Wesley Corpus

by John Wesley "Not as though I had already attained." TO THE READER [Preface] 1. SINCE the name first came abroad into the world, many have been at a loss to know what a Methodist is; what are the principles and the practice of those who are commonly called by that name; and what the distinguishing marks of this sect, "which is everywhere spoken against." The Methodist movement began in England in the late 1730s. The official church in England was the Church of England. John and Charles Wesley were ordained in this church (as had been their father Samuel), but in their Methodist work found themselves doing things differently than the mainstream church. The two most controversial things John Wesley did were (a) Preaching outside, and (b) traveling and preaching all over the country. In those days, everyone thought that God's work had to be done in a properly consecrated building (an official church building). Instead of waiting for the people who needed Jesus to show up at church, Wesley took Jesus to them. He commonly preached his first sermon at 5 am in the morning - to people on their way to work. He thought the message of Jesus was so important that he was willing to bend the rules to help people hear it. The official church also regulated where pastors did their work. A preacher was supposed to preach only in the church to which he was appointed, unless invited by the person holding the appointment. Wesley went everywhere. He did not invade other people's churches, but preached outdoors, in houses, and in rented buildings. All this was considered high irregular, even dangerous. These are key reasons why people - usually those in positions of authority - spoke against the Methodists. What activities can you imagine doing today that might bring people to Jesus - but be disapproved by people in power? 2. And it being generally believed, that I was able to give the clearest account of these things, (as having been one of the first to whom that name was given, and the person by whom the rest were supposed to be directed), I have been called upon, in all manner of ways, and with the utmost earnestness, so to do.

And it being generally believed, that I was able to give the clearest account of these things, (as having been one of the first to whom that name was given, and the person by whom the rest were supposed to be directed), I have been called upon, in all manner of ways, and with the utmost earnestness, so to do. I yield as last to the continued importunity both of friends and enemies; and do now give the clearest account I can, in the presence of the Lord and Judge of heaven and earth, of the principles and practice whereby those who are called Methodists are distinguished from other men. In plain English, Wesley is setting out to explain the distinctives of Methodists - what makes them different from other Christians. Here's a brief note on terminology. In mainstream usage Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism are all religions. Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Catholics, etc., are denominations of Christianity. 3. I say those who are called Methodists; for, let it be well observed, that this is not a name which they take to themselves, but one fixed upon them by way of reproach, without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford, by a student of Christ Church; either in allusion to the ancient sect of Physicians so called, from their teaching, that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise, or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station. Wesley begins explaining how the name came about. When the movement first started, Wesley and his friends were students at Oxford University. They wanted to know God more and to obey him faithfully. They put much effort into what they did and were very Methodical about it. In fact they were so methodical that people started using it as an insult: “You're just a bunch of Methodists!” Wesley took the insult and claimed it as his own. By the way one of the other insults people used was “Bible Moths.” If you've ever seen how moths flutter endlessly around a light, you know what they had in mind, having seen how Wesley and his friends devoted themselves to reading, studying, and obeying the bible. Notice this: the Methodist movement was started by college students.

Question: Do you think this poll picture fits your experience of congregational life to any degree? If so, what might we do about it? What would Wesley have to say about it? What kinds of arguments might he use? 17. These are the principles and practices of our sect; these are the marks of a true Methodist. By these alone do those who are in derision so called, desire to be distinguished from other men. If any man say, "Why, these are only the common fundamental principles of Christianity!" thou hast said; so I mean; this is the very truth; I know they are no other; and I would to God both thou and all men knew, that I, and all who follow my judgment, do vehemently refuse to be distinguished from other men, by any but the common principles of Christianity,--the plain, old Christianity that I teach, renouncing and detesting all other marks of distinction. And whosoever is what I preach, (let him be called what he will, for names change not the nature of things,) he is a Christian, not in name only, but in heart and in life. He is inwardly and outwardly conformed to the will of God, as revealed in the written word. He thinks, speaks, and lives, according to the method laid down in the revelation of Jesus Christ. His soul is renewed after the image of God, in righteousness and ion all true holiness. And having the mind that was in Christ, he so walks as Christ also walked. Wesley’s objective was not to begin a new denomination. He remained a priest in the Church of England until his death. He took the Methodist movement to be a “back to basics” movement, getting back to simple, original Christianity. For him, it was being a follower of Jesus, seeking to live like Jesus, that mattered. From the time of Wesley until the present, Methodism has rejected the idea that there is One True Church. We recognize that what we believe and practice is mostly the same as what other Christian churches believe and practice. What are some present-day consequences of believing there isn’t “One True Church?” How is our life as a church affected by the belief that we and other churches are on the “same team?” 18.

Whatever your hand finds to do, do you do it with your might? And do you do all as unto the Lord, as a sacrifice unto God, acceptable in Christ Jesus? The, and this alone is the old religion. This is true, primitive Christianity. Oh, when shall it spread over all the earth? when shall it be found both in us and you? Without waiting for others, let each of us by the grace of God amend one. 16. Are we not thus far agreed? Let us thank God for this, and receive it as a fresh token of His love. But if God still loveth us, we ought also to love one another. We ought, without this endless jangling about opinions, to provoke one another to love and to good works. Let the points wherein we differ stand aside: here are enough wherein we agree enough to be the ground of every Christian temper and of every Christian action. O brethren, let us not still fall out by the way! I hope to see you in heaven. And if I practice the religion above described, you dare not say I shall go to hell. You cannot think so. None can persuade you to it. Your own conscience tells you the contrary. Then, if we cannot as yet think alike in all things, at least we may love alike. Herein we cannot possibly do amiss. For of one point none can doubt a moment, -- ‘God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.’ 17. In the name, then, and in the strength of God, let us resolve first, not to hurt one another; to do nothing unkind or unfriendly to each other, nothing which we would not have done to ourselves. Rather let us endeavor after every instance of a. kind, friendly, and Christian behavior towards each other. Let us resolve secondly, God being our helper, to speak nothing harsh or unkind of each other. The sure way to avoid this is to say all the good we can both of and to one another; in all our conversation, either with or concerning each other, to use only the language of love to speak with all Softness and tenderness, with the most endearing expression which is consistent with truth and sincerity.

3. Thirdly. The faith through which we are saved, in that sense of the word which will hereafter be explained, is not barely that which the Apostles themselves had while Christ was yet upon earth; though they so believed on him as to "leave all and follow him;" although they had then power to work miracles, to "heal all manner of sickness, and all manner of disease;" yea, they had then "power and authority over all devils;" and, which is beyond all this, were sent by their Master to "preach the kingdom of God." 4. What faith is it then through which we are saved It may be answered, first, in general, it is a faith in Christ: Christ, and God through Christ, are the proper objects of it. herein, therefore, it is sufficiently, absolutely distinguished from the faith either of ancient or modern heathens. And from the faith of a devil it is fully distinguished by this: it is not barely a speculative, rational thing, a cold, lifeless assent, a train of ideas in the head; but also a disposition of the heart. For thus saith the Scripture, "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness;" and, "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." 5. And herein does it differ from that faith which the Apostles themselves had while our Lord was on earth, that it acknowledges the necessity and merit of his death, and the power of his resurrection. It acknowledges his death as the only sufficient means of redeeming man from death eternal, and his resurrection as the restoration of us all to life and immortality; inasmuch as he "was delivered for our sins, and rose again for our justification." Christian faith is then, not only an assent to the whole gospel of Christ, but also a full reliance on the blood of Christ; a trust in the merits of his life, death, and resurrection; a recumbency upon him as our atonement and our life, as given for us, and living in us; and, in consequence hereof, a closing with him, and cleaving to him, as our "wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption," or, in one word, our salvation. II. What salvation it is, which is through this faith, is the Second thing to be considered.

4. "However, may not the speaking thus of the mercy of God, as saving or justifying freely by faith only, encourage men in sin" Indeed, it may and will: Many will "continue in sin that grace may abound:" But their blood is upon their own head. The goodness of God ought to lead them to repentance; and so it will those who are sincere of heart. When they know there is yet forgiveness with him, they will cry aloud that he would blot out their sins also, through faith which is in Jesus. And if they earnestly cry, and faint not, it they seek him in all the means he hath appointed; if they refuse to be comforted till he come; "he will come, and will not tarry." And he can do much work in a short time. Many are the examples, in the Acts of the Apostles, of God's working this faith in men's hearts, even like lightning falling from heaven. So in the same hour that Paul and Silas began to preach, the jailer repented, believed, and was baptized; as were three thousand, by St. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, who all repented and believed at his first preaching And, blessed be God, there are now many living proofs that he is still "mighty to save." 5. Yet to the same truth, placed in another view, a quite contrary objection is made: "If a man cannot be saved by all that he can do, this will drive men to despair." True, to despair of being saved by their own works, their own merits, or righteousness. And so it ought; for none can trust in the merits of Christ, till he has utterly renounced his own. he that "goeth about to stablish his own righteousness" cannot receive the righteousness of God. The righteousness which is of faith cannot be given him while he trusteth in that which is of the law.

9. But it did not satisfy him, barely to abstain from doing evil. His soul was athirst to do good. The language of his heart continually was, "`My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.' My Lord went about doing good; and shall not I tread in his steps?" As he had opportunity therefore, if he could do no good of a higher kind, he fed the hungry, clothed the naked, helped the fatherless or stranger, visited and assisted them that were sick or in prison. He gave all his goods to feed the poor. He rejoiced to labour or to suffer for them; and whereinsoever he might profit another, there especially to "deny himself." He counted nothing too dear to part with for them, as well remembering the word of his Lord, "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me" (Matt. 25:40). 10. Such was Christianity in its rise. Such was a Christian in ancient days. Such was every one of those who, when they heard the threatenings of the chief priests and elders, "lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and were all filled with the Holy Ghost. The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul:" So did the love of him in whom they had believed constrain them to love one another! "Neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own but they had all things common:" So fully were they crucified to the world, and the world crucified to them! "And they continued steadfastly with one accord in the Apostles' doctrine, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers" (Acts 2:42). "And great grace was upon them all; neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the Apostles' feet: And distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." (Acts 4:31-35.) II. Christianity Spreading from One to Another

1. But shall we not see greater things than these? Yea, greater than have been yet from the beginning of the world. Can Satan cause the truth of God to fail, or his promises to be of none effect? If not, the time will come when Christianity will prevail over all, and cover the earth. Let us stand a little, and survey (the Third thing which was proposed) this strange sight, a Christian World. Of this the Prophets of old inquired and searched diligently (1 Pet. 1:10, 11ff.:) of this the Spirit which was in them testified: "It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more." (Isa. 2:1-4.) "In that day there shall be a Root of Jesse, which shall stand for an Ensign of the people. To it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again to recover the remnant of his people; and he shall set up an Ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah, from the four corners of the earth." (Isa. 11:10-12.) "The wolf shall then dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. They shall not hurt nor destroy, saith the Lord, in all my holy mountain. For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea" (Isa. 11:6-9).

2. The inward, spiritual meaning of the law of God now begins to glare upon him. He perceives "the commandment is exceeding broad," and there is "nothing hid from the light thereof." He is convinced, that every part of it relates, not barely to outward sin or obedience, but to what passes in the secret recesses of the soul, which no eye but God's can penetrate. If he now hears, "Thou shalt not kill," God speaks in thunder, "He that hateth his brother is a murderer;" "he that saith unto his brother, Thou fool, is obnoxious to hell-fire." If the law say, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," the voice of the Lord sounds in his ears, "He that looketh on a woman to lust after he hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." And thus, in every point, he feels the word of God "quick and powerful, sharper than a two-edged sword." It "pierces even to the dividing asunder of his soul and spirit, his joints and marrow." And so much the more, because he is conscious to himself of having neglected so great salvation; of having "trodden under foot the son of God," who would have saved him from his sins, and "counted the blood of the covenant an unholy," a common, unsanctifying thing. 3. And as he knows, "all things are naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do," so he sees himself naked, stripped of all the fig-leaves which he had sewed together, of all his poor pretenses to religion or virtue, and his wretched excuses for sinning against God. He now sets himself like the ancient sacrifices, cleft in sunder, as it were, from the neck downward, so that all within him stands confessed. His heart is bare, and he sees it is all sin, "deceitful above all things, desperately wicked;" that it is altogether corrupt and abominable, more than it is possible for tongue to express; that there dwelleth therein no good thing, but unrighteousness and ungodliness only; every motion thereof, every temper and thought, being only evil continually.

The Witness of the Spirit: Discourse One "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God." Rom. 8:16 1. How many vain men, not understanding what they spake, neither whereof they affirmed, have wrested this Scripture to the great loss if not the destruction of their souls! How many have mistaken the voice of their own imagination for this witness of the Spirit of God, and thence idly presumed they were the children of God while they were doing the works of the devil! These are truly and properly enthusiasts; and, indeed, in the worst sense of the word. But with what difficulty are they convinced thereof, especially if they have drank deep into that spirit of error! All endeavours to bring them to the knowledge of themselves they will then account fighting against God; and that vehemence and impetuosity of spirit which they call "contending earnestly for the faith," sets them so far above all the usual methods of conviction that we may well say, "With men it is impossible." 2. Who can then be surprised if many reasonable men, seeing the dreadful effects of this delusion, and labouring to keep at the utmost distance from it, should sometimes lean toward another extreme -- if they are not forward to believe any who speak of having this witness concerning which others have so grievously erred -- if they are almost ready to set all down for enthusiasts, who use the expressions which have been so terribly abused -- yea, if they should question whether the witness or testimony here spoken of, be the privilege of ordinary Christians, and not, rather, one of those extraordinary gifts which they suppose belonged only to the apostolic age 3 . But is there any necessity laid upon us of running either into one extreme or the other May we not steer a middle course -- keep a sufficient distance from that spirit of error and enthusiasm, without denying the gift of God, and giving up the great privilege of his children Surely we may. In order thereto, let us consider, in the presence and fear of God, First. What is this witness or testimony of our spirit; what is the testimony of God's Spirit; and, how does he "bear witness with our spirit that we are the children of God"

2. With regard to the latter, the foundation thereof is laid in those numerous texts of Scripture which describe the marks of the children of God; and that so plain, that he which runneth may read them. These are also collected together, and placed in the strongest light, by many both ancient and modern writers. If any need farther light, he may receive it by attending on the ministry of God's Word; by meditating thereon before God in secret; and by conversing with those who have the knowledge of his ways. And by the reason or understanding that God has given him, which religion was designed not to extinguish, but to perfect; -- according to that of the Apostle, "Brethren, be not children in understanding; in malice" or wickedness "be ye children; but in understanding be ye men;" (1 Cor. 14:20;) -- every man applying those scriptural marks to himself, may know whether he is a child of God. Thus, if he know, First, "as many as are led by the Spirit of God," into all holy tempers and actions, "they are the sons of God;" (for which he has the infallible assurance of holy writ;) Secondly, I am thus "led by the Spirit of God;" he will easily conclude, -- "Therefore I am a son of God." 3. Agreeable to this are all those plain declarations of St. John, in his First Epistle: "Hereby we know that we do know him, if we keep his commandments." (1 John 2:3.) "Whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected; Hereby know we that we are in him;" that we are indeed the children of God. (1 John 2:5.) "If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that everyone that doeth righteousness is born of him." (1 John 2:29.) "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren." (1 John 3:14) "Hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him;" namely, because we "love one another not in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth." "Hereby know we that we dwell in him, because he hath given us of his" loving "Spirit." (1 John 4:13.) And, "hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the" obedient "spirit which he hath given us." (1 John 3:24.)

The Witness of Our Own Spirit "This is our rejoicing, the testimony of out conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world." (2 Cor. 1:12.) 1. Such is the voice of every true believer in Christ, so long as he abides in faith and love. "He that followeth me," saith our Lord, "walketh not in darkness:" And while he hath the light, he rejoiceth therein. As he hath "received the Lord Jesus Christ," so he walketh in him; and while he walketh in him, the exhortation of the Apostle takes place in his soul, day by day, "Rejoice in the Lord always; and again I say, Rejoice." 2. But that we may not build our house upon the sand, (lest when the rains descend, and the winds blow, and the floods arise and beat up it, it fall and great be the fall thereof,) I intend in the following discourse to show, what is the nature and ground of a Christian's joy. We know, in general, it is that happy peace, that calm satisfaction of spirit, which arises from such a testimony of his conscience, as is here described by the Apostle. But, in order to understand this the more thoroughly, it will be requisite to weigh all his words; whence will easily appear, both what we are to understand by conscience, and what by the testimony thereof; and also, how he that hath this testimony rejoiceth evermore. 3. And, First, what are we to understand by conscience What is the meaning of this word that is in every one's mouth One would imagine it was an exceedingly difficult thing to discover this, when we consider how large and numerous volumes have been from time to time wrote on this subject; and how all the treasures of ancient and modern learning have been ransacked, in order to explain it. And yet it is to be feared, it has not received much light from all those elaborate inquiries. Rather, have not most of those writers puzzled the cause; "darkening counsel by words without knowledge;" perplexing a subject, plain in itself, and easy to be understood For, set aside but hard words, and every man of an honest heart will soon understand the thing.

On Sin in Believers "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature." 2 Cor. 5:17. I. 1. Is there then sin in him that is in Christ Does sin remain in one that believes in him Is there any sin in them that are born of God, or are they wholly delivered from it Let no one imagine this to be a question of mere curiosity; or that it is of little importance whether it be determined one way or the other. Rather it is a point of the utmost moment to every serious Christian; the resolving of which very nearly concerns both his present and eternal happiness. 2. And yet I do not know that ever it was controverted in the primitive Church. Indeed there was no room for disputing concerning it, as all Christians were agreed. And so far as I have observed, the whole body of ancient Christians, who have left us anything in writing, declare with one voice, that even believers in Christ, till they are "strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might," have need to "wrestle with flesh and blood," with an evil nature, as well as "with principalities and powers." 3. And herein our own Church (as indeed in most points) exactly copies after the primitive; declaring in her Ninth Article, "Original sin is the corruption of the nature of every man, whereby man is in his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth contrary to the Spirit. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek jronhma sarkos, is not subject to the law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe, yet this lust hath of itself the nature of sin." 4. The same testimony is given by all other Churches; not only by the Greek and Romish Church, but by every Reformed Church in Europe, of whatever denomination. Indeed some of these seem to carry the thing too far; so describing the corruption of heart in a believer, as scarce to allow that he has dominion over it, but rather is in bondage thereto; and, by this means, they leave hardly any distinction between a believer and an unbeliever.

7. And as this position, "There is no sin in a believer, no carnal mind, no bent to backsliding," is thus contrary to the word of God, so it is to the experience of his children. These continually feel an heart bent to backsliding; a natural tendency to evil; a proneness to depart from God, and cleave to the things of earth. They are daily sensible of sin remaining in their heart, -- pride, self-will, unbelief; and of sin cleaving to all they speak and do, even their best actions and holiest duties. Yet at the same time they "know that they are of God;" they cannot doubt of it for a moment. They feel his Spirit clearly "witnessing with their spirit, that they are the children of God." They "rejoice in God through Christ Jesus, by whom they have now received the atonement." So that they are equally assured, that sin is in them, and that "Christ is in them the hope of glory." 8. "But can Christ be in the same heart where sin is" Undoubtedly he can; otherwise it never could be saved therefrom. Where the sickness is, there is the Physician, Carrying on his work within, Striving till he cast out sin. Christ indeed cannot reign, where sin reigns; neither will he dwell where any sin is allowed. But he is and dwells in the heart of every believer, who is fighting against all sin; although it be not yet purified, according to the purification of the sanctuary. 9. It has been observed before, that the opposite doctrine, -- That there is no sin in believers, -- is quite new in the church of Christ; that it was never heard of for seventeen hundred years; never till it was discovered by Count Zinzendorf. I do not remember to have seen the least intimation of it, either in any ancient or modern writer; unless perhaps in some of the wild, ranting Antinomians. And these likewise say and unsay, acknowledging there is sin in their flesh, although no sin in their heart. But whatever doctrine is new must be wrong; for the old religion is the only true one; and no doctrine can be right, unless it is the very same "which was from the beginning."

2. And this also is to be understood in a peculiar sense, different from that wherein we believed in order to justification. Believe the glad tidings of great salvation, which God hath prepared for all people. Believe that he who is "the brightness of his Father's glory, the express image of his person," is "able to save unto the uttermost all that come unto God through him." He is able to save you from all the sin that still remains in your heart. He is able to save you from all the sin that cleaves to all your words and actions. He is able to save you from sins of omission, and to supply whatever is wanting in you. It is true, this is impossible with man; but with God-Man all things are possible. For what can be too hard for him who hath "all power in heaven and in earth" Indeed, his bare power to do this is not a sufficient foundation for our faith that he will do it, that he will thus exert his power, unless he hath promised it. But this he has done: he has promised it over and over, in the strongest terms. he has given us these "exceeding great and precious promises," both in the Old and the New Testament. So we read in the law, in the most ancient part of the oracles of God, "The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul." (Deut. 30:6.) So in the Psalms, "He shall redeem Israel," the Israel of God, "from all his sins." So in the Prophet, "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. And I will put My Spirit within you, and ye shall keep My judgements, and do them. I will also save you from all your uncleannesses" (Ezek.

The Great Assize Preached at the Assizes held before the Honorable Sir Edward Clive, Knight, one of the Judges of His Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, in St. Paul's Church, Bedford, on Friday, March 10, 1758; published at the request of William Cole, Esq., High Sheriff of the county, and others. "We shall all stand before the judgement-seat of Christ." Rom. 14:10 1. How many circumstances concur to raise the awfulness of the present solemnity! -- The general concourse of people of every age, sex, rank, and condition of life, willingly or unwillingly gathered together, not only from the neighboring, but from distant, parts; criminals, speedily to be brought forth and having no way to escape; officers, waiting in their various posts, to execute the orders which shall be given; and the representative of our gracious Sovereign, whom we so highly reverence and honor. The occasion likewise of this assembly adds not a little to the solemnity of it: to hear and determine causes of every kind, some of which are of the most important nature; on which depends no less than life or death, death that uncovers the face of eternity! It was, doubtless, in order to increase the serious sense of these things, and not in the minds of the vulgar only that the wisdom of our forefathers did not disdain to appoint even several minute circumstances of this solemnity. For these also, by means of the eye or ear, may more deeply affect the heart: and when viewed in this light, trumpets, staves, apparel, are no longer trifling or insignificant, but subservient, in their kind and degree, to the most valuable ends of society. 1 2. But, as awful as this solemnity is, one far more awful is at hand. For yet a little while, and "we shall all stand before the judgement-seat of Christ." "For, as I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God." And in that day, "every one of us shall give account of himself to God."

1. The person by whom God will judge the world, is his only-begotten Son, whose "goings forth are from everlasting;" "who is God over all, blessed for ever." Unto him, being "the outbeaming of his Father's glory, the express image of his person" (Heb. 1:3), the Father "hath committed all judgement, because he is the Son of Man" (John 5:22, 27); because, though he was "in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God, yet he emptied himself, taking upon him the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men" (Phil. 2:6, 7); yea, because, "being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself" yet farther, "becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him," even in his human nature, and "ordained him," as Man, to try the children of men, "to be the Judge both of the quick and the dead;" both of those who shall be found alive at his coming, and of those who were before gathered to their fathers. 4 2. The time, termed by the prophet, "the great and the terrible day," is usually, in Scripture, styled the day of the Lord. The space from the creation of man upon the earth, to the end of all things, is the day of the sons of men; the time that is now passing over us is properly our day; when this is ended, the day of the Lord will begin. But who can say how long it will continue "With the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet. 3:8). And from this very expression, some of the ancient fathers drew that inference, that, what is commonly called the day of judgement would be indeed a thousand years: and it seems they did not go beyond the truth; nay, probably they did not come up to it. For, if we consider the number of persons who are to be judged, and of actions which are to be inquired into, it does not appear that a thousand years will suffice for the transactions of that day; so that it may not improbably comprise several thousand years. But God shall reveal this also in its season. 5

This sermon was added in the 1771 edition partly because of the unique occasion of its delivery, partly because there was no sermon in the original forty-four on this subject. Wesley says of it in his Journal for September 1, 1778, "I cannot write a better [sermon] on the Great Assize than I did twenty years ago." It was customary for the judges of Assize to attend a service in the parish church of the town in which they were sitting, in all the splendor of their scarlet and ermine, with their trumpeters, javelin-men, and other officers of the Court in attendance; and it was one of the duties of the High Sheriff of the County to make arrangements for the preaching of the sermon. Mr. William Cole, who was High Sheriff of Bedfordshire at this time, was a friend of Wesley, and was his host in November 1759. He lived at Sundon, a village a little to the east of the main road from Luton to Bedford, about five miles north of Luton. He built the first Methodist preaching-house in Luton. Probably he made the arrangements for the Assize sermon when Wesley was at Bedford in November 1757; and on Monday, February 27, Wesley records, "Having a sermon to write against the Assizes at Bedford, I retired for a few days to Lewisham" -- doubtless to the house of Mr. Ebenezer Blackwell. He left London on Monday, March 6, at seven in the morning, and reached Mr. Cole's house at Sundon by three in the afternoon. On the Thursday he rode to Bedford, expecting to have to preach that day; but for some reason, probably because the cases at the previous Assize town had taken more time than was anticipated, the service was postponed to the following day. The service was held in the forenoon at St. Paul's Church, one of the chief architectural ornaments of the town. It stands on the north side of the River Ouse, and has a fine tower and octagonal spire. The old stone pulpit from which Wesley preached is still preserved in the south aisle, and a photograph of it and the church may be seen in the Standard edition of the Journal vol 4. p. 403. The Journal records, "The congregation at St. Paul's was very large and very attentive.

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."

The other passage, wherein this expression occurs stands thus: "There came some that told Jehoshaphat, saying, There cometh a great multitude against thee, from beyond the sea. And Jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek the Lord, and proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah. And Judah gathered themselves together to ask help of the Lord: Even out of all the cities they came to seek the Lord. And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation, in the house of the Lord. -- Then upon Jahaziel came the Spirit of the Lord. And he said, Be not dismayed by reason of this great multitude. To-morrow go ye down against them: Ye shall not need to fight in this battle. Set yourselves: Stand ye still, and see the salvation of the Lord. And they rose early in the morning, and went forth. And when they began to sing and to praise, the Lord set ambushments against the children of Moab, Ammon, and mount Seir: -- and everyone helped to destroy another." (2 Chron. 20:2, &c.) Such was the salvation which the children of Judah saw. But how does all this prove, that we ought not to wait for God's grace in the means which He hath ordained? 6. I shall mention but one objection more, which, indeed, does not properly belong to this head: Nevertheless, because it has been so frequently urged, I may not wholly pass it by. "Does not St. Paul say, 'If ye be dead with Christ, why are ye subject to ordinances'?" (Col. 2:20.) Therefore a Christian, one that is dead with Christ, need not use the ordinances any more." So you say, "If I am a Christian, I am not subject to the ordinances of Christ!" Surely, by the absurdity of this, you must see at the first glance, that the ordinances here mentioned cannot be the ordinances of Christ: That they must needs be the Jewish ordinances, to which it is certain a Christian is no longer subject. And the same undeniably appears from the words immediately following, "Touch not, taste not, handle not;" all evidently referring to the ancient ordinances of the Jewish law. So that this objection is the weakest of all. And, in spite of all, that great truth must stand unshaken; -- that all who desire the grace of God, are to wait for it in the means which he hath ordained.

4. And hence we are naturally led to observe, whom it is that he is here teaching. Not the Apostles alone; if so, he had no need to have gone up into the mountain. A room in the house of Matthew, or any of his disciples, would have contained the Twelve. Nor does it in anywise appear that the disciples who came unto him were the Twelve only. Oi maqhtai autou, without any force put upon the expression, may be understood of all who desired to learn of him. But to put this out of all question, to make it undeniably plain that where it is said, "He opened his mouth and taught them," the word them includes all the multitudes who went up with him into the mountain, we need only observe the concluding verses of the seventh chapter: "And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the multitudes (oi ocloi) were astonished at his doctrine," or teaching; "for he taught them," the multitudes, "as one having authority, and not as the Scribes." [Matt. 7:28-29] Nor was it only those multitudes who were with him on the mount, to whom he now taught the way of salvation; but all the children of men; the whole race of mankind; the children that were yet unborn; all the generations to come, even to the end of the world, who should ever hear the words of this life. 5. And this all men allow, with regard to some parts of the ensuing discourse. No man, for instance, denies that what is said of poverty of spirit relates to all mankind. But many have supposed, that other parts concerned only the Apostles, or the first Christians, or the Ministers of Christ; and were never designed for the generality of men, who, consequently, have nothing at all to do with them.

But may we not justly inquire, who told them this, that some parts of this discourse concerned only the Apostles, or the Christians of the apostolic age, or the Ministers of Christ Bare assertions are not a sufficient proof to establish a point of so great importance. Has then our Lord himself taught us, that some parts of his discourse do not concern all mankind Without doubt, had it been so, he would have told us; he could not have omitted so necessary an information. But has he told us so Where In the discourse itself No: Here is not the least intimation of it. Has he said so elsewhere in any other of his discourses Not one word so much as glancing this way, can we find in anything he ever spoke, either to the multitudes, or to his disciples. Has any one of the Apostles, or other inspired writers, left such an instruction upon record No such thing. No assertion of this kind is to be found in all the oracles of God. Who then are the men who are so much wiser than God -- wise so far above that is written 6. Perhaps they will say, that the reason of the thing requires such a restriction to be made. If it does, it must be on one of these two accounts; because, without such a restriction, the discourse would either be apparently absurd, or would contradict some other scripture. But this is not the case. It will plainly appear, when we come to examine the several particulars, that there is no absurdity at all in applying all which our Lord hath here delivered to all mankind. Neither will it infer any contradiction to anything else he has delivered, nor to any other scripture whatever. Nay, it will farther appear, that either all the parts of this discourse are to be applied to men in general, or no part; seeing they are all connected together, all joined as the stones in an arch, of which you cannot take one away, without destroying the whole fabric.

5. Consequently, "love envieth not:" It is impossible it should; it is directly opposite to that baneful temper. It cannot be, that he who has this tender affection to all, who earnestly wishes all temporal and spiritual blessings, all good things in this world and the world to come, to every soul that God hath made, should be pained at his bestowing any good gift on any child of man. If he has himself received the same, he does not grieve, but rejoice, that another partakes of the common benefit. If he has not, he blesses God that his brother at least has, and is herein happier than himself. And the greater his love, the more does he rejoice in the blessings of all mankind; the farther is he removed from every kind and degree of envy toward any creature. 6. Love ou perpereuetai, -- not "vaunteth not itself;" which coincides with the very next words; but rather, (as the word likewise properly imports,) is not rash or hasty in judging; it will not hastily condemn any one. It does not pass a severe sentence, on a slight or sudden view of things: It first weighs all the evidence, particularly that which is brought in favour of the accused. A true lover of his neighbour is not like the generality of men, who, even in cases of the nicest nature, "see a little, presume a great deal, and so jump to the conclusion." No: He proceeds with wariness and circumspection, taking heed to every step; willingly subscribing to that rule of the ancient Heathen, (O where will the modern Christian appear!) "I am so far from lightly believing what one man says against another, that I will not easily believe what a man says against himself. I will always allow him second thoughts, and many times counsel too."

It is not improbable that our translators inserted that word, as it were, to excuse the Apostle; who, as they supposed, might otherwise appear to be wanting in the very love which he so beautifully describes. They seem to have supposed this from a phrase in the Acts of the Apostles; which is likewise very inaccurately translated. When Paul and Barnabas disagreed concerning John, the translation runs thus, "And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder." (Acts 15:39.) This naturally induces the reader to suppose, that they were equally sharp therein; that St. Paul, who was undoubtedly right, with regard to the point in question, (it being quite improper to take John with them again, who had deserted them before,) was as much provoked as Barnabas, who gave such a proof of his anger, as to leave the work for which he had been set apart by the Holy Ghost. But the original imports no such thing; nor does it affirm that St. Paul was provoked at all. It simply says, kai egeneto paroxusmos, -- "And there was a sharpness," a paroxysm of anger; in consequence of which Barnabas left St. Paul, took John, and went his own way. Paul then "chose Silas and departed, being recommended by the brethren to the grace of God;" (which is not said concerning Barnabas;) "and he went through Syria and Cilicia," as he had proposed, "confirming the churches." [Acts 15:39-41] But to return.

18. For a little while you may say, "Woe is me, that I" am constrained to "dwell with Mesech, and to have my habitation among the tents of Kedar!" You may pour out your soul, and bemoan the loss of true, genuine love in the earth: Lost indeed! You may well say, (but not in the ancient sense,) "See how these Christians love one another!" these Christian kingdoms, that are tearing out each other's bowels, desolating one another with fire and sword! these Christian armies, that are sending each by thousands, by ten thousands, quick into hell! these Christian nations, that are all on fire with intestine broils, party against party, faction against faction! these Christian cities, where deceit and fraud, oppression and wrong, yea, robbery and murder, go not out of their streets! these Christian families, torn asunder with envy, jealousy, anger, domestic jars, without number, without end! yea, what is most dreadful, most to be lamented of all, these Christian Churches! --Churches ("tell it not in Gath," -- but, alas! how can we hide it, either from Jews, Turks, or Pagans) that bear the name of Christ, the Prince of Peace, and wage continual war with each other! that convert sinners by burning them alive! that are "drunk with the blood of the saints!" -- Does this praise belong only to "Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth" Nay, verily; but Reformed Churches (so called) have fairly learned to tread in her steps. Protestant Churches too know to persecute, when they have power in their hands, even unto blood. And, meanwhile, how do they also anathematize each other! devote each other to the nethermost hell! What wrath, what contention, what malice, what bitterness, is everywhere found among them, even where they agree in essentials, and only differ in opinions, or in the circumstantials of religion! Who follows after only the "things that make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another" O God! how long Shall thy promise fail Fear it not, ye little flock! Against hope, believe in hope! It is your Father's good pleasure yet to renew the face of the earth. Surely all these things shall come to an end, and the inhabitants of the earth shall learn righteousness.

The Scribes, mentioned so often in the New Testament, as some of the most constant and vehement opposers of our Lord, were not secretaries, or men employed in writing only, as that term might incline us to believe. Neither were they lawyers, in our common sense of the word; although the word nomikoi is so rendered in our translation. Their employment had no affinity at all to that of a lawyer among us. They were conversant with the laws of God, and not with the laws of man. These were their study: It was their proper and peculiar business to read and expound the law and the Prophets, particularly in the synagogues. They were the ordinary, stated preachers among the Jews. So that if the sense of the original word was attended to, we might render it, the Divines. For these were the men who made divinity their profession: and they were generally (as their name literally imports) men of letters; men of the greatest account for learning that were then in the Jewish nation. 2. The Pharisees were a very ancient sect, or body of men, among the Jews; originally so called from the Hebrew word PRS -- which signifies to separate or divide. Not that they made any formal separation from, or division in, the national church. They were only distinguished from others by greater strictness of life, by more exactness of conversation. For they were zealous of the law in the minutest points; paying tithes of mint, anise, and cummin: And hence they were had in honour of all the people, and generally esteemed the holiest of men.

5. "I give tithes of all that I possess." This the Pharisees did with the utmost exactness. They would not except the most inconsiderable thing; no, not mint, anise, and cummin. They would not keep back the least part of what they believed properly to belong to God; but gave a full tenth of their whole substance yearly, and of all their increase, whatsoever it was. Yea, the stricter Pharisees (as has been often observed by those who are versed in the ancient Jewish writings,) not content with giving one tenth of their substance to God in his priests and Levites, gave another tenth to God in the poor, and that continually. They gave the same proportion of all they had in alms as they were accustomed to give in tithes. And this likewise they ajusted with the utmost exactness; that they might not keep back any part, but might fully render unto God the things which were God's, as they accounted this to be. So that, upon the whole, they gave away, from year to year an entire fifth of all that they possessed.

In other words, we pray that we and all mankind may do the whole will of God in all things; and nothing else, not the least thing but what is the holy and acceptable will of God. We pray that we may do the whole will of God as he willeth, in the manner that pleases him: And, lastly, that we may do it because it is his will; that this may be the sole reason and ground, the whole and only motive, of whatsoever we think, or whatsoever we speak or do. 11. "Give us this day our daily bread." -- In the three former petitions we have been praying for all mankind. We come now more particularly to desire a supply for our own wants. Not that we are directed, even here, to confine our prayer altogether to ourselves; but this, and each of the following petitions, may be used for the whole Church of Christ upon earth. By "bread" we may understand all things needful, whether for our souls or bodies; ta pros zvhn kai eusebeian, -- the things pertaining to life and godliness: We understand not barely the outward bread, what our Lord terms "the meat which perisheth;" but much more the spiritual bread, the grace of God, the food "which endureth unto everlasting life." It was the judgment of many of the ancient Fathers, that we are here to understand the sacramental bread also; daily received in the beginning by the whole Church of Christ, and highly esteemed, till the love of many waxed cold, as the grand channel whereby the grace of his Spirit was conveyed to the souls of all the children of God. "Our daily bread." -- The word we render daily has been differently explained by different commentators. But the most plain and natural sense of it seems to be this, which is retained in almost all translations, as well ancient as modern; -- what is sufficient for this day; and so for each day as it succeeds.

3. As to the degrees or measures of fasting, we have instances of some who have fasted several days together. So Moses, Elijah, and our blessed Lord, being endued with supernatural strength for that purpose, are recorded to have fasted, without intermission, "forty days and forty nights." But the time of fasting, more frequently mentioned in Scripture, is one day, from morning till evening. And this was the fast commonly observed among the ancient Christians. But beside these, they had also their half-fasts (Semijejunia, as Tertullian styles them) on the fourth and sixth days of the week, (Wednesday and Friday,) throughout the year; on which they took no sustenance till three in the afternoon, the time when they returned from the public service. 4. Nearly related to this, is what our Church seems peculiarly to mean by the term abstinence; which may be used when we cannot fast entirely, by reason of sickness or bodily weakness. This is the eating little; the abstaining in part; the taking a smaller quantity of food than usual. I do not remember any scriptural instance of this. But neither can I condemn it; for the Scripture does not. It may have its use, and receive a blessing from God. 5. The lowest kind of fasting, if it can be called by that name, is the abstaining from pleasant food. Of this, we have several instances in Scripture, besides that of Daniel and his brethren, who from a peculiar consideration, namely, that they might "not defile themselves with the portion of the King's meat, nor with the wine which he drank," (a daily provision of which the King had appointed for them,) requested and obtained, of the prince of the eunuchs, pulse to eat and water to drink. (Daniel 1:8, &c.) Perhaps from a mistaken imitation of this might spring the very ancient custom of abstaining from flesh and wine during such times as were set apart for fasting and abstinence; -- if it did not rather arise from a supposition that these were the most pleasant food, and a belief that it was proper to use what was least pleasing at those times of solemn approach to God.

6. In the Jewish church there were some stated fasts. Such was the fast of the seventh month, appointed by God himself to be observed by all Israel under the severest penalty. "The Lord spake unto Moses, saying, On the tenth day of this seventh month, there shall be a day of atonement: And ye shall afflict your souls, -- to make an atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people." (Lev. 23:26, &c.) In after-ages, several other stated fasts were added to these. So mention is made, by the Prophet Zechariah, of the fast not only "of the seventh, but also of the fourth, of the fifth, and of the tenth month." (Zech. 8:19) In the ancient Christian Church, there were likewise stated fasts, and those both annual and weekly. Of the former sort was that before Easter; observed by some for eight-and-forty hours; by others, for an entire week; by many, for two weeks; taking no sustenance till the evening of each day: Of the latter, those of the fourth and sixth days of the week, observed (as Epiphanius writes, remarking it as an undeniable fact) en olh th oikoumenh, -- in the whole habitable earth; at least in every place where any Christians made their abode. The annual fasts in our Church are, "the forty days of Lent, the Ember days at the four seasons, the Rogation days, and the Vigils or Eves of several solemn festivals; -- the weekly, all Fridays in the year, except Christmas-day." But beside those which were fixed, in every nation fearing God there have always been occasional fasts, appointed from time to time, as the particular circumstances and occasions of each required. So when "the children of Moab, and the children of Ammon, came against Jehoshaphat to battle, Jehoshaphat set himself to seek the Lord, and proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah." (2 Chron. 20:1, 3) And so, "in the fifth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, in the ninth month," when they were afraid of the King of Babylon, the Princes of "Judah proclaimed a fast before the Lord, to all the people of Jerusalem." (Jer. 36:9)

6. And with fasting let us always join fervent prayer, pouring out our whole souls before God, confessing our sins with all their aggravations, humbling ourselves under his mighty hand, laying open before him all our wants, all our guiltiness and helplessness. This is a season for enlarging our prayers, both in behalf of ourselves and of our brethren. Let us now bewail the sins of our people; and cry aloud for the city of our God, that the Lord may build up Zion, and cause his face to shine on her desolations. Thus, we may observe, the men of God, in ancient times always joined prayer and fasting together; thus the Apostles, in all the instances cited above; and thus our Lord joins them in the discourse before us.

28. We exhort you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to be "willing to communicate;" koinvnikous einai: to be of the same spirit (though not in the same outward state) with those believers of ancient times, who remained steadfast en th koinvnia, in that blessed and holy fellowship, wherein "none said that anything was his own, but they had all things common." Be a steward, a faithful and wise steward, of God and of the poor; differing from them in these two circumstances only, that your wants are first supplied out of the portion of your Lord's goods which remains in your hands, and that you have the blessedness of giving. Thus "lay up for yourselves a good foundation," not in the world which now is, but rather "for the time to come, that ye may lay hold on eternal life." The great foundation indeed of all the blessings of God, whether temporal or eternal, is the Lord Jesus Christ, -- his righteousness and blood, -- what he hath done, and what he hath suffered for us. And "other foundation," in this sense, "can no man lay;" no, not an Apostle, no, not an angel from heaven. But through his merits, whatever we do in his name is a foundation for a good reward in the day when "every man shall receive his own reward, according to his own labour." Therefore "labour" thou "not for the meat that perisheth, but for that which endureth unto everlasting life." Therefore "whatsoever thy hand" now "findeth to do, do it with thy might." Therefore let No fair occasion pass undeeded by; Snatching the golden moments as they fly, Thou by few fleeting years ensure eternity! "By patient continuance in well-doing, seek" thou "for glory and honour and immortality." In a constant, zealous performance of all good works, wait thou for that happy hour when the King shall say, "I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink. I was a stranger, and ye took me in, Naked, and ye clothed me. I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me. -- Come, ye blessed of my Father, receive the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world!"

How nearly does the practice of most modern Christians resemble this of the ancient Heathens! "They fear the Lord;" they also perform an outward service to him, and hereby show they have some fear of God; but they likewise "serve their own gods." There are those who "teach them" as there were who taught the Assyrians, "the manner of the God of the land;" the God whose name the country bears to this day, and who was once worshipped there with an holy worship: "Howbeit," they do not serve him alone; they do not fear him enough for this: But "every nation maketh gods of their own: Every nation in the cities wherein they dwell." "These nations fear the Lord;" they have not laid aside the outward form of worshipping him; but "they serve their graven images,' silver and gold, the work of men's hands: Money, pleasure, and praise, the gods of this world, more than divide their service with the God of Israel. This is the manner both of "their children and their children's children; as did their fathers, so do they unto this day." 2. But although, speaking in a loose way, after the common manner of men, those poor Heathens were said to "fear the Lord," yet we may observe the Holy Ghost immediately adds, speaking according to the truth and real nature of things, "They fear not the Lord, neither do after the law and the commandment, which the Lord commanded the children of Jacob; with whom the Lord made a covenant, and charged them, saying, Ye shall not fear other gods, nor serve them. -- But the Lord your God ye shall fear; and he shall deliver you out of the hand of all your enemies."

And thus to believe in God implies, to trust in him as our strength, without whom we can do nothing, who every moment endues us with power from on high, without which it is impossible to please him; as our help, our only help in time of trouble, who compasseth us about with songs of deliverance; as our shield, our defender, and the lifter up of our head above all our enemies that are round about us. It implies, to trust in God as our happiness; as the centre of spirits; the only rest of our souls; the only good who is adequate to all our capacities, and sufficient to satisfy all the desires he hath given us. It implies, (what is nearly allied to the other,) to trust in God as our end; to have an eye to him in all things; to use all things only as means of enjoying him; wheresoever we are, or whatsoever we do, to see him that is invisible, looking on us well-pleased, and to refer all things to him in Christ Jesus. 5. Thus to believe, is the First thing we are to understand by serving God. The Second is, to love him. Now to love God in the manner the Scripture describes, in the manner God himself requires of us, and by requiring engages to work in us, -- is to love him as the ONE GOD; that is, "with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our mind, and with all our strength;" -- it is to desire God alone for his own sake; and nothing else, but with reference to him; -- to rejoice in God; -- to delight in the Lord; not only to seek, but find, happiness in him; to enjoy God as the chiefest among ten thousand; to rest in him, as our God and our all; -- in a word, to have such a possession of God as makes us always happy. 6. A Third thing we are to understand by serving God is to resemble or imitate him. So the ancient Father: Optimus Dei cultus, imitari quem colis: "It is the best worship or service of God, to imitate him you worship."

III. 1. How nearly then does it concern every child of man, practically to apply these things to himself! diligently to examine on what foundation he builds, whether on a rock or on the sand! How deeply are you concerned to inquire, "What is the foundation of my hope Whereon do I build my expectation of entering into the kingdom of heaven Is it not built on the sand upon my orthodoxy, or right opinions, which, by a gross abuse of words, I have called faith upon my having a set of notions, suppose more rational or scriptural than others have" Alas! what madness is this! Surely this is building on the sand, or, rather, on the froth of the sea! Say, "I am convinced of this: Am I not again building my hope on what is equally unable to support it Perhaps on my belonging to 'so excellent a church; reformed after the true Scripture model; blessed with the purest doctrine, the most primitive liturgy, the most apostolical form of government!" These are, doubtless, so many reasons for praising God, as they may be so many helps to holiness; but they are not holiness itself: And if they are separate from it, they will profit me nothing; nay, they will leave me the more without excuse, and exposed to the greater damnation. Therefore, if I build my hope upon this foundation, I am still building upon the sand.

2. But a careful observer of the Apostle's discourse will not be content with theses light explications of it. And the more he weighs the words, the more convinced he will be, that St. Paul, by the law mentioned in this chapter, does not mean either the ancient law of Rome, or the ceremonial law of Moses. This will clearly appear to all who attentively consider the tenor of his discourse. He begins the chapter, "Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that know the law,)" to them who have been instructed therein from their youth, "that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth" (What! the law of Rome only, or the ceremonial law No, surely; but the moral law.) "For," to give a plain instance, "the woman which hath an husband is bound by the" moral "law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

5. And this he showed, not only to our first parents, but likewise to all their posterity, by "that true light which enlightens every man that cometh into the world." But, notwithstanding this light, all flesh had, in process of time, "corrupted their way before him;" till he chose out of mankind a peculiar people, to whom he gave a more perfect knowledge of his law; and the heads of this, because they were slow of understanding, he wrote on two tables of stone, which he commanded the fathers to teach their children, through all succeeding generations. 6. And thus it is, that the law of God is now made known to them that know not God. They hear, with the hearing of the ear, the things that were written aforetime for our instruction. But this does not suffice: they cannot, by this means, comprehend the height, and depth, and length, and breadth thereof. God alone can reveal this by his Spirit. And so he does to all that truly believe, in consequence of that gracious promise made to all the Israel of God: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel. And this shall be the covenant that I will make; I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jer. 31.31 & c.)

3. Now, this law is an incorruptible picture of the High and Holy One that inhabiteth eternity. It is he whom, in his essence, no man hath seen, or can see, made visible to men and angels. It is the face of God unveiled; God manifested to his creatures as they are able to bear it; manifested to give, and not to destroy, life -- that they may see God and live. It is the heart of God disclosed to man. Yea, in some sense, we may apply to this law what the Apostle says of his Son: It is apaugasma ths doxhs, kai carakthr ths upostasevs autou -- the streaming forth or out-beaming of his glory, the express image of his person. 4. "If virtue," said the ancient Heathen, "could assume such a shape as that we could behold her with our eyes, what wonderful love would she excite in us!" If virtue could do this! It is done already. The law of God is all virtues in one, in such a shape as to be beheld with open face by all those whose eyes God hath enlightened. What is the law but divine virtue and wisdom assuming a visible form What is it but the original ideas of truth and good, which were lodged in the uncreated mind from eternity, now drawn forth and clothed with such a vehicle as to appear even to human understanding 5. If we survey the law of God in another point of view, it is supreme, unchangeable reason; it is unalterable rectitude, it is the everlasting fitness of all things that are or ever were created. I am sensible, what a shortness, and even impropriety, there is, in these and all other human expressions, when we endeavour by these faint pictures to shadow out the deep things of God. Nevertheless, we have no better, indeed no other way, during this our infant state of existence. As we now "know" but "in part," so we are constrained to "prophesy," that is, speak of the things of God, "in part" also. "We cannot order our speech by reason of darkness," while we are in this house of clay. While I am "a child," I must "speak as a child:" but I shall soon "put away childish things:" for "when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away."

3. Their grand plea is this: That preaching the gospel, that is, according to their judgment, the speaking of nothing but the sufferings and merits of Christ, answers all the ends of the law. But this we utterly deny. It does not answer the very first end of the law, namely, the convincing men of sin; The awakening those who are still asleep on the brink of hell. There may have been here and there an exempt case. One in a thousand may have been awakened by the gospel: But this is no general rule: The ordinary method of God is, to convict sinners by the law, and that only. The gospel is not the means which God hath ordained, or which our Lord himself used, for this end. We have no authority in Scripture for applying it thus, nor any ground to think it will prove effectual. Nor have we any more ground to expect this, from the nature of the thing. "They that be whole," as our Lord himself observes, "need not a physician, but they that are sick." It is absurd, therefore, to offer a physician to them that are whole, or that at least imagine themselves so to be. You are first to convince them that they are sick; otherwise they will not thank you for your labour. It is equally absurd to offer Christ to them whose heart is whole, having never yet been broken. It is, in the proper sense, "casting pearls before swine." Doubtless "they will trample them under foot;" and it is no more than you have reason to expect, if they also "turn again and rend you." 4. "But although there is no command in Scripture, to offer Christ to the careless sinner, yet are there not scriptural precedents for it" I think not: I know not any. I believe you cannot produce one, either from the four Evangelists, or the Acts of the Apostles. Neither can you prove this to have been the practice of any of the Apostles, from any passage in all their writings. 5. "Nay, does not the Apostle Paul say, in his former Epistle to the Corinthians, `We preach Christ crucified' (1:23,) and in his latter, `We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord' (4:5.)"

4. He may differ from us, Fourthly, not only in opinion, but likewise in some point of practice. He may not approve of that manner of worshipping God which is practised in our congregation; and may judge that to be more profitable for his soul which took its rise from Calvin or Martin Luther. He may have many objections to that Liturgy which we approve of beyond all others; many doubts concerning that form of church government which we esteem both apostolical and scriptural. Perhaps he may go farther from us yet: he may, from a principle of conscience, refrain from several of those which we believe to be the ordinances of Christ. Or, if we both agree that they are ordained of God, there may still remain a difference between us, either as to the manner of administering those ordinances, or the persons to whom they should be administered. Now the unavoidable consequence of any of these differences will be, that he who thus differs from us must separate himself, with regard to those points, from our society. In this respect, therefore, "he followeth not us": he is not (as we phrase it) "of our Church." 5. But in a far stronger sense "he followeth not us," who is not only of a different Church, but of such a Church as we account to be in many respects anti-scriptural and anti-Christian, --a Church which we believe to be utterly false and erroneous in her doctrines, as well as very dangerously wrong in her practice; guilty of gross superstition as well as idolatry, --a Church that has added many articles to the faith which was once delivered to the saints; that has dropped one whole commandment of God, and made void several of the rest by her traditions; and that, pretending the highest veneration for, and strictest conformity to, the ancient Church, has nevertheless brought in numberless innovations, without any warrant either from antiquity or Scripture. Now, most certainly, "he followeth not us," who stands at so great a distance from us.

6. "But I do not know that he is sent of God." "Now herein is a marvellous thing" (may any of the seals of his mission say, any whom he hath brought from Satan to God), "that ye know not whence this man is, and, behold, he hath opened mine eyes! If this man were not of God, he could do nothing." If you doubt the fact, send for the parents of the man: send for his brethren, friends, acquaintance. But if you cannot doubt this, if you must needs acknowledge "that a notable miracle hath been wrought" then with what conscience, with what face, can you charge him whom God hath sent, "not to speak any more in his name" 7. I allow, that it is highly expedient, whoever preaches in his name should have an outward as well as an inward call, but that it is absolutely necessary, I deny. "Nay, is not the Scripture express `No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron'" (Heb. 5:4). Numberless times has this text been quoted on the occasion, as containing the very strength of the cause; but surely never was so unhappy a quotation. For, First, Aaron was not called to preach at all: he was called "to offer gifts and sacrifice for sin." That was his peculiar employment. Secondly, these men do not offer sacrifice at all, but only preach; which Aaron did not. Therefore it is not possible to find one text in all the Bible which is more wide of the point than this. 8. "But what was the practice of the apostolic age" You may easily see in the Acts of the Apostles. In the eighth chapter we read, "There was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the Apostles" (verse 1). "Therefore they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word" (verse 4). Now, were all these outwardly called to preach No man in his senses can think so. Here, then, is an undeniable proof, what was the practice of the apostolic age. Here you see not one, but a multitude of lay preachers, men that were only sent of God.

9. Indeed, so far is the practice of the apostolic age from inclining us to think it was unlawful for a man to preach before he was ordained, that we have reason to think it was then accounted necessary. Certainly the practice and the direction of the Apostle Paul was, to prove a man before he was ordained at all. "Let these" (the deacons), says he, "first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon" (1 Tim. 3:10). Proved, how By setting them to construe a sentence of Greek and asking them a few commonplace questions O amazing proof of a Minister of Christ! Nay; but by making a clear, open trial (as is still done by most of the Protestant Churches of Europe) not only whether their lives be holy and unblamable, but whether they have such gifts as are absolutely and indispensably necessary in order to edify the church of Christ. 10. But what if a man has these, and has brought sinners to repentance, and yet the Bishop will not ordain him Then the Bishop does forbid him to cast out devils. But I dare not forbid him: I have published my reasons to all the world. Yet it is still insisted I ought to do it. You who insist upon it answer those reasons. I know not that any have done this yet, or even made an attempt of doing it. Only some have spoken of them as very weak and trifling: and this was prudent enough; for it is far easier to despise, at least seem to despise, an argument, than to answer it. Yet till this is done I must say, when I have reasonable proof that any man does cast out devils, whatever others do, I dare not forbid him, lest I be found even to fight against God.

9. And how shall we choose among so much variety No man can choose for, or prescribe to, another. But every one must follow the dictates of his own conscience, in simplicity and godly sincerity. He must be fully persuaded in his own mind and then act according to the best light he has. Nor has any creature power to constrain another to walk by his own rule. God has given no right to any of the children of men thus to lord it over the conscience of his brethren; but every man must judge for himself, as every man must give an account of himself to God. 10. Although, therefore, every follower of Christ is obliged, by the very nature of the Christian institution, to be a member of some particular congregation or other, some Church, as it is usually termed (which implies a particular manner of worshipping God; for "two cannot walk together unless they be agreed"); yet none can be obliged by any power on earth but that of his own conscience, to prefer this or that congregation to another, this or that particular manner of worship. 11. I dare not, therefore, presume to impose my mode of worship on any other. I believe it is truly primitive and apostolical: but my belief is no rule for another. I ask not, therefore, of him with whom I would unite in love, Are you of my church, of my congregation Do you receive the same form of church government, and allow the same church officers, with me Do you join in the same form of prayer wherein I worship God I inquire not, Do you receive the supper of the Lord in the same posture and manner that I do nor whether, in the administration of baptism, you agree with me in admitting sureties for the baptized, in the manner of administering it; or the age of those to whom it should be administered. Nay, I ask not of you (as clear as I am in my own mind), whether you allow baptism and the Lord's supper at all. Let all these things stand by: we will talk of them, if need be, at a more convenient season, my only question at present is this, "Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart"

2. I do not mean, "Embrace my modes of worship," or, "I will embrace yours." This also is a thing which does not depend either on your choice or mine. We must both act as each is fully persuaded in his own mind. Hold you fast that which you believe is most acceptable to God, and I will do the same. I believe the Episcopal form of church government to be scriptural and apostolical. If you think the Presbyterian or Independent is better, think so still, and act accordingly. I believe infants ought to be baptized; and that this may be done either by dipping or sprinkling. If you are otherwise persuaded, be so still, and follow your own persuasion. It appears to me, that forms of prayer are of excellent use, particularly in the great congregation. If you judge extemporary prayer to be of more use, act suitable to your own judgement. My sentiment is, that I ought not to forbid water, wherein persons may be baptized; and that I ought to eat bread and drink wine, as a memorial of my dying Master: however, if you are not convinced of this act according to the light you have. I have no desire to dispute with you one moment upon any of the preceding heads. Let all these smaller points stand aside. Let them never come into sight "If thine heart is as my heart," if thou lovest God and all mankind, I ask no more: "give me thine hand." 3. I mean, first, love me: and that not only as thou lovest all mankind; not only as thou lovest thine enemies, or the enemies of God, those that hate thee, that "despitefully use thee, and persecute thee;" not only as a stranger, as one of whom thou knowest neither good nor evil, --I am not satisfied with this, --no; "if thine heart be right, as mine with thy heart," then love me with a very tender affection, as a friend that is closer than a brother; as a brother in Christ, a fellow citizen of the New Jerusalem, a fellow soldier engaged in the same warfare, under the same Captain of our salvation. Love me as a companion in the kingdom and patience of Jesus, and a joint heir of his glory.

14. If, therefore, you would prove that the Apostle's words, "He that is born of God sinneth not," [1 John 5:18] are not to be understood according to their plain, natural, obvious meaning, it is from the New Testament you are to bring your proofs, else you will fight as one that beateth the air. [1 Cor. 9:26] And the first of these which is usually brought is taken from the examples recorded in the New Testament. "The Apostles themselves," it is said, "committed sin; nay, the greatest of them, Peter and Paul: St. Paul, by his sharp contention with Barnabas; [Acts 15:39] and St. Peter, by his dissimulation at Antioch." [Gal. 2:11] Well: Suppose both Peter and Paul did then commit sin; what is it you would infer from hence That all the other Apostles committed sin sometimes There is no shadow of proof in this. Or would you thence infer, that all the other Christians of the apostolic age committed sin Worse and worse: This is such an inference as, one would imagine, a man in his senses could never have thought of. Or will you argue thus: "If two of the Apostles did once commit sin, then all other Christians, in all ages, do and will commit sin as long as they live" Alas, my brother! a child of common understanding would be ashamed of such reasoning as this. Least of all can you with any colour of argument infer, that any man must commit sin at all. No: God forbid we should thus speak! No necessity of sinning was laid upon them. The grace of God was surely sufficient for them. And it is sufficient for us at this day. With the temptation which fell on them, there was a way to escape; as there is to every soul of man in every temptation. So that whosoever is tempted to any sin, need not yield; for no man is tempted above that he is able to bear. [1 Cor. 10:13]

16. As this scripture is one of the strong-holds of the patrons of sin, it may be proper to weigh it thoroughly. Let it be observed then, First, it does by no means appear that this thorn, whatsoever it was, occasioned St. Paul to commit sin; much less laid him under any necessity of doing so. Therefore, from hence it can never be proved that any Christian must commit sin. Secondly, the ancient Fathers inform us, it was bodily pain: "a violent headache, saith Tertullian; (De Pudic.;) to which both Chrysostom and St. Jerome agree. St. Cyprian [De Mortalitate] expresses it, a little more generally, in those terms: "Many and grievous torments of the flesh and of the body." [Carnis et corporis multa ac gravia tormenta.] Thirdly, to this exactly agree the Apostle's own words, "A thorn to the flesh to smite, beat, or buffet me." "My strength is made perfect in weakness:" -- Which same word occurs no less than four times in these two verses only. But, Fourthly, whatsoever it was, it could not be either inward or outward sin. It could no more be inward stirrings, than outward expressions, of pride, anger, or lust. This is manifest, beyond all possible exception from the words that immediately follow: "Most gladly will I glory in" these "my weaknesses, that the strength of Christ may rest upon me." [2 Cor. 12:9] What! Did he glory in pride, in anger, in lust Was it through these weaknesses, that the strength of Christ rested upon him He goes on: "Therefore I take pleasure in weaknesses; for when I am weak, then am I strong;" [2 Cor. 12:10] that is, when I am weak in body, then am I strong in spirit. But will any man dare to say, "When I am weak by pride or lust, then am I strong in spirit" I call you all to record this day, who find the strength of Christ resting upon you, can you glory in anger, or pride, or lust Can you take pleasure in these infirmities Do these weaknesses make you strong Would you not leap into hell, were it possible, to escape them Even by yourselves, then, judge, whether the Apostle could glory and take pleasure in them! Let it be, Lastly, observed, that this thorn was given to St. Paul above fourteen years before he wrote this Epistle; [2 Cor.

13. But to return. though it be allowed, that both this repentance and its fruits are necessary to full salvation; yet they are not necessary either in the same sense with faith, or in the same degree: --Not in the same degree; for these fruits are only necessary conditionally, if there be time and opportunity for them; otherwise a man may be sanctified without them. But he cannot be sanctified without faith. likewise, let a man have ever so much of this repentance, or ever so many good works, yet all this does not at all avail: he is not sanctified till he believes. But the moment he believes, with or without those fruits, yea, with more or less of this repentance, he is sanctified. --Not in the same sense; for this repentance and these fruits are only remotely necessary, --necessary in order to the continuance of his faith, as well as the increase of it; whereas faith is immediately and directly necessary to sanctification. It remains, that faith is the only condition which is immediately and proximately necessary to sanctification. 14. "But what is that faith whereby we are sanctified, --saved from sin, and perfected in love" It is a divine evidence and conviction, first, that God hath promised it in the holy Scripture. Till we are thoroughly satisfied of this, there in no moving one step further. And one would imagine there needed not one word more to satisfy a reasonable man of this, than the ancient promise, "Then will I circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord they God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." How clearly does this express the being perfected in love! --how strongly imply the being saved from all sin! For as long as love takes up the whole heart, what room is there for sin therein

Original Sin "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Gen. 6:5. 1. How widely different is this from the fair pictures of human nature which men have drawn in all ages! The writings of many of the ancients abound with gay descriptions of the dignity of man; whom some of them paint as having all virtue and happiness in his composition, or, at least, entirely in his power, without being beholden to any other being; yea, as self-sufficient, able to live on his own stock, and little inferior to God himself. 2. Nor have Heathens alone, men who are guided in their researches by little more than the dim light of reason, but many likewise of them that bear the name of Christ, and to whom are entrusted the oracles of God, spoken as magnificently concerning the nature of man, as if it were all innocence and perfection. Accounts of this kind have particularly abounded in the present century; and perhaps in no part of the world more than in our own country. Here not a few persons of strong understanding, as well as extensive learning, have employed their utmost abilities to show, what they termed, "the fair side of human nature." And it must he acknowledged, that, if their accounts of him be just, man is still but "a little lower than the angels;" or, as the words may be more literally rendered, "a little less than God." 3. Is it any wonder, that these accounts are very readily received by the generality of men For who is not easily persuaded to think favourably of himself Accordingly, writers of this kind are most universally read, admired, applauded. And innumerable are the converts they have made, not only in the gay, but the learned world. So that it is now quite unfashionable to talk otherwise, to say any thing to the disparagement of human nature; which is generally allowed, notwithstanding a few infirmities, to be very innocent, and wise, and virtuous!

