneth the heart to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth on the tongue of man to stir him to speak His honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and selfsame Spirit.' (Homily for Rogation Week, Part III.)

To Mr. Tho. Rankin, At Mr. Hutton's, In Epworth, Near Thorne, Yorkshire. To his Brother Charles LONDON, January 27, 1767. DEAR BROTHER,--Some thoughts occurred to my mind this morning which I believe it may be useful to set down: the rather because it may be a means of our understanding each other clearly; that we may agree as far as ever we can, and then let all the world know it. I was thinking on Christian Perfection, with regard to the thing, the manner, and the time. 1. By perfection I mean the humble, gentle, patient love of God and man ruling all the tempers, words, and actions, the whole heart by the whole life. I do not include an impossibility of falling from it, either in part or in whole. Therefore I retract several expressions in our Hymns which partly express, partly imply, such an impossibility. And I do not contend for the term sinless, though I do not object against it. Do we agree or differ here If we differ, wherein 2. As to the manner. I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by faith, by a simple act of faith, consequently in an instant. But I believe in a gradual work both preceding and following that instant. Do we agree or differ here 3. As to the time. I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before death. Do we agree or differ here I believe it is usually many years after justification, but that it may be within five years or five months after it. I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. Do you If it must be many years after justification, I would be glad to know how many. Pretium quotus arrogat annus [Horace's Epistles, II. i. 35 'What year must claim the reward'] And how many days or months or even years can you allow to be between perfection and death How far from justification must it be And how near to death If it be possible, let you and I come to a good understanding, both for our own sakes and for the sake of the people. [See letter of Feb. 12.] To George Merryweather LONDON, January 29, 1767.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Concerning that displeasure, one may doubt whether it was any other than the concern you ought to have felt on the occasion; or, at least, whether it was any more than temptation to sin. But if it was, what would it prove Not that your heart had not been cleansed, but that, being off your guard, you suffered a degree of evil to re-enter. Was it so Then (if it be not done already) the Lord cleanse you from it this moment! Woman, be it unto thee even as thou wilt! Believe, and feel the blessing! Certainly the more vigorously you follow after Him the clearer will that unction be, without which it is not possible on some occasions to distinguish between temptation and sins. But you take the right way, without perplexing your mind about anything else. Now give yourself up to God. This is all you have to do. And even while you are doing it light will spring up. I feel it does me good to converse with you even at a distance. O never diminish either your love or your prayers for, my dear Peggy, Your affectionate brother. To Lady Maxwell CORK, June 4, 1767.

7. 'My preaching in your chapel would have been in effect to tell the people of Edinburgh that the Methodists did not deny the Calvinist doctrines.' Amazing! Did Mr. Gillies [Dr. John Gillies. See letter of March 24, 1761 n.] tell them so when he preached in our house Just the contrary. He told them: 'In some opinions I do not agree with the Methodists; but I know they are a people of God: therefore I wish them good luck in the name of the Lord.' Might not you have done the very same May you not still Can you be clear before God without doing it I have now told you all that lay upon my mind. If you can receive it, I shall rejoice for your sake and for the people's. If not, I have delivered my own soul. For many years I have been labouring for peace, though I have had little thanks for my pains. However, my record is above, and my reward with the Most High. It is but a little while that I have to endure the contradiction either of sinners or good men. May God enable you, that stand up in my stead, to labour more successfully! So prays, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To Ann Foard NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE:, August 8, 1767. DEAR SISTER,--We have many instances of this: persons cold and dull, and scarce knowing how to believe their own words, have asserted as they could the truths of the gospel and enforced them upon others, and at that very time God has caused light and love to spring up in their own hearts. Therefore, however you feel it in your own breast, speak as well as you can for God. Many times you will see some fruit upon others; if not, you shall have a recompense in your own bosom. In one sense you do believe that God is both able and willing to cleanse you from all unrighteousness, and to do it now; but not in that sense wherein all things are possible to him that believeth. But what if He should give you this faith also yea, while you have this paper in your hand! To-day hear His voice! O listen! and heaven springs up in your heart.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--When you seek God with fasting added to prayer, you cannot seek His face in vain. This has been exceedingly blessed in various parts, and the revival of God's work has begun at the very time. You would do well to have several meetings of this kind as well as frequent meetings for prayer. Undoubtedly the visits paid you by Dr. Conyers, by Mr. Venn, and Mr. King [John King, Rector of Pertonhall, Beds (1752-1800), Cowper's schoolfellow. See Journal, v. 61, 63n.] were so many answers to prayer; and He will not withhold from you any manner of thing that is good. It is by patient continuance in well doing, in using all the grace which is already given you, that you are to seek the whole gift of God, the entire renewal of your soul, the full deliverance from sin. And do not think it far off: this is the voice of unbelief. He is nigh that sanctifieth: only believe, and feel Him near. This is what you should continually insist on, the nearness of the promise. And, indeed, if it is to be received by naked faith, by consequence it may be received now.-- I am, dear George, Your affectionate brother. To Jane Hilton [32] LONDON, November 26, 1768. MY DEAR SISTER,--There seems to have been a particular providence in Hannah Harrison's coming to Beverley, especially at that very time when a peace-maker was so much wanting; and it was a pledge that God will withhold from you no manner of thing that is good. The words of our Lord Himself show us what we are to expect from 'those of our own household.' But all this likewise shall be for good. 'It is given to you to suffer' for Him; and all will turn to your profit, that you may be more largely a partaker of His holiness. Do you feel, when you are tried in a tender point, no temper contrary to love Grief there may be; but is there no resentment or anger Do you feel invariable calmness of spirit Do you perceive nothing but pity and tender goodwill both at the time and afterwards Write to me of the trials you meet with. You may always direct to London, and the letter will come safe. Expect more faith and love daily. Your affectionate brother. To Thomas Rankin LONDON, December 1, 1768.

MY DEAR JOSEPH,--You do not quite take my meaning yet. [See letter of Dec. 4.] When I recommend to any one a method or scheme of study, I do not barely consider this or that book separately but in conjunction with the rest. And what I recommend I know; I know both the style and sentiments of each author, and how he will confirm or illustrate what goes before and prepare for what comes after. Now, supposing Mr. Stonehouse, [Dr. James Stonehouse, lecturer of All Saints', Bristol. See Tyerman's Whitefield, ii. 195; and for James Rouquet, letter of March 30, 1761.] Rouquet, or any other to have ever so great learning and judgement, yet he does not enter into my plan. He does not comprehend my views nor keep his eye fixed on the same point. Therefore I must insist upon it, the interposing other books between these till you have read them through is not good husbandry. It is not making your time and pains go so far as they might go. If you want more books, let me recommend more, who best understand my own scheme. And do not ramble, however learned the persons may be that advise you so to do. This does indulge curiosity, but does not minister to real improvement, as a stricter method would do. No; you would gain more clearness and strength of judgement by reading those Latin and Greek books (compared with which most of the English are whipped syllabub) than by fourscore modern books. I have seen the proof, as none of your Bristol friends have done or can do. Therefore I advise you again, keep to your plan (though this implies continual self-denial) if you would improve your understanding to the highest degree of which it is capable.--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother. To Jane Hilton SHOREHAM, December 22, 1768. MY DEAR SISTER,--I do not remember that I ever found a fault in you before. But I do now. I must blame you. Why are you so short You can tell me all that is in your heart. And what should hinder you Suppose I was now sitting by you, would you need to hide anything And sometimes we can write what we cannot speak. But, either in writing or speaking, there need be no reserve between us.

You mention trials. But this is a general word. Would it not ease your mind to be more particular Are your trials mostly inward or outward Are they from those of your own household Can any one lay disobedience to your charge Or do they only say you are proud and stubborn Let them say everything they can. Still look unto Jesus! Commune with Him in your heart! Let your eye be singly fixed on Him; your whole soul shall be full of light!--I am, my dear Jenny, Your affectionate brother. To Jenny Hilton, At Mr. Hilton's, In Beverley. To Hannah Ball LONDON, December 24, 1768. Nothing can be more certain than that God is willing to give always what He gives once, and that therefore, whatever you experience now, you may enjoy to your life's end. . . . Watch and pray, and you will not enter into temptation. . . . Be the success more or less, never be weary of well doing. In due time you shall reap if you faint not. . . . To Mary Bosanquet LONDON, December 28, 1768. MY DEAR SISTER,--To hear from you is always agreeable to me; and at present there is no hindrance. In this house we have no jarring string; all is peace and harmony. [Mrs. Wesley was away from the Foundery.] Right precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints. And to hear particular accounts of this kind is exceedingly helpful to those they leave behind. Therefore I wanted as particular an account as Sally Crosby or you can give. [Of the death of Sarah Ryan. See letter of Dec. 11.] T. Lee is of a shy, backward, natural temper, as well as of a slow, cool speech and behaviour; but he is a sincere, upright man; and it will be worth all the pains to have a thorough good understanding with him. Peace be with your spirits!-- I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Miss Bosanquet, At Gildersome Hall, near Leeds. To a Friend [37] To Dr. Brown [1768.]

SIR,--Since I had the pleasure of waiting upon you, I [have] been often reflecting on the account given us of the Indians in Paraguay. It is about four and twenty years since I read the first account of them, translated from a French author. It then made much the same impression on my mind, which I believe it has now made on yours. Permit me, Sir, to speak my free thoughts concerning it, which I shall be glad to alter, upon better information. I am throughly persuaded that true, genuine religion is capable of working all those happy effects which are said to be wrought there; and that, in the most ignorant and savage of the human-kind. I have seen instances of this: no Indians are more savage than were the colliers of Kingswood; many of whom are now an humane, hospitable people full of love to God and man; quiet, diligent in business; in every state content; every way adorning the Gospel of God their Saviour. But the difficulty with me lies here. I am not persuaded, that the Romish Missionaries (very few excepted) either know, or teach, true, genuine religion. And of all their Missionaries, generally speaking, the Jesuits are the worst. They teach nothing less than the true genuine religion of Jesus Christ. They spend their main strength in teaching their converts, so called, the opinions and usages of their Church. Perhaps the most religious that ever was among them, was their 'East Indian Apostle,' Francis Xavier. And from his own Letters (four volumes of which I had) it plainly appears, that (whether he knew it himself or no) he never taught one tittle of the religion of the heart, but barely opinions and externals. Now what virtue, what happiness can possibly spring from such a root as this Allowing then, that the Paraguay converts have peace and plenty, allowing they have moral honesty, allowing they have an outward form of religion (and thus far I know not but their guides may bring them), I cannot believe they have gone one step farther, or that they know what True Religion is. Do their instructors experience the inward Kingdom of God Righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And if not, are they likely to lead others, any farther than they have gone themselves Can they point out The Eternal Sunshine of the spotless Mind,

Your affectionate friend and brother. To Edward Bolton [4] LONDON, February 12, 1769. MY DEAR BROTHER,--A preaching-house can't be too light or too airy. Therefore your windows must be large. And let them be sashes, opening downward; otherwise the air coming in would give the people cold. I do not know but it might be best to have either a paved or a boarded floor. And see that whatever is done be done neat and strong. It is the Lord's work, and He will provide. I will give you ten pounds towards it; for which you may draw upon Mr. Franks when you please. [See Journal, v. 345.] I hope my dear Nancy is recovered from her cold. Don't let her omit riding. [See letters of Feb. 4, 1769, and Jan. 25, 1770.] And make the best use of both her advice and example; for you know not how soon she may be taken away.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Woodhouse LONDON, February 15, 1769. MY DEAR SISTER,--You are not incapable of speaking just what you feel, just what nature and grace dictate. And you need never think of any difference between us; for we love one another. And it is a true observation, Love, like death, makes all distinctions void. [Prior's Solomon, ii. 242. See letter of Aug. 9, 1772.] Think we are just sitting by each other as when I saw you last at Owston. And write just as you would speak to me-- as free, or, if you can, more freely. Meantime stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free. Let temptations come as they will. Let them fly all round you. But they cannot enter unless you please. What temptations do you find the most troublesome Sometimes the most troublesome are not the most dangerous. But no danger can hurt you while you watch and pray: so long you are unconquerable. I know not why your name is not in the paper, if you are not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. O be bold for a good Master!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. Mrs. Woodhouse, Owston, Lincolnshire. To Robert Costerdine NORWICH, February 18, 1769.

I conjecture (to tell you just what rises in my heart) that this change was owing to several causes. Some admired and commended you as a person of uncommon sense and uncommon attainments in religion. Others told you at large from time to time all the real or supposed faults of the Methodists, in particular the jars which had lately been in Dublin on account of Mr. Morgan and Olivers. This naturally tended to breed and increase pride on the one hand and prejudice on the other. Riches increased; which not only led you step by step into more conformity to the world, but insensibly instilled self-importance, unwillingness to be contradicted, and an overbearing temper. And hence you was of course disgusted at those who did not yield to this temper and blamed that conformity. Perhaps some of these professed or expected to be perfected in love; they at least believed perfection. Now, this you seemed to hate with a perfect hatred; and on that account disliked them the more. Permit me to add a few words on each of these heads. And first, would it not be well if you started back from every appearance of admiration (which you know is deadly poison), whether on account of your sense or piety and if you utterly discountenanced all who directly or indirectly commended you to your face yea, and all who told you of the jars or faults of the Methodists, or indeed of any absent person Should you not earnestly strive and pray against thinking highly of your own understanding or attainments in religion Otherwise this, by grieving the Holy Spirit, would expose you to still more prejudice; especially towards those who might seem to vie with you in religion, if not in understanding. Can you be too sensible how hardly they that have riches enter into the kingdom of heaven Yea, or into the kingdom of an inward heaven into the whole spirit of the gospel How hard is it for these (whether you do or no) not to conform too much to the world! how hard not to be a little overbearing, especially to inferiors! Is it right to be disgusted at those who fear you conform too far, who do not sink down before you--nay, perhaps oppose your judgement or blame your practice

When you mentioned, first your apprehension that you could manage the Kingswood School, and then your thoughts concerning Nancy Smith, [Mr. Smith was an apothecary at Bristol (Journal, iii. 254). Did Whitehead marry his daughter] it seemed to me that there might be a providential connexion between the one and the other--though not to the exclusion of James Hindmarsh: that I never thought of. Good will follow from the disagreement of Brother Proctor and Palmer. I should be apt to believe a dying woman. Be zealous! Be watchful!--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Bennis [15] DUBLIN, July 24, 1769. MY DEAR SISTER,--If the reading over your papers has no other effect, this it certainly has--it makes me love you abundantly better than I did before: I have now a more intimate knowledge of you; I enter more into your spirit, your tempers and hopes and fears and desires, all which tends to endear you to me. It is plain one of your constant enemies, and the most dangerous of all, is evil reasoning. Accordingly the thing which you chiefly want is Christian simplicity. Brother Bourke [The Assistant at Limerick.] and you should carefully watch over each other in that respect, and let each deal faithfully with the other; let there be no reserve between you; encourage one another also to pray for and expect the continual and direct witness of the Spirit. They are by no means the best part of our preachers in any sense who doubt of this. I know but of one who had experienced the work that doubted concerning the witness-- namely, James Oddie [See letter of March 29, 1766.]; and I am afraid that for some time he has experienced neither the one nor the other. Two of your written books I send back by that lovely woman Jenny Moore [Mrs. Moore, of Augher. She received these safely after some delay. See Crookshank's Methodism in Ireland, i. 200.]; the third I must borrow a little longer. My dear friend, remember Your affectionate brother. To Ann Bolton [16] LEEDS, July 30, 1769.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Now I understand you well; but I did not understand you before. I thought you meant that you had not now the love that you had once. [See letter of Aug. 6.] I am glad to find that I was mistaken, and that you still retain that precious gift of God. Undoubtedly you may retain it always; yea, and with a continual increase. You may have a deeper and deeper fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. You may have more and more of the mind which was in Him and be more fully renewed in His likeness. You should send me word from time to time what your present experience and your present trials are. Peace be with your spirits!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Edward Spencer [21] FROME, September 13, 1769. REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I expect to be at Bradford on Tuesday and Wednesday next. In returning from thence to Bath to-morrow se'nnight, the 21st instant, I will preach if you please in your church. I remember preaching some years since at Combe Grove. [On Sept. 17 and 19 and Oct. 1, 1764. See Journal, v. 94-8.] Peace be with you and yours.-- I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To Mr. -- [22] BRISTOL, September, 17, 1769. MY DEAR BROTHER,--I hope you will not be disappointed any more. On Thursday se'nnight I propose with God's leave to preach at Pill at three o'clock.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Bennis BRISTOL, September 18, 1769. MY DEAR SISTER,--I wrote a longer letter to you than I usually do before I set out from Dublin: where or how it stopped I cannot imagine. [She evidently received it. See letter of July 24.] I think of you every day; indeed, I do not know that I ever loved you so well as since I was at Limerick last. [June 5-8. See note in letter of May 30 to her.] The more we are acquainted with each other the more we ought to love one another.

Your affectionate brother. To Hannah Ball [24] November 5, 1769. MY DEAR SISTER,--Need I tell you that I found a particular satisfaction in my late conversations with you Perhaps you observed such a freedom in my behaviour as I never showed to you before. Indeed, it seemed to me as if I had just recovered a dear friend whom I had been in fear of losing. But you sweetly relieved me from that fear and showed me that your heart is as my heart. Do you still find a clear deliverance from pride, from anger, from your own will, and from the love of earthly things Have you an uninterrupted sense of the presence of God as a loving and gracious Father Do you find your heart is continually ascending to Him And are you still enabled in everything to give thanks You must expect various trials. We know nature is variable as the wind. But go on. Be never weary of well doing; in due time you shall reap if you faint not.--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Joseph Benson NORWICH, November 5, 1769. DEAR JOSEPH,--I heard that tale, and answered pointblank, 'It is mere invention.' However, I wrote to inquire at the school, so you did well to send a real account both to me and to Ireland. [See letter of Jan. 2.] 'This gives any one enough of Kingswood School.' [Benson had used these words in his letter to Wesley.] 'Ah! simple Master Shallow!' as Shakespeare has it, should not I then have enough of it long ago You put me in mind of Sir John Phillips's [Sir John was a devout Christian who attended the Religious Societies in London. He was a benefactor of the Holy Club and one of the Georgia Trustees. See Journal, i. 186, 297; viii. 278-82, 301.] exclamation when a puff of smoke came out of the chimney, 'Oh, Mr. Wesley, these are the trials which I meet with every day.'--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother. To Mary Bishop [25] IPSWICH, November 5, 1769.

I must do this even with regard to my fellow labourers, lest I should seem to mean more than I do. But I am sensible this is a tender point, and one so extremely difficult to treat upon that I should not venture to say one word did I not know to whom I speak. What I mean is this: From many little circumstances which have occurred, I have been afraid (just so far it went) that those clergymen with whom you are most acquainted were jealous of your being acquainted with me. I was the more afraid when I heard the sudden exclamation of one whom you well know, 'Good God! Mr. Wesley is always speaking well of these gentlemen, and they can never speak well of him.' But I am entirely satisfied by that full declaration which you make: 'I do not know of any impression that has been made upon me to your disadvantage.' I had once the opportunity of speaking a few minutes to you on the head of Christian Perfection; and I believe you had not much objection to anything which was then spoken. When I spoke nearly to the same effect to one of the late Bishops of London, Bishop Gibson, he said earnestly, 'Why, Mr. Wesley, if this is what you mean by perfection, who can be against it?' I believe verily there would need no more than a single hour, spent in free and open conversation, to convince you that none can rationally or scripturally say anything against the perfection I have preached for thirty years. The union which I desire among the persons I mentioned is an entire union of heart, constraining them to labour together as one man in spreading vital religion through the nation. But this I do not hope for, though I know a few who would cordially rejoice therein. The union which I proposed is of a lower kind: I proposed that they should love as brethren and behave as such. And I particularized what I think is implied in this, I imagined in so plain a manner, as was hardly possible without great skill to be either misunderstood or misrepresented. I really do not conceive what ambiguity there can be in any part of this proposal, or what objection can lie against our going thus far, whether we go farther or no.

To use the grace given is the certain way to obtain more grace. To use all the faith you have will bring an increase of faith. But this word is of very wide extent: it takes in the full exercise of every talent wherewith we are entrusted. This comprises the whole compass both of inward and outward religion. That you may be able steadily and effectually to attend to this you have need of that prayer, 'Give me understanding, that I may keep Thy law; yea, that I may keep it with my whole heart.' This is to 'make the best of life,' which cannot be done without growing in grace. I believe it would help you to read and consider the sermon on Self-Denial in the fourth volume, [See Works, vi. 103--14.] and that on Universal Conscientiousness in the Christian Library. A sense of wants and weaknesses, with various trials and temptations, will do you no real hurt, though they occasion heaviness for a time and abate your joy in the Lord. It is wrong so to attend to this as to weaken your faith; and yet in the general it is not wrong 'to form your estimate of the state of your soul from your sensations'--not, indeed, from these alone, but from these in conjunction with your words and actions. It is true we cannot judge of ourselves by the measure of our joy, the most variable of all our sensations, and frequently depending in a great degree on the state of our blood and spirits. But if you take love, joy, peace, meekness, gentleness, and resignation together, I know no surer rule whereby to judge of your state to Godward.

What is the difference between 'the frame of my mind and the state of my soul'? Is there the difference of an hair's breadth? I will not affirm it. If there be any at all, perhaps it is this: the frame may mean a single, transient sensation; the state, a more complicated and lasting sensation, something which we habitually feel. By frame some may mean fleeting passions; by state, rooted tempers. But I do not know that we have any authority to use the terms thus or to distinguish one from the other. He whose mind is in a good frame is certainly a good man as long as it so continues. I would therefore no more require you to cease from judging of your state by your frame of mind than I would require you to cease from breathing. Unless you deal very closely with those committed to your care, you will not give an account of them with joy. Advices and admonitions at a distance will do little harm or good. To those who give in to dress you might read or recommend the Advice to the Methodists on that head. It would be proper to go to the root of the matter once or twice; then to let it sleep, and after a few weeks try again. A Methodist using fine or gay apparel must suffer loss in her soul, although she may retain a little life; but she never will attain an high degree either of holiness or happiness. [See Works, xi. 466-77; and letter of Feb. 26, 1776.] To Joseph Thompson [19] BRISTOL, September 23, 1770. DEAR JOSEPH,--You are in the right. The most proper time for making the division is in the Quarter Day. I can confide in your prudence as well as impartiality in greater things than these. Be diligent in the books everywhere and exact in every point of discipline.--I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Richard Locke BRISTOL, October 4, 1770. Your last gave me a good deal of satisfaction. I am glad your mind is more settled, [See letter of Sept. 14.] and hope you will not rest till you are not only almost but altogether a Christian.

I understand from our common friend, Mr. Bold, [See letter of May 6, 1774, to Charles Wesley.] that your situation is critical indeed. But what have Mr. Thomas and you to do but to continue instant in prayer? Then, suppose that your eye is single, that you simply pursue the glory of God in the good of souls, He will from time to time clear up all difficulties and make plain the way before your face.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Walter Churchey, Near the Hay, Brecon. [26] To Joseph Benson LONDON, November 30, 1770. DEAR JOSEPH,--For several years I had been deeply convinced that I had not done my duty with regard to that valuable woman; that I had not told her what I was throughly assured no one else would dare to do, and what I knew she would bear from no other person, but possibly might bear from me. But, being unwilling to give her pain, I put it off from time to time. At length I did not dare to delay any longer, lest death should call one of us hence. So I at once delivered my own soul, by telling her all that was in my heart. It was my business, my proper business, so to do, as none else either could or would do it. Neither did I take at all too much upon me; I know the office of a Christian minister. If she is not profited, it is her own fault, not mine; I have done my duty. I do not know there is one charge in that letter which was either unjust, unimportant, or aggravated, any more than that against the doggerel hymns which are equally an insult upon poetry and common sense. We had a good time both at the Tabernacle and Tottenham Court Chapel. The congregations were immense. Perhaps not a third part could come within hearing; and they were more quiet than could well have been expected. The sermon will be published on Monday and sent down to Bristol. Mr. Keen and Hardy, his executors, have, I apprehend, the whole and sole disposal of the Tabernacle, Tottenham Court Chapel, and all the other houses which were occupied by Mr. Whitefield. The Chapel and Tabernacle are supplied by Mr. Joss and Brooksbank, and Mr. Neale administers the sacrament there.

I am glad you use more exercise. It is good for both body and soul. As soon as Mr. De Courcy is come, I shall be glad to hear how the prospect opens. [See letter of Feb. 26 to her.] You will then need a larger share of the wisdom from above; and I trust you will write with all openness to, my dear Lady, Your ever affectionate servant. To Philothea Briggs LONDON, January 25, 1771. MY DEAR PHILLY,--As you desire a few directions with regard to the improvement of your mind, I will set down just what occur to me at present. Only, as my business is great and my time is short, I cannot stay to explain them at large. All the knowledge you want is comprised in one book--the Bible. When you understand this, you will know enough. I advise you, therefore, to begin every day (before or after private prayer) with reading a portion more or less of the Old or New Testament, or of both if you have time, together with the Notes, which may lead you by the hand into suitable meditation. After breakfast you may read in order the volumes of Sermons and the other practical books which we have published, more or less at a time (as other business permits) with meditation and prayer. Young, Milton, and the Moral and Sacred Poems you may read chiefly in the afternoons. Whatever you write, you should write in the forenoons. But learn to write sloping, not leaning upon your breast. Take care never to read or write too long a time. That is not conducive either to bodily or spiritual health. If I can be of use to you in anything else, tell me; you know you may speak freely to, my dear Philly, Yours affectionately. To Thomas Wride [5] LONDON, February 14, 1771. DEAR TOMMY,--If we live till August, the matter of David Evans [David Evans was preacher on trial at Haworth. Sister Evans is among the preachers' wives to be provided for. He ceased from travelling in 1776.] must be throughly inquired into. I do not see that you could do anything more with regard to Longtown. The providence of God has remarkably interposed in behalf of the poor people at Whitehaven. I am in hopes there will be more peace among them, and more life than has been for some time.

Round assertions! Let us consider them one by one. (1) These are styled by Christ "ravening wolves," by St. Paul "grievous wolves."' True; but how does it appear that these names are applicable to the Methodists Why, they rend the Church of Christ.' What is the Church of Christ According to our Article, a Church is a company of faithful people,' of true believers, who have the mind that was in Christ,' and walk as Christ walked.' Who, then, are the Church of Christ in Waterford Point them out, sir, if you know them; and then be pleased to show how the Methodists rend this Church of Christ. You may as justly say they rend the walls or the steeple of the cathedral church. However, they pervert the true sense of the gospel for their own private ends.' Wherein do they pervert the true sense of the gospel I have published Notes both on the Gospels and the other Scriptures. But wherein do those Notes pervert the sense None has yet attempted to show. But for what private ends should I pervert it for ease or honour Then I should be sadly disappointed. Or for money This is the silliest tale of all. You may easily know, if you are willing to know it, that I did not leave Waterford without being some pounds lighter than I was when I came thither.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Perhaps we may see a new accomplishment of Solomon's words, 'He that reproveth a man shall afterward find more favour than he who flattereth with his tongue. But, be that as it may, I have done my duty; I could no otherwise have delivered my own soul. And no offence at all would have been given thereby had not pride stifled both religion and generosity. [See letter of March 8.] But the letter is now out of date; it is mentioned no more: there is a more plausible occasion found-- namely, those eight terrible propositions which conclude the Minutes of our Conference. [The Minutes for 1770, which gave occasion to Fletcher to write his Checks to Antinomianism.] At the instance of some who were sadly frightened thereby, I have revised them over and over; I have considered them in every point of view; and truly, the more I consider them, the more I like them, the more fully I am convinced, not only that they are true, agreeable both to Scripture and to sound experience, but that they contain truths of the deepest importance, and such as ought to be continually inculcated by those who would be pure from the blood of all men. Joseph Benson is a good man and a good preacher. But he is by no means clear in his judgement. The imagination which he has borrowed from another good man, 'that he is not a believer who has any sin remaining in him,' is not only an error, but a very dangerous one, of which I have seen fatal effects. Herein we divided from the Germans near thirty years ago; and the falseness and absurdity of it is shown in the Second Journal and in my sermon on that subject. [The Lord our Righteousness. See Works, v. 234-46.] Your experience reminds me of these lines: So many tender joys and woes Have o'er my quivering soul had power! Plain life with heightening passions rose, The boast or burthen of an hour. [Gambold, in Poetical Works of J. and C. Wesley, i. 8.] They who feel less, certainly suffer less; but the more we suffer, the more we may improve; the more obedience, the more holiness, we may learn by the things we suffer. So that, upon the whole, I do not know if the insensible ones have the advantage over us.

There cannot be a more proper phrase than that you used, and I well understand your meaning; yet it is sure you are a transgressor still--namely, of the perfect, Adamic law. But though it be true all sin is a transgression of this law, yet it is by no means true on the other hand (though we have so often taken it for granted) that all transgressions of this law are sin: no, not at all--only all voluntary transgressions of it; none else are sins against the gospel law. Although we have 'faith's abiding impression, realizing things to come'; yet as long as we are in the body we have but an imperfect, shadowy knowledge of the things of eternity. For now we only see them in a glass, a mirror, which gives us no more than a shadow of them; therefore we see them darkly, or in a riddle, as St. Paul speaks. The whole invisible world is as yet a riddle to us; and it seems to be in this sense that some writers speak so much of the night or darkness of faith--namely, when opposed to sight; that is, to the view of things which we shall have when the veil of flesh and blood is removed. Those reasonings concerning the measure of holiness (a curious, not useful question) are not inconsistent with pure love, but they tend to damp it; and were you to pursue them far, they would lead you into unbelief. What you feel is certainly a degree of anger, but not of sinful anger. There ought to be in us (as there was in our Lord) not barely a perception in the understanding that this or that is evil, but also an emotion of mind, a sensation or passion suitable thereto. This anger at sin, accompanied with love and compassion to the sinner, is so far from being itself a sin, that it is rather a duty. St. Paul's word is, 'not easily provoked' to any paroxysm of anger: neither are you; nevertheless, I suppose there is in you, when you feel a proper anger at sin, an hurrying motion of the blood and spirits, which is an imperfection, and will be done away. To Ann Bolton ROOSKY, June 8, 1771.

DUBLIN, July 20, 1771. MY DEAR SISTER,--For your own satisfaction I send you this [See letter of July 10.]; but I wish you would not show it before the Conference. If the Calvinists do not or will not understand me, I understand myself. And I do not contradict anything which I have written within these thirty years. You understand me right, and express more at large the very thing I mean. I know not that any one could express it more justly in the same number of words. Poor Mr. Shirley's triumph will be short. Peace be with your spirit!--My dear sister, adieu! To Miss Bishop, Near Lady Huntingdon's Chapel, Bath. To his Brother Charles KINGSWOOD, August 3, 1771. DEAR BROTHER,--I will not throw away T. Rankin on the people of London. He shall go where they know the value of him. [Rankin had been in London; he now went to Cornwall West.] We cannot put out what we never put in. I do not use the word merit. [See sect. 6 in letter of July 10.] I never did. I never did, neither do now, contend for the use of it. But I ask you or any other a plain question; and do not cry 'Murder,' but give me an answer: What is the difference between merere and 'to deserve' or between 'deserving' and meritum I say still, I cannot tell. Can you Can Mr. Shirley or any man living In asking this question, I neither plead for merit nor against it. I have nothing to do with it. I have declared a thousand times there is no goodness in man till he is justified; no merit either before or after: that is, taking the word in its proper sense; for in a loose sense meritorious means no more than rewardable. As to Reprobation, seeing they have drawn the sword, I throw away the scabbard. I send you a specimen. Let fifteen hundred of them be printed as soon as you please. [A Defence of the Minute of Conference (1770) relating to Calvinism. See Green's Bibliography, No. 273; and letters of July 10 and 20. ] Nothing was ever yet expended out of the Yearly Subscription without being immediately set down by the secretary. I never took a shilling from that fund yet. What you advise with regard to our behaviour toward opposers exactly agrees with my sentiments.

I am in great hopes, if we live until another Conference, John Christian will be useful as a travelling preacher: so would J-- M-- [Evidently a local preacher in Limerick.] if he had courage to break through. However, I am pleased he exercises himself a little: encourage him. I wish you would lend Mrs. Dawson [See letter of March 31, 1772.] the Appeals: take them from the book-room, and present them to her in my name. Go yourself; for I wish you to be acquainted with her. I believe they will satisfy her about the Church. She halts just as I did many years ago. Be not shy towards Brother Collins: he is an upright man. Sister L-- is already doing good in Clonmel. [See letter of July 27, 1770.] Do you correspond with her Your affectionate. To Isaac Twycross [34] RYE, October 29, 1771. DEAR ISAAC,--Nothing is fixed as yet. But whatever God calls you to He will fit you for. Not, indeed, without a good measure of reproach; but so much the better. Reproach for doing our duty is an unspeakable blessing.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Isaac Twycross, At Kingswood School. To Philothea Briggs LONDON, November 3, 1771. DEAR PHILLY,--I am always well pleased to see and hear from you. I answer you, more or less fully, as I have time. Neither do I know how to advise Nancy Greenwood; although I think he is free to marry. Rollin was a pious man and a fine historian. If you read one volume, you would feel whether it enlivened or deadened your soul. The same trial you may make as to serious poetry. Very probably this would enliven your soul; and certainly the volumes of Philosophy may, as Galen entitles his description of the human body, 'An Hymn to the Creator.' Temporal business need not interrupt your communion with God, though it varies the manner of it.

DEAR WALTER,--You do not understand your information right. Observe, 'I am going to America to turn bishop.' [See letter of Aug. 14, 1771, to Philothea Briggs.] You are to understand it in sensu composito. ['In the sense agreed.'] I am not to be a bishop till I am in America. While I am in Europe, therefore, you have nothing to fear. But as soon as ever you hear of my being landed at Philadelphia, it will be time for your apprehensions to revive. It is true some of our preachers would not have me stay so long; but I keep my old rule, Festina lente. ['Make haste slowly.']--I am, dear Walter, Your affectionate brother. To Rebecca Yeoman LONDON, February 5, 1772. MY DEAR SISTER,--As far as I understand, you are now properly in the wilderness state. I advise you to read over that sermon in the fourth volume, [See Works, vi. 77-91] and examine yourself thereby. If you find out the cause of heaviness or darkness, you are more than half-way to the cure. If Jenny Johnson [See letter of Aug. 4, 1770.] is throughly sensible of her fault, you may trust her; if not, she should not meet in band. As your mind is tender and easily moved, you may readily fall into inordinate affection; if you do, that will quickly darken your soul. But watch and pray, and you shall not enter into temptation. If it please God to continue my life and strength, I expect to come through Scotland in April and May, so as to reach Newcastle about the beginning of June [He arrived on May 25.]; but who knows whether we may not before then take a longer journey Our wisdom is to live to-day.--I am, dear Becky, Your affectionate brother. To Lady Maxwell LONDON, February 8, 1772.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Do I flatter myself in judging of you by myself Am I mistaken in thinking we feel alike I believe we do: I believe in this your heart is as mine. But if so, it is not so easy for you to part. Indeed, I judged before, this was only a sudden start, arising from a misapprehension of my meaning. That was really the case. I did not, could not compare one I so tenderly love (with a love of esteem as well as complacence) with him: only with regard to one circumstance. Well, now you have made me amends for the pain you gave me before. And see that you make me farther amends by swiftly advancing in lowliness, in meekness, in gentleness towards all men. So fulfil the joy of, my dear Nancy, Yours affectionately. To Miss Foard, In Blackman Street, No. 86. Southwark, London. To Mrs. Bennis[13] YARM, June 16, 1772. MY DEAR SISTER,--As often as you can I hope you will converse with Mrs. Dawson, as her heart is much united to you; and when you are at a distance from each other, you may converse by letters. And I believe you are particularly called to be useful to those whom the riches or the grandeur of this world keep at a distance from the pure word of God. When you are at Waterford, see that you be not idle there. You should gather up and meet a band immediately. If you would meet a class too, it would be so much the better: you know, the more labour the more blessing. You did well to send me the last enclosure; it is absolutely needful that I should be acquainted with all such matters; the contrary would be false delicacy. Mr. Goodwin is a valuable young man; he has much grace and a good understanding. I have wrote to Mr. Glassbrook and the leaders, if James Deaves should come to Limerick in the same spirit wherein he has been for some time, to take care that he do no mischief. If he should proceed in that impetuous manner, we shall be obliged to take harsher measures. This I should be sorry for; one would not cut off a limb while there is any hope of recovering it. I expect John Christian will be an useful labourer; he has a zeal according to knowledge.

DEAR JOSEPH,--That Michael [Thompson was in Hall. Michael Fenwick was hospitably entertained by a gentleman at Bridlington for 'some years previous to his death' in 1797. See Atmore's Memorial, p. 124.] is not overcharged with wisdom is certain. But I do not know that he is a mischief-maker. It is your part to insist upon his keeping his round; to press the Yearly Collection in every place; and to see that all our rules be observed, whoever praises or blames. You have only to commend yourself to every man's conscience in the sight of God.... Whoever among us undertakes to baptize a child is ipso facto excluded from our Connexion.--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Savage GRIMSBY, July 22, 1772. MY DEAR SISTER,--It is easy to see the difference between those two things, sinfulness and helplessness. The former you need feel no more; the latter you will feel as long as you live. And, indeed, the nearer you draw to God, the more sensible of it you will be. But beware this does not bring you into the least doubt of what God has done for your soul. And beware it does not make you a jot the less forward to speak of it with all simplicity. Do you still feel an entire deliverance from pride, anger, and every desire that does not centre in God Do you trust Him both with soul and body Have you learned to cast all your care upon Him Are you always happy in Him In what sense do you pray without ceasing Expect all the promises!--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. In about a fortnight I am to be at Mr. Glynne's, Shrewsbury [Edward Glynne's mother was cousin to Lord Hereford, and wrote to him in defence of the Methodists. See Journal, iv. 491; Wesley's Veterans, i. 219-22; W.H.S. iv. 217 - 20.] To Philothea Briggs LEWISHAM, July 23, 1772. At many times our advances in the race that is set before us are clear and perceptible; at other times they are no more perceptible (at least to ourselves) than the growth of a tree. At any time you may pray Strength and comfort from Thy word Imperceptibly supply.

Mr. Baxter well observes (or, indeed, Archbishop Usher, to whom he refers, had done before him), 'that whoever attempt to profit children will find need of all the understanding God has given them.' But, indeed, natural understanding will go but a little way. It is a peculiar gift of God. I believe He has given you a measure of it already, and you may ask and expect an increase of it. Our dear sisters at Publow [Mrs. Owen and her daughters. See letter of Nov. 22, 1769.] enjoy it in as high a degree as any young women I know. It certainly must be an inordinate affection which creates so many jealousies and misunderstandings. I should think it would be absolutely needful, the very next time that you observe anything of that kind, to come to a full explanation with the parties concerned; to tell them calmly and roundly, 'I must and I will choose for myself whom I will converse with, and when and how; and if any one of you take upon you to be offended at me on this account, you will make it necessary for me to be more shy and reserved to you than ever I was before.' If you steadily take up this cross, if you speak thus once or twice in the band or class in a cool but peremptory manner, I am much inclined to think it will save both you and others a good deal of uneasiness. When you see those ladies (with whom I have no acquaintance), you would do well to speak exceeding plain. I am afraid they are still entire strangers to the religion of the heart. On Saturday, the 29th instant, I hope to be at Bristol, and on the Wednesday evening following at Bath. Let notice be given of this.--I am, dear Miss Bishop, Your affectionate brother. To his Niece Sarah Wesley[21] CARDIFF, August 28, 1772.

I fear you are too idle: this will certainly bring condemnation. Up, and be doing! Do not loiter. See that your talent rust not: rather let it gain ten more; and it will, if you use it [On March 16 she had written of herself as ‘the same poor, tottering, feeble creature’]. You are permitted to be in heaviness to humble and prove you yet more. Then you shall come forth as gold. If you love me, you will both write and speak freely to, my dear sister, Your affectionate. To Mrs. Woodhouse DUBLIN, April 1, 1773. MY DEAR SISTER,--In such a case as you describe I do not see how you could well leave your brother. Where there is sickness, and especially an apprehension of death, we do not know how to break away from a friend. If the house is not built at Misterton [Six miles south of Epworth, and frequently visited by Wesley] as I directed, the people there must not expect to see me any more. I shall take it as both an instance of injustice and of personal disrespect to myself. Mr. Fletcher [See letter of July 30], of Gainsborough (if I understand the thing), refused to receive our preachers any longer. If so, they were not to blame in quitting the place; for they could do no otherwise. I believe my wife is still at Bristol, where I left her when I set out for Ireland.

One reason, it may be, why this was permitted, was to confound the pride of your understanding. You had been accounted a woman of sense and commended for it. And our nature readily receives such commendation. But see how little your sense avails! You can do no more herein than if you was an idiot. ' The help that is done upon earth He doeth it Himself,' whether with or without instruments. Let your whole soul be stayed upon Him for time and eternity. I am always wen pleased to hear from you. And you can speak freely to, my dear Miss Bishop, Yours affectionately. To Miss Bishop, Near the Cross Bath, In Bath. To Joseph Benson [28] LONDON, November 6, 1773. I came to London. The rest of the week I made what inquiry I could into the state of my accounts (at the Room). Some confusion had arisen from the sudden death of my bookkeeper; but it was less than might have been expected. To Christopher Hopper LONDON, November 12, 1773. MY DEAR BROTHER,--We see not how the work can continue, and we saw not (beforehand) how it could ever come to what it is now. All we can say is, It is the Lord’s doing. And He must see to His own work. You must contract your sails if you live another year, and not take so large a compass. Unless you should pass into a warmer climate, Northumberland is cool enough. I am glad you spoke freely to Brother Hilton [See letters of Oct. 7, 1773, and Aug. 18, 1775; and for Erskine, April 24, 1765]. It would do immense mischief; humanly speaking, it would be the greatest stumbling that was ever in Edinburgh yet. And truly there need be no more while good Dr. Erskine lives. But the preachers in Scotland never had their wages yet--I mean not from Scotland. We are obliged to supply them every year. English people we certainly may cure. We have the staff in our own hands. Therefore mend them or end them. Let them meet in band and class where you appoint or nowhere. Stand your ground. Kill or cure.... To Thomas Wride LONDON November 12, 1773.

You have hurt yourself by giving way to reasoning, and if you don’t take care you will hurt others. There has been good, much good done in America, and would have been abundantly more had Brother Boardman and Pilmoor continued genuine Methodists both in doctrine and discipline. It is your part to supply what was wanting in them. Therefore are you sent. Let Brother Shadford, Asbury, and you go on hand in hand, and who can stand against you Why, you are enough, trusting in Him that loves you, to overturn America. Go on in His name and in the power of His might, and all your enemies shall be found liars. Read David Brainerd again, and see your pattern! He was a good soldier of Jesus. Ah! but he first suffered, and then saw the fruit of his labor. Go and do likewise! I have written to Robert Williams and given him leave to print the Notes on my account; nothing on his own. I never knew he did till afterward. Be of good courage! Strengthen yourself in the Lord, and you will see good days, and will send better news to, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Savage LONDON, December 11, 1773. MY DEAR SISTER,--Whatever was reported concerning Brother Wolfe [Francis Wolfe had removed from Gloucestershire to Bristol] it did not come to my ears. I never heard anything of him but good; nor do I know of anything laid to his charge. I advise you to speak very freely to Mr. Collins [William Collins, Assistant in Wiltshire South. See letter of May 6, 1774, to her]. He has much experience in the things of God, and has likewise seen so much of trouble and temptation that he knows how to sympathize with those that are tempted. By stirring up the gift of God that is in you, you will find a constant increase of inward life. Labor to be more and more active, more and more devoted to Him. Be ready to do and suffer His whole will; then will He Sink you to perfection’s height, The depth of humble love. --I am, dear Molly, Your affectionate brother. To Ann Bolton LONDON, December 12, 1773.

I do not know whether there is any other outward employ which would be so proper for you as that you are now engaged in. You have scope to use all the talents which God has given you, and that is the most excellent way. You have likewise a most admirable exercise for your patience, either in the dullness or forwardness of your little ones. And some of these will learn from you, what is of the greatest importance, to know themselves and to know God. You must not, therefore, relinquish this station lightly--not without full and clear proof that God calls you so to do. Meantime bear your cross, and it will bear you. Seek an inward, not an outward change. What you want is only inward liberty, the glorious liberty of the children of God. And how soon may you enjoy this! Who knows what a day, an hour, a moment may bring forth How soon may you hear 'the voice that speaks Jehovah near'! Why should it not be to-day--I am, my dear sister, Yours affectionately. Miss Bishop, Near the Cross Bath, In Bath. To Mary Bosanquet [5] LONDON, February 9, 1774. MY DEAR SISTER,--The mob which hurt not me but the old hired chaise which I then used made their assault some months since at Enniskillen in Ireland. We are little troubled at present with English mobs, and probably shall not while King George III lives. In July I hope to see you in Cross Hall. My spring journey lies thus: Manchester, April 4; Monday, April 18, Halifax; Tuesday, Huddersfield, Dewsbury; Thursday, Bradford; Sunday, 24, Haworth Church. Surely, though we have seen great things already, we shall see greater than these. ' If thou canst believe! ' That is the point; then what is impossible--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Ann Bolton LONDON, February 17, 1774. MY DEAR SISTER,--As our friends who write to me from Witney observe, Mr. Saunderson might be useful if he continued with you. But I have promised, not only to him but also to several at Edinburgh, that he should come with me when I came into Scotland [See letter of Feb. 27]. Joseph Bradford, who succeeds him for the present, is much devoted to God, and he is active and laborious. Tell him if you think anything wanting. I doubt not he will take it well.

The manner wherein you receive advice encourages me to give it you freely [See letter of Jan. 20]. I am fully persuaded that is not the person. He has neither such a measure of understanding nor of spiritual experience as to advance you either in divine knowledge or in the life of God. Therefore yield to no importunity, and be as peremptory as you can consistent with civility. This is the wisest way with regard for you and the kindest with regard to him. I should have desired you to meet me at Stroud, March 14; but on this account [Probably the gentleman lived at Stroud] it seems not expedient. I have often examined myself (to speak without any reserve) with respect to you, and I find ' no fever’s heat, no fluttering spirits dance,' but a steady rational affection, ' calm as the warmth of life.’ [Probably based on Young’s Night Thoughts, viii.] March 2, 1774. I found the above (which I thought had been finished and sent) among my papers this morning. I hope you did not think you were forgotten by, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother. To his Brother Charles DEPTFORD, February 22, 1774. DEAR BROTHER,--I have seen Mr. Leddiard [One of Charles Wesley’s Bristol friends, evidently visiting London. See his Journal, ii. 270, 275, 279]. Speak a few words in the congregation, and the remaining tracts will be sold in a quarter of an hour [Wesley published his Thoughts on Slavery in 1774. See Green’s Bibliography, No. 298]. Surely you should reprint the depositions; only leaving out the names both of captains and ships. Read on. The farther you read in Thomas’s [A Scourge to Calumny, by Thomas Olivers. See letter of Jan. 13] tract the better you will like it. I never saw it till it was printed. Miss March [See letters of March 4, 1760, and June 17, 1774, to her] is likely to recover; she rides out every day. Mrs. G---is not joined with the Germans. I believe Miss B----is. Miss F----is in town.