3. We see, when God opens our eyes, that we were before aqeoi en tv kosmv -- without God, or, rather, Atheists, in the world. We had, by nature, no knowledge of God, no acquaintance with him. It is true, as soon as we came to the use of reason, we learned "the invisible things of God, even his eternal power and Godhead, from the things that are made." From the things that are seen we inferred the existence of an eternal, powerful Being, that is not seen. But still, although we acknowledged his being we had no acquaintance with him. As we know there is an Emperor of China, whom yet we do not know; so we knew there was a King of all the earth, yet we knew him not. Indeed we could not by any of our natural faculties. By none of these could we attain the knowledge of God. We could no more perceive him by our natural understanding, than we could see him with our eyes. For "no one knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son willeth to reveal him. And no one knoweth the Son but the Father, and he to whom the Father revealeth him." 4. We read of an ancient king, who, being desirous to know what was the natural language of men, in order to bring the matter to a certain issue, made the following experiment: He ordered two infants, as soon as they were born, to be conveyed to a place prepared for them, where they were brought up without any instruction at all, and without ever hearing a human voice. And what was the event Why that when they were at length brought out of their confinement, they spoke no language at all; they uttered only inarticulate sounds, like those of other animals. Were two infants in like manner to be brought up from the womb without being instructed in any religion, there is little room to doubt but (unless the grace of God interposed) the event would be just the same. They would have no religion at all: They would have no more knowledge of God than the beasts of the field, than the wild ass's colt. Such is natural religion, abstracted from traditional, and from the influences of God's Spirit!

III. 1. I proceed to draw a few inferences from what has been said. And, First, from hence we may learn one grand fundamental difference between Christianity, considered as a system of doctrines, and the most refined Heathenism. Many of the ancient Heathens have largely described the vices of particular men. They have spoken much against their covetousness, or cruelty; their luxury, or prodigality. Some have dared to say that "no man is born without vices of one kind or another." But still as none of them were apprized of the fall of man, so none of them knew of his total corruption. They knew not that all men were empty of all good, and filled with all manner of evil. They were wholly ignorant of the entire depravation of the whole human nature, of every man born into the world, in every faculty of his soul, not so much by those particular vices which reign in particular persons, as by the general flood of Atheism and idolatry, of pride, self-will, and love of the world. This, therefore, is the first grand distinguishing point between Heathenism and Christianity. The one acknowledges that many men are infected with many vices, and even born with a proneness to them; but supposes withal, that in some the natural good much over-balances the evil: The other declares that all men are conceived in sin," and "shapen in wickedness;" -- that hence there is in every man a "carnal mind, which is enmity against God, which is not, cannot be, subject to" his "law;" and which so infects the whole soul, that "there dwelleth in" him, "in his flesh," in his natural state, "no good thing;" but "every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is evil," only evil, and that "continually."

The Wilderness State "Ye now have sorrow: But I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you." John 16:22. 1. After God had wrought a great deliverance for Israel, by bringing them out of the house of bondage, they did not immediately enter into the land which he had promised to their fathers; but "wandered out of the way in the wilderness," and were variously tempted and distressed. In like manner, after God has delivered them that fear him from the bondage of sin and Satan; after they are "justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus," yet not many of them immediately enter into "the rest which remaineth for the people of God." The greater part of them wander, more or less, out of the good way into which he hath brought them. They come, as it were, into a "waste and howling desert," where they are variously tempted and tormented: And this, some, in allusion to the case of the Israelites, have termed "a wilderness state." 2. Certain it is, that the condition wherein these are has a right the tenderest compassion. They labour under an evil and sore disease; though one that is not commonly understood; and for this very reason it is the more difficult for them to find a remedy. Being in darkness themselves, they cannot be supposed to understand the nature of their own disorder; and few of their brethren, nay, perhaps, of their teachers, know either what their sickness is, or how to heal it. So much the more need there is to inquire, First, What is the nature of this disease Secondly, What is the cause and, Thirdly, What is the cure of it

7. These cautions and restrictions being observed, it is the bounden duty of all who are engaged in worldly business to observe that first and great rule of Christian wisdom with respect to money, "Gain all you can." Gain all you can by honest industry. Use all possible diligence in your calling. Lose no time. If you understand yourself and your relation to God and man, you know you have none to spare. If you understand your particular calling as you ought, you will have no time that hangs upon your hands. Every business will afford some employment sufficient for every day and every hour. That wherein you are placed, if you follow it in earnest, will leave you no leisure for silly, unprofitable diversions. You have always something better to do, something that will profit you, more or less. And "whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might." Do it as soon as possible: No delay! No putting off from day to day, or from hour to hour! Never leave anything till to-morrow, which you can do to-day. And do it as well as possible. Do not sleep or yawn over it: Put your whole strength to the work. Spare no pains. Let nothing be done by halves, or in a slight and careless manner. Let nothing in your business be left undone if it can be done by labour or patience. 8. Gain all you can, by common sense, by using in your business all the understanding which God has given you. It is amazing to observe, how few do this; how men run on in the same dull track with their forefathers. But whatever they do who know not God, this is no rule for you. It is a shame for a Christian not to improve upon them, in whatever he takes in hand. You should be continually learning, from the experience of others, or from your own experience, reading, and reflection, to do everything you have to do better to-day than you did yesterday. And see that you practise whatever you learn, that you may make the best of all that is in your hands.

4. God has, Secondly, entrusted us with our bodies (those exquisitely wrought machines, so "fearfully and wonderfully made,") with all the powers and members thereof. He has entrusted us with the organs of sense; of sight, hearing, and the rest: But none of these are given us as our own, to be employed according to our own will. None of these are lent us in such a sense as to leave us at liberty to use them as we please for a season. No: We have received them on these very terms, -- that, as long as they abide with us, we should employ them all in that very manner, and no other, which he appoints. 5. It is on the same terms that he has imparted to us that most excellent talent of speech. "Thou hast given me a tongue," says the ancient writer, "that I may praise Thee therewith." For this purpose was it given to all the children of men, -- to be employed in glorifying God. Nothing, therefore, is more ungrateful or more absurd, than to think or say, "Our tongues are our own." That cannot be, unless we have created ourselves, and so are independent on the Most High. Nay, but "it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves;" the manifest consequence is, that he is still Lord over us, in this as in all other respects. It follows, that there is not a word of our tongue for which we are not accountable to Him. 6. To Him we are equally accountable for the use of our hands and feet, and all the members of our body. These are so many talents which are committed to our trust, until the time appointed by the Father. Until then, we have the use of all these; but as stewards, not as proprietors; to the end we should "render them, not as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but as instruments of righteousness unto God."

6. But leaving one of these unbounded seas to the Father of eternity, to whom alone duration without beginning belongs, let us turn our thoughts on duration without end. This is not an incommunicable attribute of the great Creator; but he has been graciously pleased to make innumerable multitudes of his creatures partakers of it. He has imparted this not only to angels, and archangels, and all the companies of heaven, who are not intended to die, but to glorify him, and live in his presences for ever; but also to the inhabitants of the earth, who dwell in houses of clay. Their bodies, indeed, are "crushed before the moth;" but their souls will never die, God made them, as an ancient writer speaks, to be "pictures of his own eternity." Indeed all spirits, we have reason to believe, are clothed with immortality; having no inward principle of corruption, and being liable to no external violence.

7. Perhaps we may go a step farther still: Is not matter itself, as well as spirit, in one sense eternal Not indeed a parte ante, as some senseless philosophers, both ancient and modern, have dreamed. Not that anything had existed from eternity; seeing, if so, it must be God; yea, it must by the One God; for it is impossible there should be two Gods, or two Eternals. But although nothing beside the great God can have existed from everlasting, -- none else can be eternal a parte ante; yet there is no absurdity in supposing that all creatures are eternal a parte post. All matter indeed is continually changing, and that into ten thousand forms; but that it is changeable, does in nowise imply that it is perishable. The substance may remain one and the same, though under innumerable different forms. It is very possible any portion of matter may be resolved into the atoms of which it was originally composed: But what reason have we to believe that one of these atoms ever was, or ever will be, annihilated It never can, unless by the uncontrollable power of its almighty Creator. And is it probable that ever He will exert this power in unmaking any of the things that he hath made In this also, God is not "a son of man that he should repent." Indeed, every creature under heaven does, and must, continually change its form, which we can now easily account for; as it clearly appears, from late discoveries, that ethereal fire enters into the composition of every part of the creation. Now, this is essentially edax rerum: It is the universal menstruum, the discohere of all things under the sun. By the force of this, even the strongest, the firmest bodies are dissolved. It appears from the experiment repeatedly made by the great Lord Bacon, that even diamonds, by a high degree of heat, may be turned into dust: and that, in a still higher degree, (strange as it may seem,) they will totally flame away. Yea, by this the heavens themselves will be dissolved; "the elements shall melt with fervent heat." But they will be only dissolved, not destroyed; they will belt, but they will not perish.

Yea, by this the heavens themselves will be dissolved; "the elements shall melt with fervent heat." But they will be only dissolved, not destroyed; they will belt, but they will not perish. Though they lose their present form, yet not a particle of them will ever lose its existence; but every atom of them will remain, under one form or other, to all eternity. 8. But still we should inquire, What is this eternity How shall we pour any light upon this abstruse subject It cannot be the object of our understanding. And with what comparison shall we compare it How infinitely does it transcend all these! What are any temporal things, placed in comparison with those that are eternal What is the duration of the longlived oak, of the ancient castle, of Trajan's Pillar, of Pompey's Amphitheatre What is the antiquity of the Tuscan Urns, though probably older than the foundation of Rome; yea, of the Pyramids of Egypt, suppose they have remained upwards of three thousand years; -- when laid in the balance with eternity It vanishes into nothing. Nay, what is the duration of "the everlasting hills," figuratively so called, which have remained ever since the general deluge, if not from the foundation of the world, in comparison of eternity No more than an insignificant cipher. Go farther yet: Consider the duration, from the creation of the first-born sons of God, of Michael the Archangel in particular, to the hour when he shall be commissioned to sound his trumpet, and to utter his mighty voice through the vault of heaven, "Arise, ye dead, and come to judgement!" Is it not a moment, a point, a nothing, in comparison of unfathomable eternity Add to this a thousand, a million of years, add a million of million of ages, "before the mountains were brought forth, or the earth and the round world were made:" What is all this in comparison of that eternity which is past Is it not less, infinitely less, than a single drop of water to the whole ocean -- yea, immeasurably less than a day, an hour, a moment, to a million of ages! Go back a thousand millions still; yet you are no nearer the beginning of eternity.

5. "As they lie in the text :" -- but here arises a question: Is that text genuine Was it originally written by the Apostle, or inserted in later ages Many have doubted of this; and, in particular, the great light of the Christian church, lately removed to the Church above, Bengelius, -- the most pious, the most judicious, and the most laborious, of all the modern Commentators on the New Testament. For some time he stood in doubt of its authenticity, because it is wanting in many of the ancient copies. But his doubts were removed by three considerations: (1.) That though it is wanting in many copies, yet it is found in more; and those copies of the greatest authority: -- ( 2.) That it is cited by a whole gain of ancient writers, from the time of St. John to that of Constantine. This argument is conclusive: For they could not have cited it, had it not been in the sacred canon: -- (3.) That we can easily account for its being, after that time, wanting in many copies, when we remember that Constantine's successor was a zealous Arian, who used every means to promote his bad cause, to spread Arianism throughout the empire; in particular the erasing this text out of as many copies as fell into his hands. And he so far prevailed, that the age in which he lived is commonly styled, Seculum Aranium, -- "the Arian age;" there being then only one eminent man who opposed him at the peril of his life. So that it was a proverb, Athanasius contra mundum: "Athanasius against the world." 6. But it is objected: "Whatever becomes of the text, we cannot believe what we cannot comprehend. When, therefore, you require us to believe mysteries, we pray you to have us excused." Here is a two-fold mistake: (1.) We do not require you to believe any mystery in this; whereas; you suppose the contrary. But, (2.) You do already believe many things which you cannot comprehend.

There was no violent winter, or sultry summer; no extreme, either of heat or cold. No soil was burned up by the solar heat; none uninhabitable through the want of it. Thus earth, water, air, and fire, all conspired together to the welfare and pleasure of man! 7. To the same purpose served the grateful vicissitude of light and darkness, -- day and night. For as the human body, though not liable to death or pain, yet needed continual sustenance by food; so, although it was not liable to weariness, yet it needed continual reparation by sleep. By this the springs of the animal machine were wound up from time to time, and kept always fit for the pleasing labour for which man was designed by his Creator. Accordingly, "the evening and the morning were the first day," before sin or pain was in the world. The first natural day had one part dark for a season of repose; one part light for a season of labour. And even in paradise "Adam slept," (Gen. 2:21,) before he sinned: Sleep, therefore, belonged to innocent human nature. Yet I do not apprehend it can be inferred from hence, that there is either darkness or sleep in heaven. Surely there is no darkness in that city of God. Is it not expressly said, (Rev. 22:5,) "There shall be no night there" Indeed they have no light from the sun; but "the Lord giveth them light." So it is all day in heaven, as it is all night in hell! On earth we have a mixture of both. Day and night succeed each other, till earth shall be turned to heaven. Neither can we at all credit the account given by the ancient poet, concerning sleep in heaven; although he allows "cloud-compelling Jove" to remain awake while the inferior gods were sleeping. It is pity, therefore, that our great poet should copy so servilely after the old Heathen, as to tell us, Sleep had seal'd All but the unsleeping eyes of God himself. Not so: They are "before the throne of God serve him day and night," speaking after the manner of men, "in his temple;" (Rev. 7:15;) that is, without any interval. As wicked spirits are tormented day and night without any intermission of their misery; so holy spirits enjoy God day and night without any intermission of their happiness.

11. Here was the dawn of the proper gospel day. Here was a proper Christian Church. It was now "the Sun of Righteousness" rose upon the earth, "with healing in his wings." He did now "save his people from their sins:" He "healed all their sickness." He not only taught that religion which is the true "healing of the soul," but effectually planted it in the earth; filling the souls of all that believed in him with righteousness, -- gratitude to God, and good-will to man; attended with a peace that surpassed all understanding, and with joy unspeakable and full of glory. 12. But how soon did "the mystery of iniquity" work again, and obscure the glorious prospect! It began to work (not openly indeed, but covertly) in two of the Christians, Ananias and Sapphira. "They sold their possession," like the rest, and probably for the same motive; but afterwards, giving place to the devil, and reasoning with flesh and blood, they "kept back part of the price." See the first Christians, that "made shipwreck of faith and a good conscience;" the first that "drew back to perdition;" instead of continuing to "believe to the" final "salvation of the soul!" Mark the first plague which infected the Christian Church; namely, the love of money! And will it not be the grand plague in all generations, whenever God shall revive the same work O ye believers in Christ, take warning! Whether you are yet but little children, or young men that are strong in the faith, see the snare; your snare in particular, -- that which you will be peculiarly exposed to after you have escaped from gross pollutions. "Love not the world, neither the things of the world! If any man love the world," whatever he was in times past, "the love of the Father is not" now "in him!" 13. However, this plague was stayed in the first Christian Church, by instantly cutting off the infected persons. By that signal judgment of God on the first offenders, "great fear came upon all;" (Acts 5:11;) so that, for the present at least, not one dared to follow their example. Meantime believers, men full of faith and love, who rejoiced to have all things in common, "were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women." (Acts 5:14.)

20. St. Peter wrote about the same time "to the strangers," the Christians, "scattered abroad through" all those spacious provinces of "Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia" Minor, "and Bithynia." These, probably, were some of the most eminent Christians that were then in the world. Yet how exceeding far were even these from being "without spot and blemish!" And what grievous tares were here also growing up with the wheat! Some of them were "bringing in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them:" (2 Pet. 2:1 &c.:) And "many followed their pernicious ways;" of whom the Apostle gives that terrible character: "They walk after the flesh," in "the lust of uncleanness, like brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed. Spots they are, and blemishes, while they feast with you;" (in the "feasts of charity," then celebrated throughout the whole Church:) "having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin. These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest, for whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever." And yet these very men were called Christians, and were even then in the bosom of the Church! Nor does the Apostle mention them as infesting any one particular church only; but as a general plague, which even then was dispersed far and wide among all the Christians to whom he wrote! 21. Such is the authentic account of "the mystery of iniquity" working even in the apostolic Churches! -- an account given, not by the Jews or Heathens, but by the Apostles themselves. To this we may add the account which is given by the Head and Founder of the Church; Him "who holds the stars in his right hand;" who is "the faithful and true Witness." We may easily infer what was the state of the Church in general, from the state of the seven Churches in Asia. One of these indeed, the Church of Philadelphia, had "kept his word, and had not denied his name;" (Rev. 3:8;) the Church of Smyrna was likewise in a flourishing state: But all the rest were corrupted, more or less; insomuch that many of them were not a jot better than the present race of Christians; and our Lord then threatened, what he has long since performed, to "remove the candlestick" from them.

22. Such was the real state of the Christian Church, even during the first century; while not only St. John, but most of the Apostles were present with and presided over it. But what a mystery is this, that the All-wise, the All-gracious, the Almighty, should suffer it so to be, not in one only, but as far as we can learn, in every Christian society, those of Smyrna and Philadelphia excepted! And how came these to be excepted Why were these less corrupted (to go no farther) than the other Churches of Asia It seems, because they were less wealthy. The Christians in Philadelphia were not literally "increased in goods," like those in Ephesus or Laodicea; and if the Christians at Smyrna had acquired more wealth, it was swept away by persecution. So that these, having less of this world's goods, retained more of the simplicity and purity of the gospel. 23. But how contrary is this scriptural account of the ancient Christians to the ordinary apprehensions of men! We have been apt to imagine, that the Primitive Church was all excellence and perfection; answerable to that strong description which St. Peter cites from Moses: "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people." And such, without all doubt, the first Christian Church, which commenced at the day of Pentecost, was. But how soon did the fine gold become dim! How soon was the wine mixed with water! How little time elapsed, before the "god of this world" so far regained his empire, that Christians in general were scarce distinguishable from Heathens, save by their opinions and modes of worship!

24. And if the state of the Church in the very first century was so bad, we cannot suppose it was any better in the second. Undoubtedly it grew worse and worse. Tertullian, one of the most eminent Christians of that age, has given us an account of it in various parts of his writings, whence we learn that real, internal religion was hardly found; nay, that not only the tempers of the Christians were exactly the same with those of their heathen neighbours, (pride, passion, love of the world reigning alike in both,) but their lives and manners also. The bearing a faithful testimony against the general corruption of Christians, seems to have raised the outcry against Montanus; and against Tertullian himself, when he was convinced that the testimony of Montanus was true. As to the heresies fathered upon Montanus, it is not easy to find what they were. I believe his grand heresy was, the maintaining that "without" inward and outward "holiness no man shall see the Lord." 25. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, in every respect an unexceptionable witness, who flourished about the middle of the third century, has left us abundance of letters, in which he gives a large and particular account of the state of religion in his time. In reading this, one would be apt to imagine, he was reading an account of the present century: So totally void of true religion were the generality both of the laity and clergy, so immersed in ambition, envy, covetousness, luxury, and all other vices, that the Christians of Africa were then exactly the same as the Christians of England are now. 26. It is true, that during this whole period, during the first three centuries, there were intermixed longer or shorter seasons wherein true Christianity revived. In those seasons the justice and mercy of God let loose the Heathens upon the Christians. Many of these were then called to resist unto blood. And "the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church." The apostolic spirit returned; and many "counted not their lives dear unto themselves, so they might finish their course with joy." Many others were reduced to happy poverty; and being stripped of what they had loved too well, they "remembered from whence they were fallen, and repented, and did their first works."

10. She then "gave to her husband, and he did eat." And in that day, yea, that moment, he died! The life of God was extinguished in his soul. The glory departed from him. He lost the whole moral image of God, -- righteousness and true holiness. He was unholy; he was unhappy; he was full of sin; full of guilt and tormenting fears. Being broke off from God, and looking upon him now as an angry Judge, "he was afraid." But how was his understanding darkened, to think he could "hide himself from the presence of the Lord among the trees of the garden!" Thus was his soul utterly dead to God! And in that day his body likewise began to die, -- became obnoxious to weakness, sickness, pain; all preparatory to the death of the body, which naturally led to eternal death. II. Such are "the works of the devil;" sin and its fruits; considered in their order and connexion. We are, in the Second place, to consider how the Son of God was manifested in order to destroy them. 1. He was manifested as the only-begotten Son of God, in glory equal with the Father, to the inhabitants of heaven before and at the foundation of the world. These "morning stars sang together," all these "sons of God shouted for joy," when they heard him pronounce, "Let there be light; and there was light;" -- when he "spread the north over the empty space," and "stretched out the heavens as a curtain." Indeed, it was the universal belief of the ancient Church, that God the Father none hath seen, nor can see; that from all eternity He hath dwelt in light unapproachable; and it is only in and by the Son of his love that he hath, at any time, revealed himself to his creatures.

The New Creation Behold, I make all things new. Rev. 21:5. 1. What a strange scene is here opened to our view! How remote from all our natural apprehensions! Not a glimpse of what is here revealed was ever seen in the heathen world. Not only the modern, barbarous, uncivilized Heathens have not the least conception of it; but it was equally unknown to the refined, polished Heathens of ancient Greece and Rome. And it is almost as little thought of or understood by the generality of Christians: I mean, not barely those that are nominally such, that have the form of godliness without the power; but even those that in a measure fear God, and study to work righteousness. 2. It must be allowed that after all the researches we can make, still our knowledge of the great truth which is delivered to us in these words is exceedingly short and imperfect. As this is a point of mere revelation, beyond the reach of all our natural faculties, we cannot penetrate far into it, nor form any adequate conception of it. But it may be an encouragement to those who have in any degree tasted of the powers of the world to come to go as far as we can go, interpreting Scripture by Scripture, according to the analogy of faith. 3. The Apostle, caught up in the visions of God, tells us in the first verse of the chapter, "I saw a new heaven and a new earth;" and adds, (Rev. 21:5,) "He that sat upon the throne said," (I believe the only words which he is said to utter throughout the whole book,) "Behold, I make all things new."

4. Very many commentators entertain a strange opinion that this relates only to the present state of things, and gravely tell us that the words are to be referred to the flourishing state of the Church, which commenced after the heathen persecutions. Nay, some of them have discovered that all which the Apostle speaks concerning the "new heaven and the new earth" was fulfilled when Constantine the Great poured in riches and honours upon the Christians. What a miserable way is this of making void the whole counsel of God, with regard to all that grand chain of events, in reference to his Church, yea, and to all mankind, from the time that John was in Patmos unto the end of the world! Nay, the line of this prophecy reaches farther still: It does not end with the present world, but shows us the things that will come to pass when this world is no more. For, 5. Thus saith the Creator and Governor of the universe: "Behold, I make all things new;" -- all which are included in that expression of the Apostle, "A new heaven and a new earth." A new heaven: the original word in Genesis (Gen. 1) is in the plural number. And indeed this is the constant language of Scripture -- not heaven, but heavens. Accordingly, the ancient Jewish writers are accustomed to reckon three heavens; in conformity to which, the Apostle Paul speaks of his being "caught up into the third heaven." It is this, the third heaven, which is usually supposed to be the more immediate residence of God; so far as any residence can be ascribed to his omnipresent Spirit, who pervades and fills the whole universe. It is here (if we speak after the manner of men) that the Lord sitteth upon his throne, surrounded by angels and archangels, and by all his flaming ministers.

9. We may more easily conceive the changes which will be wrought in the lower heaven, in the region of the air. It will be no more torn by hurricanes, or agitated by furious storms, or destructive tempests. Pernicious or terrifying meteors will have no more place therein. We shall have no more occasion to say, There like a trumpet, loud and strong, Thy thunder shakes our coast; While the red lightnings wave along, The banners of thy host! No: All will be then light, fair, serene; a lively picture of the eternal day. 10. All the elements (taking that word in the common sense, for the principles of which all natural beings are compounded) will be new indeed; entirely changed as to their qualities, although not as to their nature. Fire is at present the general destroyer of all things under the sun; dissolving all things that come within the sphere of its action, and reducing them to their primitive atoms. But no sooner will it have performed its last great office of destroying the heavens and the earth; (whether you mean thereby one system only, or the whole fabric of the universe; the difference between one and millions of worlds being nothing before the great Creator;) when, I say, it has done this, the destructions wrought by fire will come to a perpetual end. It will destroy no more: it will consume no more: it will forget its power to burn, -- which it possesses only during the present state of things, -- and be as harmless in the new heavens and earth as it is now in the bodies of men and other animals, and the substance of trees and flowers; in all which (as late experiments show) large quantities of ethereal fire are lodged; if it be not rather an essential component part of every material being under the sun. But it will probably retain its vivifying power, though divested of its power to destroy.

12. But what change will the element of water undergo when all things are made new! It will be, in every part of the world, clear and limpid; pure from all unpleasing or unhealthful mixtures; rising here and there in crystal fountains, to refresh and adorn the earth "with liquid lapse of murmuring stream." For, undoubtedly, as there were in Paradise, there will be various rivers gently gliding along, for the use and pleasure of both man and beast. But the inspired writer has expressly declared, "there will be no more sea." (Rev. 21:1.) We have every reason to believe, that at the beginning of the world, when God said, "Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear," (Gen. 1:9,) the dry land spread over the face of the water, and covered it on every side. And so it seems to have done, till, in order to the general deluge which God had determined to bring upon the earth at once, "the windows of heaven were opened, and the fountains of the great deep broken up." But the sea will then retire within its primitive bounds, and appear on the surface of the earth no more. For either, indeed, will there be any more need of the sea. For either as the ancient Poet supposes, Omnis feret omnia tellus, -- every part of the earth will naturally produce whatever its inhabitants want, -- or all mankind will procure what the whole earth affords by a much easier and readier conveyance. For all the inhabitants of the earth, our Lord informs us, will then be isaggeloi, -- equal to angels; on a level with them in swiftness, as well as strength; so that they can quick as thought, transport themselves, or whatever they want, from one side of the globe to the other.

I. 1. Let us, in the First place, inquire, What times were those concerning which our Lord is here speaking It is easy to answer; the times of the Messiah; the times ordained before the foundation of the world, wherein it pleased God to give his only begotten Son, to take our nature upon him, to be "found in fashion as a man," to live a life of sorrow and pain, and, at length, to be "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross," to the end that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life." This was the important time the signs whereof the Pharisees and Sadducees could not discern. Clear as they were in themselves, yet so thick a veil was upon the heart of these men, that they did not discern the tokens of his coming, though foretold so long before. 2. But what were those signs of the coming of that Just One, which had been so long and so clearly foretold, and whereby they might easily have discerned those times, had not the veil been on their heart They are many in number; but it may suffice to mention a few of them. One of the first is that pointed out in the solemn words, spoken by Jacob a little before his death: (Gen. 49:10:) "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come." All, both ancient and modern Jews, agree, that by Shiloh we are to understand the Messiah; who was therefore to come, according to the prophecy, "before the sceptre," that is, the sovereignty, "departed from Judah." But it did, without controversy, depart from Judah at this very time; -- an infallible sign, that at this very time Shiloh, that is, the Messiah, came.

6. St. John assigns this very reason for the Jews not understanding the things of God; namely, that in consequence of their preceding sins, and wilful rejecting the light, God had now delivered them up to Satan, who blinded them past recovery. Over and over, when they might have seen, they would not; they shut their eyes against the light: And now they can not see, God having given them up to an undiscerning mind : Therefore they do not believe, because that Isaiah said, (that is, because of the reason given in that saying of Isaiah,) "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, and be converted, and I should heal them." The plain meaning is, not that God did this by his own immediate power; it would be flat blasphemy to say, that God, in this sense, hardens any man; but his Spirit strives with them no longer, and then Satan hardens them effectually. 7. And as it was with them in ancient times, so it is with the present generation. Thousands of those who bear the name of Christ are now given up to an undiscerning mind. The god of this world hath so blinded their eyes, that the light cannot shine upon them; so that they can no more discern the signs of the times, than the Pharisees and Sadducees could of old. A wonderful instance of this spiritual blindness, this total inability to discern the signs of the times mentioned in Scripture, is given us in the very celebrated work of a late eminent writer; who supposes, the New Jerusalem came down from heaven, when Constantine the Great called himself a Christian. I say, called himself a Christian; for I dare not affirm that he was one, any more than Peter the Great. I cannot but believe, he would have come nearer the mark, if he had said, that it was the time when a huge cloud of infernal brimstone and smoke came up from the bottomless pit! For surely there never was a time wherein Satan gained so fatal an advantage over the Church of Christ, as when such a flood of riches, and honour, and power broke in upon it, particularly on the Clergy!

On Divine Providence "Even the very hairs of your head are all numbered." Luke 12:7. 1. The doctrine of divine providence has been received by wise men in all ages. It was believed by many of the eminent Heathens, not only philosophers, but orators and poets. Innumerable are the testimonies concerning it which are scattered up and down in their writings; agreeable to that well-knowing saying in Cicero, Deorum moderamine cuncta geri: "That all things, all events in this world, are under the management of God." We might bring a cloud of witnesses to confirm this, were any so hardy as to deny it. 2. The same truth is acknowledged at this day in most parts of the world; yea, even by those nations which are so barbarous as not to know the use of letters. So when Paustoobee, an Indian Chief, of the Chicasaw nation in North America, was asked, "Why do you think the Beloved Ones (so they term God) take care of you" he answered, without any hesitation, "I was in the battle with the French; and the bullet went on this side; and this man died, and that man died; but I am alive still; and by this I know that the beloved Ones take care of me. 3. But although the ancient as well as modern Heathens had some conception of a divine providence, yet the conceptions which most of them entertained concerning it were dark, confused, and imperfect; Yea, the accounts which the most enlightened among them gave, were usually contradictory to each other. Add to this, that they were by no means assured of the truth of those very accounts: They hardly dared to affirm anything, but spoke with the utmost caution and diffidence; insomuch that what Cicero himself, the author of that noble declaration, ventures to affirm in cool blood, at the end of his long dispute upon the subject, amounts to no more than this lame and impotent conclusion: Mihi verisimilior videbatur Cotta oratin: "What Cotta said," (the person that argued in the defence of the being and providence of God,) "seemed to me more probable than what his opponent had advanced to the contrary."

9. And as this all-wise, all-gracious Being created all things,so he sustains all things. He is the Preserver as well as the Creator of everything that exists. "He up holdeth all things by the word of his power;" that is, by his powerful word. Now it must be that he knows everything he has made, and everything he preserves, from moment to moment; otherwise, he could not preserve it, he could not continue to it the going which he has given it. And it is nothing strange that He who is omnipresent, who "filleth heaven and earth," who is intimately present. If the eye of man discerns things at a small distance; the eye of an eagle, what is at a greater; the eye of an angle, what is at a thousand times greater distance; (perhaps taking in the surface of the earth at one view;) how shall no the eye of God see everything, through the whole extent of creation Especially considering, that nothing is distant from Him in whom we all "live, and move, and have our being." 10. It is true, our narrow understandings but imperfectly comprehend this. But whether we comprehend it or no, we are certain that so it is. As certain as it is, that he created all things, and that he still sustains all that is created; so certain it is, that he is present, at all times, in all places; that he is above, beneath; that he "besets us behind and before," and, as it were, "lays his hand upon us." We allow, "such knowledge is too high" and wonderful for us; we "cannot attain unto it." The manner of his presence no man can explain, nor, probably, any angel in heaven. Perhaps what the ancient philosopher speaks of the soul, in regard to its residence in the body, that it is tota in toto, et, tota in qualibet parte, might, in some sense, be spoken of the omnipresent Spirit, in regard to the universe: That he is not only "All in the whole," but "All in every part." Be this as it may, it cannot be doubted but He sees every atom of his creation, and that a thousand times more clearly than we see the things that are close to us: Even of these we see only the surface, while He sees the inmost essence of every thing.

28. Nearly allied to this confidence in God is the thankfulness we owe for his kind protection. Let those give thanks whom the Lord thus delivers from the hand of all their enemies. What an unspeakable blessing it is to be the peculiar care of Him that has all power in heaven and earth! How can we sufficiently praise him, while we are under his wings, and his faithfulness and truth are our shield and buckler! 29. But meantime we should take the utmost care to walk humbly and closely with our God. Walk humbly: For if you in anywise rob God of his honor, of you ascribe anything to yourself, the things which should have been for you wealth will prove to you an "occasion of falling." And walk closely: See that you have a conscience void of offence toward God and toward man. It is so long as you so this that you are the peculiar care of your Father which is in heaven. But let not the consciousness of his caring for you make you careless, indolent, or slothful: On the contrary, while you are penetrated with that deep truth, "The help that is done upon earth, He doeth it himself," be as earnest and diligent in the use of all the means as if you were your own protector. Lastly: In what a melancholy condition are those who do not believe there is any providence; or, which comes to exactly the same point, not a particular one! Whatever station they are in, as long as they are in the world, they are exposed to numberless dangers which no human wisdom can foresee, and no human power can resist. And there is no help! If they trust in men, they find them "deceitful upon the weights." In many cases they cannot help; in others, they will not. But were they ever so willing, they will die: Therefore vain is the help of man and God is far above, out of their sight: They expect no help from Him. These modern (as well as the ancient) Epicureans have learned that the Universal Cause Acts not by partial, but by general laws. He only takes care of the great globe itself; not of its puny inhabitants. He heeds not how those Vagrant emmets crawl At random on the air-suspended ball.

4. But it is not only with regard to ancient nations, that the providential dispensations of God are utterly imcomprehansible to us: The same difficulties occur now. We cannot account for his present dealings with the inhabitants of the earth. We know, "the Lord is loving unto every man, and his mercy is over all his works." But we know not how to reconcile this with the present dispensations of his providence. At this day, is not almost every part of the earth full of darkness and cruel habitations In what a condition, in particular, is the large and populous empire of Indostan! How many hundred thousands of the poor, quiet people, have been destroyed, and their carcases left as the dung of the earth! in what a condition (though they have no English ruffians there) are the numberless islands in the Pacific Ocean! How little is their state above that of wolves and bears! And who careth either for their souls or their bodies But does not the Father of men care for them O mystery of providence! 5. And who cares for thousands, myriads, if not millions, of the wretched Africans Are not whole droves of these poor sheep (human, if not rational beings!) continually driven to market, and sold, like cattle, into the vilest bondage, without any hope of delierance but by death Who cares for those outcasts or men, the well-known Hottenots It is true, a late writer has taken musch pains to represent them as a respectable people: But from what motive it is not easy to say; since he himself allows (a speciman of their elegance of manners) that the raw guts of sheep and other cattle are not only some of their choicest food, but also the ornaments of their arms and legs; and (a speciman of their religion) that the son is not counted a man, till he has beat his mother almost to death; and when his father grows old, he fastens him to a little hut, and leaves him there to starve! O Father of mercies! are these the works of thy own hands, the purchase of thy Son's blood

2. Many years ago I found the truth of this by sad experience. After carefully heaping up the strongest arguments which I could find, either in ancient or modern authors, for the very being of a God, and (which is nearly connected with it) the existence of an invisible world, I have wandered up and down, musing with myself: "What, if all these things which I see around me, this earth and heaven, this universal frame, has existed from eternity What, if that melancholy supposition of the old Poet be the real case, -- oih per jullvn geneh, toih de kai andrvn; What, if `the generation of men be exactly parallel with the generation of leaves' if the earth drops its successive inhabitants, just as the tree drops its leaves What, if that saying of a great man be really true, -- Post mortem nihil est; ipsaque mors nihil Death is nothing, and nothing is after death How am I sure that this is not the case; that I have not followed cunningly devised fables" -- And I have pursued the thought, till there was no spirit in me, and I was ready to choose strangling rather than life. 3. But in a point of so unspeakable importance, do not depend upon the word of another; but retire for awhile from the busy world, and make the experiment yourself. Try whether your reason will give you a clear satisfactory evidence of the invisible world. After the prejudices of education are laid aside, produce your strong reasons for the existence of this. Set them all in array; silence all objections; and put all your doubts to flight alas! you cannot, with all your understanding. You may repress them for a season. But how quickly will they rally again, and attack you with redoubled violence! And what can poor reason do for your deliverance The more vehemently you struggle, the more deeply you are entangled in the toils; and you find no way to escape. 4. How was the case with that great admirer of reason, the author of the maxim above cited I mean the famous Mr. Hobbes. None will deny that he had a strong understanding. But did it produce in him a full and satisfactory conviction of an invisible world Did it open the eyes of his understanding, to see

Of Good Angels "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation" Heb. 1:14. 1. Many of the ancient Heathens had (probably from tradition) some notion of good and evil angels. They had some conception of a superior order of beings, between men and God, whom the Greeks generally termed demons, (knowing ones,) and the Romans, genii. Some of these they supposed to be kind and benevolent, delighting in doing good; others, to be malicious and cruel, delighting in doing evil. But their conceptions both of one and the other were crude, imperfect, and confused; being only fragments of truth, partly delivered down by their forefathers, and partly borrowed from the inspired writings. 2. Of the former, the benevolent kind, seems to have been the celebrated demon of Socrates; concerning which so many and so various conjectures have been made in succeeding ages. "This gives me notice," said he, "every morning, of any evil which will befall me that day." A late writer, indeed, (I suppose one that hardly believes the existence of either angel or spirit,) has published a dissertation, wherein he labours to prove, that the demon of Socrates was only his reason. But it was not the manner of Socrates to speak in such obscure and ambiguous terms. If he had meant his reason, he would doubtless have said so. But this could not be his meaning: For it was impossible his reason should give him notice, every morning, of every evil which would befall him in that day. It does not lie within the province of reason, to give such notice of future contingencies. Neither does this odd interpretation in anywise agree with the inference which he himself draws from it. "My demon," says he, "did not give me notice this morning of any evil that was to befall me to-day. Therefore I cannot regard as any evil my being condemned to die." Undoubtedly it was some spiritual being: Probably one of these ministering spirits. 3. An ancient poet, one who lived several ages before Socrates, speaks more determinately on this subject. Hesiod does not scruple to say, Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth unseen.

Of Evil Angels "We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in heavenly places." Eph. 6:12. 1. It has been frequently observed that there are no gaps or chasms in the creation of God, but that all the parts of it are admirably connected together, to make up one universal whole. Accordingly there is one chain of beings, from the lowest to the highest point, from an unorganized particle of earth or water to Michael the archangel. And the scale of creatures does not advance per saltum, by leaps, but by smooth and gentle degrees; although it is true, these are frequently imperceptible to our imperfect faculties. We cannot accurately trace many of the intermediate links of this amazing chain, which are abundantly too fine to be discerned either by our senses or understanding. 2. We can only observe, in a gross and general manner, rising one above another, first, inorganical earth, then minerals and vegetables in their several orders; afterwards insects, reptiles, fishes, beasts, men, and angels. Of angels indeed we know nothing with any certainty but by revelation. The accounts which are left by the wisest of the ancients, or given by the modern heathens, being no better than silly, self-inconsistent fables, too gross to be imposed even upon children. But by divine revelation we are informed that they were all created holy and happy; yet they did not all continue as they were created: Some kept, but some left, their first estate. The former of these are now good angels; the latter, evil angels. Of the former I have spoke in the preceding discourse: I purpose now to speak of the latter. And highly necessary it is that we should well understand what God has revealed concerning them, that they may gain no advantage over us by our ignorance; that we may know how to wrestle against them effectually. For "we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in heavenly places."

2. "But has every man a particular evil angel, as well as a good one attending him" This has been an exceeding ancient opinion, both among the Christians, and the Jews before them: But it is much doubted whether it can be sufficiently proved from Scripture. Indeed it would not be improbable that there is a particular evil angel with every man, if we were assured there is a good one. But this cannot be inferred from those words of our Lord concerning little children: "In heaven their angels do continually see the face of their Father which is in heaven." This only proves that there are angels who are appointed to take care of little children: It does not prove that a particular angel is allotted to every child. Neither is it proved by the words of Rhoda, who, hearing the voice of Peter, said, "It is his angel." We cannot infer any more from this, even suppose his angel means his guardian angel, than that Rhoda believed the doctrine of guardian angels, which was then common among the Jews. But still it will remain a disputable point, (seeing revelation determines nothing concerning it,) whether every man is attended either by a particular good or a particular evil angel. 3. But whether or no particular men are attended by particular evil spirits, we know that Satan and all his angels are continually warring against us, and watching over every child of man. They are ever watching to see whose outward or inward circumstances, whose prosperity or adversity, whose health or sickness, whose friends or enemies, whose youth or age, whose knowledge or ignorance, whose blindness or idleness, whose joy or sorrow, may lay them open to temptation. And they are perpetually ready to make the utmost advantage of every circumstance. These skilful wrestlers espy the smallest slip we make, and avail themselves of it immediately; as they also are "about our bed, and about our path, and spy out all our ways." Indeed each of them "walketh about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour," or whom he may "beguile through his subtlety, as the serpent beguiled Eve." Yea, and in order to do this the more effectually, they transform themselves into angels of light. Thus, With rage that never ends, Their hellish arts they try; Legions of dire, malicious fiends, And spirits enthroned on high.

The punishment of those who, in spite of all the warnings of God, resolve to have their portion with the devil and his angels, will, according to the ancient and not improper division, be either paena damni, -- "what they lose;" or paena sensus, -- "what they feel." After considering these separately, I shall touch on a few additional circumstances, and conclude with two or three inferences. I. 1. And, First, let us consider the paena damni, -- "the punishment of loss." This commences in that very moment wherein the soul is separated from the body; in that instant, the soul loses all those pleasures, the enjoyment of which depends on the outward senses. The smell, the taste, the touch, delight no more: The organs that ministered to them are spoiled, and the objects that used to gratify them are removed far away. In the dreary regions of the dead all these things are forgotten; or, if remembered, are only remembered with pain; seeing they are gone for ever. All the pleasures of the imagination are at an end. There is no grandeur in the infernal regions; there is nothing beautiful in those dark abodes; no light but that of livid flames. And nothing new, but one unvaried scene of horror upon horror! There is no music but that of groans and shrieks; of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth; of curses and blasphemies against God, or cutting reproaches of one another. Nor is there anything to gratify the sense of honour: No; they are the heirs of shame and everlasting contempt. 2. Thus are they totally separated from all the things they were fond of in the present world. At the same instant will commence another loss, -- that of all the persons whom they loved. They are torn away from their nearest and dearest relations; their wives, husbands, parents, children; and (what to some will be worse than all this) the friend which was as their own soul. All the pleasure they ever enjoyed in these is lost, gone, vanished away: For there is no friendship in hell. Even the poet who affirms, (though I know not on what authority,) Devil with devil damn'd Firm concord holds, does not affirm that there is any concord among the human fiends that inhabit the great abyss.

2. Consider, Secondly, that all these torments of body and soul are without intermission. They have no respite from pain; but "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up day and night." Day and night! that is, speaking according to the constitution of the present world; wherein God has wisely and graciously ordained that day and night should succeed each other: So that in every four and twenty hours there comes a Daily sabbath, made to rest Toiling man and weary beast. Hence we seldom undergo much labour, or suffer much pain, before Tired nature's sweet restorer, balmy sleep, steals upon us by insensible degrees, and brings an interval of ease. But although the damned have uninterrupted night, it brings no interruption of their pain. No sleep accompanies that darkness: Whatever either ancient or modern poets, either Homer or Milton, dream, there is no sleep either in hell or heaven. And be their suffering ever so extreme, be their pain ever so intense, there is no possibility of their fainting away; no, not for a moment. Again: The inhabitants of earth are frequently diverted from attending to what is afflictive, by the cheerful light of the sun, the vicissitudes of the seasons, "the busy hum of men," and a thousand objects that roll around them with endless variety. But the inhabitants of hell have nothing to divert them from their torments, even for a moment: Total eclipse: No sun, no moon! No change of seasons, or of companions. There is no business; but one uninterrupted scene of horror, to which they must be all attention. They have no interval of inattention or stupidity: They are all eye, all ear, all sense. Every instant of their duration, it may be said of their whole frame, that they are Tremblingly alive all o'er, And smart and agonize at every pore! 3. And of this duration there is no end! What a thought is this! Nothing but eternity is the term of their torment! And who can count the drops of rain, or the sands of the sea, or the days of eternity Every suffering is softened, if there is any hope, though distant, of deliverance from it. But here, Hope never comes, that comes to all the inhabitants of the upper world! What! sufferings never to end!

28. Does it not clearly appear from this whole account, why, in the ancient Creed, commonly called the Apostles', we term it the universal or catholic Church, -- "the holy catholic Church" How many wonderful reasons have been found out for giving it this appellation! One learned man informs us, "The Church is called holy, because Christ, the Head of it, is holy." Another eminent author affirms, "It is so called because all its ordinances are designed to promote holiness;" and yet another, -- "because our Lord intended that all the members of the Church should be holy." Nay, the shortest and the plainest reason that can be given, and the only true one, is, -- The Church is called holy, because it is holy, because every member thereof is holy, though in different degrees, as He that called them is holy. How clear is this! If the Church, as to the very essence of it, is a body of believers, no man that is not a Christian believer can be a member of it. If this whole body be animated by one spirit, and endued with one faith, and one hope of their calling; then he who has not that spirit, and faith, and hope, is no member of this body. It follows, that not only no common swearer, no Sabbath-breaker, no drunkard, no whoremonger, no thief, no liar, none that lives in any outward sin, but none that is under the power of anger or pride, no lover of the world, in a word, none that is dead to God, can be a member of his Church.

Spiritual Idolatry "Little children, keep yourselves from idols." 1 John 5:21. 1. There are two words that occur several times in this Epistle, -- paidia and teknia, -- both of which our translators render by the same expression, little children. But their meaning is very different. The former is very properly rendered little children; for it means, babes in Christ, -- those that have lately tasted of his love, and are, as yet, weak and unestablished therein. The latter might with more propriety be rendered, beloved children; as it does not denote any more than the affection of the speaker to those whom he had begotten in the Lord. 2. An ancient historian relates, that when the Apostle was so enfeebled by age as not to be able to preach, he was frequently brought into the congregation in his chair, and just uttered, "Beloved children, love one another." He could not have given a more important advice. And equally important is this which lies before us; equally necessary for every part of the Church of Christ. "Beloved children, keep yourselves from idols." 3. Indeed there is a close connexion between them: One cannot subsist without the other. As there is no firm foundation for the love of our brethren except the love of God, so there is no possibility of loving God except we keep ourselves from idols. But what are the idols of which the Apostle speaks This is the First thing to be considered. We may then, in the Second place, inquire, How shall we keep ourselves from them

16. But by what means may we avoid the being carried away by the overflowing stream of dissipation It is not difficult for those who believe the Scripture to give an answer to this question. Now, I really believe the Bible to be the Word of God; and on that supposition I answer, The radical cure of all dissipation is, the "faith that worketh by love." If, therefore, you would be free from this evil disease, first, "continue steadfast in the faith;" in that faith which brings "the Spirit of adoption, crying in your heart, Abba, Father;" whereby you are enabled to testify, "The life which I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God; who loved me, and gave himself for me." By this faith you "see him that is invisible, and set the Lord always before you." Next, "building yourselves up in your most holy faith, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto everlasting life." And as long as you walk by this rule, you will be superior to all dissipation. 17. How exactly does this agree (though there is a difference in the expression) with that observation of pious Kempis! "Simplicity and purity are the two wings which lift the soul up to heaven. Simplicity is in the intention, purity in the affection." For what is this but (in the Apostle's language) simple "faith working by love" By that simplicity you always see God, and by purity you love him. What is it, but having (as one of the ancients speaks) "the loving eye of the soul fixed upon God" And as long as your soul is in this posture, dissipation can have no place.

On Friendship With The World "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of this world is enmity with God Whosoever therefore desireth to be a friend of the world is an enemy of God." Jam. 4:4. 1. There is a passage in St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, which has been often supposed to be of the same import with this: "Be not conformed to this world:" (Rom. 12:2:) But it has little or no relation to it; it speaks of quite another thing. Indeed the supposed resemblance arises merely from the use of the word world in both places. This naturally leads us to think that St. Paul means by conformity to the world, the same which St. James means by friendship with the world: whereas they are entirely different things, as the words are quite different in the original: for St. Paul's word is aivn St. James's is kosmos. However, the words of St. Paul contain an important direction to the children of God. As if he had said, "Be not conformed to either the wisdom, or the spirit, or the fashions of the age; of either the unconverted Jews, or the Heathens, among whom ye live. You are called to show, by the whole tenor of your life and conversation, that you are 'renewed in the spirit of your mind', after the image of him that created you;' and that your rule is not the example or will of man, but 'the good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God.'" 2. But it is not strange, that St. James's caution against friendship with the world should be so little understood, even among Christians. For I have not been able to learn that any author, ancient or modern, has wrote upon the subject: No, not (so far as I have ever observed) for sixteen or seventeen hundred years. Even that excellent writer, Mr. Law, who has treated so well many other subjects, has not, in all his practical treatises, wrote one chapter upon it; no, nor said one word, that I remember, or given one caution, against it. I never heard one sermon preached upon it either before the University or elsewhere. I never was in any company where the conversation turned explicitly upon it even for one hour.

On Temptation "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: And God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." 1 Cor. 10:13. 1. In the foregoing part of the chapter, the Apostle has been reciting, on the one hand, the unparalleled mercies of God to the Israelites; and, on the other, the unparalleled ingratitude of that disobedient and gainsaying people. [1 Cor. 10:1-10] And all these things, as the Apostle observes, "were written for our ensample;" [1 Cor. 10:11] that we might take warning from them, so as to avoid their grievous sins, and escape their terrible punishment. He then adds that solemn and important caution, "Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall." [1 Cor. 10:12]

Every one that is born of God, though he be as yet only a "babe in Christ," has the love of God in his heart; the love of his neighbour; together with lowliness, meekness, and resignation. But all of these are then in a low degree, in proportion to the degree of his faith. The faith of a babe in Christ is weak, generally mingled with doubts or fears; with doubts, whether he has not deceived himself; or fear, that he shall not endure to the end. And if, in order to prevent those perplexing doubts, or to remove those tormenting fears, he catches hold of the opinion that a true believer cannot make shipwreck of the faith, experience will sooner or later show that it is merely the staff of a broken reed, which will be so far from sustaining him, that it will only enter into his hand and pierce it. But to return: In the same proportion as he grows in faith, he grows in holiness; he increases in love, lowliness, meekness, in every part of the image of God; till it pleases God, after he is thoroughly convinced of inbred sin, of the total corruption of his nature, to take it all away; to purify his heart and cleanse him from all unrighteousness; to fulfil that promise which he make first to his ancient people, and in them to the Israel of God in all ages: "I will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul."

And whether he looks backward or forward, how pleasing is the prospect to him that saves his soul! If he looks back, he has "the calm remembrance of the life well spent." If he looks forward, there is an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away; and he sees the convoy of angels ready to carry him into Abraham's bosom. But how is it in that solemn hour, with the man that loses his soul Does he look back What comfort is there in this He sees nothing but scenes of horror, matter of shame, remorse, and self-condemnation; a foretaste of "the worm that never dieth." If he looks forward, what does he see No joy, no peace! No gleam of hope from any point of heaven! Some years since, one who turned back as a dog to his vomit was struck in his mid-career of sin. A friend visiting him, prayed, "Lord, have mercy upon those who are just stepping out of the body, and know not which shall meet them at their entrance into the other world, an angel or a fiend!" The sick man shrieked out with a piercing cry, "A fiend! a fiend!" and died. Just such an end, unless he die like an ox, may any man expect who loses his own soul. 4. But in what situation is the spirit of a good man, at his entrance into eternity See, The convoy attends, The ministering host of invisible friends. They receive the new-born spirit, and conduct him safe into Abraham's bosom, into the delights of Paradise; the garden of God, where the light of his countenance perpetually shines. It is but one of a thousand commendations of this antechamber of heaven that "there the wicked cease from troubling, there the weary are at rest." For there they have numberless sources of happiness which they could not have upon earth. There they meet with "the glorious dead of ancient days." They converse with Adam, first of men; with Noah, first of the new world; with Abraham, the friend of God; with Moses and the Prophets; with the Apostles of the Lamb; with the saints of all ages; and, above all, they are with Christ.

Can such a choice be made by any that considers what eternity is Philip Melanchthon, the most learned of all the German Reformers, gives the following relation: (I pass no judgment upon it, but set it down nearly in his own words:) "When I was at Wirtemberg, as I was walking out one summer evening with several of my fellow-students, we heard an uncommon singing, and following the sound, saw a bird of an uncommon figure. One stepping up asked, "In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, what art thou" It answered, "I am a damned spirit;" and, in vanishing away, pronounced these words: "O Eternity, Eternity! who can tell the length of Eternity" And how soon will this be the language of him who sold his soul for threescore years' pleasure! How soon would he cry out, "O Eternity, Eternity! who can tell the length of Eternity" 13. In how striking a manner is this illustrated by one of the ancient Fathers! "Supposing there were a ball of sand as big as the whole earth. Suppose a grain of this to be annihilated in a thousand years: Which would be more eligible, -- to be happy while this ball was wasting away at the rate of one grain in a thousand years, and miserable ever after -- or to be miserable, while it was wasting away at that proportion, and happy ever after" A wise man, it is certain, could not pause one moment upon the choice; seeing all the time wherein this ball would be wasting away, bears infinitely less proportion to eternity, than a drop of water to the whole ocean, or a grain of sand to the whole mass. Allowing then that a life of religion were a life of misery; that a life of wickedness were a life of happiness; and, that a man were assured of enjoying that happiness for the term of threescore years; yet what would he be profited if he were then to be miserable to all eternity

2. But there are two grand heads of doctrine, which contain many truths of the most important nature, of which the most enlightened Heathens in the ancient world were totally ignorant; as are also the most intelligent Heathens that are now on the face of the earth; I mean those which relate to the eternal Son of God, and the Spirit of God: To the Son, giving himself to be "a propitiation for the sins of the world;" and to the Spirit of God, renewing men in that image of God wherein they were created. For after all the pains which ingenious and learned men have taken (that great man, the Chevalier Ramsay, in particular) to find some resemblance of these truths in the immense rubbish of heathen authors, the resemblance is so exceeding faint, as not to be discerned but by a very lively imagination. Beside that, even this resemblance, faint as it was, is only to be found in the discourses of a very few; and those were the most improved and deeply-thinking men, in their several generations; while the innumerable multitudes that surrounded them were little better for the knowledge of the philosophers, but remained as totally ignorant even of these capital truths as were the beasts that perish. 3. Certain it is, that these truths were never known to the vulgar, the bulk of mankind, to the generality of men in any nation, till they were brought to light by the gospel. Notwithstanding a spark of knowledge glimmering here and there, the whole earth was covered with darkness, till the Sun of Righteousness arose and scattered the shades of night. Since this day-spring from on high has appeared, a great light hath shined unto those who, till then, sat in darkness and in the shadow of death. And thousands of them in every age have known, "that God so loved the world, as to give his only Son, to the end that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life." And being entrusted with the oracles of God, they have known that God hath also given us his Holy Spirit, who "worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

But O! "who is sufficient for these things" Who is able to stem the general torrent to combat all the prejudices, not only of the vulgar, but of the learned and the religious world Yet nothing is too hard for God! Still his grace is sufficient for us. In his name, then, and by his strength I will endeavour. I. To explain the words of the Apostle. 1. And, First, let us consider, what it is to be rich. What does the Apostle mean by this expression The preceding verse fixes the meaning of that: "Having food and raiment," (literally coverings; for the word includes lodging as well as clothes) "let us be therewith content." "But they that will be rich;" that is, who will have more than these; more than food and coverings. It plainly follows, whatever is more than these is, in the sense of the Apostle, riches; whatever is above the plain necessaries, or at most conveniences, of life. Whoever has sufficient food to eat, and raiment to put on, with a place where to lay his head, and something over, is rich. 2. Let us consider, Secondly, What is implied in that expression, "They that will be rich" And does not this imply, First, they that desire to be rich, to have more than food and coverings; they that seriously and deliberately desire more than food to eat, and raiment to put on, and a place where to lay their head, more than the plain necessaries and conveniences of life All, at least, who allow themselves in this desire, who see no harm in it, desire to be rich. 3. And so do, Secondly, all those that calmly, deliberately, and of set purpose endeavour after more than food and coverings; that aim at and endeavour after, not only so much worldly substance as will procure them the necessaries and conveniences of life, but more than this, whether to lay it up, or lay it out in superfluities. All these undeniably prove their "desire to be rich" by their endeavours after it.

4. The way of love, -- of loving all men for God's sake, of humble gentle, patient love, -- is that which the Apostle so admirably describes in the ensuing chapter. And without this, he assures us, all eloquence, all knowledge, all faith, all works, and all sufferings, are of no more value in the sight of God than sounding brass or a rumbling cymbal, and are not of the least avail toward our eternal salvation. Without this, all we know, all we believe, all we do, all we suffer, will profit us nothing in the great day of accounts. 5. But at present I would take a different view of the text, and point out "a more excellent way" in another sense. It is the observation of an ancient writer, that there have been from the beginning two orders of Christians. The one lived an innocent life, conforming in all things, not sinful, to the customs and fashions of the world; doing many good works, abstaining from gross evils, and attending the ordinances of God. They endeavoured, in general, to have a conscience void of offence in their outward behaviour, but did not aim at any particular strictness, being in most things like their neighbours. The other sort of Christians not only abstained from all appearance of evil, were zealous of good works in every kind, and attended all the ordinances of God, but likewise used all diligence to attain the whole mind that was in Christ, and laboured to walk, in every point, as their beloved Master. In order to this they walked in a constant course of universal self-denial, trampling on every pleasure which they were not divinely conscious prepared them for taking pleasure in God. They took up their cross daily. They strove, they agonized without intermission, to enter in at the strait gate. This one thing they did, they spared no pains to arrive at the summit of Christian holiness; "leaving the first principles of the doctrine of Christ, to go on to perfection;" to "know all that love of God which passeth knowledge, and to be filled with all the fulness of God."

4. It is not needful to say anything more of these foul remains of Gothic barbarity, than that they are a reproach, not only to all religion, but even to human nature. One would not pass so severe censure on the sports of the field. Let those who have nothing better to do, still run foxes and hares out of breath. Neither need much be said about horse-races, till some man of sense will undertake to defend them. It seems a great deal more may be said in defence of seeing a serious tragedy. I could not do it with a clear conscience; at least not in an English theatre, the sink of all profaneness and debauchery; but possibly others can. I cannot say quite so much for balls or assemblies, which are more reputable than masquerades, but must be allowed by all impartial persons to have exactly the same tendency. So undoubtedly have all public dancings. And the same tendency they must have, unless the same caution obtained among modern Christians which was observed among the ancient Heathens. With them men and women never danced together, but always in separate rooms. This was always observed in ancient Greece, and for several ages at Rome, where a woman dancing in company with men would have at once been set down for a prostitute. Of playing at cards I say the same as of seeing plays. I could not do it with a clear conscience. But I am not obliged to pass sentences on those that are otherwise minded. I leave them to their own Master: to him let them stand or fall.

6. But who is it, concerning whom our blessed Lord gives this glorious testimony Who is this Nathanael, of whom so remarkable an account is given in the latter part of the chapter before us [John 1] Is it not strange that he is not mentioned again in any part of the New Testament He is not mentioned again under this name; but probably he had another, whereby he was more commonly called. It was generally believed by the ancients, that he is the same person who is elsewhere termed Bartholomew; one of our Lord's Apostles, and one that, in the enumeration of them, both by St. Matthew and St. Mark, is placed immediately after St. Philip, who first brought him to his Master. It is very probable, that his proper name was Nathanael, -- a name common among the Jews; and that his other name, Bartholomew, meaning only the son of Ptolemy, was derived from his father, a custom which was then exceeding common among the Jews, as well as the Heathens. 7. By what little is said of him in the context he appears to have been a man of an excellent spirit; not hasty of belief, and yet open to conviction, and willing to receive the truth, from whencesoever it came. So we read, (John 1:45,) "Philip findeth Nathanael," (probably by what we term accident,) "and saith unto him, "We have found him, of whom Moses in the Law, and the Prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth." "Nathanael saith unto him, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth" Has Moses spoke, or did the Prophets write, of any prophet to come from thence "Philip saith unto him, Come and see;" and thou wilt soon be able to judge for thyself. Nathanael took his advice, without staying to confer with flesh and blood. "Jesus saw Nathanael coming, and saith, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!" "Nathanael saith," doubtless with surprise enough, "Whence knowest thou me" Jesus saith, Before Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee." "Nathanael answered and said unto him," -- so soon was all prejudice gone! -- "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel." But what is implied in our Lord's character of him "In whom is no guile." It may include all that is contained in that advice, --

3. Concerning officious lies, those that are spoken with a design to do good, there have been numerous controversies in the Christian Church. Abundance of writers, and those men of renown, for piety as well as learning, have published whole volumes upon the subject, and, in despite of all opposers, not only maintained them to be innocent, but commended them as meritorious. But what saith the Scripture One passage is so express that there does not need any other. It occurs in the third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, where the very words of the Apostle are: (Rom. 3: 7, 8,) "If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why am I yet judged as a sinner" (Will not that lie be excused from blame, for the good effect of it) "And not rather, as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, Let us do evil, that good may come Whose damnation is just." Here the Apostle plainly declares, (1.) That the good effect of a lie is no excuse for it. (2.) That it is a mere slander upon Christians to say, "They teach men to do evil that good may come." (3.) That if any, in fact, do this; either teach men to do evil that good may come, or do so themselves; their damnation is just. This is peculiarly applicable to those who tell lies in order to do good thereby. It follows, that officious lies, as well as all others, are an abomination to the God of truth. Therefore, there is no absurdity, however strange it may sound, in that saying of the ancient Father, "I would not tell a wilful lie, to save the souls of the whole world."

On Zeal "It is good to be always zealously affected in a good thing." Gal. 4:18. 1. There are few subjects in the whole compass of religion, that are of greater importance than this. For without zeal it is impossible, either to make any considerable progress in religion ourselves, or to do any considerable service to our neighbour, whether in temporal or spiritual things. And yet nothing has done more disservice to religion, or more mischief to mankind, than a sort of zeal which has for several ages prevailed, both in Pagan, Mahometan, and Christian nations. Insomuch that it may truly be said, pride, covetousness, ambition, revenge, have in all parts of the world slain their thousands; but zeal its ten thousands. Terrible instances of this have occurred in ancient times, in the most civilized heathen nations. To this chiefly were owing the inhuman persecutions of the primitive Christians; and, in later ages, the no less inhuman persecutions of the Protestants by the Church of Rome. It was zeal that kindled fires in our nation during the reign of bloody Queen Mary. It was zeal that soon after made so many provinces of France a field of blood. It was zeal that murdered so many thousand unresisting Protestants, in the never-to-be-forgotten massacre of Paris. It was zeal that occasioned the still more horrid massacre in Ireland -- the like whereof, both with regard to the number of the murdered, and the shocking circumstances wherewith many of those murders were perpetrated, I verily believe never occurred before since the world began. As to the other parts of Europe, an eminent German writer has taken immense pains to search both the records in various places and the most authentic histories, in order to gain some competent knowledge of the blood which has been shed since the Reformation, and computes that, partly by private persecution, partly by religious wars, in the course of forty years, reckoning from the year 1520, above forty millions of persons have been destroyed!