I want to hear how you go in your new way of life. Is it likely to answer your brother’s expectations with regard to temporal affairs In so short a time you cannot know much, but you may form some little conjecture. Do you give attention enough and not too much to the various businesses that lie upon you I know you will be diligent therein. But are you too diligent, so as to engage too much of your time and thoughts to entrench upon things of an higher nature To deprive yourself of sufficient time for exercises of a nobler kind If you should intermit these on account of any business whatever, I doubt you would suffer loss. There would be a danger that the tenor of your spirit should cool by imperceptible degrees, and that your mind should be too much engaged in the things of this world. For many years my mother was employed in abundance of temporal business while my father, who meddled with no temporals, had his living in his own hands. Yet she never suffered anything to break in upon her stated hours of retirement, which she sacredly observed from the age of seventeen or eighteen to seventy-two. Let my friend tread in the steps of my mother. Follow her as she followed Christ. Do not delay to write and tell me just how you are and what you do. Everything that concerns you very nearly concerns me, my dear Nancy, Your friend and brother. Any time this month direct to me at Edinburgh. To Elizabeth Ritchie [12] WHITEHAVEN, May 8, 1774.

MY DEAR BETSY,--It is not common for me to write to any one first; I only answer those that write to me. But I willingly make an exception with regard to you; for it is not a common concern that I feel for you. You are just rising into life; and I would fain have you not almost but altogether a Christian. I would have you just such an one as Miranda. And you cannot be content with less: you cannot be satisfied with right notions; neither with harmlessness; no, nor yet with barely external religion, how exact so ever it be. Nay, you will not be content with a taste of inward religion. This it has pleased God to give you already. You know in whom you have believed; you have tasted of the powers of the word to come; but A taste of love cannot suffice; Your soul for all His fullness cries! Cry on, and never cease! Mind not those who rebuke you that you should hold your peace. Cry so much the more, 'Jesus of Nazareth, take away all my sins! Leave none remaining! Speak the word only, and I shall be healed!' Write freely to Yours affectionately. To Ann Bolton GLASGOW, May 13, 1774. MY DEAR SISTER,--You give me a pleasing account of the work of God which seems to be dawning about Tavistock. It is probable you was sent thither for this. Redeem the time; buy up every opportunity; and never be discouraged, although many fair blossoms should fall off and never ripen into fruit. How gladly should I pay you a visit there! But I know not how I can do it this summer, unless I was to miss Stroud and come directly from Cheltenham. But I will say no more of it yet. I hope to hear from you again and again before that time. Take care you do not forget poor Witney! Be mindful of your eldest care! I am not content that you should be pinned down to any one place. That is not your calling. Methinks I want you to be (like me) here and there and everywhere. Oh what a deal of work has our Lord to do on the earth! And may we be workers together with Him! What mighty wonders love performs That puts such dignity on worms.

There have undoubtedly been instances of real friendship among Jews, yea and among heathens, who were susceptible of it: but they were by no means wicked men; they were men fearing God and working righteousness according to the dispensation they were under. I apprehend wicked men, under whatever dispensation, to be absolutely incapable of true friendship. By wicked men I mean either men openly profane or men void of justice, mercy, and truth. There may be a shadow of friendship between those, whether of the same or of different sexes. But surely the substance is wanting; in all my experience I have found no exception to this rule. After an acquaintance of four-and-thirty years, I myself cannot have freedom with Miss Johnson. Yet I know not but you may. In most respects she judges truly, although her natural understanding is not strong. Miss Newman's is: the more you know her the more you will taste her spirit. The others you mention want a little more age and experience; then they might make companions for you. To Hannah Ball SUNDERLAND, June 19, 1774. MY DEAR SISTER,--It is next to impossible to retain salvation from sin without having a dear witness of it, especially in time of temptation; they who then lose the witness commonly lose the blessing itself. When you can spare a day or two to visit any of the neighboring Societies, it will be a labor well bestowed. You will always find it a blessing to your own soul, as it is a means of quickening and strengthening others Sometimes I have been a little afraid for my dear Ann Bolton. If she is more engaged than she used to be in temporal things and less in spiritual, she must be something more than human or she will suffer loss, her soul will be flattened thereby. I am afraid lest she should sink into that delicate species of spiritual sloth which some call 'ceasing from our own works.' I wish she would write more frequently either to me or to you. It might be profitable to her. She has been as a mother in Israel; pity she should ever be less useful. I left Mr. Saunderson behind me in Scotland, but expect to see him at the Conference.--I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Jonathan Pritchard [15] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 22, 1774.

DEAR JOSEPH,--You fell upon Hugh Saunderson without rhyme or reason for contriving to supplant you at Edinburgh; whereas his staying there was not his choice but his cross: he must be there from the 24th instant to the 5th of July. During that time you may make an excursion either north, west, or south. Afterwards you will be fight welcome at Edinburgh. And seeing the people desire it, I cheerfully consent to your staying in that circuit another year. The following year, if you and I live, you may spend in London. Your congregations in Edinburgh are large: Hugh Saunderson’s are larger still. Your preaching, and perhaps mine, has stirred up a sleepy people: his preaching has stirred them up still more. Our conversation has often quickened them: his has quickened them much more. 'But why does God work more by him that has far less sense than we' To stain the pride of our wisdom. And hence not 'five or six girls' but 'the generality of the congregation' prefer his preaching to either yours or mine. They feel therein more of the power of God, though it has less of the wisdom of man. Now, I see more than any single preacher can see, which of the preachers do most good, who have most fruit; and according to this, I form my estimate of them. Pray tell Sister Gow I have her letter, and that both Mr. Thompson and I wholly acquit her. She has neither done nor said anything amiss. Mr. Broadbent blamed her without cause.--I am, dear Joseph, Yours affectionately. To Henry Brooke [17] HULL, July 8, 1774.

MY DEAR SISTER,--I am glad you have been with James Oddie and Sister Merryweather I hope their souls will revive. It is of great importance that you should be upon as good terms as may be with the preachers in every place. And everywhere [tell them] to preach in the morning; else they will do little good either to themselves or others. A fortnight longer I stay here, and then move toward London. My disorder is no hindrance to me, only that my friends will not let me ride on horseback. Now and then I break through a little, where the roads are not convenient for wheels. You are called to do all you can, be it more or less. And the more we do the more we feel how little it is. While I was in Wales my best friend (as my brother terms her) went to London, and has hired part of an house in Hoxton, professing she would never more set foot in Bristol house or in the Foundery. Good is the will of the Lord! 'I cannot choose. He cannot err.' Your advice is good. I desire to follow it; and am, dear Sally, Your affectionate brother To Ann Bolton [28] BRISTOL, October 1, 1774. MY DEAR SISTER,--I hope to be at Wallingford on Monday the 17th instant; Tuesday, the 18th at noon, in Oxford; at five or six in the evening at Finstock; and on Wednesday evening at Witney. There is no exercise more profitable to the soul than that of the presence of God. It is likewise of great use constantly and invariably to attend to His inward voice. And yet there is a danger even in this

To Him commend thy cause, His ear attends the softest prayer. To Miss March REIGATE, November 30, 1774. You are in the safer extreme. When I formerly removed from one college to another, I fixed my resolution not to be hastily acquainted with any one; indeed, not to return any visit unless I had a reasonable hope of receiving or doing good therein. This my new neighbors generally imputed to pride; and I was willing to suffer the imputation. I 'sum up the experience' of persons, too, in order to form their general character. But in doing this we take a different way of making our estimate. It may be you chiefly regard (as my brother does) the length of their experience. Now, this I make little account of; I measure the depth and breadth of it. Does it sink deep in humble, gentle love Does it extend wide in all inward and outward holiness If so, I do not care whether they are of five or five-and-thirty years’ standing. Nay, when I look at Miss Betsy Briggs or Miss Philly Briggs, I am ready to hide my face: I am ashamed of having set out before they were born. Undoubtedly Miss Johnson is deep in grace, and lives like an angel here below. Yet some things in her character I do not admire; I impute them to human frailty. Many years ago I might have said, but I do not now, Give me a woman made of stone, A widow of Pygmalion. And just such a Christian one of the Fathers, Clemens Alexandrinus describes; but I do not admire that description now as I did formerly. I now see a Stoic and a Christian are different characters; and at some times I have been a good deal disgusted at Miss Johnson's apathy. When God restores our friends to us, we ought to rejoice; it is a defect if we do not. In that and several other instances I take knowledge of Sarah Ryan's littleness of understanding: and this, as well as our temper, we ought to improve to the utmost of our power; which can no otherwise be done than by reading authors of various kinds as well as by thinking and conversation. If we read nothing but the Bible, we should hear nothing but the Bible; and then what becomes of preaching

You know it is very natural for me to estimate wisdom and goodness by years, and to suppose the longest experience must be the best. But, although there is much advantage in long experience and we may trust an old soldier more than a novice, yet God is tied down to no rules; He frequently works a great work in a little time. He makes young men and women wiser than the aged; and gives to many in a very shorn time a closer and deeper communion with Himself than others attain in a long course of years. Betsy and Philly Briggs are witnesses. They have borne huge contradiction; and Philly has stood such shocks as might have overset some of the most established souls we have in London. There is a great calmness and meekness in Betty Johnson; but I want more softness and tenderness; I want more of human mingled with the divine. Nay, sometimes I want it in Miss March too. But I do not call that warmth anger--at least, not sinful anger; perhaps it would be culpable to be without it. I desire no apathy in religion; a Christian is very far from a Stoic. In every case, the last appeal must be made to our own conscience. Yet our conscience is far from being an infallible guide, as every wrong temper tends to bribe and blind the judge. To Elizabeth Briggs LONDON, December 28, 1774. MY DEAR BETSY,--You have done what you could in this matter and 'angels can do no more.' I am glad you tried; by-and-by she may see more clearly. I am always glad to hear from you, whether you have time to write accurately or not. And I love that you should tell me both what you feel and what you do; for I take part in all. I doubted not but you would find a blessing at this solemn season: see that you strengthen each other’s hands in God. I should be glad to see both or either of you when it is convenient.--I am, my dear Betsy, Yours affectionately. To Charles Perronet [34] LONDON, December 28, 1774. DEAR CHARLES,--Certainly there is nothing amiss in the desire to do something for a good Master; only still adding (in this, as in all things else), 'Yet not as I will, but as Thou wilt.'

MY DEAR SISTER,--If I could have seen you, though it had been only for an hour, it would have given me a very sensible satisfaction. I cannot easily express that union of spirit which I feel whenever I think of you. There is I know not what in your whole spirit and behavior which has always given me unspeakable pleasure; and when I look upon you (you know to whom the glory is due!), I am often ready to cry out, 'Thou perfect pattern of true womanhood!' But I know good is the will of the Lord; therefore I am content. If it is best, I shall see my dear friend again before I take my long journey; and if I do not see you till we meet in a better world, Surely our disembodied souls shall join, Surely my friendly shade shall mix with thine. To die is not to be lost; but our union will be more complete in the world of spirits than it can be while we dwell in tenements of clay. Certainly till persons experience something of the second awakening, till they are feelingly convinced of inbred sin so as earnestly to groan for deliverance from it, we need not speak to them of present sanctification. We should first labor to work that conviction in them. When they feel it and hunger and thirst after full salvation, then is the time to show them it is nigh at hand, it may be received just now by simple faith. I can now hardly expect (if I should live to return to England) to see you before next autumn. Let me, however, have the pleasure of hearing from you; and give a place in your memory and your prayers to, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother. Direct to me at Dublin. To Miss Bolton, At Witney, Oxfordshire. To Martha Chapman WORCESTER, March 15, 1775.

Great was the concern which I felt when I conversed with Miss Morgan, a child so spoiled to all intents and purposes I have not seen in the course of fifty years either in Europe or America. I know not what she is fit for. Does she regard the reproof of either father or mother Have not you humored her out of all her sense, all her good nature, and even good breeding What behavior was that which I saw with my own eyes What words which I heard with my own ears No weakness, no pain could excuse these. Pain should soften, not roughen our temper. And what a wife must a woman of such a temper make! what a torment must she be to any man of feeling! Happy would it be both [for] her and you if God would speedily take her to Himself! I could not but be concerned for you likewise. You have often desires to be a Christian: an inward Christian, a Bible Christian, a man happy in God. What hinders Scraping up more money Cui bono Have you not already more than does you good ' What, would you have me be idle ' No. Am I idle But I labor for eternity, for treasure in heaven, for satisfying riches. Go thou and do likewise! If you receive this in love, you may profit thereby. If you show it to your wife and daughter, you will not hurt me, but you will thereby renounce all future intercourse with Your truly affectionate servant. To Richard Morgan, Esq., No. 35 Stephen's Green, Dublin. To James Dempster [8] BALLINROBE, May 19, 1775. DEAR JEMMY,--That one point I earnestly recommend, both to Brother Rankin and you and all our preachers--by prayer, by exhortation, and by every possible means, to oppose a party spirit. This has always, so far as it prevailed, been the bane of all true religion, more especially when a country was in such a situation as America is now. None but the God of almighty love can extricate the poor people out of the snare. O what need have you to besiege His throne with all the power of prayer!--I am, dear Jemmy, Yours affectionately. To Thomas Rankin, in America

I am less careful about your increase in knowledge any farther than it tends to love. There is a danger of your laying more stress on this than sound reason requires. Otherwise you would reap much profit from sermons, which do not improve your knowledge--which do not apply to the understanding so directly as to the heart. I feel more want of heat than light. I value light; but it is nothing compared to love. Aim at this, my dear friend, in all public exercises, and then you will seldom be disappointed. Then you will not stop on the threshold of perfection (I trust you do not now), but will press on to the mark, to the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus, till you experimentally know all that love of God which passeth all (speculative) knowledge. The lengthening of your life and the restoring your health are invaluable blessings. But do you ask how you shall improve them to the glory of the Giver And are you willing to know Then I will tell you how. Go and see the poor and sick in their own poor little hovels. Take up your cross, woman! Remember the faith! Jesus went before you, and will go with you. Put off the gentlewoman; you bear an higher character. You are an heir of God and joint-heir with Christ ! Are you not going to meet Him in the air with ten thousand of His saints O be ready! To William Alwood [9] ARMAGH, June 11, 1775. DEAR BILLY,--I am not easy to have this thing hang any longer. I therefore desire that you will immediately fix a day and summon all the trustees, preachers, stewards, to meet you on that day at Chester, to determine that affair at once and to bring it to a final issue.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Thomas Rankin CLONMAIN, NEAR ARMAGH, June 13, 1775.

But what hope can I have of doing good, of making the least impression upon your Lordship where so many have spoken in vain, and those far better qualified to speak on so delicate a subject They were better qualified in some respects; in others they were not. They had not less bias upon their minds; they were not free from worldly hopes and fears. Their passions were engaged; and how easily do these blind the eyes of the understanding! They were not more impartial. Most of them were prejudiced in the highest degree. They neither loved the King nor his Ministers. Rather they hated them with a perfect hatred. And your Lordship knowing this, if you was a man, could not avoid having some prejudice to them; in which case it would be hardly possible to feel the full force of their arguments. They had not better means of information, of knowing the real tempers and sentiments, either of the Americans on the one hand, or of the English, Irish, and Scots on the other. Above all, they trusted in themselves, in their own power of convincing and persuading. I trust only in the living God, who hath the hearts of all men in His hand. And whether my writing do any good or no, it need do no harm. For it rests within your Lordship's breast whether any eye but your own shall see it. All my prejudices are against the Americans. For I am an High Churchman, the son of an High Churchman, bred up from my childhood in the highest notions of passive obedience and non-resistance. And yet, in spite of all my rooted prejudice, I cannot avoid thinking (if I think at all) that an oppressed people asked for nothing more than their legal rights, and that in the most modest and inoffensive manner which the nature of the thing would allow. But waiving this, waiving all considerations of right and wrong, I ask, Is it common sense to use force toward the Americans A letter now before me says, 'Four hundred of the Regulars and forty of the Militia were killed in the last skirmish.' What a disproportion! And this is the first essay of raw men against regular troops!

You see, my Lord, whatever has been affirmed, these men will not be frightened. And it seems they will not be conquered so easily as was at first imagined. They will probably dispute every inch of ground, and, if they die, die sword in hand. Indeed, some of our valiant officers say, 'Two thousand men will clear America of these rebels.' No, nor twenty thousand, nor perhaps treble that number, be they rebels or not. They are as strong men as you; they are as valiant as you, if not abundantly more valiant. For they are one and all enthusiasts --enthusiasts for liberty. They are calm, deliberate enthusiasts. And we know how this principle Breathes into softest souls stem love of war, And thirst of vengeance, and contempt of death. We know men animated with this will leap into a fire or rush upon a cannon's mouth. 'But they have no experience of war.' And how much more have our troops How few of them ever saw a battle! 'But they have no discipline.' That is an entire mistake. Already they have near as much as our army. And they will learn more of it every day. So that in a short time they will understand it as well as their assailants. 'But they are divided, among themselves: so you are informed by various letters and memorials.' So, I doubt not, was poor Rehoboam informed concerning the ten tribes! So (nearer our times) was Philip informed concerning the people of the Netherlands! No, my Lord, they are terribly united; not in the Province of New England only, but down as low as the Jerseys and Pennsylvania the bulk of the people are so united that to speak a word in favor of the present English measures would almost endanger a man's life. Those who inform me of this (one of whom was with me last week, lately come from Philadelphia) are no sycophants; they say nothing to curry favor; they have nothing to gain or lose by me. But they speak with sorrow of heart what they have seen with their eyes and heard with their own ears.

I find a danger now of a new kind--a danger of losing my love for the Americans: I mean for their miserable leaders; for the poor sheep are 'more sinned against than sinning,' especially since the amazing informations which I have received from James Ireland. Yet it is certain the bulk of the people both in England and America mean no harm; they only follow their leaders, and do as they are bid without knowing why or wherefore. On Friday I hope to be in London and to talk with the committee about building a new Foundery. This is a lovely spot and a lovely family. 'Tis pity but you could call here. It is four miles from Marlborough, and only a mile north of the London road. Peace be with you and yours! Adieu! To his Brother Charles [22] NEWBURY, October 19, 1775. DEAR BROTHER,--Last night I received a curious anecdote from Mr. Merchant, the Independent minister here. He told me, 'Mr. Evans of Bristol (the elder) informed me that he dined with you (J. W.) at a merchant's house in Bristol; that he asked you how you was affected when you read the answer to your late tract: and you answered, Not at all; for you had never read it, and never would: to which he replied, That was not fair.' Where lies the mistake The answer to my late tract is dated October 2. But I left Bristol October 1. Consequently no such conversation could exist. I fancy I have caught hold of the thread, and can unravel the whole. Last year a gentleman I did not know (who I suppose was Mr. Evans) dined with me at Mr. Wraxall’s; and probably he might speak to me (though I do not remember it) of some tract which I had then published. If so, there is only an harmless mistake of Mr. Merchant's, who misunderstood what Mr. Evans said. But this makes it still more probable that his son is the author of the letter to me. 'Tis pity! Some of our friends at Bristol should tell him that he has quite lost himself; that he has forgotten all decency and good manners, and writes like a pert, self-conceited young man. I think a man of sense that could command his temper would make him a little ashamed. Adieu! To Robert Costerdine [23] LONDON, October 20, 1775.

DEAR BROTHER,--I am just returned from Bedford. I have not seen the King these dozen years. I don't know what you mean by Dr. Smyth's book. It was best to take no notice of the angry ones. At Ramsbury Park, about a mile to the left of the high road, lives James Nind, local preacher, and general steward for the circuit, on a farm of five hundred pounds a year. His wife, Sally Nind, is one of the most amiable women I know. They mightily desire that you would spend a few nights with them. I am just putting into the press 'a new edition of the Address, corrected'; in which my change is accounted for, and two of the questions fully answered To the third, ' Why did not the Parliament tax them before' Mr. Madan answers, ' Because they were wiser; they knew the mischief that would ensue.' Dr. Johnson is in France. I have not heard lately from Shoreham. If the worst comes, you must make shift at the Foundery for a week or two. I can put up another bed in that which was Jenny's room. I do not think you are wise in destroying those papers. Some of them might have been useful to many. When I was in Bristol, I ordered that Hugh Saunderson should preach on Thursday night. None but you should take his place. Joseph Pilmoor may preach on Friday or Monday. Some much like, others much dislike, H. Saunderson; but his audience generally is not small. However, I will refer him to you; but I wish you would fix Thursday. Mr. Fletcher would not be safe without you or me. I should like a conference with Mr. Madan. I have a second friendly letter from him to-day. Peace be with you and yours! Adieu! Pray give my love to T. Lewis, and tell him I thank him for his letter. If the persons now taken up are hanged, it may be the saving of the nation. To Joseph Benson [26] LONDON, October 30, 1775.

Sometimes I have been afraid lest you should sustain loss for want of some reproach or disgrace. Your being young and a woman of fortune, and not wanting in understanding, were circumstances which, according to the ordinary course of Providence, keep reproach at a distance. However, you shall not escape it if our blessed Lord sees it to be the best means of purifying your soul. You shall have it just in due measure and in due time; for He will withhold from you no manner of thing that is good. There is one with me here who seems as yet to be under a peculiar dispensation--to be wholly screened from the reproach of Christ. There is something in the natural temper, the understanding, the person, and the behavior of Lady Maxwell which has hitherto prevented reproach, although she is much devoted to God and in many things quite singular. But she is not careful about it; being wining, whenever He shall see it best', and in whatever measure He shall choose, to share the portion of her Lord. The knowledge of ourselves is true humility; and without this we cannot be freed from vanity, a desire of praise being inseparably connected with every degree of pride. Continual watchfulness is absolutely necessary to hinder this from stealing in upon us. But as long as we steadily watch and pray we shall not enter into temptation. It may and will assault us on every side; but it cannot prevail. To John Fletcher [9] NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 1, 1776. DEAR SIR,--Your answer to Dr. Price will not interfere with mine. But Mr. Collinson is a more able antagonist than him. However, if he does not publish his tract, you need not take any other notice of it than to fortify your arguments against his plausible objections. If you can't overtake me at York (July 2) or at any other part of Yorkshire, I hope you will at least plan your business so as to meet me at the Conference. It would be highly expedient that my brother and you and I should then meet together. I have letters from two clergymen in Ireland, one or both of whom will probably be with us before that time.

I am not sorry that you have met with a little blame in the affair; and I hope it was not undeserved. Happy are they that suffer for well doing! I was almost afraid all men would speak well of you. Do you feel no intermission of your happiness in Him Does He ' bid you even in sleep go on’ What do you usually dream of Do you never find any lowness of spirits Is there never any time that hangs upon your hands How is your health Are you entirely free of your cough and the pain in your side You see how inquisitive I am, because everything relating to you nearly concerns me. I once thought I could not be well acquainted with any one till many years had elapsed. And yet I am as well acquainted with you as if I had known you from your infancy. Away with that thought, ' I shall not have you long.' Let our Lord see to that. Let us enjoy to-day. You are now my comfort and joy! And I hope to be far longer than this little span of life, my dear Hetty, Yours in tender affection. To Elizabeth Ritchie [17] PUBLOW, September 20, 1776. MY DEAR BETSY,--Some time since, you certainly were in danger of exchanging the plain religion of the Bible for the refined one of Mysticism, a danger which few can judge of but those that feel it. This my brother and I did for several years. This scheme, especially as Madame Guyon has polished and improved it, gives a delicate satisfaction to whatever of curiosity and self-esteem lies hid in the heart. It was particularly liable to make an impression upon you, as it came recommended by one you had a friendship for, whom you knew to be upright and sincere, and who had both sense and a pleasing address. At the same time that subtle enemy ' who beguiled Eve by his subtilty' would not fail to enforce the temptation. The more reason you have to bless God that you are delivered out of the snare of the fowler.

I take no horses with me. To Mrs. Woodhouse LONDON, January 21, 1777. MY DEAR SISTER, There is something exceedingly remarkable in the case of Mr. Dixon. To be snatched away just at the time that he was set above the world! But He with whom we have to do best understands what will be for our real advantage. Probably He saw that prosperity would hurt his soul, and so took him away from the evil to come. I should have great hope that sickness or bodily weakness would be of use to your neighbors. When we feel pain, or when death looks us in the face, what do riches avail? In such circumstances you are richer than them all. You know in whom you have believed. You know that, if all these things pass away, you have in heaven a better and a more enduring substance. You may profit much by Richard Condy. [Condy was stationed at Epworth.] He is a valuable man. I seldom converse with him but he does me good. I wish you would tell him I desire he would send me a full account of his experience. Still be ready to do and to suffer the whole will of God.--My dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Christopher Hopper NEAR LONDON, February 1, 1777. MY DEAR BROTHER,--James Kershaw is stark staring mad, more than ever John Reed was. [See letters of March 3, 1776 (to Mrs. Woodhouse), and Feb. 15, 1777.] He prophesies that 'all the Methodists are to go over to America in the belly of a whale.' Take this as a specimen. We shall not begin our building here before April. Probably I shall take a short journey (to Leeds or Newcastle or Dublin) once a month; but I must never be absent long at a time. [See letter of Feb. 14.] How we shall be able to raise the money I know not. But ' the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof.'--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. Hopper, At the Preaching-house, In Manchester. Hester Ann Roe LONDON, February 11, 1777.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Your state of mind for some time has been that which the Papists very improperly term a state of Desertion; wherein they suppose God deserts or forsakes the soul only for His own will and pleasure ! But this is absolutely impossible: I deny that such a state ever existed under the sun. As I observed before, the trouble you feel is in the very root and ground of it, a natural effect of disordered liver, of the corruptible body pressing down the soul. But you must likewise take into the account preternatural influence. For you may be assured your grand adversary will not be forgetful to avail himself of the opportunity, sometimes by plausible suggestions, sometimes by horrid and grievous injections. But blessed is the soul that endureth temptation. The Lord shall deliver you out of his hand. Doth not He know the way wherein you go? And when you have been tried you shall come forth as gold! I feel much sympathy with you in your troubles, which endear you to me exceedingly. But though I grieve with you, [I joy] over you; for I can easily see ' the end of the Lord.' The fire your graces shall refine, Till, molded from above, You bear the character divine, The stamp of perfect love I I am glad you are to spend a few days with my dear friends at Publow. And when you are happy in each other, do not forget, my dear Nancy, Yours most affectionately. To Penelope Newman LONDON, April 24, 1777. MY DEAR SISTER,--If I had gone over into Ireland, as I proposed, it would have been scarce possible for me to visit Gloucestershire. But I think the time I had allotted for that journey may be more profitably bestowed in England. Therefore if I live till June, I purpose pay a short visit to Stroud, Tewkesbury, Gloucester, and a few other places. I laid the foundation of our new chapel here on Monday, with an immense concourse of people. Work your work betimes; and in due time He will give you a full reward.--I am, my dear sister, Yours affectionately. To Miss March LONDON, April 26, 1777. To begin at the end: I did not preach any sermon for you in particular, though by accident. I know what sermon you mean, and both you and I have need of it.

MY DEAR MISS BISHOP,--By long experience I am convinced that natural strength of understanding is no defense against the most absurd errors; more especially if we lean to it ever so little, if we are not deeply conscious of our own weakness. I am therefore jealous of you also: I am afraid lest you too 'fall where many mightier have been slain.' Indeed, some have not scrupled to say already, 'Oh, Miss Bishop will soon be enlightened as well as Miss Flower. [ See letters of Sept. 15 (to her) and Nov. 16.] She has such a regard for Mr. Hilton, that he will soon open her eyes.' As yet I cannot believe he will; yet I do not say there is no danger. Has he opened the cause? Has he spoke o wrote to you upon the favorite subject? Has he talked you about 'being still, ceasing from your own works, and from crying, Lo here and lo there'? If he has, what impression did that smooth and plausible conversation make upon your mind Was you almost persuaded it was right? or did you stand unmoved? If you was moved, if you too should leave 'the fallen Methodists,' and join 'the Friends, the only living people in the world '; still, I do not find myself inclined to bring am heavy indictment against you. I should not be angry; though I should grieve, for I cannot easily part with those I love. I am inclined to think your friend of Bath made a mistake with regard to the person. I did receive ' a letter which I knew-not what to make of.' But it was from Miss Flower, not Miss Bishop. I do not remember that ever I received a letter from you which I did not understand. I know few people who write or speak more intelligibly than you do; and I hope you will soon give a fresh proof of it to, my dear Miss Bishop, Yours affectionately To Miss Bishop, At Mrs. Taylor's, Above Bar, Hanover Row, Southampton. To Mrs. Barton STONY STRATFORD, October 28, 1777.

1778 To Mrs. Johnston, Annandde, Listeen. MY DEAR SISTER, - I do not remember the receiving any letter from you, either at Dublin or since I left it. Neither have I received any fresh complaint concerning you. [See letter of Feb. 14 to her.] What I formerly heard I gave you an account of, to which you gave me a distinct answer, and I was fully satisfied. I am relieved to think someone talked of making a fresh complaint. But it is very probable his heart failed, and so the child was strangled in the birth. Indeed, I do not wonder if people are not forward to complain of you to me. Because they know I am a prejudicial person: they know the tender regard I have you and yours, and consequently how hard it is for me: to blame you in anything. That God may give you many happy is the prayer of, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Thomas Taylor [1] LONDON, January 15, 1778. DEAR TOMMY, - I am glad you have seen Mr. Pugh. The Philosophy is finished, [See letter of Feb. 15, 1777.] and will be sent down next month. I spoke briefly before; but since you urge me to it, I will now come full upon your subject. As to Preaching, you ought not to preach against that unscriptural, blasphemous, mischievous doctrine constantly - no, nor very frequently. But you ought now and then to bear a full, strong, express testimony against it; otherwise you are a sinner against God and your people and your own soul. I have done this too seldom, scarce once in fifty sermons: ought to have done it once in fifteen or ten.

As to Writing and Publishing, the deadly poison has for many years been spread through England, chiefly by means of those pestilent declamations the Gospel and the Spiritual Magazine. Whatever is designed for an antidote to this poison must be spread in the same manner. Thousands have been thereby poisoned already, and are now twice dead. To guard those who are not poisoned yet (not to get money), I fight them at their own weapons. I oppose magazine to magazine, though of a totally different kind. But it seems you know nothing at all of the matter. You do not appear to have even read the Proposals. This Magazine not only contains no railing, but (properly speaking) no controversy. It proves one point: 'God willeth all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.' It goes straight forward, taking notice of no opponent, but invariably pursuing the one point. And this is the only way to preserve Methodists and to make the Calvinists quiet. Meantime the Letters and the Lives, which will make a considerable part of every number, contain the marrow of experimental and practical religion; so that nothing of the kind has appeared before. Therefore a magazine of this kind is a new thing in the land; and those who formerly spoke against magazines may with a good grace recommend this as being quite another thing and published upon other motives. I do not desire any Calvinist to read it. I publish it not to convince but preserve. I know by long experience they will never bend but when the war is carried into their own quarters. This I will do, as long as God spares my life, in love and in meekness of wisdom. This is the way, and the only way, to establish a lasting peace. But is it not odd that a Methodist preacher, an Assistant, should be the only one who sees my brother and me, and the bulk of the preachers, and the body of the people to be wrong Tommy, distrust yourself. Do not lean much to your own understanding. 'Tis possible they may be right and you wrong. You do not at all understand the affair. We are well rid of those turbulent men. With love to Nancy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Duncan McAllum LONDON, January 17, 1778.

But it is certain, had God never been angry, He could never have been reconciled. So that, in affirming this, Mr. Law strikes at the very root of the Atonement, and finds a very short method of converting Deists. [He is evidently thinking of Charles Leslie (1650-1722), Nonjuror and his A Short and Easy Method with the Deists.] Although, therefore, I do not term God, as Mr. Law supposes, ' a wrathful Being,' which conveys a wrong idea; yet I firmly believe He was angry with all mankind, and that He was reconciled to them by the death of His Son. And I know He was angry with me till I believed in the Son of His love; and yet this is no impeachment to His mercy, that He is just as well as merciful. But undoubtedly, as long as the world stands, there will be a thousand objections to this scriptural doctrine. For still the preaching of Christ crucified will be foolishness to the wise men of the world. Hovever let us hold the precious truth fast in our hearts as well as in our understanding; and we shall find by happy experience that this is to us the wisdom of God and power of God. I do not doubt but your health will be so far re-established that you may either teach school or live in Bath. But I do not know whether you will be able to do both together, to teach school in Bath. A little time will determine. And meanwhile we know that will be which is best. - I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Miss Bishop, At Mrs. Taylor's, Southampton. To Duncan McAllum LONDON, February 11, 1778. MY DEAR BROTHER, - You do not write too often. When I think your letters troublesome, I will tell you. I leave it to your choice how you should divide your time between Perth and Inverness. [See letter of Jan. 17.] It seems to me you should spend at least a month in the North before the Conference. If you have not money for the journey, I will help you. I shall hardly see Scotland this year. About the end of next month I expect to be in Dublin. If Brother Ellis is angry at you, be not you angry at him. A soft answer turneth away wrath. - Dear Duncan, Your affectionate brother.

I hope to be at the Man of War [A small decayed hamlet in co. Dublin. Bradburn went there to meet Wesley on June 26, and slept there. Wesley married him on the 28th to Betsy Nangle.] on the 26th instant at five or six in the evening; at Dublin on the 27th. On Monday and Tuesday I may meet the classes; so the Conference will begin on Tuesday, July the 7th. - I am, dear Sammy, Your affectionate brother. To a Friend LONDONDERRY, June 5, 1778. DEAR SIR, - I have a long letter from an anonymous correspondent respecting the Arminian Magazine. It appears to be wrote with a friendly design and in an excellent spirit. The objections mentioned therein seem to be partly his own, partly repeated from others. The first is: 'It is too short; some other magazines are almost as long again. It is true there are as many pages as in others; but there are not so many lines in a page, not so many by ten or twelve, as in the Spiritual Magazine.' I answer by confessing the charge. It is undeniably true that it does not contain so many lines either in prose or verse as the Spiritual Magazine. And Tonson, who is himself a wit, Weighs writers' merits by the sheet. [Prior's Epistle to F. Shephard.] So do thousands besides; but I do not write for these. I write for those who judge of books not by the quantity but by the quality of them, who ask not how long but how good they are. I spare both my reader's time and my own by couching my sense in as few words as I can. Those who prefer the dealers in many words may find them on every side. And from these they may have not only as much more but ten times as much for their money.

MY DEAR SISTER, - It is true that some of our friends of Brecon have intimated to me that they feared a prophet would not be honored in his own country, and that Billy Church [He was the younger son of John Church, of Brecon, and grandfather of the Rev. H. L. Church, Wesleyan minister 1844-93. See Young's Methodism in Wales, p. 136; and letter of Oct. 13.] might do more good elsewhere. But they did not mention his changing with Brother Pescod. And I should have a particular objection to it - namely, that he would not have those opportunities of preaching in Welsh which he has now. There is therefore no danger of Joseph Pescod's [Pescod, now at Pembroke, died in 1805, aged fifty-four, after serving twenty-eight years as a preacher, with unblemished character and sound judgment. His preaching was pleasing and profitable.] quitting his circuit before the end of the year. Let all of you now make the full use of the advantages which you enjoy; especially of meeting in band, which I hope none of you neglect who have tasted that the Lord is gracious. I am glad you feel the want of a deeper change. Whereunto you have attained hold fast; but rest not till you experience the full rest that remaineth for the people of God. You will never weary me with your letters. The oftener you write the more I love you. Peace be with all your spirits! - I am, my dear Kitty, Yours affectionately. To Alexander Knox BRISTOL, September 27, 1778. MY DEAR ALLECK, - I am afraid the late return of your fits was in some measure my fault, because I did not provide you with the remedy which probably would have prevented it. I thought of it, indeed; but went no farther when you said your grandmother would send you down to the salt water. I doubt you have not been there this fine autumn, and now the year is too far spent.

There is frequently something very mysterious in the ways of divine Providence. A little of them we may understand; but much more is beyond our comprehension, and we must be content to say, 'What Thou doest I know not now, but I shall know hereafter.' At present it is sufficient for me to know that all His ways are mercy and truth to them that love Him. Even in these troublous times there is a very considerable increase of the work of God. Cleave to Him with your whole heart, and you will have more and more' reason to praise Him.-I am, my dear Jenny, Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Woodhouse LONDON, November, 18, 1778. MY DEAR SISTER, - I have no intimacy with Lord North. I never saw him. I never wrote to him; very probably I never shall. I never asked any favor of him. I would not on any consideration whatever. It is a saying, You do not know what kind of animals great men are. They will not move an hair's breadth out of their line. They will on no account interfere in each other's province. Now, I told you before, only the Commissioners at the Customs dispose of Custom House places. And I know not one of those Commissioners. Therefore I can do nothing in this matter. [Compare letter of Dec. 26.] I am not sparing of my pains; but I know what I can do and what I cannot. If I could do it, you would not need to ask anything twice of Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Woodhouse, At Mr. Hutton's, In Epworth, Near Thorne, Yorkshire. To Hannah Ball [ROBERTSBRIDGE], December 2, 1778.

'But the late Act,' you say, 'does not either tolerate or encourage Roman Catholics.' I appeal to matter of fact. Do not the Romanists themselves understand it as a toleration You know they do. And does it not already (let alone what it may do by-and-by) encourage them to preach openly, to build chapels (at Bath and elsewhere), to raise seminaries, and to make numerous converts day by day to their intolerant, persecuting principles I can point out, if need be, several of the persons. And they are increasing daily. But 'nothing dangerous to English liberty is to be apprehended from them.' I am not certain of that. Some time since, a Romish priest came to one I knew [Elizabeth Duchesne. See letter of Oct. 27, 1758.]; and, after talking with her largely, broke out, 'You are no heretic! You have the experience of a real Christian!' 'And would you,' she asked, 'burn me alive' He said, 'God forbid! unless it were for the good of the Church!' Now, what security could she have had for her life, if it had depended on that man The good of the Church would have burst all the ties of truth, justice, and mercy; especially when seconded by the absolution of a priest, or (if need were) a papal pardon. If any one please to answer this, and to set his name, I shall probably reply; but the productions of anonymous writers I do not promise to take any notice of. - I am, sir, Your humble servant. To Ann Bolton LONDON, January 14, 1780. If I could be angry at my dear Nancy for anything, I should be so for your not using me as a friend. If you believe me to be so, why do you not tell me without reserve when there is anything in which I can serve you You may judge by yourself whether this must not give me a particular satisfaction. So it always will if you suffer me to give you any assistance that is in my power.

What you speak of feeling the peace of God in the midst of the most exquisite sufferings does not surprise me at all. [See letter of Feb. 26 to her.] 'I feel my pains,' says Mr. De Renty, 'in all their extremity. But by the grace of God I give myself up to Him and not to them.' And again: 'I cannot say but my soul is deeply grieved at the sense of so great a loss; yet I feel such joy in that the will of the Lord is done, not that of a poor sinner, that, were it not for giving offence, I could dance and sing.' I saw a stranger instance than either of these a few years ago. I saw exactly such distress in an human countenance as appears in the waxwork taken from the face of Cartouche [Louis Dominique Cartouche, head of a Paris band of robbers, broken on the wheel in 1721.] while he was breaking upon the wheel. In the morning I asked her, 'Was not you in great distress when I saw you last night' She answered, 'I was in such distress as was ready to tear my soul and body asunder; and yet at that very time I was as happy as I could well be out of heaven.' I do not wonder, therefore, that all the trials you feel do not interrupt the peace of God. They never need. His grace is sufficient to keep you in and to deliver you out of all temptations. And the unction of the Holy One which abideth with you shall guide you from time to time and enable you to east back upon his own head all the fiery darts of the wicked one. Love me still, my dear Nancy, and know me to be Yours invariably. To Abraham Brames LONDON, January 16, 1780. MY DEAR BROTHER, - You have done exceeding well in setting that little collection on foot. [See letter of Dec. 12, 1779.] I trust it will be productive of much good. On February 6 you may expect a preacher from hence. Tell the traveling preachers whatever you think or hear concerning them, if you love either them or Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Abr. Brames, At the Preaching. house, In Rochester. To Lancelot Harrison [4] LONDON, January 16, 1780.

MY DEAR BROTHER, - I perceive many in your circuit do not know our Rules. You should immediately read them in every Society, and receive no new member till he has read them. Let all know what they are about. A Plan of a Circuit should contain (1) the several Societies, (2) the number of members in each, (3) the new members, (4) the backsliders, (5) the persons in band. Then the conversions, deaths, marriages, removes, with the total number at the foot of each column. Let me have such a plan next quarter. [See letter of Feb. 16.] You did well to recommend the Hymn-Books, and you will do still better in taking every opportunity of recommending the Magazine. [See letter of Jan. 29.] Be zealous! Be active! Stir up the gift of God that is in you! - I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. L. Harrison, At Dr. Kershaw's, In Gainsborough, Lincolnshire. To Thomas Taylor () [5] LONDON, January [18], 1780.

MY DEAR MISS MORGAN, - As I know not when you have been so much upon my mind as for a day or two past, I was agreeably surprised last night at opening a letter and seeing your name. [See letters of Jan. x7, 1779, and March 13, 1781.] It is on Monday the 28th instant I purpose, if God permit, to set out from here. One day I expect to spend at Bath; and on Thursday, March z, to be at Bristol. The next morning, at eleven, if it be convenient for you, I will wait upon you. On Monday, March 13, I am to set out for Ireland. Before that time, as you are a ready learner, I may probably be able to give you all the assistance you will want in order to the understanding that little tract. And I am persuaded, whatever knowledge you acquire, you will endeavor to apply it to the noblest purposes. O let this be your continual care, to grow in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ and to recover that whole image of God wherein you was created! If I can in any degree assist you in this, it will be an unspeakable pleasure to, my dear Miss Morgan, Yours most affectionately. Miss Morgan, At Waiter King's, Esq., At Marsh, near Bristol. To William Strahan CITY ROAD, February 21, 1780. DEAR SIR, - I want to disperse among the French prisoners fifteen hundred of the tract which I send by Mr. Olivers. Shall I beg it may be printed as soon as convenient I must likewise desire of you to advise Mr. Olivers in a little affair which he is engaged in. - I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant. To Mr. William Strahan. To Ann Bolton LONDON, February 26, 1780.

MY DEAR SISTER,--A letter directed to me in London will find me at any time. I trust you will never sink into Quietism (or Quakerism, which is only one mode of it). For then you would soon sink into lukewarmness; and what would come next who can tell I have not known ten Quakers in my life whose experience went so far as justification. I never knew one who clearly experienced what we term 'sanctification.' But, indeed, their language is so dark and equivocal that one scarce knows what they do experience and what they do not. If it may be a probable means of doing good either to others or to your own soul, I think you need not scruple making an excursion of a few days for fear of giving offence. Our Conference this year will last till Friday, the 11th instant. And for the time to come (at least while I live) will always continue ten days. [Conference began in Bristol on Aug. 1. Wesley says that it was resolved to 'allow nine or ten days for each Conference' (Journal, vi. 290).] No less time will suffice for sifting to the bottom the various points of importance that are to be considered. The hand of the Lord is not shortened either in Great Britain or Ireland. He still carries on His own work and shows Himself mighty to save.--I am, my dear Penny, Yours affectionately. To Brian Bury Collins [11] BRISTOL, August 5, 1780. DEAR SIR,--It is not at all surprising that the Bishop, though a good man, should scruple to ordain a field-preacher; and I apprehend his brethren will neither endeavor or desire to remove his scruple, unless it should please God to touch some of their hearts and employ them to soften the rest. Perhaps that humane man may aim at a middle way--namely, to ordain you upon conditions. And if such conditions were proposed as would not entangle your conscience, I should have no objection. But in this case you will have need of all the wisdom from above, that you may yield far enough and not too far. I do not think that Presbyterian ordination would add anything to what you have already. And it seems we need not consider the matter farther till we know the Bishop's final determination. This we know already, that He who rules over all will order

Give me leave, my Lord, to speak more freely still: perhaps it is the last time I shall trouble your Lordship. I know your Lordship's abilities and extensive learning; I believe, what is far more, that your Lordship fears God. I have heard that your Lordship is unfashionably diligent in examining the candidates for Holy Orders--yea, that your Lordship is generally at the pains of examining them yourself. Examining them! In what respects Why, whether they understand a little Latin and Greek and can answer a few trite questions in the science of divinity l Alas, how little does this avail! Does your Lordship examine whether they serve Christ or Belial whether they love God or the world whether they ever had any serious thoughts about heaven or hell whether they have any real desire to save their own souls or the souls of others If not, what have they to do with Holy Orders and what will become of the souls committed to their care My Lord, I do by no means despise learning; I know the value of it too well. But what is this, particularly in a Christian minister, compared to piety What is it in a man that has no religion ' As a jewel in a swine's snout.' Some time since, I recommended to your Lordship a plain man, whom I had known above twenty years as a person of deep, genuine piety and of unblameable conversation. But he neither understood Greek nor Latin; and he affirmed in so many words that he believed it was his duty to preach whether he was ordained or no. I believe so too. What became of him since, I know not; but I suppose he received Presbyterian ordination, and I cannot blame him if he did. He might think any ordination better than none. I do not know that Mr. Hoskins had any favour to ask of the Society. He asked the favour of your Lordship to ordain him that he might minister to a little flock in America. But your Lordship did not see good to ordain him; but your Lordship did see good to ordain and send into America other persons who knew something of Greek and Latin, but who knew no more of saving souls than of catching whales.

MY DEAR NANCY, -- Yesterday I returned from a little tour through Norfolk, and had the pleasure of finding your letter. You know I feel with you and for you. But I am almost at a loss to understand what trials can sit so heavy upon you! You are with those whom you love and who love you. You have in general tolerable health. You have no husband, no children to perplex you. How came you to be so weighted down with care Think aloud, my dear, my much-loved friend. Explain yourself. Be as particular as you please. You need not fear my telling others. You have known me since you were little more than a child. Has Neddy [Her brother. See letters of May 8, 1774, and Sept. 9, 1781, to her.] no hope of getting out of his trouble Is his farm rented above its value Is it on his sake only that you grieve Or are other trials added to this By all means accept the providential invitation to Bristol. My dear Nancy, adieu. On Monday se’nnight I set out for Bath and Bristol. On Monday, March 8 [5], I hope to be at Newbury; on Monday, 15th, [Monday was March 19, and that evening he preached at Stroud, and on the 20th at Worcester. See next letter.] at Stroud; on Tuesday the x6th at Worcester. You will contrive to be with me where you can. I do not find any fault with you at present. Only I am afraid you are not careful enough of your health. Otherwise I rejoice that I have confidence in you in all things. -- I am, my dear Nancy, Your ever affectionate brother. To Miss Bolton, In Witney, Oxfordshire. To Thomas Rutherford [2] LONDON, February 20, 1781. DEAR TOMMY, -- I am glad to hear so good an account of Mr. Abraham. [See letters of Nov. 4, 1780, and May 8, 1781.] I hope to be at Dublin in April; and if he goes on well till then, it is not improbable he and you and I may return to England together. A few days in March (till Monday the 19th) I purpose to spend in and about Bristol. I then go slowly through Gloucestershire and Staffordshire to Manchester, which I hope to reach on March the 29th.

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- That should be always upon your mind, to carry the gospel into new places. There is room still for enlarging our borders, particularly in Holderness. I am in doubt whether anything will much avail Sister Harrison till she takes the quicksilver and aqua sulphurata. But John Floyd [Floyd, then preacher at Birstall. See letter of March 15, 1777.] tells me elixir of vitriol does just as well as the aqua sulphurata. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To his Niece Sarah Wesley MANCHESTER, March 31, 1781. MY DEAR SALLY, -- The expression of ‘eating and drinking unworthily’ has one, and only one, meaning affixed to it by St. Paul, who is the only inspired writer that uses that expression. He means by it that particular sin of which the Corinthians were then guilty -- the snatching one before another his own supper, so that one was hungry and another was drunken. Now, it is certain you are in no danger of this any more than of committing murder. Deadness, coldness, wandering thoughts of various kinds are totally distinct from it. And now, when the worst of these occur, you may answer with pious Kempis, ‘Go, go, thou unclean spirit. These are not my thoughts but thine, and thou shalt answer for them to God.’ [Imitation, 111. vi.] God is now aiming, in all His dealings with you, to bring you to a knowledge of yourself as one in whom by nature dwells no good thing. And this He is particularly pursuing when you approach His Table. Were He to give you at that time remarkable joy or sweetness, it would not answer His design; neither were He to give you much contrition and brokenness of heart. Therefore He leaves you in great measure to your own dull, unfeeling heart, that you may know yourself in order to know Him. But nevertheless this is the way; walk thou in it, and in due time you shall reap if you faint not.

1781 To Thomas Rutherford LOUTH, July 4, 1781. DEAR TOMMY, -- I got half-way again, as far as the Isle of Man; but I could get no farther. What He doth we know not now, but we shall know hereafter. I wish Isabella and you much happiness, which you cannot fail of if you have much holiness. Therefore the certain way to make each other happy is to strengthen each other's hands in God. Some time since, I desired Brother Moore [Henry Moore was his colleague at Lisburn, and their wives were sisters. He had just removed from Tanderagee. See Crookshank’s Methodism in Ireland, i. 345; and letter of Feb. 23, 1783.] to procure and send me as particular account as possible of that odd affair near Tanderagee; I mean with regard to the house which was so strangely disturbed. I wish he would do it without delay. -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Hannah Ball SHEFFIELD, July 12, 1781. MY DEAR SISTER,--I cannot at all understand George Story’s [George Story was Assistant in Oxfordshire. The new preachers were Richard Rodda and Thomas Warwick. See letter of Nov. 17.] behavior. He seems prejudiced against you; and I cannot devise for what. But your business is to go straight forward. And let both Nancy and you do all the good you can. Surely you should take an opportunity to warn Jo. Accutt [John Accutt was the second preacher. He desisted from work in 1785.] of his danger. I shall appoint two new preachers for the Oxford Circuit next year. Jasper Winscom [See letter of Oct. 20, 1775, to him.] is a good man and a local preacher. But I am glad you are not minded to leave Wycombe. The longer your letters are the more welcome they are to, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Ann Loxdale NOTTINGHAM, July 14, 1781.

MY DEAR MISS LOXDALE, -- As it has pleased God to restore you in a measure to what you enjoyed once, I make no doubt but He will restore all which you then had, and will add to it what you never had yet. There is no end of His mercies. He will give ‘exceeding abundantly beyond all that you are able to ask or think.’ If that sickness you mention came (as is the case with some) only at the time of private prayer, I should incline to think it was preternatural, a messenger of Satan permitted to buffet you. But as you find it likewise at other times, when you feel any vehement emotion of mind, it seems to be (partly at least) a natural effect of What is called weakness of nerves. But even in this case the prayer of faith will not fail to the ground. You may ask with resignation; and if it be best, this cup will be removed from you. You have, indeed, reason to rejoice over your sister. Is she not given you in answer to prayer And have you not encouragement even from this very thing to expect that more of your family will be given you Those are true words, when in His own strength you wrestle with God, -- My powerful groans Thou canst not bear, Nor stand the violence of my prayer, My prayer omnipotent. You remind me of what occurred when my dear Hetty Roe first mentioned you to me. I almost wondered I should feel so much regard for one I had never seen! But I can taste your spirit, and rejoice to find that you are so near, my dear Miss Loxdale, to Yours in tender affection. To Mary Bishop NEAR LEEDS, July 17, 1781. MY DEAR SISTER, -- When the school began at Publow, [See letter of May 21 to her.] it was in all respects a school after my own heart, conducted exactly on the same principles as that of Miss Bosanquet at Leytonstone. But it declined from its original simplicity, I know not how, by slow and insensible degrees indeed, so insensible that I hardly know what to blame, and so know not how to cure it.

3. Would it not be well, then, to spend at least an hour a day in reading and meditating on the Bible reading every morning and evening a portion of the Old and New Testament with the Explanatory Notes 4. Might you not read two or three hours in the morning and one or two in the afternoon When you are tired of severer studies, you may relax your mind by history or poetry. 5. The first thing you should understand a little of is Grammar. You may read first the Kingswood English Grammar, and then Bishop Lowth’s Introduction. 6. You should acquire (if you have not already) some knowledge of Arithmetic. Dilworth’s Arithmetic would suffice. 7. For Geography I think you need only read over Randal’s or Guthrie’s Geographical Grammar. 8. Watts's Logic is not a very good one; but I believe you cannot find a better. 9. In Natural Philosophy you have all that you need to know in the Survey of the Wisdom of God in Creation. But you may add the Glasgow [Edinburgh] abridgement of Mr. Hutchinson’s Works. 10. With any or all of the foregoing studies you may intermix that of History. You may begin with Rollin’s Ancient History; and afterwards read in order the Concise History of the Church, Burnet’s History of the Reformation, the Concise History of England, Clarendon’s History of the Rebellion, Neal’s History of the Puritans, his History of New England, and Robertson's History of America. 11. In Metaphysics you may read Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding and Malebranche’s Search after Truth. 12. For Poetry you may read Spenser's Fairy Queen, select parts of Shakspeare, Fairfax’s or Hoole’s Godfrey of Bouillon, Paradise Lost, the Night Thoughts, and Young's Moral and Sacred Poems. 13. You may begin and end with Divinity; in which I will only add, to the books mentioned before, Bishop Pearson On the Creed and the Christian Library. By this course of study you may gain all the knowledge which any reasonable Christian needs. But remember, before all, in all, and above all, your great point is to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. -- I am, my dear Sally, Your affectionate Uncle. To Ann Bolton BRISTOL, September 9, 1781.

MY DEAR NANCY, -- One thing we are absolutely assured of -- that good is the will of the Lord! But I should be glad to know, How do Neddy’s [See letters of Feb. 20, 1781, and Aug. 3, 1782, to her.] affairs stand now Has he any prospects of getting out of his troubles Is there a probability that he will be able to extricate himself from the present difficulties How far are you concerned therein Are you perplexed on any other account Where do you spend your time, and how are you employed When you have any leisure, certainly you cannot bestow it better than in visiting as many as you can of your poor neighbors. How is your health now I should be afraid these pressures upon your mind would increase your bodily disorders. I do not believe you murmur or fret at anything. But you cannot avoid grieving (unless when the power of the Highest overshadows you in an extraordinary manner). And even this will shake the tenement of clay. My dear Nancy, share all your griefs with Your real friend. To Miss Bolton, In Witney, Oxfordshire. X Post. To Elijah Bush [7] COLEFORD, September 11, 1781. MY DEAR BROTHER,--I was much concerned yesterday when I heard you were likely to marry a woman against the consent of your parents. I have never in an observation of fifty years known such a marriage attended with a blessing. I know not how it should be, since it is flatly contrary to the fifth commandment. I told my own mother, when pressing me to marry, ‘I dare not allow you a positive voice herein; I dare not marry a person because you bid me. But I must allow you a negative voice: I will marry no person if you forbid. I know it would be a sin against God.’ Take care what you do. Mr. S----- is not a proper judge; he hopes to separate you from the Methodists; and I expect, if you take this step, that will be the end. -- I am Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Hall BATH, September 15, 1781.

DEAR PATTY, -- But when will the hundred pounds come I hear nothing about that. But fifty pounds of it were bespoke by him that sent me the first notice, and what could be done less For, you know, the messenger of good news should always be rewarded. However, if we live to meet again, probably something may be done without waiting for the legacy; and it is not impossible that you should procure half an hour's very private conversation into the bargain. I say still, you are one of the youngest women of your years that I know, [See letter of May 28 to her.] and perhaps it is your fervor that keeps you alive as well as keeps you from the gout and stone, to which you know we have an hereditary right. God does all things well. -- I am, dear Patty, Your affectionate friend and Brother. To John Bredin NEAR BRISTOL, September 22, 1781. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I supposed you to be a dying man, and had therefore no thought of your being an Assistant or even a traveling preacher. [Bredin had been at Athlone, and was now in the Londonderry Circuit, though his name does not appear in the Minutes. See letters of May 17 and Oct.] But if you can undertake it, do. The more exercise you use the better. But the morning preaching must not be left off on any account. That is the glory of the Methodists. It is hardly worth while to keep an horse for the sake of three or four little places. We have need to save all possible expense. Several of our preachers in England now walk their circuits.--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. John Bredin, In Coleraine, Ireland. To Robert Lindsay [8] BRISTOL, October 7, 1781. DEAR ROBERT, -- The question is, ‘Is the chapel actually made over to Mr. Jacques and Egerton for that debt’ If not, they cannot sell it. Mr. Hunt will inform you how this is.

My DEAR HETTY, -- You should always have in readiness that little tract The Plain Account of Christian Perfection. There is nothing that would so effectually stop the mouths of those who call this ‘a new doctrine.’ All who thus object are really (though they suspect nothing less) seeking sanctification by works. If it be by works, then certainly these will need time in order to the doing of these works. But if it is by faith, it is plain a moment is as a thousand years. Then God says (in the spiritual as in the outward world), Let there be light, and there is light. I am in great hopes, as John Sellars [See letter of Jan. 18.] got his own soul much quickened in Macdesfield, he will now be a blessing to many at Chester. A few witnesses of pure love remain there still; but several are gone to Abraham's bosom. Encourage those in Macclesfield who enjoy it to speak explicitly what they do experience, and to go on till they know all that ‘love of God that pusseth knowledge.’ Give all the help you can, my dear Hetty, to them, and to Yours most affectionately. To Mr. ----- LEWISHAM, January 9, 1782. 1. Last summer I received a letter from Yorkshire [See letter of Nov. 19, 1781.] signed by several serious men, who proposed a difficulty they were under, wherein they knew not how to act. And, indeed, I did not well know how to advise them. So I delayed giving them a determinate answer till I could lay the matter before our brethren at the ensuing Conference. 2. Their difficulty was this: ‘You advise all the members of our Societies constantly to attend the service of the Church. We have done so for a considerable time. But very frequently Mr. R., our minister, preaches not only what we believe to be false, but dangerously false, doctrine. He asserts and endeavors to prove that we cannot be saved from our sins in this life, and that we must not hope to be perfected in love on this side eternity. Our nature is very willing to receive this; therefore it is very liable to hurt us. Hence we have a doubt whether it is our duty to hear this preaching, which experience shows to weaken our souls.’

MY DEAR SISTER, -- It pleases God to give me much better health in general than I had at five-and-twenty. For many years also I was frequently weary; but I know not now what weariness means. I have just strength enough for what I am called to do; and at the end of my work I feel just the Same as at the beginning. Till very lately I had hopes of paying you a short visit after the Conference. But I find it cannot be. I must see them in the West of Cornwall, where there is a great revival of the work of God. And before I can return thence there will hardly so much time remain as will be due to the Bristol Circuit. [He finished the Conference in London on Aug. 13, and set out by coach the same afternoon for the West of England.] T. Tennant [The preachers at Pembroke were Samuel Randall, Thomas Tennant, and James Hall. Tennant stayed another year.] writes to me and desires he may not continue any longer in Pembrokeshire. However, I will tell him the desire of his friends in Wales, and then leave him to his choice. Mr. Randall has been there two years already. So it is time for him to remove. You are exactly in your place. If you desire it, you shall have more employment [See letters of Oct. 19, 1779, and June 8, 1786.]; but you would be a loser if you had less. Peace be with all your spirits! -- I am, my dear Kitty, Your ever affectionate brother. To Miss Warren, In Haverfordwest. To Joseph Benson NEAR LONDON, August 3, 1782. DEAR JOSEPH, -- Do not you know that all the preachers cannot leave a circuit at once Therefore, if you left it, Brother Hopper could not. Perhaps, likewise, I can depend upon your judgment more than that of another man.

Two or three years ago, when the kingdom was in imminent danger, I made an offer to the Government of raising some men. The Secretary of War (by the King's order) wrote me word that ‘it was not necessary; but if it ever should be necessary, His Majesty would let me know.’ I never renewed the offer, and never intended it. But Captain Webb, without my knowing anything of the matter, went to Colonel Barr, the new Secretary of War, and renewed that offer. [Colonel Barr became Paymaster of the Forces in July. See letter of July 24.] The Colonel (I verily believe, to avoid his importunity) asked him how many men we could raise. But the Colonel is out of place. So the thing is at an end. I read over both the sermons; but I did not see anything materially wrong in either. -- I am, with love to Sister Benson, Your affectionate brother. We will consider what you propose. To Ann Bolton NEAR LONDON, August 3, 1782. MY DEAR NANCY, -- I thought you had known the truth of the old saying, ‘A Friend is made for adversity.’ Very probably you have suffered more by keeping your sufferings to yourself. But still we know the Lord is King and ruleth all things both in heaven and earth. I am glad your brother's distresses are a little relieved. I shall not be sorry when he is entirely quit of Finstock. I never expected great things from it; but I thought he knew better than me. [See letters of Sept. 9, 1781, and Jan. 5, 1783.] I believe, if you feed the poor man three or four weeks with absolutely nothing but bread and milk, it will totally restore his senses. I have known it tried here, and the patient recovered entirely. Miss Ritchie is just alive; she is still hovering between life and death. I have divided Nottingham Circuit into two, and stationed Brother Warwick [Thomas Warwick (1778-1809), who appears in the Minutes for Leicestershire, was a laborious and successful preacher. See letter of March 6, 1788.] in the Derby part of it. Do not, my dear Nancy, again delay so long writing to Yours most affectionately. To Miss Bolton, In Witney, Oxfordshire. To Hannah Ball LONDON, August 4, 1782.

MY DEAR SISTER, -- I almost wondered that I did not receive a line from you for so long a season. I could not easily believe that your love was grown cold; and I am glad to hear it is not. But it is a discouragement to see one month pass after another without any perceptible fruit of our labor, without any discernible outpouring of the Spirit, either in His convincing or converting influences. But beware you do not cast away hope! ‘He will come, and will not tarry.’ You know not how soon He may send on all around you A kindly gracious shower Of heart-reviving love! Look for it, my dear Hannah! Pray for it! Expect it soon! And you will not be disappointed. Peace be with all your spirits! -- I am, my sister and friend, Your affectionate brother. To John Bredin LONDON. August 4, 1782. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- In your present state you must not attempt to travel. It is as much as your life is worth. [See letters of July 9 and Nov. 30 to him.] You may be a supernumerary in whatever place you judge most advisable; and the little salary, the 12, we will allow from hence. I do not understand what is the accusation against Hugh Moore. [Moore moved from Londonderry to Aberdeen, See letter of April 10.] Simply administering an oath is a folly; but I know not that it is contrary to any law. If he is afraid of staying at Coleraine (although I know not why), let him change with a Sligo or Castlebar preacher. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Francis Wolfe [4] LONDON. August 6, 1782. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Necessity has no law. Till your strength is restored do all the good you can as a local preacher. According to my last regulations pray inform the preachers and Captain Williams my plan is this, -- Taunton, Thursday, Aug. 15; Exeter, Friday, Aug. 16; Plymouth, Monday, Aug. 19; St. Austell, Wednesday, Aug. 21; Helstone, Thursday, Aug. 22; Penzance, Friday and Saturday, Aug. 23 and 24; St. Just, Sunday, Aug. 25: and in the West, -- St. Ives, Thursday, Aug. 29; Redruth, Saturday, Aug. 31; St. Anne's, Redruth, Gwennap, Sept. 1. -- I am Your affectionate brother. To Jasper Winscom LONDON, August 10, 1782.

Are you, then, in more debt than you can pay Or is your trade gone, so that it will no more than keep your house Do you clear nothing in the year If so, you may still lay up the annual income of your estate. (What you could sell it for is nothing to the purpose; you do not need to sell it.) Are you not, then, ‘laying up treasures upon earth’ And how is this consistent with Scripture Surely no more than living in adultery or habitual drunkenness. Those words of St. Paul have for some time past been much impressed on my mind, ‘If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, with such an one, no not to eat.’ Now, I cannot dear you of covetousness, deep, uncommon covetousness, such as I very rarely meet with. I do not know that in forty years I have asked a guinea of any other man that has denied me! So I have done! I give you up to God. I do not know that you will any more be troubled with Your former Friend. [Wesley was mistaken in his judgment, as the following reply from Robarts on September 16 shows. He was evidently using all possible economy that he might escape failure in business.]

I hope you do not drop the select society. If Mr. Rhodda [Then in the circuit.] strongly and explicitly preaches perfection, he will see more and more fruit of his labor. -- I am, with love to my dear Ann, Your affectionate brother. To John Valton [20] St. NEOTS, December 3, 1782. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- You are thoroughly satisfied that there is nothing wherein conscience is not concerned which I would not do for your sake. But here conscience is very deeply concerned. What I do I do unto the Lord. The question is in the last resort, Methodism or no Methodism I A blow is struck at the very roots of our whole discipline, as appears by the short state of the ‘case’ which I have sent to Joseph Benson. And if this work is not obviated while I live, probably it never will be. None can stem the tide when I am gone; therefore I must now do what I can, God being my helper. And I know the fierceness of man shall turn to His praise. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Zachariah Yewdall LONDON, December 7, 1782. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I do not see that you can fix upon a more proper person than either George Howe or Laren Wright. [Howe was one of the most devoted Methodists in Cork. He led the party of thirty horsemen who met Wesley as he was coming to the city in May 1785. See Journal, vii. 74-5n.] You should endorse it on the back of the deed, only taking care to have fresh stamps. Those who will not meet in class cannot stay with us. Read the Thoughts upon a Single Life, and weigh them well. You will then feel the wisdom of St. Paul’s advice (especially to a preacher, and to a Methodist preacher above all), ‘If thou mayest be free, use it rather.’ [See letter of May 26, 1781, to him.] I hope Andrew Blair is now with you. Brother Swindells is dead, and John Trembath is alive again. [For Robert Swindells, see letter of Feb. 28, 1748; and for Trembath, Sept. 21, 1755.] -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Thomas Davenport LONDON, December 23 [1782].

That afternoon and the next day I gathered strength apace. The place was agreeable, and much more the company. Lady Gibbes put me in mind of one of Queen Elizabeth's dames of honour. Her daughters are exceeding amiable, but sink under Miss Freeman's superior sense, and begin to feel that they are not Christians. She has been of great service to them, and hies at them day and night to show them what is real religion. On Wednesday night they were much struck; the younger sister could not contain herself, but burst out into a passion of tears. M. F. herself seems to be utterly disconcerted, seeking rest, but finding none. If Sally is not hurt by her, she (Sally [Charles Wesley’s daughter.]) will help her much. She now feels her want of help. I wish King George (like Louis XIV) would be his own Prime Minister. The nation would soon feel the difference. All these things will work together for good. Let us work while the day is! I take no thought for the morrow. Peace be with you all. Adieu. Revd. Mr. C. Wesley, Marybone, London. Hester Ann Roe writes in her Journal for 1783: ‘Sunday, April 6. -- I had a letter from dear Mr. Wesley, who tells me he is hastening to Holyhead in his way to Dublin, and he will be at Newcastle on Tuesday.’ She says she met him at Lane End on Tuesday, and heard him preach; then he took her in his chaise to Newcastle-under-Lyme, where he preached from ‘One thing is needful.’ She heard him again next morning at five. See Journal of Mrs. Hester Ann Rogers, pp. 210-11. To Henry Brooke [12] WILLIAM STREET, [DUBLIN], April 21, 1783.

... I am in the enjoyment of such health as I have never had before. Mr. Henry said, 'I bless God that I am never tired of my work, yet I am often tired in my work.' By the blessing of God I can say more: I am never tired in my work. From the beginning of the day or the week or the year to the end I do not know what weariness means. I am never weary of writing or preaching or traveling; but am just as fresh at the end as at the beginning. Thus it is with me to-day, and I take no thought for to-morrow. I am in hopes Dr. Coke will come to you. [See letter of July 3, 1784.] To Mr. Barry, Shelburne, Nova Scotia. To Mrs. Freeman [4] LONDON, February 1, 1785. MY DEAR SISTER, - So strange things come to pass I I did not expect to hear of Mr. Smyth's 'living in lodgings.' I do not remember the person who is so kind as to offer me a lodging; and I know no reason why I should not accept of it if I live to see Dublin again.' It gives me pleasure to hear that the work of God flourishes among you. I did not doubt but it would when He sent that earnest couple [Mr. and Mrs. James Rogers.] to Dublin. He will send a blessing with them wherever they go. And that you and yours may partake of it more and more is the wish of, my dear sister, Yours affectionately. To Samuel Bardsley [5] LONDON, February 12, 1785. DEAR BROTHER, - Mr. Wesley desires me to inform you that he is glad to find that you go on so well in your circuit, and hopes that the work of the Lord will prosper more and more. Mr. Wesley cannot say anything positive respecting his coming into your circuit, but does intend to contrive to pay you a visit, though his usual way, you know, is but once in two years. I suppose you will know in time before he comes. Peace be with your spirit! - I am Yours affectionately, To Adam Clarke [6] LONDON, February 12, 1785.

DEAR BROTHER, - Certainly you have heard from me; for I sent you one, and intended to send you two Journals; only George Whitfield [Afterwards his Book Steward.] made a blunder, and directed the second to Henry Moore. Several months since, I wrote to Dr. Coke concerning the extract he had taken from your Journal. I will write to him again. But he must bring it, not send it by post. My letters to-day cost me eighteen shillings. I promise you not to publish your picture in the Magazine before midsummer 1785. I think that is long enough to look forward. Mr. Barnard is dead. [Son of the Bishop of Killaloe.] I know nothing of Miss Freeman. Ireland is full as quiet as England; and our Societies were never so much alive as they are now. I cannot believe that history. If Sally is ill, why does she not go into the country Peace be with all your spirits! Adieu! To Freeborn Garrettson [22] DUBLIN, June 26, 1785. MY DEAR BROTHER, - Dr. Coke gives some account of you in one of his Journals; so that, although I have not seen you, I am not a stranger to your character. By all means send me, when you have opportunity, a more particular account of your experiences and travels. It is, though, not improbable that God may find out a way for you to visit England; and it might be a means of your receiving more strength as well as more light. It is a very desirable thing that the children of God should communicate their experience to each other; and it is generally most profitable when they can do it face to face. Till Providence opens a way for you to see Europe do all you can for a good Master in America.

1785 To Ann Bolton DUBLIN, July 8, 1785. MY DEAR NANCY, - It is undoubtedly expedient for you to have a friend in whom you can fully confide that may be always near you or at a small distance, and ready to be consulted on all occasions. The time was when you took ma to be your friend; and (to speak freely) I have loved you with no common affection. I 'have loved you' - nay, I do still; my heart warms to you while I am writing. But I am generally at too great a distance, so that you cannot converse with me when you would. I am glad, therefore, that a good Providence has given you one whom you can more easily see and correspond with. [Probably Hannah Ball.] You may certainly trust her in every instance; and she has both understanding, piety and experience. She may therefore perform those offices of friendship which I should rejoice to perform were I near you. But wherever you can, give me the pleasure of seeing you. You know, while I have an house, you will always be welcome to it. I desire Brother Day [Simon Day, then in the Oxfordshire Circuit. The Conference opened that day in London.] to meet me in London, on the 16th instant. I do not know how you can have more preaching by the traveling preachers unless you had more preachers; which, indeed, might easily be if your moneyed men did not love their money more than they do their souls. I hope neither marriage nor business makes Neddy [Edward Bolton, her brother, whose daughter, Mrs. Marriott, gave the letter to Miss J. Ayliff at Witney in 1861.] less zealous for God or less active in his work. Peace be with all your spirits! - I am, my dear Nancy, Ever yours. To Thomas Wride [1] DUBLIN, July 8, 1785. DEAR TOMMY, - I wonder at nothing in poor Nicholas, but I wonder much at James .Kershaw. Unless our preachers had already left their preaching-house, surely he would not have let it to any others! I love John Fenwick well; but I know he was a faulty man that once or twice. However, if there be no fresh matter of complaint, what is past shall go for nothing.

How 'confound their intellects' How 'weaken your hands' I know nothing which I do to prevent the possible separation but pray. God forbid I should sin against Him by ceasing to pray for the Church of England and for you while any breath remains in me. - I am Your affectionate Brother. To Jasper Winscom [6] BRISTOL, September 13, 1785. DEAR JASPER, - I think I can serve you as far as 100 will go. If you can pay me in a year, you may; if not, I shall not quarrel with you about it. I want no interest. You may draw upon John Atlay for it, to whom I shall write this morning. - I am, dear Jasper, Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Fletcher [7] BRISTOL, September 16, 1785. My DEAR SISTER, - I wanted much to hear from you, being desirous to know whether you have thought where you should settle if God should please to prolong your life. I should love to be as near you as I could; and on that account should be glad if you chose Bristol or London. I expect to be in town on Monday fortnight, October the 1st. Mr. Ireland has printed a thousand or two of your Letters, [About her husband's last illness.] with some little variations, I think for the worse! Peace be with your spirit! - I am, my dear sister, Ever yours. I am glad the people desire to join us. I shall reprint your letter when I come to London. To Mrs. Fletcher, at Madeley, Near Shifnal, Salop. To Thomas Wride KINGSWOOD, September 16, 1785. DEAR TOMMY, - Your next will, I suppose, find me in London, where I hope to be in about a fortnight. We know not what stops our northern schoolmaster, and expect to see him every day. As soon as he comes, Mr. Jones [Thomas Jones was his colleague, just admitted on trial. He does not seem to have been able to leave Kingswood, and James M. Byron was sent. See letter of Nov. 8 to Wride.] will make the best of his way to Norwich. I leave it wholly to you whether and how far you should accept of Dr. Hunt's offer. [See letter of Feb. 25.] With regard to Mr. Proud and your capital singer, you acted exactly right; but I expect you will hear of it at both ears.

It gives me much satisfaction, my dear friend, to observe you are happier than when you wrote last. I do not doubt but you have at some times a rich foretaste of the state which your soul pants after. And even These wandering gleams of light And gentle ardors from above Have made you sit, like seraph bright, Some moments on a throne of love. But you know you are not to rest here; this is but a drop out of the ocean. Only this has been known again and again, that one of those happy moments has been the prelude of pure love. It has opened into the full liberty of the children of God. Who knows but this may be your happy experience - but the next time your soul is so caught up He that loves you may touch your nature clean, and so take you into the holiest, that You may never leave the skies, Never stoop to earth again I am now intent upon my own work, finishing the Life of Mr. Fletcher. This requires all the time I have to spare; so that, as far as it is possible, I must for two or three months shut myself up. Two weeks I give to Bristol; after that time I return to London. I cannot, therefore, have the happiness of seeing Trowbridge this autumn. But might I not see you or your sisters at Bristol If I am invisible to others, I would not be so to you. You may always command everything that is in the power of, my very dear friend, Yours in life and in death. To Walter Churchey BRISTOL, September 20, 1786.

MY DEAR BROTHER, - At length Jenny has broke through, and given me the satisfaction of exchanging a few words with her. You send us strange news that the lions of Wales are become lambs! I really think a spirit of humanity and benevolence is gone forth upon the earth, perhaps intimating that the time is drawing near when men shall not know war any more. Mr. Wrigley has been detained here by a sore face ever since the Conference; but is now also on the mending hand, though he is not yet able to go abroad. [Francis Wrigley, Assistant at Redruth.] I am glad to hear that Dr. Powell, of Brecon, continues in the good way. He seems to be of a frank, open temper, and to be skilful in his profession. I am rather gaining than losing ground as to my health. I think Mr. Cowper has done as much as is possible to be done with his lamentable story. I can only wish he had a better subject. [The Task was published in June 1785. See letter of July 22, 1788, to Churchey.] Peace be with you and yours! - I am Your affectionate brother. I set out for London on Monday. To Elizabeth Briggs [8] BRISTOL, September 24, 1786. MY DEAR BETSY, - I thank you for the letters which you sent, and shall be glad to see those which you mention. There is no doubt but Shoreham is the place which God at present points out for your residence, and it is well that you have such an assistant there as honest Sampson Staniforth. Great care should be taken to preserve a perfect good understanding between him and the traveling preachers. I know not who in Shoreham is able to give me a night's lodging now. Tomorrow I expect to set out for London. - I am, my dear Betsy, Yours affectionately. To William Robarts BRISTOL, September 25, 1786. MY DEAR BROTHER, - I doubt not but you could say in the hour of trial, 'The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away: blessed be the name of the Lord!'

I would add a word upon this head myself. I do not think you act wisely. Not one of your genteel friends can be depended on: they are mere summer flies. Whereas, had you condescended to make the Methodists your friends, they would have clave to you, one and all. And they are already no inconsiderable body of people; besides that they are increasing more and more. Suffer me now to speak a word between you and me. Is not the reason of your preaching so languidly and coldly, that you do not feel what you say And why not Because your soul is not alive to God! Do you know that your sins are forgiven I fear not. Can you say, 'I know that my Redeemer liveth' I doubt, if you did know it once, whether you know it now Have you fellowship with the Father and the Son Alas! 'tis well if you know what it means! And are you content to have your portion in this world Do you favor only earthly things Then I do not wonder that you are shy to the Methodists; for they are not to your taste! O think and pray to-day! For I do not promise you that you shall live another year! I now give you a full proof that I am Your truly affectionate. To John Valton [12] LONDON, October 29, 1786.

I see nothing of your Journal yet. I am afraid of another American Revolution. I do not know how to get the enclosed safe to Dr. Coke; probably you know. On second thoughts I think it best not to write to him at present. To Samuel Bradburn [20] December, 1786. DEAR SAMMY, - You know I love you. Ever since I knew you I have neglected no way of showing it that was in my power. And you know how I esteem you for .your zeal and activity, for your love of discipline, and for your gifts which God has given you - particularly quickness of apprehension, and readiness of utterance, especially in prayer. Therefore I am jealous over you, lest you should lose any of the things you have gained, and not receive a full reward; and the more so because I fear you are wanting in other respects. And who will venture to tell you so You will scarce know how to bear it from me unless you lift up your heart to God. If you do this, I may venture to tell you what I fear without any further preface. I fear you think of yourself more highly than you ought to think. Do not you think too highly of your own understanding of your gifts, particularly in preaching, as if you were the very best preacher in the Connection of your own importance, as if the work of God here or there depended wholly or mainly on you and of your popularity, which I have found, to my surprise, far less, even in London, than I expected May not this be much owing to the want of brotherly love With what measure you mete, men will measure to you again. I fear there is something unloving in your spirit - something not only of roughness, but of harshness, yea of sourness! Are you not also extremely open to prejudice, and not easy to be cured of it so that whenever you are prejudiced you commence bitter, implacable, unmerciful If so, that people are prejudiced against you is both the natural and the judicial consequence.

DEAR HENRY, -- I know you are a man of feeling. You can sympathize with the afflicted. Therefore I employ you in a labor of love. Dear John Bull [See letter of July 1, 1789.] is now in the Marshalsea Prison. How far he was formerly to blame is not now the question. But what can be done for him now for one who through a course of many years deserved well of the Methodists We cannot deliver him from his confinement. That is too hard for us. But possibly something might be done to make it a little easier to him. I desire you would go and talk with him. You will find acceptable words. Tell him I desired you to call upon him in consequence of his letter, and try to make him sensible of the hand of God in all this. Now especially he stands in need of such a friend. -- I am, dear Henry, with kind love to Nancy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Pray give him a guinea on my account, and another whenever you see proper. To Mrs. Tighe BRISTOL, October 2, 1787. DEAR MADAM, -- I have no doubt at all of the uprightness of Mr. Tozer and his wife: but I have more acquaintance with Mr. Harper. He is a truly good man, and has a considerable share of knowledge; so that if he was willing to take the charge of this little school. [Was this John Harper who had been a preacher Mrs. Tighe lived at Rosanna, near Wicklow. See letter of Feb. 7, 1789, to her.] I know of no one that is more likely to promote the design of it. -- I am, dear madam, Your very affectionate servant. Next week I expect to be in London. To Hannah Ball BRISTOL, October 4, 1787.

MY DEAR SALLY, -- When my appetite was entirely gone, so that all I could take at dinner was a roasted turnip, it was restored in a few days by riding out daily, after taking ten drops of elixir of vitriol in a glass of water. It is highly probable this would have the same effect in my brother's case. But in the meantime I wish he would see Dr. Whitehead. [John Whitehead. See letter of Oct. 15, 1766.] I am persuaded there is not such another physician in England; although (to confound human wisdom) he does not know how to cure his own wife. He must lie in bed as little as possible in the daytime; otherwise it will hinder his sleeping at night. Now, Sally, tell your brothers from me [See letter of March 5.] that their tenderly respectful behavior to their father (even asking his pardon if in anything they have offended him) will be the best cordial for him under heaven. I know not but they may save his life thereby. To know nothing will be wanting on your part gives great satisfaction to, my dear Sally, Yours very affectionately. To Sarah Mallet [6] BATH, March 11, 1788. MY DEAR SISTER, -- I should have been exceedingly glad to see you; for I have a tender affection for you, and I shall always be well pleased to hear from you and to know how your soul prospers. I do not wonder you should have trials: you may expect them from every quarter. You tread daily on dangers, snares, and death. But they cannot hurt you whilst your heart cleaves to God. Beware of pride! Beware of flatterers! Beware of dejections! But above all beware of inordinate affection! Those who profit by you will be apt to love you more than enough; and will not this naturally lead you into the same temptation Nay, Sally, is not this the case already Is your heart filled wholly with God Is it clear of idols I think you can speak to me freely, though on so delicate a subject you can hardly speak to anyone else. Is He still the sole object of your desire, the treasure and joy of your heart Considering your age and sex and situation, what but Omnipotence can keep you in the midst of the fire

DEAR ADAM, -- Is it not a doubt whether you will be suffered to build a chapel so near the Chapel-of-Ease I should be afraid one congregation would hinder the other if ever they meet at the same hour. Then in England no house of worship must be built within so many yards of any other. I am glad you have gained Mrs. Saumarez and Miss Lempriere; and I hope Mrs. Walker, jun., is not lost. When I heard of Jenny Bisson's marriage, I was much afraid she had lost ground. I am glad to hear that you think she is still alive to God; but I shall be surprised if she be as much alive as ever. [See letter of May 20 (to Mrs. Cock).] So you are a proficient in French. If you come to the Conference, the way will be made plain for you. But if you have not your health in the islands, you must spend part of your time in England. -- I am, dear Adam, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Charles Wesley BLACKBURN, April 21, 1788. You will excuse me, my dear sister, for troubling you with so many letters, for I know not how to help it. I had you and your family so much upon my heart, both for your own sake and for the sake of my brother. But I am much easier now that I find you are joined with honest John Collinson, whom I know to be not only a man of probity, but likewise a man of diligence and understanding. I am therefore persuaded he will spare no pains in doing what you wish to be done. So that I shall [not] be wanted you, as he will fully supply my lack of service. [On his return to London Wesley had breakfast with Charles Wesley's family. See letter of July 6, 1788; and for Collinson, that of May 20, 1769.] I only both Charles and Sammy may follow your example and advice [See letter of April 12 to her.] in keeping little company, and those of the best sort, men sound understanding and solid piety; for such only are for the acquaintance of men of sense. I commit you all to Him that loves you, and am, my dear Sister, Ever yours. To his Niece Sarah Wesley [14] BLACKBURN, April 21, 1788.

MY DEAR SISTER, -- From my long delay to answer, you might conclude I had forgotten you; but that is impossible. I shall not easily forget the agreeable conversations I had with you at Mont Plaisir and the plain and artless account which from time to time you have given me of your experience. I shall be glad to know how you have found your soul since you altered your condition. You must needs have abundantly more care now than you had in a single life. And are you able still, among all these cares, to attend upon the Lord without distraction Does nothing make you unattentive to His presence Is there no intermission of your communion with the Father and the Son When you have leisure, you will send an answer to, [See letters of April 17 and June 26 to Adam Clarke.] my dear sister, Yours very affectionately. You may direct to London. To William Whitestone EDINBURGH, May 20, 1788. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- From one of Dr. Coke's letters I concluded that you was quite reconciled to the step which he had taken, and I myself can go so far but no further. I will not leave the Church. But on condition that our friends will attend St. Patrick's one Sunday in the month, on the other three I will allow that there should be service at the New Room. [Whitestone was one of the Dublin Methodists. See letters of May 16 and 28 (to Mrs. Rogers).] -- I am, dear Billy, Your affectionate brother. To Mrs. Rogers May 28, 1788.

MY DEAR BROTER, -- I think you know that I love you and that I should rejoice to do anything for you that is in my power. And one allowed proof of love is plain dealing. Therefore I will speak to you without any reserve. There are many good lines, and some very good, both in the ode and in the translation of The Art of Painting. And I really think you improve in versifying: you write a good deal better than you did some years ago. You express your sense with more perspicuity than you used to do, and appear to have greater variety of words as well as more strength. But there is nothing (to use the modern cant word) sentimental in either the ode or the translation. There is nothing of tender or pathetic, nothing that touches the passions. Therefore no bookseller would venture to buy them, as knowing they will not sell. And they lie utterly out of the way of the Methodists, who do not care to buy or even to read (at least the generality of them) any but religious books. I do not believe all my influence would induce them to buy as many copies as would suffice to pay for the printing. I have not yet seen my brother's translation of the Psalms. Neither, indeed, could I as yet have time to read it, were it put into my hands. If any had asked my advice, they would not have thrust out the account of George Lukins [Lukins had been exorcised in the Vestry of Temple Church, Bristol. See Journal, vii. 362.] into the world so prematurely. It should have been fully authenticated first. I am, with love to Sister Churchey, Your affectionate brother. I expect to be at Brecon on Sunday se'nnight. To Arthur Keene LONDON, August 8, 1788.

DEAR NANCY, -- Last night I received yours at Monmouth. The same complaint which you make of not receiving an answer to your letter another person had just been making. But I had answered you both. I cannot therefore but conclude that both my letters had some way or other miscarried. Since I saw you a young slender girl just beginning to seek salvation I do not remember that you ever offended in anything. But you was always exceeding dear to me. So you are still. And I would show it effectually if my power were equal to my will. I love you the more because you are a daughter of affliction. I suppose you are still in God's school. But you still remember He loveth whom He chasteneth. If you love me still, write freely to, my dear Nancy, Yours very affectionately. To Miss Bolton, In Witney, Oxfordshire. To John Atlay [10] PEMBROKE, August 23, 1788. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- If you are persuaded that such a promise (which is the whole and sole cause of the breach at Dewsbury) is binding, &c., you must follow your persuasion. You will have blame enough from other persons; my hand shall not be upon you. If I can do you good, I will; but I shall certainly do you no harm. George Whitfield is the person I choose to succeed you. I wish you would teach him as much as you can without delay. -- I am, with kind love to Sister Atlay, Your affectionate brother. To Elizabeth Baker [11] CARMARTHEN, August 26, 1788. MY DEAR BETSY, -- Since I had the pleasure of seeing you I have been thinking much on what you said concerning your loving others too much. In one sense this cannot be; you cannot have too much benevolence for the whole human race: but in another sense you may; you may grieve too much for the distresses of others, even so much as to make you incapable of giving them the relief which otherwise you should give them. So I know one that, when he sees any one in strong pain, directly faints away. [See letter of Aug. 8 to Lady Maxwell.] It is something like this which you mean by feeling too much for others You can give me two or three instances of it, and then I shall be better able to judge.

MY DEAR SISTER, -- I answered your letter long ago, and desired Mr. Whitfield to send my letter with the Magazines which he was sending to Norwich, desiring withal that the next preacher who went to Long Stratton would give it you. But for the time to come whenever I write I will send the letter by post, and I can easily make up the expense. [He had given it to his Book Steward to be forwarded, so that Miss Mallet might not be put to expense, as she was poor. See letters of Aug. 2, 1788, and Feb. 21, 1789, to her.] I am well pleased to find that you have regard for me; so have I for you. And it is therefore a pleasure to me to serve you in anything that is within my power. Indeed, I could not so well send the Notes on the Old Testament, as the edition is nearly sold off, and we have very few of them left, which are reserved to make up full sets. But any other books are at your service. I want to forward you in all useful knowledge, which indeed lies in a very narrow compass. You do not expect to go through life without crosses; and some will fall upon you on my account; for my taking notice of you may bring envy upon you. But in your patience possess your soul. Please God, and it is enough. Go steadily and quietly on in the way wherein Providence leads you, and in every temptation He by His Spirit will clear a way for you to escape. If any particular difficulty or trim comes upon you, do not fail to let me know. None can be more ready to assist you than, my dear Sally, Yours affectionately. To Mrs. Cock LONDON, December 27, 1788. MY DEAR SISTER, -- I was glad to receive a few lines from you. From the time I saw you first, and indeed before I saw you, I could not but feel a strong affection for you. And I pray that nothing may abate our affection for each other till we meet in a better world.

When I heard of your marriage it gave me pain. I was afraid least you should have suffered loss. [See letter of Oct. 12.] Do you feel as much union with God as ever As close fellowship with the Father and the Son And is it as constant as ever Are you as happy as you was once And do you ever think of, my dear Jenny, Your affectionate brother

1789 To Benjamin Rhodes NEAR LONDON, January 7, 1789. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- You have done exactly right. Observe the rules of the Conference, both in changing the stewards or in any other point, whoever is pleased or displeased. [See letters of Nov. 6, 1788, and April 26, 1789.] And do not fail mildly to expostulate the case, either with George [George Shadford at St, Ives.] or any other Assistant who does not observe them. The trustees and leaders will soon trample them under-foot if you will let them. But I think you can be mild, and yet firm. -- I am, with love to Sister Rhodes, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Ann Bolton LONDON, January 9, 1789. MY DEAR SISTER, -- 'Sir, you are troubled,' said Mr. Law to me, 'because you do not understand how God is dealing with you. Perhaps if you. did, it would not so well answer His design. He is teaching you to trust Him further than you can see Him.' He is now teaching you the same lesson. Hitherto you cannot understand His ways. But they are all mercy and truth. And though you do not know now what He does you shall know hereafter. I am acquainted with several persons whom I believed to be saved from sin. But there is great variety in the manner wherein God is pleased to lead them. Some of them are called to act much for God, some to rejoice much, some to suffer much. All of these shall receive their crown. But when the Son of Man shall come in His glory, the brightest crown will be given to the sufferers. Look up, thou blessed one l the time is at hand! -- I am Ever yours. To Duncan McAllum LONDON, January 20, 1789.

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Thirty years ago we had thirty or forty preachers, the greater part of whom were truly devoted to God; but one or two of them departed from us, loving the present world. At present we have in Great Britain and Ireland about two hundred traveling preachers, and probably there are three or four of these whose hearts are not right with God; but we do not know it; we have no proof of this, or we should put them away. I do not know that Henry Brians has any gifts for preaching or any desire of it. Samuel Woods I do not remember at all. But in a few days I shall probably set out for Ireland. What becomes of James Wray [See letter of June 30, 1788, to John Mann.] Is he dead or alive I know not that I have had a letter from him for above this twelve months. What concerns me is that I cannot find any union between you northern preachers. John Hoskins, John McGeary, and John Stretton I should imagine would have all acted in concert; on the contrary, each seems to be afraid of the other. How is this What is the true ground of this shyness What objections have you to John Hoskins or John McGeary What objections have they to you 'Tis a pity but you had all spoken freely to Your affectionate brother. To George Holder LONDON, February 28, 1789. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- You say, 'The last quarter, when we compared our plans with the Minutes of Conference, we wanted a considerable number of people whom Mr. Crook had given in to you.' I cannot understand this. Cannot Mr. Crook cast up a plain account And surely neither he, nor you, nor any preacher would willfully give in a false account. [Holder had followed John Crook as Assistant in the Isle of Man. See letter of June 24.]

My DEAR BROTHER, -- I am afraid Henry Floyd's estate is unsaleable, unless he can find the writing, for I cannot. I shall not be in London before October at soonest; but if Henry Moore will revise the copy, [Moore was at City Road, near to the printer of Churchey's Poems. See letters of March 3 and May 25 to him.] he will do almost as well as me. I hope the beginning of the work is in the press, else the book will not be printed off before Michaelmas. I wonder you do not understand mankind better, especially those wretches the great vulgar. If two in three of your subscribers stand to their word, it will be strange indeed. It was a deadly step not to secure half the money at the time of subscription. I receive the whole. I have now about sixty guineas, and hope to receive as many more. But where have you lived that you have found so many generous men It is strange that you should know more of them than I do. I am utterly against printing above five hundred copies. [Wesley's prudence and business sagacity contrast favorably with the lawyer's. See letters of Jan. 27 and May 25 to him.] If you and I between us can procure four hundred subscriptions, it is all we can expect. -- I am, in haste, Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Churchey, Near the Hoy, Brecon. To Samual Bradburn BRISTOL, May 6, 1789.