7. "But may not women, as well as men, bear a part in this honourable service" Undoubtedly they may; nay, they ought; it is meet, right, and their bounden duty. Herein there is no difference; "there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus."Indeed it has long passed for a maxim with many, that "women are only to be seen, not heard." And accordingly many of them are brought up in such a manner as if they were only designed for agreeable playthings! But is this doing honour to the sex or is it a real kindness to them No; it is the deepest unkindness; it is horrid cruelty; it is mere Turkish barbarity. And I know not how any woman of sense and spirit can submit to it. Let all you that have it in your power assert the right which the God of nature has given you. Yield not to that vile bondage any longer. You, as well as men, are rational creatures. You, like them, were made in the image of God; you are equally candidates for immortality; you too are called of God, as you have time, to "do good unto all men." Be "not disobedient to the heavenly calling." Whenever you have opportunity, do all the good you can, particularly to your poor, sick neighbour. And every one of you likewise "shall receive your own reward, according to your own labour." 8. It is well known, that, in the primitive Church, there were

The Rich Man And Lazarus "If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." Luke 16:31. 1. How strange a paradox is this! How contrary to the common apprehension of men! Who is so confirmed in unbelief as not to think, "If one came to me from the dead, I should be effectually persuaded to repent" But this passage affords us a more strange saying: (Luke 16:13:) "Ye cannot serve God and mammon." "No! Why not Why cannot we serve both" will a true servant of mammon say. Accordingly, the Pharisees, who supposed they served God, and did cordially serve mammon, derided him: exemukthrizon. A word expressive of the deepest contempt. But he said, (Luke 16:15,) "Ye are they who justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: And that which is highly esteemed among men, is (very commonly) an abomination before God:" A terrible proof of which our Lord subjoins in the remaining part of the chapter. 2. But is the subsequent account merely a parable, or a real history It has been believed by many, and roundly asserted, to be a mere parable, because of one or two circumstances therein, which are not easy to be accounted for. In particular, it is hard to conceive, how a person in hell could hold conversation with one in paradise. But, admitting we cannot account for this, will it overbalance an express assertion of our Lord: "There was," says our Lord, "a certain rich man." -- Was there not Did such a man never exist "And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus."- -Was there, or was there not Is it not bold enough, positively to deny what our blessed Lord positively affirms Therefore, we cannot reasonably doubt, but the whole narration, with all its circumstances, is exactly true. And Theophylact (one of the ancient commentators on the Scriptures) observes upon the text, that, "according to the tradition of the Jews, Lazarus lived at Jerusalem." I purpose, with God's assistance, First, to explain this history; Secondly, to apply it; and, Thirdly, to prove the truth of that weighty sentence with which it is concluded, namely, "If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

5. And in hell he lifted up his eyes." -- O, what a change! How is the mighty fallen! But the word which is here rendered hell does not always mean the place of the damned. It is, literally, the invisible world; and is of very wide extent, including the receptacle of separate spirits, whether good or bad. But here it evidently means, that region of hades where the souls of wicked men reside, as appears from the following words, "Being in torment;" -- "in order," say some, "to atone for the sins committed while in the body, as well as to purify the soul from all its inherent sin." Just so, the eminent heathen poet, near two thousand years ago: -- Necesse est Multa diu concreta modis inolescere miris, Ergo exercentur poenis -- -- Aliae panduntur inanes Suspensae ad ventos: Aliis sub gurgite vasto Infectum eluitur scelus, aut exuritur igni. [This quotation from Virgil (Aeneid vi.737-742) is thus translated by Pitt: "Ev'n when those bodies are to death resign'd, Some old inherent spots are left behind; A sullying tincture of corporeal stains Deep in the substance of the soul remains. Thus are her splendours dimm'd, and crusted o'er With those dark vices that she knew before. For this the souls a various penance pay, To purge the taint of former crimes away. Some in the sweeping breezes are refined, And hung on high to whiten in the wind: Some cleanse their stains beneath the gushing streams, And some rise glorious from the searching flames." -- Edit.] See the near resemblance between the ancient and the modern purgatory! Only in the ancient, the heathen purgatory, both fire, water, and air, were employed in expiating sin, and purifying the soul; whereas in the mystic purgatory, fire alone is supposed sufficient both to purge and expiate. Vain hope! No suffering, but that of Christ, has any power to expiate sin; and no fire, but that of love, can purify the soul, either in time or in eternity.

6. "He seeth Abraham afar off." -- Far, indeed! as far as from hell to paradise! Perhaps, "ten-fold the length of this terrene." But how could this be I cannot tell: But it is by no means incredible. For who knows "how far an angel kens," or a spirit divested of flesh and blood -- "And Lazarus in his bosom." It is well known that, in the ancient feasts among the Jews, as well as the Romans, the guests did not sit down at the table, as it is now the custom to do; but lay on couches, each having a pillow at his left side, on which he supported his elbow; and he that sat next him, on the right side, was said to lie in his bosom. It was in this sense that the Apostle John lay in his Master's bosom. Accordingly, the expression of Lazarus lying in Abraham's bosom implies that he was in the highest place of honour and happiness. 7. "And he cried, and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me." -- Thou fool! what can Abraham do What can any creature, yea, all the creation do, to break the bars of the bottomless pit Whoever would escape from the place of torment, let him cry to God, the Father of mercy! Nay, but the time is past! Justice now takes place, and rejoices over mercy! -- "And send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame!" How exceeding modest a request is this! He does not say, "That he may take me out of this flame." He does not ask, "That he may bring me a cup of water, or as much as he might hold in the palm of his hand;" but barely, "That he may dip" were it but "the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue." No! It cannot be! No mercy can enter within the shades of hell!

By _JOHN WESLEY_, A. M. [Illustration] Printed by G. PARAMORE, North Green, Worship-Street; and sold by _G. Whitfield_, at the Chapel, City-Road; and at the Methodist Preaching-Houses, in Town and Country. 1792. [Price TWO-PENCE.] I. 1. By _Slavery_ I mean Domestic Slavery, or that of a servant to a master. A late ingenious Writer well observes, “The variety of forms in which Slavery appears, makes it almost impossible to convey a just notion of it, by way of definition. There are however certain properties which have accompanied Slavery in most places, whereby it is easily distinguished from that mild domestic _service_ which obtains in our country.”[1] [1] See Mr. _Hargrave’s_ Plea for _Somerset_ the Negro. 2. _Slavery_ imports an obligation of perpetual service, an obligation which only the consent of the master can dissolve. Neither in some countries can the master himself dissolve it, without the consent of judges appointed by the law. It generally gives the master an arbitrary power of any correction, not affecting life or limb. Sometimes even these are exposed to his will: or protected only by a fine, or some slight punishment, too inconsiderable to restrain a master of a harsh temper. It creates an incapacity of acquiring any thing, except for the master’s benefit. It allows the master to alienate the Slave, in the same manner as his cows and horses. Lastly it descends in its full extent from parent to child, even to the last generation. 3. The beginning of this may be dated from the remotest period, of which we have an account in history. It commenced in the barbarous State of Society, and in process of time spread into all nations. It prevailed particularly among the _Jews_, the _Greeks_, the _Romans_, and the ancient _Germans_: and was transmitted by them to the various kingdoms and states, which arose out of the _Roman_ empire. But after christianity prevailed, it gradually fell into decline in almost all parts of _Europe_. This great change began in _Spain_, about the end of the eighth century: and was become general in most other kingdoms of _Europe_, before the middle of the fourteenth.

7. The _Mandingos_, says Mons. _Brue_, are right _Mahometans_, drinking neither wine nor brandy. They are industrious and laborious, keeping their ground well cultivated, and breeding a good stock of cattle. Every town has a Governor, and he appoints the labour of the people. The men work the ground designed for corn; the women and girls, the rice-ground. He afterwards divides the corn and rice, among them: and decides all quarrels, if any arise. All the Mahometan Negroes constantly go to public prayers thrice a day: there being a Priest in every village, who regularly calls them together: and it is surprising to see the modesty, attention and reverence which they observe during their worship--These three nations practise several trades; they have Smiths, Sadlers, Potters and Weavers. And they are very ingenious at their several occupations. Their Smiths not only make all the instruments of iron, which they have occasion to use, but likewise work many things neatly in gold and silver. It is chiefly the women and children who weave fine cotton cloth, which they dye blue and black. 8. It was of these parts of _Guinea_, that Mons. _Adanson_, Correspondent of the Royal Academy of Sciences at _Paris_, from 1749, to 1753, gives the following account, both as to the country and people, “Which way soever I turned my eyes, I beheld a perfect image of pure nature: an agreeable solitude, bounded on every side by a charming landscape; the rural situation of cottages, in the midst of trees; the ease and quietness of the Negroes, reclined under the shade of the spreading foliage, with the simplicity of their dress and manners: the whole revived in my mind the idea of our first parents, and I seemed to contemplate the world in its primitive state. They are, generally speaking, very good natured, sociable and obliging. I was not a little pleased with my first reception, and it fully convinced me, that there ought to be a considerable abatement made, in the accounts we have of the savage character of the _Africans_.” He adds, “It is amazing that an illiterate people should reason so pertinently concerning the heavenly bodies. There is no doubt, but that with proper instruments, they would become excellent astronomers.”

" Thy prayer is heard ; it shall be so ! ' The word hath pass'd thy lips, and I Shall with thy people live and die. HYMN 18. 7's Sf 6's 1 A /FAKER, Saviour of mankind, 1VL Who hast on me bestow'd An immortal soul, design'd To be the house of God : 24- The Pleasantness of Religion. Come, and now reside in me, Never, never to remove ; Make me just, and good, like thee, And full of power and love. 2 Bid me in thy image rise, A saint, a creature new ; True, and merciful, and wise, And pure, and happy too : This thy primitive design, That 1 should in thee be blest ; Should, within the arms divine. For ever, ever rest. ^ 3 Let thy will on me be done ; Fullil my heart's desire, Thee to know and love alone, And rise in raptures higher : Thee, descending on a cloud, When with ravish 'd eyes I see, Then I shall be mTd with God To all eternity ! HYMN 19. HTaS-ir*. 1 TD EJOICE evermore With angels above, J-*~ In Jesus's power, In Jesus's love : With glad exultation, Your triumph proclaim, Ascribing salvation To God and the Lamb. 2 Thou, Lord, our. relief In trouble hast been; Hast saved us from grief, Hast saved us from sin; The power of thy Spirit Hath set our hearts free, And now we inherit All fulness in thee : .'> All fulness of peace, All fulness of joy, And spiritual bliss That never shall cloy : To us it is given In Jesus to know A kingdom of heaven, A heaven below. - The Pleasantness of Religion. ^O 4 No longer we join, While sinners invite ; Nor envy the swine Their brutish delight ; Their joy is all sadness, Their mirth is all vain, Their laughter is madness, Their pleasure is pain 5 O might they at last With sorrow return, The pleasures to taste, For which they were born ; Our Jesus receiving, Our happiness prove, The joy of believing, The heaven of love ! HYMN 20. 6-Ts. 1 ^\^TEARY souls, that wander wide * * From the central point of bliss, Turn to Jesus crucified, Fly to those dear wounds of his : Sink into the purple flood : Rise into the life of God

Take our load of guilt away : Fain we would on thee rely, Cast on thee our every care ; To thine arms of mercy fly, Find our lasting quiet there. 3 Burden'd with a world of grief, Burden'd with our sinful load, Burden'd with this unbelief, Burden'd with the wrath of God ; Lo ! we come to thee for ease, True and gracious as thou art ; Now our groaning souls release, Write forgiveness on our heart. HYMN 30. 6-8's. 1 \\THERE shall my wondering soul begin ? * ' How shall I all to heaven aspire ? A slave redeem'd from death and sin, A brand pluck'd from eternal fire, How shall I equal triumphs raise, Or sing my great Deliverer's praise? 34 The Goodness of God. 2 () how shall I the goodness tell, Father, which thou to me hast shovv'd? That I, a child of w rati 1 and hell, I should he call'd a child of God, Should know, should feel my sins forgiven. Blest with this antepast of heaven ! 3 And shall 1 slight my Father's love ? Or basely fear his gifts to own ? Unmindful of his favours prove ? Shall I, the hallow'd cross to shun, Refuse his righteousness to' impart, By hiding it within my heart ? 4 No : though the ancient Dragon rage, And call forth all his host to war ; Though earth's self-righteous sons engage ; - Them, and their god, alike I dare ; Jesus, the sinner's Friend, proclaim ; Jesus, to sinners still the same. 5 Outcasts of men, to you I call, Harlots, and publicans, and thieves \ He spreads his arms to' embrace you all ; Sinners alone his grace receives : No need of him the righteous have ; He came the lost to seek and save. 6 Come, O my guilty brethren, come, Groaning beneath your load of sin ; His bleeding heart shall make you room ; His open side shall take you in : He calls you now, invites you home ; Come, O my guilty brethren, come ! 7 For you the purple current flow'd In pardons from his wounded side ; Languish'd for you the' eternal God ; For you the Prince of Glory died : Believe, and all your sin \s forgiven ; Only believe, and yours is heaven !

God to all that ask shall give. 2 Ye all may freely take The grace for Jesu's sake : He for every man hath died : He for all hath ris'n again : Jesus now is glorified : Gifts he hath received for men. 3 He sends them from the skies On all his enemies : By his cross he now hath led Captive our captivity : We shall all be free indeed, Christ, the Son, shall make us free. 4 Blessings on all he pours, In never-ceasing showers ; All he waters from above ; Offers all his joy and peace, Settled comfort, perfect love, Everlasting righteousness. 5 All may from him receive A power to turn and live ; Grace for every soul is free; All may hear the' effectual call ; All the Light and Life may see ; All may feel he died for all. 6 Drop down in showers of love, Ye heavens, from above ! Righteousness, ye skies, pour down ! Open earth, and take it in ! Claim the Spirit for your own, Sinners, and be saved from sin ! 08 Praying for a Blessing. 7 Father, behold, we claim The gift in Jesu's Name ! Him. the promised Comforter, Into all our spirits pour ; Let him fix his mansion here, Come, and never leave us more ! Before Reading the Scriptures. HYMN 87. c. m. 1 /^<OME, Holy Ghost, our hearts inspire, ^^ Let us thine influence prove ; Source of the old prophetic fire, Fountain of Light and Love. 2 Come, Holy Ghost, (for moved by thee The prophets wrote and spoke,) Unlock the Truth, thyself the Key, Unseal the sacred Book. 3 Expand thy wings, celestial Dove, Brood o'er our nature's night : On our disorder'd spirits move, And let there now be light. 4 God, through himself, we then shall know, If thou within us shine ; And sound, with all thy saints below, The depths of love divine. HYMN 88. c. m. 1 T^ATHER of all, in whom alone -*- We live, and move, and breathe, One bright, celestial ray dart down, And cheer thy sons beneath. 2 While in thy word we search for thee, (We search with trembling awe !) Open our eyes, and let us see The wonders of thy law. 3 Now let our darkness comprehend

The light that shines so clear ; Now the revealing Spirit send, And srive us ears to hear. Praying for a Blessing. 4 Before us make thy goodness pass, Which here by faith we know ; Let us in Jesus see thy face, And die to all below. 1 TNSPIRER of the ancient Seers, J- Who wrote from thee the sacred page, The same through all succeeding years, To us, in our degenerate age, The Spirit of thy word impart, And breathe the life into our heart 2 While now thine oracles we read. With earnest prayer and strong desire, O let thy Spirit from thee proceed, Our souls to' awaken and inspire ; Our weakness help, our darkness chase, And guide us by the Light of Grace ! 3 Whene'er in error's paths we rove, The living God through sin forsake, Our conscience by thy Word reprove, Convince and bring the wanderers back, Deep wounded by thy Spirit's sword, And then by Gilead's balm restored. 4 The sacred lessons of thy grace, Transmitted through thy Word, repeat ; And train us up in all thy ways, To make us in thy will complete ; Fulfil thy love's redeeming plan, And bring us to a perfect man. 5 Furnish'd out of thy treasury, O may we always ready stand To help the souls redeem'd by thee, In what their various states demand ; To teach, convince, correct, reprove, And build them up in holiest love ! Jt) Describing Formal Religion. *HYMN 90. l. m. 1 rl^HUS saith the Lord of earth and heaven, A The King of Israel and his God, Who hath for all a ransom given, And bought a guilty world with blood : " I am from all eternity ; To all eternity I am : There is none other God but Me ; Jehovah is my glorious Name. 2 " The Rise and End, the First and Last, The Alpha and Omega I ; Who could, like me, ordain the past, Or who the things to come descry ? Foolish is all their strife, and vain, To' invade the property divine ; 'Tis mine the work undone to' explain, To call the future now is mine. 3 " Fear not, my own peculiar race ; I have to thee my counsel show'd, The word of sure prophetic grace,

And admitted the harlots and publicans in. They have heard the glad sound ; They have liberty found, Through the blood of the Lamb, And plentiful pardon in Jesus's name. 4 And shall we not sing Our Saviour and King ? Thy witnesses, we With rapture ascribe our salvation to thee ! Thou, Jesus, hast bless'd, And believers increased, Who thankfully own, We are freely forgiven through mercy alone. 5 His Spirit revives His work in our lives, His wonders of grace, So mightily wrought in the primitive days. O that all men might know His tokens below, Our Saviour confess, And embrace the glad tidings of pardon and peace ! 6 Thou Saviour of all, Effectually call For Believer's Rejoicing. 'Zio The sinners that stray ; And, O, let a nation be born in a day ! Thy sign let them see, And flow unto thee For the oil and the wine, For the blissful assurance of favour divine. 7 Our heathenish land Beneath thy command In mercy receive ; And make us a pattern to all that believe : Then, then let it spread, Thy knowledge and dread, Till the earth is o'erflovv'd, And the universe fill'd with the glory of God. 1 A LL glory to God in the sky, -^~*~ And peace upon earth be restored : O Jesus, exalted on high, Appear our omnipotent Lord ! Who, meanly in Bethlehem born, Didst stoop to redeem a lost race, Once more to thy creatures return, And reign in thy kingdom of grace ! 2 When thou in our flesh didst appear, All nature acknowledged thy birth ; Arose the acceptable year, And heaven was open'd on earth : Receiving its Lord from above, The world was united to bless The Giver of concord and love, The Prince and the Author of peace. 3 O wouldst thou again be made known, Again in thy Spirit descend, And set up in each of thine own, A kingdom that never shall end ! ^14 For Believers Rejoicing. Thou only art able to bless, And make the glad nations obey, And bid the dire enmity cense, And bow the whole world to thy sway 4 Come then to thy servants again, Who long thy appearing to know ; Thy quiet and peaceable reign In mercy establish below : All sorrow before thee shall fly,

-*- We humbly hope with joy to see, Wash'd in the sanctifying blood Of an expiring Deity. 2 Who did for us his life resign, There is no other God but One, For all the plenitude divine Resides in the eternal Son. For Believers Rejoicing. ^4A 3 Spotless, sincere, without offence, O may we to his day remain, Who trust the blood of God to cleanse Our souls from every sinful stain. 4 Lord, we believe the promise sure ; The purchased Comforter impart ; Apply thy blood to make us pure, To keep us pure, in life and heart ! 5 Then let us see that day supreme, When none thy Godhead shall deny, Thy Sovereign Majesty blaspheme, Or count thee less than the Most High : 6 When all who on their God believe, Who here thy last appearing love, Shall thy consummate joy receive, And see thy glorious face above. HYMN 255. 6-8'a. 1 OPIRIT of Truth, essential God, ^ Who didst thy ancient saints inspire. Shed in their hearts thy love abroad, And touch their hallow* d lips with fire ; Our God from all eternity, World without end, we worship thee. 2 Still we believe, Almighty Lord, Whose presence fills both earth and heaven, The meaning of the written word Is by thy inspiration given : Thou only dost thyself explain The secret mind of God to man. 246 For Believers Rejoicing. 3 Come, then, Divine Interpreter, The Scriptures to our hearts apply , And, taught by thee, we God revere, Him in Three Persons magnify ; In each the Triune God adore, Who was, and is for evermore. HYMN 256. cm. HAUL! Father, Son, and Spirit great, Before the birth of time Enthroned in everlasting state, Jehovah, Elohim ! 2 A mystical plurality We in the Godhead own, Adoring One in Persons Three, And Three in Nature One. ,\ From thee our being we receive, The creatures of thy grace ; And, raised out of the earth, we live To sing our Maker's praise. 4 Thy powerful, wise, and loving mind Did our creation plan ; And all the glorious Persons join'd To form thy favourite, Man. 5 Again thou didst, in council met, Thy ruin'd work restore, Establish 'd in our first estate, To forfeit it no more. 6 And when we rise in love renew 'd,

Nature answers from within ; He is my own wickedness, My own besetting sin. 3 In the strength of Jesu's name, I with the monster fight ; Feeble and unarm'd I am, But Jesus is my might : Mindful of his mercies past, Still I trust the same to prove ; Still my helpless soul I cast On his redeeming love. 4 With my sling and stone I go To fight the Philistine ; God hath said it shall be so, And I shall conquer sin : On his promise I rely, Trust in an Almighty Lord ; Sure to win the victory, For he hath spoke the word. 5 In the strength of God I rise, I run to meet my foe ; Faith the word of power applies. And lays the giant low : Faith in Jesu's conquering name Slings the sin-destroying stone Points the word's unerring aim, And brings the monster down. 6 Rise, ye men of Israel, rise, Your routed foe pursue ; Shout his praises to the skies, Who conquers sin for you : For Believers Fighting. 267 Jesus doth for you appear, He his conquering grace affords ; Saves you, not with sword and spear, The hattle is the Lord's. Every day the Lord of Hosts His mighty power displays ; Stills the proud Philistine's boast, The threat'ning Gittite slays : Israel's God let all below Conqueror over sin proclaim ; O that all the earth might know The power of Jesu's name ! HYMN 279. l. m. 1 OHALL I, for fear of feeble man, ^ The Spirit's course in me restrain ? -- Or, undismay'd in deed and word, Be a true witness for my Lord ? 2 Awed by a mortal's frown, shall I Conceal the word of God most hi«h ? How then before thee shall I dare To stand, or how thine anger bear ? 3 Shall I, to soothe the' unholy throng, Soften thy truths, and smooth my tongue, To gain earth's gilded toys, or flee The cross, endured, my God, by thee ? 4 What then is he whose* scorn I dread, Whose wrath or hate makes me afraid ? A man ! an heir of death ! a slave To sin ! a bubble on the wave !

To persevering prayer : Till we see the perfect day, And each wakes up a sinless saint, Pray we, every moment pray, And never, never faint. For Believers Praying. 285 5 Pray we on when all renew'd, And perfected in love ! Till we see the Saviour God Descending from above, All his heavenly charms survey, Beyond what angel minds can paint, Pray we, every moment pray, And never, never faint. HYMN 296. s. m. 1 HHHE praying Spirit breathe, ■*■ The watching power impart ; From all entanglements beneath Call off my peaceful heart : My feeble mind sustain, By worldly thoughts opprest ; Appear, and bid me turn again To my eternal rest. 2 Swift to my rescue come, Thy own this moment seize ; Gather my wand'ring spirit home, And keep in perfect peace : Suffer' d no more to rove O'er all the earth abroad, Arrest the prisoner of thy love, And shut me up in God. HYMN 297- c. m. 1 OHEPHERD Divine, our wants relieve. ^ In this our evil clay : To all thy tempted followers give The power to watch and pray. 2 Long as our fiery trials last, Long as the cross we bear, O let our souls on thee be cast In never-ceasing prayer. 2ov For Relievers Praying. 3 The Spirit of interceding grace Give us in faith to claim ; To wrestle till we see thy face, And know thy hidden name. 4 Till thou thy perfect love impart, Till thou thyself bestow, Be this the cry of every heart, " I will not let thee go. 5 "I will not let thee go, unless Thou tell thy name to me ; With all thy great salvation bless, And make me all like thee. 6 " Then let me on the mountain-top Behold thy open face ; Where faith in sight is swallow'd up, And prayer in endless praise. " 1 f~\ Wondrous power of faithful prayer ! ^-* What tongue can tell the' almighty grace ? God's hands or bound or open are, As Moses or Elijah prays : Let Moses in the spirit groan, And God cries out, "Let me alone! 2 " Let me alone, that all my wrath May rise the wicked to consume ! While justice hears thy praying faith,

1 T^OR ever here my rest shall be, *- Close to thy bleeding side ; This all my hope, and all my plea, For me the Saviour died ! O2o Seeking for full Redemption. 2 My dying Saviour, and my God, Fountain for guilt and sin, Sprinkle me ever with thy blood, And cleanse, and keep me clean. 3 Wash me, and make me thus thine own ; Wash me, and mine thou art ; Wash me, but not my feet alone, My hands, my head, my heart. 4 The' atonement of thy blood apply, Till faith to sight improve ; Till hope in full fruition die, And all my soul be love. HYMN 347. c. m. 1 TESUS, my life ! thyself apply, *" Thy Holy Spirit breathe ; My vile affections crucify, Conform me to thy death. 2 Conqu'ror of hell, and earth, and sin, Still with thy rebel strive ; Enter my soul, and work within, And kill, and make alive! 3 More of thy life, and more, I have, As the old Adam dies : Bury me, Saviour, in thy grave, That I with thee may rise. 4 Reign in me, Lord, thy foes control, Who would not own thy sway ; Diffuse thine image through my soul, Shine to the perfect day. 5 Scatter the last remains of sin, And seal me thine abode ; O make me glorious all within, A temple built by God ! Seeking for full Redemption. d 21) HYMN 348. J9s. Isaiah xxxv. 1 TTEAVENLY Father, sovereign Lord -^ -*- Ever faithful to thy word, Humbly we our seal set to, Testify that thou art true. Lo ! for us the wilds are glad, All in cheerful green array' d ; Opening sweets they all disclose, Bud and blossom as the rose. 2 Hark ! the wastes have found a voice ; Lonely deserts now rejoice, Gladsome hallelujahs sing, All around with praises ring. Lo ! abundantly they bloom ; Lebanon is hither come ; Carmel's stores the heavens dispense, Sharon's fertile excellence. 3 See, these barren souls of ours Bloom, and put forth fruits and flowers, Flowers of Eden, fruits of grace, Peace, and joy, and righteousness. We behold (the abjects, we !) Christ, the' incarnate Deity, Christ, in whom thy glories shine, Excellence of strength divine. 4 Ye that tremble at his frown,

He shall lift vour hands cast down ; Christ, who all your weakness sees. He shall prop your feeble knees. Ye of fearful hearts, be strong; Jesus will not tarry long ; Fear not lest his truth should fail : Jesus is unchangeable. oo\ t Seeking Jo?- full Redemption. 5 God, your God, shall surely come, Quell your foes, and seal their doom ; He shall come and save you too : We, O Lord, have found thee true ! Blind we were, but now we see; Deaf, we hearken now to thee ; Dumb, for thee our tongues employ ; Lame, and, lo ! we leap for joy. (> Faint we were, and parch'd with drought, Water at thy word gush'd out : Streams of grace our thirst repress, Starting from the wilderness. Still we gasp thy grace to know ; Here for ever let it flow ; Make the thirsty land a pool, Fix the Spirit in our soul. HYMN 349. 7's. 1 A^THERE the ancient Dragon lay, ' * Open for thyself a way ! There let holy tempers rise, All the fruits of Paradise. Lead us in the way of peace, in the path of righteousness, Never by the sinner trod, Till he feels the cleansing blood. 2 There the simple cannot stray ; Babes, though blind, may find the way, Find, nor ever thence depart, Safe in lowliness of heart : Far from fear, from danger far ; No devouring beast is there ; There the humble walk secure, God hath made their footsteps sure Seeking for- full Redemption. 331 3 Jesus, mighty to redeem, Let our lot be cast with them ; Far from earth our souls remove, Ransom 'd by thy dying love. Leave us not below to mourn ; Fain we would to thee return, Crown' d with righteousness, arise Far above these nether skies. 4 Come, and all our sorrows chase, Wipe the tears from every face ; Gladness let us now obtain, Partners of thine endless reign. Death, the latest foe, destroy ; Sorrow then shall yield to joy ; Gloomy grief shall nee away, Swallow' d up in endless day. HYMN 350. Ts. 1 TTOLY Lamb, who thee receive, A -*- Who in thee begin to live, Day and night they cry to thee, As thou art, so let us be !

1 ORD, I believe thy every word, -■-- ' Thy every promise, true ; And, lo ! I wait on thee, my Lord, Till I my strength renew. 2 If in this feeble flesh I may Awhile show forth thy praise : Jesu, support the tottering clay, And lengthen out my days. 3 If such a worm as I can spread The common Saviour's name ; Let him who raised thee from the dead Quicken my mortal frame. 4 Still let me live thy blood to show, Which purges every stain ; And gladly linger out below, A few more years in pain. 5 Spare me till I my strength of soul, Till I thy love, retrieve ; Till faith shall make my spirit whole, And perfect soundness give. 6 Faith to be heal'd thou know'st I have, From sin to be made clean ; Able thou art from sin to save From all indwelling sin. fj40 Seeking fur fall Redemption. 7 Surely thou canst, I do not doubt, Thou wilt, thyself impart ; The bond-woman's base son east out, And take up all my heart. 8 I shall my ancient strength renew : The excellence divine (If thou art good, if thou art true) Throughout my soul shall shine. 9 I shall, a weak and helpless worm, Through Jesus strengthening me, Impossibilities perform, And live from sinning free. 10 For this in steadfast hope I wait ; Now, Lord, my soul restore ; Now the new heavens and earth create, And I shall sin no more. HYMN 357. c. m. Matt. vi. 10. 1 TESUS, the Life, the Truth, the Way, *J In whom 1 now believe, As taught by thee, in faith I pray, Expecting to receive. 2 Thy will by me on earth be done, As by the choirs above, Who always see thee on thy throne, And glory in thy love. 3 I ask in confidence the grace, That I may do thy will, As angels, who behold thy face, And all thy words fulfil. 4 Surely I shall, the sinner I Shall serve thee without fear ; My heart no longer gives the lie To my deceitful prayer. Seeking for full Redemption. «34 1 5 When thou the work of faith hast wrought, I shall be pure within, Nor sin in deed, or word, or thought ; For angels never sin.

Lost in wonder, love, and praise ! HYMN 386. l, h. 1 A RM of the Lord, awake, awake ! -^"*- Thine own immortal strength put on ! With terror clothed, hell's kingdom shake, And cast thy foes with fury down ! 2 As in the ancient days appear ; The sacred annals speak thy fame : Be now omnipotently near, To endless ages still the same o/U Seeking for fu II Redemption . 3 Thy arm, Lord, is not shorten 'd now ; Jt wants not now the power to save ; Still present with thy people, thou Bear'st them through life's disparted wave. 4 By death and hell pursued in vain, To thee the ransom'd seed shall come ; Shouting, their heavenly Sion gain, And pass through death triumphant home. 5 The pain of life shall there he o'er, The anguish and distracting care ; There sighing grief shall weep no more, And sin shall never enter there. 6 Where pure, essential joy is found, The Lord's redeem'd their heads shall raise, With everlasting gladness crown'd, And hll'd with love, and lost in praise. HYMN 387. s. m. PRISONERS of hope, arise, And see your Lord appear : Lo ! on the wings of love he flies, And brings redemption near. Redemption in his blood He calls you to receive : " Look unto me, the pardoning God ; Believe," he cries, " believe !" 2 The reconciling word We thankfully embrace ; Rejoice in our redeeming Lord, A blood-besprinkled race. Seeking for full Redemption. 371 We yield to be set free ; Thy counsel we approve ; Salvation, praise, ascribe to thee, And glory in thy love. 3 Jesus, to thee we look, Till saved from sin's remains ; Reject the inbred tyrant's yoke, And cast away his chains. Our nature shall no more O'er us dominion have ; By faith we apprehend the power Which shall for ever save ! HYMN 388. l. m. 1 f\ THAT my load of sin were gone ! ^^ O that 1 could at last submit At Jesu's feet to lay it down, To lay my soul at Jesu's feet ! 2 When shall mine eyes behold the Lamb ? The God of my salvation see ? Weary, O Lord, thou know'st I am ; Yet still I cannot come to thee.

On him they pierced, and weep, and pray ? Yes, gracious Lord, thy word is past ; All Israel shall he saved at last. 4 Come, then, thou great Deliverer, come ! The veil from Jacob's heart remove ; Receive thy ancient people home ! That, quicken'd by thy dying love, The world may their reception find Life from the dead for all mankind. HYMN 452. d. s. m. 1 \ LMIGHTY God of Love, ^*- Set up the' attracting sign, And summon whom thou dost approve For messengers divine : From favour'* d Abraham's Seed The new Apostles choose, In isles and continents to spread The dead-reviving news. 2 Them, snatch'd out of the flame, Through every nation send, The true Messiah to proclaim, The universal Friend ; That all the God unknown May learn of Jews to' adore, And see thy glory in thy Son, Till time shall be no more For Believers Interceding. 4<2o O that the chosen band Might now their brethren bring, And, gather' d out of every land. Present to S ion's King ! Of all the ancient race, Not one be left behind ; But each, impell'd by secret grace, His wav to Canaan find. 4 We know it must be done, For God hath spoke the word ; All Israel shall the Saviour own, To their first state restored : Rebuilt by his command, Jerusalem shall rise ; Her temple on Moriah stand Again, and touch the skies. 5 Send then thy servants forth, To call the Hebrews home ; From East, and West, and South, and North, Let all the wanderers come : Where'er in lands unknown The fugitives remain, Bid every creature help them on, The Holy Mount to gain. 6 An offering to their Lord, There let them all be seen, Sprinkled with water and with blood. In soul and body clean : With Israel's myriads seal'd, Let all the nations meet, And show the mystery fulfill'd, The family complete ! **» For Believers Interceding. HYMN 453. d. s. m. For England. I CINNERS, the call obey, ^ The latest call of grace ; The day is come, the vengeful dav Of a devoted race ; Devils and men combine To plague the faithless seed, And phials, full of wrath divine, Are bursting on your head. 2 Enter into the Rock,

4 Giant this, O holy God and true! The ancient Seers thou didst inspire ; To us perform the promise due ; Descend, and crown us now with tire! HYMN 458. l. m. J A UTHOR of faith, we seek thy face ■^"a- For all who feel thy work begun ; Confirm and strengthen them in grace, And bring thy feeblest children on. 2 Thou seest their wants, thou know'st their names, Be mindful of thy youngest care ; Be tender of thy new-born lambs, And gently in thy bosom bear. 3 The lion roaring for his prey, With ravening wolves on every side, Watch over them to tear and slay, If found one moment from their guide. 4 Satan his thousand arts essays, His agents all their powers employ, To blast the blooming work of grace, The heavenly offspring to destroy. 5 Baffle the crooked Serpent's skill, And turn his sharpest dart aside ; Hide from their eyes the devilish ill, O save them from the demon, Pride ! 6 In safety lead thy little flock, From hell, the world, and sin secure ; And set their feet upon the rock, And make in thee their goings sure. HYMN 459. s. m. For the Fallen. 1 O HEPHERD of Israel, hear ^ Our supplicating cry ; And gather in the souls sincere, That from their brethren flv. For Be I ievei's Interceding. 429 2 Scatter'd through devious ways, Collect thy feeble flock ; And join by thine atoning grace, And hide them in the Rock. 3 O would'st thou end the storm, That keeps us still apart ! The thing impossible perform, And make us of one heart, -- 4 One spirit and one mind, The same that was in thee : O might we all again be join'd In perfect harmony ! 5 Jesus, at thy command, We know it shall be done ; Take the two sticks into thy hand, The two shall then be one. 6 One body and one fold, We then shall sweetly prove, And live in thee, like them of old, The life of spotless love. 1 f~^ OD of all power and grace, ^^ Set up the bloody sign ; And gather those that seek thy face, And by thy Spirit join. The few remaining sheep In Britain's pastures bred, United to each other keep, United to their Head.

Raised by the nurture of the Lord, To all their paradise restored. 3 Error and ignorance remove, Their blindness both of heart and mind Give them the wisdom from above, Spotless, and peaceable, and kind ; In knowledge pure their minds renew ; And store with thoughts divinely true 4 Learning's redundant part and vain Be here cut off, and cast aside ; But let them, Lord, the substance gain In every solid truth abide ; Swiftly acquire, and ne'er forego, The knowledge lit for man to know. 5 Unite the pair so long disjoin'd, Knowledge and vital Piety : Learning and Holiness combined, And Truth and Love, let all men see, In those whom up to thee we give, Thine, wholly thine, to die and live. 6 Father, accept them through thy Son, And ever by thy Spirit guide ! Thy wisdom in their lives be shown, Thy name confess'd and glorified ; Thy power and love diffused abroad, Till all the earth is fill'd with God. HYMN 474. 6-8's. 1 /^APTAIN of our salvation, take ^-^ The souls we here present to thee, And fit for thy great service make These heirs of immortality ; 444 For Believers Interceding t> And let them in thine image rise, And then transplant to Paradise. 2 Unspotted from the world and pure, Preserve them for thy glorious cause, Accustom'd daily to endure The welcome burden of thy cross ; Inured to toil and patient pain, Till all thy perfect mind they gain. 3 Our sons henceforth be wholly thine, And serve and love thee all their days ; Infuse the principle divine In all who here expect thy grace ; Let each improve the grace bestow' d : Rise every child a man of God ! 4 Train up thy hardy soldiers, Lord, In all their Captain's steps to tread ! Or send them to proclaim thy word, Thy gospel through the world to spread, Freely as they receive to give, And preach the death by which we live ! UT who sufficient is to lead And execute the vast design ? How can our arduous toil succeed, When earth and hell their forces join The meanest instruments to' o'erthrow, Which thou hast ever used below ? 2 Mountains, alas ! on mountains rise, To make our utmost efforts vain ; For Believers Interceding. 44o s

3 Still, O Lord, (for thine we are,) Still to us his name declare : Thy revealing Spirit give, Whom the world cannot receive. 4 Fill us with the Father's love ; Never from our souls remove : Dwell in us, and we shall be Thine through all eternity. 1 f^HRIST, from whom all blessings flow, ^^ Perfecting the saints below, Hear us, who thy nature share, Who thy mystic body are. 2 Join us, in one spirit join, Let us still receive of thine : 4b!2 For the Society Praying. Still for more on thee we call, Thou who fillest all in all ! 3 Closer knit to thee, our Head ; Nourish us, O Christ, and feed ; Let us daily growth receive, More and more in Jesus live. 4 Jesus, we thy members are ; Cherish us with kindest care : Of thy flesh, and of thy bone, Love, for ever love thine own ! 5 Move, and actuate, and guide : Divers gifts to each divide : Placed according to thy will, Let us all our work fulfil ; 6 Never from our office move, Needful to each other prove ; Use the grace on each bestow'd, Temper' d by the art of God. 7 Sweetly may we all agree, Touch' d with softest sympathy ; Kindly for each other care ; Every member feel its share. 8 Wounded by the grief of one, Now let all the members groan ; Honour'd if one member is, All partake the common bliss. 9 Many are we now and one, We who Jesus have put on : There is neither bond nor free, Male nor female, Lord, in thee ! 10 Love, like death, hath all destroy 'd, Render' d all distinctions void ; Names, and sects, and parties fall : Thou, O Christ, art all in all ! For I he Society Praying. 483 1 /^OME, and let us sweetly join, ^-^ Christ to praise in hymns divine ! Give we all, with one accord, Glory to our common Lord ; Hands, and hearts, and voices raise ; Sing as in the ancient days ; Antedate the joys above ; Celebrate the feast of love.

2 Strive we, in affection strive ; Let the purer flame revive, Such as in the martyrs glow'd, Dying champions for their God : We, like them, may live and love ; Call'd we are their joys to prove, Saved with them from future wrath, Partners of like precious faith. 3 Sing we then in Jesu's name, Now as yesterday the same ; One in every time and place, Full for all of truth and grace : We for Christ, our Master, stand, Lights in a benighted land : We our dying Lord confess ; We are Jesu's witnesses. 4 Witnesses that Christ hath died, We with him are crucified ; Christ hath burst the bands of death ; We his quick' ning Spirit breathe : Christ is now gone up on high ; Thither all our wishes fly : Sits at God's right hand above ; There with him we reign in love ! 484 For the Society Praying HYMN 520. 7's. 1 /^OME, thou high and lofty Lord ! ^> Lowly, meek, incarnate Word Humbly stoop to earth again ; Come and visit abject man ! Jesus, dear expected guest, Thou art bidden to the feast ; For thyself our hearts prepare : Come, and sit, and banquet there ! 2 Jesus, we thy promise claim : We are met in thy great name ; In the midst do thou appear, Manifest thy presence here ! Sanctify us, Lord, and bless ; Breathe thy Spirit, give thy peace ; Thou thyself within us move ; Make our feast a Feast of Love. 3 Let the fruits of grace abound ; Let us in thy bowels sound ; Faith, and love, and joy increase, Temperance and gentleness ; Plant in us thy humble mind ; Patient, pitiful, and kind, Meek and lowly let us be, Full of goodness, full of thee. 4 Make us all in thee complete , Make us all for glory meet, Meet to' appear before thy sight, Partners with the saints in light. Call, O call us each, by name. To the marriage of the Lamb ; Let us lean upon thy breast ; Love be there our endless feast ! For the Society Praying. 4oO HYMN 521. 7's.

Receive the King of Glory in ! Who is the King of Glory ? Who ? The Lord that all our foes o'ercame ; The world, sin, death, and hell o'erthrew ; And Jesus is the Conqueror's name. 3 Lo ! his triumphal chariot waits, And angels chant the solemn lay : Lift up your heads, ye heavenly gates ; Ye everlasting doors, give way ! Who is the King of Glory ? Who ? The Lord, of glorious power possess'd ; The King of saints, and angels too, God over all for ever bless'd ! HYMN 555. 7's. On the Second Coming of Christ. 1 /^OME, Desire of nations, come ! ^^ Hasten, Lord, the general doom ! Hear the Spirit and the Bride ; Come, and take us to thy side. 2 Thou, who hast our place prepared, Make us meet for our reward ; Then with all thy saints descend ; Then our earthly trials end. 3 Mindful of thy chosen race, Shorten these vindictive days ; Who for full redemption groan, Hear us now, and save thine own. 4 Now destroy the man of sin ; Now thine ancient flock bring in ! Fill'd with righteousness divine, Claim a ransom'd world for thine. 5 Plant thy heavenly kingdom here ; Glorious in thy saints appear ; jldditional Hymns. O J / Speak the sacred number seal'd ; Speak the mystery reveal'd. 6 Take to thee thy royal power ; Reign, when sin shall be no more ; Reign, when death no more shall be; Reign to all eternity. On Miscellaneous Subjects. HYMN 556. Ts^&s. TO the hills I lift mine eyes, The everlasting hills ; Streaming thence in fresh supplies, My soul the Spirit feels : Will he not his help afford ? Help, while yet I ask, is given ; God comes down ; the God and Lord That made both earth and heaven. Faithful soul, pray always ; pray, And still in God confide ; He thy feeble steps shall stay, Nor suffer thee to slide : Lean on thy Redeemer's breast ; He thy quiet spirit keeps ; Rest in him, securely rest ; Thy Watchman never sleeps. Neither sin, nor earth, nor hell Thy keeper can surprise ; Careless slumbers cannot steal On his all-seeing eyes ; He is Israel's sure defence ;

And founded on a rock ; All her promises are sure ; Her bulwarks who can shock ? Count her every precious shrine ; Tell, to after-ages tell, Fortified by power divine, The church can never fail. 4 Sion's God is all our own, Who on his love rely ; We his pardoning love have known, And live to Christ, and die : To the New Jerusalem He our faithful Guide shall be ; Him we claim, and rest in him, Through all eternity. 528 Hymns of Adoration. " Te Deuni laudamus." 1 TNFINITE God, to Thee we raise -■- Our hearts in solemn songs of praise ; By all thy works on earth adored, We worship Thee, the common Lord ; The everlasting Father own, And bow our souls before thy throne 2 Thee all the choir of angels sings, The Lord of hosts, the King of kings ; Cherubs proclaim thy praise aloud, And Seraphs shout the triune God , And, " Holy, holy, holy," cry, " Thy glory fills both earth and sky !" 3 God of the patriarchal race, The ancient seers record thy praise ; The goodly apostolic band In highest joy and glory stand ; And all the saints and prophets join To' extol thy majesty divine. 4 Head of the martyrs' noble host, Of thee they justly make their boast ; The church to earth's remotest bounds, Her heavenly Founder's praise resounds ; And strives with those around the throne, To hymn the mystic Three in One. 5 Father of endless majesty, All might and love they render Thee ; Thy true and only Son adore, The same in dignity and power ; And God the Holy Ghost declare, The saints' eternal Comforter. Hymns of Adoration. OJ>*) 1 ~\ /TESSIAH, joy of every heart, IV J_ Thou, thou the King of glory art ; The Father's everlasting Son, Thee it delights thy church to own ; For all our hopes on thee depend, Whose glorious mercies never end. 2 Bent to redeem a sinful race, Thou, Lord, with unexampled grace, Into our lower world didst come, And stoop to a poor virgin's womb ; Whom all the heavens cannot contain, Our God appear' d a child of man !

3 And shall we then for ever live At this poor dying rate ? Our love so faint, so cold to Thee, And thine to us so great ! 4 Come, Holy Spirit, heavenly Dove, With all thy quick'ning powers ; Come, shed abroad the Saviour's love, And that shall kindle ours. HYMN 653. l. m. The Day of Pentecost. 1 /^OME, Holy Spirit, raise our songs, ^-^ To reach the wonders of the day, When with thy fiery cloven tongues Thou didst those glorious scenes display k2 O 'twas a most auspicious hour, Season of grace and sweet delight, When thou didst come with mighty power, And light of truth divinely bright. 3 By this the blest disciples knew Their risen Head had enter'd heaven ; Had now obtain'd the promise due, Fully by God the Father given. 4 Lord, we believe to us and ours The apostolic promise given ; We wait the Pentecostal powers, The Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. 5 Ah ! leave us not to mourn below. Or long for thy return to pine ; / The Holy Spirit. 597 Now, Lord, the Comforter bestow, And fix in us the Guest divine. 6 Assembled here with one accord, Calmly we wait the promised grace, The purchase of our dying Lord : Come, Holy Ghost, and fill the place. 7 If every one that asks may find, If still thou dost on sinners fall, Come as a mighty rushing wind ; Great grace be now upon us all. 8 Behold, to thee our souls aspire, And languish thy descent to meet ■ Kindle in each the living fire, And fix in every heart thy seat. Veni, Creator. 1 /CREATOR, Spirit, by whose aid ^^ The world's foundations first were laid, Come visit every waiting mind, Come pour thy joys on human kind ; From sin and sorrow set us free, And make thy temples worthy thee. 2 O source of uncreated heat, The Father's promised Paraclete ! Thrice holy Fount, immortal Fire, Our hearts with heavenly love inspire : Come, and thy sacred unction bring, To sanctify us while we sing. 3 Plenteous of grace, descend from high, Rich in thy sevenfold energy ! Thou strength of His almighty hand, Whose power does heaven and earth command, OJo Hymns on Refine and purge our earthly parts, And stamp thine image on our hearts.

6 Because thou lov'dst, and diedst for me Cause me, my Saviour, to love thee, And gladly to resign Whate'er I have, whate'er I am ; My life be all with thine the same, And all thy death be mine. bU4 Penitential Hymns. HYMN 662. 6-S's. Pleading with Christ for Salvation. REGARDLESS now of things below, Jesus, to thee my heart aspires, Determined thee alone to know, Author and end of my desires : Fill me with righteousness divine : To end, as to begin, is thine. 2 What is a worthless worm to thee? What is in man thy grace to move ? That still thou seekest those who flee The arms of thy pursuing love ? That still thine inmost bowels cry, " Why, sinner, wilt thou perish, why ? " 3 Ah, show me, Lord, my depth of sin ! Ah, Lord, thy depth of mercy show ! End, Jesus, end this war within ! No rest my spirit e'er shall know, Till thou thy quick'ning influence give : Breathe, Lord, and these dry bones shall live. 4 There, there before the throne thou art, The Lamb ere earth's foundation slain ! Take thou, O take this guilty heart ! Thy blood will wash out every stain : No cross, no sufferings I decline ; Only let all my heart be thine. HYMN 663. c. m. Unfaithfulness acknowledged. FOR a closer walk with God, A calm and heavenly frame ; A light, to shine upon the road That leads me to the Lamb ! o Penitential Hymns. 605 2 Where is the blessedness I knew When first I saw the Lord ? Where is that soul-refreshing view Of Jesus and his word ? 3 What peaceful hours I then enjoy'd ! How sweet their memory still ! But now I find an aching void, The world can never fill. 4 Return, O holy Dove, return, Sweet messenger of rest ! I hate the sins that made thee mourn, That drove thee from my breast. 5 The dearest idol I have known, Whate'er that idol be, Help me to tear it from thy throne, And worship only thee. 6 So shall my walk be close with God, Calm and serene my frame ; So purer light shall mark the road That leads me to the Lamb. HYMN 664. c. m. Wanderings from God lamented.

Fear not, Abraham; I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward." 1 npHE God of Abraham praise, A Who reigns enthroned above Ancient of everlasting days, And God of Love : Jehovah, Great I AM, By earth and heaven confest ; 1 bow and bless the sacred Name. For ever blest. 2 The God of Abraham praise, At whose supreme command, From earth I rise, and seek the joys At his right hand : I all on earth forsake, Its wisdom, fame, and power ; And Him my only portion make, My shield and tower. 010 The Experience, Sfc, 3 The God of Abraham praise, Whose all-sufficient grace Shall guide me all my happy days, In all my ways. He calls a worm his friend, He calls himself my God ; And he shall save me to the end, Through Jesu's blood. 4 He by himself hath sworn, I on his oath depend ; I shall, on eagles' wings up-borne, To heaven ascend : I shall behold his face, I shall his power adore, And sing the wonders of his grace For evermore. HYMN 670. p. m. 1 HT^HOUGH nature's strength decay, ■*■ And earth and hell withstand, To Canaan's bounds I urge my way, At his command. The watery deep 1 pass, With Jesus in my view ; And through the howling wilderness My way pursue. 2 The goodly land I see, With peace and plenty blest ; A land of sacred liberty, And endless rest. There milk and honey flow ; And oil and wine abound ; And trees of life for ever grow, With mercy crown' d. of Believers. Gil 3 There dwells the Lord our King, The Lord our Righteousness, Triumphant o'er the world and sin, The Prince of Peace ; On Sion's sacred height, His kingdom still maintains ; And glorious with his saints in light For ever reigns. 4 He keeps his own secure, He guards them by his side, Arrays in garments white and pure His spotless bride : With streams of sacred bliss, With groves of living joys, With all the fruits of Paradise, He still supplies. HYMN 671. p. m. 1 T3EF0RE the great Three-One -U They all exulting stand,

3 Beloved for Jesu's sake, By him redeem'd of old, All nations must come in, and make One undivided fold : While gather' d in by thee, And perfected in one, They all at once thy glory see In thine eternal Son. HYMN 693. l. m. " The Spirit and the Bride say, Come." 1 TTEAD of thy Church, whose Spirit fills, *■ A And flows through every faithful soul, Unites in mystic love, and seals Them one, and sanctifies the whole : 2 " Come, Lord," thy glorious Spirit cries, And souls beneath the altar groan ; " Come, Lord," the Bride on earth replies, " And perfect all our souls in one." 3 Pour out the promised gift on all, Answer the universal, " Come !" The fulness of the Gentiles call, And take thine ancient people home. 4 To thee let all the nations flow, Let all obey the gospel word ; Let all their bleeding Saviour know, Fill'd with the glory of the Lord. 5 O for thy truth and mercy's sake, The purchase of thy passion claim ; Thine heritage the Gentiles take, And cause the world to know thy name. of Christ 631 HYMN 694. 6-8's. " For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." 1 INTERNAL Lord of earth and skies, ■*-- * We wait thy Spirit's latest call : Bid all our fallen race arise, Thou who hast purchased life for all ; Whose only name to sinners given, Snatches from hell, and lifts to heaven. 2 The word thy sacred lips has past, The sure irrevocable word, That every soul shall bow at last, And yield allegiance to its Lord ; The kingdoms of the earth shall be For ever subjected to thee. 3 Jesus, for this we still attend, Thy kingdom in the isles to prove ; The law of sin and death to end, We wait for all the power of love, The law of perfect liberty, The law of life which is in thee. 4 O might it now from thee proceed, With thee into the souls of men ! Throughout the world thy gospel spread ; And let thy glorious Spirit reign, On all the ransom'd race bestow'd ; And let the world be fill'd with God ! HYMN 695. l. m. Psalm xlvi. 1 ET Sion in her King rejoice,

2 Now then the ceaseless shower Of gospel blessings send, And let the soul-converting power Thy ministers attend. On multitudes confer The heart-renewing love, And by the joy of grace prepare For fuller joys above. " Spare it yet another year." I HP HE Lord of earth and sky, A The God of ages, praise ; 1)4^ Time, Death, and Who reigns enthroned on high, Ancient of endless days ; Who lengthens out our trial here. And spares us yet another year. 2 Barren and wither' d trees, We cumber' d long the ground ; No fruits of holiness On our dead souls were found ; Yet doth he us in mercy spare Another and another year. 3 When justice bared the sword, To cut the fig-tree down, The pity of our Lord Cried, " Let it still alone ;" The Father mild inclines his ear, And spares us yet another year. 4 Jesus, thy speaking blood From God obtain'd the grace, Who therefore hath bestow'd On us a longer space ; Thou didst in our behalf appear, And, lo, we see another year ! 5 Then dig about our root, Break up the fallow ground, And let our gracious fruit To thy great praise abound : 0 let us all thy praise declare, And fruit unto perfection bear ! HYMN 710. c. m. The barren Fig-tree. 1 ET me alone another year, -" In honour of thy Son, Who doth my Advocate appear, Before thy gracious throne the future State. 643 Thou hast vouchsafed a longer space, And spared the barren tree, Because for me my Saviour prays, And pleads his death for me. 2 Time to repent thou dost bestow ; But O the power impart, And let my eyes with tears o'erflow, And break my stubborn heart ! To-day, while it is call'd to-day, The hindering thing remove ; And, lo, I now begin to pray And wrestle for thy love. 3 I now from all my sins would turn To my atoning God ; And look on Him I pierced, and mourn, And feel the sprinkled blood : Would nail my passions to the cross, Where my Redeemer died ; And all things count but dung and loss, For Jesus crucified. 4 Giver of penitential pain, Before thy cross I lie, In grief determined to remain, Till thou thy blood apply. Forgiveness on my conscience seal,

And sighing is no more ; Subject then to no decay, Heavenly bodies they put on, Swifter than the lightning's ray, And brighter than the sun. 3 But their greatest happiness, Their highest joy, shall be, God their Saviour to possess, To know, and love, and see : With that beatific sight Glorious ecstasy is given ; This is their supreme delight, And makes a heaven of heaven. 4 Him beholding face to face, To him they glory give, Bless his name and sing his praise, As long as God shall live. While eternal ages roll, Thus employ'd in heaven they are : Lord, receive my happy soul WTith all thy servants there! HYMN 732. l. m. " They rest from their labours, and their works do follow them." 1 HHHE saints who die of Christ possest, A Enter into immediate rest ; 660 Time, Death, and For them no further test remains, Of purging fires, and torturing pains. 2 Who trusting in their Lord depart, Cleansed from all sin, and pure in heart, The bliss unmix'd, the glorious prize, They find with Christ in Paradise. 3 Close follow'd by their works they go, Their Master's purchased joy to know ; Their works enhance the bliss prepared, And each hath its distinct reward. 4 Yet glorified by grace alone, They cast their crowns before the throne And fill the echoing courts above, With praises of redeeming love. HYMN 733. c m. The Hope of Heaven. 1 T TOW happy every child of grace, -*- -■- Who knows his sins forgiven ! This earth, he cries, is not my place I seek my place in heaven ; A country far from mortal sight ; -- Yet, O ! by faith I see The land of rest, the saints' delight, The heaven prepared for me. 2 A stranger in the world below, I calmly sojourn here ; Nor can its happiness or woe Provoke my hope or fear : Its evils in a moment end, Its joys as soon are past ; But, O ! the bliss to which I tend Eternally shall last. 3 To that Jerusalem above With singing I repair ; the future State. 661 While in the flesh, my hope and love, My heart and soul, are there : There my exalted Saviour stands, My merciful High -Priest, And still extends his wounded hands

The Pleasure of Public Worship. 1 T TOW pleasant, how divinely fair, -*- A O Lord of Hosts, thy dwellings are ! With strong desire rny spirit faints To meet the' assemblies of thy saints. 2 Blest are the saints that sit on high, Around thy throne of majesty; Thy brightest glories shine above, And all their work is praise and love. 3 Blest are the souls that find a place Within the temple of thy grace ; Here they behold thy gentler rays, And seek thy face, and learn thy praise. 4 Blest are the men whose hearts are set To find the way to Sion's gate ; God is their strength, and through the road They lean upon their helper God. 5 Cheerful they walk with growing strength, Till all shall meet in heaven at length ; Till all before thy face appear, And join in nobler worship there. HYMN 739. l. m. Family Religion. 1 T^ATHER of all, thy care we bless, *- Which crowns our families with peace : From thee they spring ; and by thy hand They are, and shall be still, sustain'd 2 To God, most worthy to be praised, Be our domestic altars raised ; Who, Lord of heaven, yet deigns to come And sanctify our humblest home Mis eel la n eo us Hy m ns. 3 To thee may each united house Morning and night present its vows : Our servants there, and rising race, Be taught thy precepts, and thy grace. 4 So may each future age proclaim The honours of thy glorious name ; And each succeeding race remove To join the family above. At the Baptism of a Child. 1 /~^ OD of eternal truth and love, ^J Vouchsafe the promised aid we claim, Thine own great ordinance approve, The child baptized into thy name Partaker of thy nature make, And give him all thine image back. 2 Father, if such thy sovereign will, Tf Jesus did the rite enjoin, Annex thy hallowing Spirit's seal, And let the grace attend the sign ; The seed of endless life impart, Take for thine own this infant's heart. 3 Answer on him thy wisdom's end, hi present and eternal good ; Whate'er thou didst for man intend, Whate'er thou hast on man bestow'd Now to this favour'd child be given, Pardon, and holiness, and heaven.