Dr. Coke made two or three little alterations in the Prayer-Book without my knowledge. [The Sunday Service of the Methodists. A new edition was printed in 1788. See Green's Bibliography, Appendix, pp. vii-ix, and Nos. 376, 390; letter also of Sept. 10, 1784.] I took particular care throughout to alter nothing merely for altering' sake. In religion I am for as few innovations as possible. I love the old wine best. And if it were only on this account, I prefer 'which' before 'who art in heaven.' Mr. Howard is really an extraordinary man. [Wesley met John Howard on July 28, 1787, in Dublin: 'I think one of the greatest men in Europe.' He called on Wesley in March 1789, but found him away on one of his journeys. See Journal, vii. 295, 472n.] God has raised him up to be a blessing to many nations. I do not doubt but there has been something more than natural in his preservation hitherto, and should not wonder if the providence of God should hereafter be still more conspicuous in his favor. About three weeks hence I expect to embark for England. Peace be with you and yours! -- I am Your affectionate brother. To the Publisher of the 'Dublin Chronicle' June 20, 1789. Since Mr. Edward Smyth, [See letters of June 2 and June 25 (to Adam Clarke).] as he says, 'has me in his power,' I hope as he is stout he will be merciful; and that he will remember the words of the honest Quaker to him that answered the Ernest Appeal, 'Canst thou not be content with laying John Wesley on his back, but thou wilt tread his guts out too' [See letter of Nov. 4, 1758, 5 (Mr. Potter).] To Zachariah Yewdull [27] DUBLIN, June 20, 1789. DEAR ZACHARY, -- You have chose an admirably good advocate in honest Alexander Mather. I shall blame you if you cannot plead your own cause when you have him at your elbows, especially when you know you have another friend standing behind the curtain. For with regard to circuits to be assigned, or any other assistance you may be assured of anything that is in the power of Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Yewdall, In South Wynd, In Edinburgh, P. Portpatrick. To George Holder [28] DUBLIN, June 24, 1789.

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- After the many proofs which you have already had both of the power and goodness of God, particularly in giving you your heart's desire in the change wrought in several of your children, you can have no reason to doubt but that He will give you your mother also if you continue earnest in prayer. [See letter of Aug. 3, 1772.] The great hindrance to the inward work of God is Antinomianism, wherever it breaks in. I am glad you are aware of it. Show your faith by your works. Fight the good fight of faith and lay hold on eternal life. Peace be with you and yours. -- I am Yours affectionately. To Freeborn Garrettson CHESTER, July 15, 1789. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- You are entirely in the right. There can be no manner of doubt that it was the enemy of souls that hindered your sending me your experience. Many parts both of your inward and outward experience ought by no means to be suppressed. But if you are minded to send anything to me, you have no time to lose. [See letters of Jan. 24, 1789, and Feb. 3, 1790, to him.] Whatever you do for me you must do quickly, lest death have quicker wings than love. A great man observes that there is a threefold leading of the Spirit: some He leads by giving them on every occasion apposite texts of Scripture; some by suggesting reasons for every step they take -- the way by which He chiefly leads me; and some by impressions. But He judges the last to be the least desirable way, as it is often impossible to distinguish dark impressions from divine or even diabolical. I hope you will not long delay to write more particularly to Your affectionate friend and brother. To Henry Moore [34] MANCHESTZR, July 17, 1789. DEAR HENRY, -- I came hither yesterday, and purpose to spend most of the next week at Otley. I had forgot, when I wrote last, that our dear friend Mr. Allay was in London. If he is there still, you cannot be so unkind as to leave him behind you; so that you can only send T. Rankin and George Whitfield to bear us company at Leeds. But if he is gone to Yorkshire you may go thither to. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

2. On these suppositions the use of it has not only continued, but much increased during the present century. 'I have lived in this town' (Whitechurch in Shropshire), said a gentleman to me sometime since, 'above forty years, and have all that time brewed much malt drink. I use just the same quantity of hops that I did forty years ago; but most of my neighbors use four times as much now as they did then.' 3. Nearly the same has been done in other counties, Yorkshire and Lincolnshire in particular. Forty years ago, I well remember, all the ale I tasted there had a soft, sweetish taste, such as the decoction of barley will always have if not adulterated by bitter herbs. So it had two or three thousand years ago, according to the account in Ovid, who, speaking of the manner wherein Baucis entertained Jupiter, says, Bibendure Dulce dedit, tosta quod coxerat ante polenta [Metamorphoses, v. 450; of the old woman and Ceres: 'She gave her something sweet to drink which she had prepared from parched malt.']; whereas all the ale in Yorkshire as well as in other counties is now quite harsh and bitter. 4. But may it not be asked 'whether this is not a change for the better, seeing hops are so exceeding wholesome a plant' Are they so Why, then, do physicians almost with one voice forbid their patients the use of malt drink, particularly all that are infected with the scurvy or any distemper related to it Do not they know there is not a more powerful anti-scorbutic in the world than wort -- that is, unhopped decoction of malt What a demonstration is this that it is the addition of hops which turns this excellent medicine into poison! And who does not know that wort, unhopped malt drink, is an excellent medicine both for the gout and stone But will any physician in his senses recommend the common malt drink to one that is ill of or subject to those diseases Why not Because there is no drink that more directly tends to breed and increase both one and the other.

MY DEAR BETSY, -- Frequently I have been thinking of you and I thought it a long time since I heard from you. [See letters of Sept. 16, 1788, and Oct. 29, 1789.] This is always very agreeable to me, as I found much union with you ever since I saw you. I then took knowledge that you had been with Jesus and had drunk into His spirit. Ne'er let your faith forsake its hold, Nor hope decline, nor love grow cold, both in the case of Robert Humphrey and that of the poor woman you mention. You will do well to [note] everything of this kind that came [within] your notice. The merciful Lord has so done His marvelous works that they ought to be had in remembrance. These instances should certainly quicken your zeal and increase your expectation of seeing good days at Monmouth. When Dr. [Papar] came to see his friend Dr. Curtis, he found mortification on his instep, where was a black spot as large as a crown piece. The mortification was likewise begun under his knee, where was a circle .... and adjoining to it a circle as [red] as scarlet. He ordered me to rub this with a warm hand.. The parts were steeped half an hour with boiled camo[mile].. After one with a warm hand rubbed a mixture.. This was [done] twice a day. In two or three days Dr. Curtis was [well]. [Some part of the letter is missing, so that the sense is not clear.] Pray send me your Receipt for the Hyaran... Behavior to me from, my dear Betsy, Yours very affectionately. I am going to London. To Charles Atmore LONDON, October 12, 1789.

To Edward Jackson LONDON, January 2, 1790. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- It is no wonder many of the Societies should be in poor condition, considering what poor care has lately been taken of them. They will soon find the difference. The books that are damaged you may give away as you judge proper. None ought to have made a collection for any place before the house at Dewsbury was built. However, do what you can, and you do enough. -- I am, with love to Sister Jackson, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Thomas Tattershall NEAR LONDON, January 6, 1790. DEAR TOMMY, -- Because you desire some word I write, although I have no tidings ready. I know of no preacher that is now ready to go out; and you know we can neither buy nor hire preachers. Yet I am not sorry that your small friend [William Green, his colleague. See letter of Oct. 25, 1789, to him.] has taken himself away; for he was really a dangerous man. His bitter enmity against the Church made him utterly unfit to be a Methodist preacher; and his elaborate Discourse against Going to Church was enough to confound any one that was not used to controversy. Yet I did not dare to put him away; but I am not at all sorry that he is gone away. I shall not be forward to take him again; but in any other way I would be glad to help him. I would not scruple giving him a few pounds if it would do him any good. -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. Tattershall, At the Preaching-house, Norwich. To Thomas McGeary [1] LONDON, January 9, 1790. DEAR TOMMY, There is no danger of my thinking your writing troublesome. If Mr. [Funnal] thinks he did wrong in going away, and that it is a favor to receive him again, you may receive him; but he seems to me to be out of his senses. Mr. Carr has not wrote to me at all. I hope he (at least) knows when he is well. Such another place for him can hardly be found.

DEAR ADAM, -- On Monday, March 1st, I hope to set out hence; and to preach that evening and on Tuesday at half hour past six o'clock in Bath. On Thursday, if he desires it, I will dine at Mr. Durbin's; and on Monday following begin as usual to meet the classes. I am not at all sorry that James Gore is removed from this evil world. You and I shall follow him in due time, as soon as our work is done. Many of our friends have been lately gathered into the garner as ripe shocks of wheat. Peace be with both your spirits! -- I am, dear Adam, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Cock LONDON, February 13, 1790. MY DEAR SISTER, The tender affection which I bear you makes me love to see your name at the bottom of a letter; but especially when it brings me the good news that your spirit is still rejoicing in God your Savior. My sight is so far decayed that I cannot well read a small print by candlelight; but I can write almost as well as ever I could: and it does me no harm but rather good to preach once or twice a day. I love to hear the particulars of your experience, and I had a letter a few days ago from one of our sisters in Scotland whose experience agrees much with yours; only she goes further. She speaks of being 'taken up into heaven, surrounded with the blessed Trinity, and let into God the Father.' I commend you to His care; and am Yours most affectionately. To Joseph Benson NEAR LONDON, February 16, 1790. DEAR JOSEPH, -- On Monday se'nnight the 1st I hope to be at Bath; on the Thursday following at Bristol; on Monday the I5th I expect to be at Stroud, and on the Friday following at Birmingham. In a few days you will see the remaining part of my treatise [Was this The Rules of the Strangers' Friend Society in Bristol, dated Bristol, March 12, 1790 See Journal, viii. 49; Miles's Chronological History (4th edition), p. 180; Tyerman's Wesley, iii. 253; and letter of Dec. 31, 1785, to John Gardner.] in one of the public papers.

MY DEAR SALLY,--I always mildly reprove the profane person or (what is worse) the profane gentlemen; and many of them will receive it civilly if not thankfully. They all know (captains as well as common men) that swearing is not necessary; and even now we have captains of our men-of-war who do not swear at all. The captain of the ship ['The Samuel, Captain Percy' (Journal, i. 413).] wherein I came from America did not swear at all; and never was man better obeyed. You have certainly need for thankfulness as well as patience, and you should be sure to take as much exercise every day as you can bear. I wish you would desire George Whitfield to send you the chamber-horse [For indoor exercise. See letters of July 17, 1785, and March 13, 1788.] out of my dining-room, which you should use half an hour at least daily. If I live to see London, I think I must take you to Twicken-ham. Surely Mr. Galloway owes to the world a true account of the American revolution. All the question is whether it should be published during his life. What says my brother - When loss of friends ordained to know, Next pain and guilt the sorest ill below. [S. Wesley, Jun., on Dr. Gastrell.] But this you did not take into the question. Neither that-- Let each his friendly aid afford, And feel his brother's care. Perpetual cheerfulness is the temper of a Christian, which is far enough from Stoicism. Real Christians know it is their duty to maintain this, which .is in one sense to rejoice evermore. I think Sammy and you should converse frequently and freely together. He might help you, and you might help him. I take him to have a mind capable of friendship, and hope if I live to be more acquainted with him. The gentleman you mention just called upon me, but did not stay, as I had company with me. To-morrow I hope to be at Bristol. -- I am, my dear Sally, Most affectionately yours. To James Creighton [7] COWBRIDGE, August 19, 1790.

Yours, &c. To Adam Clarke [14] LONDON, February 9, 1791. DEAR ADAM, --You have great reason to bless God for giving you strength according to your day. [See letter of Jan. 18.] He has indeed supported you in a wonderful manner under these complicated afflictions. You may well say, 'I will put my trust in the Lord as long as I live.' I will desire Dr. Whitehead to consider your case and give you his thoughts upon it. I am not afraid of your doing too little, but too much. I am in continual danger of this. Do a little at a time, that you may do more. My love to Sister Cookman and Boyle [See letters of March 28, 1777, and May 2, 1787; and Crookshank's Methodism in Ireland, i. 428.]; but it is a doubt with me whether I shall cross the seas any more. What preacher was it who first omitted meeting the Select Society I wonder it did not destroy the work! You have done right in setting up the Strangers' (Friend) Society. It is an excellent institution. I am quite at a loss concerning Mr. Madan. I know not what to think of him. Send me your best thoughts concerning him. Let not the excluded preachers by any means creep in again. In any wise, write, and send me your thoughts on Animal Magnetism. [See letter of Jan. 3.] I set my face against that device of Satan. Two of our preachers here are in that Satanic delusion; but if they persist to defend it, I must drop them. I know its principles full well. With much love to your wife, I am, my dear Adam, Your affectionate brother. To Thomas Taylor LONDON, February 13, 1791. DEAR TOMMY, -- The doubt is whether the remedy would not propagate the diseases by making many people curious to understand it who never thought of it before. Remember the madman's words, Kill your enemies Kill a fool's head of your own. They will die of themselves if you let them alone.

Thus, Justin himself was imposed upon by those of Alexandria, who showed him some old ruins under the name of cells. And so he was by those who told him, there was a statue at Rome, inscribed, Simoni Deo Sancto; whereas it was really inscribed, Semoni Sanco Deo; to an old deity of the Sabines. Now,” say you, “if he was deceived in such obvious facts, how much more easily would he be deceived by subtle and crafty impostors!” (Pages 40, 41.) Far less easily. A man of good judgment may be deceived in the inscriptions of statues, and points of ancient history. But, if he has only eyes and ears, and a small degree of common sense, he cannot be deceived in facts where he is both an eye and ear witness. 10. For a parting blow, you endeavour to prove, Sixthly, that Justin was a knave, as well as a fool. To this end you remark, that “he charges the Jews with erasing three passages out of the Greek Bible; one whereof stands there still, and the other two were not expunged by some Jew, but added by some Christian. Nay, that able critic and Divine, John Croius,” (you know when to bestow honourable appel lations,) “says Justin forged and published this passage for the confirmation of the Christian doctrine, as well as the greatest part of the Sibylline oracles, and the sentences of Mercurius.” (Page 42.) With far greater probability than John Croius asserts that Justin forged these passages, a man of candour would hope that he read them in his copy (though incorrect) of the Greek Bible. And till you disprove this, or prove the assertion of Croius, you are got not a jot farther still. But, notwith standing you have taken true pains to blacken him, both with regard to his morals and understanding, he may still be an honest man, and an unexceptionable witness, as to plain facts done before his face. 11. You fall upon Irenaeus next, and carefully enumerate all the mistakes in his writings. As, First, that he held the doctrine of the millennium, and related a weak fancy of Tapias concerning it. Secondly: That he believed our Saviour to have lived fifty years. Thirdly: That he believed Enoch and Elias were translated, and St. Paul caught up to that very paradise from which Adam was expelled.

But hold. You are going to prove it too: “For,” say you, “should the like case happen now, that any Methodist, Moravian, or French prophet,” (right skilfully put together,) “should publish an apology for his brethren, addressed to the King and Parliament; is it not wholly improbable, that the Government would pay any regard to it?” You should add, (to make the parallel complete,) “ or know that any such was addressed to them.” No: I conceive the improbability supposed lies wholly on the other side. Whatever the Government of heathen Rome was, (which I presume you will not depreciate,) the Govern ment of England is remarkable for tenderness to the very meanest subject. It is therefore not improbable in the least, that an address from some thousands of those subjects, how contemptible soever they were generally esteemed, would not be totally disregarded by such a Government. But that they should “not know that any such had been addressed to them,” is not only improbable, but morally impossible. If therefore it were possible for the Heathens to “have a worse opinion of the ancient Christians than we,” you say, “have of our modern fanatics,” still it is utterly incredible that the Roman Government should, not only “take no notice of their apologies,” but “not even know that any such were addressed to them.” 4. “But the publishing books was more expensive then than it is now; and therefore we cannot think the Christians of those days were able to provide such a number of them as was sufficient for the information of the public.” (Pages 198, 199.) Nay, if they were not able to provide themselves food and raiment, they would be sure to provide a sufficient number of these; sufficient, at least, for the information of the Emperor and Senate, to whom those apologies were addressed. And how great a number, do you suppose, might suffice for them? How many hundred or thousand copies? I apprehend the Emperor would be content with one; and one more would be needful for the Senate. Now, I really believe the Christians of those days were able to provide both these copies; nay, and even two more; if it should have fallen out, that two or three Emperors were on the throne; even though we should suppose that in Tertullian’s time there were but forty thousand of them in all Rome. 62 LETTER.

That these have feeling, as well as other men, plainly appeared, in the case of Bishop Ridley, crying out, “I cannot burn, I cannot burn l” when his lower parts were consumed. Do you think the fear of shame, or the desire of praise, was the motive on which these acted? Or have you reason to believe it was mere obstinacy that hindered them from accepting deliverance? Sir, since “human nature has always been the same, so that our experience of what now passes in our own soul will be the best comment on what is delivered to us concerning others,” let me entreat you to make the case 64 LETTER. To your own. You must not say, “I am not one of the ignorant vulgar: I am a man of sense and learning.” So were many of them; not inferior even to you, either in natural or acquired endowments. I ask, then, Would any of these motives suffice to induce you to burn at a stake? I beseech you, lay your hand on your heart, and answer between God and your own soul, what motive could incite you to walk into a fire, but an hope full of immortality. When you mention this motive, you speak to the point. And yet even with regard to this, both you and I should find, did it come to a trial, that the hope of a fool, or the hope of an hypocrite, would stand us in no stead. We should find, nothing else would sustain usin that hour, but a well-grounded confidence of a better resurrection; nothing less than the “steadfastly looking up to heaven, and beholding the glory which shall be revealed.” 8. “But heretics,” you say, “have been Martyrs.” I will answer more particularly, when you specify who and when. It may suffice to say now, whosoever he be, that, rather than he will offend God, calmly and deliberately chooses to suffer death, I cannot lightly speak evil of him. But Cyprian says, “Some who had suffered tortures for Christ, yet afterwards fell into gross, open sin.” It may be so; but it is nothing to the question.

And though, in many cases, it may reason. ably be presumed, yet in none can it certainly be known.” If this be as you assert, (I repeat it again,) then farewell the credit of all history. Sir, this is not the cant of zealots: You must not escape so: It is plain, sober reason. If the credibility of witnesses, of all witnesses, (for you make na distinction,) depends, as you peremptorily affirm, on a variety of principles wholly concealed from us, and, consequently, though it may be presumed in many cases, yet can be certainly known in none; then it is plain, all history, sacred or profane, is utterly precarious and uncertain. Then I may indeed presume, but I cannot certainly know, that Julius Caesar was killed in the Senate-house; then I cannot certainly know that there was an Emperor in Germany, called Charles the Fifth; that Leo the Tenth ever sat in the See of Rome, or Lewis the Fourteenth on the throne of France. Now, let any man of common understanding judge, whether this objection has any sense in it, or no. 12. Under this same head, you fall again upon the case of witchcraft, and say, “There is not in all history any one mira culous fact so authentically attested as the existence of witches. All Christian ” (yea, and all heathen) “nations whatsoever have consented in the belief of them. Now, to deny the reality of facts so solemnly attested, and so universally believed, seems to give the lie to the sense and experience of all Christendom; to the wisest and best of every nation, and to public monu ments subsisting to our own times.” (Page 221.) 66 LETTER. To What obliges you, then, to deny it? You answer: “The incredibility of the thing.” (Page 223.) O Sir, never strain at the incredibility of this, after you have swallowed an hundred people talking without tongues! 13. What you aim at in this also is plain, as well as in your account of the Abbé de Paris. The point of your argument is, “If you cannot believe these, then you ought not to believe the Bible: The incredibility of the things related ought to overrule all testimony whatsoever.” Your argument, at length, would run thus: “If things be incredible in themselves, then this incredibi lity ought to overrule all testimony concerning them.

with all his wisdom and philosophy, . What points of knowledge did he gain * That life is sacred all,--and vain : Sacred, how high, and vain, how low, [e could not tell; but died to know. 9. “He died to know !” and so must you, unless you are now a partaker of Christian faith. O consider this ! Nay, and consider, not only how little you know of the immensity of the things that are beyond sense and time, but how uncer tainly do you know even that little ! How faintly glimmering a light is that you have ! Can you properly be said to know any of these things? Is that knowledge any more than bare conjecture? And the reason is plain. You have no senses suitable to invisible or eternal objects. What desiderata then, especially to the rational, the reflecting, part of man kind are these? A more extensive knowledge of things invisible and eternal; a greater certainty in whatever know ledge of them we have; and, in order to both, faculties capable of discerning things invisible. 10. Is it not so? Let impartial reason speak. Does not every thinking man want a window, not so much in his neighbour's, as in his own, breast? He wants an opening there, of whatever kind, that might let in light from eternity. He is pained to be thus feeling after God so darkly, so uncertainly; to know so little of God, and indeed so little of any beside material objects. He is concerned, that he must see even that little, not directly, but in the dim, sullied glass * of sense; and consequently so imperfectly and obscurely, that it is all a mere enigma still. 11. Now, these very desiderata faith supplies. It gives a more extensive knowledge of things invisible, showing what eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither could it before enter into our heart to conceive. And all these it shows in the clear est light, with the fullest certainty and evidence. For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible.

For it does not leave us to receive our notices of them by mere reflection from the dull glass of sense; but resolves a thousand enigmas of the highest concern by giving faculties suited to things invisible. O who would not wish for such a faith, were it only on these accounts How much more, if by this I may receive the promise, I may attain all that holiness and happiness ! 12. So Christianity tells me; and so I find it, may every real Christian say. I now am assured that these things are so: I experience them in my own breast. What Christianity (considered as a doctrine) promised, is accomplished in my soul. And Christianity, considered as an inward principle, is the completion of all those promises. It is holiness and hap piness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit; a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life. Section III. 1. And this I conceive to be the strongest evidence of the truth of Christianity. I do not undervalue traditional evidence. Let it have its place and its due honour. It is highly serviceable in its kind, and in its degree. And yet I cannot set it on a level with this. It is generally supposed, that traditional evidence is weak ened by length of time; as it must necessarily pass through so many hands, in a continued succession of ages. But no length of time can possibly affect the strength of this internal evidence. It is equally strong, equally new, through the course of seventeen hundred years. It passes now, even as it has done from the beginning, directly from God into the believing soul. Do you suppose time will ever, dry up this stream ? O no ! It shall never be cut off: Labitur et labetur in omne volubilis avum.* 2. Traditional evidence is of an extremely complicated nature, necessarily including so many and so various consi derations, that only men of a strong and clear understanding can be sensible of its full force. On the contrary, how plain * It flows on, and will for ever flow. 76 LETTER. To and simple is this; and how level to the lowest capacity!

Reason, rally, laugh them out of their dead, empty forms, void of spirit, of faith, of love. Convince them, that such mean pageantry (for such it manifestly is, if there is nothing in the heart correspondent with the outward show) is absolutely unworthy, you need not say of God, but even of any man that is endued with common understanding. Show them, that while they are endeavouring to please God thus, they are only beating the air. Know your time; press on; push your victories, till you have conquered all that know not God. And then He, whom neither they nor you know now, shall rise and gird himself with strength, and go forth in his almighty love, and sweetly conquer you all together. 9. O that the time were come ! How do I long for you to be partakers of the exceeding great and precious promise ! 78 LETTER. To How am I pained when I hear any of you using those silly terms, which the men of form have taught you, calling the mention of the only thing you want, cant 1 the deepest wisdom, the highest happiness, enthusiasm What ignorance is this ! How extremely despicable would it make you in the eyes of any but a Christian | But he cannot despise you, who loves you as his own soul, who is ready to lay down his life for your sake. 10. Perhaps you will say, “But this internal evidence of Christianity affects only those in whom the promise is fulfilled. It is no evidence to me.” There is truth in this objection. It does affect them chiefly, but it does not affect them only. It cannot, in the nature of things, be so strong an evidence to others as it is to them. And yet it may bring a degree of evidence, it may reflect some light on you also. For, First, you see the beauty and loveliness of Christianity, when it is rightly understood; and you are sure there is nothing to be desired in comparison of it. Secondly. You know the Scripture promises this, and says, it is attained by faith, and by no other way. Thirdly. You see clearly how desirable Christian faith is, even on account of its own intrinsic value. Fourthly. You are a witness, that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way.

You are a witness, that the holiness and happiness above described can be attained no other way. The more you have laboured after virtue and happiness, the more convinced you are of this. Thus far then you need not lean upon other men; thus far you have personal experience. Fifthly. What reasonable assurance can you have of things whereof you have not personal experience? Suppose the question were, Can the blind be restored to sight? This you have not yourself experienced. How then will you know that such a thing ever was? Can there be an easier or surer way than to talk with one or some number of men who were blind, but are now restored to sight? They cannot be deceived as to the fact in question; the nature of the thing leaves no room for this. And if they are honest men, (which you may learn from other circumstances,) they will not deceive you. Now, transfer this to the case before us: And those who were blind, but now see, -those who were sick many years, but now are healed,--those who were miserable, but now are happy, -will afford you also a very strong evidence of the truth of Christianity; as strong as can be in the nature of things, till you experience it in your own soul: And this, though it be allowed they are but plain men, and, in general, of weak understanding; nay, though some of them should be mistaken in other points, and hold opinions which cannot be defended. 11. All this may be allowed concerning the primitive Fathers', I mean particularly Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian; to whom I would add Macarius and Ephraim Syrus. I allow that some of these had not strong natural sense, that few of them had much learning, and none the assistances which our age enjoys in some respects above all that went before. Hence I doubt not but whoever will be at the pains of reading over their writings for that poor end, will find many mistakes, many weak suppositions, and many ill-drawn conclusions. 12. And yet I exceedingly reverence them, as well as their writings, and esteem them very highly in love. I reverence them, because they were Christians, such Christians as are above described.

But this no Romanist can do, not only while he holds that “no faith is to be kept with heretics;” but so long as he acknowledges either priestly absolution, or the spiritual power of the Pope. “But the late Act,” you say, “does not either tolerate or encourage Roman Catholics.” I appeal to matter of fact. Do not the Romanists themselves understand it as a toleration? You know they do. And does it not already (let alone what it may do by and by) encourage them to preach openly, to build chapels, (at Bath and elsewhere,) to raise seminaries, and to make numerous converts day by day to their intolerant, persecuting principles? I can point out, if need be, several of the persons. And they are increasing daily. But “nothing dangerous to English liberty is to be appre hended from them.” I am not certain of that. Some time since, a Romish Priest came to one I knew, and, after talking with her largely, broke out, “You are no heretic; you have the experience of a real Christian l’” “And would you,” she asked, “burn me alive?” He said, “God forbid!--unless it were for the good of the Church !” Now, what security could she have had for her life, if it had depended on that man? The good of the Church would have burst all the ties of truth, justice, and mercy; especially when seconded by the absolution of a Priest, or (if need were) a Papal pardon. If any one please to answer this, and to set his name, I shall probably reply.--But the productions of anonymous writers, I do not promise to take any notice of. I am, Sir, Your humble servant, CITY-RoAD, JOHN WESLEY. January 21, 1780. To THE EDITORS OF THE FREEMAN's JOURNAL, SEv ERAL months since, Father O'Leary, a Capuchin Friar in Dublin, published Remarks upon this Letter in the Freeman's Journal. As soon as these were sent to me, I published a Reply in the same Paper. When I read more of his Remarks, printed in five succeeding Journals, I wrote a second Reply; but did not think it worth while to follow, step by step, so wild, rambling a writer. Mr. O'Leary has now'put his six Letters into one, which are reprinted in London, with this title, “Mr. O'Leary's remarks on the Rev. Mr.

Stand forth, then, free-will on the one side, and reproba tion on the other; and let us see whether the one scheme, attended with the absurdity, as you think it, of free-will, or the other scheme, attended with the absurdity of reprobation, be the more defensible. Let us see (if it please the Father of Lights to open the eyes of our understanding) which of these is more for the glory of God, for the display of his glorious attributes, for the manifestation of his wisdom, justice, and mercy, to the sons of men. 51. First, his wisdom. If man be in some measure free; if, by that light which “lighteneth every man that comes into the world,” there be “set before him life and death, good and evil;” then how gloriously does the manifold wisdom of God appear in the whole economy of man’s salvation Being willing that all men should be saved, yet not willing to force them thereto; willing that men should be saved, yet not as trees or stones, but as men, as reasonable creatures, endued with understanding to discern what is good, and liberty either to accept or refuse it; how does he suit the whole scheme of his dispensations to this his a poisaig, his plan, “the counsel of his will!” His first step is to enlighten the understanding by that general knowledge of good and evil. To this he adds many secret reproofs, if they act contrary to this light; many inward convictions, which there is not a man on earth who has not often felt. At other times he gently moves their wills, he draws and woos them, as it were, to walk in the light. He instils into their hearts good desires, though perhaps they know not from whence they come. Thus far he proceeds with all the children of men, yea, even with those who have not the knowledge of his written word. But in this, what a field of wisdom is displayed, suppose man to be in some degree a free agent How is every part of it suited to this end to save man, as man; to set life and death before him, and then persuade (not force) him to choose life.

I know indeed, ye cannot easily believe this. But whether ye believe it or no, you believe, as well as I, that without holiness no man shall see the Lord. May we not then, at least, join in this,--in declaring the nature of inward holiness, and testifying to all the necessity of it? May we not all thus far join in tearing away the broken reeds wherein so many rest, without either inward or outward holiness, and which they idly trust will supply its place? As far as is possible, let us join in destroying the works of the devil, and in setting up the kingdom of God upon earth, in promoting righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Of whatever opinion or denomination we are, we must serve either God or the devil. If we serve God, our agree ment is far greater than our difference. Therefore, as far as may be, setting aside that difference, let us unite in destroy ing the works of the devil, in bringing all we can from the power of darkness into the kingdom of God's dear Son. And let us assist each other to value more and more the glorious grace whereby we stand, and daily to grow in that grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. Out of thine own mouth ! 1. I AM informed, some of you have said, that the following quotations are false; that these words were not spoken by these authors; others, that they were not spoken in this sense; and others, that neither you yourself, nor any true Predestinarian, ever did, or ever would, speak so. 2. My friends, the authors here quoted are well known, in whom you may read the words with your own eyes. And you who have read them know in your own conscience, they were spoken in this sense, and no other; nay, that this sense of them is professedly defended throughout the whole treatises whence they are taken. 3. But, be this as it may, do you indeed say, “No true Predestinarian ever did or would speak so?” Why, every true Predestinarian must speak so, and so must you yourself too, if you dare speak out, unless they and you renounce your fundamental principle. 4.

Friend.--You went on: “On the contrary, we believe that the blood shed upon the cross has put away and blotted out all our sins.” Why, who believes otherwise? If you mean only, that Christ then put away the punishment of all our sins, who believe in him; what a marvellous discovery is this ! I pray, whom doth this arguing reprove? Ant.--It reproves you, who deny that “an everlasting righteousness was then brought in.” Friend.--I do not deny it: No more than you understand it. But I ask, in what sense was it “brought in ?” What was it brought into? Was it then first brought into the world? You cannot say this, without saying that all who went out of the world before that hour were lost. Or was it brought into the souls of believers? Then believers have an inward or inherent righteousness. You had better, therefore, let this text alone. It will do no service at all to your cause. Ant.--I see plain you are as blind as a beetle still. I am afraid your head-knowledge will destroy you. Did not I tell you, “Our hearts and consciences are made perfectly clean by our believing; and that in this consists true purity of soul, and not in habitual qualities? Thus we are made per fectly holy.” And though “the vile, sinful body continually disposes the mind to evil,” yet “the blood of Christ makes us free from sin, and, as it were, destroys the connexion.” Friend.--Destroys the connexion of what? I doubt you have stumbled upon another word which you do not under stand. But whether you understand yourself or no, it is sure I do not understand you. How can my mind at the same time it is “continually disposed to evil,” be “free from sin, perfectly clean, perfectly holy?” Ant.--O the dulness of some men ' I do not mean really holy, but holy by imputation. I told you plainly, the holi ness of which we speak is not in us, but in Christ. “The fruits of the Spirit, (commonly called sanctification,) such as love, gentleness, longsuffering, goodness, meekness, temper ance, neither make us holy before God, nor in our own consciences.” Friend.--I know these cannot atone for one sin. This is done by the blood of Christ alone: For the sake of which, God forgives, and works these in us by faith.

This is done by the blood of Christ alone: For the sake of which, God forgives, and works these in us by faith. Do I reach your meaning now? Ant.-No, no; I wonder at your ignorance. I mean, “we are not made good or holy by any inward qualities or dispo sitions: But being made pure and holy in our consciences, by believing in Christ, we bear forth, inwardly and outwardly, the fruits of holiness.” Now, I hope, you understand me. Friend.--I hope not. For, if I do, you talk as gross nonsense and contradiction as ever came out of the mouth of man. Ant.--How so? Friend.--You say, “We are not made good or holy by any inward qualities or dispositions.” No | are we not made good by inward goodness? (observe, we are not speaking of justification, but sanctification;) holy, by inward holiness? meek, by inward meekness? gentle, by inward gentleness? And are not all these, if they are anything at all, “inward qualities or dispositions?” Again: Just after denying that we have any inward holi ness, you say, “We are made holy in our consciences, and bear forth, inwardly and outwardly, the fruits of holiness.” What heaps of self-contradictions are here ! Ant.--You do not take me right. I mean, these inward dispositions “are not our holiness. For we are not more holy, if we have more love to God and man, nor less holy, if we have less.” Friend.--No ! Does not a believer increase in holiness, as he increases in the love of God and man? Ant.--I say, No. “The very moment he is justified, he is wholly sanctified. And he is neither more nor less holy, from that hour, to the day of his death. Entire justification and entire sanctification are in the same instant. And neither of them is thenceforth capable either of increase or decrease. Friend.--I thought we were to grow in grace! Ant.--“We are so; but not in holiness. The moment we are justified, we are as pure in heart as ever we shall be. A new-born babe is as pure in heart as a father in Christ. There is no difference.” Friend.--You do well to except against Scripture and reason. For till a man has done with them, he can never swallow this. I understand your doctrine now, far better than I like it.

But this cannot be allowed by any who impartially search the Scriptures. They cannot allow, without clear and particular proof, that any one of those texts which related primarily to the Apostles (as all men grant) belong to any but them. W. 21. Fifthly. Those who so effectually know Christ, as by that knowledge to have escaped the pollutions of the world, may yet fall back into those pollutions, and perish everlastingly. For thus saith the Apostle Peter, “If after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” (the only possible way of escaping them,) “they are again entangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.” (2 Peter ii. 20, 21.) That the knowledge of the way of righteousness, which they had attained, was an inward, experimental knowledge, is evident from that other expression,-they had “escaped the pollutions of the world;” an expression parallel to that in the preceding chapter, verse 4: “Having escaped the corruption which is in the world.” And in both chapters, this effect is ascribed to the same cause; termed in the first, “the knowledge of Him who hath called us to glory and virtue;” in the second, more explicitly, “the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” And yet they lost that experimental knowledge of Christ and the way of righteousness; they fell back into the same pollutions they had escaped, and were “again entangled therein and overcome.” They “turned from the holy com mandment delivered to them,” so that their “latter end was worse than their beginning.” Therefore, those who so effectually know Christ, as by that knowledge to have escaped the pollutions of the world, may yet fall back into those pollutions, and perish everlastingly. 22. And this is perfectly consistent with St. Peter's words, in the first chapter of his former Epistle: “Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.” Undoubtedly, so are all they who ever attain eternal salva tion. It is the power of God only, and not our own, by which we are kept one day or one hour. VI. 23. Sixthly.

“The whole world of believers” (page 148) is an expres sion which never occurs in Scripture, nor has it any coun tenance there: The world, in the inspired writings, being constantly taken either in the universal or in a bad sense; either for the whole of mankind, or for that part of them who know not God. “‘In the Lord shall all the house of Israel be justified.’” (Page 149.) It ought unquestionably to be rendered, “By or through the Lord:” This argument therefore proves nothing. “Ye are complete in him.” The words literally rendered are, “Ye are filled with him.” And the whole passage, as any unprejudiced reader may observe, relates to sanctification, not justification. “They are accepted for Christ's sake; this is justification through imputed righteousness.” (Page 150.) That remains to be proved. Many allow the former, who cannot allow the latter. “The righteousness which justifies us is already wrought out.” (Page 151.)--A crude, unscriptural expression “It was set on foot, carried on, completed.”--O vain philosophy The plain truth is, Christ lived and “tasted death for every man.” And through the merits of his life and death, every believer is justified. “Whoever perverts so glorious a doctrine shows he never believed.” (Page 152.) Not so. They who “turn back as a dog to the vomit” had once “escaped the pollutions of the world by the knowledge of Christ.” 320 PREFACE. To “The goodness of God leadeth to repentance.” (Page 153.) This is unquestionably true. But the nice, metaphysical doctrine of imputed righteousness leads not to repentance, but to licentiousness. “The believer cannot but add to his faith works of righteous ness.” (Page 154.) During his first love, this is often true. But it is not true afterwards, as we know and feel by melan choly experience. “We no longer obey in order to lay the foundation of our final acceptance.” (Page 155.) No.: That foundation is already laid in the merits of Christ. Yet we obey in order to our final acceptance through his merits. And in this sense, by obeying, we “lay a good foundation, that we may attain eternal life.” “‘We establish the law:” We provide for its honour, by the perfect obedience of Christ.” (Page 156.) Can you possibly think St. Paul meant this? that such a thought ever entered into his mind?

He is not speaking here of the cause of our justification, but the fruits of it. Therefore, that unnatural sense of his words does not at all “agree with the tenor of his arguing.” I totally deny the criticism on 8.xxioavvm and Bixaloux, and cannot conceive on what authority it is founded. O how deep an aversion to inward holiness does this scheme naturally create 1 (Page 140.) “The righteousness they attained could not be any personal righteousness.” (Page 142) Certainly it was: It was implanted as well as imputed. “For ‘instruction in righteousness, in the righteousness of Christ.” (Page 145.) Was there ever such a comment before? The plain meaning is, “for training up in holiness” of heart and of life. “He shall convince the world of righteousness;” that I am not a sinner, but innocent and holy. (Page 146.) “‘That we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Not intrinsically, but imputatively.” (Page 148.) Both the one and the other. God, through him, first accounts and then makes us righteous. Accordingly, “‘The righteousness which is of God by faith, is both imputed and inherent.” (Page 152.) “My faith fixes on both the meritorious life and atoning death of Christ.” (Page 153.) Here we clearly agree. Hold then to this, and never talk of the former without the latter. If you do, you cannot say, “Here we are exposed to no hazard.” Yes, you are to an exceeding great one; even the hazard of living and dying without holiness. And then we are lost for ever. The Sixth Letter contains an admirable account of the earth and atmosphere, and comprises abundance of sense in a narrow compass, expressed in beautiful language. 332 PREFACE to Gems have “a seat on the virtuous fair one’s breast.” (Page 177.) I cannot reconcile this with St. Paul. He says, “Not with pearls;” by a parity of reason, Not with diamonds. But in all things I perceive you are too favourable, both to “the desire of the flesh, and the desire of the eye.” You are a gentle casuist as to every self-indulgence which a plentiful fortune can furnish. “Our Saviour’s obedience.” (Page 182.) O say, with the good old Puritans, “Our Saviour's death or merits!” We swarm with Antinomians on every side. Why are you at such pains to increase their number?

1. To say, “This man is an Arminian,” has the same effect on many hearers, as to say, “This is a mad dog.” It puts them into a fright at once: They run away from him with all speed and diligence; and will hardly stop, unless it be to throw a stone at the dreadful and mischievous animal. 2. The more unintelligible the word is, the better it answers the purpose. Those on whom it is fixed know not what to do: Not understanding what it means, they cannot tell what defence to make, or how to clear themselves from the charge. And it is not easy to remove the prejudice which others have imbibed, who know no more of it, than that it is “something very bad,” if not “all that is bad!”. 3. To clear the meaning, therefore, of this ambiguous term, may be of use to many: To those who so freely pin this name upon others, that they may not say what they do not under stand; to those that hear them, that they may be no longer abused by men saying they know not what; and to those upon whom the name is fixed, that they may know how to answer for themselves. 4. It may be necessary to observe, First, that many con found Arminians with Arians. But this is entirely a different thing; the one has no resemblance to the other. An Arian is one who denies the Godhead of Christ; we scarce need say, the supreme, eternal Godhead; because there can be no God but the supreme, eternal God, unless we will make two Gods, a great God and a little one. Now, none have ever more firmly believed, or more strongly asserted, the Godhead of whAT Is AN ARMINIAN ? 359 Christ, than many of the (so called) Arminians have done; yea, and do at this day. Arminianism therefore (whatever it be) is totally different from Arianism. 5. The rise of the word was this: JAMEs HARMENs, in Latin, Jacobus Arminius, was first one of the Ministers of Amsterdam, and afterwards Professor of Divinity at Leyden. He was educated at Geneva; but in the year 1591 began to doubt of the principles which he had till then received.

I believe he will not affirm it. So any man of understanding may judge, before he opens his book, what manner of review it is likely to contain However, it must be owned that he and his faithful allies have been at the pains of looking into many of my writings. I say many; for I apprehend there are many more, which they have not so much as looked into; nor does it appear that they have seriously looked through any, so as to observe the scope and tenor of them. However, from those which he or they have, after a fashion, reviewed, abundance of objections are extracted. It is true, none of them (one only excepted) are new, and there is hardly one that has not been answered again and again. Yet since they are proposed in a new form, they may seem to demand a new answer. 10. The grand objection is, that I am inconsistent with myself. This, therefore, I shall particularly consider. The others, which flutter up and down the whole work, I can but just touch upon. Mr. H. opens the charge thus: “Saying and unsaying is nothing new with Mr. W., who has only shown himself consistent, by a regular series of inconsistencies.” (Page 3.) “How full are you of contradictions to yourself! how full of contrary purposes! How often do you chide with yourself! How oft do you fight with yourself!” (Title-page.) “Mr. W. seems well contented you should settle his creed. If you can, you will do in a few months what he himself has not been able to effect in near forty years.” “On this fluctuating ocean he has been tossed for so many years together.” (Page 20.) “All his Journals and Tracts are replete with proofs of his having been tossed from one system to another, and from one opinion to another, from the time of his ordniation to this present moment.” (Page 143.) “The most ignorant collier can immediately see his inconsistency with himself.” (Page 145.) He sums up the whole charge in the lively words of Mr. Cudworth, graced with the name of Mr. Hervey: “Contradic tion, didst thou ever know so trusty a friend, so faithful a devotee? Many people are ready enough to contradict others; but it seems all one to this gentleman whether it be another or himself, so he may but contradict.” 11.

Fletcher's Letters?” Because I judged it would be an effectual means of undoing the mischief which Mr. Shirley had done: Not that I am now sorry (though I was) for what he has done, for his publication of that bitter Circular Letter: For 1 now clearly discern the hand of God throughout that whole affair. Both my brother and I still indulged the fond hope of living in peace with our warm Calvinist brethren; but we now give it up; our eyes are open; we see what we have to expect. We look for neither mercy nor justice at their hands; if we find any, it will be clear gains. 23. The Second objection is, “Mr. Wesley acknowledged the unguarded manner in which the Minutes were drawn up; and yet immediately after defended them.” I answer, How did I “acknowledge the unguarded manner?” The plain case was this: I seek peace, and would do anything for it, which I can with a safe conscience. On this principle it was, that when Mr. Shirley read over his Declaration, (I say his; for it was he drew it up, not I,) and asked, if we agreed thereto, I was heartily desirous to agree with him as far as possible. In order to this, after altering some words, I asked our brethren, if they were willing to sign it. One immediately said, “The Minutes are not unguarded; they are guarded enough.” I said, “They are guarded enough for you; but not for those who seek occasion against us.” And observe, it is only in this sense, that I subscribed to that expression. But I will not affirm, that my love of peace did not carry me a little too far. I know not but it would have been better, not to have signed the paper at all. MR. HILL's REVIEw. 407 24. So much for the Minutes. Perhaps it may be expected, that I should also take some notice of what Mr. Hill says concerning perfection. All his arguments indeed, and ten times more, I have answered over and over. But if it is required, I will answer once more; only premising, by that perfection, to which St. Paul directs Mr. Hill and me to go on, (Heb. vi. 1) I understand meither more nor less, than what St. John terms “perfect love;” (1 John iv.

Bernard or Ambrose, we must consult the authors themselves, and tell our readers what edition we use, with the page where the words are found; otherwise they cannot form a judgment either of the fairness of the quota tion, or of the sense and weight of it. Hitherto, then, we have not one tittle of proof, that this is a Popish doctrine; that it ever was, or is now, “almost generally received in the Church of Rome;” (although, if it had, this would be no conclusive argument against it, as neither is it conclusive against the doctrine of the blessed Trinity;) I do not know that it ever was: But this I know; it has been solemnly condemned by the Church of Rome. It has been condemned by the Pope and his whole conclave, even in this present century. In the famous bull Unigenitus, (so called from the first words, Unigenitus Dei filius,') they utterly condemn the uninterrupted act (of faith and love, which some then talked of, of continually rejoicing, praying, and giving thanks) as dreadful heresy Now, in what public act of the Church of Rome is the doctrine of perfection maintained? Till this is produced, I pray let us hear no more, that perfection is a Popish doctrine. 25. However, “the distinction between sins and innocent infirmities is derived from the Romish Church.” (Page 56.) How does this appear? Thus: “Two of her devoted cham pions, Lindenus and Andradius, distinguish between infirmi ties and sins.” Lindenus and Andradius / Who are they? From what country did they come? I do not know the men. One of them, for aught I know, might serve as an interpreter at the Council of Trent? What then? Was he an autho rized interpreter of the doctrines of the Church? Nay, and how do you know that they did speak of “little, trifling faults,” or of “minute and trivial sins?” Did you ever read them? Pray, what edition of their works do you use? and in what page do these words occur? Till we know this, that there may be an opportunity of examining the books, (though I fear scarce worth examining,) it is doing too much honour to such quotations, to take any notice of them at all. 26. Well, now for the buskins !

Baroe, Bishop Wilkins, Dr. Clark, and George Bell, are utterly thrown away. As to George Bell, Mr. Richard says, Mr. M d “justly censures the enthusiasm and credulity of Mr. John, in paying so much attention to Bell’s ridiculous reveries; in calling him a sensible man, and entreating him to continue in his society, on account of the great good he did. However, Bell refused to remain in connexion with him, because of his double dealings and unfaithful proceedings; for he sometimes was full of Bell’s praises; at other times, he would warn the people against him. He also gives a particular narration of what he rightly calls the ‘comet enthusiasm.” Mr. John preached more than ten times about the comet, which he supposed was to appear in 1758, to burn up all the produce of the earth, and 424 REMARKs on MR. HILL’s lastly to execute its grand commission on the globe itsclf, causing the stars to fall from heaven.” (Farrago, p. 37.) What an heap of dirt is here raked together ! I must not let it pass quite unnoticed. (1.) He “justly censures the enthu siasm and credulity of Mr. Wesley in paying so much atten tion to Bell’s ridiculous reveries.” Nay, so very little, that I checked them strongly, as soon as ever they came to my know ledge; particularly his whim about the end of the world, which I earnestly opposed, both in private and public. (2) “Bragging of the many miraculous cures he had wrought.” I bragged of--that is, simply related, the case of Mary Special, and no other; in the close of which I said, “Here are three plain facts,--She was ill; she is well; she became so in a moment. Which of these can with any modesty be denied?” I still ask the same question. (3.) That I ever called him “a sensible man,” is altogether false. A man of faith and love I then knew him to be; but I never thought him a man of sense. (4.) That I “entreated him to continue in the society,” is likewise totally false. (5.) Nor did I ever tell him, on that or any other occasion, of “the great good” he did. I know he was an instrument in God’s hands of convincing and converting many sinners. But though I speak this now to all the world, I never spoke it to himself.

adds, is a mere play upon words: “Does Mr. W., by this looser merit, mean a merit that does not merit?” Yes; by terming a work meritorious in this improper sense, I do not mean, that it merits or deserves a reward in the proper sense of the word. Instances of the word taken in this improper sense occur all over the Bible. “This is shamefully evasive.” No more than it is Greek. It is a plain, rational, solid distinction; and it holds with regard to numberless words in all languages, which may be taken cither in a proper or improper sense. When I say, “I do not grant that works are meritorious, even when accompanied by faith,” I take that word in a proper sense. But others take it in an improper, as nearly equivalent with rewardable. Here, therefore, I no more contradict Mr. Fletcher than I do myself. Least of all do I plead, as Mr. H. roundly affirms, “for justification by the merit of my own good works.” (Page 52.) Of Marriage. 34. “Mr. W. says, his thoughts on a single life are just the same they have been these thirty years.” (I mean, with regard to the advantages which attend that state in general.) “Why then did he marry?” (Page 39.) I answered short, “For reasons best known to himself.” As much as to say, I judge it extremely impertinent for any but a superior to ask me the question. So the harmless raillery which Mr. H. pleases himself with upon this occasion may stand just as it is. Concerning Dress. 35. “Mr. W.