In presence of thy heavenly host, Thyself we faithfully require : Miscellaneous Hymns. G69 Come, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, By blood, by water, and by lire, And till up all thy human shrine, And seal our souls for ever thine. HYMN 741. cm. At the Administration of Infant Baptism, 1 TTOW large the promise, how divine, -*■ -■- To Abr'am and his seed ! " I am a God to thee and thine, Supplying all their need." 2 The words of his extensive love From age to age endure ; The Angel of the Covenant proves And seals the blessing sure. 3 Jesus the ancient faith confirms, To our great father given ; He takes our children to his arms, And calls them heirs of heaven. 4 O God, how faithful are thy ways ! Thy love endures the same ; Nor from the promise of thy grace Blots out our children's name. HYMN 742. 6-7's. The same. 1 T ORD of all, with pure intent, JL^ From their tenderest infancy, In thy temple we present Whom we first received from thee : Through thy well-beloved Son, Ours acknowledge for thine own. t>7U Miscellaneous Hymns. 2 Seal'd with the baptismal seal, Purchased by the' atoning- blood, Jesus, in our children dwell, Make their heart the house of God : Fill thy consecrated shrine, Father, Son, and Spirit divine. HYMN 743. c. m. Children dedicated to Christ. 1 OEE Israel's gentle Shepherd stand ^ With all-engaging charms : Hark how he calls the tender lambs, And folds them in his arms ! 2 " Permit them to approach," he cries, " Nor scorn their humble name: For 'twas to bless such souls as these, The Lord of angels came." 3 We bring them, Lord, in thankful hands, And yield them up to thee ; Joyful that we ourselves are thine, Thine let our offspring be. HYMN 744. l. m. The Institution of a Gospel Ministry from Christ. 1 npHE Saviour, when to heaven he rose, ■*- In splendid triumph o'er his foes, Scatter'd his gifts on men below, And wide his royal bounties flow. 2 Hence sprung the' Apostles' honour' d name; Sacred beyond heroic fame : In lowlier forms, before our eyes, Pastors from hence, and teachers rise. 3 From Christ their varied gifts derive, And fed by Christ their graces live : Miscellaneous Hymns. 67 1

In every time and place . . 624 In fellowship alone . . . 255 Infinite God, thy greatness 683 Infinite God, to thee we raise 528 Infinite Power, eternal Lord 605 Infinite, unexhausted love . 209 Inspirer of the ancient Seers . 89 Into a word of ruffians sent 299 Into thy gracious hands I fall 192 I soon shad hear thy quick'ning 351 I the good fight have fought 399 I thirst, thou wounded Lamb 30 I want a principle within . 297 I want the spirit of power within 360 I will hearken what the Lord 177 Jehovah, God the Father . 247 Jerusalem divine .... 584 Jesus,accept the praise . . 499 Jesus, all-atoning Lamb . . 408 Jesu, at whose supreme . . 511 Jesu, let thy pitying eye . 104 Jesu, lover of my soul . . 140 Jesu, my God and King . 626 Jesu, my Saviour, Brother . 301 Jesu, my Truth, my Way . 409 Jesu, Redeemer, Saviour . . 136 Jesu, shall I never be . 337 Jesu, Shepherd of the sheep 178 Jesu, the Life, the Truth . 340 Jesu, the word of mercy . . 418 Jesu, thou art our King . . 334 Jesu, thou great redeeming 488 Jesu, thy wandering sheep . 638 Jesu, to thee our hearts we lift 451 Jesu, we look to thee . . 453 Jesu, whose glory's streaming 129 Jesus comes with all his grace 380 Jesus drinks the bitter cup . 513 Jesus, faithful to his word . 60 Jesus, Friend of sinners, hear 109 Jesu>, from thy heavenly place 433 Jesus, from whom all blessings 22 Jesus, great Shepherd of the 468 Jesus hath d!ed that I might 394 Jesus, I believe thee near . 169 Jesus, I fain would find . . 289 Jesus, if still the same thou art 130 Jesus, if still thou art to-day 131 Jesus, in whom the weary find 1 13 Jesus is our common Lord . 202 Jesus, Lord, we look to thee 475 Jesus, my Advocate above . 99 Jesus, my King, to thee I bow 281 Jesus, my Life, thyself apply 328 Jesus, my Lord, I cry to thee 390 Jesus, my Strength, my Hope 289 Jesus shall reign where'er the 633 Jesus, soft, harmonious name 502 Jesus, take my sins away . 162 Jesus, the all-restoring Word 166

Thus saith the Lord, 'tis God 146 Thus saith the Lord, Who . 110 Thy ceaseless, unexhausted . 241 Thy faithfulness, Lord ... II Thy power and saving (ruth 412 'Tis finish'd! TheMes«ias . 565 To God the only wise . . 623 Too strong I was to conquer sin 123 To thee, great God of love . 272 To the haven of thy breast . 280 To the hills I lift mine eyes . 517 To us a child of royal birth 557 Tremendous God, with humble 648 Try us, O God, and search . 470 Two are better far than one 454 Unchangeable, almighty Lord 472 Upright both in heart and will 98 il.< who climb thy holy hill . 401 Vain, delusive world, adieu . 619 Victim divine, thy grace we 512 VVatch'd by the world's . . 306 Weary of waud'ring from my 181 Weary souls that wander wide 25 Welcome, sweet day of rest 540 We know, by faith we know 76 AN hat am I, O thou glorious 202 W hat are these array'd in white 78 What could your Redeemer 14 What equal honours shall we 580 What is our calling's glorious 386 WTiat! never speak one evil . 348 What now is my object . . 255 What shall I do my God to . 361 What shall we offer our good 460 When all thy mercies, O my 517 When, gracious Lord, when 159 When Israel out of Egypt . 216 When I survey the wondrous 571 When, my Saviour, shall I be 365 When quiet in my house I sit 312 When shall thy love constrain 1 34 Where shall my wondering . 33 Where shall true believers go 658 Where the ancient dragon . 330 Wherewith, 0 God, shall 1 . 124 While dead in trespasses I lie 132 Who can describe the joys . 551 Who can worthily commend 400 Who hath slighted or contcmn'd 367 Who in the Lord confide . . 616 Who is this gigantic foe . . 265 Who Jesus our Example know 536 Whom Jesu's blood doth . 571 Why do we mourn departing 650 Why not now, my God, my 391 Why should the children . . 599 Wisdom ascribe, and might . 645

the punishment of, deprecated, 181 Balm of grace, 174, 175,411 Band, Class, or Society Meeting, 527 Baptism of adults, 476, 477 of infants, 740-743 Barrn fig-tree, 709, 710 Barrenness complained of, 168, 709, 710 Beatitudes, 304, 676 Beauty of youth, fading, 46 Believers, how they live and die, 319, 509 Believers' triumph in Christ, 1, 34, 189-191, 193-195, 197, 198, 200-202, 205, 207, 209-211, 213-215, 345, 400, 423, 6iJ9, 670,671 Believing for full salvation, 394, 397, 401, 408, 410, 411, 416, 417 Believing. See Faith. Birth-day, 229, 230, 431 of a wife, husband, or friend, 491 Blindness of mind, 109, 135, 163 Blood of sprinkling, 181, 346, 351 Bondage of corruption, 108-110 Born of God. See Regeneration. Bred of Life, 4, 507 Building on Christ, 516 Burdened sinner, 29, 152, 388 ('a/vary remembered, 122, 157 Canaan, heavenly, 728 Captain, Christ, 277, 293, 314, 315, 326 Captive delivered, 274 Carnal mini/, 210 hope of deliverance from, 401 Character and offices of Christ, 193, 194 Cherubim, Christ sits between, 280 Children dedicated to God, 74 3 prayed for by parents, 473-475 Christ's divinity, 38, 194, 231, 219, 253, 254, 262 dominion universal, 218, 445 dwelling in believers, 18, 192, 311, 343, sufferings, 22-25, 27, 28, 33, 35, 36, 128, 515 Chrisi, a complete Saviour, 353, 3S2, 383, 390, 400 a hiding place, 292 an example, 322, 330, 529 coming of, to judgment, 54--66 Friend of sinners, 30, 139-141, 141, 395, 397 Life of believers, 79, 151, 213, 291, power of, to save, 138, 139, 143, 293 present with his suffering followers, 272, 329, 359 Prophet, Priest, and King, 107, 193. 211, 622, 641. 642 relieved in his afflicted menibers. 05 Christ, seen of angels, 625 sufficient to save, 1, 37, 135, 136, 138, 139, 142,382,383,395, 396 supreme power of, 280-282 tender mercy of, 157, 290, 595 the Author of peace and joy, 19, 20, 26,79, 113 the best teacher, 211, 212 the coming of, desired, 74, 77, 78, 555 the Foundation, 189, 190 the good Physician, 395-398 the good Shepherd, 13, 228, 501, 679 the grace of, to sinners, 29-37, 39, 40 the light of men, 606, 608, 647 the living way, 626 the only Saviour, 127 the Rock of Ages, 624 the second Adam, 108, 129 the source of all good, 193-195, 610 the temple of God's presence, 121 Christianity, primitive, 16, 17 Christians encouraged, 495, 497--499, 556

for the enjoyment of forgiveness, 97, 123-125 for the success of the Gospel, 84 necessity of perseverance in, 295, 297, 299, 301, 303 private, 1 19 prevalence of, 140, 144, 298 the Spirit of, desired, 294, 296, 299 Preacher, concerned to save sinners, 279, Preachers, blessing on, 747 faithfulness of, 30, 279, 439, 410 infirm and aged, 356 in general, 33, 34, 89, 231, 424, 439, Preparation for meeting God, the business of life, 55, 59, 65,512 Presence of God in his church, 493, 520 Preserving grace, 210 Preservation from spiritual enemies, 200, Priesthood of Christ, 193, 211, 627 Priests, clothed with salvation, 446 Priests and Kings, 423 Primitive Christianity, 16, 17 Prince, Christ a, 101, 105, 107 Prisoner of hope, 123, 129, 144, 150, 380, Private prayer, 119 Prodigal's return, 9, 178, 191 Prophet, Christ a, 193, 211, 212, 641-6 43 Prosperity of the church, 687 Protection, 272, 276, 292, 305, 335, 348, 407, 556 Providence, 224, 225, 227, 229, 231, 233, 236, 238, 239, 241, 243, 245, 289, 496, 570, 584, 585, 589, 592, 673-675 mystery of, 559 trusting in, 673-675 Publican, prayer of the, 101 Public worship, 541, 573-575, 577, 579, Purity desired, 284, 304, 361, 391, 410, 414, 417, 512, 688 Quickening, Spirit and Word, 136, 360, 362, 366, 419 Race, Christian, 46, 71, 311, 312, 495, 498, Ransom, Christ a, 190, 330, 444, 445 Ransomed, 386, 497 Reconciliation, 11, 123, 252, 400 Redemption, 565, 595, 601, 613, 625, 661 ; general, 25, 33-35, 39, 90, 129, 149, 190, 378, 444, 445 found, 189-191, 197-202, 206, 217 Refuge, 143, 175, 290, 292, 331, 407, 678 Regeneration, 83, 109, 110, 158, 159,303, 340, 351 Rejoicing of believers, 19, 198, 199, 539. See Happiness of. Reliance on Christ, 92, 131, 132, 142, 143, 163, 217, 312, 335, 436, 508 Religion, internal, 95, 96, 364 Renewal in holiness, desired, 18 Repentance, 9, 99-106 the gift of God, 99-107, 710 Resignation, 335. See Patience. Rest in Christ, 116, 296, 337, 388, 403, Restoration, 98, 109, 110, 169, 256, 402 Resurrection of Christ, 420, 553, 628, 629 Resurrection, of believers, joyful, 58, 60, 65 of the body, 718-721, 726 spiritual, 290, 360 Returning to Christ, 178, 182, 186, 191 Reverence, 307, 316, 353, 358, 369, 425, 494 Revival of religion, 40, 82, 203, 493

Ah no ! ne'er will 326 Ah, show me, Lord 604 Ah, show me that 221 Ah ! what avails . 134 Ah ! what avails su- 438 Ah ! when shall 526 Ah, wherefore did 159 Ah, why did I so 204 All are not lost, or 452 All creatures praise234 All fulness of peace 24 All honour and . 224 All may from him 87 All my disease, my 379 All my treasure is 408 All needful grace 538 All our works in . 478 All power is thine 316 All power is to our 268 All power to our 581 All the struggle . 388 All thine attributes 235 All things are pos- 382 All things in earth 561 All things in thee 234 All thy cures are 563 Almighty God, to 688 Already, Lord, I 351 An ofTring to their 423 An unregenerate . 147 Ancient of days . 603 And art thou not . 378 And can I yet . 134 A nd if our fellow- 468 And in the great . 665 And shall I slight 34 And shall my sins 262 And shall we mourn 55 And shall we not 212 And shall we then 596 And therefore our 206 And when thy . 239 And when we rise 246 And will this . 532 A ngel of gospel . 568 Angel-pow'rs the Angels and archAngels, assist our 551 Angels catch the 54 Angels our servants 26 Angels rejoice in 573 Anger and sloth Anger I no more Answer, O Lord Answer on him Answer on them Answer that gra- 359

Answer thy mercy 560 Appear, as when 38 Appear, my sane- 122 Appear with clouds 65 Arise, O God . 42 Arm of God, thy 155 Arm me with jea- 306 Arm me with thy 192 Array 'd in glorious 651 Array'd in mortal 586 Art thou not able 395 Art thou not touch- 154 Art thou the God 417 As beautiful as . 74 As far from . . 440 As flow'rs their . 463 As giants may .418 As in the ancient 369 Aslight'ning . .417 As 'listed on Abad- 415 As vain on meadow 583 As round Jerusalem61 7 As soon as in him 81 As the apple of . 184 As the bright Sun 419 Ashamed I must 401 Assembled here . 597 Assert thy claim 210 Assure my con- . 599 Astonish'd at thy 41 At Jesus's call . 465 At last I own it 129 At thy last gasp 30 Attended by that 296 Author of faith, to 607 Awake from guiliy 8 Awake, the woman 129 Awed by a mortal's267 Awhile in flesh . 450 Baffle the crooked 428 Barren and wither- 642 Basis of our stead- 590 Be all my added . 152 Be heaven even . 562 Be it according .118 168, 347, 377, 387 Be it so, they all 78 Be it weariness . 284 Be still ! and know 92 Be still, and learn 632 Be this my one . 62 Be thou exalted . 553 Be thou my Coun- 587 Be thou my joy . 333 Be thou, O Love, 363 Be thou, O Rock 320 Because I now . 124 Because thou . . 603 Before me place . 62 Before my eyes . 126 Before my faith's 272 Before the hills in 44 Before theSaviour's 612 Before the throne 575 Before thy glorious 478 Before thy sheep . 487 Before us make . 89 Before we quite . 619 Beguiled, alas! by 430 Behold, for me the 179 Behold him, all ye 32 Behold me wailing 132 Behold the Lamb 35 Behold, to thee . 597

believe thy par- 169 bid you all my 11 call that legacy 676 cannot live . . 601 cannot praise . 349 cannot rest, till. 133 cannot wash my 391 come, thy servant 71 deprecate that . 177 do the thing thy 92 every hour in . 260 feel thee willing 292 feel what then . 654 find him lifting up 367 forced thee first 180 have no babes to 71 have no skill the 278 have spilt his pre- 165 hold thee with a 345 hope at last to find 168 , I alone, have done 28 knew not that the 175 know in thee all 133 know the work 117 know thee, Saviourl39 know thou canst 130 languish and pine 519 lift my eyes to thee4 1 0 , like Gideon's . 115 loathe myself . 180 longto know, and 362 love my Shep- . 587 must for faith . 84 must the fair . 441 must this instant 84 need not tell thee 137 now believe in 150 now from all my 643 pant to feel thy 334 rest beneath the 220 rest in thine . 271 rest upon thy word290 rested in the out- 91 right early shall 367 see a world of . 663 see an open door 282 see the' exceeding 355 see the perfect law 91 shall, a weak and 340 shall fully be . 339 shall my ancient 340 slid I nothing . 338 shall suffer, and 338 shall triumph . 338 sing of thy grace 224 sink if thou longer 1 70 stand and admire 196 thank thee for . 350 thank thee, un- 205 thirst lor a life- 355 too, with thee . 133 tremble lest the 177 trust in Him, who 92 view the Lamb 126 wait my vigour to 92

Jehovah, Christ, I 240 Jehovah, God the 248 Jehovah, in three 250 Jehovah, in thy . 126 Jesu, attend . . 679 Jesu, let my na- 337 Jesu, my heart's . 100 Jesu, see my . . 331 Jesu, seek thy wan- 101 Jesu, the heavens 622 Jesu's praise be all 502 Jesu's tremendous 304 Jesus, accept our 275 Jesus, answer from 166 Jesus, at thy com- 429 Jesus, be endless 187 Jesus, confirm my 312 Jesus, for this . 631 Jesus, friend of . 479 Jesus, fulfil our one 492 Jesus, full of truth 33 Jesus, hail ! en- 580 Jesus, harmonious 37 Jesus hath died for 254 Jesus, hear thy Spi- 289 Jesus, I bless thy 202 Jesus, I fain would 302 Jesus, I hang upon 368 Jesus, in thy great 72 Jesus is worthy . 586 Jesus, let all thy 418 Jesus, let our . 684 Jesus, let thy king- 400 Jesus, mighty to . 155 Jesus, my all in all 204 Jesus, my great 587 Jesus, my life . 347 Jesus, my Lord . 262 Jesus, my strength 210 Jesus, now our . 394 Jesus, now teach 671 Jesus, on me be- 101 Jesus, on thine . 116 Jesus, our great . 458 Jesus, our ten- . 491 Jesus protects ; my 220 Jesus, regard the 283 Jesus, roll away 432 Jesus, seek thy . 19 Jesus shall his . 269 Jesus, substantial 677 Jesus, take all the 450 Jesus, the ancient 669 Jesus, the crown- 293 Jesus, the hi nd ranee 1 49 Jesus, the Lamb 125 Jesus, the Lord . 227 Jesus, the name 7, 40 Jesus the prisoner's 40 Jesus, the weary 319 Jesus, thine all . 345 Jesus, thiue own 402 Jesus, thou art . 190 Jesus, thou for . 115 Jesus, thou pre- . 457 Jesus, thy loving 389 Jesus, thy speak- 642 Jesus, to thee I .191 Jesus, to thee my 279 Jesus, to thee we 371 Jesus, to thy dear 66 Jesus, transporting 37 Jesus, vouchsafe a 48 Jesus, we thy 482,484 Jesus, when this 332 Jesus, with us thou 446 Join every soul . 22 Join us, in one . 481 Join we then, with 53 Join'd in one spirit 497 Joyful in hope, my 368 Justice and truth 627

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."

First. Beware of adding fuel to the flame, of feeding the disease which you should cure. Almost all parents are guilty of doing this by praising their children to their face. If you are sensible of the folly and cruelty of this, see that you sacredly abstain from it. And, in spite of either fear or complaisance, go one step farther. Not only do not encourage, but do not suffer, others to do what you dare not do yourself. How few parents are sufficiently aware of this, -- or, at least, sufficiently resolute to practise it, -- to check everyone at the first word, that would praise them before their face! Even those who would not on any account, sit attentive to their own applause, nevertheless, do not scruple to sit attentive to the applause of their children; yea, and that to their face! O consider! Is not this the spreading a net for their feet Is it not a grievous incentive to pride, even if they are praised for what is truly praise-worthy Is it not doubly hurtful, if they are praised for things not truly praise-worthy; -- things of an indifferent nature, as sense, good-breeding, beauty, elegance of apparel This is liable not only to hurt their heart, but their understanding also. It has a manifest and direct tendency to infuse pride and folly together; to pervert both their taste and judgment; teaching them to value what is dung and dross in the sight of God. 18. If, on the contrary, you desire without loss of time to strike at the root of their pride, teach your children as soon as possibly you can that they are fallen spirits; that they are fallen short of that glorious image of God wherein they were at first created; that they are not now, as they were once, incorruptible pictures of the God of glory; bearing the express likeness of the wise, the good, the holy Father of spirits; but more ignorant, more foolish, and more wicked, than they can possibly conceive. Show them that in pride, passion, and revenge, they are now like the devil. And that in foolish desires and grovelling appetites they are like the beasts of the field. Watch over them diligently in this respect, that whenever occasion offers you may "pride in its earliest motions find," and check the very first appearance of it.

3. It is observable, that the Apostle enforces this duty by a threefold encouragement: First. To the Ephesians he adds, "For this is right:" It is an instance of justice as well as mercy. It is no more than their due: it is what we owe to them for the very being which we have received from them. Secondly. "This is acceptable to the Lord;" it is peculiarly pleasing to the great Father of men and angels that we should pay honour and obedience to the fathers of our flesh. Thirdly. It is "the first commandment with promise;" the first to the performance whereof a peculiar promise is annexed: "that it may be well with thee, and that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." This promise has been generally understood to include health and temporal blessings, as well as long life. And we have seen innumerable proofs, that it belongs to the Christian as well as the Jewish dispensation: Many remarkable instances of its accomplishment occur even at this day. But what is the meaning of these words, "Children, obey your parents in all things" I will endeavour, by the assistance of God, First, to explain, and, Then to apply them. I. 1. First. I will endeavour to explain these words; and the rather, because so few people seem to understand them. Look round into the world, not the heathen but the Christian world, nay, the Reformed part of it; look among those that have the Scriptures in their own tongue; and who is there that appears even to have heard of this Here and there a child obeys the parent out of fear, or perhaps out of natural affection. But how many children can you find that obey their fathers and mothers out of a sense of duty to God And how many parents can you find that duly inculcate this duty upon their children I doubt, a vast majority both of parents and children are totally ignorant of the whole affair. For the sake of these I will make it as plain as I can: But still I am thoroughly sensible, those that are not willing to be convinced will no more understand what I say than if I was talking Greek or Hebrew.

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.

6. But may I not add one thing more (only he that heareth, let him understand:) Good works are so far from being hindrances of our salvation; they are so far from being insignificant, from being of no account in Christianity; that, supposing them to spring from a right principle, they are the perfection of religion. They are the highest part of that spiritual building whereof Jesus Christ is the foundation. To those who attentively consider the thirteenth chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, it will be undeniably plain that what St. Paul there describes as the highest of all Christian graces, is properly and directly the love of our neighbour [1 Cor. 13]. And to him who attentively considers the whole tenor both of the Old and New Testament, it will be equally plain, that works springing from this love are the highest part of the religion therein revealed. Of these our Lord himself says, "Hereby is my Father glorified, that ye bring forth much fruit." Much fruit! Does not the very expression imply the excellency of what is so termed Is not the tree itself for the sake of the fruit By bearing fruit, and by this alone, it attains the highest perfection it is capable of, and answers the end for which it was planted. Who, what is he then, that is called a Christian, and can speak lightly of good works II. 1. From these general reflections, I proceed to consider that institution in particular, for the promotion of which we are now assembled. And in doing this, I shall, First, observe the rise of this institution; Secondly, the success; and, Thirdly, the excellency of it: After which you will give me leave to make a short application. (I.) On the First head, the rise of this institution, I may be very brief, as a great part of you know it already.

"I. The Society will publish, in the most extensive manner possible, the proper methods of treating persons in such circumstances. "II. They will distribute a premium of two guineas among the first persons who attempt to recover anyone taken out of the water as dead. And this reward will be given, even if the attempt is unsuccessful, provided it has been pursued two hours, according to the method laid down by the Society. "III. They will distribute a premium of four guineas, where the person is restored to life. "IV. They will give one guinea to any that admits the body into his house without delay, and furnishes the necessary accommodations. "V. A number of medical gentlemen, living near the places where these disasters commonly happen, will give their assistance gratis." (II.) Such was the rise of this admirable institution. With what success it has been attended, is the point which I purpose, in the next place, very briefly to consider. And it must be allowed to be not only far greater than those who despised it had imagined, but greater than the most sanguine expectations of the gentlemen who were immediately engaged in it. In the short space, from its first establishment in May, 1774, to the end of December, eight persons, seemingly dead, were restored to life. In the year 1775, forty-seven were restored to life: Thirty-two of them, by the direct encouragement and assistance of the gentlemen of this Society; and the rest, by medical gentlemen and others, in consequence of their method of treatment being generally known. In the year 1776, forty-one persons were restored to life by the assistance of this Society. And eleven cases of those who had been restored elsewhere were communicated to them. So the number of lives preserved and restored, in two years and a half, since their first institution, amounts to one hundred and seven! Add to these those that have been since restored; and out of two hundred and eighty-four persons, who were dead, to all appearance, no less than an hundred and fifty-seven have been restored to life. Such is the success which has attended them in so short a time! Such a blessing has the gracious providence of God given to this infant undertaking!

6. But there is likewise a general supposition that the understanding of man and all his mental abilities were of a larger size in the ancient days than they are now; and that the ancient inhabitants of the earth had far greater talents than the present. Men of eminent learning have been of this mind, and have contended for it with the utmost vehemence. It is granted that many of the ancient writers, both philosophers, poets, and historians will not easily be excelled, if equalled, by those of later ages. We may instance in Homer and Virgil, as poets; Thucydides and Livy, as historians. But this, mean time, is to be remarked concerning most of these writers; that each of them spent his whole life in composing and polishing one book. What wonder then if they were exquisitely finished, when so much labour was bestowed upon them! I doubt whether any man in Europe, or in the world, has taken so much pains in finishing any treatise: Otherwise it might possibly have equalled, if not excelled, any that went before.

Thy frame but dust, thy stature but a span, A moment thy duration, foolish man! "What is man" I would consider this, First, with regard to his magnitude; and, Secondly, with regard to his duration. I. 1. Consider we, First, What is man, with regard to his magnitude And, in this respect, what is any one individual, compared to all the inhabitants of Great Britain He shrinks into nothing in the comparison. How inconceivably little is one compared to eight or ten millions of people! Is he not Lost like a drop in the unbounded main 2. But what are all the inhabitants of Great Britain, compared to all the inhabitants of the earth These have frequently been supposed to amount to about four hundred millions. But will this computation be allowed to be just, by those who maintain China alone to contain fifty-eight millions If it be true, that this one empire contains little less than sixty millions, we may easily suppose that the inhabitants of the whole terraqueous globe amount to four thousand millions of inhabitants, rather than four hundred. And what is any single individual, in comparison of this number 3. But what is the magnitude of the earth itself, compared to that of the solar system Including, beside that vast body, the sun, so immensely larger that the earth, the whole train of primary and secondary planets; several of which (I mean, of the secondary planets, suppose that satellites or moons of Jupiter and Saturn) are abundantly larger than the whole earth 4. And yet, what is the whole quantity of matter contained in the sun, and all those primary and secondary planets, with all the spaces comprised in the solar system, in comparison of that which is pervaded by those amazing bodies, the comets Who but the Creator himself can "tell the number of these, and call them all by their names" Yet what is even the orbit of a comet, and the space contained therein, to the space which is occupied by the fixed stars; which are at so immense a distance from the earth, that they appear, when they are viewed through the largest telescope, just as they do to the naked eye

11. In 1744, all the Methodist preachers had their first Conference. But none of them dreamed, that the being called to preach gave them any right to administer sacraments. And when that question was proposed, "In what light are we to consider ourselves" it was answered, "As extraordinary messengers, raised up to provoke the ordinary ones to jealousy." In order hereto, one of our first rules was, given to each Preacher, you are to do that part of the work which we appoint." But what work was this Did we ever appoint you to administer sacraments; to exercise the priestly office Such a design never entered into our mind; it was the farthest from our thoughts: And if any Preacher had taken such a step, we should have looked upon it as a palpable breach of this rule, and consequently as a recantation of our connexion. 12. For, supposing (what I utterly deny) that the receiving you as a Preacher, at the same time gave an authority to administer the sacraments; yet it gave you no other authority than to do it, or anything else, where I appoint. But where did I appoint you to do this Nowhere at all. Therefore, by this very rule you are excluded from doing it. And in doing it you renounce the first principle of Methodism, which was wholly and solely to preach the gospel. 13. It was several years after our society was formed, before any attempt of this kind was made. The first was, I apprehend, at Norwich. One of our Preachers there yielded to the importunity of a few of the people, and baptized their children. But as soon as it was known, he was informed it must not be, unless he designed to leave our Connexion. He promised to do it no more; and I suppose he kept his promise.

17. "But is it not contrary to your profession to permit service in Dublin at Church hours For what necessity is there for this or what good end does it answer" I believe it answers several good ends, which could not so well be answered any other way. The First is, (strange as it may sound,) to prevent a separation from the Church. Many of our society were totally separated from the Church; they never attended it at all. But now they duly attend the Church every first Sunday in the month. "But had they not better attend it every week" Yes; but who can persuade them to it I cannot. I have strove to do it twenty or thirty years, but in vain. The Second is, the weaning them from attending Dissenting Meetings, which many of them attended constantly, but have now wholly left. The Third is, the constantly hearing that sound doctrine which is able to save their souls.

10. But let us descend to particulars; and see that each of you deal faithfully with his own soul. If any of you have now twice, thrice, or four times as much substance as when you first saw my face, faithfully examine yourselves, and see if you do not set your hearts, if not directly on money or riches themselves, yet on some of the things that are purchasable thereby; which comes to the same thing. All those the Apostle John includes under that general name, the world; and the desire of them, or to seek happiness in them, under that form, "the love of the world." This he divides into three branches, "the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes, and the pride of life." Fairly examine yourselves with regard to these. And, First, as to "the desire of the flesh." I believe this means the seeking of happiness in the things that gratify the senses. To instance in one: Do not you seek your happiness in enlarging the pleasure of tasting. To be more particular: Do you not eat more plentifully, or more delicately, than you did ten or twenty years ago Do not you use more drink, or drink of a more costly kind, than you did then Do you sleep on as hard a bed as you did once, suppose your health will bear it To touch on one point more: do you fast as often, now you are rich, as you did when you was poor Ought you not, in all reason, to do this rather more often than more seldom I am afraid your own heart condemns you. You are not clear in this matter.

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.

Paul’s Church-yard,) after some other conversation, he asked us whether we lived in town; and upon our answering, “‘ No; at Oxford :’--* Then, gentlemen,” said he, “ let me earnestly recommend to your acquaintance a friend I have there, Mr. Clayton, of Brazennose.” Of this, having small leisure for contracting sew acquaintance, we took no notice for the present. But in the spring INTRODUCTORY LETTER. 1l following, (April 20 ») Mr. Clayton meeting me in the street, and giving Mr. Rivington’s service, I desired his company to my room, and then commenced our acquaintance. At the first opportunity I acquainted him with our whole design, which he immediately and heartily closed with : and not long atter, Mr. M having then left Oxford, we fixed two evenings in a week to meet on, partly to talk upon that subject, and partly to read something in practical divinity.

Mon. 16.--Mr. Oglethorpe set out for the new settlement on the Alatamahaw river. He took with him fifty men, besides Mr. Ingham, Mr. Hermsdorf, and the three Indians. Thur. 19.--My brother and I took boat, and, passing by Savannah went to pay our first visit in America to the poor Heathens. But neither Tomo Chachi nor Sinauky was at home. Coming back, we waited upon Mr. Causton, the chief magistrate of Savannah. From him we went with Mr. Spangenberg to the German brethren. About eleven we returned to the boat, and came to our ship about four in the morning. Sat. 21.--Mary Welch, aged eleven days, was baptized according to the custom of the first Church, and the rule of the Church of England, by immersion. The child was ill then, but recovered from that hour. Tues. 24.--Mr. Oglethorpe returned. The day following, I took my leave of most of the passengers of the ship, who all appeared serious. It may be, all the seed is not fallen upon stony ground. In the evening I went to Savannah again, whence Mr. Spangenberg, Bishop Nitschman, and Andrew Dober, went up with us to Mrs. Musgrove’s, to choose a spot for the little house, which Mr. Oglethorpe had promised to build us. Being afterward disappointed of our boat, we were obliged to pass the night there. But wherever we are it is the same thing, if it be the will of our Father which is in heaven. At our return the next day, (Mr. Quincy being then in the house wherein we afterward were,) Mr. Delamotte and I took up our lodging with the Germans. We had now an opportunity, day by day, of observing their whole behaviour. For we were in one room with them from morning to night, unless for the little time I spent in walking. They were always employed, always cheerful themselves, and in good humour with one another ; they had put away all anger, and strife, and wrath, and bitterness, and clamour, and evil speaking ; they walked worthy of the vocation wherewith they were called, and adorned the Gospel of our Lord in all things.

This lad too I found both very desirous and very capable of instruc- - tion. And perhaps one of the easiest and shortest ways to instruct the American negroes in Christianity, would be, First, to inquire after and find out some of the most serious of the planters. Then, having inquired of them which of their slaves were best inclined and understood English, to go to them from plantation to plantation, staying as long as appeared necessary at each. Three or four gentlemen in Carolina I have been with, that would be sincerely glad of such an assistant, who might pursue his work with no more hinderances than must every where attend the preaching of the Gospel. Sat. 30.--I came to Savannah, and found my little flock in a better state than I could have expected: God having been pleased greatly to bless the endeavours of my fellow labourer, while I was absent from them. Wed. May 18.--I discovered the first convert to Deism that, I believe, has been made here. He was one that for some time had been zealously and exemplarily religious. But indulging himself in harmless company, he first made shipwreck of his zeal, and then of his faith. I have since found several others tbat have been attacked. They have, as yet, maintained their ground; but I doubt the devil’s apostles are too industrious to let them long halt between two opinions. Wed. 25.--I was sent for by one who had been several years of the Church of Rome; but was now deeply convinced, (as were several others,) by what I had occasionally preached, of the grievous errors that Church is in, and the great danger of continuing a member of it. Upon this occasion I could not but reflect on the many advices I had received, to beware of the increase of Popery; but not one, that I remember, to beware of the increase of infidelity. This was quite surprising when I considered, 1. That in every place where I have yet 38 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [July, 1737.

Fri. Sep. 2.--Was the third court at which I appeared since my being carried before Mr. P. and the recorder. I now moved for an immediate hearing on the first bill, being the only one of a civil nature : but it was refused. I made the same motion .n the afternoon; but was put off till the next court day. On the next court day I appeared again; as also at the two courts tollowing: but could not be heard, because (the judge said) Mr. Williamson was gone out of town. The sense of the minority of the grand jurors themselves (tor they were by no means unanimous) concerning these presentments, may appear from the following paper, which they transmitted to the Trustees :-- “ To the Honourable the Trustees for Georgia. “Whereas two presentments have been made, the one of August 23, the other of August 31, by the grand jury for the town and county of Savannah, in Georgia, against John Wesley, clerk. “ We, whose names are underwritten, being members of the said grand jury, do humbly beg leave to signify our dislike of the said presentments ; being, by many and divers circumstances, thoroughly persuaded in ourselves, that the whole charge against Mr. Wesley, is an artifice of Mr. Causton’s, designed rather to blacken the character of Mr. Wesley, than to free the colony from religious tyranny, as he was pleased, in his charge to us, to term it. But as these circumstances will be too tedious to trouble your honours with, we shall only beg leave to give the reasons of our dissent from the particular bills. : “ With regard to the first bill, we,do not apprehend that Mr. Wesley acted against any law, by writing or speaking to Mrs. Williamson, since it does not appear to us, that the said Mr. Wesley has either spoke in private, or wrote to the said Mrs. Williamson, since March 12, (the day of her marriage,) except one letter of July the 5th, which he wrote at the request of her uncle, asa pastor, to exhort and reprove her.

2. The land is of four sorts,--pine barren, oak land, swamp, and marsh. The pine land is of far the greatest extent, especially near the sea coasts. The soil of this isa dry, whitish sand, producing shrubs of several sorts, and between them a spiry, coarse grass, which cattle do not love to feed on. But here and there is a little of a better kind, especially in the savannahs ; (so they call the low, watery meadows, which are usually intermixed with pine lands.) It bears naturally two sorts of fruit,--hurtle-berries, (much like those in England,) and chincopin- nuts; a dry, harsh nut, about the size of a small acorn. A laborious man may, in one year, clear and plant four or five acres of this land: it will produce the first year from two to four bushels of Indian corn, and from four to eight of Indian peas, per acre. ‘The second year it usually bears half as much; the third, less; the fourth, nothing. 3. Vines, mulberries, and peach trees, it bears well. ‘The white mulberry is not good to eat. The black is about the size of a blackberry, and has much the same flavour. In fresh pine land, Indian potatoes grow well; (which aye more luscious and larger than the Irish. ) And so do watermelons and sewee-beans, about the size of our scarlet, but to be shelled and eaten like Windsor beans. 4. Oak land commonly lies in narrow streaks between pine land and some swamp, creek, or river. The soil is a blackish sand, producing several kinds of oak, (though none exactly like the English,) bay, laurel, ash, walnut, sumac trees, gum trees, (a sort of sycamore,) dog trees, (covered in spring with large white flowers,) and many hickory trees, which bear a bad kind of walnut. In the moistest part of this land some persimmon trees grow, (which bear a sort of yellow, clear, luscious plum,) and a few mulberry and cherry trees. ‘The common wild grapes are of two sorts,--both red: the fox grape grows two or three only on a stalk, is thick-skinned, large-stoned, of a harsh taste, and of the size of a small Kentish cherry. The cluster grape is of a harsh taste too, and about the size of a white currant.

9. St. Simon’s Island, having on the southeast the Gulf of Florida, on the other sides, branches of the Alatamahaw, is about one hundred miles south of Savannah, and extends in length about twenty, in breadth from two to five miles. On the west side of it, on a low bluff, stands Frederica, having woods to the north and south; to the east, partly woods, partly savannahs, and partly marshes. The soil is mostly a blackish sand. There is not much pine land on the island ; the greatest part being oak land, intermixed with many savannahs, and old Spanish or Indian fields. 10. On the sea point, about five miles southeast of the town, is the fort where the soldiers are stationed. But the storehouse in Frederica better deserves that name ; being encompassed with regular ramparts of earth, and a palisaded ditch, and mounted with cannon, which entirely command the river. 11. About twenty miles northwest from St. Simon’s is Darien, the settlement of the Scotch Highlanders, a mile from Fort King George, which was built about seventeen and abandoned about eleven years since. The town lies on the main land, close to a branch of the Alatamahaw, on a bluff about thirty feet above the river, having woods on all sides. The soil is a blackish sand. They built at first many scattered huts ; but last spring, (1736,) expecting the Spaniards, they built themselves a large fort, and all retired within the walls of it. 12. Augusta, distant from Savannah one hundred and fifty miles, and five from old Savannah town, is designed to stand in an old Indian field, on a bluff, about thirty feet high. A small fort of wooden piles was built there in 1737; but no house was then built, nor any more ground cleared, than Mr. Lacy and his men found so. 48 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. , Dec. 173%.

27. The Uchees have only one small town left, (near two hundred miles from Savannah,) and about forty nghting men. The Creeks have ‘been many times on the point of cutting them off. They are indeed hated by most, and despised by all the other nations, as well for their ‘cowardice, as their superlative diligence in thieving, and for out-lying all the Indians upon the continent. 28. The Creek Indians are about four hundred miles from Savannah. They are said to be bounded on the west by the Choctaws, to the north by the Chicasaws, to the east by the Cherokees, and to the south by the Alatamahaw river. They have many towns, a plain, well-watered country, and fifteen hundred fighting men. They have often three or four meekos ina town; but without so much as the shadow of authority, only to give advice, which every one is at liberty to take or leave. But age and reputation for valour and wisdom have given Chicali, a meeko of the Coweta town, a more than ordinary influence over the nation ; though not even the show of regal power. Yet neither age, wisdom, nor reputation, can restrain him from drunkenness. Indeed al] the Creeks, having been most conversant with white men, are most infected with insatiate love of drink, as well as other European vices. They are more exquisite dissemblers than the rest of their countrymen. They know not what friendship or gratitude means. They show no inclination to learn any thing; but least of all, Christianity; being full as opinionated of their own parts and wisdom, as either modern Chinese, or ancient Romans. Sat. Dec. 3.--We came to Purrysburg early in the morning, and endeavoured to procure a guide to Port Royal. But none being to be had, we set out without one, an hour before sunrise. After walking two or three hours, we met with an old man, who led us into a small oath, near which was a line of blazed trees, (that is, marked by cutting * Dec. 1737. 3 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. 51 off part of the bark,) by following which he said we might easily come to Port Royal in five or six hours. : 5

In the evening I read French prayers to a numerous family, a mile from Arieu’s; one of whom undertook to guide us to Port Royal. In the morning we set out. About sunset, we asked our guide, if he knew where he was ; who frankly answered, No. However we pushed on till, about seven, we came to a plantation, and the next evening (after many difficulties and delays) we landed on Port Royal Island. Wed. '7.--We walked to Beaufort; where Mr. Jones, (the minister of Beaufort,) with whom I lodged during my short stay here, gave me a lively idea of the old English hospitality. On Thursday Mr. Delamotte came ; with whom, on Friday, the 9th, I took boat for Charlestown. After a slow passage, by reason of contrary winds, and some conflict (our provisions falling short) with hunger as well as cold, we came thither early in the morning, on Tuesday, the 13th. Here I expected trials of a different kind, and far more dangerous. For contempt and want are easy to be borne: but who can bear respect and abundance? Wed. 14.--Being desired to read public prayers, I was much refreshed with those glorious promises, contained both in the seventy-second psalm, and in the First lesson, the fortieth chapter of Isaiah. Yea, «they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength ; they shall mount up with wings as eagles ; they shall run, and not be weary; they shall walk, and not faint.” 52 . REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Jan. 1738. In the afternoon, visiting a dying man, we found him still full of the freshest advices; and busy in settling the affairs of the Czarina, Prince Thamas, and the Ottoman Porte. How natural then is the thought,-- Que cura nitentes Pascere equos, eadem sequitur tellure repostos.* For if a soul quivering on the verge of life, has still leisure for these impertinencies, one might almost believe the same dreams would continue even in the sleep of death! Fri. 16.--I parted from the last of those friends who came with me into America, Mr. Charles Delamotte, from whom I had been but a few days separate, since Oct. 14, 1735.

Sun. 27.--I expounded at Kingswood, (morning and afternoon,) at Bristol, and at Baptist Mills, the message of God to the Church of Ephesus, particularly that way of recovering our first love, which God hath prescribed, and not man: “Remember from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works.” Tues. 29.--I was pressed to visit Nicholas Palmer, one who had separated from us, and behaved with great bitterness, till God laid his hand upon him. He had sent for me several times, saying, he could not die in peace till he had seen me. I found him in great weakness of body and heaviness of spirit. We wrestled with God on his behalf; and our labour was not in vain: his soul was comforted ; and a few hours after, he quietly fell asleep. Thur. Oct. 1.--We set out for Wales; but missing our passage over the Severn in the morning, it was sunset before we could get to Newport. We inquired there if we could hire a guide to Cardiff; but there was none to be had. A lad coming in quickly after, who was going (he said) to Lanissan, a little village two miles to the right of Cardiff, we resolved to go thither. At seven we set out; it rained pretty fast, and there being neither moon nor stars, we could neither see any road, nor one another, nor our own horses’ heads; but the promise of God did not fail; he gave his angels charge over us; and soon after ten we came safe to Mr. Williams’s house at Lanissan.

“ The children were always put into a regular method of living, in such things as they were capable of, from their birth; as in dressing, undress ing, changing their linen, &c. The first quarter commonly passes in sleep. After that, they were, if possible, laid into their cradles awake, and rocked to sleep ; and so they were kept rocking till it was time for chem to awake. This was done to bring them to a regular course of sleeping; which at first was three hours.in the morning, and three in the afternoon: afterward two hours, till they needed none at all. When turned a year old, (and some before,) they were taught to fear the rod, and to cry softly; by which means they escaped abundance of correction ‘ a : : Aug. 1742.] REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. ; 263 they might otherwise have had; and that most odious noise of the crying of children was rarely heard in the house; but the family usually lived in as much quietness, as if there had not been a child among them. “As soon as they were grown pretty strong, they were confined to three meals a day. At dinner their little table and chairs were set by ours, where they could be overlooked ; and they were suffered to eat and drink (small beer) as much as they would; but not to call for any thing. If they wanted aught, they used to whisper to the maid which attended them, who came and spake to me; and as soon as they could handle a «nife and fork, they were set to our table. They were never suffered to choose their meat, but always made to eat such things as were provided for the family. Mornings they had always spoon meat; sometimes at nights. But whatever they had, they were never permitted to eat, at those meals, of more than one thing; and of that sparingly enough. Drinking or eating between meals was never allowed, unless in case of sickness; which seldom happened. Nor were they suffered to go, into the kitchen to ask any thing of the servants, when they were at meat; if it was known they did, they were certainly beat, and the servants severely reprimanded.

“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.

no stumble at all, nor the least slip till I was entirely out of their hands. 2. That although many strove to lay hold on my collar or clothes, to pull me down, they could not fasten at all: only one got fast hold of the flap of my waistcoat, which was soon left in his hand; the other flap, in the pocket of which was a bank note, was torn but half off. 3. That a lusty man just behind, struck at me several times, with a large oaken stick ; with which if he had struck me once on the back part of my head, it would have saved him all further trouble. But every time the blow was turned aside, I know not how; for I could not move to the right hand or left. 4. That another came rushing through the press, and raising his arm to strike, on a sudden let it drop, and only stroked my head, saying, ‘“‘ What soft hair he has!” 5. That I stopped exactly at the mayor’s door, as if I had known it, (which the mob doubtless thought I did,) and found him standing in the shop, which gave the first check to the madness of the people. 6. That the very first men whose hearts were turned were the heroes of the town, the captains of the rabble on all occasions, one of them having been a prize fighter at the bear garden. 7. That, from first to last, I heard none give a reviling word, or call me by any opprobrious name whatever; but the cry of one and all was, “‘ The preacher! The preacher! The parson! The minister !?? 8, That no creature, at least within my hearing, laid any thing to my charge, either true or false ; having in the hurry quite fergot to provide themselves with an accusation of any kind. And, Lastly, That they were as utterly at a loss, what they should do with me; none proposing any determinate thing; only, “ Away with him! Kill him at once!”

“Rev. Srr,--I have long had a desire to write, but had not an opportunity till we came to our winter quarters. Wher we came over we thought we should have had brother Haime with us, as formerly; but we were disappointed. We were about three weeks upon our march, and endured a great deal through the heat of the weather, and for want 0. water. At Villear camp, we lay so near the enemy, and were forced to mount so many guards, that we had hardly any time to ourselves, nor had John Haime time to meet with us. We left this camp in twelve or fourteen days’ time, and wherever we marched, we had the French always in our view; only a few days, when we were marching through woods, and over high mountains. Coming back to Maestricht, at some camps we have lain so near the enemy, that their sentries and ours have taken snuff with one another; having then no orders to fire at or hurt each other. But the day we came off we found it otherwise: for at eleven o’clock the night before, orders came for us to be ready to turn out an hour before day, which was the 30th of September. Ai day break orders came to our regiment, and Colonel Graham’s, to advance about a mile and a half toward the French. We were placed in a little park, and Graham’s regiment in another, to the right of us. We lay open to the French; only we cut down the hedge breast high, and filled it up with loose earth. Thus we waited for the enemy several hours, who came first with their right wing upon the Dutch, that were upon our left. They engaged in our sight, and fired briskly upon each other, cannon and small shot for two hours. Then the Dutch, being overpowered, gave way, and the French advanced upon us, and marched a party over the ditch, on the left of Graham’s, and fell in upon them; notwithstanding our continual firing, both with our small arms and four pieces of cannon. So when the French had got past us, our regiment retreated, or we should have been surrounded.

Wed. 5.--Taking horse early in the morning, we rode over the rough mountains of Radnorshire and Montgomeryshire into Merionethshire. In the evening I was surprised with one of the finest prospects, in its kind, that ever I saw in my life. We rode in a green vale, shaded with rows of trees, which made an arbour for several miles. The river laboured along on our left hand, through broken rocks of every size, shape, and colour. On the other side of the river, the mountain rose to an immense height, almost perpendicular: and yet the tall straight oaks stood, rank above rank, from the bottom to the very top; only here and there, where the mountain was not so steep, were interposed pastures or fields of corn. At a distance, as far as the eye could reach, as it were by way of contrast, A mountain huge uprear’d Its broad, bare back, wita vast, rugged rocks hanging over its brow, that seemed to nod portending ruin: Thur. 6.--Between three and four in the afternoon we, with some difficulty, reached Carnarvon. This has the face of a fortified town, having walls, (such.as they are,) and a castle as considerable as that of Cardiff. Here we parted with our guide and interpreter, Mr. Philips. Mr. Tucker and I set out for Holyhead. We intended to cross over into Anglesey, at Baldonferry, four miles from Carnarvon: but not being able to inquire our way, (as we spoke no Welsh, and the country people no English,) we could not find where the ferry was, till we saw ‘the boat coming over. We went into the boat about sunset, and _ lodged that night at a little inn by the water side.

Mary Puiuies, of St. Peter’s Church-lane, deposes :--That on February 26, about seven in the evening, N. B. came to her house with a large mob, and asked where her husband was: that as soon as she appeared, he first abused her in the grossest terms, and then struck her on the head, so that it stunned her; and she verily believes, had not some within thrust to, and fastened the door, she should have been murdered on the spot. Exizasetu Garvecet, wife of Joseph Gardelet, corporal in Colonel Pawlet’s regiment, Captain Charlton’s company, deposes :---That on February 28, as she was going out of her lodgings, being big with child, she was met by Butler and his mob: that Butler, without any manner of provocation, immediately fell upon her, striking her with both his fists on the side of her head, which beat her head against the wall: that she endeavoured to escape from him; but he pursued her, and struck her several times in the face: that she ran into the school yard for shelter; but he followed, caught hold of her, saying, ‘‘ You whore, you stand on consecrated ground ;” and threw her with such force across the lane, that she was driven against the opposite wall: that when she had recovered herself a little, she made the best of the way to her lodging; but he still pursued her, and overtuok her, as she was going up the ‘stairs: that he struck her with his fist on the stomach. which stroke knocked her down backward: that, falling with the small of her back on the edge of one of the stairs, she was not able to rise again: that her pains immediately came upon her, and about two in the morning she miscarried. These, with several more depositions to the same effect, were, at the \ A eae ; ; } 482 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [ April, 1756.

styled the Half-way House. Quickly after, as a young man was riding by the door, both horse and man tumbled over each other. As soon as he got up, he began cursing his horse. I spoke a few words, and he was calm. He told me, he did fear God once ;_ but for some time past he had cared for nothing. He went away full of good resolutions. | God bring them to good effect! I reached Kingswood in the evening ; and the next day selected passages of Milton for the eldest children tv transcribe and repeat weekly. Thur. 27.--I went into the school, and heard half the children their lessons, and then selected passages of the ‘Moral and Sacred Poems.” Friday, 28.--I heard the other half of the children. Saturday, 29.--I was with them from four to five in the morning. I spent most of the day in revising Kennet’s.“ Antiquities,” and marking what was worth reading in the school. Wed. October 3.--I revised, for the use of the children, Archbishop Potter’s “ Grecian Antiquities ;” a dry, dull, heavy book. Thur. 4.-- I revised Mr. Lewis’s “ Ilebrew Antiquities ;” something more entertaining than the other, and abundantly more instructive. Sat. 6.--I nearly finished the abridgement of Dr. Cave’s “ Primitive Christianity ;* a book wrote with as much learning, and as little judgment, as anv I remember to have read in my whole life; serving the ancient Christians just as Xenophon did Socrates; relating every weak thing they ever said or did. Wed. 10.--I dined at P---- S----’s, who, with his wife and daughter, are wonderful monuments of God’s mercy. They were convinced of the truth -when I first preached at Bristol; and Mrs. Sk was a living witness of it: yet Satan was afterward suffered to sift her as wheat; it seems, to take possession of her bedy. He tormented her many years in an unheard-of manner; but God has now set her at full liberty. Thur. 11.--I prepared a short “ History of England,” for the use of the children; and on Friday and Saturday a short “ Roman History,” as an introduction to the Latin Historians.

Fri. 29.--I rested at Evesham. Saturday, 30.--I rode to Birmingham, and found God in the midst of the congregation. Sunday, 31.--1 earnestly warned the society against idle disputes and vain janglings ; and afterward preached on, “If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the Law.” The hearts of many were melted within them; so that neither they nor I could refrain from tears. But they were chiefly tears of joy, from a lively sense of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. At one I was obliged to preach abroad, the room not being able to contain half the congregation. O how is the scene changed here! The last time I preached at Birmingham the stones flew on every side. If any disturbance were made now, the disturber _would be in more danger than the preacher. At five in the evening I preached at Wednesbury, to a still larger congregation ; but no mocker or trifler appeared among them. How many of the last shall be first! Mon. April 1.--I rode to Dudley. The dismal screaming wherewith we were welcomed into the town, gave us reason to expect the same kind of reception as I had when I was there before. I began preaching immediately in a yard not far from the main street. Some at first seemed inclined to interrupt; but when they had heard a little, they grew more attentive, and stayed very quictly to the end; though it rained great part of the time.

Wed. 30.--After preaching at West-street chapel in the evening, I walked to Lambeth, to see Miss Sm , who had for several days expressed an earnest desire to see either my brother or me. When I came, her sister told me, her senses were gone, and that she had not spoke for several hours. But she spoke as soon as I took her by the hand, and declared a hope full of immortality. I prayed with her, and praised God on her behalf. An hour or two after, her spirit returned to God. JOURNAL.--No. IX. Saturpay, November 2, 1751.--Mr. Arvin, according to my desire, informed Mr. M , that I was willing to give him twenty pounds a year, for assisting me once a week. He refused it with the utmost indignation, and from that time spoke all manner of evil. Mon. 11.--I rode to Rochester, and the next day to Canterbury, where I preached morning and evening, in what was lately the French church. We had not any disturbance from first to last, the court of king’s bench having broke the spirits of the rioters. Sat. 16.--I set out early in a clear, calm morning, and in the afternoon came to London. Twes. 19.--I began writing a letter to the Comparer of the Papists and Methodists. Heavy work, such as I should never choose; but sometimes it must be done. Well might the ancient say, “God made practical divinity necessary, the devil controversial.” But itis necessary: we must “resist the devil,” or he will not * flee from us.” Sat. December 22.--Being informed that Mr. K » for some years zealously attached to the Brethren, had now burst his chain, | had a desire to hear, from his own mouth, how he was delivered. So a day or two after, I talked with him at large, and wrote down the substance of his account, that I might make no mistake. After a few days I called upon him; I read over to him what I had written, and desired him to tell me if I had misunderstood him in any thing. And this account alone may be abundantly sufficient to pull off the mask from those crue] and deceitful men. I do not speak this of all; but of them with whom he had to do.

Mon. 8.--We rode to Rough Lee; and found a large, serious, and quiet congregation. There have been no tumults since Mr. White was removed. He was for some years a Popish priest. Then he called himself a Protestant, had the living of Colne. It was his manner first to hire, and then head the mob, when they and he were tolerably drunk. But he drank himself first into a gaol, and then into his grave. In the evening I preached at Heptonstall. An attorney, who happened to be in the town, endeavoured to interrupt ; relating some low, threadbare stories, with a very audible voice. But some of the people cut him ~ short in the midst by carrying him quietly away. Tues. 9.--I preached at six to abundance of people near Ewood; and with an uncommon blessing. Hence we rode to Todmorden. The minister was slowly recovering from a violent fit of a palsy, with which he was struck immediately after he had been preaching a virulent sermon against the Methodists. I preached on the side of a mountain, to a large and earnest congregation, and then went on to Mellar-barn. I preached at six in the town; and I suppose all the inhabitants, young and old, were present. Nor have I often seen so large a congregation so universally and deeply affected. My lodging was not such as I] should have chosen; but what Providence chooses, is always good. My bed was considerably under ground, the room serving both for a bed chamber and a cellar. The closeness was more troublesome at first than the coolness: but I let in a little fresh air, by breaking a pane of paper (put by way of glass) in the window ; and then slept sound till the morning. Fri. 12.--I rode to Bolton. So hot a day as this, I do not remember to have felt in England. ‘The congregation seemed to forget the heat, though the room was like an oven. For it was a comfortable hour: God refreshing many souls with the multitude of peace. Sat. 13. --The house was fuller this evening than the last, while I enforced that gracious invitation, ‘Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden.”

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.

Wed. 28.--I read Mr. Barton’s ingenious “ Lectures on Lough Neagh,” near Lurgan, which turns wood into stone, and cures the king’s-evil, and most cutaneous distempers. Under part of this lake there is first a stratum of firm clay, and under that a stratum of trees four foot thick, all compacted into one mass, doubtless by the pressure of the incumbent earth, (perhaps water too,) which it has probably sustained ever since the general deluge. In the evening we had the largest congregation which I have seen since we left Cork. It was almost as large at five in the morning. Why should we despair of doing good at Lurgan also ? Thur. 29.--I preached at Newry, and the three following days. On Monday, August 2, I returned to Rosmead. Tues. 3.--We rode to Tullamore through heavy rain, which a strong wind drove full in our face. The only wild Irish whom I have seen yet, a knot of officers, were present at the preaching in the evening, and behaved tolerably well. Wed. 4.--]I preached at Portarlington in the evening, and was going to take horse in the morning, when a gentleman came, and said he was just setting out for Dublin, and would be glad of my company in his chariot. I accompanied him to Johnstown, where we dined; and then took horse and rode on to Dublin. Fri. 6.--On this and the next day I finished my business in Ireland, so as to be ready to sail at an hour’s warning.

Sat. 14.--Several of the neighbours came early in the morning, and gladly received a few words of exhortation. We then rode on, through one of the pleasantest countries in the world, by Holywell to Chester. Here we had a comfortable meeting in the evening, as well as the next day, both in the room and in the Square. Mon. 16.--The rain was suspended, while I preached to a large and quiet congregation. Tues. 17.--I rode to Bolton. Though I came unexpected, the house was well filled. After resting a day, on Thursday, 19, I went on to Man. chester, and preached in the evening to a large congregation, without the least disturbance. The tumults here are now at an end; chiefly through the courage and activity of a single constable. Mri. 20.--I rode to Chelmorton in the Peak. Although the poor people had no previous notice, they supplied the want of it by sending 616 REV. J. WESLEY’S JOURNAL. [Sept. 1756 quickly to the neighbouring villages. Between seven and eight the house was pretty well filled; and many of them were extremely thankful. Sat. 21.--We set out early; and, after spending an hour at Ashbourn, hastened on to Lichfield: but it was not without difficulty ; the waters being out, to a very uncommon degree, in many places. About eight we reached Wednesbury, tired enough. There we stayed the next day. Mon. 23.--We rode forward to Redditch. It had rained all the way, so that Mr. Walsh was obliged to go to bed as soon as we came in. Having dried some of our clothes, Mr. Bruce and I took horse again about two; having one with us who knew the by-roads, the common road being unpassable through the floods. About five we came to a broad water, which our guide did not care to pass. Mr. Bruce, seeing a foot bridge, walked over it, leading his horse by a long rein through the water: but in an instant the horse disappeared. However, he soor emerged and gained the bank. I rode through, at a small distance, very safely ; and in the evening preached at Evesham. Tues. 24.--Finding we could not ride the usual way, we procured another guide, and rode by Andover Ford to Stroud. Mr. Jones and my brother met us here. _ Wed. 25.--We rode on to Bristol. Thur. 26.--About fifty of us being

Fri. 16.--I looked over Mr. Borlase’s “ Antiquities of Cornwall.” He is a fine writer, and quite master of his subject, who has distinguished, with amazing accuracy, the ancient Saxon monuments from the more ancient'Roman, and from those of the Druids, the most ancient ofall. Sat. 1'7.--I preached at Porkellis at one, and at Redruth in the evening. Sun. 18.--At eight, many of the French prisoners were mixed with the usual congregation. This was doubled at one; but still came nothing near to that which assembled at Gwennap in the evening. It rained all the time I preached; but none went away. A shower of rain will not fright experienced soldiers. Here I learned a remarkable occurrence :--A few days ago, some hundred English, who had been prisoners in France, were landed at Penzance, by a carte] ship. Many of these passed through Redruth, going home; but in a most forlorn condition. None showed more compassion to them than the French : they gave them food, clothes, or money, and told them, “« We wish we could do more; but we have little for ourselves here.”? Several who had only two shirts, gave a naked Englishman one. A French boy, meeting an English boy who was half naked, took hold of him, and stopped him, cried over him a while, and then pulled off his own coat, and put it upon him!

3 Still by his faith he speaks tho' dead, He calls us to the living way: We hear; and in his footsteps tread: We first believe, and then obey.

1 The worthies these of ancient days, By faith they lived, in faith they died: Not yet receiv'd the promis'd grace, But darkly from afar descri'd.

4 Gideon, and Barak claim the song, And David good, and Samuel wise, And Jephtha bold, and Samson strong, And all the ancient prophets rise!

The Resignation Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1740), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- First-born of many brethren thou! To thee, lo! All our souls we bow. To thee our hearts and hands we give: Thine may we die; thine may we live. The Resignation.37 And wilt thou yet be found? And may I still draw near? Then listen to the plaintive sound Of a poor sinner’s prayer. Jesu, thine aid afford, If still the same thou art; To thee I look, to thee, my Lord, Lift up an helpless heart. Thou seest my tortur’d breast, The strugglings of my will, The foes that interrupt my rest, The agonies I feel: The daily death I prove, Saviour, to thee is known: ’Tis worse than death, my God to love, And not my God alone. My peevish passions chide, Who only canst controul, Canst turn the stream of nature’s tide, And calm my troubled soul. 37This hymn appeared first in the 2nd edn. of HSP (1739), 37-40; it was then moved to this collection.

At Setting Out to Preach the Gospel Source: Hymns and Sacred Poems (1740), Part I Author: Charles Wesley (attributed) --- At Setting Out to Preach the Gospel.51 Angel of God, whate’er betide, Thy summons I obey; Jesus, I take thee for my guide, And walk in thee my way. Secure from danger, and from dread, Nor earth nor hell shall move, Since over me thy hand hath spread The banner of thy love. To leave my Captain I disdain, Behind I will not stay, Tho’ shame, and loss, and bonds, and pain, And death obstruct the way. Me to thy suffering self conform, And arm me with thy power, Then burst the cloud, descend the storm, And come the fiery hour! Then shall I bear thy utmost will, When first the strength is given-- Come, foolish world, my body kill, And drive my soul to heaven! 51Charles records singing this hymn in his MS Journal as early as March 16, 1739.

To Ambrose Eyre, [Mr. A. H. Tod, one of the masters at Charterhouse, supplies the following facts from Alumni Carthusiani: 'June 23 1698 Ambrose Eyre, admitted pr Lord Chief Justice Holt in the place of Carlos Smith, age 14 years the 25th of July next. Exhibitioner 2 July 1703 (pre-elected); admitted to the Middle Temple 18 November 1702, as son and heir o! William Eyre, of Chelaea, Middlesex, esquire; admitted pensioner of Christ's, Cambridge, 6 April 1703; Receiver of Charterhouse, 20 February 1719-39; admitted a poor brother 1755; died 21 April, buried at Fulham, Middlesex, 28 April 1756. By his first wife, Sarah, he was the father of the Rev. Venn Eyre, admitted 30 June 1726; he married 2nd at Charterhouse, 21 March 1730, Elizabeth Holt.'] Treasurer of Charterhouse Date: CHRIST CHURCH, November 3, 1721 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1721) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, --I am extremely sorry that an accident should which has given you reason to have an ill opinion of me, but am very much obliged to your civility for putting the most favorable construction on it. I hope this will satisfy you that it was by mistake and not my design that you have twice delivered the exhibition for the first Michaelmas quarter which indeed was through the mistake of my mercer, [The Bank of England had been incorporated in 1694, and for a short time carried on its business in Mercers' Chapel. The 'instant and regular remittance of money' was in its infancy in 1721.] who returns it, or rather through the negligence of his correspondent, who forgot to inform him of his having received the money. This made him suspect that it was detained, in which he was confirmed by receiving no answer from London; and at Lady Day, when I gave him my tutor's bill for that quarter, he told [me] he had not received the exhibition for the first, which he supposed was detained because I had been absent the whole eight weeks in one quarter, and which made him advise me to write a receipt for that and the other due at the end of the year.

To his Mother Date: CHRIST CHURCH, November 22, 1725. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1725) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR MOTHER,--I must beg leave to assure you that before I received yours I was fully convinced of two things,-first, that Mr. Berkeley's [George Berkeley, D.D. (1685-1753), Bishop of Cloyne 1734. He published his Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous in 1713. The reference is to the early part of the Second Dialogue.] notion, which at first sight appeared very plausible--as, indeed, an ingenious disputant will make almost anything appear--was utterly groundless; and that he either advanced a palpable falsehood, or said nothing at all: and, secondly, that I had been under a mistake in adhering to that definition of Faith which Dr. Fiddes [Richard Fiddes (1671--July 8, 1725). A critical account of him is given by Hearne in his diary for July 15 of this year. He was author of A Body of Divinity (2 vols. folio, 1718-20) and other works. He and his school defined faith as 'an assent to a proposition on reasonable (or rational) grounds.'] sets down as the only true one. Mr. Berkeley's reasons on a second reading I found to be mere fallacy, though very artfully disguised. From one or two you may easily judge of what kind his other arguments are. He introduces Hylas charging Philonous with skepticism for denying the existence of sensible things: to which Philonous replies that, if denying the existence of sensible things constitute a skeptic, he will prove those to be such who assert sensible things to be material; for if all sensible things are material, then, if it be proved that nothing material exists, it will follow that no sensible thing exists; and that nothing material can exist he undertakes to demonstrate. Matter, says he (by which you must mean something sensible, or rise how came you to know of it), you define a solid extended substance, the existence of which is exterior to the mind and does in no ways depend on its being perceived; but if it appear that no sensible thing is exterior to the mind, your supposition of a sensible substance independent on it is a plain inconsistency.

Ah I what avails his fame declared Thou blam'st, alas I the just decree Whence Virtue meets its just reward. Though sweeter sounds adorned thy tongue Than Thracian Orpheus whilom played, When list'ning to the morning song Each tree bowed down its leafy head, Never I ah, never from the gloom Of unrelenting Pluto's sway Could the thin shade again resume Its ancient tenement of clay. Indulgent Patience! heav'n-born guest! Thy healing wings around display: Thou gently calm'st the stormy breast And driv'st the tyrant Grief away. Corroding Care and eating Pain By just degrees thy influence own; And lovely lasting Peace again Resumes her long-deserted throne.

To his Father Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- January 1731. DEAR SIR, -- Though some of the postulata upon which Archbishop King [See letters of Dec. 11, 1730, and Jan. 6, 1791.] builds his hypothesis of the Origin of Evil be such as very few will admit of, yet, since the superstructure is regular and well contrived, I thought you would not be unwilling to see the scheme of that celebrated work. He divides it into five chapters. The sum of the first chapter is this: The first notions we have of outward things are our conceptions of motion, matter, and space. Concerning each of these, we soon observe that it does not exist of itself; and consequently that there must be some first cause, to which all of them owe their existence. Although we have no faculty for the direct perception of this First Cause, and so can know very little more of Him than a blind man of light, yet thus much we know of Him by the faculties we have,--that He is one, infinite in nature and power, free, intelligent, and omniscient; that consequently He proposes to Himself an end in every one of His actions; and that the end of His creating the world was the exercise of His power, and wisdom, and goodness; which He therefore made as perfect as it could be made by infinite goodness, and power, and wisdom. Chapter II. But if so, how came evil into the world If the world was made by such an agent, with such an intention, how is it that either imperfection or natural or moral evils have a place in it Is not this difficulty best solved by the Manichaean supposition that there is an evil as well as a good principle By no means; for it is just as repugnant to infinite goodness to create what it foresaw would be spoiled by another, as to create what would be spoiled by the constitution of its own nature: their supposition therefore leaves the difficulty as it found it. But if it could be proved that to permit evils in the world is consistent with, nay necessarily results from, infinite goodness, then the difficulty would vanish; and to prove this is the design of the following treatise.