F. defends them, and strives to reconcile them with the Declaration. But then comes Mr. W., and tells us, he does not know, but it had been better not to have signed it at all.” And what then? Why, “hereby he intimates, that he has fixed a different sense upon the Minutes from that which they originally bore.” No such thing; he intimates this and no more, that by that well-intended concession, he had given occasion, to those who sought occasion, of offence against him. So all this laboured charge vanishes into air; and no more proves inconsistency than high-treason. 42. We come now to the main point, perfection; the objections to which spread almost throughout the book. But the question is not, whether the doctrine be true or false; but whether I contradict myself concerning it. As to what occurs in the fourth and fifth pages, it may therefore suffice to say, I do believe (as you observe) that real Christians (meaning those that are “perfected in love”) are freed from evil or sinful thoughts. And where do I contradict this? “You say, I cannot prove the facts alleged against some professors of perfection. Indeed I can.” (Page 10.) If you could, that would not prove that I contradict myself on this head. “But one at Worcester writes, ‘I can send you an account of two or three shocking instances of bad behaviour among the professors of perfection here.’” Perhaps so. But will that prove my inconsistency? 43. Awhile since, Mr. Ma--d related to me the whole story of Samuel Wi-n. I know not that I ever heard of it before, but only some imperfect fragments of it. The other story, of “a Preacher of perfection who said, the Holy Ghost visibly descended on all true converts,” may be true for aught I know; but I question much, whether that madman was a Preacher. It may likewise be true, that several wild expres sions were uttered at West-street chapel. Yet I think, all these put together will not prove, that I contradict myself. However, I am glad to read, “If I publish another edition of the Review, these instances shall all be omitted; and personal vilifications shall be left to the sole pen of Mr. W.” Then you will reduce your Farrago to a page, and your Review to a penny pamphlet.

John is stuck fast in the mire. For in his “Remarks,’ he contradicts his brother; in his Annotations, he contradicts himself; and in his Hymn, he contradicts both bis brother and himself.” Mr. John is not quite stuck fast yet; for this is a mistake from beginning to end. (1) I do not contradict my brother in my “Remarks.” In saying, “I do not subscribe to that expression,” I mean, I do not make it my own; I do not undertake to defend it. Yet neither do I enter the lists against it; it is capable of a sound meaning. (2.) I do not contradict myself in the note; let him prove it that can. (3.) I contradict nobody in the hymn; for it is not mine. Again: “I never said, While one evil thought can rise, I am not born again.” My brother said so once; but he took the words in too high a sense.” I add, and in a sense not warranted by the Bible. And yet I believe, that “real Christians, I mean those perfected in love, are freed from evil or sinful thoughts.” “But is not a babe in Christ born again? Is he not a real 442 REMARKs on MR. HILL’s Christian?” He is doubtless born again; and in some sense he is a real Christian; but not in the sense above defined. 47. We come now to the additional contradictions whiêh Mr. Hill undertakes to find in my writings. They are already dwindled into one; and I hope to show quickly, this one is none at all. It stands thus:-- “Most express are the words of St. John : “We know, that whosoever is born of God sinneth not.’” “Indeed, it is said, This means only, he doth not commit sin wilfully or habitually.” (Observe. I do not deny the text to mean this; but I deny that it means this only.) As a contradiction to this, Mr. Hill places these words in the opposite column:-- “The Apostle John declares, ‘Whosoever is born of God sinneth not,’ (1.) By any habitual sin; nor, (2.) By any wilful sin.” True; but do I say, the Apostle means this only? Otherwise, here is no contradiction. So, although you have got the gallows ready, you have not turned off old Mordecai yet.

So, although you have got the gallows ready, you have not turned off old Mordecai yet. As you so frequently give me that appellation, I for once accept of your favour. 48. “Before I quit this subject,” (of perfection,) “I cannot help expressing my astonishment, that Mr. Wesley should deny that his tenets on that point exactly harmonize with those of the Popish Church; since all the decrees and books that have been published by the Roman Clergy prove this matter beyond a doubt.” I believe you have been told so. But you should not assert it, unless from personal knowledge. “Alexander Ross says so.” What is Alexander Ross? See with your own eyes. “Mr. Hervey too gives an account of Lindenus and Andradius.” Second-hand evidence still. Have you seen them yourself? Otherwise, you ought not to allow their testimony. As to that “most excellent and evangelical work,” as you term it, the Eleven Letters ascribed to Mr. Hervey, Mr. Sellon has abundantly shown, that they are most excellently virulent, scurrilous, and abusive; and full as far from the evangelical spirit, as the Koran of Mahomet. “But Bishop Cowper”--I object to him, beside his being a hot, bitter Calvinist, that he is a dull, heavy, shallow writer. And let him be what he may, all you cite from him is but second-hand authority. “Nay, I refer to the Bishop's own FARRAGo Dou BLE-DISTILLED. 443 words.” But still, you have only the words at second-hand. In order to know the tenets of the Church of Rome, you must read the Romish authors themselves. Nay, it does not suffice to read their own private authors. They will disown anything we charge them with, unless we can prove it by recurring to their public and authentic records. Such are the “Canones et Decreta Concilii Tridentini.” Such the “Catechismus ad Parochos.” Till you have read these at least, you should never undertake to determine what is, or what is not, Popery. 49. “But as I am now on the subject of Popery, I must make a few animadversions on what Mr. Wesley affirms, ‘I always thought the tenets of the Church of Rome were nearer by half to Mr. Hill's tenets, than to Mr. Wesley’s.” (Page 33.) Nay, give the honour of this to its true author: Mr.

I infer, that colour is just as real as size or figure; and that all colours do as really exist without us, as trees, or corn, or heaven, or earth. “But what do you mean by colour?” When I say, “That cloth is of a red colour,” I mean its surface is so dis posed as to reflect the red (that is, the largest) rays of light. When I say, “The sky is blue,” I mean, it is so disposed as to reflect the blue (that is, the smallest) rays of light. And where is the delusion here? Does not that disposition, do not those rays, as really exist, as either the cloth or the sky? And are they not as really reflected, as the ball in a tennis court? It is true, that, when they strike upon my eye, a particular sensation follows in my soul. But that sensation is not colour; I know no one that calls it so. Colour therefore is a real material thing. There is no illusion in the case, unless you confound the perception with the thing perceived. And all other secondary qualities are just as real as figure or any other primary one. So you have no illusion in the natural world to countenance that you imagine to be in the moral. Wherever, therefore, this argument occurs, (and it occurs ten times over,)--“The natural world is all illusion; therefore, so is the moral,”--it is just good for nothing. But, take it all together, and what a supposition is this ! Is it not enough to make one's blood run cold 2 “The great God, the Creator of heaven and earth, the Father of the spirits of all flesh, the God of truth, has encompassed with falsehood every soul that he has made I has given up all mankind ‘to a strong delusion, to believe a lie!

The premises indeed are a little different, but the conclusion is one and the same. If every thought, word, and action necessarily depends upon those traces in the brain, which are formed whether we will or no, without either our consent or knowledge; then the man has no more liberty in thinking, speaking, or acting, than the stone has in falling. III. That great man, President Edwards, of New-England, places this in a still stronger light. He says,-- 1. The whole frame of this world wherein we are placed is so constituted, that, without our choice, visible objects affect our eyes, sounds strike upon the ear, and the other things which surround us affect the other bodily organs, according to their several natures. 2. The nerves, which are spread all over the body, without anv choice of ours, convey the impression made on the out ward organ to the common sensory; supposed to be lodged either in the pineal gland, or in some other part of the brain. 3. Immediately, without our choice, the perception or sensation follows: And from this, 4. The simple apprehension, (analogous to sensation,) which furnishes us with simple ideas. 5. These ideas are more and more associated together, still without our choice; and we understand, judge, reason accord ingly; yea, love, hate, joy, grieve, hope, or fear. 6. And according to our passions we speak and act. Where is liberty then? It is excluded. All you see, is one con nected chain, fixed as the pillars of heaven. IV. To the same effect, though with a little variation, speaks the ingenious Lord Kames. He says,-- The universe is one immense machine, one amazing piece of clock-work, consisting of innumerable wheels fitly framed, and indissolubly linked together. Man is one of these wheels, fixed in the middle of this vast automaton. And he moves just as necessarily as the rest, as the sun or moon, or earth. Only with this difference, (which was necessary for completing the design of the great Artificer,) that he seems to himself perfectly free; he imagines that he is unnecessitated, and master of his own motion; whereas in truth he no more directs or moves himself, than any other wheel in the machine.

Is it not necessary, with respect to the numerous enemies whom he has to encounter? Can a fool cope with all the men that know not God, and with all the spirits of darkness? Nay, he will neither be aware of the devices of Satan, nor the craftiness of his children. Secondly. Is it not highly expedient that a guide of souls should have likewise some liveliness and readiness of thought? Or how will he be able, when need requires, to “answer a fool according to his folly?” How frequent is this need ! seeing we almost everywhere meet with those empty, yet petulant creatures, who are far “wiser in their own eyes, than seven men that can render a reason.” Reasoning, therefore, is not the weapon to be used with them. You cannot deal with them thus. They scorn being convinced; nor can they be silenced, but in their own way. Thirdly. To a sound understanding, and a lively turn of thought, should be joined a good memory; if it may be, ready, that you may make whatever occurs in reading or conversation your own; but, however, retentive, lest we be “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” On the contrary, “every scribe instructed unto the kingdom of heaven,” every Teacher fitted for his work, “is like an house holder who bringeth out of his treasures things new and old.” 2. And as to acquired endowments, can he take one step aright, without first a competent share of knowledge? a knowledge, First, of his own office; of the high trust in which he stands, the important work to which he is called? Is there any hope that a man should discharge his office well, if he knows not what it is? that he should acquit himself faithfully of a trust, the very nature whereof he does not understand? Nay, if he knows not the work God has given him to do, he cannot finish it. Secondly. No less necessary is a knowledge of the Scrip tures, which teach us how to teach others; yea, a knowledge of all the Scriptures; seeing scripture interprets scripture; one part fixing the sense of another. So that, whether it be true or not, that every good textuary is a good Divine, it is certain none can be a good Divine who is not a good textuary.

So that, whether it be true or not, that every good textuary is a good Divine, it is certain none can be a good Divine who is not a good textuary. None else can be mighty in the Scriptures; able both to instruct and to stop the mouths of gainsayers. In order to do this accurately, ought he not to know the literal meaning of every word, verse, and chapter; without which there can be no firm foundation on which the spiritual meaning can be built? Should he not likewise be able to deduce the proper corollaries, speculative and practical, from each text; to solve the difficulties which arise, and answer the objections which are or may be raised against it; and to make a suitable application of all to the consciences of his hearers? Thirdly. But can he do this, in the most effectual manner, without a knowledge of the original tongues? Without this, will he not frequently be at a stand, even as to texts which regard practice only ? But he will be under still greater difficulties, with respect to controverted scriptures. He will be ill able to rescue these out of the hands of any man of learning that would pervert them: For whenever an appeal is made to the original, his n:outh is stopped at once. Fourthly. Is not a knowledge of profane history, likewise, of ancient customs, of chronology and geography, though not absolutely necessary, yet highly expedient, for him that would throughly understand the Scriptures? since the want even of this knowledge is but poorly supplied by reading the comments of other men. Fifthly. Some knowledge of the sciences also, is, to say the least, equally expedient. Nay, may we not say, that the knowledge of one, (whether art or science,) although now quite unfashionable, is even necessary next, and in order to, the knowledge of the Scripture itself? I mean logic. For what is this, if rightly understood, but the art of good sense? of apprehending things clearly, judging truly, and reasoning conclusively? What is it, viewed in another light, but the art of learning and teaching; whether by convincing or persuading? What is there, then, in the whole compass of science, to be desired in comparison of it? Is not some acquaintance with what has been termed the second part of logic, (metaphysics,) if not so necessary as this,.

Is not some acquaintance with what has been termed the second part of logic, (metaphysics,) if not so necessary as this,. yet highly expedient, (1.) In order to clear our apprehension, (without which it is impossible either to judge correctly, or to reason closely or conclusively,) by ranging our ideas under general heads? And, (2.) In order to understand many useful writers, who can very hardly be understood without it? Should not a Minister be acquainted too with at least the general grounds of natural philosophy? Is not this a great help to the accurate understanding several passages of Scrip ture? Assisted by this, he may himself comprehend, and on proper occasions explain to others, how the invisible things of God are seen from the creation of the world; how “the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork;” till they cry out, “O Lord, how manifold are thy works | In wisdom hast thou made them all.” But how far can he go in this, without some knowledge of geometry? which is likewise useful, not barely on this account, but to give clearness of apprehension, and an habit of thinking closely and connectedly. It must be allowed, indeed, that some of these branches of knowledge are not so indispensably necessary as the rest; and therefore no thinking man will condemn the Fathers of the Church, for having, in all ages and nations, appointed some to the ministry, who, suppose they had the capacity, yet had not had the opportunity of attaining them. But what excuse is this for one who has the opportunity, and makes no use of it? What can be urged for a person who has had an University education, if he does not understand them all? Certainly, supposing him to have any capacity, to have common understanding, he is inexcusable before God and man. Sixthly. Can any who spend several years in those seats of learning, be excused, if they do not add to that of the languages and sciences, the knowledge of the Fathers? the most authentic commentators on Scripture, as being both nearest the fountain, and eminently endued with that Spirit by whom all Scripture was given. It will be easily perceived, I speak chiefly of those who wrote before the Council of Nice. But who would not likewise desire to have some acquaintance with those that followed them?

But who would not likewise desire to have some acquaintance with those that followed them? with St. Chrysostom, Basil, Jerome, Austin; and, above all, the man of a broken heart, Ephraim Syrus? Seventhly. There is yet another branch of knowledge highly necessary for a Clergyman, and that is, knowledge of the world; a knowledge of men, of their maxims, tempers, and manners, such as they occur in real life. Without this he will be liable to receive much hurt, and capable of doing little good; as he will not know, either how to deal with men according to the vast variety of their characters, or to preserve himself from those who almost in every place lie in wait to deceive. How nearly allied to this is the discernment of spirits so far as it may be acquired by diligent observation. And can a guide of souls be without it? If he is, is he not liable to stumble at every step? Eighthly. Can he be without an eminent share of prudence? that most uncommon thing which is usually called common sense? But how shall we define it? Shall we say, with the Schools, that it is recta ratio rerum agibilium particu larium ?* Or is it an habitual consideration of all the circumstances of a thing, Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando 2 + and a facility of adapting our behaviour to the various combinations of them? However it be defined, should it not be studied with all care, and pursued with all earnestness of application ? For what terrible inconveniences ensue, when ever it is remarkably wanting ! Ninthly. Next to prudence or common sense, (if it be not included therein,) a Clergyman ought certainly to have some degree of good breeding; I mean address, easiness and propriety of behaviour, wherever his lot is cast: Perhaps one might add, he should have (though not the stateliness; for he is “the servant of all,” yet) all the courtesy of a gentleman, joined with the correctness of a scholar. Do we want a pattern of this? We have one in St. Paul, even before Felix, Festus, King Agrippa. One can scarce help thinking he was one of the best bred men, one of the finest gentlemen in the world.

It is true, many have wrote upon this subject; and some of them admirably well: Yet few, if any, at least in our nation, have carried their inquiry through all these particulars. Neither have they always spoken su plain and home as the nature of the thing required. But why did they not? Was it because they were unwilling to give pain to those whom they loved? Or were they hindered by fear of disobliging, or of incurring any temporal inconvenience? Miserable fear ! Is any temporal inconvenience whatever to be laid in the balance with the souls of our brethren? Or were they prevented by shame, arising from a consciousness of their own many and great defects? Undoubtedly this might extenuate the fault, but not altogether remove it. For is it not a wise advice, “Be not ashamed when it concerneth thy soul?” especially when it concerns the souls of thousands also? In such a case may God Set as a flint our steady face, Harden to adamant our brow ! But is there not another hinderance? Should not compas sion, should not tenderness, hinder us from giving pain? Yes, from giving unnecessary pain. But what manner of tenderness is this? It is like that of a surgeon who lets his patient be lost because he is too compassionate to probe his wounds. Cruel compassion | Let me give pain, so I may save life. Let me probe, that God may heal. 1. Are we then such as we are sensible we should be, First, with regard to natural endowments? I am afraid not. If we were, how many stumbling-blosks would be removed out of the way of serious Infidels? Alas, what terrible effects do we continually see of that common though sense less imagination, “The boy, if he is fit for nothing else, will do well enough for a Parson 1” Hence it is, that we see (I would to God there were no such instance in all Great Britain, or Ireland 1) dull, heavy, blockish Ministers; men of no life, no spirit, no readiness of thought; who are consequently the jest of every pert fool, every lively, airy coxcomb they meet. We see others whose memory can retain nothing; therefore they can never be men of considerable knowledge; they can never know much even of those things which they are most nearly concerned to know.

We see others whose memory can retain nothing; therefore they can never be men of considerable knowledge; they can never know much even of those things which they are most nearly concerned to know. Alas, they are pouring the water into a leaky vessel; and the broken cistern can hold no water ! I do not say, with Plato, that “all human know ledge is nothing but remembering.” Yet certain it is, that, without remembering, we can have but a small share of knowledge. And even those who enjoy the most retentive memory, find great reason still to complain, Skill comes so slow, and life so fast does fly; We learn so little, and forget so much ! And yet we see and bewail a still greater defect in some that are in the ministry. They want sense, they are defective in understanding, their capacity is low and shallow, their apprehension is muddy and confused; of consequence, they are utterly incapable either of forming a true judgment of things, or of reasoning justly upon anything. O how can these who themselves know nothing aright, impart knowledge to others? how instruct them in all the variety of duty, to God, their neighbour, and themselves? How will they guide them through all the mazes of error, through all the intanglements of sin and temptation? How will they apprize them of the devices of Satan, and guard them against all the wisdom of the world? It is easy to perceive, I do not speak this for their sake; (for they are incorrigible;) but for the sake of parents, that they may open their eyes and see, a blockhead can never “do well enough for a Parson.” He may do well enough for a tradesman; so well as to gain fifty or an hundred thousand pounds. He may do well enough for a soldier; nay, (if you pay well for it,) for a very well-dressed and well mounted officer. He may do well enough for a sailor, and may shine on the quarter-deck of a man-of-war. He may do so well, in the capacity of a lawyer or physician, as to ride in his gilt chariot. But O ! think not of his being a Minister, unless you would bring a blot upon your family, a scandal upon our Church, and a reproach on the gospel, which he may murder, but cannot teach.

think not of his being a Minister, unless you would bring a blot upon your family, a scandal upon our Church, and a reproach on the gospel, which he may murder, but cannot teach. Are we such as we are sensible we should be, Secondly, with regard to acquired endowments? Here the matter (suppose we have common understanding) lies more directly within our own power. But under this, as well as the following heads, methinks I would not consider at all, how many or how few are either excellent or defective. I would only desire every person who reads this to apply it to himself. Certainly some one in the nation is defective. Am not I the man? Let us each seriously examine himself. Have I, (1.) Such a knowledge of Scripture, as becomes him who undertakes so to explain it to others, that it may be a light in all their paths? Have I a full and clear view of the analogy of faith, which is the clue to guide me through the whole? Am I acquainted with the several parts of Scripture; with all parts of the Old Testament and the New Upon the mention of any text, do I know the context, and the parallel places? Have I that point at least of a good Divine, the being a good textuary? Do I know the grammatical construction of the four Gospels; of the Acts; of the Epistles; and am I a master of the spiritual sense (as well as the literal) of what I read? Do I understand the scope of each book, and how every part of it tends thereto? Have I skill to draw the natural inferences deducible from each text? Do I know the objections raised to them or from them by Jews, Deists, Papists, Arians, Socinians, and all other sectaries, who more or less corrupt or cauponize the word of God? Am I ready to give a satisfactory answer to each of these objections? And have I learned to apply every part of the sacred writings, as the various states of my hearers require? (2.) Do I understand Greek and Hebrew Otherwise, how can I undertake, (as every Minister does,) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents?

(2.) Do I understand Greek and Hebrew Otherwise, how can I undertake, (as every Minister does,) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents? Am I not at the mercy of every one who does understand, or even pretends to understand, the original? For which way can I confute his pretence? Do I under stand the language of the Old Testament? critically? at all? Can I read into English one of David's Psalms; or even the first chapter of Genesis? Do I understand the language of the New Testament ? Am I a critical master of it? Have I enough of it even to read into English the first chapter of St. Luke 2 If not, how many years did I spend at school? How many at the University? And what was I doing all those years? Ought not shame to cover my face? (3) Do I understand my own office? Have I deeply considered before God the character which I bear? What is it to be an Ambassador of Christ, an Envoy from the King of heaven? And do I know and feel what is implied in “watching over the souls” of men “as he that must give account ?” (4) Do I understand so much of profane history as tends to confirm and illustrate the sacred? Am I acquainted with the ancient customs of the Jews and other nations mentioned in Scripture? Have I a competent knowledge of chrono logy, that at least which refers to the sacred writings? And am I so far (if no farther) skilled in geography, as to know the situation, and give some account, of all the considerable places mentioned therein 7 (5.) Am I a tolerable master of the sciences? Have I gone through the very gate of them, logic? If not, I am not likely to go much farther, when I stumble at the threshold. Do I understand it so as to be ever the better for it? to have it always ready for use; so as to apply every rule of it, when occasion is, almost as naturally as I turn my hand? Do I understand it at all? Are not even the moods and figures above my comprehension?

Are not even the moods and figures above my comprehension? Do not I poorly endeavour to cover my ignorance, by affecting to laugh at their barbarous names P Can I even reduce an indirect mood to a direct; an hypothetic to a categorical syllogism ? Rather, have not my stupid indolence and laziness made me very ready to believe, what the little wits and pretty gentlemen affirm, “that logic is good for nothing?” It is good for this at least, (wherever it is understood,) to make people talk less; by showing them both what is, and what is not, to the point; and how extremely hard it is to prove anything. Do I under stand metaphysics; if not the depths of the Schoolmen, the subtleties of Scotus or Aquinas, yet the first rudiments, the general principles, of that useful science? Have I conquered so much of it, as to clear my apprehension and range my ideas under proper heads; so much as enables me to read with ease and pleasure, as well as profit, Dr. Henry More's Works, Malebranche’s “Search after Truth,” and Dr. Clarke's “Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God?” Do I understand natural philosophy? If I have not gone deep therein, have I digested the general grounds of it? Have I mastered Gravesande, Keill, Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, with his “Theory of Light and Colours?” In order thereto, have I laid in some stock of mathematical knowledge? Am I master of the mathematical A B C of Euclid's Elements? If I have not gone thus far, if I am such a novice still, what have I been about ever since I came from school? (6.) Am I acquainted with the Fathers; at least with those venerable men who lived in the earliest ages of the Church? Have I read over and over the golden remains of Clemens Romanus, of Ignatius and Polycarp; and have I given one reading, at least, to the works of Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Cyprian 2 (7.) Have I any knowledge of the world? Have I studied men, (as well as books,) and observed their tempers, maxims, and manners? Have I learned to beware of men; to add the wisdom of the serpent to the innocence of the dove?

It seemed to come from the cliffs; looking up to which, they saw a large body of stone, four or five yards broad, split and fly off from the very top of the rock. They thought it strange, but rode on. Between ten and eleven, a larger piece of the rock, about fifteen yards thick, thirty high, and between sixty and seventy broad, was torn off and thrown into the valley. About seven in the evening, one who was riding by observed the ground to shake exceedingly; and soon after several large stones or rocks, of some tons weight cach, rose out of the ground. Others were thrown on one side, others turned upside down, and many rolled over and over. Being a little surprised, and not very curious, he hasted on his way. On Friday and Saturday the ground continued to shake, and the rocks to roll over one another. The earth also clave asunder in very many places, and continued so to do till Sunday morning. Being at Osmotherley, seven miles from the Cliffs, on Monday, June 1, and finding Edward Abbot there, I desired him the next morning to show me the way thither. I walked, crept, and climbed round and over great part of the ruins. I could not perceive by any sign, that there was ever any cavity in the rock at all; but one part of the solid stone is cleft from the rest, in a perpendicular line, and as smooth as if cut with instruments. Nor is it barely thrown down, but split into many hundred pieces, some of which lie four or five hundred yards from the main rock. The ground nearest the cliff is not raised, but sunk con siderably beneath the level. But, at some distance, it is raised in a ridge of eight or ten yards high, twelve or fifteen broad, and near a hundred long. Adjoining to this lies an oval piece of ground, thirty or forty yards in diameter, which has been removed, whole as it is, from beneath the cliff, without the least fissure, with all its load of rocks, some of which were as large as the hull of a small ship.

Does not passion blind the eyes of the understanding, as smoke does the bodily eyes? And how little of the truth can we learn from those who sec nothing but through a cloud 7 This advantage then I have over both parties,--the being angry at neither. So that if I have a little understanding from nature or experience, it is (in this instance at least) unclouded by passion. I wish the same happiness which I wish to myself, to those on one side and on the other. I would not hurt either in the lcast degree; I would not willingly give them any pain. I have likewise another advantage, that of having no bias one way or the other. I have no interest depending; I want no man’s favour, having no hopes, no fears, from any man; and having no particular attachment of any kind to either of the contending parties. But am I so weak as to imagine, that because I am not angry at them, they will not be angry at me? No; I do not imagine any such thing. Probably both will be angry enough; that is, the warm men on both sides, were it only for this, -that I am not as warm as themselves. For what is more insufferable to a man in a passion, than to see you keep your temper? And is it not a farther provocation, that I do not behave as he does to his opponent; that I call him no ill names; that I give him no ill words? I expect, there fore, to be abused on all sides; and cannot be disappointed, unless by being treated with common humanity. This premised, I come to the point, to give you my “free thoughts on the present state of public affairs;” the causes and consequences of the present commotions. But permit me to remind you, that I say nothing peremptorily. I do not take upon me to affirm, that things are thus or thus. I just set down my naked thoughts, and that without any art or colouring.

I just set down my naked thoughts, and that without any art or colouring. “What then do you think is the direct and principal cause of the present public commotions, of the amazing ferment among the people, the general discontent of the nation?” which now rises to an higher degree than it has done in the memory of man; insomuch that I have heard it affirmed with my own ears, “King George ought to be treated as King Charles was 1” Is it the extraordinary bad character of the King? I do not apprehend it is. Certainly, if he is not, as some think, the best Prince in Europe, he is far from being the worst. One not greatly prejudiced in his favour does not charge him with want of virtue, (of this he judges him to have more than enough,) but with wanting those royal vices, which (with Machiavel and the ingenious Doctor Mandeville) he supposes would be public benefits. “But does he not likewise want understanding?” So it has been boldly affirmed. And it must be acknowledged, this charge is supported by facts which cannot be denied. The First is, he believes the Bible; the Second, he fears God; the Third, he loves the Queen. Now, suppose the First of these, considering the prejudice of education, might consist with some share of understanding, yet how can this be allowed with regard to the Second? For although, in the times of igno rance and barbarism men imagined, “the fear of God” was “the beginning of wisdom,” our enlightened age has discovered it is the end of it; that whenever the fear of God begins, wisdom is at an end. And with regard to the Third, for a man to love his wife, unless perhaps for a month or two, must argue such utter want of sense, as most men of rank are now ashamed of. But, after all, there are some who, allowing the facts, deny the consequence; who still believe, and that after the most accurate inquiry, from such as have had the best means of information, that there are few noblemen or gentle men in the nation, (and we have many not inferior to most in Europe,) who have either so good a natural understanding, or so general a knowledge of all the valuable parts of learning.

And whom can he trust better? Suppose then it was true, (which is more than any man can prove,) that he did consult her on all occasions, and particularly when he was in trouble and perplexity, who can blame him for so doing? “Well, be this as it may, who can help blaming him for giving so many pensions?” This is a thing which I do not understand, and can therefore neither praise nor blame. Some indeed, I think, are well bestowed on men eminent in their several professions. All, I believe, are well designed, particularly those given to men who are removed from public employments. Yet, I fear, some of these are ill bestowed on those who not only fly in the face of their benefactor, but avail themselves of his favours to wound the deeper. “For were he not in the wrong, these would never turn against him!” What pity they should enjoy them another day, after such foul and flagrant ingratitude I This fault (if it were really such) would argue too great easiness of temper. But this is quite the reverse of what is commonly objected,--inflexible stubbornness. “Nay, what else could occasion the settled disregard of so many petitions and remonstrances, signed by so many thousand hands, and declaring the sense of the nation?” The sense of the nation / Who can imagine this that knows the manner wherein nine in ten, I might say ninety-nine in an hundred, of those petitions are procured ? A Lord or Squire (sometimes two or more) goes, or sends his steward, round the town where his seat is, with a paper, which he tells the homest men is for the good of their King and country. He desires each to set his name or mark to this. And who has the hardiness to gainsay; especially if my Lord keeps open house? Mean time, the contents of it they know nothing about. I was not long since at a town in Kent, when one of these petitions was carrying about. I asked one and another, “Have you signed the petition?” and found none that had refused it. And yet not one single person to whom I spoke had either read it, or heard it read.

And yet not one single person to whom I spoke had either read it, or heard it read. Now, I would ask any man of common sense, what stress is to be laid on these petitions; and how they do declare “the sense of the nation;” nay, of the very persons that have signed them? What a shocking insult is it then on the whole kingdom, to palm these petitions upon us, of which the very subscribers have not read three lines, as the general “sense of the nation l” But suppose they had read all that they have subscribed, what judges are they of these matters? To put this beyond dispute, let us only propose one case out of a thousand. Step back a few years, and suppose Mr. Pitt at the head of the administration. Here comes up a petition from New castle-upon-Tyne, signed by five hundred hands, begging His Majesty to dismiss that corrupt Minister, who was taking such measures as tended to the utter ruin of the nation. What would Mr. Pitt say to this? Would he not ask, “How came these colliers and keelmen to be so well acquainted with affairs of State? How long have they been judges of public administration ? of naval and military operations? How came they to understand the propriety or impropriety of the measures I take? Do they comprehend the balance of Europe? Do they know the weakness and strength of its several kingdoms; the characters of the Monarchs and their Ministers; the springs of this and that public motion? Else, why do they take upon them to scan my conduct? Ne sutor ultra crepidam / ‘Let them mind their own work, keep to their pits and keels, and leave State affairs to me.” “But surely you do not place the citizens of London on a level with the colliers of Newcastle !” I do not. And yet I suppose they were equally incompetent judges of the measures which Mr. Pitt took. And I doubt they are full as incom petent judges of the measures taken by the present ministry. To form a tolerable judgment of them requires, not only a good understanding, but more time than common tradesmen can spare, and better information than they can possibly procure.

To form a tolerable judgment of them requires, not only a good understanding, but more time than common tradesmen can spare, and better information than they can possibly procure. I think, therefore, that the encouraging them to pass their verdict on Ministers of State, yea, on King, Lords, and Commons, is not only putting them out of their way, but doing them more mischief than you are aware of. “But the remonstrance I Surely the King ought to have paid more regard to the remonstrance of the city of London.” Consider the case: The city had presented a petition which he could by no means approve of, as he judged it was designed not so much to inform him as to inflame his subjects. After he had rejected this, as mildly as could be done, whilst he viewed it in this light, they present a remonstrance to the same effect, and (as he judged) with the same design. What then could he do less than he did? Could he seem to approve what he did not approve? If not, how could he testify his full disapprobation in more inoffensive terms? As to the idle, shameless tale of his bursting out into laughter at the Magistrates, any who know His Majesty's temper would as soon believe that he spit in their faces, or struck them a box on the ear. His Majesty’s character, then, after all the pains which have been taken to make him odious, as well as contemptible, remains unimpeached; and therefore cannot be, in any degree, the cause of the present commotions. His whole conduct, both in public and private, ever since he began his reign, the uniform tenor of his behaviour, the general course both of his words and actions, has been worthy of an Englishman, worthy of a Christian, and worthy of a King. “Are not, then, the present commotions owing to his having extraordinary bad Ministers? Can you say that his Ministers are as blameless as himself?” I do not say this; I do not think so. But I think they are not one jot worse than those that went before them; nor than any set of Ministers who have been in place for at least thirty years last past.

Where is there a nation in Europe, in the habitable world, which * See Wodrow’s “History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland.” ThouGIITS UPON LIBERTY. 4l enjoys such liberty of conscience as the English? I will be bold to say there is nothing like it in Holland, in Germany, (Protestant or Popish,) in either the Protestant or Popish cantons of Switzerland; no, nor in any country under the sun. Have we not in England full liberty to choose any religion, yea, or no religion at all? to have no more religion than a Hottentot, shall I say? nay, no more than a bull or a swine? Whoever therefore in England stretches his throat, and bawls for more religious liberty, must be totally void of shame, and can have no excuse but want of understanding. 21. But is not the ground of this vehement outcry, that we are deprived of our civil liberty? What is civil liberty? A liberty to enjoy our lives and fortunes in our own way; to use our property, whatever is legally our own, according to our own choice. And can you deny, “that we are robbed of this liberty?” Who are? Certainly I am not. I pray, do not face me down that I am. Do not argue me out of my senses. If the Great Turk, or the King of France, wills that a man should die, with or without cause, die he must. And instances of the kind continually occur; but no such instances occur in England. I am in no more danger of death from King George, than from the Queen of Hungary. And if I study to be quiet and mind my own business, I am in no more danger of losing my liberty than my life. No, nor my property; I mean, by any act of the King. If this is in any degree invaded, it is not by the King, or his Parliament, or army, but by the good patriots. Hark! Is hell or Bedlam broke loose? What roaring is that, loud as the waves of the sea? “It is the patriot mob.” What do they want with me? Why do they flock about my house? “Make haste illuminate your windows in honour of Mr. Wilkes.” I cannot in conscience; I think it is encouraging vice.

How? Where are the fetters, but in your own imagination? There are none, either on your hands or mine: Neither you nor I can show to any man in his senses, that we have one chain upon us, even so big as a knitting-needle. 23. I do not say, that the ministry are without fault; or that they have done all things well. But still I ask, What is the liberty which we want? It is not civil or religious liberty. These we have in such a degree as was never known before, not from the times of William the Conqueror.” But all this is nothing; this will never satisfy the bellua multorum capitum. That “many-headed beast,” the people, roars for liberty of another kind. Many want Indian liberty, the liberty of cutting throats, or of driving a brace of balls * If the famous Middlesex election was an exception to this, yet observe, one Swallow makes no summer. through the head of those ugly-looking fellows, whom they cannot abide the sight of Many more want the old High land liberty, the convenient liberty of plundering. Many others there are who want the liberty of war, of borrowing their neighbours' wives or daughters; and not a few, though they do not always avow it, the liberty of murdering their Prince. 24. If you are a reasonable man, a man of real honour, and consequently want none of these, I beg to know what would you have? Considering the thing calmly, what liberty can you reasonably desire which you do not already enjoy? What is the matter with you, and with multitudes of the good people, both in England and Ireland, that they are crying and groaning as if they were chained to an oar, or barred up in the dungeons of the Inquisition? The plain. melancholy truth is this: There is a general infatuation, which spreads, like an overflowing stream, from one end of the land to the other; and a man must have great wisdom and great strength, or he will be carried away by the torrent. But how can we account for this epidemic madness? for it deserves no better name. We must not dare to give the least intimation, that the devil has anything to do with it. No! this enlightened age is too wise to believe that there is any devil in being !

will first despise and then abhor the King? What can we expect, but that by the repeated doses of this poison they will be perfectly intoxicated, and only wait for a con venient season to tear in pieces the royal monster, as they think him, and all his adherents? 25. At present there are hinderances in the way, so that they cannot use their teeth as they would. One is an untoward Parliament, who will not look upon the King with the same eyes that they do; but still think he has no more design or desire to enslave the nation, than to burn the city of London. A still greater hinderance is the army; even lions and bears do not choose to encounter them, so that these men of war do really at this time preserve the peace of ithe nation. What then can be done before the people cools, that this precious opportunity be not lost? What indeed, but to prevail upon the King to dissolve his Parliament and disband his army? Nay, let the Parliament stay as it is, it will suffice to disband the army. If these red-coats were but out of the way, the mob would soon deal with the Parliament. Probatum est: * Nothing is more easy than to keep malignant members from the House. Remember Lord North not long ago;t this was a taste, a specimen, of their activity. What then would they not do if they were masters of the field, if none were left to oppose them? Would not the * This has already been put to the proof-EDIT. + Rudely insulted by a turbulent mob, as he was going into the House. Titou GHTS UPON LIBERTY. 45. avenues of both Houses be so well guarded, that none but patriots would dare to approach? 26. But (as often as you have heard the contrary affirmed) King George has too much understanding, to throw himself into the hands of those men who have given full proof that they bear him no great good-will. Nor has he reason to believe that they are much more fond of his office than of his person. They are not vehemently fond of monarchy itself, whoever the Monarch be. Therefore neither their good nor ill words will induce him, in haste, to leap into the fire with his eyes open. 27.

of power, is every way indefensible. It is absolutely over turned by the very principle on which it is supposed to stand; namely, that a right of choosing his Governors belongs to THoUGHTs on THE PRESENT scARCITY of PRovisions. 53 every partaker of human nature. If this be so, then it belongs to every individual of the human species; conse quently, not to freeholders alone, but to all men; not to men only, but to women also; nor only to adult men and women, to those who have lived one-and-twenty years, but to those who have lived eighteen or twenty, as well as those who have lived threescore. But none did ever maintain this, nor probably ever will. Therefore this boasted principle falls to the ground, and the whole superstructure with it. So common sense brings us back to the grand truth, “There is no power but of God.” MANY excellent things have been lately published con cerning the present scarcity of provisions; and many causes have been assigned for it, by men of experience and reflec tion. But may it not be observed, there is something wanting still, in most of those publications? One writer assigns and insists on one cause, another on one or two more. But who assigns all the causes that manifestly concur to produce this melancholy effect? at the same time pointing out, how each particular cause affects the price of each particular sort of provision? I would willingly offer to candid and benevolent men a few hints on this important subject; proposing a few questions, and subjoining to each what seems to be the plain and direct anSWer. I. 1. I ask, First, Why are thousands of people starving, perishing for want, in every part of the nation? The fact I know; I have seen it with my eyes, in every corner of the land. I have known those who could only afford to eat a little coarse food once every other day. I have known one 54 ThouGHTS ON THE PRESENT in London (and one that a few years before had all the conveniencies of life) picking up from a dunghill stinking sprats, and carrying them home for herself and her children. I have known another gathering the bones which the dogs.

But you well know how populous, how fruitful, how pleasant it was a few years ago. You know, the people were not stupid, not wanting in sense, considering the few means of improvement they enjoyed. Neither did you find them savage, fierce, cruel, treacherous, or unkind to strangers. On the contrary, they were, in most parts, a sensible and ingenious people. They were kind and friendly, courteous and obliging, and remarkably fair and just in their dealings. Such are the men whom you hire their own countrymen to tear away from this lovely country; part by stealth, part by force, part made captives in those wars which you raise or foment on purpose. You have seen them torn away,+children from their parents, parents from their children; husbands from their wives, wives from their beloved husbands, brethren and sisters from each other. You have dragged them who had never done you any wrong, perhaps in chains, from their native shore. You have forced them into your ships like an herd of swine,--them who had souls immortal as your own; only some of them leaped into the sea, and resolutely stayed under water, till they could suffer no more from you. You have stowed them together as close as ever they could lie, without any regard either to decency or convenience. And when many of them had been poisoned by foul air, or had sunk under various hardships, you have seen their remains delivered to the deep, till the sea should give up his dead. You have carried the survivors into the vilest slavery, never to end but with life; such slavery as is not found among the Turks at Algiers, no, nor among the Heathens in America. 3. May I speak plainly to you? I must. Love constrains me; love to you, as well as to those you are concerned with. Is there a God? You know there is. Is he a just God? Then there must be a state of retribution; a state wherein +he just God will reward every man according to his Thou GhiTS UPON SLAVERY. 77 works. Then what reward will he render to you? O think betimes ! before you drop into eternity | Think now, “He shall have judgment without mercy that showed no mercy.” Are you a man? Then you should have an human heart. But have you indeed?

But have you indeed? What is your heart made of? Is there no such principle as compassion there? Do you never feel another’s pain? Have you no sympathy, no sense of human woe, no pity for the miserable? When you saw the flowing eyes, the heaving breasts, or the bleeding sides and tortured limbs of your fellow-creatures, was you a stone, or a brute? Did you look upon them with the eyes of a tiger? When you squeezed the agonizing creatures down in the ship, or when you threw their poor mangled remains into the sea, had you no relenting? Did not one tear drop from your eye, one sigh escape from your breast? Do you feel no relenting now? If you do not, you must go on, till the measure of your iniquities is full. Then will the great God deal with you as you have dealt with them, and require all their blood at your hands. And at “that day it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for you!” But if your heart does relent, though in a small degree, know it is a call from the God of love. And “to-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your heart.” To-day resolve, God being your helper, to escape for your life. Regard not money ! All that a man hath will he give for his life : Whatever you lose, lose not your soul: Nothing can countervail that loss. Immediately quit the horrid trade: At all events, be an honest man. 4. This equally concerns every merchant who is engaged in the slave-trade. It is you that induce the African villain to sell his countrymen; and in order thereto, to steal, rob, murder men, women, and children without number, by enabling the English villain to pay him for so doing, whom you overpay for his execrable labour. It is your money that is the spring of all, that empowers him to go on: So that whatever he or the African does in this matter is all your act and deed. And is your conscience quite reconciled to this? Does it never reproach you at all? Has gold entirely blinded your eyes, and stupified your heart? Can you see, can you feel, no harm therein? Is it doing as you would be done to? Make the case your own.

5. UNHAPPY, very unhappy for us, we are a kingdom divided against itself; and, without a miracle, fall we must ! What a fall will there then be, when such “distress is upon the land, aud wrath upon the people !” And is this a little thing, brethren? Is it what any of us either desire or promote? God forbid! A kingdom divided against itself is an evil, of all others, the most dreadful; inasmuch as an innumerable train of evils necessarily follow; no inconsiderable part of which are the sword, fire, plunder, and famine. This our forefathers unhappily felt, and to our inexpressible sorrow we may feel. And is this an unlikely thing? Is it altogether impro bable? Surely no ! But that small cloud which arose some few years since, has, to discerning minds, been gathering blackness, and spreading itself well-nigh over the whole land. And is it any marvel if, by and by, it should burst upon us, as it has done upon America? Let him that has wisdom understand this. Then who that has any understanding, any bowels of mercy and compassion, would not do the utmost, that either human or divine prudence can suggest, to prevent it? For who knows, when the sword is once drawn, where it may stop? Who can command it to be put up into its scabbard, and it will obey him? Such power is not in man; it is only in Him Who rides upon the stormy sky, And calms the roaring seas. Again: If the sword should be drawn, upon whom may it light? This we know not. But supposing it should be on yourself, or a beloved wife, an aged parent, a tender child, a dear relative, what recompence can be found for such a loss? What, O ! what would the whole world then be, if it might be gained? Alas! what a poor trifle ! But, suppose you escape with your life, and the lives of those that are near and dear to you, there is yet another dreadful evil to fear, and which has been the case; plunder, lawless plunder, may deprive you of your little all. Now, who can insure another? Who can exempt himself in the time of general distress, from such an evil? Alas ! brethren, “we must let this alone for ever. We are of yesterday, and know nothing” of to-morrow.

What an amazing way of deciding controversies ! But so it is; and O what horrors attend on it ! At what a price is the decision made | By the blood and wounds of thousands; the burning cities, ravaging and laying waste the country.” Now, who that seriously considers this awful contest, can help lamenting the astonishing want of wisdom in our brethren to decide the matter without bloodshed? What, are there no wise men amongst us? none that are able to judge between brethren? But brother goeth to war against brother; and that in the very sight of the Heathen. Surely this is a sore evil amongst us. O how are the mighty fallent How is wisdom perished from the wise ! What a flood of folly and madness has broke in upon us! But do you farther ask me, Who was first in the transgres sion? Who began the dreadful strife? I must beg your pardon for not touching this subject now. Excuse my saying any thing of the second cause, as I mean only to inquire into the first. I fear doing harm, and this is far from my design. Another great reason for my avoiding any reflections of this sort, on this delicate subject, is, that it has been already done by some of the most able hands, and to very little purpose. Argument seems lost in clamour, in confusion of passion and party rage; and the satanic dust of prejudice seems to have put out the eyes of our understanding. But thus much I might venture to say,-the case is rendered very complicated, and must in general remain unintelligible, unless to those who thoroughly understand the constitution of each party, and then have wisdom enough to weigh it in an unprejudiced balance. To be plain, the present melancholy dispute either is, or is not, founded in a constitutional right on the one part, and a constitutional opposition on the other. So far is certain. Therefore, till the entire nature of both constitutions is well and fully understood, it is utterly impossible to decide thereon. I speak as to the matter of the dispute only; the manner of it is another point. Now, how many understand, or ever properly consider, either the one or the other? I fear but few.

The inquirers jumped into the middle of it at once, in defiance of all logic and common sense. “The state of the nation” is a very vague and indeterminate expression; so indeterminate, that, if the meaning of the phrase be not fixed before the inquiry concerning it is begun, men of elo quence may make vehement speeches, of two or three hours long, while neither the speakers nor the hearers know what they are talking about. And speeches of this kind tend to inflame, not to inform, our homest countrymen. They are calculated, not to bring light, but fire; to raise the nation into a flame. But to come to the point: You are desirous to inquire concerning the state of the nation. But what is it you would know concerning it? “Certainly, whether it be prosperous or not?” In what respects? It may be prosperous in one respect, and not so in another. Tell us coolly and distinctly, what is the question? And what is it you would prove? It is this: “Is not the nation ruined?” Ruined / What can you mean? The great men of another nation asked the King, “Knowest thou not that Egypt is destroyed?” How was it destroyed? Why, all the cattle of Egypt were killed by the murrain. And not only all the flax and corn, all the wheat and barley were consumed, but the locusts had devoured every herb and leaf, and left no green thing in the land. Countrymen, judge | Is England thus destroyed? Are all our cattle killed? Have you no oxen, or cows, or sheep, or swine?--no horses, mules, asses left? Whatever be the case elsewhere, are not a few of them left alive in London? Is all your corn destroyed? Look round upon the fields; is there no green thing left? See with your own eyes. You do see, that there is as fair a prospect, as has been for many years. I can testify, that for more than half a century, there has not been greater plenty, either of cattle or vegetables of every kind, than there is at this day. England therefore is not destroyed. “But is it not in the high road to destruction? What is its present state? good or bad? increasing or decreasing?” Increasing or decreasing, in what respects?