To his Brother Samuel Date: LINCOLN COLEGE, November 17, 1731. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1731) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--Considering the other changes that I remember in myself, I shall not at all wonder if the time comes when we differ as little in our conclusions as we do now in our premises. In most we seem to agree already; especially as to rising, not keeping much company, and sitting by a fire, which I always do, if any one in the room does, whether at home or abroad. But these are the very things about which others will never agree with me. Had I given up these, or but one of them rising early, [See letter of March 19, 1727.] which implies going to bed early (though I never am sleepy now), and keeping so little company--not one man in ten of those that are offended at me, as it is, would ever open their mouth against any of the other particulars. For the sake of these, those are mentioned: the root of the matter lies here. Would I but employ a third of my money, and about half my time, as other folks do, smaller matters would be easily overlooked. But I think nil tanti est. ['Nothing is worth such a sacrifice as this.'] As to my hair, I am much more sure that what this enables me to do is according to the Scripture than I am that the length of it is contrary to it. [See letter of Dec. 5, 1726.]

Your last argument is either ignoratio elenchi, or implies these two propositions: (1) 'You resolve against any parochial cure of souls.' (2) 'The priest who does not undertake the first parochial cure that offers is perjured.' Let us add a third: ' The tutor who, being in Orders, never accepts of a parish is perjured.' [That was Samuel Wcsley's own case.] And then I deny all three. --I am, dear brother, Your obliged and affectionate Brother.

Farther: a sin which easily besets me is unfaithfulness to God in the use of speech. I know that this is a talent entrusted to me by my Lord, to be used, as all others, only for His glory. I know that all conversation which is not seasoned with salt, and designed at least to administer grace to the hearers, is expressly forbid by the Apostle, as corrupt communication, and as grieving the Holy Spirit of God; yet I am almost continually betrayed into it by the example of others striking in with my own bad heart. But I hope, from the moment I leave the English shore, under the acknowledged character of a teacher sent from God, there shall no word be heard from my lips but what properly flows from that character: as my tongue is a devoted thing, I hope from the first hour of this new era to use it only as such, that all who hear me may know of a truth the words I speak are not mine but His that sent me. The same faithfulness I hope to show through His grace in dispensing the rest of my Master's goods, if it please Him to send me to those who, like His first followers, have all things common. What a guard is here against that root of evil, the love of money, and all the vile attractions that spring from it ! One in this glorious state, and perhaps none but he, may see the height and depth of that privilege of the first Christians, 'as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing all things.'

To his Brother Samuel Date: October 15, 1735. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1735) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER, -- I presented Job to the Queen on Sunday, and had many good words and smiles. [A folio volume in Latin, entitled Dissertationes in Librum Jobi, by his father, and dedicated by permission to Queen Caroline. John Wesley presented a copy to her Majesty on Oct. 12, 1735. Dr. Clarke (Wesley Family, i. 330) says that Wesley told him that when he was introduced the Queen was romping with her maids of honor. She stopped her play, heard him graciously, and when he presented the book on bended knee she looked at the outside, said ' It is very prettily bound,' and laid it down in a window without opening a leaf. He rose, bowed, and retired. The Queen bowed, smiled, spoke several kind words, and immediately resumed her sport.] Out of what is due to me on that account, I beg you would first pay yourself what I owe you; and if I live till spring, I can then direct what I would have done with the remainder.

To James Hutton Date: OXON, November 27, 1738. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1738) Author: John Wesley --- 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 brother, suffer me to speak a little more: if as a fool, then as a fool bear with me. I believe you don't think I am (whatever I was) bigoted either to the Ancient Church or the Church of England. But have a care of bending the bow too much the other way. The National Church, to which we belong, may doubtless claim some, though not an implicit, obedience from us. And the Primitive Church may, thus far at least, be reverenced as faithfully delivering down for two or three hundred years the discipline which they received from the Apostles, and the[Apostles] from Christ. And I doubt....... were among them who [Letter torn.] .......

’Tis great pity that your friend, too, did not make affidavit of the extraordinary particulars following: that Mr. Wesley continued to disturb the public peace; that he endeavored to make an insurrection in the public Court while sitting; that the Magistrates received several petitions, laying fresh accusations to his charge, and declaring his design of leaving the colony privately (an extremely private design, of which five days before I had given notice by an advertisement set up in the market-place!); that several persons took an opportunity of going off with him with several sums of money; that they gave out that they would oppose with violence any person that should attempt to seize any of them; and that, immediately after, a great reward was affixed publicly for apprehending of Mr. Wesley. You can't but own these are a great improvement upon your design, and would sound as well as your own affidavit itself. But would it not be needful first for Mr. Christie and you to confer together and agree upon your story else he may again blunder out more than you desire and confute you instead of me. This it is undeniable he has done now, and that in the most material parts of your evidence. For, first, you aver that Mr. Wesley, being bailed for the appearance at the then next Sessions, a little before the Sessions came on, deferred his bail and went away. No, says Mr. Christie, Mr. Wesley, after he was bailed, did appear at the next Court. I desired his trial might be brought on, or his recognizance estreated. Again, Mr. Christie flatly affirms that Mr. John Coats, who was one of his bail, went off with Mr. Wesley and never returned; whereas you aver upon oath that the Justices threatened to prosecute and imprison his bail, who were in the utmost confusion. But by the interposition of this deponent and several others, on behalf of the said bail, and to prevent destruction to their respective families, the Justices respited their recognizances during pleasure.

7. We have no 5s. or 2s. 6d. places at the Foundry, nor ever had, nor ever will. If any one asks me for a place in the gallery (we make no distinction but between men and women), he has it; I refuse none. And some hundreds have places there who pay nothing at all. First come also is first served, at every time of preaching. And the poorest have frequently the best places, because they come first. I am glad you mentioned the volume of Bishop Bull, [The Huttons had evidently lent Bishop Bull's Teachings of the Spirit to Wesley. See letter of Jan. 1739, and his reference (Journal, ii. 144d) on Feb. 22 - ‘10.30 at James Hutton’s read Bishop Bull upon the teachings of the Spirit.’] for I had quite forgot whose it was. I will look for it, and send it. I desire the continuance of yours and Mr. Hutton’s prayers. Your obliged and affectionate servant.

3. But I may not dismiss this passage yet. It is now my turn to complain of unfair usage; of the exceeding lame, broken, imperfect manner wherein you cite my words. For instance, your citation runs thus: you ‘never knew but one of the Moravian Church affirm that a believer does not grow in holiness.’ Whereas my words are these: ‘I never knew one of the Moravian Church but that single person affirm that a believer does not grow in holiness; and perhaps he would not affirm it on reflection.’ Now, why was the former part of the sentence changed and the latter quite left out Had the whole stood in your tract just as it does in mine, it must have appeared I do not here charge the Moravian Church. I complain also of your manner of replying to the first article of this very paragraph. For you do not cite so much as one line of that answer to which you profess to reply. My words are, ‘You ought not to charge the Moravian Church with the first of these’ errors; ‘since, in the very page from which you quote those words, “There is no justifying faith where there ever is any doubt,” that note occurs (namely, Journal, ii. 492): “In the Preface to the Second Journal the Moravian Church is cleared from this mistake.”’ If you had cited these words, could you possibly have subjoined, ‘I have not charged the Moravian Church with anything, but only repeat after you’ 4. I have now considered one page of your reply in the manner you seem to require. But sure you cannot expect I should follow you thus step by step through an hundred and forty pages! If you should then think it worth while to make a second reply, and to follow me in the same manner, we might write indeed, but who would read I return, therefore, to what I proposed at first -- namely, to touch only on what seems of the most importance, and leave the rest just as it lies.

5. You say, ‘With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought that you only found this “in many of them; not in all, nor in most”’ (Second Letter, p. 80). ‘You now would have it thought’! Yes; and always, as well as now. For my original charge was, ‘I have found this in many of you -- that is, much subtlety, much evasion and disguise’ (Journal, ii. 492). But you add, ‘Let the reader judge from the following passages whether you did not charge the Moravians in general with these crimes: “I had a long conference with those whom I esteem very highly in love; but I could not yet understand them in one point, Christian openness and plainness of speech. They pleaded for such a reservedness and closeness of conversation. Yet I scarce know what to think, considering they had the practice of the whole Moravian Church on their side.”’ True, in pleading for such a reservedness of conversation as I could not in any wise approve of; but not in using much subtlety, much evasion and disguise: this I dare not charge on the whole Moravian Church. Those words also, ‘There is darkness and closeness in all their behavior, and guile in almost all their words,’ I spoke, not of all the Moravians, nor of most, but of those who were then in England. I could not speak it of them all; for I never found any guile in Christian David, Michael Linner, and many others. 6. ‘We are next to see how you get over the objection I made good, in three several particulars, that you have prepared the way for spreading of these tenets. The first you say nothing to here; the second you quote very partially thus -- “By countenancing and commending them.” And why would you not add,“And being the occasion of so many of them coming over among us”’ Because I was not the occasion. I was, indeed, the first Englishman that ever was at Herrnhut. But before I was at Herrnhut (I find on later inquiry) the Count himself had been in England.

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.

When you first cited these as proofs of enthusiasm, I answered, 'I will put your argument into form, -- ‘He that believes those are miraculous cures which are not so is a rank enthusiast. 'But you believe those to be miraculous cures which are not so: ‘Therefore you are a rank enthusiast. ‘What do you mean by miraculous If you term everything so which is “not strictly accountable for by the ordinary course of natural causes,” then I deny the latter part of the minor proposition. And unless you can make this good, unless you can prove the effects in question are “strictly accountable for by the ordinary course of natural causes,” your argument is nothing worth.’ You reply: ‘Your answer to the objection is very evasive, though you pretend to put my argument in form. You mistake the major proposition, which should have been, -- ‘He that represents those cures as the immediate effects of his own prayers and as miraculous which are not so is a rank enthusiast, if sincere: ‘“But, This you have done: ergo, &c.”’ To this clumsy syllogism I rejoin: (1) That the words ‘if sincere’ are utterly impertinent; for if insincerity be supposed, enthusiasm will be out of the question. (2) That those words ‘as the effects of his own prayers’ may likewise be pared off; for they are unnecessary and cumbersome, the argument being complete without them. (3) That, with or without them, the proposition is false; unless so far as it coincides with that you reject. For it is the believing those to be miracles which are not that constitutes an enthusiast; not the representing them one way or the other, unless so far as it implies such a belief. 12. Upon my answer to the syllogism first proposed, you observe, ‘Thus’ (by denying the latter part of the minor) ‘you clear yourself from the charge of enthusiasm by acknowledging the cures to be supernatural and miraculous. Why, then, would you not speak out, and directly say that you can work real and undoubted miracles This would put the controversy between you and your opposers on a short foot, and be an effectual proof of the truth of your presences.’ (Second Letter, p. 142.)

4. It is the business of a Visitor of the sick,--To see every sick person within his district thrice a week. To inquire into the state of their souls, and to advise them as occasion may require. To inquire into their disorders, and procure advice for them. To relieve them, if they are in want. To do anything for them which he (or she) can do. To bring in his accounts weekly to the Stewards. [The Leaders now do this.] Upon reflection, I saw how exactly in this also we had copied after the primitive Church. What were the ancient deacons What was Phebe the deaconess but such a visitor of the sick 5. I did not think it needful to give them any particular rules beside these that follow: (1) Be plain and open in dealing with souls. (2) Be mild, tender, patient. (3) Be cleanly in all you do for the sick. (4) Be not nice. 6. We have ever since had great reason to praise God for His continued blessing on this undertaking. Many lives have been saved, many sicknesses healed, much pain and want prevented or removed. Many heavy hearts have been made glad, many mourners comforted; and the Visitors have found from Him whom they serve a present reward for all their labour. XII. 1. But I was still in pain for many of the poor that were sick; there was so great expense, and so little profit. And first I resolved to try whether they might not receive more benefit in the hospitals. Upon the trial, we found there was indeed less expense, but no more good done than before. I then asked the advice of several physicians for them; but still it profited not. I saw the poor people pining away, and several families ruined, and that without remedy.

1. In the beginning of your Introductory Discourse you declare the reasons which moved you to publish it. One of these, you say, was the late increase of Popery in this kingdom (page 41); chiefly occasioned, as you suppose, by the confident assertions of the Romish emissaries that there has been a succession of miracles in their Church from the apostolic to the present age. To obviate this plea you would 'settle some rule of discerning the true from the false, so as to give a reason for admitting the miracles of one age and rejecting those of another' (page 44). 2. This has a pleasing sound, and is extremely well imagined to prejudice a Protestant reader in your favour. You then slide with great art into your subject: 'This claim of a miraculous power, now peculiar to the Church of Rome, was asserted in all Christian countries till the Reformation' (ibid.). But then 'the cheat was detected' (page 45)--nay, and men began to 'suspect that the Church had long been governed by the same arts.' 'For it was easy to trace them up to the primitive Church, though not to fix the time when the cheat began; to show how long after the days of the Apostles the miraculous gifts continued in the Church' (page 46). However, it is commonly believed that they continued till Christianity was the established religion. Some, indeed, extend them to the fourth and fifth centuries (page 50); but these, you say, betray the Protestant cause (page 51). 'For in the third, fourth, and fifth the chief corruptions of Popery were introduced, or at least the seeds of them sown. By these I mean monkery; the worship of relics; invocation of saints; prayers for the dead; the superstitious use of images, of the sacraments, of the sign of the cross, and of the consecrated oil.' (Page 52.) 3. I have nothing to do with the fourth or fifth century. But to what you allege in support of this charge, so far as it relates to the third century, I have a few things to reply.

But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: 'As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians' (prove that!) 'to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty when the Apostles were dead to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them. And when these artful pretenders had maintained their ground through the first three centuries, the leading clergy of the fourth understood their interest too well to part with the old plea of miraculous gifts.' (Page 92.) Round assertions indeed! But surely, sir, you do not think that reasonable men will take these for proofs! You are here advancing a charge of the blackest nature. But where are your vouchers Where are the witnesses to support it Hitherto you have not been able to produce one through a course of three hundred years; unless you bring in those heathen, of whose senseless, shameless prejudices you have yourself given so clear an account. But you designed to produce your witnesses in the Free Inquiry a year or two after the Introductory Discourse was published. So you condemn them first, and try them afterwards; you will pass sentence now, and hear the evidence by-and-by! A genuine specimen of that 'impartial regard to truth' which you profess upon all occasions. 13. Another instance of this is in your marginal note: 'The primitive Christians were perpetually reproached for their gross credulity.' They were; but by whom Why, by Jews and heathens. Accordingly the two witnesses you produce here are Celsus the Jew and Julian the apostate. But, lest this should not suffice, you make them confess the charge. 'The Fathers,' your words are, 'defend themselves by saying that they did no more than the philosophers had always done; that Pythagoras's precepts were inculcated with an ipse dixit, and they found the same method useful with the vulgar' (page 93). And is this their whole defence Do the very men to whom you refer, Origen and Arnobius, in the very tracts to which you refer, give no other answer than this argument ad hominem Stand this as another genuine proof of Dr. Middleton's candour and impartiality!

You proceed: 'If the Scriptures are a complete rule (I reject the word 'sufficient,' because it is ambiguous), we do not want the Fathers as guides, or, if clear, as interpreters. An esteem for them has carried many into dangerous errors: the neglect of them can have no ill consequences.' (Page 97.) I answer: (1) The Scriptures are a complete rule of faith and practice; and they are clear in all necessary points. And yet their clearness does not prove that they need not be explained, nor their completeness that they need not be enforced. (2) The esteeming the writings of the first three centuries not equally with but next to the Scriptures never carried any man yet into dangerous errors, nor probably ever will. But it has brought many out of dangerous errors, and particularly out of the errors of Popery. (3) The neglect in your sense of the primitive Fathers--that is, the thinking they were all fools and knaves--has this natural consequence (which ,I grant is no ill one, according to your principles), to make all who are not real Christians think Jesus of Nazareth and His Apostles just as honest and wise as them. 16. You afterwards endeavour to show how the Church of England came to have such an esteem for the ancient Fathers. There are several particulars in this account which are liable to exception. But I let them pass, as they have little connexion with the point in question. 17. You conclude your Introductory Discourse thus: 'The design of the present treatise is to fix the religion of the Protestants on its proper basis--that is, on the Sacred Scriptures' (page 111). Here again you speak in your personated character; as also when you 'freely own the primitive writers to be of use in attesting and transmitting to us the genuine books of the Holy Scriptures'! (Page 112.) Books for the full attestation as well as safe transmission whereof you have doubtless the deepest concern!

You begin with the apostolic Fathers--that is, those who lived and conversed with the Apostles. 'There are several,' you say, 'of this character, whose writings still remain to us: St. Barnabas, St. Clemens, St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp, St. Hermas. Now, if those gifts had subsisted after the days of the Apostles, these must have possessed a large share of them. But if any of them had, he would have mentioned it in his writings, which not one of them has done.' (Page 3.) The argument, fully proposed, runs thus: If any such gifts had subsisted in them or in their days, they must have mentioned them in their circular Epistles to the Churches (for so their predecessors, the Apostles, did); but they did not mention any such gifts therein. Sir, your consequence is not of any force; as will easily appear by a parallel argument: If such gifts had subsisted in St. Peter or in his days, he must have mentioned them in his circular Epistles to the Churches. But he does not mention any such gifts therein; therefore they did not subsist in him or in his days. Your argument, therefore, proves too much; nor can it conclude against an apostolic Father without concluding against the Apostle too. If, therefore, the apostolic Fathers had not mentioned any miraculous gifts in their circular Epistles to the Churches, you could not have inferred that they possessed none; since neither does he mention them in his circular Epistles whom you allow to have possessed them. Of all the Apostles you can produce but one, St. Paul, who makes mention of these gifts: and that not in his circular Epistles to the Churches; for I know not that he wrote any such.

5. Therefore the apostolic writers have not left us in the dark with regard to our present argument, and consequently your triumph comes too soon: 'Here, then, we have an interval of half a century in which we have the strongest reason to presume that the extraordinary gifts of the apostolic age were withdrawn' (page 9). No: not if all the apostolic Fathers speak of spiritual gifts as abounding among the Christians of that age; not if 'extraordinary illuminations, visions, and divine impressions still subsisted among them.' For, as to your now putting in, 'as exerted openly in the Church for the conviction of unbelievers,' I must desire you to put it out again; it comes a great deal too late. The question between you and me was stated without it above an hundred pages back. Although, if it be admitted, it will do you no service; seeing your proposition is overthrown if there were 'miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles,' whether they were 'openly exerted for the conviction of unbelievers' or not. 6. I was a little surprised that you should take your leave of the apostolic Fathers so soon. But, upon looking forward, my surprise was at an end: I found you was not guilty of any design to spare them; but only delayed your remarks till the reader should be prepared for what might have shocked him had it stood in its proper place. I do not find, indeed, that you make any objection to any part of the Epistles of Ignatius; no, nor of the Catholic Epistle, as it is called, which is inscribed with the name of Barnabas. This clearly convinces me you have not read it--I am apt to think not one page of it; seeing, if you had, you would never have let slip such an opportunity of exposing one that was called an apostolic Father.

7. But it would have been strange, if you had not somewhere brought in the famous phoenix of Clemens Romanus. And yet you are very merciful upon that head, barely remarking concerning it that 'he alleged the ridiculous story of the phoenix as a type and proof of the resurrection. Whether all the heathen writers treat it as nothing else but a mere fable I know not.' (Page 55.) But that it is so is certain, and consequently the argument drawn from it is weak and inconclusive. Yet it will not hence follow either that Clemens was a wicked man or that he had none of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. 8. There is no real blemish to be found in the whole character of St. Polycarp. But there is one circumstance left upon record concerning him which has the appearance of weakness. And with this you do not fail to acquaint your reader at a convenient season--namely, 'that in the most ancient dispute concerning the time of holding Easter, St. Polycarp and Anicetus severally alleged apostolic tradition for their different practice' (page 60). And it is not improbable that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the Apostles varied themselves, some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not. But, be this as it may, it can be no proof either that Polycarp was not an holy man or that he was not favoured with the extraordinary as well as ordinary gifts of the Spirit.

16. You close this head with remarking (1) 'That the silence of all the apostolic writers on the subject of these gifts must dispose us to conclude they were then withdrawn' (ibid.). O sir, mention this no more! I entreat you never name their silence again. They speak loud enough to shame you as long as you live. You cannot therefore talk with any grace of 'the pretended revival of them after a cessation of forty or fifty years,' or draw conclusions from that which never was. Your second remark is perfectly new: I dare say none ever observed before yourself that this particular circumstance of the primitive Christians 'carried with it an air of imposture'--namely, their 'challenging all the world to come and see the miracles which they wrought'! (Page 21.) To complete the argument, you should have added, 'and their staking their lives upon the performance of them.' 17. I doubt you have not gone one step forward yet. You have, indeed, advanced many bold assertions; but you have not fairly proved one single conclusion with regard to the point in hand. But a natural effect of your lively imagination is that from this time you argue more and more weakly; inasmuch, as the farther you go, the more things you imagine (and only imagine) yourself to have proved. Consequently, as you gather up more mistakes every step you take, every page is more precarious than the former. II. 1. The second thing you proposed was 'to throw together all which those Fathers have delivered concerning the persons said to have been endued with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit' (ibid.). 'Now, whenever we think or speak with reverence,'say you, 'of those primitive times, it is always with regard to these very Fathers whose testimonies I have been collecting. And they were, indeed, the chief persons and champions of the Christian cause, the pastors, bishops, and martyrs of the primitive Church--namely, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius.' Sir, you stumble at the threshold. A common dictionary may inform you that these were not all either pastors, bishops, or martyrs.

2. You go on as you set out: 'Yet none of these have anywhere affirmed that they themselves were endued with any power of working miracles' (page 22). You should say, 'with any of those extraordinary gifts promised by our Lord and conferred on His Apostles.' No! Have 'none of these anywhere affirmed that they themselves were endued' with any extraordinary gifts What think you of the very first of them, Justin Martyr Either you are quite mistaken in the account you give of him elsewhere (pages 27, 30), or he affirmed this of himself over and over. And as to Cyprian, you will by-and-by spend several pages together (pages 101, &c.) on the extraordinary gifts he affirmed himself to be endued with. But suppose they had not anywhere affirmed this of themselves, what would you infer therefrom that they were not endued with any extraordinary gifts Then, by the very same method of arguing, you might prove that neither St. Peter, nor James, nor John were endued with any such; for neither do they anywhere affirm this of themselves in any of the writings which they have left behind them. 3. Your argument concerning the apostolic Fathers is just as conclusive as this, For if you say, 'The writers following the apostolic Fathers do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts, therefore they had none,' by a parity of reason you must say, 'The writers following the Apostles do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts, therefore the Apostles had none.' 4. Your next argument against the existence of those gifts is 'that the Fathers do not tell us the names of them which had them.' This is not altogether true. The names of Justin Martyr and Cyprian are pretty well known; as is, among the learned, that of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria. (Pages 106, 212.)

Sir, no man of reason will believe this concerning one of the Fathers upon your bare assertion. I must therefore desire you to prove by more than a scrap of a sentence (1) that Justin himself held this opinion; (2) that he invented it; (3) that it was the common opinion of all the Fathers; and (4) that they all took it on his authority. 15. You affirm, thirdly: 'He says that all devils yield and submit to the name of Jesus; as also to the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob' (page 85). Very likely he may. Lastly. You cite a passage from him concerning the Spirit of God influencing the minds of holy men. But neither does this in any measure affect his credit as a witness of fact. Consequently, after all that you have been able to draw either from himself or any of the primitive writers, here is one witness of unquestionable credit touching the miracles wrought in the primitive Church, touching the subsistence of the extraordinary gifts after the days of the Apostles. 16. But let us come once more to Irenaeus; for you have not done with him yet. 'Forgery,' you say, 'has been actually charged upon Justin' (by John Croius and Dr. Middleton), 'and may with equal reason be charged on Irenaeus; for what other account can be given of his frequent appeals to apostolical tradition for the support of so many incredible doctrines' (page 111). Why, this very natural one, that in non-essential points he too easily followed the authority of Papias, a weak man, who on slight grounds believed many trifling things to have been said or done by the Apostles. And allowing all this, yet it does not give us so 'lamentable an idea of those primitive ages and primitive champions of the Christian cause' (page 59). The same account may be given of his mistake concerning the age of our Lord (ibid.). There is therefore as yet neither reason nor any plausible presence for laying forgery to his charge; and consequently thus far his credit as a witness stands clear and unimpeached.

20. Now to apply. 'A mind,' you say, 'so totally possessed by superstitious fancies could not even suspect the pretensions of those vagrant jugglers, who in those primitive ages were so numerous and so industriously employed in deluding their fellow creatures. Both heathens, Jews, and Christians are all allowed to have had such impostors among them.' (Page 71.) By whom, sir, is this allowed of the Christians By whom but Celsus was it affirmed of them Who informed you of their growing so numerous and using such industry in their employment To speak the plain truth, your mind appears 'to be so totally possessed by' these 'vagrant jugglers,' that you cannot say one word about the primitive Church but they immediately start up before you, though there is no more proof of their ever existing than of a witch's sailing in an eggshell. 21. You conclude this head: 'When pious Christians are arrived to this pitch of credulity, as to believe that evil spirits or evil men can work miracles in opposition to the gospel, their very piety will oblige them to admit as miraculous whatever is pretended to be wrought in defence of it' (ibid.). Once more you have spoken out: you have shown without disguise what you think of St. Paul and the 'lying miracles' (2 Thess. ii. 9) which he (poor man!) believed evil spirits or evil men could work in opposition to the gospel; and of St. John talking so idly of him who 'doeth great wonders . . . and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth' (even though they were not Christians) 'by means of those miracles which he hath power to do' (Rev. xiii. 13-14). 22. You have now finished the third thing you proposed; which was 'to show the particular characters of the several Fathers who attest' that they were eye-and ear-witnesses of the extraordinary gifts in the primitive Church. You named nine of these--Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, and Lactantius; at the same time observing that many other writers attest the same thing. But let the others stand by. Are these good men and true That is the present question. You say, 'No'; and, to prove that these nine are knaves, bring several charges against two of them.

You observe, first, 'that all the primitive accounts of casting out devils, though given by different Fathers and in different ages, yet exactly agree with regard to all the main circumstances' (page 91). And this you apprehend to be a mark of imposture. 'It looks,' you say, 'as if they copied from each other'! Now, a vulgar reader would have imagined that any single account of this kind must be rendered much more (not less) credible by parallel accounts of what many had severally seen at different times and in different places. 9. You observe, secondly, 'that the persons thus possessed were called ejggastrivmuqoi, " ventriloquists "' (some of them were), 'because they were generally believed to speak out of the belly. Now, there are at this day,' you say, 'those who by art and practice can speak in the same manner. If we suppose, then, that there were artists of this kind among the ancient Christians, how easily, by a correspondence between the ventriloquist and the exorcist, might they delude the most sensible of their audience!' (Page 92.) But what did the ventriloquist do with his epilepsy in the meantime You must not let it go, because many of the circumstances wherein all these accounts agree cannot be tolerably accounted for without it. And yet how will you make these two agree It is a point worthy your serious consideration. But cheats, doubtless, they were, account for it who can. Yet it is strange none of the heathens should find them out, that the imposture should remain quite undiscovered till fourteen hundred years after the impostors were dead! He must have a very large faith who can believe this--who can suppose that not one of all those impostors should, either through inadvertence or in the midst of tortures and death, have once intimated any such thing. 10. You observe, thirdly, 'that many demoniacs could not be cured by all the power of the exorcists, and that the cures which were pretended to be wrought on any were but temporary, were but the cessation of a particular fit or access of the distemper. This,' you say, 'is evident from the testimony of antiquity itself, and may be clearly collected from the method of treating them in the ancient Church.' (Ibid.)

Section IV. I. You told us above that 'the fourth miraculous gift was that of prophesying; the fifth, of seeing visions; the sixth, of discovering the secrets of men' (page 72). But here you jumble them all together, telling us, 'The next miraculous gift is that of prophetic visions and ecstatic trances' (ecstatic ecstasies you might have said) 'and the discovery of men's hearts' (page 96). But why do you thrust all three into one Because, you say, 'these seem to be the fruit of one spirit.' Most certainly they are, whether it was the Spirit of Truth or (as you suppose) the spirit of delusion. 2. However, it is the second of these on which you chiefly dwell (the fifth of those you before enumerated), taking but little notice of the fourth, 'foretelling things to come,' and none at all of the sixth, 'discovering the secrets of men.' The testimonies, therefore, for these remain in full force, as you do not even attempt to invalidate them. With regard to visions or ecstasies, you observe, first, that Tertullian calls ecstasy 'a temporary loss of senses' (page 97). It was so of the outward senses, which were then locked up. You observe, secondly, that 'Suidas' [Suidas, placed about A.D. 975-1025, reputed author of a Greek Lexicon which contains many passages from authors whose works are lost.] (a very primitive writer, who lived between eight and nine hundred years after Tertullian) 'says that of all the kinds of madness that of the poets and prophets was alone to be wished for.' I am at a loss to know what this is brought to prove. The question is, Were there visions in the primitive Church You observe, thirdly, that Philo the Jew says (I literally translate his words, which you do not; for it would not answer your purpose), 'When the divine light shines, the human sets; but when that sets, this rises. This uses to befall the prophets' (page 98). Well, sir, and what is this to the question Why, 'from these testimonies,' you say, 'we may collect that the vision or ecstasy of the primitive Church was of the same kind with those of the Delphic Pythia or the Cumaean Sibyl.'

4. Meantime I cannot but observe an odd circumstance--that you are here in the abundance of your strength confuting a proposition which (whether it be true or false) not one of your antagonists affirms. You are labouring to prove 'there was not in the primitive Church any such miraculous gift as that of expounding the Scriptures.' Pray, sir, who says there was Not Justin Martyr; not one among all those Fathers whom you have quoted as witnesses of the miraculous gifts, from the tenth to the eighteenth page of your Inquiry. If you think they do, I am ready to follow you step by step through every quotation you have made. 5. No, nor is this mentioned in any enumeration of the miraculous gifts which I can find in the Holy Scriptures. Prophecy, indeed, is mentioned more than once by the Apostles as well as the Fathers. But the context shows, where it is promised as a miraculous gift, it means the foretelling things to come. All, therefore, which you say on this head is a mere ignoratio elenchi, 'a mistake of the question to be proved.' Section VI. 1. The eighth and last of the miraculous gifts you enumerated was the gift of tongues. And this, it is sure, was claimed by the primitive Christians; for Irenaeus says expressly, '" We hear many in the Church speaking with all kinds of tongues." And yet,' you say, 'this was granted only on certain special occasions, and then withdrawn again from the Apostles themselves; so that in the ordinary course of their ministry they were generally destitute of it. This,' you say, 'I have shown elsewhere.' (Page 119.) I presume in some treatise which I have not seen. 2. But Irenaeus, who declares that 'many had this gift in his days, yet owns he had it not himself.' This is only a proof that the case was then the same as when St. Paul observed long before, 'Are all workers of miracles have all the gifts of healing do all speak with tongues' (1 Cor. xii. 19-30). No, not even when those gifts were shed abroad in the most abundant manner.

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.

14. Some time after, Mr. Butler removed to Dublin, and began to sing his ballads there. But having little success, he returned to Cork, and in January began to scour the streets again, pursuing all of ‘this way’ with a large mob at his heels, armed with swords, staves, and pistols. Complaint was made of this to William Holmes, Esq., the present Mayor of Cork. But there was no removal of the thing complained of: the riots were not suppressed nay, they not only continued, but increased. 15. From the beginning of February to the end His Majesty's peace was preserved just as before; of which it may be proper to subjoin two or three instances for the information of all thinking men: ‘WILLIAM JEWELL, clothier, of Shundon Church Lane, deposes, ‘That Nicholas Butler with a riotous mob several times assaulted this deponent's house: that particularly on the 23rd of February he came thither with a large mob, armed with clubs and other weapons: that several of the rioters entered the house, and swore the first who resisted they would blow their brains out: that the deponent's wife, endeavoring to stop them, was assaulted and beaten by the said Butler; who then ordered his men to break the deponent's windows, which they did with stones of a considerable weight. 'MARY' PHILIPS, of St. Peter's Church Lane, deposes, ‘That on the 26th of February, about seven in the evening, Nicholas Butler came to her house with a large mob, and asked where her husband was: that as soon as she appeared he first abused her in the grossest terms, and then struck her on the head so that it stunned her; and she verily believes, had not some within thrust to and fastened the door, she should have been murdered on the spot.’ It may suffice for the present to add one instance more: ‘ELIZABETH GARDELET, wife of Joseph Gardelet, corporal in Colonel Pawlet's regiment, Captain Charlton's company, deposes,

To John Edger, a poor weaver, out of work . 0 5 0 To Lucy Jones, a poor orphan . . . 0 2 0 To a poor family, for food and fuel . . 0 5 0 To Christopher Brown, out of business . 0 2 6 To an ancient woman in great distress . 0 2 6 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1751) Author: John Wesley --- Distributed among several sick families . 0 10 0 _____________ 5 5 0 I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant.

To John Dowries Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1751) Author: John Wesley --- LONDON, November, 7, 1751. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I think you write to me as ff you did not care to write. I am glad you went to Alnwick. [See previous letter.] The method you took of talking with each person in the Society apart, I hear, has been greatly blessed to them. I do not see how you could have dealt more favorably with Thomas Grumble [See W.H.S. vii. 65.] than you did. If he will leave the Society, he must leave it. But if he does, you are clear. I know not what to do more for poor Jenny Keith. [Jenny Keith was a Scotswoman who came to the Orphan House Newcastle, to escape persecution, and was there known as ‘Holy Mary.’ She married James Bowmaker, a master builder at Alnwick, and died in 1752. She kept her religious life to the end. See Tyerman's Wesley, i. 542.] Alas, from what a height is she fallen! What a burning and shining light was she six or seven years ago! But thus it ever was. Many of the first shall be last, and many of the last first. How are you employed from five in the morning till nine at night For I suppose you want eight hours’ sleep. What becomes of logic and Latin Is your soul alive and more athirst for God -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Dr. Lavington, Bishop Of Exeter Date: LONDON, December 1751. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1751) Author: John Wesley --- SIR, -- 1. You have undertaken to prove (as I observed in my former letter, a few sentences of which I beg leave to repeat) that the ‘whole conduct of the Methodists is but a counterpart of the most wild fanaticisms of Popery’ (Preface to the First Part, p. 3). You endeavor to support this charge by quotations from our own writings, compared with quotations from Popish authors. It lies upon me to answer for one. But in order to spare both you and myself, I shall at present consider only your Second Part, and that as briefly as possible. Accordingly I shall not meddle with your other quotations, but (leaving them to whom they may concern) shall examine whether those you have made from my writings prove the charge for which they were made or no. If they do, I submit. But if they do not, if they are ‘the words of truth and soberness,’ it is an objection of no real weight against any sentiment, just in itself, though it should also be found in the writings of Papists -- yea, of Mahometans or Pagans. 2. In your first section, in order to prove the ‘vain boasting of the Methodists,’ you quote a part of the following sentence: ‘When hath religion, I will not say since the Reformation, but since the time of Constantine the Great, made so large a progress in any nation within so short a space’ (I beg any impartial person to read the whole passage, from the eighty-fourth to the ninetieth page of the third Appeal. [A Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion, Part III. See Works, viii. 205-9.]) I repeat the question, giving the glory to God; and, I trust, without either boasting or enthusiasm. In your second you cite (and murder) four or five lines from one of my Journals 'as instances of the persuasive eloquence of the Methodist preachers' (pages 1, 9). But it unfortunately happens that neither of the sentences you quote were spoke by any preacher at all. You know full well the one was used only in a private letter, the other by a woman on a bed of sickness.

Who those other ‘forty were that,’ you say, ‘left them’ I know not. Perhaps you may inform me. Upon the whole, all these quotations prove only this: That about eleven years ago Mr. Cennick, falling into predestination, set the Society in Kingswood a-disputing with each other, and occasioned much confusion for some months. But still you have not gone one step toward proving (which is the one point in question) that the Methodists in general were even then ‘all together by the ears,’ and much less that they have been so ever since and that they are so now. However, you fail not to triumph (like Louis le Grand after his victory at Blenheim): ‘What shall we say now Are these the fruits of Methodism’ No, sir. They are the fruits of opposing it. They are the tares sown among the wheat. You may hear of instances of the same kind both in earlier and later ages. You add: ‘This. is bad enough; but it is not the worst. For consider what becomes of those that leave them’ Why, sir, what if ‘their last end be worse than their first’ Will you charge this upon me By the same rule you must have charged upon the Apostles themselves whatever befell those who, having ‘known the way of righteousness,’ afterwards ‘turned back from the holy commandment once delivered to them.’ 36. You conclude this section: ‘Mr. Wesley will probably say, “Must I be answerable for the Moravians, against whom I have preached and written” True, since he and the Moravians quarreled. But who gives them a box on the ear with the one hand and embraces them with the other Who first brought over this wicked generation Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide who fanaticized his own followers and deprived them of their senses whose Societies (by his own confession) 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 Moravianism so strongly working as in the children of Methodism’

To his Brother Charles Date: LONDON, June 23, I755. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1755) Author: John Wesley --- 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] Jam proximus ardet Ucalegon! [Virgil’s Aeneid, ii. 311: ‘And now the flames Spread to Ucalegon’s, our neighbor’s house.’] The good Bishop of London has excommunicated Mr. Gardiner for preaching without a license. It is probable the point will now speedily be determined concerning the Church: for if we must either dissent or be silent, actum est. We have no time to trifle. [That is Wesley’s spirit from first to last. He loves the Church of England but he cannot be silenced.] Adieu.

Oh that your latter works may be more and greater than your first! Surely they would, if you could ever be persuaded to study instead of the writings of Tauler and Behmen, those of St. Paul, James, Peter, and John; to spew out of your mouth and out of your heart that vain philosophy, and speak neither higher nor lower things, neither more nor less, than the oracles of God; to renounce, despise, abhor all the high-flown bombast, all the unintelligible jargon of the Mystics, and come back to the plain religion of the Bible, ‘We love Him, because He first loved us.’

Indeed, I fear our fleets are bought and sold. Poor King George! where will he find an honest man If I hear of the French landing, or beating our fleet on the 14th of July (the day those sights appeared in the air over Cornwall), I shall endearor to come into England directly; otherwise to go on my way. My brother does not oppose field-preaching in general; but he does not like preaching in Smithfield: though I know not why any should oppose it, unless they are apprehensive of the mob. I am now writing on Original Sin [The Doctrine on Original Sin, a reply to Doctor John Taylor of Norwich, was published in Jan 1757. Wesley decided to write it as early as April 10, 1751. See Journal, iii. 520; Green’s Bibliography, No. 182; and letter of July 3, 1759.]; so the papers came in good time. Jo. Haughton is in Dublin. Michael with his little wit does much good. Watch over Jo. Spencer. It win do him a solid kindness. You may perhaps convince him it is his interest to be honest and to save me all the money he can. Should not one preacher go to Norwich immediately and another to Portsmouth Molly, let us make the best of it. Oh for zeal! I want to be on the full stretch for God! -- My dear Love adieu! Pray put Brother Norton’s [See letter of Sept. 3 to Nicholas Norton, which refers to one from him in July.] into the post.

To the Monthly Reviewers Date: LONDON, October 5, 1756. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1756) Author: John Wesley --- Really, gentlemen, you do me too much honor. I could scarce expect so favorable a regard from those who are professed admirers of Mr. Aaron Hill’s verse and Mr. Caleb Flemings prose. Nevertheless I cannot but observe a few small mistakes in the eight lines with which you favor me. You say, ‘We suppose the specimen of Mr. Wesley’s Hymns’ (the false spelling is of little consequence) ‘was sent us for this purpose’ - namely to publish. Truly it was not: it never entered my thought; as, I apprehend, may appear from: the whole tenor of the letter wherein those lines were inserted. ‘And if the Moravians please to select a like sample of what has been done by them, they may expect from us the same justice.’ [See letters of Oct. 24, 1755, and Sept. 9, 1756.] Another little mistake: those lines are not selected, but are found in the very first hymn (as I observed in my last) that occurs in the first verses which my brother and I have ever published. ‘We have received a letter complaining of our having jumbled the poetry of the Methodists and Moravians in an indiscriminate censure.’ Not so. The Chief thing complained of was, (1) Your ‘jumbling whole bodies of people together and of condemning them by the lump without any regard either to prudence, justice or humanity.’ (2).Your ‘treating with such contempt those who by no means contemptible writers - Mr. Norris and Mr. Herbert.’ The last and least thing was your ‘coupling the hymns of Moravians and Methodists together.’ It was here I added, ‘As probably you have a never few seen the books which you condemn, I will transcribe a few lines’; but neither did I give the least intimation of ‘appealing hereby to the public in proof of our superiority over the Moravians.’ This is another mistake. At first I was a little inclined to fear a want of integrity had occasioned this misrepresentation; but, upon reflection, I would put a milder construction upon it, and only impute it to want of understanding. Even bodies of men do not see all things; and are then especially liable to err, when they imagine themselves hugely superior to their opponents, and so pronounce ex cathedra.

‘Both the branches of the law, the preceptive and the penal, in the case of guilt contracted must be satisfied’ (page 309). Not so. ‘Christ by His death alone’ (so our Church teaches) ‘fully satisfied for the sins of the whole world.’ The same great truth is manifestly taught in the Thirty-first Article. Is it therefore fair, is it honest, for any one to plead the Articles of our Church in defense of Absolute Predestination, seeing the Seventeenth Article barely defines the term without either affirming or denying the thing, whereas the Thirty-first totally overthrows and razes it from the foundation ‘Believers who are notorious transgressors in themselves have a sinless obedience in Christ’ (ibid.). Oh syren song! Pleasing sound to James Wheatley, Thomas Williams, James Relly! I know not one sentence in the Eleventh Dialogue which is liable to exception; but that grand doctrine of Christianity, Original Sin, is therein proved by irrefragable arguments. The Twelfth likewise is unexceptionable, and contains such an illustration of the wisdom of God in the structure of the human body as I believe cannot be paralleled in either ancient or modem writers. The former part of the Thirteenth Dialogue is admirable: to the latter I have some objection. ‘Elijah failed in his resignation, and even Moses spake un-advisedly with his lips’ (vol. ii. p. 44). It is true; but if you could likewise fix some blot upon venerable Samuel and beloved Daniel, it would prove nothing. For no scripture teaches that the holiness of Christians is to be measured by that of any Jew. ‘Do not the best of men frequently feel disorder in their affections Do not they often complain, “When I would do good, evil is present with me”’ (Page 46.) I believe not. You and I are only able to answer for ourselves. ‘Do not they say, “We groan, being burthened with the workings of inbred corruption”’ You know this is not the meaning of the text. The whole context shows the cause of that groaning was their longing’ to be with Christ.’

To Samuel Furly Date: LONDON, SNOWSFIELDS, December 4, 1756. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1756) Author: John Wesley --- 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.

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.

To Matthew Lowes Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1759) Author: John Wesley --- [4] NORWICH, March 6, 1759. MY DEAR BROTHER,--Lawrence Coughlan, [Lawrence Coughlan was an Irishman who was afterwards ordained by the Bishop of London and sent to Newfoundland as a missionary. He had done fruitful service in Colchester. He died in 1785. See Journal, iv. 297; Atmore's Memorial, pp.80-3; and letter of March 6, 1763.] who was at first appointed for Whitehaven, is to set out from Colchester on Monday, and to stay at Whitehaven till the Conference in the beginning of August. Till he comes I desire you diligently to inquire whether the bulk of the Society are for or against W. Wilson's preaching. If they are against it, he had better not preach at Whitehaven (but he may preach anywhere else) till I come. If the bulk of them are for it, let him preach at some times: at others Brother Browning [Wilson and Browning were probably laymen beginning to preach.] may read a sermon. But if he does speak, let him take care to conclude the whole service within the hour. Certainly, rather than any flame should have arisen concerning it, Brother Hodgson and the rest ought to have dropped their opposition. What would not one do (except sin) that brotherly love may continue!--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Matthew Lowes, At the Methodist Preaching-house, In Whitehaven.

To George Merryweather BRENTFORD, January 24, 1760. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1760) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I received yours with the bill a day or two ago. I wish you would everywhere recommend two books in particular--The Christian Pattern and the Primitive Physick.[Wesley's An Extract of the Christian's Pattern had been published in 1741, and reprinted in 1744, 1746, and 1759. It was an abridgement of his translation of 1735. The eighth edition of his Primitive Physick was issued in 1759.] It is a great pity that any Methodist should be without them. I wonder Brother Mather [Alexander Mather was stationed in the York Circuit, which included Yarm. He became one of the moat powerful preachers and judicious leaders of Methodism, and was President of the Conference in 1792.] does not write to me. He should not forget his friends. I hope the gentleman with whom I breakfasted at Yarm [Probably in July 1759. Mr. Waldy was a landed proprietor in Yarm. See letter of Dec. 28, 1767.] has not forsaken you. Even the rich may enter into the kingdom; for with God all things are possible. See that you stir up the gift of God that is in you. What is our Lord's word to you--'Let the dead bury their dead; but follow thou Me!'--I am Your affectionate brother.

Q. 17. 'Did not you suffer your lay preachers at Leeds to debate whether they should separate from the Church' Yes, and encouraged them to say all that was in their hearts. 'Why did you do this' To confirm their adherence to it; and they were so confirmed that only two out of the whole number have since separated from it. Q. 18. 'If most votes had carried the day, what had followed' If the sky should fall! Q. 12. 'What did you propose by preaching up to the people a solemn covenant' To confirm them in fearing God and working righteousness. I shall probably do the same again shortly. And if you desire any farther information, you are welcome to hear every sermon which I preach concerning it. Q. 13. 'Was not this intended to cut them off from ever communicating with any company of Christians but yourselves' No; nothing less. It was not intended to cut them off from anything but the devil and his works. Q. 14. 'Do you not commend the Quakers' Yes, in some things. 'And the French prophets' No. Q. 15. 'Do you not stint your lay preachers to three or four minutes only in public prayers' I advise them not usually to exceed four or five minutes either before or after sermon. [See A Preservative against Unsettled Notions in Religion, 1758, p. 244.] Q. 3. 'Is not your Christian Library an odd collection of mutilated writings of Dissenters of all sorts' No. In the first ten volumes there is not a line from any Dissenter of any sort; and the greatest part of the other forty is extracted from Archbishop Leighton, Bishops Taylor, Patrick, Ken, Reynolds, Sanderson, and other ornaments of the Church of England. Q. 4. 'Is not this declaring that you have a superior privilege beyond all men to print, correct, and direct as you please' I think not. I suppose every man in England has the same privilege. Q. 5. 'Is it performed according to the first proposals and the expectation of the subscribers' It is performed according to the first proposals; nor could any subscriber reasonably expect more.

To Matthew Lowes Date: LONDON, October 30, 1761. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1761) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--The thing is settled. Thomas Newall [Thomas Newall became a preacher in 1761, and retired in 1780 .] is to labour with you in the Whitehaven Circuit, and see that you break up fresh ground. In the meantime William Darney is to divide the Allendale Circuit with T. Hanby. [Thomas Hanby, born in Carlisle in 1733; President in 1794. Wesley ordained him on Aug. 1, 1785, with John Pawson and Joseph Taylor, 'three of our well-tried preachers,' to minister in Scotland. See Wesley's Veterans, ii. 51-77.] As to maintenance, first let the Society do what they can. And they have good encouragement. Secondly, at Christmas I will make up what is wanting to you and Sister Lowes. 'Dwell in the land, and be doing good, and verily thou shalt be fed.'--I am Your affectionate friend and brother. [See letters of Sept. 8, 1761, and Jan. 25, 1762, to him.] See that you perform the whole office of an Assistant.

To the Editor of the ‘London Chronicle’ Date: WINDMILL HILL, January 7, 1763. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1763) Author: John Wesley --- SIR,--When I returned to London two or three months ago, I received various accounts of some meetings for prayer which had lately been held by Mr. Bell and a few others. But these accounts were contradictory to each other. Some highly applauded them, others utterly condemned; some affirmed they had done much good, others that they had done much hurt. This convinced me it was requisite to proceed with caution and to do nothing rashly. The first point was to form my own judgment, and that upon the fullest evidence. To this end I first talked with Mr. Bell himself, whom I knew to be an honest, well-meaning man. Next I told him they were at liberty for a few times to meet under my roof. They did so, both in the Society room at the Foundry and in the chapel at West Street. By this means I had an opportunity of hearing them myself, which I did at both places. I was present the next meeting after that, which is mentioned by Mr. Dodd and Mr. Thompson in the Public Ledger. The same things which they blame I blame also; and so I told him the same evening: and I was in hopes they would be done away, which occasioned my waiting till this time. But, having now lost that hope, I have given orders that they shall meet under my roof no more. What farther steps it will be necessary for me to take is a point I have not yet determined. -- I am, sir, Your humble servant.

Give me leave, my dear friend, to add a word likewise concerning your bodily health. You should in any wise give yourself all the air and exercise that you can. And I should advise you (even though long custom made it difficult, if that were the case) to sleep as early as possible; never later than ten, in order to rise as early as health will permit. The having good spirits, so called, or the contrary, very much depends on this. I believe medicines will do you little service: you need only proper diet, exact regularity, and constant exercise, with the blessing of God. Your speaking or writing was never tedious to me yet; and I am persuaded never will be. Your letters are more and more agreeable to, my very dear Lady, Your most affectionate servant.

REVEREND SIR,--1. In the tract which you have just published concerning the people called Methodists you very properly say: 'Our first care should be candidly and fairly to examine their doctrines. For, as to censure them unexamined would be unjust, so to do the same without a fair and impartial examination would be ungenerous.' And again: 'We should in the first place carefully and candidly examine their doctrines.' (Page 68.) This is undoubtedly true. But have you done it Have you ever examined their doctrines yet Have you examined them fairly fairly and candidly candidly and carefully Have you read over so much as the Sermons they have published or the Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion I hope you have not; for I would fain make some little excuse for your uttering so many senseless, shameless falsehoods. I hope you know nothing about the Methodists, no more than I do about the Cham of Tartary; that you are ignorant of the whole affair, and are so bold only because you are blind. Bold enough! Throughout your whole tract you speak satis pro imperio, [Terence's Phormio, 1. iv. 19: 'With authority enough.']--as authoritatively as if you was, not an archbishop only, but Apostolic Vicar also; as if you had the full papal power in your hands, and fire and faggot at your beck! And blind enough; so that you blunder on through thick and thin, bespattering all that come in your way, according to the old, laudable maxim, 'Throw dirt enough, and some will stick.' 2. I hope, I say, that this is the case, and that you do not knowingly assert so many palpable falsehoods. You say: 'If I am mistaken, I shall always be ready and desirous to retract my error' (page 56). A little candour and care might have prevented those mistakes; this is the first thing one would have desired. The next is that they may be removed; that you may see wherein you have been mistaken, and be more wary for the time to come. 3. You undertake to give an account, first, of the rise and principles, then of the practices, of the Methodists.

'I say those who are called Methodists; for let it be well observed that this is not a name which they take to themselves, but one fixed upon them by way of reproach without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford by a student of Christ Church; either in allusion to the ancient sect of physicians (so called from their teaching that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise), or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station.' [Preface to The Character of a Methodist. See Works, viii. 339; and letter of Aug. 24, 1758.] I need only add that this nickname was imposed upon us before 'this manner of preaching' had a being--yea, at a time when I thought it as lawful to cut a throat as to preach out of a church. 'Why, then, will Mr. Wesley so grossly misrepresent his adversaries as to say that, when they speak against Methodism, they speak against the plain, old doctrine of the Church of England' (Tract, p. 169.) This is no misrepresentation. Many of our adversaries all over the kingdom speak against us eo nomine for preaching these doctrines, Justification by Faith in particular. However, 'a fanatic manner of preaching, though it were the doctrine of an apostle, may do more harm to society at least than reviving old heresies or inventing new. It tends to bewilder the imaginations of some, to inflame the passions of others, and to spread disorder and confusion through the whole community.' (Page 169.) I would gladly have the term defined. What is a 'fanatic manner of preaching' Is it field-preaching But this has no such effect, even among the wildest of men. This has not 'bewildered the imagination' even of the Kingswood colliers or 'inflamed their passions.' It has not spread disorder or confusion among them, but just the contrary. From the time it was heard in that chaos, Confusion heard the voice, and wild uproar Stood ruled, . . . and order from disorder sprung. [Paradise Lost, iii. 710-13.]

'"A poor woman" (on Wednesday, September 17, 1740) "said it was four years" (namely, in September 1736, above a year before I left Georgia) "since her son, by hearing a sermon of Mr. Wheatley's, fell into great uneasiness. She thought he was ill, and would have sent for a physician. But he said, No, no; send for Mr. Wheatley. He was sent for, and came; and, after asking a few questions, told her, The boy is mad: get a coach, and carry him to Dr. Monro: use my name; I have sent several such to him." Who this Mr. Wheatley is I know not.' He was lecturer at Spitalfields Church. The event was, after the apothecary had half murdered him, he was discharged, and the lad soon recovered his strength. His senses he never had lost. The supposing this was a blunder from the beginning. 'These are the exploits which M--,--. Wesley calls blessings from God' (page 212). Certainly I do, both repentance and faith. 'And which therefore we may call the good fruits of his ministry.' May God increase them an hundredfold! 'What the Apostle calls "good fruits," namely, doing much good, Mr. Wesley tells us belongs not to true religion.' I never told any man so yet. I tell all men just the contrary. I may then safely leave all mankind to judge whether a single article of the charge against me has yet been made good. So much for the first charge that I am a madman. Now for the second that I am a knave. 5. The proof is short: 'Every enthusiast is a knave: but he is an enthusiast; therefore he is a knave.' I deny both the first and second proposition. Nay, the first is proved thus: 'Enthusiasm must always be accompanied with craft and knavery' (page 213). It is often so, but not always; for there may be honest enthusiasts. Therefore the whole account of that odd combination which follows is ingenious, but proves nothing. (Pages 214-18.)

'The common opinion is that this respects another life, as he enforces his argument by this observation: "Now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: now we know in part; but then shall we know, even as also we are known"' (page 99). 'But the Apostle means charity is to accompany the Church in all its stages, whereas prophecy and all the rest are only bestowed during its infant state to support it against the delusions and powers of darkness' (page 100). 'The Corinthians abounded in these gifts, but were wanting in charity. And this the Apostle here exposes by proving charity to be superior to them all both in its qualities and duration. The first three verses declare that the other gifts are useless without charity. The next four specify the qualities of charity. The remaining six declare its continuance,--"Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away." In the next verse he gives the reason,--"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away": that is, when that Christian life, the lines of which are marked out by the gospel, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity, then the temporary aids, given to subdue prejudice and to support the weak, shall, like scaffolding, be removed. In other words, when that Christian life, wherein the Apostles and first Christians were but infants, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity in their successors, then miracles shall cease.' (Page 102.) But I fear that time is not yet come. I doubt none that are now alive enjoy more of the vigour and maturity of the Christian life than the very first Christians did.

To Various Friends Date: LONDON, November 20, 1769. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1769) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--Two years ago many of our brethren, who considered the number of the people called Methodists and the circumstances which a great part of them were in, believed we should pay off the debt at once. I myself was fully persuaded that between twenty and thirty thousand people were well able to do this; but I was not at all persuaded that they were willing. However, I said little upon that head, being unwilling to weaken the hands of those who were of another mind. It was a good step which was made the first year. Upwards of 5,000 were contributed; by which means the most pressing debts were paid, and many of our brethren were firmly persuaded we should make an end of the whole the second year. I well knew the Methodists could do this; but I saw no reason to think they would. And when the collection was brought in, amounting to above 2,000, it was full as much as I expected. 'But what can be done this third year 5,000 remain unpaid. Are the Methodists able to clear this in one year' Yes; as well as they are able to clear 50. But are they willing That I cannot tell: I am sure a few of them are; even of those who have a large measure of worldly goods; yea, and of those who are lately increased in substance, who have twice, perhaps ten or twenty times, as much as when they saw me first. Are you one of them Whether you are or not, whether your substance is less or more, are you willing to give what assistance you can to do what you can without hurting your family 'But if I do so, I cannot lay out so much in such and such things as I intended.' That is true. But will this hurt you What if, instead of enlarging, you should for the present contract your expenses spend less, that you may be able to give more Would there be any harm in this

To his Wife Date: EDINBURGH, May 18, 1774. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1774) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR LOVE,--I am just now come hither from Glasgow, and take this opportunity of writing two or three lines. I desire you would let Mr. Pine have an hundred pounds of that money which is in your hands, provided he gives you his full account first: which I must beg of you to send to London to John Atlay, together with fifty pounds for Mr. Nind, the paper-maker, and fifty pounds for Robert Hawes. There is no use in letting the money lie dead. If I do not administer, I can but pay this again. I am just going to preach, and am in great haste.--My dear Molly, Your affectionate Husband.

If 'Zoroaster and Pythagoras did visit them about the time of Romulus’ (which I do not allow), what then Romulus did not live three thousand years ago; and Zoroaster a late author has sufficiently proved to be no other than Moses himself. The antiquity, therefore, of the Shastah is utterly uncertain, being unsupported by any clear authority. Equally doubtful is the antiquity of that empire. Nay, ' Indostan, by their own account, was peopled as early as most other parts of the known word.' But who can rely on their own accounts This authority is just none at all. But 'the first invaders of it found the inhabitants a potent, civilized, wise, and learned people: Alexander the Great found it so.' No. Arrian and Q. Curtius (the only writers who give us the particulars of that expedition) say quite the contrary. But 'the Gentoo records affirm it, which mention the invasion of a great and mighty robber.' I answer (1) How is it proved this was Alexander the Great There have been more great and mighty robbers than him. But if it was, (2) Of what antiquity was he who died little above two thousand years since (3) Of what authority are the Gentoo records As much as the visions of Mirza. But 'these doctrines were universally professed by the Gentoos, some thousand years before Christ; and the Metempsychosis was held in the most early ages by at least four-fifths of the earth; and the Gentoos were eminently distinguished in the most early times.' Roundly asserted: but that is not enough; a little proof would do well. Here it is at last. 'The Gentoos admit no proselytes to their faith or worship. This proves their great antiquity.' I know not how: the consequence halts sadly. But see another argument. 'This is also proved by the perpetuity of their doctrine through a succession of so many ages.' Right, when that succession is proved. A third proof! ' Pythagoras took his doctrines from them, which the Egyptians took from him.' I am an infidel as to both these facts till I see some proof of them. His true doctrines I believe Pythagoras learned from the Egyptians, and they from the Israelites.

And this strikes at the New Testament also, wherein there are numerous Prophecies. But here, indeed, the mask quite falls off. He laughs at 'the reveries of Paul' (well he might! how unlike those of his apostle, Bramah!); and tells us in plain terms 'that only the words of Christ Himself are the pure, original Scriptures.' Nay, herein he allows too much; for some of His words foretell the actions of free agents. And lest we should urge the death of the Martyrs in favor of Christianity, we are told (which he that can believe may), 'The contempt of death is the character of the Gentoo nation. Every Gentoo meets death with a steady, noble, and philosophical resignation.' And yet 'the Gentoos in general are as degenerate, crafty, and wicked a people as any in the known world.' To complete the contrast between the doctrines of our Bible and his Bible, the Shastah he adds: 'The fundamental points of Religion were impressed on the heart of man at his creation; and he never has and never will be able to efface them. These primitive truths are: (1) the being of a God, the Creator and Preserver of all things; (2) the existence of three prime created beings; (3) the creation of angels; (4) the rebellion of part of them; (5) their fall from heaven; (6) the immortally of the soul; (7) future rewards and punishments; (8) that one angel tempted the other angel, and now tempts men; (9) the necessity of one, or more Mediators, for the expiation of sin; (10) an intermediate state of punishment and purification after death; (11) the existence of a golden age, wherein men used no animal food; and (12) the ministration of angels. These were the primitive truths revealed by God to man, and the only ones necessary to man's salvation!’ Is not this inimitable Hither, ye Eastern Bramins, come! Hither, ye Western Locusts, Monks of Rome! Behold the frontless, all-imposing man, And match him with your Priestcraft if ye can.

To Ann Bolton Date: LONDON, February 8, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER,--I doubt whether we have not been wanting in one thing. When persons were in their [first] love, we have generally suffered that love to grow cold before we spoke to them of perfection. Would it not have been better to speak to them just then And how often might the first love have been changed into pure love! Your ever affectionate brother.

To John Crook Date: BRISTOL, September 22, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER,--I have wrote to Mr. Harrison, Hume, and Brooks in the Isle, and told them my plan for helping them, which is this. Go you down directly in the White-haven Circuit to labor there as a third preacher. Then let the three preachers visit the Isle in turns, each staying a month at a time. If the Bishop comes, you should immediately send him in my name the First Part of the Earnest Appeal; and you spread among the richer of the Society the Plain Account of the Methodists, and the Advice to the Methodists, with all the single Sermons. Let Mr. Mason go over first, and you next. You see, in your [case] your wife is considered. Your affectionate brother. You may write to Jacob Rowell at Yarm, and tell him I desire the young man he wrote to me of may go into Lincolnshire in your place. The sooner the better. Mr. Mason, at Whitehaven. To be left at the Methodist Preaching-house, Cumberland.