You may inquire next, with regard to “salt-water carriage of goods. Is the quantity of British shipping decreased since the year 1759? Are there fewer ships now employed in the ThE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND. 145 coasting-trade? fewer in the Irish trade? or fewer for distant voyages? Nay, have we fewer ship-carpenters, or fewer sail makers at work? And do we build fewer or smaller ships for merchants’ service than formerly?” The more particu larly you inquire, the more clearly you will see how immensely the nation has improved in this article. But it is objected, “We have lost eight hundred of our ships since the beginning of the war.” Perhaps so; although you have no proof of this; for Lloyd's Catalogue is no sufficient evidence. But how many have we taken? This it is absolutely needful you should know, or you cannot know whether we have lost or gained upon the whole. We have taken above nine hundred. And the evidence of our gain is at least as good as that of our loss. “Nay, but we have also lost our Negro trade.” I would to God it may never be found more ! that we may never more steal and sell our brethren like beasts; never murder them by thousands and tens of thousands ! O may this worse than Mahometan, worse than Pagan, abomination, be removed from us for ever ! Never was anything such a reproach to England since it was a nation, as the having any hand in this execrable traffic. 6. “The state of our fisheries at home and abroad forms another important article of comparison. For as our ships of war are our bulwarks, and our sailors are the proper guards for defending such works, so it is of the utmost importance to have always ready, for manning our fleets, a number of able seamen. Now, these are most readily supplied by our fisheries. And when were these in their most flourishing state? in 1759, or 1777? Were more British ships employed in the fisheries on the banks of Newfoundland, or in the gulf of St. Lawrence, or on the coasts of Labrador, then, than there are now 7 Were there half as many? Again: Were there more employed in the fisheries for whales, and fish to make oil? Were there even half as many?

On how totally insufficient grounds is the contrary supposition built ! “We have lost--near as many ships as we have taken | We have been disturbed on the banks of Newfoundland; and we can no longer sell our brethren like sheep, and pour out their blood like water; therefore the nation is in a desperate state; therefore we are on the brink of ruin l’’ And are these the best arguments that can be found to support the lamentable conclusion | Now, my friends, give me leave to sum up briefly what has been offered on the other side. And, I pray, observe the difference; mark the firm and solid foundation whereon the conclusion is built. The prosperous or adverse state of the nation is to be judged of from the state of its population, its agriculture, its manufactures, its land and fresh-water carriage of goods, its salt-water carriage of goods, its fisheries, the tendency of its taxes, its annual revenue, and the national debt. But you have seen, that, in each of these particulars, considered one by one, England is not in a worse but in a far better state than it was eighteen years ago; so far from being on the brink of ruin, that it is in a state of eminent prosperity. Let none then deceive you with vain words ! Let none by subtle reasonings, or by artful, elaborate harangues, persuade you out of your senses. Let no sweet-tongued orator, by his smooth periods, steal away your understanding; no thunder ing talker fill you with vain fears of evils that have no being. Be aware of all who (perhaps sincerely) strive to terrify you with creatures of their own imagination. You are encom passed with liberty, peace, and plenty: You see them on the right hand and on the left. Let no man then cast a mist before your eyes, and face you down that they are poverty and slavery. Know the public as well as private blessings: which you enjoy, and be thankful to God and man. There is only one reason why we should fear: There is a God that judgeth the earth. And as none can harm us if we have Him for our friend, so none can help us if we have Him for our enemy. Is it not wise then seriously to consider this, Is God our friend or our enemy?

O bring him out of all His sanctified distress, And by his name thy servant call, And fill him with thy peace. Show him, almighty Lord, That thou his Saviour art; And speak the soul-converting word, “My son, give me thy heart l” 18? 1. Do not you call yourself a Protestant? Why so? Do you know what the word means? What is a Protestant? I suppose you mean one that is not a Papist. But what is a Papist? If you do not know, say so; acknowledge you cannot tell. Is not this the case? You call yourself a Protestant; but you do not know what a Protestant is. You talk against Papists; and yet neither do you know what a Papist is. Why do you pretend, then, to the knowledge which you have not? Why do you use words which you do not understand? 2. Are you desirous to know what these words, Papist and Protestant, mean? A Papist is one who holds the Pope or Bishop of Rome (the name papa, that is, father, was formerly given to all Bishops) to be head of the whole Christian Church; and the Church of Rome, or that which owns the Pope as their head, to be the only Christian Church. 3. In a course of years, many errors crept into this Church, of which good men complained from time to time. At last, about two hundred years ago, the Pope appointed many Bishops and others to meet at a town in Germany, called Trent. But these, instead of amending those errors, established them all by a law, and so delivered them down to all succeeding generations. 4. Among these errors may be numbered, their doctrine of seven sacraments; of transubstantiation; of communion in one kind only; of purgatory, and praying for the dead therein; of veneration of relics; and of indulgences, or pardons granted by the Pope, and to be bought for money. It is thought by some, that these errors, great as they are, do only defile the purity of Christianity; but it is sure, the following strike at its very root, and tend to banish true religion out of the world:-- 5. First. The doctrine of merit.

And when I approach thy altar, pour into my heart humility, faith, hope, love, and all those holy dispositions which become the solemn remem brance of a crucified Saviour. Let me employ this whole day to the ends for which it was ordained, in works of necessity and mercy, in prayer, praise, and meditation; and “let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, by always acceptable in thy sight.” I know, O Lord, that thou hast commanded me, and there fore it is my duty, to love thee with all my heart, and with all my strength. I know thou art infinitely holy and overflowing in all perfection; and therefore it is my duty so to love thee. . I know thou hast created me, and that I have neither being nor blessing but what is the effect of thy power and goodness. I know thou art the end for which I was created, and that I can expect no happiness but in thee. I know that in love to me, being lost in sin, thou didst send thy only Son, and that he, being the Lord of glory, did humble himself to the death upon the cross, that I might be raised to glory. I know thou hast provided me with all necessary helps for carrying me through this life to that eternal glory, and this out of the excess of thy pure mercy to me, unworthy of all mercies. I know thou hast promised to be thyself my “exceeding great reward;” though it is thou alone who thyself “workest in me, both to will and to do of thy good pleasure.” Upon these, and many other titles, I confess it is my duty to love thee, my God, with all my heart. Give thy strength unto thy servant, that thy love may fill my heart, and be the motive of all the use I make of my understanding, my affections, my senses, my health, my time, and whatever other talents I have received from thee.

Suffer me not to remain in darkness concerning anything that is needful for me to know in order to my present peace and my eternal glory. O Lord, incline mine ears to wisdom, and my heart. to understanding, that I may follow on to know the Lord, and increase in the knowledge and love of God. Give me, O. Lord, that highest learning, to know thee; and that best. wisdom, to know myself. Command a blessing on my studies. and endeavours; and bless me, and help me, Lord, in my learning all such things as shall stand me in stead, and do me good. Let my soul and body, and all their powers, be under thy conduct, and employed to thy glory. Show me thy ways, O Lord, and lead me into truth; and whatever I am ignorant of, unto me let it be given to know the mysteries. of thy kingdom; and let me count all things but dung and dross for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord; to whom, with thee and the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. Vouchsafe, O. Lord, to keep me this day from all sin. Bless my going out. and coming in, now and for evermore. Amen. “Our Father,” &c. O MY heavenly Father, who tookest me out of my mother's. womb, who wast my hope when Ihanged yet upon my mother's breast, I have been preserved by thee ever since I was born; Ogo not from me in this my youth, but send out thy light and thy truth, that they may lead me, and bring me to thy holy hill, and to thy dwelling-place. Teach me thy way, O Lord, and enable me to walk in thy truth. O knit my heart unto. thee, that I may fear thy name; and give me understanding in the way of godliness. Lord, I am young, and cannot dis cern between good and evil: O let me not go out of the way of thy commandments. Learn me true understanding and knowledge. Teach me to do the thing that pleaseth thee; for thou art my God. Let thy loving Spirit lead me forth into all the paths of righteousness. Let my study day and night be in thy word, that I may become wise unto salvation.

I and another indeed did with great difficulty and hazard swim to the island; but when we came thither, the rock was so steep and smooth, that we could not possibly climb up. After swim ming round several times, and making many ineffectual efforts, we thought we must perish there; but at length one of us found a place, where he made a shift to crawl up. He then helped his companion after him. The others swam about half-way. A boat then took them up, when they were just sinking. Another boat, which we had ordered to follow us, afterwards came and took us home.” 7. A still more remarkable deliverance it is of which he gave an account in the year 1760: “Some years since, I lived at a place very near the river Rhine. In that part, it is broader than the Thames at London Bridge, and extremely rapid. But, having been long practised in swimming, I made no scruple of going into it at any time; only I was always careful to keep near the shore, that the stream might not carry me away. Once, however, being less careful than usual, I was unawares drawn into the mid channel. The water there was extremely rough, and poured along like a galloping horse. I endeavoured to swim against it, but in vain, till I was hurried far from home. When I was almost spent, I rested upon my back, and then looked about for a landing place, finding I must either land or sink. With much difficulty I got near the shore; but the rocks were so ragged and sharp, that I saw, if I attempted to land there, I should be torn in pieces; so I was constrained to turn again to the mid stream. At last, despairing of life, I was cheered by the sight of a fine smooth creek, into which I was swiftly carried by a violent stream. A building stood directly across it, which I did not then know to be a powder-mill. The last thing I can remem ber was, the striking of my breast against one of the piles whereon it stood. I then lost my senses, and knew nothing more, till I rose on the other side of the mill.

from levity of every kind. Though he was constantly cheer ful, as rejoicing in hope of his heavenly inheritance, yet had he too deep a sense of his own wants, and the wants of the Church of God, as also of the sins and miseries of mankind, to be at any time light or trifling. I have a letter before me, dated December, 1771, which at once gives us a picture of his seriousness, watchfulness, and earnestness; and contains advices well deserving the consideration of all that fear God. ‘There is undoubtedly, said he, “such a thing as the full assurance of faith. Be not discouraged on account of thou sands who stop short of it: It is our own fault if we do not attain. God would give us ample satisfaction if we did but deeply feel our wants. Both you and I want a deeper awakening, which will produce a death to outward things and speculative knowledge. Let us shut our eyes to the gilded clouds without us; let us draw inward, and search after God, if haply we may find him. Let us hold our confidence, though we are often constrained against hope to believe in hope. But let us not rest in our confidence, as thousands do; let it help us to struggle and wait till he come. Let us habituate our selves to live inwardly. This will solemnize us, and prevent our trifling with the things of God. We may be thankful for what we have, without resting in it. We may strive, and yet not trust in our striving; but expect all from divine grace.” “Four or five years after, he says, “I send this to inquire after your welfare, and to let you know, that though I am pretty well in body, yet I breakfast. But I want to break faster in my spirit than I do. Yet, blessed be God, I have been in such pinching, grinding circumstances, for near a year, by a series of providential and domestic trials, as have given me some deadly blows. I am not without hope of setting my eyes on you once more. Mr. Wesley kindly invites me to travel with nim, and visit some of the societies. I feel an inclination to break one of my chains, parochial retirement, which may be a nest for self-indulgence.

But now the sun of my earthly joys is set for ever, and my soul filled with an anguish which only finds its consolation in a total resignation to the will of God. When I was asking the Lord, if he pleased, to spare him to me a little longer, the following promise was impressed on my mind: ‘Where I am, there shall my servants be, that they may behold my glory.” Lord, hasten the time !” 18. There is little need of adding any farther character of this man of God to the foregoing account, given by one who wrote out of the fulness of her heart. I would only observe, that for many years I despaired of finding any inhabitant of Great Britain, that could stand in any degree of comparison with Gregory Lopez, or Monsieur de Renty. But let any impartial person judge if Mr. Fletcher was at all inferior to them. Did he not experience as deep communion with God, and as high a measure of inward holiness, as was experienced by either one or the other of those burning and shining lights? And it is certain, his outward light shone before men with full as bright a lustre as theirs. But if any would draw a parallel between them, there are two circumstances which should be well observed. One is, we are not assured that the writers of their lives did not extenuate, if not suppress, their faults. And some faults we are assured there were; namely, some touches of superstition, and some of idolatry, as the worship of images, angels, and saints; the Virgin Mary in particular. But I have not suppressed, or even extenuated, anything in Mr. Fletcher's life. Indeed, I know nothing that needed to be extenuated, much less to be suppressed. A second circumstance is, that the writers of their lives could not have so full a knowledge of them as I, and much more Mrs. Fletcher, had; being eye and ear witnesses of his whole conduct. Consequently, we knew that his life was not sullied with any taint of idolatry or superstition. I was intimately acquainted with him for thirty years. I conversed with him morning, moon, and night, without the least reserve, during a journey of many hundred miles; and in all that time I never heard him speak an improper word, or saw him do an improper action.

He asked me what I meant by perfection. I told him without any disguise or reserve. When I ceased speaking, he said, “Mr. Wesley, if this be all you mean, publish it to all the world. If any one then can confute what you say, he may have free leave.” I answered, “My Lord, I will; ” and accordingly wrote and published the sermon on Christian perfection. In this I endeavoured to show, (1.) In what sense Christians are not, (2.) In what sense they are, perfect. “(1.) In what sense they are not. They are not perfect in knowledge. They are not free from ignorance, no, nor from mistake. We are no more to expect any living man to be infallible, than to be omniscient. They are not free from. infirmities, such as weakness or slowness of understanding, irregular quickness or heaviness of imagination. Such in another kind are impropriety of language, ungracefulness of pronunciation; to which one might add a thousand nameless defects, either in conversation or behaviour. From such infirmities as these none are perfectly freed till their spirits return to God; neither can we expect till then to be wholly freed from temptation; for ‘the servant is not above his master.” But neither in this sense is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees, none which does not admit of a continual increase. “(2.) In what sense then are they perfect? Observe, we are not now speaking of babes in Christ, but adult Christians. But even babes in Christ are so far perfect as not to commit sin. This St. John affirms expressly; and it cannot be disproved by the examples of the Old Testament. For what, if the holiest of the ancient Jews did sometimes commit sin? We cannot infer from hence, that “all Christians do and must commit sin as long as they live.’ “But does not the Scripture say, ‘A just man sinneth seven times a day?’ It does not. Indeed it says, “A just man falleth seven times. But this is quite another thing; for, First, the words, a day, are not in the text. Secondly, here is no mention of falling into sin at all. What is here mentioned, is, falling into temporal affliction. “But elsewhere Solomon says, “There is no man that sinneth not.

I endeavoured to pray, and could not. I went to Mrs. D., who prayed for me, and told me it was the death of nature. I opened the Bible, on, ‘The fearful and unbelieving shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.’ I could not bear it. I opened again, on Mark xvi. 6, 7: ‘Be not affrighted; ye seek Jesus of Nazareth. Go your way; tell his disciples he goeth before you into Galilee; there ye shall see him.’ I was encouraged, and enabled to pray, believing I should see Jesus at home. I returned that night, and found Mrs. G. She prayed for me; and the Predestinarian had no plea, but, ‘Lord, thou art no respecter of persons.’ He proved he was not, by blessing me. I was in a moment enabled to lay hold on Jesus Christ, and found salvation by simple faith. He assured me, the Lord, the King, was in the midst of me, and that I should see evil no more. I now blessed Him who had visited and redeemed me, and was become my “wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” I saw Jesus altogether lovely; and knew he was mine in all his offices. And, glory be to Him, He now reigns in my heart without a rival. I find no will but his. I feel no pride; nor any affec tion but what is placed on Him. I know it is by faith Istand; and that watching unto prayer must be the guard of faith. I am happy in God this moment, and I believe for the next. I have often read the chapter you mention, (1 Cor. xiii.,) and compared my heart and life with it. In so doing, I feel my shortcomings, and the need I have of the atoning blood. Yet I dare not say, I do not feel a measure of the love there described, though I am not all I shall be. I desire to be lost in that ‘love which passeth knowledge.’ I see ‘the just shall live by faith;’ and unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given.

You have always preached the strictest doctrine; and I loved to follow it. Do so still, whoever is pleased or displeased.’ He asked, “Do you now believe you are saved from sin 7” She said, ‘Yes; I have had no doubt of it for many months. That I ever had, was, because I did not abide in the faith. I now feel I have kept the faith; and perfect love casteth out all fear. As to you, the Lord promised me, your latter works should exceed your former, though I do not live to see it. I have been a great enthusiast, as they term it, these six months; but never lived so near the heart of Christ in my life. You, Sir, desire to comfort the hearts of hundreds by following that simplicity your soul loves.” “(9.) To one who had received the love of God under her prayer, she said, ‘I feel I have not followed a cunningly-devised fable; for I am as happy as I can live. Do you press on, and stop not short of the mark. To Miss M s she said, ‘Love Christ; he loves you. I believe I shall see you at the right hand of God: But as one star differs from another star in glory, so shall it be in the resurrection. I charge you, in the presence of God, meet me in that day all-glorious within. Avoid all conformity to the world. You are robbed of many of your privileges. I know I shall be found blameless. Do you labour to be found of him in peace, without spot.’ “(10.) Saturday morning, she prayed nearly as follows: ‘I know, my Lord, my life is prolonged only to do thy will. And though I should never eat or drink more,” (she had not swallowed anything for near eight-and-twenty hours,) ‘thy will be done. I am willing to be kept so a twelvemonth: Man liveth not by bread alone. I praise thee that there is not a shadow of complaining in our streets. In that sense we know not what sickness means. Indeed, Lord, neither life, nor death, nor things present, nor things to come, no, nor any creature, shall separate us from thy love one moment. Bless these, that there may be no lack in their souls. I believe there shall not.

13. But if Christ has put an end to that law, what need of any atonement for their transgressing it? “A. Observe in what sense he has put an end to it, and the difficulty vanishes. Were it not for the abiding merit of his death, and his continual intercession for us, that law would condemn us still. These, therefore, we still need for every transgression of it. “Q. 14. But can one that is saved from sin be tempted? “A. Yes; for Christ was tempted. “Q. 15. However, what you call temptation, I call the corruption of my heart. And how will you distinguish one from the other? “A. In some cases it is impossible to distinguish, without the direct witness of the Spirit. But in general one may distinguish thus: “One commends me. Here is a temptation to pride. But instantly my soul is humbled before God. And I feel no pride; of which I am as sure, as that pride is not humility. “A man strikes me. Here is a temptation to anger. But my heart overflows with love. And I feel no anger at all; of which I can be as sure, as that love and anger are not the same. “A woman solicits me. Here is a temptation to lust. But in the instant I shrink back. And I feel no desire or lust at all; of which I can be as sure, as that my hand is cold or hot. “Thus it is, if I am tempted by a present object; and it is just the same, if, when it is absent, the devil recals a commenda tion, an injury, or a woman, to my mind. In the instant the soul repels the temptation, and remains filled with pure love. * “And the difference is still plainer, when I compare my present state with my past, wherein I felt temptation and corruption too. “Q. 16. But how do you know, that you are sanctified, saved from your inbred corruption? “A. I can know it no otherwise than I know that I am justified. ‘Hereby know we that we are of God,” in either sense, ‘by the Spirit that he hath given us.” “We know it by the witness and by the fruit of the Spirit. And, First, by the witness.

That scripture, ‘We have received, not the spirit that is of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we may know the things which are freely given us of God.” (1 Corinthians ii. 12.) “Now surely sanctification is one of ‘the things which are freely given us of God.’ And no possible reason can be assigned why this should be excepted, when the Apostle says, “We receive the Spirit” for this very end, ‘that we may know the things which are’ thus ‘freely given us.” “Is not the same thing implied in that well-known scripture, “The Spirit itself witnesseth with our spirit, that we are the children of God?’ (Romans viii. 16.) Does he witness this only to those who are children of God in the lowest sense? Nay, but to those also who are such in the highest sense. And does he not witness, that they are such in the highest sense ? What reason have we to doubt it? “What, if a man were to affirm, (as indeed many do,) that this witness belongs only to the highest class of Christians? Would not you answer, “The Apostle makes no restriction; therefore doubtless it belongs to all the children of God?” And will not the same answer hold, if any affirm, that it belongs only to the lowest class? “Consider likewise 1 John v. 19: ‘We know that we are of God. How? ‘By the Spirit that he hath given us.” Nay, “hereby we know that He abideth in us.” And what ground have we, either from Scripture or reason, to exclude the witness, any more than the fruit, of the Spirit, from being here intended? By this then also ‘we know that we are of God,” and in what sense we are so; whether we are babes, young men, or fathers, we know in the same manner. “Not that I affirm that all young men, or even fathers, have this testimony every moment. There may be inter missions of the direct testimony that they are thus born of God; but those intermissions are fewer and shorter as they grow up in Christ; and some have the testimony both of their justification and sanctification, without any intermission at all; which I presume more might have, did they walk humbly and closely with God. “Q. 20.

It is not worth while to contend for a term. It is “ salvation from sin.” “(7.) It is ‘perfect love.” (1 John iv. 18.) This is the essence of it; its properties, or inseparable fruits, are, rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in every thing giving thanks. (1 Thess. v. 16, &c.) “(8.) It is improvable. It is so far from lying in an indivisible point, from being incapable of increase, that one perfected in love may grow in grace far swifter than he did before. “(9.) It is amissible, capable of being lost; of which we have numerous instances. But we were not thoroughly convinced of this, till five or six years ago. “(10.) It is constantly both preceded and followed by a gradual work. “(11.) But is it in itself instantaneous or not? In examining this, let us go on step by step. “An instantaneous change has been wrought in some believers: None can deny this. “Since that change, they enjoy perfect love; they feel this, and this alone; they ‘rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks. Now, this is all that I mean by perfection; therefore, these are witnesses of the perfec tion which I preach. “‘But in some this change was not instantaneous.” They did not perceive the instant when it was wrought. It is often difficult to perceive the instant when a man dies; yet there is an instant in which life ceases. And if ever sin ceases, there must be a last moment of its existence, and a first moment of our deliverance from it. “‘But if they have this love now, they will lose it. They may; but they need not. And whether they do or no, they have it now; they now experience what we teach. They now are all love; they now rejoice, pray, and praise without ceasing. “‘However, sin is only suspended in them; it is not destroyed. Call it which you please. They are all love to-day; and they take no thought for the morrow. “‘But this doctrine has been much abused.’ So has that of justification by faith. But that is no reason for giving up either this or any other scriptural doctrine.

I looked about for happiness, but could not find it. Then I thought, “O, if I had but such a person with me, I should surely be happy.” I mused with myself, “How lovely is her look How agreeably she talks !” I thought of Sappho’s words:-- “Bless'd as the immortal gods is he, The youth that fondly sits by thee; And hears and sees thee all the while Softly speak and sweetly smile.” “Surely, this is the very thing I want; and could I attain it, I should then no more be solitary ! For,-- Thou from all shades the darkness wouldst exclude, And from a desert banish solitude : Therefore, with her I can be happy; without her I never can.” 4. Perhaps your case is something like mine. Let me then ask you a few questions. Were you ever convinced of sin? of your lost, undone state? Did you feel the wrath of God abiding on you? If so, what did you then want to make you happy? “To know, my God is reconciled.” You had your wish. You were enabled to say boldly, “I know that my Redeemer liveth.” And were not you then happy? “Indeed I was.” In what? In the knowledge and love of God. 5. And if you have now the same knowledge and love of God, does it not answer the same end? Will not the same cause still produce the same effect? If, therefore, you are not happy now, is it not because you have not that intercourse with God which you then had? And are you seeking to supply the want of that intercourse by the enjoyment of a creature? You imagine that near connexion with a woman will make amends for distance from God! Have you so learned Christ? Has your expe rience taught you no better than this? 6. You were happy once; you knew you were; happy in God, without being beholden to any creature. You did not need Love's all-sufficient sea to raise With drops of creature-happiness. And is it wise to seek it now anywhere else than where you found it before? You have not the same excuse with those who never were happy in God. And how little is the seeking it in any creature better than idolatry ! Is it not, in effect, loving the creature more than the Creator?

5. I was in this perplexity when a thought shot across my mind, which solved the matter at once: “This is the key: Those that hold, “Every one is absolutely predestinated either to salvation or damnation, see no medium between salvation by works and salvation by absolute decrees.” It follows, *To excite ill-will.-EDIT. that whosoever denies salvation by absolute decrees, in so doing (according to their apprehension) asserts salvation by works. 6. And herein I verily believe they are right. As averse as I once was to the thought, upon further consideration, I allow there is, there can be, no medium. Either salvation is by absolute decree, or it is (in a scriptural sense) by works. Yea, this I will proclaim on the house-top,-there is no medium between these. You must either assert unconditional decrees, or (in a sound sense) salvation by works. 7. This deserves a fuller examination: Let us consider it more attentively. If the salvation of every man that ever was, is, or shall be, finally saved, depends wholly and solely upon an absolute, irresistible, unchangeable decree of God, without any regard either to faith or works foreseen, then it is not, in any sense, by works. But neither is it by faith: For unconditional decree excludes faith as well as works; since, if it is either by faith or works foreseen, it is not by unconditional decree. Therefore, salvation by absolute decree excludes both one and the other; and, consequently, upon this supposition, salvation is neither by faith nor by works. 8. If, on the other hand, we deny all absolute decrees, and admit only the conditional one, (the same which our blessed Lord hath revealed,) “He that believeth shall be saved;” we must, according to their apprehension, assert salvation by works. We must do this, (in a sound sense of the expression,) if we believe the Bible. For seeing no faith avails, but that “which worketh by love,” which produces both inward and outward good works, to affirm, No man is finally saved without this, is, in effect, to affirm, No man is finally saved without works. It is plain, then, if we affirm, No man is saved by an absolute, unconditional decree, but only by a conditional one; we must expect, all who hold unconditional decrees will say, we teach salvation by works. 9.

We did so; but could not find any trace of her. Coming down the stairs, I said, ‘Is there no one under these stairs?’ The Doctor answered, “There is a poor creature; but she is so outrageous, that we are obliged to shut her up in the dark. On his opening the door, she put out her head. My friend sighed, and said, ‘I know nothing of this poor thing. She answered, ‘What, Sir, am I so altered in three days, that you do not know your own daughter?” He immediately knew her voice, and took her home. Her husband was very glad to refund her fortune.” A GENTLEMAN walking with Mr. Chapoon, (uncle to Mr. Roquet) in Moorfields, proposed stepping into Bedlam. After they had walked there awhile, they were turning to go out, when a young woman cried, “Sir, I desire to speak with you.” His friend said, “Sure, you will not stay to hear a mad woman’s tale.” He answered, “Indeed I will:” On which the other went away. She then said, “My father left me and my fortune in the hands of my uncle. A young gentleman offered me marriage, and all things were agreed 498 Account of THE BROTHERs’ sTEPs. on; when one morning my uncle took me out with him in the chariot, as he said, to see a friend; but instead of this he brought me to Bedlam, where I have been confined ever since.” “Your story is plausible,” said Mr. C.; “but how shall I know it is the truth?” “Very easily,” said she, “The gentleman that was to marry me lives within a day's journey of London. Write to him; and tell him you have something to say concerning me, and would be glad to meet him at such a place in town. If he does not come, let this all pass for a mad woman’s dream.” Mr. C. wrote, and asked the gentleman, who came to the place appointed, whether he knew such a person. He answered, “Perfectly well. We were to have been married before now ; but her uncle sent me word she was taken ill.” Mr. C. then told him the whole story. He immediately sent to her uncle; who was very ready to take her out, and pay her fortune, to avoid farther trouble.

I know that those who fashionably deny the existence of spirits are hugely disgusted at accounts of this kind. I know that they incessantly labour to spread this disgust among those that are of a better mind; because if one of these accounts be admitted, their whole system falls to the ground. But, whoever is pleased or displeased, I must testify what I believe to be the truth. Indeed I never myself saw the appearance of an umbodied spirit; and I never saw the commission of a murder. Yet, upon the testimony of unexceptionable witnesses, I can firmly believe both one and the other. September 12, 1782. NEwINGTON, December 10, 1748. 1. I HAve read your letter with attention, and much approve of the spirit with which it is wrote... You speak in love. I desire to do so too; and then no harm can be done on either side. You appear not to be wedded to your own opinion, but open to further conviction. I would willingly be of the same temper; not obstimately attached to either side of the question. I am clearly satisfied of the necessity of this; a willingness to see what as yet I see not. For I know, an unwillingness to be convinced would utterly blind either you or me; and that if we are resolved to retain our present opinion, reason and argument signify nothing. 2. I shall not therefore think it is time or pains misem ployed, to give the whole cause a second hearing; to recite the occasion of every step I have taken, and the motives inducing me so to do; and then to consider whatsoever either you or others have urged on the contrary side of the question. 3. Twenty-nine years since, when I had spent a few months at Oxford, having, as I apprehended, an exceeding good constitution, and being otherwise in health, I was a little surprised at some symptoms of a paralytic disorder. I could not imagine what should occasion the shaking of my hand; till I observed it was always worst after breakfast; and that if I intermitted drinking tea for two or three days, it did not shake at all.

But “the love of dissipation,” says the author, “is the reigning evil of the present day.” Allowing it is; I ask, What do you mean by dissipation? Sometimes you use the word pleasure as an equivalent term. But what pleasure do you mean; the pleasures of sense, or of the imagination in general; or any particular pleasure of one or the other? At other times you seem to make dissipation the same with luxury; at least with a high degree of it. Sometimes, again, you use the love of amusement as the same with the love of dissipation. But the question recurs, What amusement do you mean; for there are numberless sorts. So that still, after talking about them so long, we have only a vague, indeterminate notion of a dissipated age, a dissipated nation, or a dissipated man; without having any clear or distinct idea what the word dissipation means. 3. Those who are content with slight and superficial views of things, may rest in the general account, that a dissipated age is one wherein the bulk of mankind, especially those of any rank or fashion, spend the main of their time in eating and drinking, and diversions, and the other pleasures of sense and imagination. And that we live in a dissipated age, in this meaning of the word, is as plain as that the sun shines at noon-day. Most of those that are commonly termed innocent amusements fall under this head,--the pleasures of imagination. Whenever, therefore, a general fondness of these prevails, that is a dissipated age. A dissipated nation is one where the people in general are vehemently attached to the pleasures of sense and imagination. The smaller vulgar in England are at present passionately fond of the lowest pleasures both of sense and fancy; while the great vulgar are equally engrossed by those they account a higher kind. Meantime they are all equally dissipated, although in different ways; and so indeed is every man and woman that is passionately attached to external pleasure. 4. But without dwelling any longer on the surface of things, let us search the matter to the bottom, and inquire, wherein lies the original ground of human dissipation. Let this be once pointed out, and it will place the whole question in the clearest light. 5. Man is an immortal spirit, created in the image and for the enjoyment of God.

Requiescat in Apace. That is,--“Philip Verheyen, Doctor and Professor of Physic, ordered his body to be buried in this churchyard, that he might not lessen the honour of the church, or infect it with unwholesome vapours.” What pity it is, that so few persons, even of sense and piety, feel the force of these considerations ! I am so sensible of their weight, that I have likewise left orders to bury my remains, not in the New Chapel, but in the burying-ground adjoining to it. * 3: 460

And seeing our ideas are not innate, but must all originally come from our senses, it is certainly necessary that you have senses capable of discerning objects of this kind: Not those only which are called natural senses, which in this respect profit nothing, as being altogether incapable of discerning objects of a spiritual kind; but spiritual senses, exercised to discern spiritual good and evil. It is necessary that you have the hear ting ear, and the seeing eye, emphatically so called; that you have a new class of senses opened in your soul, not depending on organs of flesh and blood, to be “the evidence of things not seen,” as your bodily senses are of visible things; to be the avenues to the invisible world, to discern spiritual objects, and to furnish you with ideas of what the outward “eye hath not seen, neither the ear heard.” 33. And till you have these internal senses, till the eyes of your understanding are opened, you can have no apprehension of divine things, no idea of them at all. Nor, consequently, till then, can you either judge truly, or reason justly, concern ing them; seeing your reason has no ground whereon to stand, no materials to work upon. 34. To use the trite instance: As you cannot reason con cerning colours, if you have no natural sight, because all the ideas received by your other senses are of a different kind; so that neither your hearing, nor any other sense, can supply your want of sight, or furnish your reason in this respect with matter to work upon: Soyou cannot reason concerning spiritual things, if you have no spiritual sight; because all your ideas received by your outward senses are of a different kind; yea, far more different from those received by faith or internal sensation, than the idea of colour from that of sound. These are only different species of one genus, namely, sensible ideas, received by exter nal sensation; whereas the ideas of faith differ toto genere from those of external sensation. So that it is not conceivable, that external sensation should supply the want of internal senses; or furnish your reason in this respect with matter to work upon. 35. What then will your reason do here?

And yet I allow you this, that although both repent ance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary be fore justification, yet neither the one nor the other is neces sary in the same sense, or in the same degree, with faith. Not in the same degree; for in whatever moment a man believes (in the Christian sense of the word) he is justified, his sins are blotted out, “his faith is counted to him for right eousness.” But it is not so at whatever moment he repents, or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Faith alone, therefore, justifies; which repentance alone does not, much less any outward work. And, consequently, none of these are necessary to justification, in the same degree with faith. Nor in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith. This is proxi mately necessary thereto; repentance, remotely, as it is neces sary to the increase or continuance of faith. And even in this sense these are only necessary on supposition,--if there be time and opportunity for them; for in many instances there is not; but God cuts short his work, and faith prevents the fruits of repentance. So that the general proposition is not overthrown, but clearly established by these concessions; and we conclude still, both on the authority of Scripture and the Church, that faith alone is the proximate condition of justification. III. l. Iwasonceinclined to believe that none would openly object against what I had anywhere said of the nature of salva tion. How greatly, then was I surprised some months ago, when I was shown a kind of circular letter, which one of those whom “the Holy Ghost hath made overseers” of his Church,” I was informed, had sent to all the Clergy of his diocese ! Past of it ran (nearly, if not exactly) thus:-- “There is great indiscretion in preaching up a sort of religion, as the true and only Christianity, which, in their own account of it, consists in an enthusiastic ardour, to be understood or attained by very few, and not to be practised without breaking in upon the common duties of life.” O, my Lord, what manner of words are these ! Supposing candour and love out of the question, are they the words of truth?

Are the feelings now in question “properties peculiar to matter?” the feeling of peace, 78 A FAItTHER APPEAL TO MEN joy, love, or any feelings at all? I can no more understand the philosophy than the divinity of this. (3.) “That the Scriptures declare the operations of the Spirit are not subject to any sensi ble feelings.” You are here disproving, as you suppose, a propo sition of mine. But are you sure you understand it? By feel ing, I mean, being inwardly conscious of. By the operations of the Spirit, I do not mean the manner in which he operates, but the graces which he operates in a Christian. Now, be pleased to produce those scriptures which declare that a Christian cannot feel or perceive these operations. 3. Are you not convinced, Sir, that you have laid to my charge things which I know not? I do not gravely tell you (as much an enthusiast as you over and over affirm me to be) that I sensibly feel (in your sense) the motions of the Holy Spirit. Much less do I make this, any more than “convulsions, agonies, howlings, roarings, and violent contortions of the body,” either “certain signs of men’s being in a state of sal vation,” or “necessary in order thereunto.” You might with equal justice and truth inform the world, and the worshipful the magistrates of Newcastle, that I make seeing the wind, or feeling the light, necessary to salvation. Neither do I confound the extraordinary with the ordinary operations of the Spirit. And as to your last inquiry, “What is the best proof of our being led by the Spirit P” I have no exception to that just and scriptural answer which you your self have given,-“A thorough change and renovation of mind and heart, and the leading a new and holy life.” 4. That I confound the extraordinary with the ordinary operations of the Spirit, and therefore am an enthusiast, is also strongly urged, in a charge delivered to his Clergy, and lately published, by the Lord Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. An extract of the former part of this I subjoin, in his Lord ship’s words: “I cannot think it improper to obviate the contagion of those enthusiastical pretensions, that have lately betrayed whole mul titudes either into presumption or melancholy.

“If we feel our conscience at peace with God, through remission of our sin,--all is of God.” Homily on Rogation, Week, Part III.) “If you feel such a faith in you, rejoice in it, and let it be daily increasing by well-working.” (Homily on Faith, Part III.) “The faithful may feel wrought tranquillity of conscience, the increase of faith and hope, with many other graces of God.” (Homily on the Sacrament, Part I.) “Godly men feel inwardly God's Holy Spirit, inflaming their hearts with love.” (Homily on certain places of Scrip ture, Part I.) “God give us grace to know these things, and to feel them in our hearts | This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with his presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For without his lively inspiration, can we not so much as speak the name of the Mediator. “No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost; much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. “But we have received, saith St. Paul, ‘not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God;’ for this purpose, ‘that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God.” In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God, and to please him. It is he that purifieth the mind by his secret working. He enlighteneth the heart, to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth in the tongue of man, to stir him to speak his honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and the self-same Spirit.” (Homily for Rogation Week, Part III.) 27. Every proposition which I have anywhere advanced concerning those operations of the Holy Ghost, which, I believe, are common to all Christians in all ages, is here clearly maintained by our own Church. Under a full sense of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was, that on the mentioning any of thesegreat truths,even among men of education, the cryimmediately arose, “An enthusiast!

Under a full sense of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was, that on the mentioning any of thesegreat truths,even among men of education, the cryimmediately arose, “An enthusiast! An enthusiast !” But I now plainly perceive this is only an old fallacy in a new shape. To object enthu siasm to any person or doctrine is but a decent method of beg £ing thequestion. It generally spares the objector the trouble of reasoning, and is a shorter and easier way of carrying his cause. For instance, I assert that “till a man “receives the Holy Ghost, he is without God in the world; that he cannot know the things of God, unless God reveal them unto him by the Spirit; no, nor have even one holy or heavenly temper, without the inspiration of the Holy One.” Now, should one who is conscious to himself that he has experienced none of these things, attempt to confute these propositions, either from Scrip ture or antiquity, it might prove a difficult task. What then shall he do? Why, cry out, “Enthusiasm ! Enthusiasm !” and the work is done. But what does he mean by enthusiasm 2 Perhaps nothing at all: Few have any distinct idea of its meaning. Perhaps “something very bad,” or, “something I never experienced and do not understand.” Shall I tell you then what that “terrible something” is ? I believe, thinking men mean by enthusiasm, a sort of religious madness; a false imagination of being inspired by God: And by an enthusiast, one that fancics himself under the influence of the Holy Ghost, when, in fact, he is not. Let him prove me guilty of this who can. I will tell you once more the whole of my belief on these heads: And if any man will show me (by arguments, not hard names) what is wrong, I will thank God and him. 28. Every good gift is from God, and is given to man by the Holy Ghost. By nature there is in us no good thing; and there can be none, but so far as it is wrought in us by that good Spirit. Have we any true knowledge of what is good? This is not the result of our matural understanding.

17. And it must be owned, a confinement of such a sort is as fit to cause as to cure distraction: For what scene of distress is to be compared to it?--To be separated at once from all who are near and dear to you; to be cut off from all reasonable con versation; to be secluded from all business, from all reading, from every innocent entertainment of the mind, which is left to prey wholly upon itself, and day and night to pore over your misfortunes; to be shut up day by day in a gloomy cell, with only the walls to employ your heavy eyes, in the midst either of melancholy silence, or horrid cries, groans and laughter inter mixed; to be forced by the main strength of those Who laugh at human nature and compassion, to take drenches of nauseous, perhaps torturing, medicines, which you know you have no need of now, but know not how soon you may, possibly by the operation of these very drugs on a weak and tender constitution: Here is distress It is an astonishing thing, a signal proof of the power of God, if any creature who has his senses when the confinement begins, does not lose them before it is at an end | How must it heighten the distress, if such a poor wretch, being deeply convinced of sin, and growing worse and worse, (as he probably will, seeing there is no medicine here for his sick ness, no such Physician as his case requires,) be soon placed among the incurables! Can imagination itself paint such a hell upon earth? where even “hope never comes, that comes to all!”--For, what remedy? If a man of sense and humanity should happen to visit that house of woe, would he give the hearing to a madman’s tale? Or if he did, would he credit it? “Do we not know,” might he say, “how well any of these will talk in their lucid intervals P” So that a thousand to one he would concern himself no more about it, but leave the weary to wait for rest in the grave 18. I have now answered most of the current objections, par ticularly such as have appeared of weight to religious or reason able men.

The same oath binds him both to one and the other, laying an equal obligation on his conscience. Howa Magistrate who neglects topunish excess, profaneness, and impiety, can excuse himself from the guilt of perjury, I do not pretend to know. If he reasons fairly, he will find himself as much forsworn, as an evidence who being upon his oath to declare the whole truth, nevertheless conceals the most considerable part of it. And his perjury is so much the more infamous, as the ill example and effects of it will be mis chievous.” (Mr. Disney's First Essay, Page 30.) 7. The same author (in the preface to his Second Essay) goes on : “You, gentlemen of the Grand Juries, take a solemn oath, that “you will diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all such articles, matters, and things as shall be given you in charge: As also, that you will (not only present no person for envy, hatred, or malice, but) not leave any unpresented, for fear, favour, or affection.” Now, are not the laws against immorality and profaneness given you in charge, as well as those against riots, felony, and treason P Are not presentment and indict ment one method expressly appointed by the statutes, for the punishment of drunkenness and tippling? Are not houses of bawdry and gaming punishable in the same courts, and, conse quently, presentable by you? Is not the proclamation for the punishing of vice, profaneness, and immorality always read before you as soon as you are sworn? And does not the Judge of Assize, or Chairman of the Bench, in the charge given imme diately after the reading it, either recite to you the particular laws against such offences, or refer you for them to that procla mation? It is plain from all this, that you are bound upon your oaths to present all vice and immorality, as well as other crimes, that fall within your knowledge, because they are expressly given you in charge.

It is plain from all this, that you are bound upon your oaths to present all vice and immorality, as well as other crimes, that fall within your knowledge, because they are expressly given you in charge. And this you are to do, not only when evidence isoffered before you by the information of others, but with regard to all such offences as you or any of you are able, of your own personal knowledge, to present; all which you have sworn to do impartially, without fear, favour, or affection.” I leave it now with all reasonable men to consider, how few Grand Jurors perform this; and, consequently, what multi tudes of them, throughout the nation, fall under the guilt of wilful perjury ! 8. The author proceeds: “I shall next address myself to you that are Constables. And to you I must needs say, that if you know your duty, it is no thanks to us that are Justices. For the oath we usually give you is so short, and in such general terms, that it leaves with you no manner of instruction in the par ticulars of the office to which you are sworn. But that which ought to be given you, recites part of your duty in the following words:-- “You shall do your best endeavour, that rogues, vagabonds, and night-walkers be apprehended; and that the statutes made for their punishment be duly put in execution. You shall have a watchful eye to such as shall keep any house or place where any unlawful game is used; as also to such as shall frequent such places, or shall use any unlawful game there or elsewhere. You shall present all and every the offences contrary to the sta tutes made to restrain the tippling in inns, alehouses, and other victualling houses, and for repressing of drunkenness. You shall once in the year, during your office, present all Popish recusants. You shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed.

You shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed. And you shall well and duly, accord ing to your knowledge, power, and ability, do and execute all other things belonging to the office of a Constable, so long as you shall continue therein.” (Page 8.) “Upon this, I would observe, first, that actors of plays are expressed by name within the statute, to be taken up for vaga bonds, and punished accordingly; and that though a statute of Queen Elizabeth’s excepts such companies as have a license under the hand and seal of a Nobleman, yet a later statute in the reign of King James the First has taken away that protec tion from them, by declaring, that ‘from thenceforth no autho rity to be given by any Peer of the realm shall be available to free or discharge them from the pains and punishments of that former statute. Every Constable, therefore, in those parishes where any of these strolling players come, is bound by his oath, to seize upon, correct, and send them packing without delay. “The next part of your oath obliges you to keep a watchful eye on such houses as keep, and such persons as use, unlawful gaming. The statute directs you weekly, or at least monthly, to search within your liberties all houses or places suspected of this offence, and, upon discovering, to bring them to punish ment. Upon this article, I would observe, (1.) That the law makes some allowance for artificers, husbandmen, apprentices, labourers, and servants, to play in Christmas, but at no other time of the year; and, (2.) That all sports and pastimes what soever are made unlawful upon the Lord’s day, by a statute of King Charles II. You are therefore bound upon oath, to bring to punishment such as are guilty of profaning that day by any sports or pastimes whatsoever. “The following parts of your oath are, (1.) That you shall present all and every the offences of tippling and drunkenness that come to your knowledge. (2.) That you shall once in the year present all Popish recusants; nay, and by the statute on which your oath is grounded, you are obliged once a year to present in Session all those within your parishes who (not being Dissenters) come not once in a month, at least, to church.

(2.) That you shall once in the year present all Popish recusants; nay, and by the statute on which your oath is grounded, you are obliged once a year to present in Session all those within your parishes who (not being Dissenters) come not once in a month, at least, to church. And, (3.) That you shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed. I believe no Constable will pre tend to be ignorant of this. How is it then, that when we send out warrants, to levy on offenders for swearing, drunkenness, and the like, those warrants are so ill obeyed? Are you not sworn to execute these as well as any other, and that duly too, according to the tenor of your precept 7 Your precept tells you, You shall demand such a sum; and if the offender will not pay, you shall levy it by distress of his goods; and if no distress can be taken, you are then only to set him in the stocks; otherwise you have no authority so to do; nor is the setting him in the stocks, when you might have distrained, any execution of your precept. “The last part of your oath is in general terms: That you shall well and duly, according to your knowledge, power, and ability, do and execute all other things belonging to the office of a Constable. I shall instance in some things which certainly belong to your office, because you, and none else, can do them. (1.) A Constable may, without a warrant, apprehend any per sons, and carry them before a Justice, who are driving carts, horses, or cattle on the Lord’s day. (2.) Such as he shall find at sports and pastimes on that day. (3.) Such as he shall find tippling in public houses. (4.) Shopkeepers selling, or exposing goods to sale, on the Lord’s day. And, Lastly, such as he shall find drunk or blaspheming, or profanely swearing or cursing. “Thus I have shown you, in part, what belongs to your office: It is well, if, according to the tenor of your oath, you duly, according to your knowledge and ability, do and execute all these things.

“Thus I have shown you, in part, what belongs to your office: It is well, if, according to the tenor of your oath, you duly, according to your knowledge and ability, do and execute all these things. But remember, that, if you do not, if you neglect any of them, you are forsworn.” Now let all men judge, how many Constables in England are clear of wilful perjury ! 9. “I will now,” he goes on, “address myself to Church wardens. Your oath is, ‘that you shall well and truly execute the office of a Churchwarden, for the ensuing year; and, to the best of your skill and knowledge, present such persons and things as are presentable by the ecclesiastical laws of this realm.’ I shall set down only a few of these. “The statute of King James I. obliges you to present, once a year, all monthly absenters from church. “The ninetieth Canon enjoins you, first to admonish, and then, if they reform not, to present, all your parishioners who do not duly resort to church on Sundays, and there continue the whole time of divine service. On this article observe, (1.) That a person’s being absent from church, is ground sufficient for you to proceed. (2.) That you are not only to present those who do not come to church, but also those that behave irreverently or indecently there, either walking about or talking; all who do not abide there, orderly and soberly, the whole time of service and sermon, and all that loiter away any part of that time in the churchyard or in the fields. “The one hundred and twelfth Canon enjoins you, within forty days after Easter, to exhibit to the Bishop, or his Chan cellor, the names of all above the age of sixteen, within your parish, that did not receive the communion. “Other statutes oblige you to present drunkenness, tippling, and public houses suffering persons to tipple in them. “And the one hundred and ninth Canon binds you to pre sent all manner of vice, profaneness, and debauchery, requiring you faithfully to present all and every the offenders in adul tery, whoredom, drunkenness, profane swearing, or any other uncleanness and wickedness of life.

But inasmuch as I am a debtor also to those who do not, my design is now, to apply to them also; and briefly to show, wherein (I fear) they are severally inconsistent with their own principles. I begin with those who are at the smallest distance from us, whether they are termed Presbyterians or Independents: Of whom in general I cannot but have a widely different opinion, from that I entertained some years ago; as having since then conversed with many among them, “in whom the root of the matter is’ undeniably found; and who labour “to keep a con science void of offence, both toward God and toward men.” I cannot, therefore, doubt, but every serious man, of either one or the other denomination, does utterly condemn all that inward as well as outward unholiness which has been above described. But do you, as a people, avoid what you condemn? Are mo whoremongers or adulterers found among you; no children disobedient to their parents; no servants that are slothful or careless, that answer again, that do not “honour their masters as is meet in the Lord?” Are there none among you that censure or “speak evil of the ruler of their people?” Are there no drunkards, no gluttons, no luxurious men, no regular epicures, none “whose belly is their God,” who, as their for tune permits, “fare sumptuously every day?” Have you no dishonest dealers, no unfair traders, no usurers, or extortion ers? Have you no liars, either for gain, or for good man ners, so called ? Are you clear of ceremony and compli ment? Alas, you are sensible, in most (if not all) these respects, you have now small pre-eminence over us. How much more sensible must you be of this, if you do not rest on the surface, but inquire into the bottom of reli gion, the religion of the heart | For, what inward unholiness, what evil tempers, are among us, which have not a place among you also ?

He wants more room. AEstuat infelix angusto limite mundi, Ut brevibus clausus Gyaris, parváque Seripho." He has already travelled through all which is called pleasure; diversions and entertainments of every kind. But among these he can find no enjoyment of any depth; they are empty, shal low, superficial things: They pleased for a while; but the gloss. is gone, and now they are dull and tasteless. And what has he next? Only the same things again; for this world affords nothing more. It can supply him with no change. Go, feed again; but it is upon one dish still. Thus Occidit miseros crambe repetita.t Yet what remedy under the sun? 16. The sounder judgment, the stronger understanding you have, the sooner are you sated with the world; and the more deeply convinced, all that cometh is vanity, foolish, insipid, nauseous. You see the foibles of men in so much clearer a light, and have the keener sense of the emptiness of life. Here you are, a poor, unsatisfied inhabitant of an unquiet world; turning your weary eyes on this side and on that side; seeking rest, but finding none. You seem to be out of your place: Neither the persons nor things that surround you are such as you want. You have a confused idea of something better than all this; but you know not where to find it. You * Frets at the narrow limits of the world, As in a prison pent. + They are surfeited with the dull repetition. are always gasping for something which you cannot attain, no, not if you range to the uttermost parts of the earth. But this is not all. You are not only negatively unhappy, as finding nothing whereon to stay the weight of your soul; but positively so, because you are unholy: You are miserable, because you are vicious. Are you not vicious? Are you then full of gratitude to Him who giveth you life, and breath, and all things? Not so; you rather spurn his gifts, and murmur at Him that gave them. How often has your heart said, God did not use you well? How often have you questioned either his wisdom or goodness? Was this well done? What kind of gratitude is this? It is the best you are master of Then take knowledge of yourself. Black ingratitude is rooted in your inmost frame.

Well may you shudder at the thought ! more especially when you are about to enter on that untried state of existence. For what a prospect is this, when you stand on the verge of life, ready to launch out into etermity! What can you then think? You see nothing before you. All is dark and dreary. On the very best supposition, how well may you address your parting soul in the words of dying Adrian: Poor, little, pretty, fluttering thing, Must we no longer live together? And dost thou prune thy trembling wing, To take thy flight thou know'st not whither?' Thy pleasing vein, thy humorous folly Is all neglected, all forgot; And pensive, wavering, melancholy, Thou hop'st and fear'st thou know'st not what. “Thou know'st not what l” Here is the sting, suppose there were no other. To be “thou know'st not what !” not for a month, or a year, but through the countless ages of eternity What a tormenting uncertainty must this be What racking unwillingness must it occasion, to exchange even this known vale of tears for the unknown valley of the shadow of death ! And is there no cure for this? Indeed there is an effectual cure; even the knowledge and love of God. There is a know ledge of God which unveils etermity, and a love of God which endears it. That knowledge makes the great abyss visible; and all uncertainty vanishes away. That love makes it amiable to the soul, so that fear has no more place | But the moment God says, by the welcome angel of death, “Come thou up hither l’” she Claps the glad wing, and towers away, And mingles with the blaze of day. 20. See ye not what advantage every way a Christian has * Some to the piercing winds are stretch'd abroad; Some plunged beneath the watery gulf: The fire In some burns out the deep-imprinted stain, Till the long course of slowly-rolling years Has purged out every spot, and pure remains The ethereal spirit, and simple heavenly fire. over you? Probably the reason you saw it not before was, because you knew none but nominal Christians; men who professed to believe more, (in their way of believing,) but had no more of the knowledge or love of God than yourselves: So that with regard to real, inward religion, you stood upon even ground.

Probably the reason you saw it not before was, because you knew none but nominal Christians; men who professed to believe more, (in their way of believing,) but had no more of the knowledge or love of God than yourselves: So that with regard to real, inward religion, you stood upon even ground. And perhaps in many branches of outward .religion the advantage was on your side. May the Lord, the God of the Christians, either reform these wretches, or take them away from the earth, that lay this grand stumbling-block in the way of those who desire to know the will of God! O ye who desire to know his will, regard them not! If it be possible, blot them out of your remembrance. They neither can nor will do you any good. O, suffer them not to do you harm ! Be not prejudiced against Christianity ‘by those who know nothing at all of it: Nay, they condemn it, all real substantial Christianity; they speak evil of the thing they know not; they have a kind of cant word for the whole religion of the heart; they call it enthusiasm. I will briefly lay before you the ground of the matter, and appeal to you yourselves for the reasonableness of it. 21. What a miserable drudgery is the service of God, unless I love the God whom I serve | But I cannot love one whom I know not. How then can I love God till I know him? And how is it possible I should know God, unless he make .himself known unto me? By analogy or proportion? Very good. But where is that proportion to be found? What proportion does a creature bear to its Creator? What is .the proportion between finite and infinite? I grant, the existence of the creatures demonstratively shows the existence of their Creator. The whole creation speaks that there is a God. But that is not the point in question. I know there is a God. Thus far is clear. But who will show ·me what that God is?

O leave that to those blind zealots who tack together a set of opinions and an outside worship, and call this poor, dull, lifeless thing by the sacred name of Chris tianity | Well might you account such Christianity as this a mere piece of empty pageantry, fit indeed to keep the vulgar in awe, but beneath the regard of a man of understanding. But in how different a light does it now appear ! If there be such a religion as I have sketched out, must not every reasonable man see there is nothing on earth to be desired in comparison of it? But if any man desire this, let him ask of God; he giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not. 24. May you not ask, quite consistently with your principles, in some manner resembling this? “O thou Being of beings, thou cause of all, thou seest my heart; thou understandest all my thoughts: But how small a part of thy ways do I understand l I know not what is above, beneath, on every side; I know not my own soul. Only this I know, I am not what I ought to be. I see and approve the virtue which I have not. I do not, love thee, neither am I thankful. I commend the love of mankind; but I feel it not. Thou hast seen hatred, malice, envy in my heart; thou hast seen anger, murmuring, discontent. These uneasy passions harrow up my soul. I cannot rest while I am under this yoke; nor am I able to shake it off; I am unhappy, and that thou knowest. “Have compassion upon me, thou whose years do not fail! on me who have but a short time to live. I rise up, and am cut down as a flower. I flee as it were a shadow. Yet a little while and I return to dust, and have no more place under the sun. “Yet I know thou hast made my soul to live for ever; but I know not where, and I am unwilling to try. I tremble, I am afraid to go thither, whence I shall not return. I stand quivering on the edge of the gulf; for clouds and darkness rest upon it. O God!

Let the instances, if there are such, be produced. But if no such are to be found, then let all reasonable men, who believe the Bible, own that a work of God is wrought in our land; and such a work (if we survey in one view the extent of it, the swiftness with which it has spread, the depth of that religion which was so swiftly diffused, and its purity from all corrupt mixtures) as, it must be acknowledged, cannot easily be paralleled, in all these con current circumstances, by any thing that is found in the Eng lish annals, since Christianity was first planted in this island. II. 1. And yet those who “can discern the face of the sky, cannot discern the signs of the times.” Yet those who are esteemed wise men do not know that God is now reviving his work upon earth. Indeed, concerning some of these, the rea son is plain: They know not, because they think not of it. Their thoughts are otherwise employed; their minds are taken up with things of quite a different nature: Or, perhaps, they may think of it a little now and then, when they have nothing else to do; but not seriously or deeply; not with any closeness or attention of thought. They are too much in haste, to weigh the facts whereof we speak, and to draw the just inference therefrom : Nor is the conviction which they may sometimes feel, suffered to sink into their hearts; but things that have a larger share in their affections soon destroy the very traces of it. 2. True it is, that there are some who think more deeply, who are accustomed to consider things from the foundation, and to lay circumstances together, that they may judge of nothing before they have full evidence; and yet even some of these appear to be in doubt concerning the present work. Now, supposing it to be a work of God, how can this be accounted for, -that they who so diligently inquire concerning it, do not know the time of their visitation? Perhaps because of the deeply rooted prejudice which they brought with them to the inquiry; and which, still hanging on their minds, makes it scarce possible for them to form an impartial judgment.

Upon what scripture do you ground this? I thought it was the same to Him, to save by many or by few. Upon what rea son ? Why cannot God save ten thousand souls by one man, as well as by ten thousand? How little, how inconsiderable a circumstance is number before God! Nay, is there not reason to believe that whensoever God is pleased to work a great deliverance, spiritual or temporal, he may first say, as of old, “The people are too many for me to give the Midi anites into their hands?” May he not purposely choose few as well as inconsiderable instruments, for the greater manifesta tion of his own glory? Very few, I grant, are the instru ments now employed; yet a great work is wrought already. And the fewer they are by whom this large harvest hath hitherto been gathered in, the more evident must it appear to unprejudiced minds that the work is not of man, but of God. 8. “But they are not only few, but unlearned also.” This is a grievous offence, and is by many csteemed a sufficient excuse for not acknowledging the work to be of God. The ground of this offence is partly true. Some of those who now preach are unlearned. They neither understand the ancient languages, nor any of the branches of philosophy. And yet this objection might have been spared by many of those who have frequently made it; because they are un learned too, though accounted otherwise. They have not themselves the very thing they require in others. Men in general are under a great mistake with regard to what is called the learned world. They do not know, they cannot easily imagine, how little learning there is among them. I do not speak of abstruse learning; but of what all Divines, at least, of any note, are supposed to have, namely, the knowledge of the tongues, at least, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and of the common arts and sciences. How few men of learning, so called, understand Hebrew ; cven so far as to read a plain chapter in Genesis ! Nay, how few understand Greek! Make an easy experiment. Desire that grave man, who is urging this objection, only to tell you the English of the first paragraph that occurs in one of Plato's Dialogues.

Desire that grave man, who is urging this objection, only to tell you the English of the first paragraph that occurs in one of Plato's Dialogues. I am afraid we may go farther still. How few understand Latin Give one of them an Epistle of Tully, and see how readily he will explain it without his dictionary. If he can hobble through that, it is odds but a Georgic in Virgil, or a Satire of Persius, sets him fast. And with regard to the arts and sciences; how few under stand so much as the general principles of logic l Can one in ten of the Clergy, (O grief of heart!) or of the Masters of Arts in either University, when an argument is brought, tell you even the mood and figure wherein it is proposed; or complete an enthy meme * Perhaps you do not so much as understand the term;--supply the premiss which is wanting, in order to make it a full categorical syllogism. Can one in ten of them demonstrate a Problem or theorem in Euclid's Elements, or define the common terms used in Metaphysics, or intelligibly explain the first principles of it? Why then will they pretend to that learning which they are conscious to themselves they have not? nay, and censure others who have it not, and do not pretend to it? Where are sincerity and candour fled? It will easily be observed, that I do not depreciate learning of any kind. The knowledge of the languages is a valuable talent; so is the knowledge of the arts and sciences. Both the one and the other may be employed to the glory of God and the good of men. But yet I ask, Where hath God declared in his word, that he cannot, or will not, make use of men that have it not? Has Moses or any of the Prophets affirmed this? or our Lord, or any of his Apostles? You are sensible all these are against you: You know the Apostles themselves, all except St. Paul, were avópes atypa/puatot cat w8total, “common, unphilosophical, unlettered men.” 9. “What! Then you make yourselves like the Apostles.” Because this silly objection has so often been urged, I will for once spend a few words upon it, though it does not deserve that honour.

You dare not; because you have respect of persons. You fear the faces of men. You cannot; because you have not overcome the world. You are not above the desire of earthly things. And it is impossible you should ever have any true order, or exercise any Christian discipline, till you are wholly crucified to the world, till you desire nothing more but God. Consider this matter, I entreat you, a little farther. Herc are thirty thousand persons” (perhaps somewhat more) of whom * In the year 1772.-EDIT. I take care, watching over their souls as he that must give account. In order hereto it lies upon me, (so I judge,) at the peril of my own salvation, to know, not only their names, but their outward and inward states, their difficulties and dangers. Otherwise, how can I know either how to guide them aright, or to commend them to God in prayer? Now, if I am willing tomake these over to you, will you watch over them in the same manner? Will you take the same care (or as much more as you please) of each soul as I have hitherto done? Not such curam animarum” as you have taken these ten years in your own parish. Poor empty name ! Has not your parish been, in fact, as much a sinecure to you as your prebend ? O what an account have you to give to the Great Shepherd and Bishop of souls ! 18. There is one more excuse for denying this work of God, taken from the instruments employed therein; that is, “that they are wicked men.” And a thousand stories have been handed about to prove it. But you may observe, their wickedness was not heard of till after they “went about doing good.” Their reputation for honesty was till then unblemished. But it was impossible it should continue so, when they were publicly employed in “tes tifying of the world, that its deeds were evil.” It could not be but the Scriptures should be fulfilled: “The servant is not above his Master. If they have called thc Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of his household !” Yet I cannot but remind considerate men, in how remarkable a manner the wisdom of God has for many years guarded against this pretence, with respect to my brother and me in particular.

c. cern was, the case of abundance of children. Some their parents could not afford to put to school: So they remained like “a wild ass’s colt.” Others were sent to school, and learned, at least, to read and write; but they learned all kind of vice at the same time: So that it had been better for them to have been without their knowledge, than to have bought it at so dear a price. 2. At length I determined to have them taught in my own house, that they might have an opportunity of learning to read, write, and cast accounts, (if no more,) without being under almost a necessity of learning Heathenism at the same time: And after several unsuccessful trials, I found two such School masters as I wanted; men of honesty and of sufficient know ledge, who had talents for, and their hearts in, the work. 3. They have now under their care near sixty children: The parents of some pay for their schooling; but the greater part, being very poor, do not; so that the expense is chiefly defrayed by voluntary contributions. We have of late clothed them too, as many as wanted. The rules of the school are these that follow:--* First. No child is admitted under six years of age. Secondly. All the children are to be present at the morning sermon. Thirdly. They are at school from six to twelve, and from one to five. Fourthly. They have no play-days. Fifthly. No child is to speak in school, but to the masters. Sixthly. The child who misses two days in one week, without leave, is excluded the school. 4. We appointed two Stewards for the school also. The busi ness of these is, to receive the school subscriptions, and expend what is needful; to talk with each of the masters weekly; to pray with and exhort the children twice a-week; to inquire diligently, whether they grow in grace and in learning, and whether the rules are punctually observed; every Tuesday morning, in conjunction with the masters, to exclude those children that do not observe the rules; every Wednesday morn ing to meet with and exhort their parents, to train them up at home in the ways of God. 5. A happy change was soon observed in the children, both with regard to their tempers and behaviour.

(3) Choose some of the weightiest points, and try if they understand them. As, “Do you believe you have sin in you? What does sin deserve? What remedy has God provided for guilty, helpless sinners?” (4.) Often with the question suggest the answer. As, “What is repentance? Sorrow for sin, or a conviction that we are guilty, helpless sinners.” “What is faith? A divine convic tion of things not seen.” (5.) Where you perceive they do not understand the stress of your question, lead them into it by other questions. For instance, you ask, “How do you think your sins will be par doned?” They answer, “By repenting and amending my life.” You ask farther, “But will your amendment make satisfac tion for your past sins?” They will answer, “I hope so, or I know not what will.” One would think, these had no know ledge of Christ at all. And some have not. But others have ; and give such answers, only because they do not understand the scope of the question. Ask them farther, “Can you be saved without the death of Christ?” They immediately say, “No.” And if you ask, “What has he suffered for you?” they will say, “He shed his blood for us.” But many cannot express even what they have some conception of; no, not even when expressions are put into their mouths. With these you are to deal exceeding tenderly, lest they be discouraged. (6.) If you perceive them troubled, that they cannot answer, step in yourself, and take the burden off them; answering the question yourself. And do it thoroughly and plainly, making a full explication of the whole business to them. (7.) When you have tried their knowledge, proceed to in struct them, according to their several capacities. If a man understand the fundamentals, speak what you perceive he most needs, either explaining farther some doctrines, or some duty, or showing him the necessity of something which he neglects. If he still understands not, go over it again till he does. (8.) Next inquire into his state, whether convinced or uncon vinced, converted or unconverted. Tell him, if need be, what conversion is; and then renew and enforce the inquiry. (9.) If unconverted, labour with all your power to bring his heart to a sense of his condition. Set this home with a more earnest voice than you spoke before.

And as much offence as you give by your name, you will give still more by your principles. You will give offence to the bigots for opinions, modes of worship, and ordinances, by laying no more stress upon them; to the bigots against them, by laying so much; to men of form, by insisting so frequently and strongly on the inward power of religion; to moral men, (so called,) by declaring the absolute necessity of faith, in order to acceptance with God. To men of reason you will give offence, by talking of inspiration and receiving the Holy Ghost; to drunkards, Sabbath-breakers, common swearers, and other open sinners, by refraining from their company, as well as by that disapprobation of their behaviour which you will often be obliged to express. And indeed your life must give them con tinual offence: Your sobriety is grievously offensive to a drunk ard; your serious conversation is equally intolerable to a gay impertinent: and, in general, that “you are grown so precise and singular, so monstrously strict, beyond all sense and reason, that you scruple so many harmless things, and fancy you are obliged to do so many others which you need not,” cannot but be an offence to abundance of people, your friends and relations in particular. Either, therefore, you must consent to give up your principles, or your fond hope of pleasing men. What makes even your principles more offensive is, this uniting of yourselves together: Because this union renders you more conspicuous, placing you more in the eye of men; more suspicious,--I mean, liable to be suspected of carrying on some sinister design (especially by those who do not, or will not, know your inviolable attachment to His present Majesty); more dreadful, to those of a fearful temper, who imagine you have any such design; and more odious to men of zeal, if their zeal be any other than fervent love to God and man. This offence will sink the deeper, because you are gathered out of so many other congregations: For the warm men in each will not easily be convinced, that you do not despise either them or their teachers; nay, will probably imagine, that you utterly condemn them, as though they could not be saved.

“Many of those who are perhaps as zealous of good works as you, think I have allowed you too much. Nay, my brethren, but how can we help allowing it, if we allow the Scriptures to be from God? For is it not written, and do not you yourselves believe, ‘Without holiness no man shall see the Lord?’ And how then, without fighting about words, can we deny, that holi ness is a condition of final acceptance? And as to the first acceptance or pardon, does not all experience as well as Scrip ture prove, that no man ever yet truly believed the gospel who did not first repent? Repentance therefore we cannot deny to be necessarily previous to faith. Is it not equally undeniable, that the running back into wilful, known sin (suppose it were drunkenness or uncleanness) stifles that repentance or convic tion? And can that repentance come to any good issue in his soul, who resolves not to forgive his brother? or who obsti nately refrains from what God convinces him is right, whether it be prayer or hearing his word? Would you scruple your self to tell one of these, “Unto him that hath shall be given; but from him that hath not,’ that is, uses it not, “shall be taken even that which he hath?’ Would you scruple to say this? But in saying this, you allow all which I have said, viz., that previous to justifying faith, there must be repentance, and, if opportunity permit, “fruits meet for repentance.” “And yet I allow you this, that although both repentance and the fruits thereof are in some sense necessary before justification, yet neither the one nor the other is necessary in the same sense, or in the same degree, with faith. Not in the same degree. For in whatever moment a man believes, (in the Christian sense of the word,) he is justified, his sins are blotted out, “his faith is counted to him for righteousness. But it is not so, at whatever moment he repents, or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Faith alone therefore justifies; which repentance alone does not; much less any outward work. And consequently, none of these are necessary to jus tification, in the same degree with faith. “No in the same sense. For none of these has so direct, immediate a relation to justification as faith.

To the first of these propositions you object, “that justi fication is not only two-fold, but manifold. For a man may possibly sin many times, and as many times be justified or for given.” (Remarks, pp. 37-39.) I grant it. I grant also, that justification sometimes means a state of acceptance with God. But all this does not in the least affect my assertion, that “that justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and by our Church in the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth Articles, is not our acquittal at the last day, but the present remission of our sins.” You add, “You write in other places so variously about this matter, that I despair to find any consistency. Once you held ‘a degree of justifying faith short of the full assurance of faitk, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him;’ and yet you afterwards “warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assur ance, that God had forgiven their sins. What difference there is between this clear assurance, and the former full assurance and clear perception, I know not.” (Page 40.) Let us go on step by step, and you will know. “Once you held ‘a degree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him.’” And so I hold still, and have done for some years. “And yet you afterwards warned all not to think they were justified before they had a clear assurance that God had forgiven their sins.” I did so. “What difference there is between this clear assurance, and that full assurance and clear perception, Iknow not.” Sir, I will tell you. The one is an assurance that my sins are forgiven, clear at first, but soon clouded with doubt or fear. The other is such a plero phory or full assurance that I am forgiven, and so clear a per ception that Christ abideth in me, as utterly excludes all doubt and fear, and leaves them no place, no, not for an hour. So that the difference between them is as great as the difference be tween the light of the morning and that of the mid-day sun. 9.

I have declared them on hat head again and again; particularly in the sermon on “Christian Perfection.” 3. Into this fallacy you plunge from the beginning to the end of what you speak on my third error, (so you term it,) relating to the Lord’s supper; confuting, as mine, notions which I know not. (Pages 56, 57.) I cannot think any farther answer is needful here, than the bare recital of my own words:-- “Friday, June 27. I preached on, “Do this in remembrance of me.’ “It has been diligently taught among us, that none but those who are converted, who ‘have received the Holy Ghost,’ who are believers in the full sense, ought to communicate. “But experience shows the gross falsehood of that assertion, that the Lord's supper is not a converting ordinance. Ye are witnesses: For many now present know, the very beginning of your conversion to God (perhaps in some the first deep convic tion) was wrought at the Lord's supper. Now, one single instance of this kind overthrows that whole assertion. “The falsehood of the other assertion appears both from Scripture precept and example. Our Lord commanded those very men who were then unconverted, who had not yet received the Holy Ghost, who, in the full sense of the word, were not believers, to do this in remembrance of him. Here the pre cept is clear. And to these he delivered the elements with his own hands. Here is example equally indisputable. “Sat. 28.--I showed at large, (1.) That the Lord’s supper was ordained by God to be a means of conveying to men either preventing, or justifying, or sanctifying grace, according to their several necessities. (2.) That the persons for whom it was ordained, are all those who know and feel that they want the grace of God, either to restrain them from sin, or to show their sins forgiven, or to renew their souls in the image of God. (3.) That, inasmuch as we come to his table, not to give him anything, but to receive whatsoever he sees best for us, there is no previous preparation indispensably necessary, but a desire to receive whatsoever he pleases to give.

The justness of some of your remarks, if I mistake not, has been pretty fully disproved. As to what you speak of my art, sub tlety, and so on, in this and many other places, I look upon it as neither better nor worse than a civil way of calling names. “‘To this multitude of crimes I am also an utter stranger.’ Then you have charged them wrongfully. What do you account guile?” &c. (Second Letter, p. 84.) I account guile, despising self-denial even in the smallest points, and teaching that those who have not the assurance of faith may not use the ordinances of God, the Lord's Supper in particular, (this is the real, un aggravated charge,) to be faults which cannot be excused. But I do not account them all together “a multitude of crimes.” I conceive this is a vehement hyperbole. “The honour of religion,” said you, “and virtue trampled apon:” I answered, “By whom ? Not by the Moravians.” You reply, “And yet you have accused some of these as decry ing all the means of grace.” No. What I accused them of, was, teaching that an unbeliever (in their sense) ought to abstain from them. “Neither did I know, or think, or say, they were desperately wicked people.’ Your Journal is before the world; to whom I appeal whether this has not so repre sented them.” But how do you here represent your remark, and my answer? My paragraph runs thus:-- “You go on, “How could you so long, and so intimately, converse with such desperately wicked people as the Moravians, according to your own account, were known by you to be?” O Sir, what another assertion is this ! “The Moravians, ac cording to your own account, were known by you to be desperately wicked people, while you intimately conversed with them !’ Utterly false and injurious! I never gave any such account. I conversed with them intimately both at Savannah and Hernhuth. But neither then, nor at any other time, did I know, or think, or say, they were desperately wicked people: I think and say just the reverse; viz., that though I soon ‘found among them a few things which I could not ap prove, yet I believe they are, in the main, some of the best Chris tians in the world.

I must therefore explain myself upon it a little farther You said, “An enthusiast accounts whatever he does to be the work of God.” I should have said, “But I do not account whatever I do to be the work of God.” What that is which I do account his work will be considered by and by. You remark, (11.) “He talks in the style of inspired persons.” I answered, “No otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.” You reply, “The point was not, whether you are actu ally inspired, but whether you have talked in the style of those who were so.” (Page 126.) That was so much the point, that if it were allowed, it would overturn your whole argument. For if I was inspired, (in your sense,) you could not term that inspi ration enthusiasm without blasphemy; but you again mistake my words. The plain meaning of them is, that I talk in the style of those persons who are “no otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.” You remark, (12.) “He applies Scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning, or once consider ing the difference of times and circumstances.” (Page 62.) I answered “ am not conscious of anything like this. I apply no Scripture phrase either to myself or any other, without care fully considering both the original meaning, and the secondary sense, wherein, allowing for different times and circumstances, it may be applied to ordinary Christians.” (Page 407.) You reply, “This also you deny to have done; holding, however, some secondary sense, (what it is you have not told us,) in which Scripture phrases may be applied to ordinary Christians.” I have largely told you what I mean by a secondary sense, in the First Part of the “Farther Appeal.” You add: “Many things which were truly written of the preaching of Christianity at first, you have vainly applied to yourselves.” Sir, I am to answer only for myself; as I will for that expression, “Behold the day of the Lord is come; he is again visiting and redeem ing his people !” 3. I come now to what you expatiate upon at large, as the two grand instances of my enthusiasm.

Not that all the Methodists (so called) “were very wicked people before they followed us.” There are those among them, and not a few, who are able to stop the boasting of those that despise them, and to say, “Whereinsoever any of you is bold, I am bold also:” Only they “count all these things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus.” But these we found, as it were, when we sought them not. We went forth to “seek that which was lost;” (more eminently lost;) “to call” the most flagrant, hardened, desperate “sinners to repentance.” To this end we preached in the Horsefair at Bristol, in Kings wood, in Newcastle; among the colliers in Staffordshire, and the tinners in Cornwall; in Southwark, Wapping, Moorfields, Drury-Lane, at London. Did any man ever pick out such places as these, in order to find “serious, regular, well-disposed peo ple?” How many such might then be in any of them I know not. But this I know, that four in five of those who are now with us were not of that number, but were wallowing in their blood, till God by us said unto them, “Live.” Sir, I willingly put the whole cause on this issue: What are the general consequences of this preaching? Are there more tares or wheat? more “good men destroyed,” (that is the pro per question,) or “wicked men saved?” The last place where we began constant preaching is a part of Wiltshire and Somerset shire, near Bath. Now, let any man inquire at Rhode, Brad ford, Wrexall, or among the colliers at Coleford, (1.) What kind of people were those “before they followed these men?” (2.) What are the main doctrines they have been teaching for this twelvemonth? (3.) What effect have these doctrines upon their followers? What manner of lives do they lead now?

Whitefield or Mr. Wesley; and I do not agree with them in opinion; but I will have no more railing in my pulpit.” From the principles of the Methodists, you proceed to their practice: “They hunt,” say you, “for extraordinary marks and revelations, whereby to know the state of the soul.” The marks by which I know the state of any soul, are the inward fruit of the Spirit,-love, joy, peace, and meekness, gentleness, good ness, longsuffering, temperance, patience; shown, not by words only, but by the genuine fruit of outward holiness. Again : “They magnify their office beyond the truth, by high pretences to miraculous inspiration.” To this assertion, we have answered over and over, We pretend to no other inspi ration than that which, not only every true gospel Minister, but every real Christian, enjoys. Again: “The end of all impostors is some kind of worldly gain; and it is difficult for them to conceal their views entirely. The love of filthy lucre will appear, either by the use they make of it, or the means of getting it.” As to the use made of it, you are silent. But as to the means of getting it, you say, “Besides inhumanly wringing from the poor, the helpless widows, the weeping orphans,” (the proof! the proof!) “they creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with divers lusts.” It is easy to say this, and ten times more; but can you prove it? And ought you to say it, till you can? I shall not concern myself with anything in your Appendix, but what relates to me in particular. This premised, I observe on No. I. There are several instances in my Journals, of per sons that were in agonies of grief or fear, and roared for the qisquietness of their heart; of some that exceedingly trennbled before God, perhaps fell down to the ground; and of others whom God, in his adorable providence, suffered to be lunatic and sore vexed. The particular instances hereof, to which you refer, have been largely vindicated already, in the Two Letters to the Rev. Dr. Church, as well as that to the late Bishop of London. In the six following numbers I am not concerned.

Your “friendly advice to avoid spiritual selfishness,” I will endeavour to follow as soon as I understand it. At present, I do not; neither do I well understand how any “sober Christian should think me guilty of arrogance or self conceit,” because I relate a fact in which I had no share at all; namely, that other men “prayed for one another, that they might be healed of the faults they had confessed; and it was so.” You add, “Dr. Middleton absolves you from all boasting, in relation to the miracle you worked upon Kirkman.” Dr. Middleton does me too much honour, in taking any notice of so inconsiderable a person. But, miracle or no miracle, the fact is plain: William Kirkman is, I apprehend, yet alive, and able to certify for himself, that he had that cough threescore years, and that since that time it has not yet returned. I do not know that any “one patient yet has died under my hands.” If any person does, let him declare it, with the time and circumstances. You conclude: “Let me beg of you, as a fellow-Christian, to remove that great load of scandal that now lies upon your sect; and that you will not, by a careless or premeditated silence, bring yourself and your followers under a just suspi cion of not being enemies to certain vices which you seem afraid even to name.” Alas, Sir, is your “hearty wish for my success” dwindled down to this? and your “sorrow for any oversight that should afford ground of cavil to those who are disposed to think unfavourably of me?” Sir, I take knowledge of you. I no longer wonder at your so readily answering for Dr. Middleton. I am persuaded none has a better right so to do: No, not the gentleman who lately printed in the public papers a letter to the Lord Bishop of Exeter. Well,"Sir, you may now lay aside the mask. I do not require you to style yourself my “fellow-Christian.” But we are fellow creatures, at least fellow-servants of the great Lord of heaven and earth ! May we both serve him faithfully ! For his sake, I remain, Sir, Your obedient servant, P. S.--I did not receive yours till last night.

(A term, indeed, which I very rarely use, because it rarely occurs in the New Testament.) “Yes; it is to “start up perfect men at once.’” (Page 41.) Indeed, Sir, it is not. A man is usually converted long before he is a perfect man. It is probable most of those Ephesians to whom St. Paul directed his Epistle were converted. Yet they were not “come” (few, if any) “to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” 20. I do not, Sir, indeed, I do not undertake to make you understand these things. I am not so vain as to think it is in my power. It is the utmost of my hope to convince you, or, at least, those who read your works, that you understand just nothing about them. To put this out of dispute, you go on : “Thus faith and being born of God are said to be an instantaneous work, at once, and in a moment, as lightning. Justification, the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith, this always in a moment.” (Ibid.) I know not which to admire most, the English or the sense, which you here father upon me; but, in truth, it is all your own; I do not thus confound faith and Seing born of God. I always speak of them as different things; it is you that thus jumble them together. It is you who dis cover justification also to be the same as regeneration, and having a lively faith. I take them to be three different things; so different as not ever to come under one genus. And yet it is true, that each of these, “as far as I know,” is at first experienced suddenly; although two of them (I leave you to find out which) gradually increase from that hour. 21. “After these sudden conversions,” say you, “they receive their assurances of salvation.” (Page 43.) Sir, Mr. Bedford's BiSHOP LAVINGTON. 9 ignorance in charging this doctrine upon me might be involun tary, and I am persuaded was real. But yours cannot be so. It must be voluntary; if it is not rather affected. For you had before you, while you wrote, the very tract wherein I corrected Mr.

This renewed the concern I felt some time since, when I was informed (in letters which I have still by me) of your * Thus translated by Gifford: “Again Crispinus comes!”-EDIT. Lordship's publishing this account, both at Plymouth in Devonshire, and at Truro in Cornwall, before the Clergy assembled from all parts of those counties, at the solemn season of your Lordship’s visiting your diocese. But I was not informed that your Lordship showed a deep concern for the honour of God, which you supposed to be so dreadfully violated, or a tender compassion for a Presbyter whom you believed to be rushing into everlasting destruction. 3. In order to be more fully informed, on Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath, of St. Ginnys, Mr. Haime, of Shaftes bury, and I, called at Mr. Morgan's, at Mitchel. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the “honest, sensible woman.” I imme diately asked, “Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me?” (So the story ran in the first part of the “Comparison; ” it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) “Or did you or he ever affirm,” (another circumstance related at Truro,) “that I was rude with your maid?” She replied, vehemently, “Sir, I never said you was, or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbours.” She added, “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word that he would dine at our house; but he did not, being invited to a neighbouring gentle man's. He sent for me thither, and said, ‘Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down? Do you know Mr. Wesley? Did not he tell you, you would be damned if you took any money of him? And did not he offer rudeness to your maid?' I told him, ‘No, my Lord; he never said any such thing to me, nor to my husband that I know of He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine.

Indeed I cannot devise what man ner of men could have been more unexceptionable on all accounts. Had God endued us with greater natural or acquired abilities, this verything might have been turned into an objec tion. Had we been remarkably defective, it would have been matter of objection on the other hand. Had we been Dissenters of any kind, or even Low-Churchmen (so called), it would have been a greatstumbling-block in the way of those who are zealous for the Church. And yet had we continued in the impetuosity of our High-Church zeal, neither should we have been willing to converse with Dissenters, nor they to receive any good at our hands.” Sir, why did you break off your quotation in the middle of this paragraph, just at, “more unexceptionable on all accounts?” Was it not on purpose to give a wrong turn to the whole? to conceal the real and obvious meaning of my words, and put one upon them that never entered into my thoughts? 5. You have reserved your strong reason for the last, namely, my own confession: “Mr. Wesley says himself, ‘By the most infallible of proofs, inward feeling, I am convinced of pride, &c.’” Sir, be pleased to decipher that &c. Or I will spare you the pains, and do it myself, by reciting the whole sentence : “By the most infallible of proofs, inward feeling, I am con vinced, “(1.) Of unbelief, having no such faith in Christ as will prevent my heart from being troubled, which it could not be, if I believed in God, and rightly believed also in him. “(2.) Of pride throughout my life past, inasmuch as I thought I had what I find I have not.” (Vol. I. p. 72.) Now, Sir, you have my whole confession. I entreat you to make the best of it. But I myself “acknowledge three Methodists to have fallen into pride.” Sir, I can tell you of three more. And yet it will not follow, that the doctrines I teach “lead men into horrid pride and blasphemy.” 6. In the close of your fourth section, you charge me with “shuffling and prevaricating with regard to extraordinary gifts and miraculous powers.” Of these I shall have occasion to speak by and by.

To prove my art, cunning, and evasion, you instance next in the case of impulses and impressions. You begin, “With what pertinacious confidence have impulses, impres sions, feelings, &c., been advanced into certain rules of con duct Their followers have been taught to depend upon them as sure guides and infallible proofs.” To support this weighty charge, you bring one single scrap, about a line and a quarter, from one of my Journals. The words are these: “By the most infallible of proofs, inward feeling, I am convinced.” Convinced of what? It immedi ately follows, “Of unbelief, having no such faith as will pre vent my heart from being troubled.” I here assert, that inward feeling or consciousness is the most infallible of proofs of unbelief,-of the want of such a faith as will prevent the heart's being troubled. But do I here “advance impressions, impulses, feelings, &c., into cer tain rules of conduct?” or anywhere else? You may just as well say, I advance them into certain proofs of transub stantiation. Neither in writing, in preaching, nor in private conversa tion, have I ever “taught any of my followers to depend upon them as sure guides or infallible proofs" of anything. Nay, you yourself own, I have taught quite the reverse; and that at my very first setting out. Then, as well as ever since, I have told the societies, “they were not to judge by their own inward feelings. I warned them, all these were in themselves of a doubtful, disputable nature. They might be from God, or they might not, and were therefore to be tried by a further rule, to be brought to the only certain test, the law and the testimony.” (Vol. I. p. 206.) This is what I have taught from first to last. And now, Sir, what becomes of your heavy charge? On which side lies the “pertinacious confidence” now? How clearly have you made out my inconsistency and self-contradiction and that I “occasionally either defend or give up my favourite notions and principal points ” 22. “Inspiration, and the extraordinary calls and guidances of the Holy Ghost, are ” what you next affirm to be “given up.” (Section xiii. p. 106, &c.) Not by me. I do not “give up” one tittle on this head, which I ever maintained.

Who fanaticized his own followers, and de prived them of their senses? Whose societies (by his own con fession) run over in shoals to Moravianism forty or fifty at a time? Would they have split upon this rock, if they had not been first Methodists? Lastly: Where is the spawn of Mora vianism so strongly working as in the children of Methodism?” Sir, you run very fast. And yet I hope to overtake you by and by. “Mr. Wesley,” you say, “has preached against the Moravians, since he quarrelled with them.” Sir, I never quarrelled with their persons yet: I did with some of their tenets long ago. He “gives them a box on the ear with the one hand, and embraces them with the other.” That is, I embrace what is good among them, and at the same time re prove what is evil. “Who first brought over this wicked generation?” Not I, whether they be wicked or not. I once thought I did; but have since then seen and acknow ledged my mistake. “Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide?” Not I; though I have occasionally consulted several. “Who fanaticized his own followers, and deprived them of their senses?” Not I. Prove it upon me if you can. “Whose societies (by his own confession) run over in shoals to Mora vianism, forty or fifty at a time?” Truly, not mine. Two and-fifty of Kingswood society ran over to Calvinism, and, a year before, part of Fetter-Lane society gradually went over to the Moravians. But I know none of ours that went over “in shoals.” They never, that I remember, gained five at a time; nor fifty in all, to the best of my knowledge, for these last ten years. “Would they” (of Fetter-Lane) “have split on this rock, if they had not first been Methodists?” Undoubtedly they would; for several of them had not first been Methodists. Mr. Viney, for instance, (as well as several others,) was with the Germans before ever he saw me. “Lastly: Where is the spawn of Moravianism working so strongly as in the children of Methodism?” If you mean the errors of Moravianism, they are not working at all in the generality of the children of Methodism; the Methodists To BISBOP LAVINGTON. 47 in general being thoroughly apprized of, and fully guarded against, them.

Morgan, at Mitchel, “You are in hell; you are damned already.” Secondly, that I asked her to live upon free cost. Thirdly, that she deter mined to admit no more Methodists into her house. At first I thought so silly and improbable a story neither deserved nor required a confutation; but when my friends thought otherwise, I called on Mrs. Morgan, who denied she ever said any such thing. I wrote down her words; part of which I transcribed in my letter to your Lordship, as follows:- “On Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath, of St. Gin nys, Mr. Haime, of Shaftesbury, and I, called at Mr. Morgan's, at Mitchel. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the ‘honest, sensible woman.’ I immediately asked, ‘Did I ever tell you or your husband, that you would be damned if you took any money of me?’ (So the story ran in the first part of the ‘Comparison;’ it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) ‘Or did * The Bishop of Exeter's Letter, pp. 2, 3. you or he ever affirm,” (another circumstance related at Truro,) ‘that I was rude with your maid?' She replied, vehemently, ‘Sir, I never said you was, or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbours. She added, “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word he would dine at our house; but he did not, being invited to a neighbouring gentleman's. He sent for me thither, and said, Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down * Do you know Mr. Wesley * Did not he tell you, you would be damned if you took any money of him 2 And did not he offer rudeness to your maid 2 I told him, No, my Lord; he never said any such thing to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine.

(2.) It was sent, not to the leaders of Methodism, but to one who was no Methodist at all. (3.) That it was a false account, I do not know: But your Lordship may easily put it out of dispute. And many have wondered, that your Lordship did not do so long ago, by printing the Charge in question. (4.) I did never confess it was a false account; nor any person by my consent, or with my knowledge. (5.) That account was never reprinted at Cork at all. (6.) When it was reprinted at Dublin, your Lordship had not disowned it. (7.) My brother was not in Dublin, when it was done; nor did either he or I know of it till long after. Therefore, when my brother was asked, how he could re print such an account, after your Lordship had publicly disowned it, I do not at all wonder, that “he did not offer a single word in answer.” Whether this, as well as my former Letter, be “mere rant and declamation,” or plain and sober reason, I must refer to the world, and your Lordship's own conscience. I am, My Lord, Your Lordship’s most obedient servant, May 8, 1752. To IN ANSWER. To LIMERICK, June 8, 1750. 1. Why do you not subscribe your name to a performance so perfectly agreeing, both as to the matter and form, with the sermons you have been occasionally preaching for more than a year last past? As to your seeming to disclaim it by saying once and again, “I am but a plain, simple man; ” and, “The doctrine you teach is only a revival of the old Antino mian heresy, I think they call it; ” I presume it is only a pious fraud. But how came so plain and simple a man to know the meaning of the Greek word Philalethes? Sir, this is not of a piece. If you did not care to own your child, had not you better have subscribed the Second (as well as the First) Letter, George Fisher ?” 2. I confess you have timed your performance well. When the other pointless thing was published, I came unluckily to Cork on the self-same day. But you might now suppose I was at a convenient distance.

2. I learn from you, that ignorance of another kind is a Second reason why some of the Clergy oppose us: They, like you, think us enemies to the Church. The natural conse quence is, that, in proportion to their zeal for the Church, their zeal against us will be. 3. The zeal which many of them have for orthodoxy, or right opinions, is a Third reason for opposing us. For they judge us heterodox in several points, maintainers of strang opinions. And the truth is, the old doctrines of the Reforma tion are now quite new in the world. Hence those who revive them cannot fail to be opposed by those of the Clergy who know them not. 4. Fourthly. Their honour is touched when others pretend to know what they do not know themselves; especially when unlearned and (otherwise) ignorant men lay claim to any such knowledge. “What is the tendency of all this,” as you observe on another head, “but to work in men’s minds a mean opinion of the Clergy?” But who can tamely suffer this? None but those who have the mind that was in Christ Jesus. 5. Again: Will not some say, “Master, by thus acting, thou reproachest us?” by preaching sixteen or eighteen times a week; and by a thousand other things of the same kind? Is not this, in effect, reproaching us, as if we were lazy and indo ent? as if we had not a sufficient love to the souls of those committed to our charge? 6. May there not likewise be some (perhaps unobserved) envy in the breast even of men that fear God? How much more in them that do not, when they hear of the great success of these Preachers, of the esteem and honour that are paid to them by the people, and the immense riches which they acquire ! What wonder if this occasions a zeal which is not the flame of fervent love? 7. Add to this a desire in some of the inferior Clergy of pleasing their superiors; supposing these (which is no impos sible supposition) are first influenced by any of these motives. Add the imprudence of some that hear those Preachers, and, perhaps, needlessly provoke their parochial Ministers.

I want only more of the Spirit of love and power, and of an healthful mind. As to those “many be lieving wives who practise pious frauds on their unbelieving husbands,” I know them not, no, not one of that kind; there fore I doubt the fact. If you know any such, be pleased to give us their names and places of abode. Otherwise you must bear the blame of being the lover, if not the maker, of a lie. Perhaps you will say, “Why, a great man said the same thing but a few years ago.” What, if he did? Let the frog swell as long as he can, he will not equal the ox. He might say many things, all circumstances considered, which will not come well from you, as you have neither his wit, nor sense, nor learning, nor age, nor dignity. Tibi parvula res est: Metiri se quemque suo modulo ac pede verum est." If you fall upon people that meddle not with you, without either fear or wit, you may possibly find they have a little more to say for themselves than you was aware of. I “follow peace with all men; ” but if a man set upon me without either rhyme or reason, I think it my duty to defend myself, so far as truth and justice permit. Yet still I am, (if a poor enthusiast may not be so bold as to style himself your brother,) Reverend Sir, Your servant for Christ's sake, LONDON, November 17, 1759. • You are not upon a level with Bishop Warburton. Let every man know his own size. REvEREND SIR, WHEN you spoke of “heresies making their periodical revolutions,” of “Antinomianism rampant among us,” and, immediately after, of “the new lights at the Tabernacle and Foundery,” must not your hearers naturally think that Mr. Whitefield and I were reviving those heresies? But do you know the persons of whom you speak? Have you ever con versed with them? Have you read their writings? If not, is it kind, is it just, to pass so severe a censure upon them? Had you only taken the trouble of reading one tract, the “Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion,” you would have seen that a great part of what you affirm is what I never denied.