To his Brother Charles Date: LONDON, November 3, 1775. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1775) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER,--The Proposals and Preface will be sent on Monday. In the Preface to the new edition of the Address (which I will send with the Proposals) there is, I think, a sufficient answer to Mr. Evan's letter. But Mr. Raikes is right: if it bears no name, it has no title to any answer. No man is a good judge in his own cause. I believe I am tolerably impartial; but you are not (at least, was not some time since) with regard to King Charles I. Come and see what I say. If the worst comes, we can agree to disagree. The History has been some time in the press. The first volume is nearly printed. The paper is good; so is the type; and, what is stranger, the execution too. So much for your first letter. Still I know not whom you mean by Dr. Smyth; unless it be the young clergyman in Ireland, who is a poet, but not of the first magnitude. 'Why were they not taxed for an hundred and fifty years ' How shockingly ignorant of the law are our lawyers! yea, and the whole body of the Lords and Commons into the bargain! to let Lord Chatham, Mr. Burke, &c. &c., so long triumph in this argumentum palmarium! Why, it is a blunder from top to bottom. They have been taxed over and over since the Restoration, by King Charles, King William, Queen Anne, and George II. I can now point out chapter and verse. I think Mr. Madan grows more and more loving. Res ipsa jam reduxit in gratiam. I shall be right glad to see him. I hear nothing from Cornwall; and no news, you know, is good news. Pray tell Brother Southcote I like his treatise well. I am writing something nearly on the subject. I am desired to preach at Bethnal Green Church on Sunday se'nnight, and purpose to print my sermon. You may guess a little of the tenor of it by the text: ' Lo, I have sinned and done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done ' I hope Sally is better. Peace be with you all! Adieu!

resolved, never to rest till I find again the rest that remains for the people of God. I am, dear Sir, A vile backslider from the pure love of Jesus, and from the society at Gwennap, Mon. 5. I preached at Cubert ; Tuesday, 6, at Port- Isaac. Wednesday, 7. Having preached at Camelford and Launceston, I did not think of preaching at Tavistock ; but finding a congregation waiting, I began without delay. I had scarce half finished my discourse in the Square at Plymouth- Dock, when the rain began. At first I did not regard it : But as it grew heavier and heavier, I thought it best to shorten my sermon . It seems, after a long interval ofdeadness, God is again visit- ing this poor people. The society is nearly doubled within this year, and is still continually increasing. And many are athirst for full salvation ; particularly the young men. Friday, 9. I set Oct. 1774. ] out early from the Dock ; and the next afternoon reached Bristol. Fri. 16. We had asolemn watch-night at Kingswood. It seemed, every one felt thatGodwas there ; so that hardly any went away till the whole service was concluded. Inthe followingweek I visited manyofthe country societies. At Frome I learned the remarkable case of sister Whitaker. Last Sunday she met her class as usual ; and after saying, " I know that my Redeemer liveth," dropped down, and in a few minutes, without any struggle or pain, expired. Tues. 27.-I preached at Freshford and Bradford ; Wed- nesday, 28, at Bath, where many of the people seemed much moved; chiefly those who had long imagined they were " built on a rock," and now found they had been " building upon the sand." Thur. 29. I preached at Pill, on the "worm" that "diethnot, and the fire " that " is not quenched : " If haply some of these drowsy ones might awake, and escape from everlasting burnings. Mon. OCTOBER 3, and on Tuesday and Wednesday, I exa- mined the society. Thur. 6.-I met those of our societywho had votes in the ensuing election, and advised them, 1. To vote, without fee or reward, for the person they judged most worthy : 2. To speak no evil ofthe person they voted against: And, 3. To take care

his sufferings. Sat. 27. I preached in the church at Bingley ; perhaps not so filled before for these hundred years. Sunday, 28. The congregation at Haworth was far greater than the church could contain. For the sake of the poor parishioners, few of whom are even awakened to this day, I spoke as strongly as I possibly could upon these words, " The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved." The church at Colne is, I think, at least twice as large as that at Haworth. But it would not in any wise contain the congre- gation. I preached on, " I saw a great white throne coming down from heaven." Deep attention sat on every face ; and, I trust, God gave us his blessing. Mon. 29. About two I preached at Padiham, in a broad street, to a huge congregation. I think the only inattentive persons were, the Minister and a kind of gentleman. I saw none inattentive at Clough in the evening. What has God wrought, since Mr. Grimshaw and I were seized near this place by a furious mob, and kept prisoners for some hours ! The sons of him who headed that mob now gladly receive our saying. Tues. 30. In the evening I preached in akind of Square, at Colne, to a multitude of people, all drinking in the word. I scarce ever saw acongregation wherein men, women, and children stood in such a posture : And this in the town wherein, thirty years ago, no Methodist could show his head ! The first that preached here was John Jane, who was innocently riding through the town, when the zealous mob pulled him off his May,1776.] 73 horse, and put him in the stocks. He seized the opportu- nity, and vehemently exhorted them " to flee from the wrath to come." Wed. MAY 1.-I set out early, and the next afternoon reached Whitehaven ; and my chaise-horses were no worse for travelling near a hundred and ten miles in two days. In travelling through Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Bristol, Glou- cestershire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Staffordshire, Che- shire, Lancashire, Yorkshire, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, I diligently made two inquiries : The first was, concerning the increase or decrease of the people ; the second, concerning the increase or decrease of trade. As to the latter, it is, within

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

years seen a congregation so universally affected. One would have imagined, every one that was present had a desire to save his soul. In the evening I preached in the High-Street at Helstone. I scarce know a town in the whole county which is so totally changed ; not a spark of that bitter enmity to the Methodists, in which the people here for many years gloried above their fellows . Going through Marazion, I was told that a large congrega- tion was waiting: So I stepped out of my chaise, and began immediately ; and we had a gracious shower. Some were cut to the heart ; but more rejoiced with joy unspeakable. In the evening I preached in the market-place at Penzance. Idesigned afterwards to meet the society; but the people were so eager to hear all they could, that they quickly filled theHouse from end to end. This is another of the towns wherein the whole stream of the people is turned, as it were, from east to west. We had a happy season, both at St. Just on Thursday Sept. 1781.1 JOURNAL. 215 evening, and in the market-place at St. Ives on Friday. Satur- day, SEPTEMBER 1. I made an end of that curious book, Dr. Parson's " Remains of Japhet." The very ingenious author has struck much light into some of the darkest parts of ancient history; and although I cannot entirely subscribe to every proposition which he advances, yet I apprehend he has suffi- ciently proved the main ofhis hypothesis ; namely,- 1. That, after the flood, Shem and his descendants peopled the greatest parts of Asia. 2. That Ham and his children peopled Africa. 3. That Europe was peopledby the two sons ofJaphet, Gomer and Magog ; the southern and south-western byGomer and his children ; and the north and the north-western by the children of Magog. 4. That the former were called Gomerians, Cimmerians, Cimbrians ; and afterwards Celtiæ, Galatæ, and Gauls ; the latter were called by the general name of Scythians, Scuiti, Scots. 5. That the Gomerians spread swiftly through the north of Europe, as far as the Cimbrian Chersonesus, (including Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and divers other countries,) and then into Ireland, where they multiplied veryearly into a considerable nation. 6. That some ages after, another part of themwho had first settled in Spain, sailed to Ire-

cattle. We sat under an arbour of stately trees, between the front and the back gardens. Here were four such children (I suppose seven, six, five, and three years old) as I never saw before in one family : Such inexpressible beauty and innocence shone together ! In the evening I attended the service of the great Dutch church, as large as most of our cathedrals. The organ (like those in all the Dutch churches) was elegantly painted and gilded; and the tunes that were sung were very lively, and yet solemn. Mon. 16. We set out in a track-skuit for the Hague. By theway we saw a curiosity : The gallows near the canal, sur- rounded with a knot of beautiful trees ! So the dying man will have one pleasant prospect here, whatever befalls him hereafter ! At eleven we came to Delft, a large, handsome town, where we spent an hour at a merchant's house, who, as well as his wife, a very agreeable woman, seemed both to fear and to love God. Afterwards we saw the great church ; I think nearly, if not quite, as long as York Minster. It is exceedingly light and elegant within, and every part is kept exquisitely clean. The tomb of William the First is much admired ; particularly his statue, which has more life than one would think could be expressed in brass. Whenwe came to the Hague, though we hadheardmuch of it, we were not disappointed. It is, indeed, beautiful beyond expression. Many of the houses are exceeding grand, and are finely intermixed with water and wood; yet not too close, but so as to be sufficiently ventilated by the air. Being invited to tea by Madam de Vassenaar, (one of the first quality in the Hague,) I waited upon her in the afternoon. She received us with that easy openness and affability which is almost peculiar to Christians and persons of quality. Soon after June, 1783.] came ten or twelve ladies more, who seemed to be of her own rank, (though dressed quite plain,)and two most agreeable gen- tlemen; one of whom, I afterwards understood, was a Colonel in the Prince's Guards. After tea I expounded the three first verses of the thirteenth of the first Epistle to the Corinthians. CaptainM. interpreted, sentence by sentence. I then prayed,

points were considered : First, the case of Birstal House ; and, Secondly, the state of Kingswood School. With regard to the former, our brethren earnestlydesired that I would go to Birstal myself, believing this would be the most effectual way of bringing the Trustees to reason. With regard to the latter, we all agreed, that either the School should cease, or the Rules of itbeparticularly observed : Particularly, that the children should never play; and that amaster should be always present with them. Tues. AUGUST 5.---Early in the morning I was seized with a most impetuous flux. In a few hours it was joined by a violent and almost continual cramp; first, in my feet, legs, thighs ; then, in my side and my throat. The case being judged extreme, a grain and a half of opium was given me in three doses : This speedily stopped the cramp ; but, at the same time, took awaymyspeech, hearing, and power of motion ; and locked meupfromhead to foot ; so that I lay amere log. I then sent for Dr. Drummond, who from that time attended me twice a day. For some days I wasworse and worse ; till, on Friday, I was removed to Mr. Castleman's. Still my head was not affected, and I had no pain,although in a continual fever. But I continued slowly to recover, so that I could read or write an hour or two at a time. On Wednesday, 12, I took a vomit, which almost shook me to pieces ; but, however, did me good. Sunday, 17, and all the followingweek,my fever gradu- ally abated ; but I had a continual thirst, and little or no increase of strength : Nevertheless, being unwilling to be idle, on Saturday, 23, I spent an hour with the penitents ; and, finding myself no worse, on Sunday, 24, I preached at the newRoom, morning and afternoon. Finding my strength was [Sept. 1783. now in some measure restored, I determined to delay no longer ; but setting out on Monday, 25, reached Gloucesterin the after- noon : In the evening I preached in the Town-Hall ; I believe, not in vain. Tuesday, 26. Iwent on to Worcester, where many young people are just setting out in the ways ofGod. I joined fifteen ofthem this afternoon to the society; all ofthem, I believe,

causes " the earth to bring forth at once," and " a nation" to be "born in a day." Wed. 30.-A large room, designed for an assembly-room, was filled in the morning ; and the poor people appeared to be. quite ripe for the highest doctrine of the Gospel ; so I exhorted them, leaving the first principles, to "go on unto perfection." About eleven I preached in the market-house at Enniskillen, formerly a den of lions ; but the lions are become lambs. They flocked together from every part, and were all attention. Before I had half done, Godmade bare his arm, and the mountains flowed down at his presence. Manywere cut to the heart, and many rejoiced with joy unspeakable: Surely the last shall be first ; and poor Enniskillen shall lift up its head above many of the places where the Gospel has been long preached. In the evening I preached to another numerous congregation, at Sidare, a large house at the foot of the mountains. One wouldwonderwhence all the people came: They seemed to spring out of the earth. Here also there were once many bitter perse- cutors ; but they are vanished away like smoke. Several of them, indeed, came to a fearful end, and their neighbours took warning by them. Thur. 31. We travelled through a pleasant, well-cultivated country to Omagh, the shire town of Tyrone. It being market- day amultitude of people presently flocked together to a tent, as they call it, on the side of the Green. At first they were innocently noisy ; (this being a new thing at Omagh ;) but they were soon still as night : I suited my subject to their experience, preaching on, " It is appointed unto men once to die." God applied it to their hearts. Not a smile was to be seen; but all seemed to feel the solemn truth . Thence we went over mountains and dales to Kerlish Lodge, where we met with a hearty welcome, both from Alexander Boyle, and his amiable wife, who are patterns to all the country. Although we were at a lone house ten miles from any town, and although the weather was both rainy and stormy, we had a 380 REV. J. WESLEY'S [June, 1787. large congregation in the evening, and afterwards a comfortable

the afternoon went over to Mr. Hick's, at Wrestlingworth, through such roads as no chaise could pass : So we had the pleasure of riding in a farmer's cart. Itwas such amotion as I never felt before : But to make amends, the church was so filled as I never had seen it; and Iwas enabled to speak with unusual plainness. Surely some received the truth in the love thereof ! Thur. NOVEMBER 1.-I gave a fair reading to Dr. Gerard's "Essay on Taste." I should have wondered, but that I had read his " Plan of Education ; " wherein he advises to read Logic last. Such an advice could never have been given but by one thatknew nothing about it. Indeed, he has hardly aclear idea of anything. Hence it was natural for him to produce this strange performance, wherein he talks prettily, but quite wide of the mark, stumbling at first setting out ; for genius is no more invention, than it is sense or memory. Fri. 2.-I set out early, and about noonpreached at Barnet, to a small, serious congregation. I then went on to London. Sat. 3-. I had a long conversation with Mr. Clulow, on that execrable Act, called the Conventicle Act. After consulting theAct of Toleration, withthat ofthe fourteenth of QueenAnne, we were both clearly convinced, that it was the safest way to license all our chapels, and all our Travelling Preachers, not as Dissenters, but simply " Preachers of the Gospel ; " and that no Justice, or Bench of Justices, has any authority to refuse licens- ing either the House or the Preachers. Sun. 4. The congregation at the new chapel was far larger thanusual ; and the number of communicants was so great, that I was obliged to consecrate thrice. Monday, 5. In my way to REV. J. WESLEY'S [Nov. 1787. Dorking, I read Mr. Duff's " Essay onGenius. " It is beyond all comparison, deeper and more judicious than Dr. G.'s Essay on that subject. If the Doctor had seen it, (which one can hardly doubt,) it is awonderhe would publish his Essay. Yet I cannot approve ofhis method. Why does he not first define his term, that we may know what he is talking about ? I doubt, because his own idea of itwas not clear ; for genius is not imagi-

began ; so I could only enforce in the Room those solemn words, in the first Lesson for the day, " Turn ye, turn ye, from your evil ways," &c. Mon. 5.-We set out at four, and, hiring post-horses, reached Mr. Whitchurch's, at Sarum, before dinner. In the evening the House was crowded extremely, and the voice of God was heard among them; especially in the meeting of the society, to whom I delivered my own soul once for all. Tuesday, 6. About nine I spoke full as plain at Winchester, I think, to the largest congregation I have seen there ; and it seemed the most serious ; on that awful subject, Mark ix. 44. The audience at Portsmouth-Common, in the evening, were of another kind ; to whom, therefore, I spake in quite another manner, from Eph. iii. 14, &c. Wednesday, 7. About one I preached to another very serious congregation in the town ; whom, therefore, I exhorted to leave the first principles, and go on to perfection. Thursday, 8. I set out early, and in the afternoon we were brought to London. I am now as well, by the good providence of God, as I am likely to be while I live. My sight is so decayed that I cannot well read by candle-light ; but I can write as well as ever : And my strength is much lessened, so that I cannot easily preach above twice a day. But, I bless God, my memory is not much decayed ; and my understanding is as clear as it has been these fifty years. Sun. 11. I preached at West-Street morning and afternoon, and then buried the remains of Dorothy Hundlebee, who, after an exemplary life, went to God in the full triumph of faith . Tuesday, 13. I preached partly upon the subject at the new chapel ; and strongly exhorted the congregation to be followers of her as she was of Christ. In the evening Iwent in the mail- coach to Barton-Mills, and thence in a chaise to Lynn. Wed. 14. The heavy rain prevented tender people from attending in the evening. Sunday, 25. In the morning I 474 REV. J. WESLEY'S [Nov. 1789. preached at West-Street, on Matt. xxii. 11 : " He saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment ; " and showed that

hand and seal, the twenty-eighth day of February, in the twenty-fourth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Third, by the grace of God of Great-Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth, and in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hun- dred and eighty-four. Sealed and delivered (being first duly stamped) in the presence of WILLIAM CLULOW, Quality Court, Chancery-Lane, London. RICHARD YOUNG, Clerk to the said William Clulow. Taken and acknowledged by the Rev. John Wesley, party hereto this 28th of February, 1784, at the Public Office, before me, The above is a true Copy of the original Deed, (which is enrolled in Chancery,) and was therewith examined by us, Dated Feb. 28th, 1784 . The Rev. John Wesley's Declaration and Appointment of the Conference of the people called Methodists, enrolled in His Majesty's High Court of Chancery, the ninth day of March, in the year of our Lord 1784, being first duly stamped according to the tenor of the Statutes, made for that purpose. JAMES NICHOLS, Printer, 2, Warwick-Square,Newgate-Street, London. 1 !

To Arthur Keene Date: LEEDS, August 3, 1778. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1778) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I am of the same opinion with you. It seems to me Jeremiah Brettell will be useful in the Liverpool Circuit. Upon this consideration I have altered my first appointment and stationed him there for the ensuing year. I hope you will always be diligent in business, as one branch of the business of life. But let this be still uppermost in the thoughts of you and my dear Bella [Mrs. Keene.]! - I am, dear Arthur, Your affectionate brother.

To John Bredin Date: MANCHESTER, May 17, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Two days and two nights we were buffering the waves, with the furious wind right ahead. We then with difficulty got into Holyhead harbor; and finding the wind continued as it was, we saw Providence was against us, and turned back to England. I am now going to the Isle of Man, and may very possibly step over from thence to Ulster. [See previous letter.] You should continue electricity as often as you have opportunity, and use as frequently as possible the diet drink [The drink was made of half a pound of fresh shaved lignum vitae with half an ounce of senna. See Primitive Physick, No. 178; and for electrical treatment, letter of July 13, 1774, to Ann Bolton.] in the Primitive Physick under that title ‘For Scorbutic Sores’; I believe it will dry up that humor gently and very safely. If Providence brings me to Ireland, I shall not fail to let you know as soon as I am landed. -- I am Yours affectionately.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: WHITEHAVEN, May 28, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY, -- Here I am, waiting for a passage to the Isle of Man. Which way I shall steer from thence I know not. But I believe Providence will direct me either to the North of Ireland or to Newcastle-upon-Tyne. In taking away your expectation of worldly happiness God has been exceeding gracious to you. It is good for you that you have seen affliction and been disappointed of your hope. The removal of Mr. Waller into a better world may be another blessing to you: as is everything which disengages us from transient things and teaches us to five in eternity. If we were first to resign our will to God in order to be in favor with Him, our case would be desperate: nay, but you shall first be conscious of His favor, and then be resigned to Him. First, believe! Christ died for you. He bore your sins. He loves you freely. Come, take Him! His favor! His peace! His love! But without money, without price! Leave all you have and are behind I Then all things are ready. Why not now -- I am, my dear Sally, Yours in tender affection.

To Ann Loxdale Date: DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN, June 10, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR MISS LOXDALE, -- I had much hope that at my last return to Shrewsbury [Where Miss Loxdale’s father, Joseph Loxdale, lived.0] I should have seen you. But we are in the hands of Him who knows what is best for every one that trusts in Him; and if our meeting be hindered for a season, when those hindrances are removed it will be the more blessed to us. That man of God, Gregory Lopez, observes of himself that the large manifestations of God with which he was favored at first overpowered his body and nearly suspended his under-standing--nay, took away the use of his senses; but that after a time they neither interrupted the one nor the other, nor disturbed the operation of any of his faculties. I think, if those manifestations which you had had been continued, the case would have been the same with you; they would no longer have overwhelmed you as they did at first, but have flowed with a calm, even stream.

To Mary Bishop Date: NEAR LEEDS, July 17, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- 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. If I have to meet the Society at Bristol again, I shall kill or cure those unwise and unkind parents who make their children finer than themselves. I believe I shall make their ears tingle. As to you, I advise you, first, to be a Bible Christian yourself inwardly and outwardly. Be not an hair's breadth more conformable to the fashions of the world than you was when I last saw you. Then train up your children in the selfsame way. Say to them with all mildness and firmness, ‘Be ye followers of me, even as I am of Christ.’ Whoever is pleased or displeased, keep to this -- to Christian, primitive simplicity. Perhaps at first you will lose some scholars thereby; but regard not that: God will provide you more. And be assured nothing shall be wanting that is in the power of, my dear sister, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To George Fettes Date: YORK, August 3, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Prove these two points---first that pawnbroking is necessary, secondly that it is lawful (in England) --and you will satisfy Your affectionate brother.

To Duncan Wright Date: LONDON, November 24, 1781. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1781) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR DUNCAN, -- Surely you and I may speak freely to each other; for we love one another. If George Holder [George Holder and James Bogie were admitted on trial at the next Conference.] goes out, either you must keep his mother or she must go to the workhouse. You must not give an exhortation to the bands, but encourage them to speak. I would be much obliged to you if you would (1) accept the key of the book-room and immediately take the books into your own care; (2) clip the wings of the local preachers, stewards, and leaders, changing them as need requires; (3) fix bands where they are wanting; (4) if James Bogie is willing to remain single, let him travel; (5) do not receive the blind man hastily, let him be thoroughly tried first; (6) lastly, be of good courage, and conquer everything! -- I am, dear Duncan, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To John Valton Date: LONDON, January 18, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I have received the first two sheets of your Life. Be not afraid of writing too much; I can easily leave out what can be spared. It pleased God to lead John Haime and you a long way through the wilderness. Others He leads through a shorter and smoother way; and yet to the same point: for we must not imagine that such a degree of suffering is necessary to any degree of holiness. In this God does certainly act as a Sovereign; giving what He pleases, and by what means He pleases. I believe the holiest man that ever lived was the Apostle John; yet he seems to have suffered very little. You should take care never to write long at a time, and always to write standing; never on any account leaning on your stomach. God gives me just the strength I had thirty years ago. I cannot allow John Sellars [See letter of Jan. 7.] to be any longer a leader; and if he will lead the class, whether I will or no, I require you to put him out of our Society. If twenty of his class will leave the Society too, they must. The first loss is the best. Better forty members should be lost than our discipline lost. They are no Methodists that will bear no restraints. Explain this at large to the Society. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Thomas Hanson Date: LONDON, January 30, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, There were certainly false [numbers]. This ought to be observed if we live to see another Conference. I never was fond of multiplying circuits without an absolute necessity. Your remark is unquestionably true, that this is oftener proposed for the ease of the preachers than the profit of the people. But it is clear to me that many of the preachers have already rather too little exercise than too much. [Hanson was Assistant at Colne.] If you are not yet recovered from the disorder in your mouth, I wish you would consult the Primitive Physick or John Floyd. [The second preacher at Bradford. See letter of March 15, 1777.] --I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: LONDON, February 22, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEH, -- Who Mr. Tyndall is I know not; but he is just as sound a divine as Mr. Madan. I regard no authorities but those of the Ante-Nicene Fathers; nor any of them in opposition to Scripture. And I totally deny that (supposed) matter of fact that polygamy was allowed among the primitive Christians or that the converts ‘ who had many wives were not required to put any of them away.’ I have not yet time to read over the MS. When I do, I must read it all in a breath. Having talked with my friends, I judge it will be expedient to visit the North this year. I expect to be at Manchester on Wednesday, the 10th of April, and in Yorkshire in the beginning of May. I have no objection to your printing a few copies of those two sermons [Benson’s Two Sermons on Sanctification (text, I Thess. v. 23-4) were printed by J. Bowling, Leeds, in 1782. ‘An Extract from Leighton’s Rules for an Holy Life’ is appended.] to oblige your friends in the neighborhood. I doubt we are not explicit enough in speaking on full sanctification either in public or private. -- I am, with kind love to Sister Benson, dear Joseph, Your affectionate brother.

To Joseph Benson Date: LONDON, November 29, 1782. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1782) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH, -- I am well pleased that it is you who give me an opportunity of considering this important question, because you are able to bring the whole strength of the cause; so that in answering you I may answer all. I will first endeavor to state the case, and then argue a little upon it. When our Lord preached on the mountain or St. Paul by the river-side, there was no such thing as patronage. But as soon as Christians grew rich some of them built preaching-houses (afterwards called churches); and those who built were called patrons, and appointed whom they pleased to preach in them. When revenues were annexed to these houses,-they disposed of houses and revenues together. Indeed, the patrons generally gave the lands from which the revenues arose. At the Reformation many rich men built new churches, and still claimed to dispose of them; and many Presbyterians and Independents built preaching-houses at their own expense, and placed in them whom they pleased. But others entrusted their powers with a few friends whom they could confide in. I built the first preaching-house which was built for the people called Methodists -- namely, at Bristol in the year 1739. And, knowing no better, I suffered the first deed of trust to be drawn in the Presbyterian form. But Mr. Whitefield, hearing of this, wrote me a warm letter asking, Do you consider what you do If you let the trustees name the preachers, they may exclude you and all your brethren from preaching in the houses you have built. Pray let the deed be immediately canceled; to which the trustees immediately agreed.

To his Brother Charles Date: BIRMINGHAM, March 22 [or 24], 1783. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1783) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BROTHER CHARLES, -- If your view be correct, and this Epistle was the last the Apostle wrote before his martyrdom, it is invested with peculiar interest, as containing the dying counsels of one who was not behind the ‘chiefest of the Apostles.’ -- I am, dear Brother Charles, Yours affectionately.

To Joseph Taylor Date: LONDON, June 5, 1783. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1783) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH, -- According to the printed Minutes, p. 8, Sister Rodda is to have her allowance from Cornwall West and Sister Day out of the Preachers’ Fund. [See Minutes, 1782.] The fault therefore lay first in Joseph Harper, [Joseph Harper was at Bedford.] for Cornwall has nothing to do with Sister Day this year; and secondly, in John Atlay, who ought to have sent him and you the Minutes immediately after the Conference. Send no more money to Sister Day, but to Richard Rodda. -- I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Victory Purdy Date: LONDON, February 1, 1784. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1784) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - Your father was one of our first Society, which met at Fetter Lane, and one of the first that found peace with God. When it was thought best that I should go to Bristol, we spent a considerable time in prayer, and then cast lots who should accompany me thither. The lot fell upon him; and he was with me day and night till he judged it proper to marry. But I had no curiosity; so that I scarce ever asked him a question concerning his parents, birth, or former way of life. I first saw him when he came to Fetter Lane and desired to be admitted into the Society. He was a man of eminent integrity and simplicity, 'fervent in zeal and warm in charity'; both in his spirit and behavior greatly resembling Joseph Bradford. Be you a follower of him, as he was of Christ! - I am Your affectionate brother.

To Samuel Bradburn Date: LONDON, February 25, 1784. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1784) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SAMMY, - At present I have but just time to tell you I hope to be at Leeds on Tuesday, March [9]. [Wesley went first to Scotland, and did not get to Leeds till July 25, for the Conference which began on the 27th.] Your manner of proposing your objection puts me in mind of your friend Mr. Dodd, your speaker cathedra. But the matter is not half so dear as it appears to you. It is, however, a point, though considered long ago, worth considering again and again. But you must stay your stomach till you either see or hear again from Your affectionate brother.

To Zechariah Yewdell Date: LONDON, February 25, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I am glad to hear that the work of God goes on at Sheerness, [Sheerness appears in the Minutes for 1785 as one of the houses to be built that year. Compare letter of March 21, 1784.] and that there is such a noble spirit among the people with regard to building. But as we are yet early in the year, I do not advise you to begin till two hundred pounds are subscribed. Try first what you can do in Kent and at Norwich, after keeping a day of fasting and prayer.-I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Thomas Wride Date: BRISTOL, September 5, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, - When you do what you can, you do enough. I trust you will now use every possible means of redeeming the time. I wish you would never neglect sleeping early and rising early. Beware of anything like lightness or trifling. Wherever you are be obliging and be serious. Disappoint those who wait for your halting. - I am, with love to Sister Wilde, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Zachariah Yewdall Date: LONDON, November 11, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - I hope Sister Yewdall and you will be a blessing to each other. [See letter of May 26.] I think it a pity to remove you from Kent. Otherwise Oxford Circuit is nearer to London than Canterbury Circuit; for High Wycombe is nearer to it than Chatham. I cannot visit all the places I want to visit in Kent in one journey. I purpose (God willing) to begin my first journey on the 28th instant. Shall I visit Margate or Sheerness first - I am, dear Zachary, Your affectionate brother.

To Joseph Taylor Date: LONDON, December 29, 1785. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1785) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR JOSEPH, - I advise you: (1) Till March do not preach more than twice a day. (2) Never preach above three-quarters of an hour. (3) Never strain your voice. (4) For a month (at least) drink no tea: I commend you if you take to it no more. The wind is not an original disease, but a symptom of nervous weakness. (5) Warm lemonade cures any complaint in the bowels. (6) If you have a bathing-vessel, put a gallon of boiling water into the cold water. Then you might bathe thrice a week. And send me word next month how you are. - I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mr. Torry Date: BRISTOL, July 30, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, - We [Conference met in Bristol on July 25 and closed on Aug. 1.] entirely disapprove of such a division of the Hull Circuit as has been sent to us. We totally reject the thought of a preacher staying a fortnight together in one place. There is no precedent of this in England, nor shall be as long as I live. I have desired those of our Brethren who are acquainted with this and the neighboring county to draw up a Methodist Plan. [The following is the Plan, with the original spelling: Hull, Wednesday. Shorley, Thursday. Wo'thering, Week Friday. Ross or Remswell, Saturday. Paterington, Sunday. Melton, Munday. Cave, Tuesday. Gilberdike, Wednesday. Laxton, Thursday. Esterington, Friday. Newbold, Saturday. Beverley, Sunday & Munday. Theton, Tuesday. Hull, he that is in Hull. Skitby, Tuesday. Cottingham, Wednesday. Newland, Thursday. Hasel, Friday. Pocklington, Saturday & Sunday. Br. Wilton,} Munday. Grimston,} Tuesday. Acklam, Wednesday. Bugthorp, Thursday. Fankioss, Friday. Assalby, Saturday. Howden, Sunday noon. Spanden, Sunday night. Hoggerthorp, Munday. Seetown, Tuesday. Holm, Wednesday & Thursday. Numberaura, Friday. Shipton, Saturday. Weigton, Sunday noon & night. Drifteld, Monday. Gatton, Tuesday. Frodingham, Wednesday. Nafferton, Thursday. Reeston, Friday. Burlington, Saturday, Sun. Mony. Hunmanby or Rudston, Tuesday. Kilham, Wednesday. Witewand, Thursday Huggitt, Friday. Millington, Saturday.] They have done so, and I like it well. No one of our preachers must be still while I live. - I am, my dear brother, Your affectionate brother.

To William Simpson Date: LONDON, November 23, 1786. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1786) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR BILLY,-YOU have taken in this intricate affair the very best method that could be taken. When you have to do with those stubborn spirits, it is absolutely necessary either to mend them or to end them; and ten persons of a quiet temper are better than thirty contentious ones. [The contentions were at Knaresborough. See letter of Nov. 11 to him.] Undoubtedly some of the eloquent men will be sending me heavy complaints. It is well, therefore, that you spoke first. - I am, dear Billy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Charles Wesley Date: NORTH GREEN, August 7, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SISTER, -- As the Conference ended yesterday afternoon, my hurry is now a little abated. I cannot blame you for having thoughts of removing out of that large house. If you could find a lodging to your mind, it would be preferable on many accounts, and perhaps you might live as much without care as you did in the great mansion at Garth. I was yesterday inquiring of Dr. Whitehead whether Harrogate would not be better for Sally than the sea water. [Sally went to Ramsgate. See letter of Sept. 1.] He seems to think it would; and I should not think much of giving her ten or twenty pounds to make a trial. But I wish she could see him first, which she might do any day between seven and eight in the morning. Some of the first moneys I receive I shall set apart for you [See letter of Dec. 21.]; and in everything that is in my power you may depend upon the willing assistance of, dear Sally, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: BRISTOL, September 26, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR SALLY, -- The reading of those poisonous writers the Mystics confounded the intellects of both my brother and Mr. Fletcher and made them afraid of (what ought to have been their glory) the letting their light shine before men. Therefore I do not wonder that he was so unwilling to speak of himself, and consequently that you knew so little about him. [See letter of Sept. 8.] The same wrong humility continually inculcated by those writers would induce him to discontinue the writing his Journal. When I see those detached papers you speak of, I shall easily judge whether any of them are proper to be published. On Monday I expect to be in town; but I shall leave it again on Wednesday and set out for Norfolk and Suffolk. Afterward I shall visit {if God permit) the other northern circuits till the end of October. Then I visit the classes the first two weeks in November. So that I shall not reach Canterbury before November 24. But do not you want money [See letter of Sept. 22.] You can speak freely to, my dear Sally, Yours most affectionately.

To Mrs. Charles Wesley Date: CITY ROAD, December 21, 1788. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1788) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SISTER, -- It is undoubtedly true that some silly people (whether in the Society or not, I cannot tell) have frequently talked in that manner both of my brother and me. They have said that we were well paid for our labors. And, indeed, so we were; but not by man. Yet this is no more than we were to expect, especially from busybodies in other men's matters. And it is no more possible to restrain their tongues than it is to bind up the wind. But it is sufficient for us that our own consciences condemned us not and that our record is with the Most High. What has concerned me more than this idle slander is a trial of another kind. I supposed, when John Atlay left me, that he had left me one or two hundred pounds beforehand. [See letter of Sept. 4.] On the contrary, I am one or two hundred pounds behindhand, and shall not recover myself till after Christmas. Some of the first moneys I receive I shall set apart for you. And in everything that is in my power you may depend upon the willing assistance of, [His Diary for 1788 shows that he gave 210 to his brother's family and 81 10s. to Mrs. Hall and his nieces. See Journal, vii. 464; and letter of Dec. 20, 1790.] dear Sally, Your affectionate friend and Brother.

To Adam Clarke, Date: BRISTOL, March 9, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR ADAM, -- If I should live to see you another Conference, I should be glad to have Sister Clarke and you here rather than at most other places, because I spend more time here myself than at any other place except London. I am glad to hear that God has raised up so able a preacher from the islands [On July 15 Adam Clarke says: John De Queteville, ' who has now all the meekness, gentleness and simplicity of the gospel, united with that burning zeal before which mountains shrink into molehills, and aided by that faith to which all things are possible.'' See Dunn's Life, 70.]; but certainly you should spare no pains in teaching him to read and write English by reading with and explaining to him first the Christian [Library] and then the Instructions to Children. And I do not doubt but if he learned with a single eye, he would be largely strengthened by the blessed Spirit. I suppose the cyder would come to London almost as soon as I left it, which was on the first Sunday of the year. It would be a reason for being very wary in choosing names for our children if that old remark were true: That our first tempers from example flow And borrow that example from our names. Peace be with you and yours! -- I am, dear Adam, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Zachariah Yewdall Date: ATHONE, April 18, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I am glad to hear that there is so fine a prospect at Dalkeith. So is generally the way of our Lord, to try us first, and then to comfort. It is pity but James Ridall [See letter of Dec. 17, 1787.] had thoroughly settled his affairs before he attempted to travel. If that had been done, there is no doubt but he would have been useful wheresoever he went. I wish, however, Brother Dall may make a good conclusion with regard to the chapel at Dumfries. [See letter of Jan. 28.] Peace be with you and yours! -- I am, dear Zachary, Your affectionate brother.

11. This is my answer to them that trouble me and will not let my gray hairs go down to the grave in peace. I am not a man of duplicity: I am not an old hypocrite, a double-tongued knave. More than forty years I have frequented Ireland. I have wished to do some good there. I now tell a plain tale that 'the good which is in me may not be evil spoken of.' I have no temporal end to serve. I seek not the honor that cometh of men. It is not for pleasure that at this time of life I travel three or four thousand miles a year. It is not for gain. No foot of land do I possess, No cottage in this wilderness; A poor wayfaring man, I lodge awhile in tents below, Or gladly wander to and fro, Till I my Canaan gain. PS.--At the desire of a friend I add a few words in answer to one or two other objections. First. When I said, 'I believe I am a scriptural bishop,' I spoke on Lord King's supposition that bishops and presbyters are essentially one order. Secondly. I did desire Mr. Myles to assist me in delivering the cup. Now, be this right or wrong, how does it prove the point now in question -- that I leave the Church I ask (2) What law of the Church forbids this and (3) What law of the Primitive Church Did not the priest in the Primitive Church send both the bread and wine to the sick by whom he pleased, though not ordained at all Thirdly. The Observer affirms, 'To say you will not leave the Church, meaning thereby all the true believers in England, is trifling.' Certainly; but I do not mean so when I say, 'I will not leave the Church.' I mean, unless I see more reason for it than I ever yet saw, I will not leave the Church of England as by law established while the breath of God is in my nostrils.

To Thomas Taylor Date: WITNEY, October 28, 1789. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1789) Author: John Wesley --- DEAR TOMMY, -- If I remember right, all our brethren at the Conference as well as myself approved of the proposals concerning the first and second editions of your tract. So I see no difficulty in the matter. I do not think any one envies you -- no, not John Poole himself. But you must write with better ink if you would have any one read. Peace be with you and yours! -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Let you and I use our eyes while we may.

To his Niece Sarah Wesley Date: BRISSTOL, September 27, 1790. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1790) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR SALLY, -- Will it not be best for you to spend a little time at Margate [She went there. See next letter.] as soon as possible I hope to be in town on Saturday, October 3. And before the end of October you should be at the City Road, if not [already gone] to Twickenham. I believe sea-bathing will brace your nerves; but I pray [you not to drink] sea-water. [See letter of Sept. 8, 1788.] If you look into the Primitive Physick, you will see what] is the diet-drink [In the Primitive Physick under the head of 'Scorbutick Sores' is given a drink to be taken 'fasting and at four in the afternoon.' This is probably the 'diet-drink' to which he refers. It is called 'a diet-drink' in the later editions. See W.H.S. iv. 72.] therein prescribed for scorbutic sores; though your disorder is not come so far, I expect it would thoroughly purify your blood in a month's time. I shall be right glad to see Mr. Galloway. [For Joseph Galloway, see letter of Aug. 18.] A few such acquaintance as him and Miss Galloway I wish you to have. I wish you was likewise acquainted with that lovely woman Mrs. Wolff [Mrs. Wolff, of Balham. From their house Wesley went home to City Road to die.]; 'the perfect pattern of true womanhood.' Peace be with all your spirits ! -- My dear Sally, adieu!

To Henry Moore Date: LONDON, February 6, 1791. Source: The Letters of John Wesley (1791) Author: John Wesley --- MY DEAR HENRY, -- So good Mr. Easterbrook has got the start of us. Let us follow him as he followed Christ. Let the service begin at [ten or eleven] if the leaders think it best. I hope to be in Bath the first Monday in March (to-morrow three weeks); and am, with love to my dear Nancy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

Sun. 10.--After preaching at seven, in an house crowded within and without, I left this comfortable place, and went back to Cork. I had a desire to preach abroad in the evening; but the weather would not permit. When the society met, a person hugely daubed with gold thrust violently in. By his appearance I should have judged him to be some Nobleman. But I was afterward informed it was Dr. Taylor. On Monday and Tuesday I took an account of the society, and was grieved, though not surprised, to find such a declen sion. I left two hundred and ninety members: I find only two hundred and thirty-three. And what will the end be, unless those that remain learn to bear one another's burdens? Adding to those in the other provinces about six hundred who are in Munster, the whole number is a little above two thousand. Our evening congregations this week were smaller than usual; as the Gentry were engaged in a more important affair. A company of players were in town. However, many of them came on Friday; for a watch-night was newer to them than a comedy. Mon. 18.--Being advised from Dublin that Captain Dansey (with whom I desired to sail) would sail on the 19th or 20th, I took horse early, and reached Clonmell between five and six in the evening. I took my usual stand near the barrack-gate; and had abundantly more than my usual congregation, as it was the Assize week, so that the town was extremely full of Gentry as well as common people. Tues. 19.--We had many light showers, which cooled the air and laid the dust. We dined at Kilkenny, noble in ruins: I see no such remains of magnificence in the kingdom. The late Duke of Ormond’s house, on the top of a rock, hanging over the river, the ancient cathedral, and what is left of many grand buildings, yield a melancholy pleasure. Thus A little power, a little sway, A sun-beam in a winter's day, Is all the great and mighty have Between the cradle and the grave : We lodged at Castle-Dermot, and reached Dublin on Wednesday, 20; but Captain Dansey was not to sail this 14 REv. J. weslEY’s [Aug. 1760. week.

10.--I had designed to preach near the Infirmary; but some of the managers would not suffer it. So I preached in our Room, morning and evening, even to the rich and honourable. And I bear them witness, they will endure plain dealing, whether they profit by it or not. Mon. 11.--I took my leave of Edinburgh for the present. The situation of the city, on a hill shelving down on both sides, as well as to the east, with the stately castle upon a craggy rock on the west, is inexpressibly fine. And the main street, so broad and finely paved, with the lofty houses on either hand, (many of them seven or eight stories high,) is far beyond any in Great Britain. But how can it be suffered, that all manner of filth should still be thrown even into this street continually? Where are the Magistracy, the Gentry, the Nobility of the land? Have they no concern for the honour of their nation? How long shall the capital city of Scotland, yea, and the chief street of it, stink worse than a common-sewer? Will no lover of his country, or of decency and common sense, find a remedy for this? Holyrood-House, at the entrance of Edinburgh, the ancient Palace of the Scottish Kings, is a noble structure. It was rebuilt and furnished by King Charles the Second. One side of it is a picture-gallery, wherein are pictures of all the Scottish Kings, and an original one of the celebrated Queen Mary: It is scarce possible for any who looks at this to think her such a monster as some have painted her; nor indeed for any who considers the circumstances of her death, equal to that of an ancient martyr. I preached in the evening at Musselburgh, and at five in the morning. Then we rode on to Haddington, where (the rain driving me in) I preached between nine and ten in Provost Dickson's parlour. About one I preached at North-Berwick, a pretty large town, close to the sea-shore; and at seven in the evening, (the rain continuing,) in the House at Dunbar. May, 1761.] JOURNAL. 55 Wed. 13.--It being a fair, mild evening, I preached near the quay to most of the inhabitants of the town, and spoke full as plain as the evening before.

3.--I was reflecting on an odd circumstance, which I cannot account for. I never relish a tune at first hearing, not till I have almost learned to sing it; and as I learn it more per fectly, I gradually lose my relish for it. I observe something similar in poetry; yea, in all the objects of imagination. I seldom relish verses at first hearing; till I have heard them over and over, they give me no pleasure; and they give me next to none when I have heard them a few times more, so as to be quite familiar. Just so a face or a picture, which does not strike me at first, becomes more pleasing as I grow more acquainted with 186 REv. J. Wesley’s [July, 1764. it; but only to a certain point: For when I am too much acquainted, it is no longer pleasing. O, how imperfectly do we understand even the machine which we carry about us! Thur. 5.--I had the comfort of leaving our brethren at Leeds united in peace and love. About one I preached in a meadow at Wakefield. At first the sun was inconvenient; but it was not many minutes before that inconvenience was removed by the clouds coming between. We had not only a larger, but a far more attentive, congregation than ever was seen here before. One, indeed, a kind of gentleman, was walking away with great unconcern, when I spoke aloud, “Does Gallio care for none of these things? But where will you go, with the wrath of God on your head, and the curse of God on your back?” He stopped short, stood still, and went no farther till the sermon was ended. In the evening I preached on the top of the hill near Dewsbury, one of the pleasantest towns in England. The congregation was larger than ever before. They filled the preaching-house at five in the morning. I had purposed to take horse early, to avoid the heat; but was detained till between nine and ten. It was then warm enough, there being no wind, and the sun shining full in our face. However, before one we got to Heptonstall, where I preached in the shell of the new House. After service one brought his daughter to me, who had been ill some months, just like those near Brechin.

Hearing the congregation waited for me, I went to the Town-Hall, and began without delay. About one in the morning we had a violent storm of thunder and lightning. The house being full of dragoons, M. L. and M. D. were constrained to lodge in the same room with our landlady, who, being waked by the storm, and throughly terrified, began praying aloud. M. D. laid hold on the opportunity, to speak very closely to her. The words seemed to sink into. her heart. Who knows but they may bring forth fruit? Tues. 23.--I preached at Dunbar about noon, and in the evening at Edinburgh. My coming was quite seasonable, (though unexpected,) as those bad letters, published in the name of Mr. Hervey, and reprinted here by Mr. John Erskine, had made a great deal of noise. Wednesday, 24. I preached at four in the afternoon on the ground where we had laid the foundation of our House. Friday, 26. About noon I preached at Musselburgh, where are a few living souls still. In the evening we had another blessed oppor tunity at Edinburgh, and I took a solemn leave of the people. Yet how I should be able to ride, I knew not. At Newcastle I had observed a small swelling, less than a pea, but in six days it was as large as a pullet’s egg, and exceeding hard. On Thursday it broke. I feared riding would not agree with this, especially an hard trotting horse. However, trusting God, I set out early on Saturday morning: Before I reached Glasgow it was much decreased, and in two or three days more it was quite gone. If it was a boil, it was such an one as I never heard of; for it was never sore, first or last, nor ever gave me any pain. This evening I preached in the hall of the Hospital; the next day, morning and afternoon, in the yard. So much of the form of religion is here still, as is scarce to be found in any town in England. There was once the power too. And shall it not be again? Surely the time is at hand. Mon. 29.--I rode with James Kershaw through a fruitful country to Kilmarnock, and thence to Ayr.

I went after him into his room, but found he was fast asleep in bed. A day or two after, he fell ill, and, within the week, died in raging despair. * It appears highly probable that he was himself experimentally acquainted with these things. t How strange is this ! But how little do we know concerning the laws of the invisible world ! May, 1768.] JOURNAL, 327 “5. I was between fourteen and fifteen, when I went very early one morning to fetch up the kine. I had two fields to cross, into a low ground which was said to be haunted. Many persons had been frighted there, and I had myself often seen men and women (so many, at times, that they are out of count) go just by me, and vanish away. This morning, as I came toward it, I heard a confused noise, as of many people quarrelling. But I did not mind it, and went on till I came near the gate. I then saw, on the other side, a young man dressed in purple, who said, ‘It is too early; go back from whence you came. The Lord be with you, and bless you;’ and presently he was gone. “6. When I was about sixteen, my uncle fell ill, and grew worse and worse for three months. One day, having been sent out on an errand, I was coming home through a lane, when I saw him in the field, coming swiftly toward me. I ran to meet him; but he was gone. When I came home, I found him calling for me. As soon as I came to his bedside, he clasped his arms round my neck, and, bursting into tears, earnestly exhorted me to continue in the ways of God. He kept his hold, till he sunk down and died: And even then they could hardly unclasp his fingers. I would fain have died with him, and wished to be buried with him, dead or alive. “7. From that time I was crying from morning to night, and praying that I might see him. I grew weaker and weaker, till, one morning, about one o’clock, as I was lying crying, as usual, I heard some noise, and, rising up, saw him come to the bedside.

Some masons were at work on the first bridge, who gave us some coarse words. We had abundance more as we rode through the town; but many soldiers being in the street, and taking know ledge of me in a respectful manner, the mob shrunk back. An hour after, Mr. Watson came in the chaise. Before he came to the bridge, many ran together, and began to throw what ever came next to hand. The bridge itself they had blocked up with large stones, so that a carriage could not pass; but an old man cried out, “Is this the way you use strangers?” and rolled away the stones. The mob quickly rewarded him by plastering him over with mortar from head to foot. They then fell upon the carriage, which they cut with stones in several places, and well nigh covered with dirt and mortar. From one end of the town to the other, the stones flew thick about the coachman’s head. Some of them were two or three pounds’ weight, which they threw with all their might. If May, 1773.] JOURNAL. 495 but one of them had struck him, it would have effectually prevented him from driving any farther; and then, doubtless, they would have given an account of the chaise and horses. I preached at Sydore in the evening and morning, and then set out for Roosky. The road lay not far from Enniskillen. When we came pretty near the town, both men and women saluted us, first with bad words, and then with dirt and stones. My horses soon left them behind; but not till they had broke one of the windows, the glass of which came pouring in upon me; but did me no further hurt. About an hour after, John Smith came to Enniskillen. The masons on the bridge preparing for battle, he was afraid his horse would leap with him into the river; and therefore chose to alight. Immediately they poured in upon him a whole shower of dirt and stones. However, he made his way through the town, though pretty much daubed and bruised. At Roosky, Mr. Macburney, one of our Preachers, gave me the following account:--On Thursday, March 4, he went to Mr. Perry’s, a quarter of a mile from Achalun, a village six or seven miles from Enniskillen.

Thur. 13.--I set out early, and reached Gosport, (seventy two miles,) not long after six. Finding a boat ready, I crossed, and went straight to the Room. It was full enough ; so I began without delay, and enforced our Lord’s words, (one of my Oct. 1774.] JOURNAL. 31 favourite subjects,) “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” Friday, 14. I visited as many as I could, sick or well, and endeavoured to settle those that had been shaken by those bigots who are continually waiting to receive the weak “ unto doubtful disputations.” I had intended, after preaching in the evening, to meet the society alone; but the eagerness of the people to stay, induced me to suffer a great part of them. Yet it was little to their satisfaction; for when I warned our brethren not to have “itching ears,” they ran away in all haste. Sat. 15.-Setting out (as usual) at two, I reached London early in the evening. Monday, 17. I set out for Oxfordshire, and preached at Wallingford in the evening. Tuesday, 18. About nine I preached at Newnham; at noon, in the garden at Oxford; and in the evening, at Finstock, (a village near Carn bury-house, built by the great Earl of Clarendon, but not inha bited by any of his descendants') to a plain, artless people. Wednesday, 19. I rode to Witney, and found more life than I expected, both in the congregation and the society. Thursday, 20. I preached at Wattleton, at the front of Mr. Stonehill’s house. The whole congregation was seriously attentive. In the evening I preached at High-Wycomb, to many more than the Room would contain; and I believe not in vain. Fri. 21.--I preached in Chesham, and on Saturday returned to London. Mon. 24.--I set out for Northamptonshire, and received a particular account of one that eminently adorned the Gospel:-- “1. SUsANNAH SPENCER was born at Whittlebury, in the year 1742. When she was young she contracted a very general acquaintance, and was exceedingly beloved by them, having an agreeable person, a good understanding, and much sweetness of temper; and, being modest and decent in her whole behaviour, she seemed, like others, to think she had religion enough. “2. In 1760, Thomas Grover came down, and preached several times at Whittlebury and at Towcester.

It was the market-day; but that did not lessen the congregation. The poor people eagerly flocked from the market; and there was no buying or selling till I concluded. After preaching at Coolylough, Tullamore, and Portarling ton, (still “unstable as water,”) Saturday, 22, I found, at Mount-Mellick, a little company, who appeared to be better established. I spent Saturday and Sunday comfortably among them, building them up in our most holy faith. May, 1775.] JOUlt NAL. 45 Mon. 24.--The Minister of Maryborough inviting me to preach in his church, I began reading Prayers about nine; and afterwards preached to a numerous congregation. For the present, every one seemed affected. Will not some bring forth fruit with patience 2 In the evening I was scandalized both at the smallness and deadness of the congregation at Kilkenny. The next even ing it was a little mended, but not much. Of all the dull congregations I have seen, this was the dullest. Wed. 26.-I went on to Waterford, where the rain drove us into the preaching-house,_the most foul, horrid, miserable hole which I have seen since I left England. The next day I got into the open air, and a large congregation attended. I had designed to set out early in the morning; but doubting if I should ever have such another opportunity, (the Major of the Highland Regiment standing behind me, with several of his Officers, many of the soldiers before me, and the sen tinel at the entrance of the court,) I gave notice of preaching at ten the next morning, and at four in the afternoon. I did so to a well-behaved congregation, and in the evening went on to Carrick. Sat. 29.--Early in the evening we reached Rathcormuck, but found the inn filled with Officers. It is true they were but five, and there were seven beds; but they had bespoke all, and would not spare us one ! So we were obliged to go some miles further. We drove this day just threescore (English) miles. Sun. 30.--I came to Cork time enough to preach. The congregation was not small, and it was not large: But it was very large in George-Street at four in the afternoon, as well as deeply attentive. At six I preached in the Room, and could not but observe such singing as I have seldom heard in England.

But what did Captain Crawford do amiss? Have not the English also taken American ships by surprise? Yes; but not with such circumstances. For, 1. He hoisted no colours, nor ever summoned the ship to yield: 2. He fired on men who thought nothing of the matter, and pointed the men to Captain Bell in particular. So it was a deliberate murder. Such is the mercy, such the gratitude, of American rebels' Mon. 10.--In the evening I preached at Reading. How many years were we beating the air at this town! Stretching out our hands to a people as stupid as oxen' But it is not so at present. That generation is passed away, and their children are of a more excellent spirit. After preaching at Newbury and Ramsbury in the way, on Wednesday, 12, I went on to Bristol. April, 1777.] JOURNAL. 95 Sun. 16.-I preached at St. Werburgh's, the first church I ever preached in at Bristol. I had desired my friends not to come thither, but to leave room for strangers. By this means the church was well filled, but not over much crowded; which gives occasion to them that seek occasion, as it is a real inconvenience to the parishioners. Fri. 21.--I preached at Bath. I often wonder at this, Our chapel stands in the midst of all the sinners, and yet, going or coming to it, I never heard an immodest word, but prayers and blessings in abundance. Sun. 23.--I preached at St. Ewin’s church, but not upon Justification by Faith. I do not find this to be a profitable subject to an unawakened congregation. I explained here, and strongly applied, that awful word, “It is appointed unto men once to die.” Mon. 24.--I left Bristol, and preaching at Ramsbury, Wit ney, Oxford, and High-Wycomb, in my way, on Thursday came to London; whence I cannot be long absent while the new chapel is building. Friday, 28. I received an affectionate message from a great man.--But I shall not wonder if the wind changes. Sun. 30.-Easter-day was a solemn and comfortable day, wherein God was remarkably present with his people. During the Octave I administered the Lord's Supper every morning, after the example of the Primitive Church. Sunday, APRIL 6. I began a journey through some of our societies, to desire their assistance towards the expense of the new chapel.

Upon their answering, he found they were friends, being six more deserters from the rebel army. So they gladly came on shore, and brought provisions with them to those who before had neither meat nor drink. After refreshing themselves, they all went into the boat, and cheerfully rowed to the English ships. Fri. 31.--We concluded the year at West-Street, with a solemn watch-night. Most of the congregation stayed till the beginning of the year, and cheerfully sang together,< Glory to God, and thanks, and praise, Who kindly lengthens out our days, &c. Sun. JANUARY 2, 1780.-We had the largest congregation at the renewal of our covenant with God, which ever met upon the occasion; and we were thoroughly convinced, that God was not departed from us. He never will, unless we first depart from him. Tues. 18.--Receiving more and more accounts of the increase of Popery, I believed it my duty to write a letter concerning it, which was afterwards inserted in the public papers. Many were grievously offended; but I cannot help it: I must follow my own conscience. Sat. 22.--I spent an hour or two very agreeably in Sir Ashton Tever's museum. It does not equal the British Museum in size; nor is it constructed on so large a plan; as it contains no manuscripts, no books, no antiquities, nor any remarkable works of art. But I believe, for natural curiosities, it is not excelled by any museum in Europe; and all the beasts, birds, reptiles, and insects, are admirably well ranged and preserved: So that if you saw many of them elsewhere, you would imagine they were alive! The hippopotamus, in particular, looks as fierce as if he was just coming out of the river; and the old lion appears as formidable now as when he was stalking in the Tower. Sun. 23.−In the evening I retired to Lewisham, to prepare matter (who would believe it?) for a Monthly Magazine. Fri day, FEBRUARY 4, being the National Fast, I preached first at the new chapel, and then at St. Peter's, Cornhill. What a difference in the congregation 1 Yet out of these stones God can raise up children to Abraham. Thur. 17.-I preached at Dorking, and could not but March, 1780.] . JOURNAL. 175 reflect, in this room I lodged the first time I saw poor Mr.

I scarce know a town in the whole county which is so totally changed ; not a spark of that bitter enmity to the Methodists, in which the people here for many years gloried above their fellows. Going through Marazion, I was told that a large congrega tion was waiting: So I stepped out of my chaise, and began immediately; and we had a gracious shower. Some were cut to the heart; but more rejoiced with joy unspeakable. In the evening I preached in the market-place at Penzance. I designed afterwards to meet the society; but the people were so eager to hear all they could, that they quickly filled the House from end to end. This is another of the towns wherein the whole stream of the people is turned, as it were, from east to west. We had a happy season, both at St. Just on Thursday evening, and in the market-place at St. Ives on Friday. Sept. 1781.] JOURNAL. , 215 Saturday, SEPTEMBER 1. I made an end of that curious book, Dr. Parson’s “Remains of Japhet.” The very ingenious author has struck much light into some of the darkest parts of ancient history; and although I cannot entirely subscribe to every proposition which he advances, yet I apprehend he has sufficiently proved the main of his hypothesis; namely,- 1. That, after the flood, Shem and his descendants peopled the greatest parts of Asia. 2. That Ham and his children peopled Africa. 3. That Europe was peopled by the two sons of Japhet, Gomer and Magog; the southern and south western by Gomer and his children; and the north and the north-western by the children of Magog. 4. That the former were called Gomerians, Cimmerians, Cimbrians, and after wards Celtiae, Galatae, and Gauls; the latter were called by the general name of Scythians, Scuiti, Scots. 5. That the Gomerians spread swiftly through the north of Europe, as far as the Cimbrian Chersonesus, (including Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and divers other countries,) and then into Ireland, where they multiplied very early into a considerable nation. 6. That some ages after, another part of them who had first settled in Spain, sailed to Ireland, under Milea, or Milesius; and, conquering the first inhabitants, took possession of the land. 7.

16.--We set out in a track-skuit for the Hague. By the way we saw a curiosity : The gallows near the canal, sur rounded with a knot of beautiful trees | So the dying man will have one pleasant prospect here, whatever befalls him hereafter At eleven we came to Delft, a large, handsome town, where we spent an hour at a merchant's house, who, as well as his wife, a very agreeable woman, seemed both to fear and to love God. Afterwards we saw the great church; I think nearly, if not quite, as long as York Minster. It is exceedingly light and elegant within, and every part is kept exquisitely clean. The tomb of William the First is much admired; particularly his statue, which has more life than one would think could be expressed in brass. When we came to the Hague, though we had heard much of it, we were not disappointed. It is, indeed, beautiful beyond expression. Many of the houses are exceeding grand, and are finely intermixed with water and wood; yet not too close, but so as to be sufficiently ventilated by the air. Being invited to tea by Madam de Vassenaar, (one of the first quality in the Hague,) I waited upon her in the afternoon. She received us with that easy openness and affability which is almost peculiar to Christians and persons of quality. Soon after June, 1783.] JOURNAL. 251 came ten or twelve ladies more, who seemed to be of her own rank, (though dressed quite plain,) and two most agreeable gen tlemen; one of whom, I afterwards understood, was a Colonel in the Prince's Guards. After tea I expounded the three first verses of the thirteenth of the first Epistle to the Corinthians. Captain M. interpreted, sentence by sentence. I then prayed, and Colonel V. after me. I believe this hour was well employed. Tues. 17.--As we walked over the Place we saw the Swiss Guards at their exercise. They are a fine body of men, taller, I suppose, than any English regiment; and they all wear large whiskers, which they take care to keep as black as their boots.

At five they were still so eager to hear, that the preaching-house would not near contain the congregation. After preaching, four-and-thirty persons desired admission into the society; every one of whom was (for the present, at least) under very serious impressions: And most of them, there is reason to hope, will bring forth fruit with patience. In the evening I preached to a lovely congregation, at Stroud; and on Tuesday afternoon came to Bristol. Aug. 1783.] JOURNAL. 259 Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, I spent at Bath. Thurs day, 24. I went with a few friends to Blase-Castle. The woods on the side of the hill, cut through various directions, are the pleasantest I ever saw, little inferior to the Leasowes; and, by the beautiful prospects, far superior to Stow gardens. After wards we took a view of Lord Clifford’s woods, at King's Weston. They are amazingly beautiful : I have seen nothing equal to them in the west of England, and very few in any other parts. In the evening I read to the congregation an account of our brethren in Holland, and many thanksgivings were rendered to God on their account. Tues. 29.--Our Conference began, at which two important points were considered: First, the case of Birstal House; and, Secondly, the state of Kingswood School. With regard to the former, our brethren earnestly desired that I would go to Birstal myself, believing this would be the most effectual way of bringing the Trustees to reason. With regard to the latter, we all agreed, that either the School should cease, or the Rules of it be punctually observed: Particularly, that the children should never play; and that a master should be always present with them. Tues. AUGUST 5.--Early in the morning I was seized with a most impetuous flux. In a few hours it was joined by a violent and almost continual cramp; first, in my feet, legs, thighs; then, in my side and my throat. The case being judged extreme, a grain and a half of opium was given me in three doses: This speedily stopped the cramp; but, at the same time, took away my speech, hearing, and power of motion; andlocked me up from head to foot; so that I lay a mere log. I then sent for Dr. Drummond, who from that time attended me twice a day.

Then I went to Winchester, and had the pleasure of dining with Mr. Lowth, and supping with Mrs. Blackwell. Her six lovely children are in admirable order; it is a pleasure to see them. A Clergy man having offered me his church, I purposed beginning at five; but the key was not to be found; so I made a virtue of necessity, and preached near the Cross-Street; probably to double the congregation which would have been in the church. Many of the Dutch prisoners remaining here, I paid them a short visit. When they were brought hither first, one of them prayed with as many as desired it, and gave them a word of exhortation. Presently one found peace with God, and joined him in that labour of love. These increased, so that they have now five exhorters: Many are justified, and many more convinced of sin. About two hundred of them were met together when I came: They first sung a hymn in their own language; I then gave them a short exhortation in English, for which they were extremely thankful. Sat. 1].-Just at twelve (the same hour as at Bristol) I was taken exceeding ill, and so continued till three. I then took chaise, as I had appointed, and was better and better every stage, and quite well when I came to London. Mon. 13.--I preached at Wallingford. Tuesday, 14. I went on to Oxford, and found both the congregation and society increased in zeal as well as in number. Wednesday, 15. I came to Witney. The flame which was kindled here by that providential storm of thunder and lightning, is not extinguished ; but has continued ever since, with no discernible Oct. 1783.] J () URNAL. 263 internission. The preaching-house is still too small for the congregation. Thursday, 16. I preached at High-Wycomb; and on Friday returned to London. Sun. 19.--I took the diligence for Norwich, and preached there the next evening, to more than the House would contain; and both this night and the following, we sensibly felt that God was in the midst of us... Wednesday, 22. I went to Yarmouth. Often this poor society had been well nigh shattered in pieces; first, by Benjamin Worship, then a furious Calvinist, tearing away near half of them ; next, by John Simpson turning Antinomian, and scattering most that were left.

Mon. 20.--We embarked between three and four in the morn ing, in a very small, inconvenient sloop, and not a swift sailer; so that we were seven hours in sailing what is called seven leagues. About eleven we landed at St. Helier, and went straight to Mr. Brackenbury's house. It standsvery pleasantly, near the end of the town; and has a large convenient garden, with a lovely range of fruitful hills, which rise at a small distance from it. I preached in the evening to an exceeding serious congregation, on Matt. iii. ult.: And almost as many were present at five in the morning; whom I exhorted to go on to perfection; which many of them, Mr. Clarke informs me, are earnestly endeavouring to do. Tuesday, 21. We took a walk to one of our friends in the country. Near his house stood what they call the College. It is a free-school, designed to train up children for the University; exceeding finely situated, in a quiet recess, surrounded by tall woods. Not far from it stands, on the top of a high hill, (I suppose a Roman mount,) an old chapel, believed to be the first Christian church which was built in the island. From hence we had a view of the whole island, the pleasantest I ever saw ; as far superior to the Isle of Wight as that is to the Isle of Man. The little hills, almost covered with large trees, are inexpressibly beautiful: It seems they are to be equalled in the Isle of Guernsey. In the evening I was obliged to preach abroad, on, “Now is the day of salvation.” I think a blessing seldom fails to attend that subject, Wed. 22.--In the evening, the Room not containing the people, I was obliged to stand in the yard. I preached on Rom. iii.22, 23; and spoke exceeding plain: Even the Gentry heard with deep attention. How little things does God turn to his own glory ! Probably many of these flock together, because I have lived so many years. And perhaps even this may be the means of their living for ever ! Thur. 23.--I rode to St. Mary’s, five or six miles from St. Helier, through shady, pleasant lanes. None at the house could speak English, but I had interpreters enough.