Wesley first entered on this ministry; who, seeing himself surrounded with subjects so harmoniously disposed, thus triumphantly exults.” To illustrate this, let us add the date: “Such was the evangelic state of things, August 9, 1750; ” (on that day, I preached that sermon;) “when Mr. Wesley first entered on this ministry.” Nay, that was in the year 1738. So I triumphed, because I saw what would be twelve years after. Let us see what the ten next quotations prove. 1. “In applying these words, ‘I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance, my soul was so enlarged, that me thought I could have cried out, (in another sense than poor vain Archimedes,) ‘Give me where to stand, and I will shake the earth.’” (Page 130.) I meant neither more nor less (though I will not justify the use of so strong an expression) than, I was so deeply penetrated with a sense of the love of God to sinners, that it seemed, if I could have declared it to all the world, they could not but be moved thereby. “Here then was a scene well prepared for a good actor, and excellently fitted up for the part he was to play.” (Page 131.) But how came so good an actor to begin playing the part twelve years before the scene was fitted up? “He sets out with declaring his mission. 2. ‘I cried aloud, All things are ready : come ye to the marriage. I then delivered my message.’” And does not every Minister do the same whenever he preaches? But how is this? “He sets out with declaring his mis sion.” Nay, but this was ten years after my setting out. 3. “My heart was not wholly resigned. Yet I know he heard my voice.” (Page 132.) 4. “The longer I spoke, the more strength I had; till at twelve, I was as one refreshed with wine.” (Page 133.) 5. “I explained the nature of inward reli gion, words flowing upon me faster than I could speak.” (Ibid.) 6. “I intended to have given an exhortation to the society.

W. had repelled Sophy out of revenge, because he had made proposals of marriage to her, which she * The one thing needful.--EDIT. rejected. Tuesday, 16. Mrs. W. made affidavit of it. Thurs day, September 1. A Grand Jury, prepared by Mr. Causton, found, that ‘John Wesley had broken the laws of the realm, by speaking and writing to Mrs. W. against her husband’s con sent, and by repelling her from the communion.’ “Friday, 2, was the third court-day at which I appeared, since my being required so to do by Mr. Parker. I moved for an immediate hearing, but was put off till the next court-day. On the next court-day I appeared again, as also at the two courts following; but could not be heard. Thursday, Novem ber 3, I appeared in court again; and yet again on Tuesday, November 22, on which day Mr. C. desired to speak with me, and read me an affidavit, in which it was affirmed, that I ‘ abused Mr. C. in his own house, calling him liar, villain, and so on.’ It was likewise repeated, that I had been repri manded at the last court, by Mr. C., as an enemy to, and hin derer of, the public peace. “My friends agreed with me, that the time we looked for was now come. And the next morning, calling on Mr. C., I told him, I designed to set out for England immediately. “Friday, December 2. I proposed to set out for Carolina about noon. But about ten, the Magistrates sent for me, and told me, I must not go out of the province; for I had not answered the allegations laid against me. I replied, ‘I have appeared at six or seven courts, in order to answer them. But I was not suffered so to do. After a few more words, I said, ‘You use me very ill. And so you do the Trustees. You know your business, and I know mine.’ “In the afternoon, they published an order, forbidding any to assist me in going out of the province. But I knew I had no more business there. So as soon as Evening Prayer was over, the tide then serving, I took boat at the Bluff, for Carolina.” This is the plain account of the matter. I need only add a remark or two on the pleasantry of my censurer.

“To show that the loss of these will not be regretted when the Church has advanced from a state of infancy to manhood,” (alas the day ! Were the Apostles but infants to us?) “he illustrates the case by an elegant similitude: ‘When I was a child, I spake as a child;--but when I became a man, I put away childish things.’ His next remark, concerning the defects of human knowledge, is only an occasional answer to an objec tion. And the last verse shows that the superior duration of charity refers to the present life only: “Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three: But the greatest of these is charity.’ That is, you may perhaps object, Faith and hope will likewise remain in the Church, when prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are ceased: They will so; but still charity is the greatest, because of its excellent qualities.” (Page 107.) The last verse shows Is not this begging the question? How forced is all this ! The plain natural meaning of the pas sage is, love (the absolute necessity and the nature of which is shown in the foregoing verses) has another commendation,-it “never faileth; ” it accompanies and adorns us to eternity. “But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail,” when all things are fulfilled, and God is all in all: “Whether there be tongues, they shall cease.” One language shall prevail among all the inhabitants of heaven, while the low, imperfect languages of earth are forgotten. The “knowledge,” likewise, we now so eagerly pursue, shall then “vanish away.” As star-light is lost in that of the mid-day sun, so our present knowledge in the light of eternity. “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.” We have here but short, narrow, imperfect conceptions, even of the things round about us, and much more of the deep things of God. And even the prophecies which men deliver from God are far from taking in the whole of future events. “But when that which is perfect is come,” at death, and in the last day, “that which is in part shall be done away.” Both that low, imperfect, glimmering light, which is all the knowledge we can now attain to; and these slow and unsatisfactory methods of attaining, as well as of imparting it to others.

Part I.) “God give us grace to know these things, and feel them in our hearts I This knowledge and feeling is not of ourselves. Let us therefore meekly call upon the bountiful Spirit, the Holy Ghost, to inspire us with his presence, that we may be able to hear the goodness of God to our salvation. For with out his lively inspiration we cannot so much as speak the name of the Mediator: “No man can say, Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Much less should we be able to believe and know these great mysteries that be opened to us by Christ. “But we have received, saith St. Paul, ‘not the Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God;’ for this purpose, ‘that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God.” In the power of the Holy Ghost resteth all ability to know God, and to please him. It is He that purifieth the mind by his secret working. He enlighteneth the heart to conceive worthy thoughts of Almighty God. He sitteth on the tongue of man, to stir him to speak his honour. He only ministereth spiritual strength to the powers of the soul and body. And if we have any gift whereby we may profit our neighbour, all is wrought by this one and selfsame Spirit.” (Homily for Roga tion Week. Part III.) Every proposition which I have anywhere advanced con cerning those operations of the Holy Ghost, which I believe are common to all Christians in all ages, is here clearly main tained by our own Church. Being fully convinced of this, I could not well understand, for many years, how it was that on the mentioning any of these great truths, even among men of education, the cry immedi ately arose, “An enthusiast, an enthusiast !” But I now plainly perceive, this is only an old fallacy in a new shape. To object enthusiasm to any person or doctrine, is but a de cent method of begging the question. It generally spares the BiSHOP of GLOUCESTER. 171 objector the trouble of reasoning, and is a shorter and easier way of carrying his cause.

Paul warned the Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, and Hebrews. (Pages 5-8.) Very true; but what is this to the point? O, much more than some are aware of. This insinuation was, all along, just as if you had said, “I beseech you, my dear hearers, mark the titles he gives to these grievous wolves, false apostles, deceitful workers, and apply them to the Methodist Teachers. There I give them a deadly thrust.” 5. “These are well styled by Christ, ‘ravening wolves;” by St. Paul, “grievous wolves, from the mischiefs they do, rending the Church of Christ, and perverting the true sense of the gospel, for their own private ends. They ever did, and to this day do, pretend to extraordinary inspiration.” (Page 8.) Round assertions! Let us consider them one by one: (1.) “These are styled by Christ ‘ravening wolves; by St. Paul, “grievous wolves.’” True; but how does it appear that these names are applicable to the Methodists? Why, they * rend the Church of Christ.” What is the Church of Christ? According to our Article, a Church is “a company of faithful people,” of true believers, who have “the mind that was in Christ,” and “walk as Christ walked.” Who then are the Church of Christ in Waterford? Point them out, Sir, if you know them; and then be pleased to show how the Methodists rend this Church of Christ. You may as justly say they rend the walls or the steeple of the cathedral church. “How ever, they pervert the true sense of the gospel, for their own private ends.” Wherein do they pervert the true sense of the gospel? I have published Notes both on the Gospels and the other Scriptures. But wherein do those Notes pervert the sense? None has yet attempted to show. But for what private ends should I pervert it? For ease or honour? Then I should be sadly disappointed. Or for money? This is the silliest tale of all. You may easily know, if you are willing to know it, that I did not leave Waterford without being some pounds lighter than I was when I came thither. 6. “But they pretend to extraordinary inspiration.” They do not: They expressly disclaim it.

6. I am sensible, in speaking on so tender a point as this must needs be, to those who believe the Chris tian system, there is danger of a warmth which does no honour to our cause, nor is at all countenanced by the Revelation which we defend. I desire neither to show nor to feel this, but to “speak the truth in love,” (the only warmth which the gospel allows,) and to write with calmness, though not indifference. There is likewise a danger of despising our oppo ments, and of speaking with an air of contempt or disdain. I would gladly keep clear of this also; well knowing that a diffidence of ourselves is far from implying a diffidence of our cause: I distrust myself, not my argument. O that the God of the Christians may be with me! that his Spirit may give me under standing, and enable me to think and “speak as the oracles of God,” without going from them to the right hand or to the left November 30, 1756. BEFoRE we attempt to account for any fact, we should be well assured of the fact itself. First, therefore, let us inquire what is the real state of mankind; and, in the Second place, endeavour to account for it. I. First, I say, let us inquire, What is the real state, with regard to knowledge and virtue, wherein mankind have been from the earliest times? And what state are they in at this day? I. 1. What is the state, (to begin with the former branch of the inquiry,) with regard to knowledge and virtue, wherein, according to the most authentic accounts, mankind have been from the earliest times? We have no authentic account of the state of mankind in the times antecedent to the deluge, but in the writings of Moses. What then, according to these, was the state of mankind in those times? Moses gives us an exact and full account: God then “saw that the wickedness of man was great, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen. vi.

1. Such is the state with regard to knowledge and virtue, wherein, according to the most authentic accounts, mankind was from earliest times, for above four thousand years. Such nearly did it continue, during the decline, and since the destruction, of the Roman empire. But we will wave all that is past, if it only appears that mankind is virtuous and wise at this day. This, then, is the point we are at present to consi der: Are-men in general now wise and virtuous? Our ingenious countryman, Mr. Brerewood, after his most careful and laborious inquiries, computes, that, supposing that part of the earth which we know to be inhabited were divided into thirty equal parts, nineteen of these are Heathen still; and of the remaining eleven, six are Mahometan, and only five Christian. Let us take as fair and impartial a survey as we can of the Heathens first, and then of the Mahometans and Christians. 2. And, First, of the Heathens. What manner of men are these, as to virtue and knowledge, at this day? Many of late, who still bear the Christian name, have entertained very honourable thoughts of the old Heathens. They cannot be lieve them to have been so stupid and senseless as they have been represented to be; particularly with regard to idolatry, in worshipping birds, beasts, and creeping things; much less can they credit the stories told of many nations, the Egyp tians in particular, Who are said to Have set the leek they after pray'd to. But if they do not consider who they are that transmit to us these accounts, namely, both those writers who, they profess to believe, spake “as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” and those whom perhaps they value more, the most credible of their contemporary Heathens; if, I say, they forget this, do they not consider the present state of the heathen world? Now, allowing the bulk of the ancient Heathens (which itself is not easily proved) to have had as much understanding as the modern, we have no pretence to suppose they had more. What therefore they were, we may safely gather from what they are; we may judge of the past by the present.

What therefore they were, we may safely gather from what they are; we may judge of the past by the present. Would we know, then, (to begin with a part of the world known to very early antiquity,) what manner of men the Heathens in Africa were two or three thousand years ago? Inquire what they are now, who are genuine Pagans still, not tainted either with Mahometanism or Christianity. They are to be found in abundance, either in Negroland, or round the Cape of Good Hope. Now, what measure of knowledge have the natives of these countries? I do not say in metaphysics, mathematics, or astronomy. Of these it is plain they know just as much as their four-footed brethren; the lion and the man are equally accomplished with regard to this knowledge. I will not ask what they know of the nature of government, of the respective rights of Kings and various orders of subjects: In this re gard, a herd of men are manifestly inferior to a herd of ele phants. But let us view them with respect to common life. What do they know of the things they continually stand in need of? How do they build habitations for themselves and their families; how select and prepare their food; clothe and adorn their persons? As to their habitations, it is certain, I will not say, our horses, (particularly those belonging to the Nobility and Gentry,) but an English peasant's dogs, nay, his very swine, are more commodiously lodged; and as to their food, apparel, and ornaments, they are just suitable to their edifices: Your nicer Hottentots think meet With guts and tripe to deck their feet. With downcast eyes on Totta's legs, The love-sick youth most humbly begs, She would not from his sight remove At once his breakfast and his love. Such is the knowledge of these accomplished animals, in things which cannot but daily employ their thoughts; and wherein, consequently, they cannot avoid exerting, to the uttermost, both their natural and acquired understanding. And what are their present attainments in virtue? Are they not, one and all, “without God in the world?” having either no knowledge of him at all; no conception of anything he has to do with them, or they with him; or such concep tions as are far worse than none, as make him such a one as themselves.

They speak much of their beloved ones ; with whom they say they converse both day and night. But their beloved ones teach them to eat and drink from morning to night, and, in a manner, from night to morning; for they rise at any hour of the night when they wake, and eat and drink as much as they can, and sleep again. Their beloved ones likewise expressly command them to torture and burn all their prisoners. Their manner of doing it is this: They hold lighted canes to their arms and legs, and several parts of their body, for some time, and then for a while take them away. They also stick burning pieces of wood in their flesh; in which condition they keep them from morning to evening. Such are at present the knowledge and virtue of the native Heathens, over another fourth of the known world. 4. In Asia, however, we are informed that the case is widely different. For although the Heathens bordering on Europe, the thousands and myriads of Tartars, have not much to boast either as to knowledge or virtue; and although the numerous little nations under the Mogul, who retain their original Hea thenism, are nearly on a level with them, as are the inhabitants of the many large and populous islands in the eastern seas; yet we hear high encomiums of the Chinese, who are as numer ous as all these together; some late travellers assuring us, that China alone has fifty-eight million of inhabitants. Now, these have been described as men of the deepest penetration, the highest learning, and the strictest integrity; and such doubtless they are, at least with regard to their understanding, if we will believe their own proverb: “The Chinese have two eyes, the Europeans one, and other men none at all.” And one circumstance, it must be owned, is much in their favour, -they live some thousand miles off; so that if it were affirmed, that every Chinese had literally three eyes, it would be difficult for us to disprove it. Nevertheless, there is room to doubt even of their understanding; nay, one of the arguments often brought to prove the greatness, to me clearly demon strates the littleness, of it; namely, the thirty thousand letters of their alphabet.

Nevertheless, there is room to doubt even of their understanding; nay, one of the arguments often brought to prove the greatness, to me clearly demon strates the littleness, of it; namely, the thirty thousand letters of their alphabet. To keep an alphabet of thirty hundred letters could never be reconciled to common sense; since every alphabet ought to be as short, simple, and easy as possible. No more can we reconcile to any degree of common sense, their crippling all the women in the empire, by a silly, senseless affectation of squeezing their feet till they bear no proportion to their bodies; so that the feet of a woman at thirty must still be as small as they would be naturally when four years old. But in order to see the true measure of their understanding in the clearest light, let us look, not at women, or the vulgar, but at the Nobility, the wisest, the politest part of the nation. Look at the Mandarins, the glory of the empire, and see any, every one of them at his meals, not deigning to use his own hands, but having his meat put into his mouth by two servants, planted for that purpose, one on his right hand, the other on his left | O the deep understanding of the noble lubber that sits in the midst, and Hiat, ceu pullus hirundinis / “Gapes, as the young swallow, for his food.” Surely an English ploughman, or a Dutch sailor, would have too much sense to endure it. If you say, “Nay, the Mandarin would not endure it, but that it is a custom ;” I answer, Undoubtedly it is; but how came it to be a custom? Such a custom could not have begun, much less have become gene ral, but through a general and marvellous want of common Sense. What their learning is now, I know not; but notwithstand ing their boast of its antiquity, it was certainly very low and contemptible in the last century, when they were so astonished at the skill of the French Jesuits, and honoured them as almost more than human, for calculating eclipses !

We are under an excellent constitution, which secures both our reli gious and civil liberty. We have religion taught in its primitive purity, its genuine, native simplicity. And how it prospers among us, we may know with great ease and certainty; for we depend not on hearsay, on the report of others, or on subtle and uncertain reasonings; but may see everything with our own eyes, and hear it with our own ears. Well, then, to make all the allowance possible, we will suppose mankind in general to be on a level, with regard to knowledge and virtue, even with the inhabitants of our fortunateislands; and take our measure of them from the present undeniable state of our own countrymen. In order to take a thorough survey of these, let us begin with the lowest, and proceed upward. The bulk of the natives of Ireland are to be found in or near their little cabins. throughout the kingdom, most of which are their own work manship, consisting of four earthen walls, covered with straw, or sods, with one opening in the side wall, which serves at once for door, window, and chimney. Here, in one room, are the cow and pig, the woman with her children, and the master of the family. Now, what knowledge have these rational animals? They know to plant and boil their potatoes, to milk their cow, and put their clothes on and off. if they have any besides a blanket; but other knowledge they have none, unless in religion. And how much do they know of this? A little more than the Hottentots, and not much. They know the names of God, and Christ, and the Virgin Mary. They know a little of St. Patrick, the Pope, and the Priest; how to tell their beads, to say Ave Maria and Pater Noster; to do what penance they are bid, to hear mass, confess, and pay so much for the pardon of their sins. But as to the nature of religion, the life of God in the soul, they know no more (I will not say, than the Priest, but) than the beasts of the field.

But as to the nature of religion, the life of God in the soul, they know no more (I will not say, than the Priest, but) than the beasts of the field. And how very little above these are the numerous inhabit ants of the northern parts of Scotland, or of the islands which lie either on the west or the north side of that kingdom I What knowledge have these, and what religion? Their re ligion usually lies in a single point, in implicitly believing the head of their clan, and implicitly doing what he bids.” Meantime they are, one and all, as ignorant of rational, scriptural religion, as of Algebra; and altogether as far from the practice as from the theory of it. “But it is not so in England: The very lowest of the peo ple are here better instructed.” I should be right glad to find it so; but I doubt a fair trial will show the contrary. I am afraid we may still say of thousands, myriads of peasants, men, women, and children, throughout our nation, “Wild as the untaught Indian's brood, The Christian savages remain; Strangers, yea, enemies to God, They make thee spill thy blood in vain.” The generality of English peasants are not only grossly, stupidly, I had almost said, brutishly ignorant as to all the arts of this life, but eminently so with regard to religion and the life to come. Ask a countryman, What is faith? What is repentance? What is holiness? What is true religion? and he is no more able to give you an intelligible answer, than if you were to ask him about the north-east passage. Is there, then, any possibility that they should practise what they know nothing of? If religion is not even in their heads, can it be in their hearts or lives? It cannot. Nor is there the least savour thereof, either in their tempers or conversation. Neither in the one, nor the other, do they rise one jot above the pitch of a Turk or a Heathen. Perhaps it will be said, “Whatever the clowns in the midland counties are, the people near the sea-coasts are more civilized.” Yes; great numbers of them are, in and near all our ports; many thousands there are civilized by smuggling.

“But if, after all, you will adhere to the literal sense of thi text, why do you not adhere to the literal sense of that text ‘This is my body, and believe transubstantiation ?” (Ibid. For those very reasons which you suggest: (1.) Because it i grossly absurd, to suppose that Christ speaks of what he the held in his hands, as his real, natural body. But it is nowa, absurd, to suppose the Psalmist was “conceived in sin.” (2. The sense of, “This is my body,” may be clearly explained b. other scriptures, where the like forms of speech are used; bu there are no other scriptures where the like forms with thi of David are used in any other sense. (3.) Transubstantia tion is attended with consequences hurtful to piety; but th doctrine of original sin, and faith grounded thereon, is th only foundation of true piety. 14. The next proof is, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” (Job xiv. 4.) On this you observe: “Job is here speaking of the weak ness of our nature; not with regard to sin, but to the short ness and afflictions of life.” (Page 139.) Certainly, with regard both to the one and the other. For though, in the first and second verses, he mentions the shortness and troubles of life, yet even these are mentioned with a manifest regard to sin. This appears from the very next verse: (Page 140:) “And dost thou open thy eyes upon such a one;” to punish one already so wretched? “And bringest me into judgment with thee;” by chastising me still more? It then immediately follows, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” It does therefore by no means appear, that “Job is here speaking only with regard to the shortness and troubles of life.” Part of the following verses too run thus: “Now thou numberest my steps: Dost thou not watch over my sin?

“However, this text gives no intimation that Adam’s posterity lost communion with God for his sin.” It shows that Adam did so; and all his posterity has done the same. Whence is this, unless from his sin P “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden, Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” (Gen. iii. 24.) Although God is equally present in every place, yet this was a clear token that man had not now that near communion with him which he had enjoyed before his sin. 18. Proposition. “The fall brought upon mankind God’s displeasure and curse, so as we are “by nature the children of wrath.” “The text on which this is grounded, (Eph. ii. 2, 3,) we have considered before.” (Page 150.) And those considera tions have been answered at large. You add: “How mankind could be justly brought under God’s displeasure for Adam’s sin, we cannot understand: On the contrary, we do understand, it is unjust. And therefore, unless our understanding or perception of truth be false, it must be unjust. But understanding must be the same in all beings, as far as they do understand. Therefore, if we understand that it is unjust, God understands it to be so too.” (Page 151.) Plausible enough. But let us take the argument in pieces: “How mankind could be justly brought under God’s displea sure for Adam’s sin, we cannot understand.” I allow it. Icannot understand, that is, clearly or fully comprehend, the deep of the divine judgment therein; no more than I can, how “the whole” brute “creation,” through his sin, should have been “made subject to vanity,” and should “groan together,” in weakness, in various pain, in death, “until this day.” “On the con trary, we do understand, it is unjust.” I do not understand it is. It is quite beyond my understanding. It is a depth which I cannot fathom. “Therefore, unless our understanding or perception of truth be false, it must be unjust.” Here lies the deceit. You shift the terms, and place as equivalent those which are not equivalent. Our perception of truth cannot be false; our understanding or apprehension of things may.

Our perception of truth cannot be false; our understanding or apprehension of things may. “But understanding must be the same in all beings.” Yes, in the former sense of the word, but not the latter. “There fore, if we understand (apprehend) it is unjust, God under stands it so too.” Nay, verily: “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are his thoughts higher than our thoughts.” “What a God must he be, who can curse his innocent creatures before they have a being ! Is this thy God, O Christian?” Bold enough ! So Lord B , “Is Moses's God your God?” He is mine, although he said, “Cursed be Canaan,” including his posterity before they had a being; and although he now permits millions to come into a world which everywhere bears the marks of his displeasure. And he permits human souls to exist in bodies which are (how we know not, but the fact we know) “conceived and born in sin; ” by reason whereof, all men coming into the world are “children of wrath.” But he has provided a Saviour for them all; and this fully acquits both his justice and mercy. 19. “So as we are by nature bond-slaves to Satan: “And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive at his will. (2 Tim. ii. 26.)” (Page 152.) But you say, “The Apostle speaks this of the unconverted Gentiles, who were slaves to Satan, not through Adam, but through their own fault.” Both one and the other. But how does it appear, that he speaks this of the Gentiles only? Without offering at any proof of this, you go on : “The clause, ‘Taken captive by him, is spoken, not of the devil, but of ‘the servant of the Lord; for thus the place should be rendered: ‘That they may awake out of the snare of the devil, being revived by him,” that is, the servant of the Lord, ‘to his, that is, God’s, “will.’” (Page 153.) Well, the proof. “The word £oypeo signifies, to revive; and so here, to restore men to life and salvation.” As a proof of this sense of the word, you cite Luke v. 10. But this rather proves the contrary; for there it has nothing to do with reviving.

Our apprehension is indis tinct, our judgment false, our reasoning wrong in a thousand instances. So it always was; and so it is still, after all the care we can possibly take: Therefore, “our faculties are not a sound and fit for right action as Adam’s were before he sinned.’ “But any man of common understanding might havedressed and kept the garden as well as he.” I can neither affirm no deny this; for we know not how he dressed and kept it. “Nor doth it appear, that in giving names to all the crea. tures, he showed any extraordinary penetration into thei natures; for that the names he gave truly expressed the several qualities of them is a mere fiction, without any foun. dation in Scripture history, or the names of animals in the original Hebrew.” (Page 171.) This is really strange that any man of learning should be so hardy as to affirm this, after the numberless instances which have been produced of Hebrew names expressing the most essential property of each animal. And is this supposition likewise “without any foundation in Scripture history?” What is that? “And the Lord God brought every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, unto Adam, to see what he would call them;” to make proof of his understanding. “And whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.” (Gen. ii. 19.) Now, whether those names were Hebrew or no, (which you affect to doubt,) can it be supposed that God would have permitted them to stand, if they had not suited the nature of each creature? It is bold therefore to affirm, that “many of his posterity could have given names to them as well as he ; and that therefore this is not a proof that he had any capacity superior to us.” (Page 172.) You proceed: “Surely his eating the forbidden fruit is no evidence of superior abilities.” (Page 173.) And it is no evidence of the contrary; “seeing,” as you yourself observe, “what his special temptation was, we do not know.” There fore, neither do we know whether any of his posterity could have overcome it; much less, that “many of his posterity have over.

After repeating the intermediate verses, you yourself add, “He subjoins a reason, which demonstrates the error of trust ing in man: ‘The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?’ (Verse 9.) This text, therefore, does not mean, Who can know his own heart, but another's?” Whether it means one or both, it positively asserts, that “the heart” of man, of men in general, of every man, is “desperately wicked.” Therefore, as to the main point contained therein, “Christians do not understand it wrong; ” (page 224;) neither misapply it at all. When I say, “I feel I have a ‘wicked heart,’” (another thing which you do not understand,) “I mean this: I feel much pride remaining in my heart, much self-will, much un belief.” (Page 225.) Now, I really believe pride, and self will, and unbelief to be essentially wicked tempers. There fore, in whatever heart they remain, (and they remain in yours as well as mine,) that is a “wicked heart.” After a long. pause, you return to the seventh of the Romans, and affirm: “We cannot, from anything in that chapter, infer, that we came into the world with sinful dispo sitions derived from Adam; for the Apostle says nothing about Adam.” (Page 229.) He had said enough in the fifth chapter of the cause: Here he only describes the effect; the state of those who are now “brought to the birth; ” but “there is not ” yet “strength to bring forth.” “Nor can we infer from hence, that any man sins through a principle which it was never in his power to command; for then it would be no sin.” Upon this I would only ask, Are you assured that no man transgresses God’s law (whether you will call it sin or not) through a principle which it was never in his power to command; at least, not for any time to gether? Every passionate man can confute you in this. He has sad experience of the contrary. To those objections which you have, in some sort, answered, you subjoin the following questions:-- “1. Is not the doctrine of original sin necessary to account for the being of so much wickedness in the world?” You answer, “Adam’s nature, it is allowed, was not sinful; and yet he sinned.

“By nature” all are “children of wrath, without hope, without God in the world.” 10. Doth that man write the sincere sense of his own mind and conscience, who charges the expression, “Adam was on trial for us all,” with this inference, “That we are none of us in a state of trial now, but Adam alone was upon trial for us all ?” We have owned and granted, that men are now in a state of trial; but this is upon the foot of a new covenant. You answer, “What can be more evident, than that, accord ing to this scheme, Adam alone was to be upon trial for us all, and that none of Adam’s posterity are upon personal trial?” (Page 209.) Do you not see the ambiguity in the word alone? Or do you see and dissemble it? Dr. Watts sup poses, that Adam alone, that is, this single person, was on trial for all men. Does it follow from hence, that Adam alone, that is, no other person, was ever in a state of trial? Again: If no person but Adam was upon trial for all men, will it follow, “No person but Adam was upon trial at all?” It is really hard to think, that you here “speak the sincere sense of your own mind and conscience.” You go on: “He supposes all mankind are still under the original covenant with Adam, according to which he alone was upon trial for us all, and none of his posterity are upon per sonal trial.” He does not suppose any man to be so under that covenant, as to supersede his being upon personal trial. Yourself add: “I knew he owned we are upon personal trial, and that all mankind are now under the covenant of grace; but how can either of these consist with the scheme?” Both of them consist with it perfectly well. (1) Adam alone, or single, was, in some sense, on trial for all mankind, according to the tenor of the oid covenant, “Do this and live.” (2.) Adam fell, and hereby the sentence of death came on him and all his posterity. (3.) The new covenant was given, whereby all mankind were put into a state of personal trial; yet, still, (4.) Death, the penalty of the old covenant, came (more or less) on all mankind.

But still the creature which was designed to bear the nearest likeness of his Maker in this lower world must have powers perfectly sufficient for his present well being and acting in that station wherein God had placed him. All his senses must be clear and strong, his limbs vigorous and active, his body healthy in all the inward and outward parts of it, and every natural power in its proper order.” (Page 3.) “For God would surely form such a creature in a state of perfect ease, without any original malady of nature, to give him pain or sorrow. Nor could there be any ten dency in his body to pain or disease while he remained with out sin.” (Page 4.) “And as the powers of his body must be thus perfect, so the faculties of his soul must have their perfection too. “His understanding must have that knowledge both of God and his creatures, which was needful for his happiness. Not that he was formed with all knowledge in arts and sciences, but such as was requisite to his peace and welfare. His reason must be clear, his judgment uncorrupted, and his conscience upright and sensible. “This leads me to speak of his moral perfection. A rational creature thus made must not only be innocent, as a tree, but must be formed holy. His will must have an inward bias to virtue; he must have an inclination to please that God who made him, a supreme love to his Creator, a zeal to serve him, and a tender fear of offending him.” (Page 5.) “For either the new-created man loved God supremely, or not; if he did not, he was not innocent, since the law of nature requires a supreme love to God; if he did, he stood ready for every act of obedience: And this is true holiness of heart. And, indeed, without this, how could a God of holiness love the work of his own hands? “There must be also in this creature a regular objection of the inferior powers to the superior. Sense, and appetite, and passion, must be subject to reason. The mind must have a power to govern these lower faculties, that he might not offend against the law of his creation.

It is absurd to imagine this of a God so wise, so righteous, and so merciful!” (Page20.) “2. Let us take a survey of the vegetables which grow out of the earth, with the brute animals which are found on the surface of it; and we shall find more reasons to conclude that man, the chief inhabitant, is not such as he came first out of his Maker's hand. “It must be granted here again, that the wisdom and good ness of the Creator are amazingly displayed in the animal and the vegetable world, beyond the utmost reach of our thoughts or praises. But still we may have leave to inquire, whether, if man had continued innocent, among the numerous herbs and flowers fitted for his support and delight, any plants or fruits of a malignant, mortal nature would have grown out of the earth, without some plain mark or caution set upon them.” (Page 21.) “Can we suppose that among the roots, herbs, and trees, good for food, the great God would have suffered mischief, malady, and deadly poison, to spring up here and there, without any sufficient distinction, that man might know how to avoid them? This is the case in our present world; disease, anguish, and death, have entered into the bowels and veins of multitudes by an innocent and fatal mistake of these pernicious things for proper food. “There was indeed ‘the tree of knowledge’ in Paradise; but man was expressly cautioned against it. And certainly had he continued holy, no poisonous plant would have been suffered to grow on the earth, without either some natural mark set upon it, or some divine caution to avoid it. (Page 22.) “Proceed to the animal world: There are many creatures, indeed, which serve the use or pleasure of man. But are there not many other sorts which he is neither able to govern nor to resist; and by which all his race are exposed, whenever they meet them, to wounds, and anguish, and death?” (Page 23.) “If man had not sinned, would there have been in the world any such creatures as bears and tigers, wolves and lions, animated with such fierceness and rage, and armed with such destructive teeth and talons? Would the innocent children of men have ever been formed to be the living prey of these devourers?

And not only they of riper age, but even those of ten der years, discover the principles of iniquity and seeds of sin. What young ferments of spite and envy, what native wrath and rage, are found in the little hearts of infants, and sufficiently discovered by their hands, and eyes, and countenances, before they can speak, or know good from evil ! What additional crimes of lying and deceit, obstinacy and perverseness proceed to blemish their younger years!” (Pages 39, 41.) “How little knowledge or thought of God, their Creator and Governor, is found in children when they can distinguish good and evil!” (Page 42.) “What an utter disregard of Him that made them, and of the duties they owe to him And when they * These quotations from Juvenal are thus translated by Gifford : “What day so sacred, which no guilt profanes?” ------“Nature still, Incapable of change, and fix’d in ill, Recurs to her old habits:-never yet Could sinner to his sin a period set. When did the flush of modest blood inflame The cheek once harden'd to the sense of shame? Or when the offender, since the birth of time, Retire, contented with a single crime?” “For youth is facile, and its yielding will Receives, with fatal ease, the print of ill.”-EDIT. begin to act according to their childish age, how little sense have they of what is morally right and good How do evil passions or irregular appetites continually prevail in them ! Even from their first capacity of acting as moral creatures, how are they led away to practise falsehood and injury to their play-fellows, perhaps with cruelty or revenge How often are they engaged in bold disobedience to their parents or teachers | And whence does this arise ? What is the root, that brings forth such early bitter fruit?” (Page 43.) “It cannot be imputed to custom, education, or example; for many of these things appear in children before they can take any notice of ill examples, or are capable of imitating them. And even where there are only good examples about them, and where the best and earliest instructions are given them, and inculcated with the utmost care, yet their hearts run astray from God.

Add to this the common calamities in which infants are involved by fire, earthquake, pestilence. And there are a thousand other acci dents which attend them, whereby their members, their natural powers, receive dismal injuries; so that, perhaps, they drag on life with blindness, deafness, lameness, or distortion of body or limbs. Sometimes they languish on to manhood, or even old age, under sore calamities, which began almost as soon as their being, and which are only ended by death.” (Page 68.) “Now, as these sufferings cannot be sent upon them to cor rect their personal sins, so neither are they sent as a trial of their virtue; for they have no knowledge of good or evil. Yet we see multitudes of these little, miserable beings. And are these treated as innocent creatures; or rather, as under some gene ral curse, involved in some general punishment?” (Page 69.) “‘But may not these sufferings of children be for the punishment of the sins of their parents?” “Not with any justice or equity, unless the sins of the parents are imputed to their children. Besides, many of the parents of these suffering children are dead or absent, so as never to know it. And how in these cases can it be a punishment for their parents’ sin, any otherwise than as it is a general punish ment for the sin of their first parent?” (Page 71.) “But God recompenses them for these sufferings hereafter.’ Where does the Scripture affirm this? Besides, many of them grow up to manhood. And if they prove wicked, and are sent to hell at last, what recompence have they for their infant suffer ings? Or will you say, God punished them before they had sinned, because he knew beforehand they would sin? Yet far ther: What wise or good design can this their punishment answer, when no creature can know what they are punished for, if it be not for that which affects all mankind? “‘But how are such miseries reigning among his creatures consistent with the goodness of God?” Perfectly well, if we consider mankind as a sinful, degenerate part of God’s creation. It is most abundant goodness that they have any comforts left, and that their miseries are not doubled.

It is the pain of hunger which makes food so relishing; the pain of weariness that renders sleep so refreshing. And as for the blessings of love and friendship, among neighbours and kindred, do they not often produce as much vexationassatisfaction; not, indeed, of themselves, but by reason of the endless humours and follies, errors and passions, of mankind?” (Page 373.) “Again: Do not the very pleasures of the body prove the ruin of ten thousand souls? They may be used with innocence and wisdom; but the unruly appetites and passions of men continually turn into a curse what God originally designed for a blessing.” (Page 374.) “Think again how short and transient are the pleasures of life in comparison of the pains of it! How vanishing the sweetest sensations of delight! But, in many persons and families, how many are the days, the months, the years, of fatigue, or pain, or bitter sorrow ! What pleasure of the animal frame is either as lasting, or as intense, as the pain of the gout or stone? How small is the proportion of sensible pleasure to that of pain, or trouble, or uneasiness! And how far is it over-balanced by the maladies or miseries, the fears or sorrows, of the greatest part of mankind | “As for intellectual pleasures, how few are there in the world who have any capacity for them ! and among those few, how many differences and contentions! How many crossing objections, bewildered inquiries, and unhappy mistakes, are mingled with the enjoyment so that ‘He who increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow,” saith the wisest of men; and upon the whole computation, he writes on this also, “Vanity and vexation of spirit.” “To talk, then, of real happiness to be enjoyed in this life, (abstracted from the foretaste of another,) is contrary to all the common sense and experience of everythinking man. Without this ‘taste of the powers of the world to come,” I know not what wise man would willingly come into these scenes of mortality, or go through them with any patience.” (Pages 376, 377.) “What, to be trained up from infancy under so many una voidable follies, prejudices, and wretched delusions, through the power of flesh and sense! to be sunk into such gross ignorance both of our souls, our better selves, and of the glorious Being that made us!

These are still ‘children of wrath: ’ But whatever difference there is between us and them, we were once what they are now. “(6.) He expressly says, “We were children of wrath even as others, by nature,” or, from our birth. He does not say, We became so by education, or by imitation, or by cus tom in sinning; but, to show us when it is that we commence sinners, by what means we become ‘children of wrath, whence it is that we are so prone to evil from our infancy and to imitate bad rather than good examples, he says, “We were children of wrath by nature; we were born fallen crea tures; we came into the world sinners, and, as such, liable to wrath, in consequence of the fall of our first father. “But, it is affirmed, (i.) That “by nature means, by habit or custom.’ I answer, Though the term, nature, with some qualifying expression annexed, is sometimes taken for in veterate custom, yet it is never so taken when put singly, without any such qualifying expression. When, therefore, the Apostle says absolutely, ‘We are children of wrath by nature, this, according to the constant sense of the words, must mean, We were so from our birth.” (Page 31.) “It is affirmed, (ii.) That “because the original words stand 420 ThE DOCTRINE OF thus, tekwa buoet opyms, children by nature of wrath; there fore, children by nature means only truly and really children of wrath. I answer, The consequence is good for nothing: For let the words stand as they will, it is evident that recwa. $vae are, children by birth ; or, such as are born so, in dis tinction from those who became such afterward. “It is affirmed, (iii.) ‘That buoet, by nature, signifies no more than truly or really.” I answer, First, It is not allowed, that any good Greek writers ever use the word in this sense. Secondly, Whatever others do, the writers of the New Testa ment always use it in another sense. So Galatians ii. 15: “We who are Jews by nature,’ buoet Iovôatou that is, We who are born Jews, in contradistinction to proselytes. ‘Ye did service to them which by nature are no gods; ” (Gal. iv.8;) um bvaret ovat Seous, persons or things which are partakers of no divine nature.

A denial of original sin contradicts the main design of the gospel, which is to humble vain man, and to ascribe to God’s free grace, not man’s free will, the whole of his salvation. Nor, indeed, can we let this doctrine go with out giving up, at the same time, the greatest part, if not all, of the essential articles of the Christian faith. If we give up this, we cannot defend either justification by the merits of Christ, or the renewal of our natures by his Spirit. Dr. Taylor’s book is not, therefore, subversive of a particular branch, but of the whole scheme, of Christianity. “WI. The doctrine, therefore, of original sin is not only a truth agreeable to Scripture and reason, but a truth of the utmost importance. And it is a truth to which the Churches of Christ, from the beginning, have borne a clear testimony. “Few truths, if any, are more necessary to be known, be lieved, and thoroughly considered. For if we are not ac quainted with this, we do not know ourselves; and if we do not know ourselves, we cannot rightly know Christ and the grace of God. And on this knowledge of Christ and the grace of God depends the whole of our salvation. St. Augustine, therefore, well remarks, ‘Christianity lies properly in the knowledge of what concerns, Adam and Christ. For, certainly, if we do not know Christ, we know nothing to any purpose; and we cannot know Christ, without some knowledge of what relates to Adam, who was ‘the figure of Him that was to come.’ “‘But if this doctrine is so important, why is so little said of it in Scripture, and in the writings of the ancients?” “This is a grand mistake. We totally deny that the Scrip ture says little of it. Dr. Taylor, indeed, affirms, ‘There are but five passages of Scripture that plainly relate to the effects of Adam’s fall.” Not so: Many Scriptures, as has been shown, plainly and directly teach us this doctrine; and many others deliver that from which it may be rationally and easily de duced. Indeed, the whole doctrine of salvation by Christ, and divine grace, implies this; and each of its main branches --justification and regeneration--directly leads to it.

But who can take the exact dimensions of it, in its breadth, length, height, and depth? ‘The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: Who can know it?” However, we may quickly perceive so much of it as may show the absolute necessity of regeneration. Man, in his natural state, is altogether corrupt, through all the faculties of his soul: Corrupt in his understanding, his will, his affections, his conscience, and his memory. “1. The understanding is despoiled of its primitive glory, and covered over with confusion. We are fallen into the hands of our grand adversary, and are deprived of our two eyes. ‘There is none that understandeth;’ the very mind and conscience of the natural man are defiled or spoiled. But to point out this corruption of the understanding more parti cularly, let the following things be considered:-- “First. There is a natural weakness in the minds of men, with respect to spiritual things. How hard is it to teach them the common principles of religion; to make truths so plain, that they may understand them I Try the same persons in other things, speak of the things of this world, and they will under stand quickly; but it is hard to make them know how their souls may be saved, or how their hearts may find rest in Christ. Consider even those who have many advantages above the common run of mankind: Yet how small is their knowledge of divine things! What confusion still remains in their minds! How often are they mired, and ‘speak as a child, even in the matter of practical truths ! It is a pitiable weakness, that we cannot perceive the things which God has revealed. And it must needs be a sinful weakness, since the law of God requires us to know and believe them. “Secondly. Man's understanding is naturally overwhelmed with gross “darkness’ in spiritual things. Man, at the instiga tion of the devil, attempting to break out a new light in his mind, instead of that, broke up the doors of the bottomless pit, by the smoke whereof he was covered with darkness. When God at first made man, his mind was a lamp of light; but sin has now turned it into darkness. Sin has closed the window of the soul.

is no salvation without regeneration? and no regeneration, but what makes man ‘a new creature?’ O no! If ye did, ye could not live in your sins, live out of Christ, and yet hope for mercy. “Fifthly. Man is naturally high-minded. Lowliness is not a flower which grows in the field of nature. It is natural to man to think highly of himself and what is his own. ‘Vain man would be wise;” so he accounts himself, and so he would be accounted by others. His way is right, because it is ‘his own;’ ‘for every way of man is right in his own eyes. He is ‘alive without the law;’ and therefore his hope is strong, and his confidence firm. It is another tower of Babel; the word batters it, yet it stands. One while breaches are made in it, but they are quickly repaired. At another time, it is all made to shake; but it is still kept up; till God's Spirit raise an heartquake within the man, which tumbles it down, and leaves not one stone upon another. “Thus much of the corruption of the understanding. Call the understanding, “Ichabod; for the glory is departed from it.” Consider this, ye that are yet in the state of nature, and groan ye out your case before the Lord, that the Sun of Righteous ness may arise upon you, before ye be shut up in everlasting darkness. What avails your worldly wisdom? What do all your attainments in religion avail, while your understanding lies wrapped up in darkness and confusion, utterly void of the light of life? “2. Nor is the will less corrupted than the understanding. It was at first faithful, and ruled with God; but now it is turned traitor against God, and rules with and for the devil. To open this plague of the heart, let the following thingsbe considered:- “First. There is in the unrenewed will an utter inability for what is truly good in the sight of God. Indeed a natural man has a power to choose and do what is materially good; but though he can will what is good and right, he can do nothing aright and well. “Without me,’ that is, separate from me, ‘ye can do nothing; nothing truly and spiritually good.

Are they not ‘as bullocks unaccus tomed to the yoke ’’ Yea, it is far easier to tame young bullocks to the yoke, than to bring young children under dis cipline. Every man may see in this, as in a glass, that man is naturally wild and wilful; that, according to Zophar’s observ ation, he ‘is born a wild ass’s colt. What can be said more? He is like a ‘colt, the colt of an “ass, the colt of a ‘wild ass; a wild ass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure; in her occasion who can turn her away?’ “2. What pain and difficulty do men find in bringing their hearts to religious duties ! And what a task is it to the natural man to abide at them to leave the world but a little, and converse with God! When they are engaged in worldly business or company, time seems to fly, and is gone before they are aware. But how heavily does it drive, while a prayer, a sermon, or a Sabbath lasts | With many the Lord’s day is the longest day in the week; and therefore they must sleep longer that morning, and go sooner to bed that night, than ordinarily they do, that the day may be of a tolerable length. And still their hearts say, ‘When will the Sabbath be gone?” “3. Consider how the will of the natural man “rebels against the light. Sometimes he is not able to keep it out; but he “loves darkness rather than light. The outer door of the understanding is broken open, but the inner door of the will remains shut. Corruption and conscience then encounter; till conscience is forced to give back; convictions are murdered, and truth is made and “held prisoner “in righteousness.” “4. When the Spirit of the Lord is working a deeper work, yet what “resistance’ does the soul make | When he connes, he finds the ‘strong man keeping the house, while the soul is fast asleep in the devil’s arms, till the Lord awakens in the sinner, opens his eyes, and strikes him with terror, while the clouds are black above his head, and the sword of vengeance is held to his breast. But what pains is he at to put a fair face on a black heart!

Has he told us, or can he tell us, any thing more? No, nor all the angels in heaven. We knew before that the foundation and the superstruc ture of religion are comprised in those words, “We love him because he first loved us.” Does he teach us anything higher or deeper? In a word, does he teach any single point, either of inward or outward holiness, which we did not know before ? If he does, what is it? I cannot find out one in all his writings. 3. But if his matter is not new, if this is nothing uncom mon, his manner of speaking is new indeed ! His language is utterly new ; it was never used since the world began. And this is the very reason for which he is so admired,-- because he speaks (which cannot be denied) as never man spake. Indeed, I hardly know for which he is most admired,--the novelty, or the obscurity, of his language. But I cannot admire it at all; because it is quite unscrip tural. There is no trace of it to be found in any part either of the Old or New Testament. Therefore, I cannot recon cile it to that express command, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.” I cannot admire it, because, Secondly, it is barbarous in the highest degree : Whatever is peculiar in his phraseology, is not authorized by any good writer whatever. It is queer ness itself. It is mere dog-Latin. It is an insult upon the ear and the understanding of all mankind. One allows, “None can understand it without much pains; perhaps not without reading him thrice over.” I would not read him thrice over on any consideration. (1.) Because it would be enough to crack any man's brain to brood so long over such unintelligible nonsense; and, (2.) Because such a waste of time might provoke God to give me up to a strong delusion, to believe a lie. But I doubt whether any man understands it at all: For it is so dark and indeterminate, that I have not found any two persons in England who understand it alike. I thought, if any man living understood Behmen, Mr. Law did. “No,” says one who has been studying him these forty years, “Mr. Law never understood a page of him.” 4.