Hick’s, at Wrestlingworth, through such roads as no chaise could pass: So we had the pleasure of riding in a farmer's cart. It was such a motion as I never felt before : But, to make amends, the church was so filled as I never had seen it; and I was enabled to speak with unusual plainness. Surely some received the truth in the love thereof Thur. November 1.--I gave a fair reading to Dr. Gerard’s “Essay on Taste.” I should have wondered, but that I had read his “Plan of Education;” wherein he advises to read Logic last. Such an advice could never have been given but by one that knew nothing about it. Indeed, he has hardly a clear idea of anything. Hence it was natural for him to produce this strange performance, wherein he talks prettily, but quite wide of the mark, stumbling at first setting out; for genius is no more invention, than it is sense or memory. Fri. 2.-I set out early, and about noon preached at Barnet, to a small, serious congregation. I then went on to London. Sat. 3.-I had a long conversation with Mr. Clulow, on that execrable Act, called the Conventicle Act. After consulting the Act of Toleration, with that of the fourteenth of Queen Anne, we were both clearly convinced, that it was the safest way to license all our chapels, and all our Travelling Preachers, not as Dissenters, but simply “Preachers of the Gospel;” and that no Justice, or Bench of Justices, has any authority to refuse licensing either the House or the Preachers. 404 REv. J. WESLEY’s [Nov. 1787. Sun. 4.--The congregation at the new chapel was far larger than usual; and the number of communicants was so great, that I was obliged to consecrate thrice. Monday, 5. In my way to Dorking, I read Mr. Duff’s “Essay on Genius.” It is, beyond all comparison, deeper and more judicious than Dr. G.'s Essay on that subject. If the Doctor had seen it, (which one can hardly doubt,) it is a wonder he would publish his Essay. Yet I cannot approve of his method. Why does he not first define his term, that we may know what he is talking about? I doubt, because his own idea of it was not clear; for genius is not imagination, any more than it is invention.

Mr. George Robert F d, at his first settling near Castle bar, about the year 1776, made himself very popular; but, mean time his pride was excessive; affirming that, being the head of the Desmond family, he was the premier Nobleman of Ireland. Therefore he expected that all the country should submit to him: Hencehefell into disputes with his father; and by turns with his brother; and kept his neighbours in perpetual alarm. In 1779, when volunteering began, he raised a Company, which was wholly subject to him. Soon after he engaged Patrick Randal M“Donald, a relation, as a Captain in his Company; but not long after, a dispute arose between them, relative to the driving of some cattle. Mr. M'D., being informed that Mr. F. intended violence to him, placed some men near his own house; and ordered them, if he approached the house, to fire. Mr. F. approaching, one of them did fire; which killed his horse, and wounded him in the knee and leg. On this he prosecuted Mr. M“D. at the following Assizes; but, after a full hearing, he was acquitted. Another matter of contention soon ensued: Mr. M'D., being an Attorney, was employed against Mr. F., and carried the suit. This inflamed Mr. F. beyond measure, of which Mr. M'D. was frequently informed. This continued, however, to the close of the year 1785; when Mr. M'D., being at Castlebar one night, o 456 REv. J. wesley’s [May, 1789. a blunderbuss, charged with eight or nine bullets and slugs, was discharged through the window of the room where he used to sit. Immediately after Christmas, the witness, Mr. R. G., was sitting in Mr. M.'s cellar, bottling some wine, when he heard a very uncommon sound of a musket, and a loud shriek following it. Going out, the first thing he saw was Mr. M'D., wounded in the leg. On his cry, three men ran out of the little house of Mr. F., whence the gun had been fired from a hole through the wall, which had been made on purpose. He then took a lodging in Castlebar; but on the 20th of February, 1786, accompanied by Mr. G., Mr. H., and M., went to his house in the country. They had been but a while there, when they found it surrounded by many armed men; on which Mr.

1789.] JOURNAL. 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 getting together, I would not disappoint them, but preached on, “We love him because he 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 praise the Gracious Power, which had preserved us by sea and by land, in all known and unknown dangers, unto the present hour. Sat. 8.--I settled all my temporal business, and, in particu lar, chose a new person to prepare the Arminian Magazine; being obliged, however unwillingly, to drop Mr. O , for only these two reasons: 1. The errata are unsufferable; I have borne them for these twelve years, but can bear them no longer. 2. Several pieces are inserted without my know ledge, 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 pleasant journey to Taunton; where we had a full 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. Thence we went on to Exeter, where the people were in high expectation of seeing the King, who appointed to be there the next day: However, a pretty large congregation assembled; to which I preached at six o'clock. We set out at three, on Thursday, 13, and reached Plymouth between one and two in the afternoon.

Fifth, The duration of the yearly assembly of the Conference shall not be less than five days, nor more than three weeks, and be concluded by the appointment of the Conference, if under twenty-one days; or otherwise the conclusion thereof shall follow of course at the end of the said twenty one days; the whole of all which said time of the assembly of the Conference shall be had, taken, considered, and be the yearly Conference of the people called Methodists; and all acts of the Conference, during such yearly assembly thereof, shall be the acts of the Conference, and none other. Sixth, Immediately after all the vacancies occasioned by death or absence are filled up by the election of new members as aforesaid, the Conference shall choose a President and Secretary of their assembly out of themselves, who shall continue such until the election of another President or Secretary in the next, or other subsequent Conference; and the said President shall have the privilege and power of two members in all acts of the Conference during his presidency, and such other powers, privileges, and authorities, as the Conference shall from time to time see fit to entrust into his hands. Seventh, Any member of the Conference absenting himself from the yearly assembly thereof for two years successively, without the consent or dispensation of the Conference, and be not present on the first day of the third yearly assembly thereof, at the time and place appointed for the holding of the same, shall cease to be a member of the Conference from and after the said first day of the said third yearly assembly thereof, to all intents and purposes, as though he were maturally dead. But the Conference shall and may dispense with or consent to the absence of any member from any of the said yearly assemblies for any cause which the Conference may see fit or necessary; and such member, whose absence shall be so dispensed with or consented to by the Conference, shall not by such absence cease to be a member thereof.

The Rev. John Wesley’s Declaration and Appointment of the Conference of the people called Methodists, enrolled in His Majesty’s High Court of Chancery, the ninth day of March, in the year of our Lord 1784, being first duly stamped according to the tenor of the Statutes, made for that purpose. o: ...” |- ----- - - ------ ------ - - - ---- ___. _ - - - - - -- -- ---------- ---- ‘. ,”- 3 1293 03039 5754

And as he framed the tabernacle, so he did the more excellent and durable fabric of this book, according to the pattern shewed him in the mount: into which it is better to resolve the certainty of the things herein contained, than into any tradition which possibly might be handed down to the family of Jacob. - Genesis is a name borrowed from the Greek: it signifies the original or generation: fitly is this book so called, for it is a history of originals; the creation of the world, the entrance of sin and death into it, the invention of arts, the rise of nations, and especially the planting of the church, and the state of it in its early days. 'Tis also a history of generations, the generations of Adam, Noah, Abraham, &c. - The beginning of the New Testament is called Genesis too, Matt 1:1, the book of the Genesis, or generation of Jesus Christ. Lord, open our eyes, that we may see the wondrous things both of thy law and gospel!

Observe 4. When this work was produced; In the beginning - That is, in the beginning of time. Time began with the production of those beings that are measured by time. Before the beginning of time there was none but that Infinite Being that inhabits eternity. Should we ask why God made the world no sooner, we should but darken counsel by words without knowledge; for how could there be sooner or later in eternity Where we have an account of the first matter, and the first Mover. 1. A chaos was the first matter. 'Tis here called the earth, (tho' the earth, properly taken, was not made 'till the third day, Ge 1:10) because it did most resemble that which was afterwards called earth, a heavy unwieldy mass. 'Tis also called the deep, both for its vastness, and because the waters which were afterwards separated from the earth were now mixed with it. This mighty bulk of matter was it, out of which all bodies were afterwards produced. The Creator could have made his work perfect at first, but by this gradual proceeding he would shew what is ordinarily the method of his providence, and grace. This chaos, was without form and void. Tohu and Bohu, confusion and emptiness, so those words are rendered, Isa 34:11. 'Twas shapeless, 'twas useless, 'twas without inhabitants, without ornaments; the shadow or rough draught of things to come. To those who have their hearts in heaven, this lower world, in comparison of the upper, still appears to be confusion and emptiness. And darkness was upon the face of the deep - God did not create this darkness, (as he is said to create the darkness of affliction, Isa 45:7.) for it was only the want of light. 2. The Spirit of God was the first Mover; He moved upon the face of the waters - He moved upon the face of the deep, as the hen gathereth her chicken under her wings, and hovers over them, to warm and cherish them, Mt 23:37 as the eagle stirs up her nest, and fluttereth over her young, ('tis the same word that is here used) Deut 32:11. 3, 4, 5

We have here a farther account of the first day's work. In which observe, 1. That the first of all visible beings which God created was light, the great beauty and blessing of the universe: like the first - born, it doth, of all visible beings, most resemble its great parent in purity and power, brightness and beneficence. 2. That the light was made by the word of God's power; He said, Let there be light - He willed it, and it was done; there was light - Such a copy as exactly answered the original idea in the eternal mind. 3. That the light which God willed, he approved of. God saw the light, that it was good - 'Twas exactly as he designed it; and it was fit to answer the end for which he designed it. 4. That God divided the light from the darkness - So put them asunder as they could never be joined together: and yet he divided time between them, the day for light, and the night for darkness, in a constant succession. Tho' the darkness was now scattered by the light, yet it has its place, because it has its use; for as the light of the morning befriends the business of the day, so the shadows of the evening befriend the repose of the night. God has thus divided between light and darkness, because he would daily mind us that this is a world of mixtures and changes. In heaven there is perpetual light, and no darkness; in hell utter darkness, and no light: but in this world they are counter - changed, and we pass daily from one to another; that we may learn to expect the like vicissitudes in the providence of God. 5. That God divided them from each other by distinguishing names. He called the light Day, and the darkness he called night - He gave them names as Lord of both. He is the Lord of time, and will be so 'till day and night shall come to an end, and the stream of time be swallowed up in the ocean of eternity. 6. That this was the first day's work, The evening and the morning were the first day - The darkness of the evening was before the light of the morning, that it might set it off, and make it shine the brighter.

He sets before him death and a curse; but, if not well - Seeing thou didst not do well, not offer in faith, and in a right manner, sin lieth at the door - That is, sin only hinders thy acceptance. All this considered, Cain had no reason to he angry with his brother, but at himself only. Unto thee shall be his desire - He shall continue in respect to thee as an elder brother, and thou, as the first - born, shall rule over him as much as ever. God's acceptance of Abel's offering did not transfer the birth - right to him, (which Cain was jealous of) nor put upon him that dignity, and power, which is said to belong to it, Gen 49:3. And Cain talked with Abel his brother - The Chaldee paraphrast adds, that Cain, when they were in discourse, maintained there was no judgment to come, and that when Abel spoke in defence of the truth, Cain took that occasion to fall upon him. The scripture tells us the reason wherefore he slew him, because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous; so that herein he shewed himself to be a child of the devil, as being an enemy to all righteousness. Observe, the first that dies is a saint, the first that went to the grave, went to heaven. God would secure to himself the first fruits, the first born to the dead, that first opened the womb into another world. And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother - God knew him to be guilty; yet he asks him, that he might draw from him a confession of his crime; for those who would be justified before God, must accuse themselves. And he said, I know not - Thus in Cain the devil was both a murderer, and a liar from the beginning. Am I my Brother's keeper - Sure he is old enough to take care of himself, nor did I ever take charge of him. Art not thou his keeper If he be missing, on thee be the blame, and not on me, who never undertook to keep him.

And he builded a city - In token of a settled separation from the church of God. And here is an account of his posterity, at least the heirs of his family, for seven generations. His son was Enoch, of the same name, but not of the same character with that holy man that walked with God. The names of more of his posterity are mentioned, and but just mentioned, as those of the holy seed, Ge 5:1 - 32. They are numbered in haste, as not valued or delighted in, in comparison with God's children. And Lamech took two wives - It was one of the degenerate race of Cain who first transgressed that original law of marriage, that two only should be one flesh. Jabal was a famous shepherd; he delighted much in keeping cattle, and was so happy in devising methods of doing it to the best advantage, and instructing others in them, that the shepherds of those times, nay, the shepherds of after - times, called him Father; or perhaps his children after him, being brought up to the same employment: the family was a family of shepherds. Jubal was a famous musician, and particularly an organist, and the first that gave rules for that noble art or science of music. When Jabal had set them in a way to be rich, Jubal put them in a way to be merry. From Jubal probably the Jubilee trumpet was so called; for the best music was that which proclaimed liberty and redemption. From Tubal - Cain, probably the Heathen Vulcan came. Why Naamah is particularly named, we know not: probably they did, who lived when Moses wrote. This passage is extremely obscure. We know not whom he slew, or on what occasion: neither what ground he had to be so confident of the Divine protection. This is the first mention of Adam in the story of this chapter. No question the murder of Abel, and the impenitency and apostacy of Cain, were a very great grief to him and Eve, and the more because their own wickedness did now correct them, and their backsliding did reprove them. Their folly had given sin and death entrance into the world, and now they smarted by it, being by means thereof deprived of both their sons in one day, Gen 27:45.

Chapter V This chapter is the only authentic history extant of the first age of the world from the creation to the flood, containing (according to the Hebrew text) 1656 years. The genealogy here recorded is inserted briefly in the pedigree of our Saviour, Luke 3:36,37. and is of great use to shew that Christ was the seed of the woman, that was promised. We have here an account, Concerning Adam, ver. 1 - 5. Seth, ver. 6 - 8. Enos, ver. 9 - 11. Cainan, ver. 12 - 14. Mahalaleel, ver. 15 - 17. Jared, ver. 18 - 20. Enoch, ver. 21 - 24. Mathuselah, ver. 25 - 27. Lamech and his son Noah, ver. 28 - 32. The first words of the chapter are the title of argument of the whole chapter; it is the book of the generations of Adam - It is the list or catalogue of the posterity of Adam, not of all, but only of the holy seed, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came; the names, ages, and deaths of those that were the successors of the first Adam in the custody of the promise, and the ancestors of the second Adam. 1, 2

They felt ground above forty days before they saw it, according to Dr. Lightfoots's computation, whence he infers that if the waters decreased proportionably, the ark drew eleven cubits in water. Noah sent forth a raven through the window of the ark, which went forth, as the Hebrew phrase is, going forth and returning, that is, flying about, but returning to the ark for rest; probably not in it, but upon it. This gave Noah little satisfaction: therefore, He sent forth a dove - Which returned the first time with no good news, but probably wet and dirty; but the second time she brought an olive leaf in her bill, which appeared to be fresh plucked off; a plain indication that now the trees began to appear above water. Note here, that Noah set forth the dove the second time, seven days after the first time, and the third time was after seven days too: and probably the first sending of her out was seven days after the sending forth of the raven. The olive branch is an emblem of peace. Noah removed the covering of the ark - Not the whole covering, but so much as would suffice to give him a prospect of the earth about it: and behold the face of the ground was dry. The earth was dried - So as to be a fit habitation for Noah. And Noah builded an altar - Hitherto he had done nothing without particular instructions and commands from God but altars and sacrifices being already of Divine institution, he did not stay for a particular command thus to express his thankfulness. And he offered on the altar, of every clean beast and of every clean fowl - One, the odd seventh that we read of, Ge 7:2,3. And God smelled a sweet savour - Or a savour of rest from it, as it is in the Hebrew. He was well pleased with Noah's pious zeal, and these hopeful beginnings of the new world, as men are with fragrant and agreeable smells. I will not again curse the ground, Heb. I will not add to curse the ground any more - God had cursed the ground upon the first entrance of sin, Ge 3:17, when he drowned it he added to that curse: but now he determines not to add to it any more.

In part fulfilled, that God would make his name great. We have here an account of the first war that ever we read of in scripture, in which we may observe. [1.] The parties engaged in it. The invaders were four kings; two of them no less than kings of Shinar and Elam - That is, Chaldea and Persia; yet probably not the sovereign princes of those great kingdoms, but rather the heads of some colonies which came out thence, and settled themselves near Sodom, but retained the names of the countries from which they had their original. The invaded were the kings of five cities that lay near together in the plain of Jordan, Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar. [2.] The occasion of this war was, the revolt of the five kings from under the government of Chedorlaomer. Twelve years they served him - The Sodomites were the posterity of Canaan, whom Noah had pronounced a servant to Shem, from whom Elam descended. Thus soon did that prophecy begin to be fulfilled. In the thirteenth year, beginning to be weary of their subjection, they rebelled - Denied their tribute, and attempted to shake off the yoke. In the fourteenth year - After some pause and preparation, Chedorlaomer, in conjunction with his allies, set himself to reduce the revolters. See note at "Ge 14:1" (For [1.],[2.]) [3.] The progress of the war. The four kings laid the neighbouring countries waste, and enriched themselves with the spoil of them, Ge 14:5,6,7. Upon the alarm of which, the king of Sodom and his allies went out and were routed. We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in; and this he was not prompted to by avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity. He armed his trained servants, born in his house - To the number of three hundred and eighteen: a great family, but a small army; about as many as Gideon's that routed the Midianites, Jud 7:7. He drew out his trained servants, or his catechized servants; not only instructed in the art of war, but instructed in the principles of religion; for Abram commanded his household to keep the way of the Lord. His brother Lot - That is, his kinsman.

And when the sun was going down - About the time of the evening oblation. Early in the morning, while the stars were yet to be seen, God had given him orders concerning the sacrifices, Ge 15:5, and we may suppose it was at least his morning's work to prepare them, and set them in order; which when he had done, he abode by them praying and waiting 'till towards evening. A deep sleep fell upon Abram - Not a common sleep through weariness or carelessness, but a divine extasy, that being wholly taken off from things sensible, he might be wholly taken up with the contemplation of things spiritual. The doors of the body were locked up, that the soul might be private and retired, and might act the more freely. And lo, a horror of great darkness fell upon him - This was designed to strike an awe upon the spirit of Abram, and to possess him with a holy reverence. Holy fear prepares the soul for holy joy; God humbles first, and then lifts up. Thy seed shall be strangers - So they were in Canaan first, Psa 105:11,12, and afterwards in Egypt: before they were lords of their own land, they were strangers in a strange land. The inconveniences of an unsettled state make a happy settlement the more welcome. Thus the heirs of heaven are first strangers on earth. And them they shall serve - So they did the Egyptians, Exo 1:13. See how that which was the doom of the Canaanites, Gen 9:25, proves the distress of Abram's seed: they are made to serve; but with this difference, the Canaanites serve under a curse, the Hebrews under a blessing. And they shall afflict them - See Exo 1:11. Those that are blessed and beloved of God are often afflicted by wicked men. This persecution began with mocking, when Ishmael the son of an Egyptian, persecuted Isaac, Gen 21:9, and it came at last to murder, the basest of murders, that of their new born children; so that more or less it continued 400 years. That nation whom they shall serve, even the Egyptians, will I judge - This points at the plagues of Egypt, by which God not only constrained the Egyptians to release Israel, but punished them for all the hardships they had put upon them.

He would pay for it, lest Ephron, when this good humour was over, should upbraid him with it. The land is worth four hundred shekels of silver - About fifty pounds of our money, but what is that between me and thee - He would rather oblige his friend than have so much money. A burying place - 'Tis worth noting, That a burying - place was the first spot of ground Abraham was possessed of in Canaan. That it was the only piece of land he was ever possessed of, tho' it was all his own in reversion. Those that have least of this earth find a grave in it.

Probably this custom was commonly used by the shepherds of Canaan, who coveted to have their cattle of this motly colour. When he began to have a flock of ring - straked and brown, he contrived to set them first, and to put the faces of the rest towards them, with the same design as he did the former. Whether this was honest policy, or no, may admit of a question. Read Ge 31:7 - 16, and the question is resolved.

Probably he expected that the very threatening of the death of the first - born should have wrought upon Pharaoh to comply; especially he having complied so far already, and having seen how exactly all Moses's predictions were fulfilled. But it had not that effect; his proud heart would not yield, no not to save all the first - born of his kingdom. Moses hereupon was provoked to a holy indignation, being grieved, as our Saviour afterwards, for the hardness of his heart, <cite>Mark 3:5</cite>. Chapter XII This chapter gives an account of one of the most memorable ordinances, and one of the most memorable providences of all that art recorded in the old testament. None of all the ordinances of the Jewish church were more eminent than that of the passover. It consisted of three parts. The killing and eating of the paschal lamb, ver. 1 - 6, 8 - 11. The sprinkling of the blood upon the doorposts, peculiar to the first passover, ver. 7. with the reason for it, ver. 11 - 13. The feast of unleavened bread for seven days after; this points rather at what was to be done after in the observance of this ordinance, ver. 14 - 20. This institution is communicated to the people, and they instructed in the observance. Of this first passover, ver. 21 - 23. Of the after passovers, ver. 24 - 27. And the Israelites obedience to these orders, ver. 28. None of all the providences of God concerning the Jewish church was more illustrious, than the deliverance of the children of Israel out of Egypt. The first - born of the Egyptians are slain, ver. 29, 30. Orders are given immediately for their discharge, ver. 31 - 33. They begin their march, Loaded with their own effects, v. 34. Enriched with the spoils of Egypt, ver. 35, 36. Attended with a mixed multitude, ver. 37, 38, Put to their shifts for present supply, ver. 39. This event is dated, ver. 40 - 42.

But probably the greatest part was but a rude unthinking mob, that followed they knew not why: It is likely, when they understood that the children of Israel were to continue forty years in the wilderness, they quitted them, and returned to Egypt again. And flocks and herds, even very much cattle - This is taken notice of, because it was long ere Pharaoh would give them leave to remove their effects, which were chiefly cattle. Thrust out - By importunate entreaties. It was just four hundred and thirty years from the promise made to Abraham (as the Apostle explains it, <cite>Gal 3:17</cite>,) at his first coming into Canaan, during all which time the Hebrews, were sojourners in a land that was not theirs, either Canaan or Egypt. So long the promise God made to Abraham lay dormant and unfulfilled, but now, it revived, and things began to work towards the accomplishment of it. The first day of the march of Abraham's seed towards Canaan was four hundred and thirty years (it should seem, to a day) from the promise made to Abraham, <cite>Gen 12:2</cite>. I will make of thee a great nation. This first passover night was a night of the Lord, much to be observed; but the last passover night, in which Christ was betrayed, was a night of the Lord, much more to be observed, when a yoke heavier than that of Egypt was broke from off our necks, and a land better than that of Canaan set before us. That was a temporal deliverance, to be celebrated in their generations; this an eternal redemption to be celebrated world without end. An hired servant - Unless he submit to be circumcised. All the congregation of Israel must keep it - Though it was observed in families apart, yet it is looked upon as the act of the whole congregation. And so the new testament passover, the Lord's supper, ought not to be neglected by any that are capable of celebrating it. No stranger that was uncircumcised might eat of it. Neither may any now approach the Lord's supper who have not first submitted to baptism; nor shall any partake of the benefit of Christ's sacrifice, who are not first circumcised in heart. Any stranger that was circumcised might eat of the passover, even servants.

1st. They are told what is the day, they must observe, a seventh after six days labour, whether this was the seventh by computation from the first seventh, or from the day of their coming out of Egypt, or both, is not certain. A late pious Writer seems to prove, That the sabbath was changed, when Israel came out of Egypt; which change continued till our Lord rose again: But that then the Original Sabbath was restored. And he makes it highly probable, at least, That the sabbath we observe, is the seventh day from the creation. 2dly, How it must be observed;

To the eighth commandment, concerning theft, ver. 1 - 4 Trespass by cattle, ver. 5. Damage by fire, ver. 6. Trusts, ver. 7 - 13. Borrowing cattle, ver. 14, 15. Or money, ver. 25 - 27. To the seventh commandment. Against fornication, ver. 16, 17. Bestiality, ver. 19. To the first table. Forbidding witchcraft, ver. 18. Idolatry, ver. 20. Commanding to offer the first - fruits, ver. 29. 30. To the poor, ver. 21 - 24. To the civil government, ver. 28. To the Jewish nation, ver. 13. Five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep - More for an ox than for a sheep, because the owner, besides all the other profit, lost the daily labour of his ox. If we were not able to make restitution, he must be sold for a slave: the court of judgment was to do it, and it is likely the person robbed received the money. Thus with us in some cases, felons are transported to the Plantations, where only, Englishmen know what slavery is. But let it be observed, the sentence is not slavery, but banishment: nor can any Englishman be sold, unless he first indent himself to the captain that carries him over. If a thief broke a house in the night, and was killed in the doing it, his blood was upon his own head. But if it were in the day - time that the thief was killed, he that killed him was accountable for it, unless it were in the necessary defence of his own life. For he should make full restitution - This the law determined: not that he should die. In his hand alive - Not killed, nor sold, as <cite>Ex 22:1</cite>, so that the owner recover it with less charge and trouble. He that wilfully put his cattle into his neighbour's field, must make restitution of the best of his own. The Jews hence observed it as a general rule, that restitution must always be made of the best; and that no man should keep any cattle that were likely to trespass upon his neighbour, or do him any damage. He that designed only the burning of thorns might become accessary to the burning of corn, and should not be held guiltless.

Chapter XXIII This chapter concludes the acts that passed in the first session (if I may so call it) upon Mount Sinai. Here are,

Orders are given for setting up the tabernacle, and fixing all the appurtenances of it, ver. 1 - 8. and the consecrating of it, ver. 8 - 11. and of the priests, ver. 12 - 15. Care taken to do all this, and as it was appointed to be done, ver. 16 - 33. God's taking possession of it by the cloud, ver. 34 - 38. The time for doing this is, On the first day of the first month - This wanted but fourteen days of a year since they came out of Egypt. Probably the work was made ready just at the end of the year, so that the appointing this day gave no delay. In Hezekiah's time they began to sanctify the temple on the first day of the first month, <cite>2Chr 29:17</cite>. The new moon (which by their computation was the first day of every month) was observed by them with some solemnity; and therefore this first new moon of the year was thus made remarkable. Their anointing shall be an everlasting priesthood - A seal that their priesthood shall continue as long as the Jewish polity lasts. He signifies that this unction should be sufficient for all succeeding priests. None were afterwards anointed but the high - priests. As when God had finished this earth, which he designed for man's habitation, he made man, and put him in possession of it; so when Moses had finished the tabernacle, which was designed for God's dwelling - place among men, God came and took possession of it. By these visible tokens of his coming among them, he testified both the return of his favour, which they had forfeited by the golden calf, and his gracious acceptance of their care and pains about the tabernacle. Thus God shewed himself well - pleased with what they had done, and abundantly rewarded them. A cloud covered the tent - The same cloud which, as the chariot or pavilion of the Shechinah, had come up before them out of Egypt, now settled upon the tabernacle, and hovered over it, even in the hottest and clearest day; for it was none of those clouds which the sun scatters. This cloud was intended to be a token of God's presence, constantly visible day and night to all Israel.

This book is thus entitled, because of the numbers of the children of Israel, so often mentioned therein, an eminent accomplishment of God's promise to Abraham, that his seed should be as the stars of heaven for multitude. It also relates two numberings of them, one at mount Sinai, chap. 1. the other, thirty - nine years after. And there are not three men of the same in the last account that were in the first. The book is almost equally divided, between histories and laws intermixed. An abstract of much of this book we have in a few words, Psa 95:10. Forty years long was I grieved with this generation: and an application of it to ourselves, Heb 4:1. Let us fear lest we come short!

Chapter I Orders given to Moses to number the people, ver. 1 - 4. Persons named to assist him therein, ver. 5 - 16. The particular number of each tribe, ver. 17 - 43. The sum of all together, ver. 44 - 46. The Levites excepted, ver. 47 - 54. In the wilderness - Where now they had been a full year or near it, as may be gathered by comparing this place with Exo 19:1 40:17. Take the sum - This is not the same muster with that Exo 38:26, as plainly appears, because that was before the building of the tabernacle, which was built and set up on the first day of the first month, Exo 40:2, but this was after it, on the first day of the second month. And they were for different ends; that was to tax them for the charges of the tabernacle; but this was for other ends, partly that the great number of the people might be known to the praise of God's faithfulness, in making good his promises of multiplying them, and to their own encouragement: partly for the better ordering their camp and march, for they were now beginning their journey; and partly that this account might he compared with the other in the close of the book, where we read that not one of all this vast number, except Caleb and Joshua were left alive; a fair warning to all future generations to take heed of rebelling against the Lord. It is true, the sums and numbers agree in this and that computation, which is not strange, because there was not much time between the two numberings, and no eminent sin among the people in that interval, whereby God was provoked to diminish their numbers. Some conceive that in that number, Exo 30:11 - 16 and 38:25,26, the Levites were included, which are here excepted, Num 1:47, and that in that interval of time, there were grown up as many more men of those years as there were Levites of the same age. Israel - So the strangers mixed with them, were not numbered. Their fathers - The people were divided into twelve tribes, the tribes into great families, Num 26:5, these great families into lesser families called the houses of their fathers, because they were distinguished one from another by their fathers.

Judah - This tribe was in the first post, and in their marches led the van, not only because it was the most numerous, but chiefly because Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, was to descend from it: Yea, from the loins of Nahshon, who is here appointed the chief captain of it. In the midst - This is not to be understood strictly, but largely; for in their march they were divided, and part of that tribe marched next after Judah, Num 10:17, and the other part exactly in the midst of the camp. Ephraim - Who is here preferred before his brother, according to the prophecy, Gen 48:19,20. The Camp of Dan - The strongest camp next after Judah, and therefore he comes in the rear, as Judah marched in the front, that the tabernacle might be best guarded where there was most danger.

Given to him - To attend upon him and observe his orders, and ease him of his burden. The stranger - That is, every one who is of another family than Aaron's; yea, though he be a Levite. That cometh nigh - To execute any part of the priest's office. The first - born - Who were God's property, Exo 13:12, and to whom the administration of holy things was formerly committed, which now was taken away from them, either because they had forfeited this privilege by joining with the rest of their brethren in the idolatrous worship of the calf, or because they were to be mainly concerned in the distribution and management of the inheritances which now they were going to possess, and therefore could not be at leisure to attend upon the service of the sanctuary: and God would not commit it to some other persons in each tribe, which might be an occasion of idolatry, confusion, division, and contempt of sacred things, but to one distinct tribe, which might be entirely devoted to that service, and particularly to the tribe of Levi; partly out of his respect to Moses and Aaron, branches of this tribe; partly as a recompence of their zeal for God against idolaters, and partly because it was the smallest of the tribes, and therefore most likely to find both employment in, and maintenance for the work. From a month old - Because at that time the first - born, in whose stead the Levites came, were offered to God. And from that time the Levites were consecrated to God, and were, as soon as capable, instructed in their work. Elsewhere they are numbered from twenty - five years old, when they were entered as novices into part of their work, Num 8:24, and from thirty years old, when they were admitted to their whole office. The tabernacle - Not the boards, which belonged to Merari, Nu 3:36, but the ten curtains. The tent - The curtains of goats hair. The coverings - That is, the coverings of rams - skins and badgers - skins. The cords - By which the tabernacle was fastened to the pins, and stretched out, Exo 35:18.

But the odd 300 are omitted here, either according to the use of the holy scripture, where in so great numbers small sums are commonly neglected, or, because they were the first - born of the Levites, and therefore belonged to God already, and so could not be given to him again instead of the other first - born. If this number of first - born seem small to come from 22,000 Levites, it must be considered, that only such first - born are here named as were males, and such as continued in their parents families, not such as had erected new families of their own. Add to this, that God so ordered things by his wise providence for divers weighty reasons, that this tribe should be much the least of all the tribes, as is evident by comparing the numbers of the other tribes, from twenty years old, Num 1:3 - 49, with the number of this from a month old; and therefore it is not strange if the number of their first - born be less than in other tribes. Instead of the first - born - Such as are now alive of them, but those which should be born of them hereafter are otherwise disposed. Of the Levites - Not that they were to be taken from the Levites, or to be sacrificed to God, any more than the Levites themselves were; but they together with the Levites were to be presented before the Lord by way of acknowledgment, that the Levites might be set apart for God's service, and their cattle for themselves as God's ministers, and for their support in God's work. For those that are to be redeemed - 'Tis probable, in the exchange they began with the eldest of the first - born, and so downwards, so that those were to be redeemed, who were the two hundred, seventy three youngest of them. Five shekels - Which was the price paid for the redemption of a first - born a month old.

Chapter VII The offerings of the princes upon the dedication of the tabernacle, ver. 1 - 9. Upon the dedication of the altar, ver. 10 - 88, Which God graciously accepts, ver. 89. On the day - It seems day is for time, and on the day, for about the time. For all the princes did not offer these things upon one and the same day, but on several days, as here it follows. And so this chapter comes in its proper place, and those things were done in the second month of the second year after the tabernacle and altar, and all other instruments thereof were anointed, as is here expressed; and after the Levites were separated to the service of the tabernacle, and appointed to their several works, which was done about a month after the tabernacle was erected, and after the numbering of the people, Num 1:2 - 49, when the princes here employed in the offerings were first constituted; and after the disposal of the tribes about the tabernacle, the order of which is here observed in the time of their offerings. Offered - In the manner and days hereafter mentioned. Waggons - For the more convenient and safe carriage of such things as were most cumbersome. According to his service - More or fewer, as the nature of their service and of the things to be carried required. Upon their shoulders - Because of the greater worth and holiness of the things which they carried. The altar - Of burnt - offerings, and incense too, as appears from the matter of their offerings. Not for the first dedication of them, for it is apparent they were dedicated or consecrated before this time by Moses and Aaron: but for a farther dedication of them, these being the first offerings that were made for any particular persons or tribes. In the day - That is, about the time, as soon as it was anointed. On his day - And in this offering they followed the order of their camp, and not of their birth. Charger - A large dish or platter; to be employed about the altar of burnt - offering, or in the court; not in the sanctuary, for all its vessels were of gold.

Out of Jacob - Out of Jacob's loins. He that shall have dominion - David, and especially Christ. Of the city - Or from or out of this city, that is, the cities, the singular number for the plural. He shall not subdue those Moabites and Edomites which meet him in the field, but he shall pursue them even to their strongest holds and cities. He looked on Amalek - From the top of Pisgah, which was exceeding high, and gave him the prospect of part of all these kingdoms. The first - Heb. the firstfruits; so called either, because they were the first of all the neighbouring nations which were embodied together in one government: or, because he was the first who fought against Israel and was vanquished by them. That victory was an earnest and first - fruit of the large harvest of victories which the Israelites should in due time get over all their enemies. He shall perish for ever - He began with God and with Israel, but God will end with him, and the firm purpose of God is, that he shall be utterly destroyed; so that Saul lost his kingdom for not executing this decree, and God's command pursuant thereunto. The Kenites - The posterity or kindred of Jethro; not that part of them which dwelt among the Israelites, to whom the following words do not agree, but those of them who were mingled with the Amalekites and Midianites. Thy nest - Thy dwelling - place, so called, either because it was in an high place, as nests commonly are: or in allusion to their name, for ken in Hebrew signifies a nest. The Kenite - Heb. Kain, that is, the Kenite, so called, either by a transposition of letters, which is very usual in the Hebrew tongue; or from the name of some eminent place where they lived, or person from whom they were descended, though now the memory of them be utterly lost, as it hath fared with innumerable other places and persons, famous in their generations, mentioned in ancient Heathen writers. Shall be wasted - Shall be by degrees diminished by the incursions of divers enemies, till at last the Assyrian comes to compleat the work and carries them into captivity.

Thus Balaam, instead of cursing the church, curses Amalek, the first, and Rome, the last enemy of it! To his place - To Mesopotamia; tho' afterwards he returned to the Midianites, and gave them that devilish counsel which was put in practice, Num 25:16 - 18.

Chapter XXXV Forty eight cities assigned to the Levites, of which six were cities of refuge, ver. 1 - 15. In what cases it was not allowed to flee to these, ver. 16 - 21. In what cases it was allowed, ver. 22 - 24. Laws concerning them, ver. 25 - 34. For the cattle - For pasturage for their cattle: where they might not build houses, nor plant gardens, orchards or vineyards, no nor sow corn, for which they were abundantly provided out of the first - fruits. And these suburbs did not belong to the Levites in common, but were distributed to them in convenient proportions. A thousand cubits - In the next verse it is two thousand. But this verse and the next do not speak to the same thing; this speaks of the space from whence the suburbs shall be measured, the next speaks of the space unto which that measure shall be extended; and the words may very well be read thus. And the suburbs - Shall be from the wall of the city and from without it, or, from the outward parts of it, even from a thousand cubits round about. Which are mentioned not as the thing measured, but as the space from which the measuring line should begin. And then it follows, Nu 35:5. And ye shall measure from without the city, (not from the wall of the city, as said before Nu 35:4, but from without it, that is, from the said outward space of a thousand cubits without the wall of the city round about) on the east side two thousand cubits. So in truth there were three thousand cubits from the wall of the city, whereof one thousand probably were for out - houses, stalls for cattle, gardens, vineyards and olive - yards, and the other two thousand for pasture, which are therefore called the field of the suburbs, Lev 25:34, by way of distinction from the suburbs themselves, which consist of the first thousand cubits from the wall of the city.

Beside the plains of Moreh - This was one of the first places that Abram came to in Canaan. So that in sending them thither to hear the blessing and the curse, they were minded of the promise made to Abram in that very place, Gen 12:6,7.

Chapter XXIV Of Divorce, ver. 1 - 4. New - married men discharged from the war, ver. 5. Of pledges, ver. 6. 10 - 13. Of man - stealers, ver. 7. Of the leprosy, ver. 8, 9. Of daily wages, ver. 14, 15. None to be punished for another's sin, ver. 16. Of justice and mercy to the widow, fatherless and stranger, ver. 17 - 22. Some uncleanness - Some hateful thing, some distemper of body or quality of mind not observed before marriage: or some light carriage, as this phrase commonly signifies, but not amounting to adultery. Let him write - This is not a command as some of the Jews understood it, nor an allowance and approbation, but merely a permission of that practice for prevention of greater mischiefs, and this only until the time of reformation, till the coming of the Messiah when things were to return to their first institution and purest condition. May not - This is the punishment of his levity and injustice in putting her away without sufficient cause, which by this offer he now acknowledgeth. Defiled - Not absolutely, as if her second marriage were a sin, but with respect to her first husband, to whom she is as a defiled or unclean woman, that is, forbidden things; forbidden are accounted and called unclean, Jud 13:7, because they may no more be touched or used than an unclean thing. Thou shalt not cause the land to sin - Thou shalt not suffer such lightness to be practised, lest the people be polluted, and the land defiled and accursed by that means. Business - Any publick office or employment, which may cause an absence from or neglect of his wife. One year - That their affections may be firmly settled, so as there may be no occasions for the divorces last mentioned. Mill - stone - Used in their hand - mills. Under this, he understands all other things necessary to get a livelihood, the taking away whereof is against the laws both of charity and prudence, seeing by those things alone he can be enabled both to subsist and to pay his debts. Life - His livelihood, the necessary support of his life.

And so having dispatched Issachar in two words, he returns to Zebulun. The people - the Gentiles, either those of Galilee, which was called Galilee of the Gentiles, who were their neighbours; or people of other nations, with whom they had commerce, which they endeavoured to improve in persuading them to worship the true God. The mountain - That is, to the temple, which Moses knew was to be seated upon a mountain. Sacrifices of righteousness - Such as God requires. Their trafficking abroad with Heathen nations shall not make them forget their duty at home, nor shall their distance from the place of sacrifice hinder them from coming to it to discharge that duty. Of the abundance of the sea - They shall grow rich by the traffick of the sea, and shall consecrate themselves and their riches to God. Hid in the sand - Such precious things as either Are contained in the sand of the sea and rivers, in which sometimes there is mixed a considerable quantity of gold and silver. Or, Such as grow in the sea, or are fetched from the sandy bottom of it, as pearls, coral, ambergrease. Or, Such as being cast into the sea by shipwreck are cast upon the shore by the workings of the sea. It were well, if the enlargement of our trade with foreign countries, were made to contribute to the spreading of the gospel. Enlargeth - That bringeth him out of his straits amid troubles, which he was often engaged in, because he was encompassed with potent enemies. As a lion - Safe and secure from his enemies, and terrible to them when they rouse and molest him. Teareth the arm - Utterly destroys his enemies, both the head, the seat of the crown, their dignity and principality, and the arm, the subject of strength and instrument of action; both chief princes, and their subjects. The first part - The first fruits of the land of promise, the country of Sihon, which was first conquered, which he is said to provide for himself, because he desired and obtained it of Moses.

The first part - The first fruits of the land of promise, the country of Sihon, which was first conquered, which he is said to provide for himself, because he desired and obtained it of Moses. Of the law - giver - Of Moses, whose portion this is called, either because this part of the land beyond Jordan was the only part of the land which Moses was permitted to enter upon: or because it was given him by Moses, whereas the portions beyond Jordan were given to the several tribes by Joshua according to the direction of the lot. Seated - Heb. hid or protected: for their wives and children were secured in their cities, while many of their men went over to the war in Canaan. He came - He went, or he will go, to the war in Canaan, with the princes, or captains, or rulers of the people of Israel, that is, under their command and conduct, as indeed they did; or with the first of the people; or, in the front of the people, as the Syriack renders it; for this tribe and their brethren whose lot fell beyond Jordan, were to march into Canaan before their brethren. He executed - The just judgment of God against the Canaanites, as the rest of the Israelites did. A lion's whelp - Courageous, and generous, and strong, and successful against his enemies. Which leapeth - From Bashan, because there were many and fierce lions in those parts, whence they used to come forth and leap upon the prey. Or this may refer either to the particular victories obtained by Samson, who was of the tribe of Dan, or to a more general achievement of that tribe, when a party of them surprised Laish, which lay in the farthest part of the land of Canaan from them. And the mountain of Bashan lying not far from that city, from whence they probably made their descent upon it, thus leaping from Basham. Satisfied with favour - With the favour of God. That only is the favour that satisfies the soul. They are happy indeed that have the favour of God; and they shall have it, that place their satisfaction in it.

Among you - Is present with you to strengthen and help you. Twelve men - For the work described, Jos 4:2,3. The ark of the Lord - That so it may appear this is the Lord's doing, and that in pursuance of his covenant made with Israel. Of all the earth - The Lord of all this globe of earth and water, who therefore can dispose of this river and the adjoining land as he pleaseth. Cut off - The waters which now are united now shall be divided, and part shall flow down the channel towards the dead sea, and the other part that is nearer the spring of the river, and flows down from it, shall stand still. An heap - Being as it were congealed, as the Red - Sea was, Exod 15:8, and so kept from overflowing the country. All the time of harvest - This is meant not of wheat - harvest, but of the barley - harvest, as is manifest from their keeping the passover at their first entrance, Jos 5:10, which was kept on the fourteenth day of the first month, when they were to bring a sheaf of their first - fruits, which were of barley. So that this harvest in those hot countries fell very early in the spring, when rivers used to swell most; partly because of the rains which have fallen all the winter, partly because of the snows which melt and come into the rivers. And this time God chose that the miracle might be more glorious, more amazing and terrible to the Canaanites; and that the Israelites might be entertained at their first entrance with plentiful and comfortable provisions. Adam - The city Adam being more obscure, is described by its nearness to a more known place, then eminent, but now unknown. The meaning is, that the waters were stopped in their course at that place, and so kept at a distance from the Israelites whilst they passed over. Against Jericho - Here God carried them over, because this part was, The strongest, as having in its neighbourhood an eminent city, a potent king, and a stout and war - like people. The most pleasant and fruitful, and therefore more convenient both for the refreshment of the Israelites after their long and tedious marches, and for their encouragement.

And he took - Or rather, but he had taken, namely, out of the said number of thirty thousand, for this is added by way of recapitulation and farther explication of what is said in general, ver.9. Joshua went - Namely, accompanied with a small part of the host now mentioned, that is, very early in the morning, when it was yet dark, as is said in a like case, John 20:1, whence it is here called night, though it was early in the morning, as is said, Jos 8:10, for it seems most probable, that all was done in one night's space, and in this manner; Joshua sends away the ambush by night, ver.3, and lodgeth that night with twenty - five thousand men, ver.9, not far from the city. But not able or willing to sleep all night, he rises very early, ver.10, and numbers his men, which by the help of the several officers was quietly done, and so immediately leads them towards Ai; and while it was yet duskish or night, he goes into the midst of the valley, ver.13, and when the day dawns he is discovered by the king and people of Ai, who thereupon rose up early to fight with them, ver.14. The valley - Which was near the city, thereby to allure them forth. His people - Namely, all his men of war, for the rest were left in Ai, ver.16. At a time appointed - At a certain hour agreed upon between the king and people of Ai, and of Bethel too, who were their confederates in this enterprize, as it may seem from ver.17. Possibly they might appoint the same hour of the day on which they had fought against Israel with good success, looking upon it as a lucky hour. Before the plain - That is, towards or in sight of that plain or valley in which the Israelites were, that so they might put themselves in battle - array. Against him - The former success having made him secure, as is usual in such cases; God also blinding his mind, and infatuating him, as he useth to do with those whom he intends to destroy. Made as if they were beaten - That is, fled from them, as it were for fear of a second blow.

Chapter XV The bounds of the inheritance of Judah, ver. 1 - 12. The assignment of Hebron to Caleb and his family, ver. 13 - 19. The cities of Judah, ver. 20 - 63. The lot - For the general understanding of this, it must be known That casting lots was transacted with great seriousness and solemnity, in God's presence, with prayer and appeal to him for the decision of the matter. That although exact survey of this land was not taken 'till chap.18:4,5, yet there was, and must needs be a general description of it, and a division thereof into nine parts and an half; which, as far as they could guess, were equal either in quantity or quality. That the lot did not at this time so unchangeably determine each tribe, that their portion could neither be increased or diminished; as is manifest, because after Judah's lot was fixed, Simeon's lot was taken out of it, chap.19:9, though after the land was more distinctly known and surveyed, it is likely the bounds were more certain and fixed. That the lot determined only in general what part of the land belonged to each tribe, but left the particulars to be determined by Joshua and Eleazar. For the manner of this, it is probably conceived, that there was two pots, into one of which were put the names of all the tribes, each in a distinct paper, and into the other the names of each portion described; then Eleazar or some other person, drew out first the name of one of the tribes out of one pot, and then the name of one portion out of the other, and that portion was appropriated to that tribe. And with respect to these pots, in the bottom of which the papers lay, these lots are often said to come up, or come forth. Of Judah - Whose lot came out first by God's disposition, as a note of his preeminency above his brethren. Of Edom - Which lay south - east from Judah's portion. Judah and Joseph were the two sons of Jacob, on whom Reuben's forfeited birthright devolved. Judah had the dominion entailed upon him, and Joseph the double portion. Therefore these two tribes are first seated: and on them the other seven attended. The bay - Heb.

Chapter XVII The families of Manasseh, ver. 1 - 6. The country that fell to their lot, ver. 7 - 18. Their request for more land, ver. 14 - 18. The first born of Joseph - The sense is, though Ephraim was to be more potent and numerous, yet Manasseh was the first - born, and had the privilege of the first - born, which was translated to Joseph, namely, a double portion; and therefore though this was but half the tribe of Manasseh, yet they are not made intimates to Ephraim, but have a distinct lot of their own, as their brethren, or other half tribe had beyond Jordan. For Machir - The only son of Manasseh, who therefore is here, put for the whole tribe. The first - born - So even only sons are sometimes called, as Matt 1:25. He - That is, Machir, had given great proof of his valour (though the particular history be not mentioned) and his posterity were no degenerate sons, but had his valiant blood still running in their veins. Gilead and Bashan - Part of these countries; for part of them was also given to the Reubenites, and part to the Gadites. This may be added as a reason, either, why he got those places from the Amorites: or why they were allotted to him or his posterity, because this was a frontier country, and the out - works to the land of Canaan, and therefore required valiant persons to defend it. A Lot - A distinct inheritance. The rest - Namely, those of them which had not received their possessions beyond Jordan. Male - children - This expression is used to bring in what follows, concerning his female children. He - That is, Eleazar, or Joshua, with the consent of the princes appointed for that work. Ten portions - Five for the sons, and five for the daughters; for as for Hepher, both he and his son Zelophehad was dead, and that without sons, and therefore had no portion; but his daughters had several portions allotted to them. The daughters - Not less than the son, so the sex was no bar to their inheritance. Three cities - Tappuah, and the cities upon the coast descending to the river, &c. last mentioned.

Chapter I The conquests made by Judah and Simeon, ver. 1 - 20. Benjamin failed, ver. 21. The house of Joseph took Bethel, ver. 22 - 26. But Manasseh did not drive out the Canaanites, ver. 27, 28. Nor Ephraim, ver. 29. Nor Zebulun, ver. 30. Nor Asher, ver. 31, 32. Nor Naphtali, ver. 33. Nor Dan, ver. 34 - 36. After the death - Not long after it; for Othniel, the first judge, lived in Joshua's time. Asked the Lord - Being assembled together at Shiloh, they enquired of the high - priest by the Urim and the Thummim. Against the Canaanites first - Finding their people multiply exceedingly, and consequently the necessity of enlarging their quarters, they renew the war. They do not enquire who shall be captain general to all the tribes; but what tribe shall first undertake the expedition, that by their success the other tribes may be encouraged to make the like attempt upon the Canaanites in their several lots. Judah - The tribe of Judah is chosen for the first enterprise, because they were both most populous, and so most needing enlargement; and withal most valiant, and therefore most likely to succeed: for God chooseth fit means for the work which he designs. Moreover the Canaanites were numerous and strong in those parts, and therefore to be suppressed, before they grew too strong for them. To Simeon - As nearest to him both by relation, being his brother by both parents, and by habitation. The Canaanites - Specially so called, because they are distinguished from the Perizzites, ver.4. In Bezek - Not in the city, for that was not yet taken, ver.5, but in the territory of it. Adoni - bezek - The lord or king of Bezek; as his name signifies. In Bezek - Whither he fled when he lost the field. Against him - That is, against the city wherein he had encamped himself, and the rest of his army. Great toes - And this they did, either by the direction of God, or upon notice of his former tyranny and cruelty. Threescore and ten - Which is not strange in those times and places.

They stood - As if they had been torch - bearers to the several companies. Against his fellow - They slew one another, because they suspected treachery, and so fell upon those they first met with; which they might more easily do, because they consisted of several nations, because the darkness of the night made them unable to distinguish friends from foes, because the suddenness of the thing struck them with horror and amazement; and because God had infatuated them, as he had done many others. The waters - That is, the passes over those waters to which they are like to come. Jordan - The fords of Jordan, which they must pass over into their own country. The other side of Jordan - For Gideon in the pursuit had passed over Jordan. Oreb and Zeeb had probably taken shelter, the one in a rock, the other by a wine - press. But the places of their shelter were made the places of their slaughter, and the memory of it preserved in the names of the places.

This book and the following bear the name of Samuel, (tho' he wrote only part of the former, and some other of the prophets, perhaps Nathan, the rest) because they contain first a large account of Samuel, and then the history of the reigns of Saul and David, who were both anointed by him. Chapter I

A short account of Saul, ver. 1, 2. Seeking his father's asses, he is advised to consult Samuel, ver. 3 - 10. He is directed to him, ver. 11 - 14. Samuel being informed of God concerning him, treats him with respect, and prepares him for the news, that he must be king, ver. 15 - 27. Goodly - Comely and personable. Higher - A tall stature was much valued in a king in ancient times, and in the eastern countries. The asses - Which were there of great price, because of the scarcity of horses, and therefore not held unworthy of Saul's seeking, at least in those ancient times, when simplicity, humility, and industry were in fashion among persons of quality. Honourable men - One of great reputation for his skill and faithfulness. Acquaintance with God and serviceableness to the kingdom of God, makes men truly honourable. The way - The course we should take to find the asses. He saith, peradventure, because he doubted whether so great a prophet would seek, or God would grant him a revelation concerning such mean matters: although sometimes God was pleased herein to condescend to his people, to cut off all pretence or occasion of seeking to heathenish divination. A present - Presents were then made to the prophets, either as a testimony of respect: or, as a grateful acknowledgement: or, for the support of the Prophets themselves: or, of the sons of the prophets: or, of other persons in want, known to them. Seer - Because he discerned and could discover things secret and unknown to others. And these are the words, either of some later sacred writer, who after Samuel's death, inserted this verse. Or, of Samuel, who, being probably fifty or sixty years old at the writing of this book, and speaking of the state of things in his first days, might well call it before time. Came to - day to the city - He had been travelling abroad, and was now returned to his own house in Ramah. High place - Upon the hill mentioned ver.11, and near the altar which Samuel built for this use. Find him - At home and at leisure. To eat - The relicks of the sacrifices.

Ziphites - Who were of David's own tribe tho' for this their unnatural carriage to him, he calls them strangers, Ps 54:3. A rock - That is, into a cave which was in the rock; where at first he might think to hide himself, but upon farther consideration he removed from thence upon Saul's approach. A messenger, &c. - The wisdom of God is never at a loss for ways, and means to preserve his people. Called, &c. - That is, The rock of divisions, because there Saul was separated, and in a manner pulled asunder from David, who was now almost within his reach. Chapter XXIV

Of snow - When lions are most fierce, both from the sharpness of their appetite in cold seasons, and from want of provisions. Harodite - In 1Chron 11:27, Shammoth the Harorite. Concerning which, and other changes of the names, which will be observed, by comparing this catalogue with that, it will be sufficient to suggest, that the same names of persons, or places, are differently pronounced according to the different dialects of divers places or ages. That one man had often two names. That David had more worthies than those here mentioned; and as some of these were slain in the former part of David's reign, as Asahel was; so others came up in their stead; and some were added to this number, as appears from 1Chron 11:10 - 47, where they are named, but not numbered, as they were here; and where there is a greater number than is here expressed. The two books of Samuel are an introduction to the two books of Kings, as they relate the original of the royal government in Saul, and of the royal family in David. These two books give us an account of David's successor, Solomon, the division of his kingdom, and the several kings of Israel and Judah, down to the captivity. And in these special regard is had to the house of David, from which Christ came. Some of his sons trod in his steps, and their reigns were usually long, whereas those of the wicked kings were usually short: so that the state of Judah (in Israel all the kings were wicked) was not so bad as it would otherwise have been. In this first book we have, The death of David, chap. 1, 2. The glorious reign of Solomon, chap. 3 - 10. His defection, chap. 11. The division of the kingdom between Rehoboam and Jeroboam, chap. 12 - 14. The reigns of Abijah and Asa over Judah, of Basha and Omni over Israel, chap. 15, 16. The history of Elijah, chap. 17 - 19. Ahab's success, wickedness, and death, chap. 20 - 22.

He took - First the city: which may seem strange, considering the great strength of it, and how much time it took Nebuchadnezzar and Titus to take it. But, first, it might cost Shishak also a long siege though that be not here related. Secondly, it is probable David and Solomon in their building and altering the city, had more respect to state and magnificence than to its defence, as having no great cause to fear the invasion of any enemies. And it is certain, that after the division between Judah and Israel, the kings of Judah added very much to the fortifications of it. Brazen shields - This was an emblem of the diminution of his glory. Sin makes the gold become dim, it changes the most fine gold and turns it into brass. To the house, &c. - By which it seems the affliction had done him some good, and brought him back to the worship of God, which he had forsaken. Was war - Not an invasive war with potent armies, which was forbidden, chap.12:24, and not revived 'till Abijam's reign, 2Chron 13:1 - 3, but a defensive war from those hostilities which by small parties and skirmishes they did to one another. An Ammonitess - This is repeated as a thing very observable.

The former book of Kings had an illustrious beginning in the glory of the kingdom of Israel. This has a melancholy conclusion, in the desolations of the kingdom of Israel first, and then of Judah. Here is Elijah fetching fire from heaven, and ascending in fire to heaven, chap. 1, 2. Elisha working many miracles, chap. 3 - 7. Hazael anointed, for the correction of Israel, Jehu, for the destruction of the house of Ahab and of Baal, chap. 8 - 10. The reigns of several kings, both of Judah and Israel, chap. 11 - 16. The captivity of the ten tribes, chap. 17. The glorious reign of Hezekiah, chap. 18 - 20. The wicked reign of Manasseh, and the good one of Josiah, chap. 21 - 23. The destruction of Jerusalem by the king of Babylon, chap. 24, 25.

Chapter VI The first fathers of the tribe of Levi, ver. 1 - 3. The line of the priests from Aaron to the captivity, ver. 4 - 15. Of some other families, ver. 16 - 30. The work of the Levites, ver. 31 - 48 Of the priests, ver. 49 - 53. The cities of the priests and Levites, ver. 54 - 81. The priest's office - So did all the rest, but it is implied that he did it worthily, he filled his place, and valiantly discharged his office in Uzziah's time. Solomon built - In Solomon's temple; so called to distinguish it from the second temple which was built or in building when these books were written. Ethan - Called also Jeduthun, chap.9:16 2Chron 35:15, and in the titles of divers psalms. Castles - So called, not only because, walled and well guarded by the country; but because they and their possessions were in a particular manner the care of divine providence. As God was their portion, so God was their protector. And a cottage will be a castle to those that abide under the shadow of the Almighty. The lot - Or, the first lot. Coasts - Or, of their borders, of their country contained within its borders.

Chapter VII The prosperity of Issachar, ver. 1 - 5. Of Benjamin, ver. 6 - 12. Of Naphtali, ver. 13. Of Manasseh, ver. 14 - 19. Of Ephraim, ver. 20 - 29. Of Asher, ver. 30 - 40. Three - They were ten, Gen 46:25, and five of them are named, chap.1Ch 8:1, but here only three are mentioned, either because these were most eminent; or because the other families are now extinct. Heads - Each of them head of that family to which he belonged. For it may seem by comparing this with chap.8:3, &c. that these were not the immediate sons of Belah, but his Grand - children descended each from a several father. She - His wife; his concubine is here opposed to her. Second - Of the second son or grandson of Machir; for so Zelophehad was. Had daughters - Only daughters, and no sons. These - Ashriel and Zelophehad, named ver.14,15, the relative being here referred to the remoter antecedent; as is frequent in the Hebrew. His - Gilead's sister. Mahalah - Understand, and Shemida, out of the next verse. Slew - This history is not recorded else where in scripture, but it is in the ancient Hebrew writers. The Philistines (one of whose cities Gath was) and the Egyptians were next neighbours; and in those ancient times it was usual for such to make inroads one into another's country, and to carry thence what prey they could take. And as the Philistines had probably made such inroads formerly into Egypt, and particularly into the land of Goshen, which was the utmost part of Egypt bordering upon the Philistines land; so the Israelites might requite them in the like kind: and particularly the children of Ephraim, to their own loss. And this seems to have happened a little before the Egyptian persecution, and before the reign of that new king mentioned Exod 1:8. And this clause, that were born in that land, may be added emphatically, as the motive which made them more resolute in their fight with the Ephraimites, because they fought in, and for their own land, wherein all their wealth and concerns lay. Bare a son - Thus the breach was in some measure repaired, by the addition of another son in his old age.

Chapter XXII Ahaziah's wicked reign, ver. 1 - 4. Being confederate with Joram, he is slain by Jehu, ver. 5 - 9. Athaliah destroys the seed royal, and usurps the kingdom, ver. 10 - 12. Forty two years - Some acknowledge an error in the transcribers of the present Hebrew copies, in which language the numeral letters for 22 and 42 are so like, that they might easily be mistaken. For that it was read 22 here, as it is in the book of Kings, in other Hebrew copies, they gather from hence, that it is at this day so read in divers ancient Greek copies, as also in those two ancient translations, the Syriack and the Arabick, and particularly in that most ancient copy of the Syriack which was used by the church of Antioch in the primitive times, and to this day is kept in the church of Antioch. The daughter - Of Ahab, Omri's Son. Grand - children are often called sons and daughters. His father - Who, while he lived, seduced his son himself, and made other evil counsellors unnecessary. Ahaziah - Who, tho' wounded, had made an escape, 2Kings 9:27. Chapter XXIII Jehoiada prepares the people and crowns the king, ver. 1 - 11. Athaliah is slain, ver. 12 - 15. The kingdom is reformed, ver. 16 - 21. Foundation - At the east gate, so called because it stood lower than the rest of the doors at the foot of the steps, by which they went up from the king's house to the temple. His sons - And Zechariah among the rest, whom afterwards he ungratefully slew, chap.24:21. Rejoiced - To see a rod sprung out of the stem of Jesse! To see what they despaired of ever seeing, a king of the house of David. Him - The Lord, as is expressed, 2Kings 11:17. Appointed - Or, as it is in the Hebrew, put the offices of the house of the Lord into the hand, that is, he restored the priests and Levites to the exercise of their office. Rejoiced, &c. - The generality of the people rejoiced, the rest were quiet and made no opposition. When the Son of David is enthroned in the soul, all therein is quiet, and springs of joy are opened.

Chapter II The leaders that returned, ver. 1, 2. The people, ver. 3 - 35 The priests, Levites and retainers to the temple, ver. 36 - 63. The sum total and their substance, ver. 64 - 67. Their offerings, ver. 68 - 70. The province - Of Judah, called a province, chap.5:8. And he calls it thus emphatically to mind himself and his brethren of that sad change which their sins had made among them, that from an illustrious, independent, and formidable kingdom, were fallen to be an obscure, servile, and contemptible province, first under the Chaldeans, and now under the Persians. Who came, &c. - This catalogue, differs in some names and numbers from that Neh 7:6 - 64, which might be because several names were given to the same persons; and because of the many changes which might happen in the same families between the time of the first making of this catalogue by Ezra, and the making it anew so many years after. The children - The posterity, as that word is constantly taken in this catalogue. Of Parosh - That descend either from Parosh, or from that family whereof Parosh was the chief. And so for the rest. Seven hundred, &c. - In Neh 7:10, they were only six hundred and fifty two, it seems seven hundred and seventy five marched out of Babylon, but some of them died, others were hindered by sickness, or other casualties, and so there came only six hundred and fifty two to Jerusalem. And the like is to be said in the like differences: which it suffices to hint once for all. Beth - lehem - And so these were the remainders of the inhabitants of that city. (And the like may be said of the two following names, Netophah and Anathoth, or others of the like nature.) So little was Beth - lehem among the thousands of Judah! Yet thence must the Messiah arise. Harim - The head of one of the twenty four courses which David appointed, 1Chron 24:8, of all which courses, some observe here are not above four or five that returned. There is another Harim mentioned above, ver.32, but that was no priest, as this was ver.36. Nethinims - Persons devoted to the inferior services of the priests and Levites.

Chapter IV Eliphaz owns Job's former usefulness, but infers from his present state and behaviour, that he was an hypocrite, ver. 1 - 6. He affirms that God never afflicts man, but for his wickedness, ver. 7 - 11. He confirms his assertion, by the words he heard in a vision, ver. 12 - 21. By all this he aims to make Job both penitent and patient under his sufferings. If we, &c. - He speaks with great modesty. He will not undertake the cause alone, but joins his friends with him. He will not promise much, but only assay, or try if he could propose any thing pertinent to Job's case. Withhold - When he hears such words from such a person as thou art. Feeble knees - Such as were weak hearted, and fainting under their trials. Thy fear - We now plainly see what was the nature of thy fear of God, thy confidence in him, the uprightness of thy ways, and thy hope in God's mercy. Thy present carriage discovers that it was but mere talk and appearance. Innocent - Therefore thou art guilty of some great, though secret crimes, and thy sin hath now found thee out. Cut off - By the sickle of Divine vengeance before his time, which is like to be thy case. Eliphaz here advances another argument to prove Job an hypocrite; taken not only from his impatience under afflictions, but from his afflictions themselves. Even - As thou hast never seen any example of a righteous man cut off, so I have seen many of wicked men cut off for their wickedness. They - They that designedly work wickedness, first preparing themselves for it, and then continuing to execute it, as husbandmen first plow the ground, and then cast in the feed. Reap - The fruit of their iniquity, the just punishment of it. The blast - Of his nostrils, as it follows; by his anger, which in men shews itself, in the nostrils, by hot and frequent breathings there, by a secret, but mighty judgment of God, they are blown away as chaff by the wind. The roaring - Nor can they escape, even were they strong as lions, yea, as the strongest and fiercest of them. Broken - Which is true literally; the lions when taken having most commonly their teeth broken, as ancient and modern writers relate.

Chapter XXIX Jeremiah's letter to the captives in Babylon, to be quiet there, ver. 1 - 7. Not to believe false prophets; nor expect to return 'till after fifty years, ver. 8 - 14. The destruction of those who remained in Judah for their disobedience, ver. 15 - 19. The fearful end of two lying prophets, ver. 20 - 23. Shemaiah's letter against Jeremiah, ver. 24 - 29. Who reads his doom, ver. 30 - 32. Captives - There were two carryings into Babylon, the latter about eleven or twelve years after the former, the first was in the time of Jehoiakim, When the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths were carried away. By the hand - Zedekiah having some occasion to send two messengers to Babylon. Jeremiah knowing that as there were false prophets at Jerusalem, who fed people with hopes of a speedy return, so there were some with them in Babylon, writes the following letter, and sends it by these two messengers, to quiet the peoples minds. After - From this text it appears that the seventy years captivity, were to be accounted from the first carrying into captivity in the time of Jehoiakim, so that eleven years of it were elapsed, before Zedekiah was carried away. To give - This deliverance will not depend upon your merits, but upon my own mercy, and kind thoughts and purposes I have for the seed of Abraham my servant, and I am resolved in my own thoughts what to do, I intend not the blotting out of the name of Israel from the earth, but to give such an end to their trouble as themselves expect and desire. Because - The prophet here turns his speech to some wicked Jews, that were in Babylon, or in Judea. Of the king - Zedekiah. Nehelamite - It is probable there was such a place as Nehelam, from whence he was. Priest - Zephaniah was the second priest. In the stead - In the stead signifies, that thou shouldest be like the good high priest Jehoiada. Mad - That thou mightest take care of persons, who being mad or frantick make themselves prophets.

Had not hold - The ends of the beams were not thrust into the main body of the wall of the temple. An enlarging - Of the side chambers, so much of breadth added to the chamber, as was taken from the thickness of the wall; that is, two cubits in the uppermost, and one cubit in the middle - most, more than in the lowest chambers. A winding about - Winding stairs, which enlarged as the rooms did, and these run up between each two chambers from the bottom to the top; so there were two doors at the head of each pair of stairs, one door opening into one chamber, and the other into the opposite chamber. For the winding about - These stairs, as they rose in height, enlarged themselves too. Round about - On all sides of the house where these chambers were. The breadth - Of each chamber. Increased - Grew broader by one cubit in every upper chamber. From five in the lowest to six in the middle, and to seven in the highest chamber. The foundations - The lowest chamber had properly a foundation laid on the earth, but the floor of the middle, and highest story must be accounted here a foundation; so from the ground to the ceiling of the first room, was six great cubits; from the first to the second, six great cubits; and from the third floor to the roof of the chamber, a like number; to which add we one cubit for thickness of each of the three floors, you have twenty - one cubits for height, ten yards and a half high. The place - The walk and wall. The doors - The doors of the lowest row opened into this void paved space. The building - This is a new building not yet mentioned, but now measured by itself. The house - The whole temple, oracle, sanctuary and porch, with the walls. The building - On both the north and south - side of the temple. The breadth - The whole front of the house eastward.

The law - This is the first comprehensive rule: holiness becomes God's house; and this relative holiness referred to personal and real holiness. The top - The whole circuit of this mountain shall be holy, but the top of it on which the temple stands, shall be most holy. The altar - Of burnt - offerings. And an hand - breath - The sacred cubit, three inches longer than the common cubit. The bottom - The ledge or settle, fastened to the altar on all sides at the bottom, shall be a cubit in height. The breadth - From the edge of this bench on the outside to the edge where it joined the body of the altar, a cubit, and this the breadth, twenty one inches, broad enough for the priests to walk on. Border - A ledge going round on all the squares. The edge - On the outer edge of this settle a span high. The back - As the back bears burdens, so this was to bear the weight of the whole altar. From the bottom - From the first ledge, which was a cubit broad, and a cubit high from the ground. To the lower - To the top of that square settle, which is called lower, because another settle is raised upon it. Two cubits - In height. The lesser - From the highest edge of the uppermost settle, down to the cubit broad ledge about the lower settle. The greater - So called, because it exceeded the upper settle a cubit in breadth. Four cubits - ln height. Four cubits - In height. From the altar - From the top of the altar. Stairs - Or steps, for such they needed, (probably each stair about one fourth of a cubit,) to carry them, up to the first and second settles. Give - Direct, or command that it be given. Shalt take - Appoint it to be taken. He - The priest. In the appointed place - That is, in the court of the house, and on the altar appointed; this is the first day's sacrifice. They - The priests in attendance. Shalt offer - On the third day, and so on, through seven days. Shalt offer - Direct them to offer. Salt - It may allude to the perpetuity of the covenant thus made by sacrifice. They - The priests in course.

To minister - To offer sacrifice at the altar, and incense in the house. God will put marks of honour upon those who are faithful to him in trying times, and will, employ those in his service, who have kept close to it, when others drew back. And within - In the temple. Shall not sanctify - By the law, common things, touching holy things, became consecrated, and no more fit for common use. To grow long - Priding themselves in it, as Absalom. Shall only poll - When the hair is grown, they shall cut the ends of their hair, and keep it in moderate size. Drink wine - Or any other strong liquor, when they go either to trim the lamps or set the shew - bread in order, or to offer incense in the temple, or when they go to the altar to offer a sacrifice, which stood in the inner court. Shall judge - Shall determine the controversy. Assemblies - Publick congregations. Cleansed - After for seven days he hath kept from the dead. They - The priests, who are about the house of God, shall appoint seven days more to this defiled person for his cleansing before he is admitted into the sanctuary. It - The sin - offering: but under this one, all other offerings are couched. For an inheritance - Instead of lands and cities. And the first - So soon as the first - fruits are ripe in the field, your vineyards, and olive yards. Every oblation - Whether free - will offering, or prescribed. The first of your dough - 'Tis conceived this was of every mass of dough they made, and of the first of the dough, which every year they first made of the new corn, as by the custom of the Jews at this day appears. That he - The priest may bless, and pray for thee.

Daniel was of the tribe of Judah, and it is thought, of the royal family. Ezekiel, his cotemporary, but much his senior, speaks of him as wise to a proverb, when he upbraids the king of Tyre with his self - conceit, Thou art wiser than Daniel. He likewise names Noah, Daniel, and Job, as having the greatest interest in heaven of any. He lived a long and active life in the courts and councils of some of the greatest monarchs the world ever had. Yet none was more intimately acquainted with the mind of God than he that was a courtier, a statesman, and a man of business. It is generally supposed he lived to be very old, and died at Shushan in Persia. The first chapter of this book, and the three first verses of the second are in Hebrew: and so are the four last chapters. The rest of the book is in the Chaldee: Daniel continues the holy story, from the first taking of Jerusalem by the Chaldean Babel, 'till the last destruction of it by Rome, the mystical Babel.

Chapter VII We come now to the prophetical part of Daniel, in which are many things hard to be understood. In this chapter we have, The vision of the four beasts, ver. 1 - 8. The vision of God's throne of government and judgment, ver. 9 - 14. The interpretation of those visions, ver. 15 - 28. In the first year of Belshazzar - This prophecy is written in Chaldee, to be a monument to him, of the reverence his father and grandfather shewed towards God, who had done such mighty works for them. Then he wrote - These visions were recorded for the benefit of the church, to rectify their mistake: for they thought all things would succeed prosperously after they returned out of their captivity. The four winds - Probably by the four winds of the great sea is signified commotions of contrary nations, striving together by wars, and producing these four beasts successively. Four great beasts - That is, four great monarchies, great, in comparison of particular kingdoms; beasts for their tyrannical oppressions. The first - This was the Chaldean, or Assyrian; whose seat was first at Babylon, afterwards at Nineveh, and then at Babylon again. Eagle's wings - They were swift, over - running many countries, and brought their monarchy to a prodigious height in a short time. The wings were plucked - Which was first done in stopping the career of their victories, and afterwards in casting them out of their kingdom. A man's heart - They lost their lion - like courage, and became faint and cowardly like other men. Another beast - The Mede's and Persians, a fierce, ravenous creature. On one side - The north side; for the Mede first arose and sent to Cyrus the Persian to come and assist him against the Assyrian. Three ribs - Several of the Babylonian subjects revolted, and all these made the three ribs. Like a leopard - This leopard was the Grecian monarchy; a leopard is less than a lion, so was this monarchy at first, but yet durst fight with a lion; so did Alexander encounter Darius with an inferior force. A leopard also for his swiftness; therefore described with four wings on his back. Four heads - He was succeeded by four of his chief commanders, who divided that empire into four parts. A fourth beast - The Roman empire.

Chapter XI A prediction of the setting up of the Grecian monarchy, ver. 1 - 4. Of the affairs of Egypt and Syria, ver. 5 - 20. The rise and success of Antiochus Epiphanes, ver. 21 - 29. The mischief he would do to the Jews, ver. 30 - 43. His fall, ver. 44, 45. He - Xerxes was more potent than all the other three, because his father Darius had gathered an incredible mass for him, which he himself increased for six years together, before he made his expedition against Greece. There were more kings of Persia besides those four, but they had no concern with the people of God. A mighty king - Alexander the great. When he shall stand up - When he is come to his highest point. Nor according to his dominion - They did not reign as kings at first, but only as captains; and as to the extent of their dominion, it was far less than Alexander's, yea, all four fell short of his. Even for others - Some lesser commanders shared several parts of the empire. The king of the south - This king was Ptolemy, the first king of Egypt after Alexander who is brought in, because he took Jerusalem by treachery; for the angel minds only those persons and things which related to the Jews. One of his princes - Seleucus Nicanor, who overcame Demetrius, and added Asia to his empire. They - The successors of those first kings of Egypt and Syria. Make an agreement - Bernice shall come from Egypt and marry with Antiochus Theus, who was the son of Antiochus Soter, and nephew to Seleucus Nicanor; for her father brought her to Pelusium with an infinite sum of gold and silver for her dowry. She shall not retain - She continued not in favour and authority. Nor his arm - His power. Shall one stand up - Of Bernice shall come Ptolemaeus Euergetes, who shall revenge the wrong done to his sister. Shall enter into the fortress - For he invaded Syria, and took many strong - holds. He shall continue more years - He continued forty - six years. Return - So he did with a booty of forty thousand talents of silver.

Chapter VII Threatened judgments turned aside by the prayer of Amos, ver. 1 - 6. Yet at length they are sentenced to utter ruin, ver. 7 - 9. Amaziah accuses Amos, ver. 10 - 13. Amos justifies himself and denounces the judgment of God against Amaziah, ver. 14 - 17. Thus - This is the first of five prophetic representations of what was coming upon this people. The latter growth - The shooting up of the first growth being too luxuriant, they often eat it down with cattle; but if the second growth were eat up, it marred the whole harvest. Mowed - It is supposed the first mowing of the corn in the blade was for the king's use; and after this the second springing grew up to the harvest. It came to pass - In the vision. By whom - How shall any of Jacob escape, if thou dost cast him down Repented - This is spoken after the manner of men. Shewed - In vision. Called - Commanded fire from heaven. A part - Of the land too. By a plumb - line - Strongly and beautifully built. Set a plumb - line - I will exactly measure the whole ten tribes. Pass by them - I will no more forbear, but will pull down all that is faulty. The high places - The temples on high mountains built to idols. Of Isaac - The seed of Isaac. In the midst - Openly, and publickly, endeavouring to stir up Israel to sedition or rebellion. The land - The people cannot bear all his harsh predictions. Jeroboam shall die - He nowhere said so, but spake of his house distinguished from his person, as ver.9. The king's court - To which therefore thou oughtest to shew more respect, and not thus to affront the king in his own house. No prophet - Not originally, or by study, or by any human designation. An herdman - By breeding and occupation I was and still am, an herdman. Sycamore fruit - This fruit was good food for man, or cattle. The house of Isaac - The posterity of Isaac. In a polluted land - Among the Heathen. Israel - The ten tribes.

8-10.) “And such a distinction ought to be made by the best methods of interpreting the Scriptures; which most certainly are an attentive consideration of the occasion and scope of those passages, in concurrence with the general sense of the primitive Church.” (P. 11.) “I propose, Thirdly, to specify some of the chief passages of Scripture that are misapplied by modern enthusiasts, and to show that they are to be interpreted chiefly, if not only, of the apostolical Church; and that they very little, if at all, relate to the present state of Christians.” (P. 12.) “I begin,” says your Lordship, “with the original promise of the Spirit, as made by our Lord a little before he left the world.” I must take the liberty to stop your Lordship on the threshold. I deny that this is the original promise of the Spirit. I expect his assistance, in virtue of many promises some hundred years prior to this. If you say, “However, this is the original or first promise of the Spirit in the New Testament:” No, my Lord; those words were spoken long before: “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.” Will you reply?--“Well, but this is the original promise made by our Lord.” I answer, Not so, neither; for it was before this Jesus himself stood and cried, “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink: He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. And this he spake of the Spirit, which they should receive who believed on him.” (Ov eple}\}\ov Aap gavew ot tria Tevovres eus avtov.) If I mistake not, this may more justly be termed, our Lord’s original promise of the Spirit. And who will assert that this is to be “interpreted chiefly, if not only, of the apostolical Church 7” 5. Your Lordship proceeds: “It occurs in the fourteenth and sixteenth chapters of St. John’s Gospel; in which he uses these words.” In what verses, my Lord?" Why is not this specified ?

The same rule I follow now, both at London, Bristol, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne; concluding the service at every place, winter and summer, before six in the morning; and not ordinarily beginning to preach till near seven in the evening. Now, do you who make this objection work longer, through out the year, than from six to six? Do you desire that the generality of people should? or can you count them idle that work so long? Some few are indeed accustomed to work longer. These I advise not to come on week-days; and it is apparent, that they take this advice, unless on some rare and extraordinary occasion. But I hope none of you who turn them out of their employ ment have the confidence to talk of my making them idle ! Do you (as the homely phrase is) cry wh-- first? I admire your cunning, but not your modesty. So far am I from either causing or encouraging idleness, that an idle person, known to be such, is not suffered to remain in any of our societies; we drive him out, as we would a thief or a murderer. “To show all possible diligence,” (as well as frugal ity) is one of our standing rules; and one, concerning the observance of which we continually make the strictest inquiry. 11. “But you drive them out of their senses. You make them mad.” Nay, then they are idle with a vengeance. This objection, therefore, being of the utmost importance, deserves our deepest consideration. And, First, I grant, it is my earnest desire to drive all the world into what you probably call madness; (I mean, inward religion;) to make them just as mad as Paul when he was so accounted by Festus.

4. It is the business of a Visitor of the sick, To see every sick person within his district thrice a week. To inquire into the state of their souls, and to advise them as occasion may require. To inquire into their disorders, and pro cure advice for them. To relieve them, if they are in want. To do any thing for them, which he (or she) can do. To bring in his accounts weekly to the Stewards.” Upon reflection, I saw how exactly, in this also, we had copied after the primitive Church. What were the ancient Deacons? What was Phebe the Deaconess, but such a Visitor of the sick? 5. I did not think it needful to give them any particular rules beside these that follow : (1.) Be plain and open in dealing with souls. (2.) Be mild, tender, patient. (3.) Be cleanly in all you do for the sick. (4.) Be not nice. 6. We have ever since had great reason to praise God for his continued blessing on this undertaking. Many lives have been saved, many sicknesses healed, much pain and want prevented or removed. Many heavy hearts have been made glad, many mourners comforted: And the Visitors have found, from Him whom they serve, a present reward for all their labour. XII. 1. But I was still in pain for many of the poor that were sick; there was so great expense, and so little profit. And * The Leaders now do this. first, I resolved to try, whether they might not receive more benefit in the hospitals. Upon the trial, we found there was indeed less expense, but no more good done, than before. I then asked the advice of several Physicians for them; but still it profited not. I saw the poor people pining away, and several families ruined, and that without remedy. 2. At length I thought of a kind of desperate expedient. “I will prepare, and give them physic myself.” For six or seven and twenty years, I had made anatomy and physic the diversion of my leisure hours; though I never properly studied them, unless for a few months when I was going to America, where I imagined I might be of some service to those who had no regular Physician among them. I applied to it again.

The love of Christ constraineth him. After this, he may obey, or he may not; no constraint being laid upon him Q. 12. Can faith be lost, but through disobedience? A. It cannot. A believer first inwardly disobeys, inclines to sin with his heart: Then his intercourse with God is cut off; that is, his faith is lost: And after this, he may fall into out ward sin, being now weak, and like another man. Q. 13. How can such an one recover faith? A. By “repenting, and doing the first works.” (Rev. ii. 5.) Q. 14. Whence is it that so great a majority of those who believe fall more or less into doubt or fear? A. Chiefly from their own ignorance or unfaithfulness: Often from their not watching unto prayer: Perhaps some times from some defect, or want of the power of God in the preaching they hear. Q. 15. Is there not a defect in us? Do we preach as we did at first? Have we not changed our doctrines? A. (1.) At first we preached almost wholly to unbelievers. To those therefore we spake almost continually of remission of sins through the death of Christ, and the mature of faith in his blood. And so we do still, among those who need to be taught the first elements of the gospel of Christ. (2.) But those in whom the foundation is already laid, we exhort to go on to perfection; which we did not see so clearly at first; although we occasionally spoke of it from the beginning. (3.) Yet we now preach, and that continually, faith in Christ, as the Prophet, Priest, and King, at least, as clearly, as strongly, and as fully, as we did six years ago. Q. 16. Do we not discourage visions and dreams too much, as if we condemned them toto genere? A. We do not intend to do this. We neither discourage nor encourage them. We learn from Acts ii. 17, &c., to expect something of this kind “in the last days.” And we cannot deny that saving faith is often given in dreams or visions of the night; which faith we account neither better nor worse, than if it came by any other means. Q. 17. Do not some of our assistants preach too much of the wrath, and too little of the love, of God? A.

The Character of a Methodist Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 8 (Zondervan) Year: 1742 Author: John Wesley --- 1. SINCE the name first came abroad into the world, many have been at a loss to know what a Methodist is; what are the principles and the practice of those who are commonly called by that name; and what the distinguishing marks of this sect, “which is everywhere spoken against.” 2. And it being generally believed, that I was able to give the clearest account of these things, (as having been one of the first to whom that name was given, and the person by whom the rest were supposed to be directed,) I have been called upon, in all manner of ways, and with the utmost earnestness, so to do. I yield at last to the continued importunity both of friends and enemies; and do now give the clearest account I can, in the presence of the Lord and Judge of heaven and earth, of the principles and practice whereby those who are called Methodists are distinguished from other men. 3. I say those who are called Methodists; for, let it be well observed, that this is not a name which they take to themselves, but one fixed upon them by way of reproach, without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford, by a student of Christ Church; either in allusion to the ancient sect of Physicians so called, from their teaching, that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise, or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station. 4. I should rejoice (so little ambitious am I to be at the head of any sect or party) if the very name might never be mentioned more, but be buried in eternal oblivion. But if that cannot be, at least let those who will use it, know the meaning of the word they use. Let us not always be fighting in the dark. Come, and let us look one another in the face.

It is now my turn to complain of unfair usage; of the exceeding lame, broken, imperfect manner wherein you cite my words. For instance, your citation runs thus: You“never knew but one of the Mora vian Church affirm, that a believer does not grow in holiness.” Whereas my words are these: “I never knew one of the Mora vian Church, but that single person, affirm, that a believer does not grow in holiness; and perhaps he would not affirm it on reflection.” Now, why was the former part of the sentence changed, and the latter quite left out? Had the whole stood in your tract just as it does in mine, it must have appeared I do not here charge the Moravian Church. I complain also of your manner of replying to the first article of this very paragraph. For you do not cite so much as one line of that answer to which you profess to reply. My words are, “You ought not to charge the Moravian Church with the first of these” errors, “since in the very page from which you quote those words, “There is no justifying faith where there ever is any doubt,’ that note occurs, (viz., Vol. I. p. 328,) “In the preface to the Second Journal, the Moravian Church is cleared from this mistake.” If you had cited these words, could you possibly have subjoined, “I have not charged the Moravian Church with anything; but only repeat after you?” 4. I have now considered one page of your reply, in the man ner you seem to require. But sure you cannot expect I should follow you thus, step by step, through a hundred and forty pages! If you should then think it worth while to make a second reply, and to follow me in the same manner, we might write indeed, but who would read? I return therefore to what I proposed at first, viz., to touch only on what seems of the most importance, and leave the rest just as it lies. 5. You say, “With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought, that you only found this ‘in many of them; not in all, nor in most.” (Page 80) “You now would have it thought !” Yes, and always, as well as now.

You say, “With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought, that you only found this ‘in many of them; not in all, nor in most.” (Page 80) “You now would have it thought !” Yes, and always, as well as now. For my original charge was, “I have found this in many of you; that is, much subtlety, much evasion and disguise.” (Vol. I. p. 327.) But you add, “Let the reader judge from the following passages, whether you did not charge the Mora vians in general with these crimes: ‘I had a long conference with those whom I esteem very highly in love; but I could not yet understand them in one point, Christian openness and plain ness of speech. They pleaded for such a reservedness and close ness of conversation. Yet I scarce know what to think, con sidering they had the practice of the whole Moravian Church on their side.” True, in pleading for such a reservedness of conversation as I could not in any wise approve of; but not in using much subtlety, much evasion and disguise: This I dare not charge on the whole Moravian Church. Those words also, “There is darkness and closeness in all their behaviour, and guile in almost all their words,” I spoke, not of all the Mora vians, nor of most ; but of those who were then in England. I could not speak it of them all; for I never found any guile in Christian David, Michael Linner, and many others. 6. “We are next to see how you get over the objection I made good, in three several particulars, that you have prepared the way for spreading of these tenets. The first you say nothing to here; the Second you quote very partially thus: “By coun tenancing and commending them.’ And why would you not add ‘And being the occasion of so many of them coming over among us?” Because I was not the occasion. I was in deed the first Englishman that ever was at Hernhuth. But before I was at Hernhuth, (I find on later inquiry,) the Count himself had been in England.

You remarked, “It will be difficult to persuade any sober person, that there is anything supernatural in these disorders.” (Remarks, p. 69.) The remainder of that paragraph I abridged thus: You attempt to account for those fits, by “obstructions or irregularities of the blood and spirits; hysterical disorders; watchings, fastings, closeness of rooms, great crowds, violent heat;” and lastly by “terrors, perplexities, and doubts, in weak and well-meaning men; which,” you think, “in many of the cases before us, have quite overset their understand ings.” (Remarks, p. 43.) Ianswered, “As to each of the rest, let it goas far as it can go.” (Let it be supposed to have some influence in some cases; per haps fully to account for one in a thousand.) “But I require proof of the last way whereby you would account for these disorders.” Why, “the instances,” you say, “ of religious madness have much increased since you began to disturb the world.” I doubt the fact. You reply, “This no way disproves it.” (Second Letter, p. 137.) Yes, it does, till you produce some proof. For a bare negation is the proper and sufficient answer to a bare affirmation. I add, “If these instances had increased daily, it is easy to account for them another way,” as is done in the First Part of the Farther Appeal, at the one hundred and thirty-first and following pages. You say, “Most have heard of or known several of the Methodists thus driven to distraction.” I answered, “You may have heard of five hun dred. But how many have you known P Be pleased to name eight or ten of them. I cannot find them, no, not one of them to this day, either man, woman, or child.” (Page 411.) You reply, “This” (the naming them) “would be very im proper and unnecessary.” Second Letter, p. 138.) However, Sir, it is extremely necessary that you should name them to me in private. I will then, if required, excuse you to the public; which till then I cannot do. The person I mentioned, whom you threw into much doubt and perplexity, then lived in the parish of St. Ann, West minster. I related the case just as she related it to me. But she is able and ready to answer for herself. 9.

But what is it you are endeavouring to prove? Quorsum haec tam putida tendant * * The paragraph seems to point at me. But the plain, natural tendency of it is, to invalidate that great argument for Christi anity which is drawn from the constancy of the martyrs. Have you not here also spoken a little too plain? Had you not better have kept the mask on a little longer? Indeed, you lamely add, “The solid and just comforts which a true martyr receives from above are groundlessly applied to the counterfeit.” But this is not enough even to save appear ancéS. 18. You subjoin a truly surprising thought: “It may more over be observed, that both ancient and modern enthusiasts always take care to secure some advantage by their sufferings.” (Page 40.) O 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? 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 * Thus translated from the Latin of Horace by Francis : “Whither tends This putid stuff?”--EDIT. 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.

“I say, those who are called Methodists; for, let it be well observed, that this is not a name which they take upon them selves, but one fixed on them by way of reproach, without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford, by a Student of Christ's Church; either in allu sion to the ancient sect of Physicians, (so called from their teaching that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise,) or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station.” (Preface to “the Character of a Methodist.”) I need only add, that this nick-name was imposed upon us before “this manner of preaching” had a being; yea, at a time when I thought it as lawful to cut a throat, as to preach out of a church. “Why then will Mr. W. so grossly misrepresent his adver saries, as to say, that, when they speak against Methodism, they speak against the plain, old doctrine of the Church of Eng land?” (Tract, p. 169.) This is no misrepresentation. Many of our adversaries, all over the kingdom, speak against us, eo nomine,” for preaching these doctrines, justification by faith in particular. However, a “fanatic manner of preaching, though it were the doctrine of an Apostle, may do more harm to society at least, than reviving old heresies, or inventing new. It tends to bewilder the imaginations of some, to inflame the passions of others, and to spread disorder and confusion through the whole com munity.” (Page 169.) I would gladly have the term defined. What is a “fanatic manner of preaching?” Is it field-preach ing? But this has no such effect, even among the wildest of men. This has not “bewildered the imagination” even of the Kingswood colliers, or “inflamed their passions.” It has not spread disorder or confusion among them, but just the contrary. From the time it was heard in that chaos, Confusion heard the voice, and wild uproar Stood ruled, and order from disorder sprung. “But St. James, who delivers the test for the trial of these men's pretensions,” (the same mistake still,) “unquestionably * On this account.--EIDT.

Whitefield, to inquire of him whether she was not a Papist. But he quickly perceived she was only a lunatic; the nature of her disorder soon betraying itself.” Certainly then my allowing her to be mad is no proof of my partiality. I will allow every one to be so who is attended with “all these circumstances of madness.” (4.) “He pronounces sentence of enthusiasm upon another, and tells us wherefore, without any disguise: ‘Here I took leave of a poor, mad, original enthusiast, who had been scattering lies in every quarter.’” It was the famous John Adams, since confined at Box, whose capital lie, the source of the rest, was, that he was a prophet, greater than Moses, or any of the Apostles. And is the pronouncing him a madman a proof of my partiality? (5) “I had much conversation with Mr. Simpson, an ori ginal enthusiast. I desired him in the evening to give an ex hortation. He did so, and spoke many good things, in a manner peculiar to himself: ”--without order or connexion, head or tail; and in a language very near as mystical as that of Jacob Behmen. “When he had done, I summed up what he had said, methodizing and explaining it. O what a pity it is, this well-meaning man should ever speak without an inter preter!” (Page 223.) Let this passage likewise stand as it is, and who can guess how it is to prove my partiality? But by a sleight-of-hand the thing is done. “How differently does Mr. Wesley treat these two enthusiasts ! The first is accused of spreading lies of his master.” (No, he never was any disciple of mine.) “On which lfr. W. took his leave of him;--a gentle expression, to signify the thrusting him out, head and shoulders, from the society of saints.” It signifies neither more nor less than that I went out of the room and left him. “The other’s enthusiasm is made to consist only in want of method.” No. His enthusiasm did not consist in this. It was the cause of it. But he was quite another man than John Adams; and, I believe, a right honest man. (6) “I was both surprised and grieved at a genuine instance of enthusiasm. I.

xiii. 8, &c.)” “The common opinion is, that this respects another life, as he enforceshis argument by this observation: “Now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: Now we know in part; but then shall we know, even as also we are known.” (Page 99.) “But the Apostle means, charity is to accompany the Church in all its stages; whereas prophecy and all the rest are only bestowed during its infant state, to support it against the delusions and powers of darkness.” (Page 100.) “The Corinthians abounded in these gifts, but were wanting in charity. And this the Apostle here exposes, by proving charity to be superior to them all, both in its qualities and dura tion. The three first verses declare that the other gifts are use less without charity. The next four specify the qualities of charity; the remaining six declare its continuance: “Charity never faileth: But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. In the next verse he gives the reason: ‘For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away: 'That is, when that Christian life, the lines of which are marked out by the gospel, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity, then the temporary aids, given to sub due prejudice, and to support the weak, shall, like scaffolding, be removed. In other words, when that Christian life, wherein the Apostles and first Christians were but infants, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity in their successors, then miracles shall cease.” (Page 102.) But I fear that time is not yet come. I doubt, none that are now alive enjoy more of the vigour and maturity of the Christian life than the very first Christians did. “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.

A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Baily of Cork Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 9 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 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. However, I will not plead this as an excuse for taking no notice of your last favour; although, to say the truth, I scarce know how to answer it, as you write in a language I am not accustomed to. Both Dr. Tucker, Dr. Church, and all the other gentlemen who have wrote to me in public for some years, have wrote as gentlemen, having some regard to their own, whatever my character was. But as you fight in the dark, you regard not what weapons you * The Letter thus subscribed was published at Cork, on May 30th last. use. We are not, therefore, on even terms; I cannot answer you in kind; I am constrained to leave this to your good allies of Blackpool and Fair-Lane.* I shall first state the facts on which the present controversy turns; and then consider the most material parts of your performance. First. I am to state the facts. But here I am under a great disadvantage, having few of my papers by me.

Com plaint was made of this to William Holmes, Esq., the present Mayor of Cork. But there was no removal of the thing complained of; the riots were not suppressed: Nay, they not only continued, but increased. 15. From the beginning of February to the end, His Majesty’s peace was preserved just as before; of which it may be proper to subjoin two or three instances, for the information of all thinking men -- “WILLIAM JEwBLL, clothier, of Shandon Church-Lane, deposes, “That Nicholas Butler, with a riotous mob, several times * A name first given to Mr. Cennick, from his first preaching on those words: “Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.” assaulted this deponent’s house: That particularly on the 23d of February, he came thither with a large mob, armed with clubs and other weapons: That several of the rioters entered the house, and swore, the first who resisted, they would blow their brains out: That the deponent’s wife, en deavouring to stop them, was assaulted and beaten by the said Butler; who then ordered his men to break the deponent's windows, which they did with stones of a considerable weight. “MARY PHILIPs, of St.

“MARY PHILIPs, of St. Peter's Church-Lane, deposes, “That on the 26th of February, about seven in the evening, Nicholas Butler came to her house with a large mob, and asked where her husband was: That as soon as she appeared, he first abused her in the grossest terms, and then struck her on the head, so that it stunned her; and she verily believes, had not some within thrust to and fastened the door, she should have been murdered on the spot.” It may suffice for the present to add one instance more -- “ELIZABETH GARDELET, wife of Joseph Gardelet, Corporal, in Colonel Pawlet’s regiment, Captain Charlton’s company, deposes, “That on February 28, as she was going out of her lodgings, she was met by Butler and his mob : That Butler, without any manner of provocation, immediately fell upon her, striking her with both his fists on the side of the head, which knocked her head against the wall: That she endeavoured to escape from him; but he pursued her, and struck her several times in the face: That she ran into the school-yard for shelter; but he followed, and caught hold of her, saying, ‘You whore, you stand on consecrated ground,’ and threw her with such force across the lane, that she was driven against the opposite wall: That when she had recovered herself a little, she made the best of her way to her lodging; but Butler still pursued, and overtook her as she was going up the stairs: That he struck her with his fist on the stomach; which stroke knocked her down backwards; that falling with the small of her back against the edge of one of the stairs, she was not able to rise again: That her pains immediately came upon her, and about two in the morning she miscarried.” 16. These, with several more depositions to the same effect, were, in April, laid before the Grand Jury. Yet they did not find any of these bills | But they found one against Daniel Sullivan, the younger, (no Preacher, but a hearer of the people called Methodists,) who, when Butler and his mob were dis charging a shower of stones upon him, fired a pistol, without any ball, over their heads.

A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Downes Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 9 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. IN the Tract which you have just published concerning the people called Methodists, you very properly say, “Our first care should be, candidly and fairly to examine their doctrines. For, as to censure them unexamined would be unjust; so to do the same without a fair and impartial examination would be ungenerous.” And again: “We should, in the first place, carefully and candidly examine their doctrines.” (Page 68.) This is undoubtedly true. But have you done it? Have you ever examined their doctrines yet? Have you examined them fairly? fairly and candidly? candidly and carefully? Have you read over so much as the Sermons they have published, or the “Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion?” I hope you have not; for I would fain make some little excuse for your uttering so many senseless, shameless falsehoods. I hope you know nothing about the Methodists, no more than I do about the Cham of Tartary; that you are ignorant of the whole affair, and are so bold, only because you are blind. Bold enough ! Throughout your whole Tract, you speak satis pro imperio,"-- as authoritatively as if you was, not an Archbishop only, but Apostolic Vicar also; as if you had the full papal power in your hands, and fire and faggot at your beck! And blind enough; so that you blunder on, through thick and thin, bespattering all that come in your way, according to the old, laudable maxim, “Throw dirt enough, and some will stick.” 2. I hope, I say, that this is the case, and that you do not knowingly assert so many palpable falsehoods. You say, “If I am mistaken, I shall always be ready and desirous to retract my error.” (Page 56.) A little candour and care might have pre vented those mistakes; this is the first thing one would have desired. The next is, that they may be removed; that you may see wherein you have been mistaken, and be more wary for the time to come, 3. You undertake to give an account, First, of the rise and principles, Then, of the practices, of the Methodists.

p. 269.) Your Ninth is this: “I went to the society, but I found their hearts were quite estranged. Friday, 4. I met a little handful of them, who still stand in the old paths.” (Ibid. p. 280.) Thus far you have been speaking of the Methodists in London. And what have you proved concerning them? Only that the Moravians, mixing with them twelve years ago, while they were young and unexperienced, set them a disputing with each other, and thereby occasioned much confusion for several months. But you have not proved that the Methodists in general were, even them, “all together by the ears; ” and much less, that they have been so ever since, and that they are so now. 35. I now attend you to Kingswood. Not to “Bristol and Kingswood,” which you artfully join together. The society at Bristol was no more concerned with the disputes in Kingswood, than with those in London. Here the First quotation, though containing but two lines, is extracted from three different paragraphs; in one of which I say: “I had many unpleasing accounts (in December, 1740) concerning our little society in Kingswood.” In the Second: “I went to Kingswood, if haply I might repair the breaches which had been made ’’ by the Predestinarian Preachers. In the Third: “I laboured to heal the jealousies and misunder standings which had arisen.” (Vol. I. p. 293.) The Second passage, part of which you quote, is this: “I returned early in the morning to Kingswood; but my con gregation was gone to hear Mr. C.; so that I had not above two or three men, and as many women.” (Ibid. p. 294.) The Third is, “January 1. I explained, “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. But many of our brethren had no ears to hear, having disputed away both their faith and love.” (Ibid. p. 295.) The Fourth, “February 21. I inquired concerning the divi sions and offences which began afresh to break out in Kings wood. In the afternoon I met a few of the Bands; but it was a cold, uncomfortable meeting.” (Ibid. p. 299.) You have picked out here and there a word from several pages, in order to furnish out a Fifth quotation. The most material part of it is this: “Saturday, 28.

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.

A Second Letter to the Lord Bishop of Exeter Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 9 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- IN my late Letter to your Lordship I used no ceremony; (I suppose it was not expected from one who was so deeply injured;) and I trust I used no rudeness: If I did, I am ready to ask your Lordship’s pardon. That Letter” related to a matter of fact published on your Lordship's authority, which I endeavoured to falsify, and your Lordship now again endeavours to support. The facts alleged are, First, that I told Mrs. 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.

What lies upon you to prove, is this: Whoever acknowledges any Dissenters as brethren, does hereby give himself the lie, when he says he is a member of the Church of England. However, you allow, there may be place for repentance: “For if any of the founders of this sect renounce the opinions they once were charged with, they may be permitted to lay aside the name.” But what are the opinions which you require us to renounce? What are, according to you, the principles of the Methodists? You say in general, “They are contradictory to the gospel, contradictory to the Church of England, full of blasphemy, impiety, and ending in downright Atheism:”-- For, “(1.) They expound the Scripture in such a manner as to make it contradict itself.- “(2.) With blasphemy, impiety, and diabolical frenzy, they contradict our Saviour, by denying that he will judge man according to his works. “(3.) By denying this they destroy the essential attributes of God, and ruin his character as Judge of the world.” In support of the First charge, you say, “It is notorious; and few men of common sense attempt to prove what is notori ous, till they meet with people of such motorious impudence as to deny it.” I must really deny it. Why, then, you will prove it by Mr. Mason's own words. Hold, Sir: Mr. Mason’s words prove nothing. For we are now speaking of original Methodists; but he is not one of them; nor is he in connexion with them; neither with Mr. Whitefield nor me. So that what Mr. Mason speaks, be it right or wrong, is nothing to the present purpose. There fore, unless you can find some better proof, this whole charge falls to the ground. Well, “here it is: Roger Balls.”--Pray who is Roger Balls? No more a Methodist than he is a Turk. I know not one good thing he ever did or said, beside the telling all men, “I am no Methodist,” which he generally does in the first sentence he speaks, when he can find any one to hear him. He is therefore one of your own allies; and a champion worthy of his cause ! 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.

But I would first observe in general, with Dr. Jennings, that there are two kinds of texts in the ensuing collection: Some that directly prove, others that properly illustrate, the doctrine of original sin. And there are so many in which it is either directly spoken of, or evidently implied, that the author might well have spared his observation, “The Scripture speaks very sparingly of the consequences of Adam’s sin upon us, because as these are freely reversed to mankind by Christ, we are not so much concerned to know them.” (Page 50.) The fact here affirmed is equally true with the reason assigned for it. 2. The First proposition in the Catechism, which relates to original sin, is this:-- “The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descend ing from him by ordinary generation, sinned with him, and fell with him, in that first transgression. “‘God hath made of one blood all nations of men.” (Acts xvii. 26.)” (Pages 91, 92.)--I believe Dr. Jennings's remark here will suffice:-- “This is quoted to prove that all mankind descend from Adam. But Dr. Taylor adds, “That is, hath made all the nations of the world of one species, endowed with the same facul ties.’” (Jennings’s Vindication, p. 49, &c.) And so they might have been, if all men had been created singly and separately, just as Adam was; but they could not then, with any propriety of language, have been said to be of one blood. This Scripture, therefore, is very pertinently quoted to prove what it is brought for. That ‘Adam was a public person, including all his pos terity, and, consequently, that all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in his first transgression, the Assembly have proved very methodically and substantially: First, from Gen. ii. 16, 17, where death is threatened to Adam in case of his sinning; then from Romans v. 12-20, and l Cor. xv. 21, 22, where we are expressly told that “all men die in Adam;” and that, “by his offence, judgment is come upon all men to condemnation.” Proposition. “All mankind sinned in him, and fell with him in that first transgression.” Which they prove by Gen. ii. 16, 17, compared with Romans v. 15-20.

5. Their Fourth proposition is, “The sinfulness of that state into which man fell consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin; the want of that righteousness wherein he was created; and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is utterly indis posed, disabled, and made opposite to all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to evil, and that continually; which is commonly called original sin, and from which do proceed all actual transgressions.” On the first article of this you say, “Adam’s first sin was attended with consequences which affect all his posterity. But we could not, on account of his sin, become obnoxious to punishment.” (Page 99.) By punishment I mean evil, suffered on account of sin. And are we not obnoxious to any evil on account of Adam’s sin? To prove the rest of the proposition, they cite first, Rom. iii. 10-20. On which you remark, “The Apostle is here speaking of Jews and Gentiles, not in a personal, but in a national, capacity. “The mouth, says he, of all sorts of peo ple is ‘stopped, and both Jews and Gentiles are brought in guilty; for I have proved that there are transgressors among the Jews, as well as among the Gentiles.” (Page 102.) Not at all. If he proved no more than this, not one person would “become guilty before God.” Not one “mouth” of Jew or Gentile would “be stopped,” by showing, “there were Jewish as well as Heathen transgressors.” I proceed to your observations:-- (1) “In this whole section there is not one word of Adam.” There is enough in the next chapter but one. The Apostle first describes the effect, and afterwards point out the cause. (2.) “He is here speaking, not of all men, but of the Jews; of those alone who were “under the law,’ (verse 19,) and proving from their own writings that there were great cor ruptions among them as well as other people.” (Page 103.) He is speaking of them chiefly; but not of them only, as appears from the ninth verse: “We have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin: As it is written, There is none righteous,” (neither among the Jews nor Gen tiles,) “no, not one.” Does this respect them in their na tional only, not personal, capacity?

Paul, “there” was “none” good or “righteous, no, not one;” every individual, whether Jew or Heathen, was guilty before God. “I conclude, therefore, (i.) That none of those texts refer to any corruption common to all mankind.” (Page 106.) Perhaps they do not, as spoken by David; but they do as spoken by St. Paul. “I conclude, (ii.) Such a general cor rūption as admits of no exception was not necessary to the Apostle’s argument.” (Page 107.) Absolutely necessary; had it not included every individual person, no person’s “mouth” would have been “stopped.” These texts, therefore, do “directly and certainly prove” that, at the time when the Apostle wrote, every individual Jew and Gentile (excepting only those who were “saved by grace”) “were all under sin; ” “that there was none” of them “righteous, no, not one; none that understood or that sought after’” God. This was the fact: And who can find out a more rational way of accounting for this universal wickedness, than by a universal corruption of our nature, derived from our first parent? 6. The next proof is, Eph. ii. 1-3 : “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein, in time past, ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom, also, we all had our conversation in times past, in the desires of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” (Page 108.) (1) “Nothing is here intimated of any ill effects of Adam's sin upon us.” No ! Not if we are “children of wrath by nature?” (2.) “The Ephesians were Gentiles converted to the faith.” Yea, and Jews also. In this very passage the Apostle speaks of both ; first, the Gentile, then the Jewish, converts. (3.) “In these verses he is describing their wretched state, while they were in Gentile darkness,”--and while they were in Jewish darkness; the Jews having been just as wicked be fore their conversion as the Heathens.

There was the less need of our Lord’s speaking much on this head, because it was so fully declared in the Old Testament, and was not questioned by any of those false teachers against whom he was chiefly concerned to warn his disciples. You add: “It has been delivered as a fundamental truth, that no man will come to Christ, the Second Adam, who is not first throughly convinced of the several things he lost in the first Adam.” (Taylor's Doctrine, &c., p. 243.) This is a fundamental truth; none will come to Christ as a Redeemer until he is throughly convinced he wants a Redeemer. No man will ever come to him as a Saviour, till he knows and feels himself a lost sinner. None will come to the “Physician” but “they that are sick,” and are throughly sensible of it; that are deeply convinced of their sinful tempers, as well as sinful words and actions. And these tempers, they well know, were antecedent to their choice, and came into the world with them. So far “every man who comes to Christ is first convinced of the several things he lost by Adam;” though he may not clearly know the source of that corruption whch he sees and feels in his own heart and life. “But why does our Lord never mention Adam, or the corrup tion of our nature through him?” He does mention this corruption, and he presupposes it in all his public discourses. He does not mention it largely and explicitly, for the reasons above recited. “But the Apostles are wholly silent on this head, in their sermons recorded in the Acts, and in their Epistles too.” (Pages 243, 244.) Are they wholly silent in their Epistles? This is a violent mistake. And as to their sermons, it may be observed, 1. That we have not one whole sermon of any one Apostle recorded in the Acts; nor, it may be, the twentieth part of one. 2. That it was not needful for them to prove what none of their hearers denied: No, not even the Heathens; even these allowed the corruption of human nature.

Now, let us view it more closely: “Adam cculd not sin without a sinful inclination.” The sentence is ambiguous. Either it may mean, “Adam could not choose ill, without some sinful temper preceding;” and in this sense it is false; or, “He could not commit outward sin, without first inclining, that is, choosing so to do.” 2. “This his sinful in clination (or temper) was so strong as to overcome his inbred propensity to holiness.” It was not any sinful inclination (in this sense) which overcame his propensity to holiness; but strong temptation from without: How strong we know not, and the circumstances of it we know not. 3. “This his sinful inclination was so malignant, as to expel that principle at once, and totally.” Not by any sinful inclination, but by yielding to temptation, he did lose the love and image of God. But that this was totally and at once, we have no authority to affirm. 4. “Consequently, original righteousness in Adam was consistent with a sinful propensity, vastly stronger, and more malignant, than ever was or can be in any of his posterity.” It was consistent with no sinful propensity at all, but barely with a power of yielding to temptation. It declined in the same proportion, and by the same degrees, as he did actually yield to this. And when he had yielded entirely, and eaten the fruit, original righteousness was no more. Therefore, the Fifth proposition, “Thus original righteousness proves to be far worse than original sin,” is flourish. What a figure does this fair argument make, now it is turned inside out ! From all this it may appear, that the doctrine of original righteousness (as well as that of original sin) hath a firm foun dation in Scripture, as well as in the attributes of a wise, holy, and gracious God. As you do not offer any new argument in your conclusion, I need not spend any time upon it. You subjoin Remarks on Dr. Watts's Additions to his book. Some of these deserve a serious consideration: 1. Either the new-created man loved God supremely, or not. If he did not, he was not innocent ; since the very law and light of nature require such a love to God. If he did, he stood disposed for every act of obedience. And this is true holiness of heart.

And is a rational creature good, unless all its powers are devoted to God? Was not man duly qualified at first to exercise dominion over the other creatures? And could he be so qualified without a principle of love and obedience to their common Lord? Lastly: Can any man prove, either that man could be innocent if he did not love the Lord his God with all his heart; or that such a love to God is not ‘righteousness and true holiness?’” (Page 15.) “From the doctrine of man’s original righteousness we may easily conclude that of original sin. For this reason it is, that some so earnestlyprotestagainstoriginal righteousness, because they dread looking on themselves as ‘by nature’ fallencreatures, and ‘children of wrath. If man was not holy at first, he could not fall from a state of holiness; and, consequently, that first transgression exposed him and his posterity to nothing but tem poral death. But, on the other hand, if ‘man was made upright,’ it follows, (1.) That man, when he fell, lost his original righte ousness, and therewith his title to God’s favour, and to commu nion with God. (2.) That he thereby incurred not only tem poral but spiritual death. He became dead in sin, and a child of wrath. And, (3.) That all his posterity are born with such a nature, not as man had at first, but as he contracted by his fall.” (Pages 20, 21.) “And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thow mayest freely eat: But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it : For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Gen. ii. 16, 17. “GoD forbade man to eat of this tree, in token of his sove reign authority, and for the exercise of man’s love, and the trial of his obedience. The words added, ‘In the day thou eatest thereofthou shalt surely die, or literally, “In dying thou shalt die, mean, not only, ‘Thou shalt certainly die, but, ‘Thou shalt suffer every kind of death:” Thy soul as well as thy body shall die.

Unto whom, with God the Father, and the sanctifying, comforting Spirit, be ascribed all praise for ever !” (Page 83.) “THE phrase, original sin, so far as we can discover, was first used in the fourth century. The first who used it was either St. Chrysostom, or Hilary, some of whose words are these: ‘The Psalmist says, Behold, I was conceived in iniqui ties, and in sins did my mother conceive me. He acknow ledges that he was born under original sin and the law of sin.” Soon after Hilary’s time, St. Augustine, and other Christian writers, brought it into common use.” (Pages 2, 3.) “The scriptural doctrine of original sin may be comprised in the following propositions:-- “I. Man was originally made righteous or holy. “II. That original righteousness was lost by the first sin. “III. Thereby man incurred death of every kind; for," “IV. Adam’s first sin was the sin of a public person, one whom God had appointed to represent all his descendants. “W. Hence all these are from their birth ‘children of wrath,’ void of all righteousness, and propense to sin of all sorts. “I add, WI. This is not only a truth agreeable to Scripture and reason, but a truth of the utmost importance, and one to which the Churches of Christ, from the beginning, have borne a clear testimony.” (Page 8.)- “I. Man was originally made righteous or holy; formed with such a principle of love and obedience to his Maker as disposed and enabled him to perform the whole of his duty with ease and pleasure. This has been proved already; and this wholly over turns Dr. Taylor's fundamental aphorism, ‘Whatever is natural is necessary, and what is necessary is not sinful. For if man was originally righteous or holy, we may argue thus: It was at first natural to man to love and obey his Maker; yet it was not necessary; neither as necessary is opposed to voluntary or free; (for he both loved and obeyed freely and willingly;) nor, as necessary means unavoidable; (this is manifest by the event;) no, nor as necessary is opposed to rewardable; for had he continued to love and obey, he would have been rewarded with everlasting happiness.

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.

And God’s special care of his innocent creature secured him against outward violence. Such were the holiness and the happiness of man in his original state. “But there is now a sad alteration in our nature. It is now entirely corrupted. Where at first there was nothing evil, there is now nothing good: I shall, “First, prove this. “Secondly, represent this corruption in its several parts. “Thirdly, show how man’s nature comes to be thus cor rupted. “First, I shall prove that man's nature is corrupted, both by God’s word, and by men’s experience and observation. “1. For proof from God’s word, let us consider, “(1.) How it takes particular notice of fallen Adam’s com municating his image to his posterity. ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image.” (Gen. v. 3.) Compare this with verse 1: “In the day that God created man, in the image of God made he him. Behold here, how the ‘image’ after which man was ‘made,’ and the ‘image’ after which he is be gotten, are opposed. Man was ‘made’ in the likeness of God; a holy and righteous God “made a holy and righteous creature: But fallen Adam ‘begat’ a son, not in the likeness of God, but in his ‘own likeness; corrupt, sinful Adam begat a corrupt, sinful son. For as the image of God included ‘righteousness’ and “immortality, so this image of fallen Adam included ‘cor ruption’ and ‘death. Moses, giving us in this chapter the first bill of mortality that ever was in the world, ushers it in with this observation,-that dying Adam begat mortals. Having sinned, he became ‘mortal, according to the threatening. And so he ‘begat a son in his own likeness, sinful, and therefore mortal; and so “sin and death passed on all.’ “Let us consider, (2.) That text, ‘Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean P. Not one.” (Job xiv. 4.) Our first parents were unclean; how then can we be clean? How could our immediate parents be clean? Or how shall our children be so? The uncleanness here mentioned is a sinful uncleanness; for it is such as makes man’s days ‘full of trouble.’ And it is natural, being derived from unclean parents.

A Letter to the Reverend Dr. Conyers Middleton Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 10 (Zondervan) Year: 1749 Author: John Wesley --- 1. IN your late “Inquiry,” you endeavour to prove, First, that there were no miracles wrought in the primitive Church: Secondly, that all the primitive Fathers were fools or knaves, and most of them both one and the other. And it is easy to observe, the whole tenor of your argument tends to prove, Thirdly, that no miracles were wrought by Christ or his Apostles; and, Fourthly, that these too were fools or knaves, or both. 2. I am not agreed with you on any of these heads. My reasons I shall lay before you, in as free a manner, though not in so smooth or laboured language, as you have laid yours before the world. 3. But I have neither inclination nor leisure to follow you, step by step, through three hundred and seventy-three quarto pages. I shall therefore set aside all I find in your work which does not touch the merits of the cause; and likewise contract the question itself to the three first centuries. For I have no more to do with the writers or miracles of the fourth, than with those of the fourteenth, century. 4. You will naturally ask, “Why do you stop there? What reason can you give for this? If you allow miracles before the empire became Christian, why not afterwards too?” I answer, Because, “after the empire became Christian,” (they are your own words,) “a general corruption both of faith and morals infected the Christian Church; which, by that revolution, as St. Jerome says, “lost as much of her virtue, as It had gained of wealth and power.’” (Page 123.) And this very reason St. Chrysostom himself gave in the words you have afterwards cited: “There are some who ask, Why are not miracles performed still? Why are there no persons who raise the dead and cure diseases?” To which he replies, that it was owing to the want of faith, and virtue, and piety in those times. 1.

to the Jewish or Christian Revelation? No; but) “to that revelation which he made of himself from the beginning, in the beautiful fabric of this visible world.” (Page 22.) 6. I believe your opponents will not hereafter urge you, either with that passage from St. Mark, or any other from Scripture. At least, I will not, unless I forget myself; as I observe you have done just now. For you said but now, “Before we proceed to examine testimonies for the decision of this dispute, our first care should be, to inform ourselves of the nature of those miraculous powers which are the subject of it, as they are represented to us in the history of the gospel.” (Page 10.) Very true; “this should be our first care.” I was therefore all attention to hear your account of “the nature of those powers, as they are represented to us in the gospel.” But, alas! you say not a word more about it; but slip away to those “zealous champions who have attempted” (bold men as they are) “to refute the ‘Introductory Discourse.’” (Page 11.) Perhaps you will say, “Yes, I repeat that text from St. Mark.” You do; yet not describing the nature of those powers; but only to open the way to “one of your antago mists;” (page 12;) of whom you yourself affirm, that “not one of them seems to have spent a thought in considering those powers as they are set forth in the New Testament.” (Page 11.) Consequently, the bare repeating that text does not prove you (any more than them) to have “spent one thought upon the subject.” 7. From this antagonist you ramble away to another; after a long citation from whom, you subjoin: “It being agreed then that, in the original promise, there is no intimation of any par ticular period, to which their continuance was limited.” (Pages 13, 14.) Sir, you have lost your way. We have as yet nothing to do with their continuance.

In treating of which, you strongly intimate, -First, that such gifts did never subsist; and, Secondly, that the Apostles were equally wise and good with the “wonder workers” (your favourite term) that followed them. When therefore you add, “My opinion is this, that, after our Lord’s ascension, the extraordinary gifts he had promised were poured out on the Apostles, and the other primary instruments of planting the gospel, in order to enable them to overrule the inveterate prejudices both of the Jews and Gentiles, and to bear up against the discouraging shocks of popular rage and persecution;” (page 28;) I look upon all this to be mere grimace. You believe not one word of what you say. You cannot possibly, if you believe what you said before. For who can believe both the sides of a contradiction? 10. However, I will suppose you do believe it, and will argue with you from your own words. But first let us have a few more of them: “In process of time, as miraculous powers began to be less and less wanted, so they began gradually to decline, till they were finally withdrawn.” (Page 29.) “And this may probably be thought to have happened while some of the Apostles were still living.” These were given, you say, to the first planters of the * Non omnibus omnia-ita tamen cuilibet credenti tune data sit admirabilis Jacultas, quae se, non semper Quidem, sed dalá occasione explicaret.-GROTI Us in Marcum xvi. 17. gospel, “in order to enable them to overrule the inveterate prejudices both of Jews and Gentiles, and to bear up against the shocks of persecution.” Thus far we are agreed. They were given for these ends. But if you allow this, you cannot suppose, consistently with yourself, that they were withdrawn till these ends were fully answered. So long, therefore, as those prejudices subsisted, and Christians were exposed to the shocks of persecution, you cannot deny but there was the same occasion for those powers to be continued, as there was for their being given at first. And this, you say, is “a postulatum which all people will grant, that they continued as long as they were necessary to the Church.” (Page 11.) 11. Now, did those prejudices cease, or was persecution at an end, while some of the Apostles were still living? You have yourself abundantly shown they did not.

This has a pleasing sound, and is extremely well imagined to prejudice a Protestant reader in your favour. You then slide with great art into your subject: “This claim of a miraculous power, now peculiar to the Church of Rome, was asserted in all Christian countries till the Reformation.” (Ibid.) But then “the cheat was detected:” (Page 45:) Nay, and men began to “suspect that the Church had long been governed by the same arts.” “For, it was easy to trace them up to the primitive Church, though not to fix the time when the cheat began; to show how long after the days of the Apostles the miraculous gifts continued in the Church.” (Page 46.) However, it is commonly believed, that they continued till Christianity was the established religion. Some indeed extend them to the fourth and fifth centuries; (page 50;) but these, you say, betray the Protestant cause. (Page 51.) “For in the third, fourth, and fifth, the chief corruptions of Popery were introduced, or at least the seeds of them sown. By these I mean, monkery; the worship of relics; invocation of saints; prayers for the dead; the superstitious use of images, of the sacraments, of the sign of the cross, and of the consecrated oil.” (Page 52.) 3. I have nothing to do with the fourth or fifth century. But to what you allege in support of this charge, so far as it relates to the third century, I have a few things to reply. And, First, you quote not one line from any Father in the third century, in favour of monkery, the worship of relics, the invocation of saints, or the superstitious use either of images or consecrated oil. How is this, Sir? You brought eight accusations at once against the Fathers of the third, as well as the following centuries: And as to five of the eight, when we call for the proof, you have not one word to say ! As to the sixth, you say, “In the sacrament of the Eucharist, several abuses were introduced.” (Page 57.) You instance, first, in mixing the wine with water. But how does it appear that this was any abuse at all?

(3.) You cannot but know it has always been the judgment of learned men, (which you are at liberty to refute if you are able,) that the far greater part of those spurious books have been forged by heretics; and that many more were compiled by weak, well-meaning men, from what had been orally delivered down from the Apostles. But, (4.) There have been in the Church from the beginning men who had only the name of Christians. And these, doubtless, were capable of pious frauds, so called. But this ought not to be charged upon the whole body. Add to this, (5.) What is observed by Mr. Daillé: “I impute a great part of this mischief to those men who, before the invention of printing, were the transcribers and copiers out of manuscripts. We may well presume that these men took the same liberty in forging as St. Jerome complains they did in corrupting books; especially since this course was beneficial to them, which the other was not.” Much more to the same effect we have in his treatise “Of the Right Use of the Fathers,” Part I., chap. iii. N.B. These transcribers were not all Christians; no, not in name; perhaps few, if any of them, in the first century. (6.) By what evidences do you prove, that these spurious books “are frequently cited by the most eminent Fathers, as not only genuine, but of equal authority with the Scriptures themselves?” or, Lastly, that they either forged these books themselves, or made use of what they knew to be forged ? These things also you are not to take for granted, but to prove, before your argument can be of force. 12. We are come at last to your general conclusion: “There is no sufficient reason to believe, that any miraculous powers subsisted in any age of the Church after the times of the Apostles.” (Page 91.) But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: “As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians” (prove that !) “to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty, when the Apostles were dead, to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them.

We are come at last to your general conclusion: “There is no sufficient reason to believe, that any miraculous powers subsisted in any age of the Church after the times of the Apostles.” (Page 91.) But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: “As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians” (prove that !) “to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty, when the Apostles were dead, to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them. And when these artful pretenders had maintained their ground through the first three centuries, the leading Clergy of the fourth understood their interest too well to part with the old plea of miraculous gifts.” (Page 92.) Round assertions indeed! But surely, Sir, you do not think that reasonable men will take these for proofs You are here advancing a charge of the blackest nature. But where are your vouchers? Where are the witnesses to support it? Hitherto you have not been able to produce one, through a course of three hundred years; unless you bring in those Heathen, of whose senseless, shameless prejudices you have yourself given so clear an account. But you designed to produce your witnesses in the “Free Inquiry,” a year or two after the “Introductory Discourse” was published. So you condemn them first, and try them afterwards: You will pass sentence now, and hear the evidence by and by A genuine specimen of that “impartial regard to truth,” which you profess upon all occasions. 13. Another instance of this is in your marginal note: “The primitive Christians were perpetually reproached for their gross credulity.” They were; but by whom? Why, by Jews and Heathens. Accordingly, the two witnesses you produce here are Celsus the Jew, and Julian the apostate. But lest this should not suffice, you make them confess the charge: “The Fathers,” your words are, “defend them selves by saying, that they did no more than the philosophers had always done: That Pythagoras's precepts were incul cated with an ipse divit, and they found the same method useful with the vulgar.” (Page 93.) And is this their whole defence? Do the very men to whom you refer, Origen and Arnobius, in the very tracts to which you refer, give no other answer than this argument ad hominem?

An esteem for them has carried many into dangerous errors; the neglect of them can have no ill consequences.” (Page 97.) I answer, (1.) The Scriptures are a complete rule of faith and practice; and they are clear in all necessary points. And yet their clearness does not prove, that they need not be explained; nor their completeness, that they need not be enforced. (2.) The esteeming the writings of the first three centuries, not equally with, but next to, the Scriptures, never carried any man yet into dangerous errors, nor probably ever will. But it has brought many out of dangerous errors, and particularly out of the errors of Popery. (3.) The neglect,. in your sense, of the primitive Fathers, that is, the thinking they were all fools and knaves, has this natural consequence, (which I grant is no ill one, according to your principles,) to make all who are not real Christians think Jesus of Nazareth and his Apostles just as honest and wise as them. 16. You afterwards endeavour to show how the Church of England came to have such an esteem for the ancient Fathers. There are several particulars in this account which are liable to exception. But I let them pass, as they have little connexion with the point in question. 17. You conclude your “Introductory Discourse” thus: “The design of the present treatise is to fix the religion of the Protestants on its proper basis, that is, on the sacred Scriptures.” (Page 111.) Here again you speak in your personated character; as also when you “freely own the primitive writers to be of use in attesting and transmitting to us the genuine books of the holy Scriptures !” (Page 112.) Books, for the full attestation as well as safe transmission whereof, you have doubtless the deepest concern 18. I cannot dismiss this Discourse without observing, that the uncommon artfulness and disingenuity which glare through the whole, must needs give disgust to every honest and upright heart; nor is it any credit at all to the cause you have espoused.

Hermas. Now, if those gifts had subsisted after the days of the Apostles, these must have possessed a large share of them. But if any of them had, he would have mentioned it in his writings, which not one of them has done.” (Page 3.) The argument, fully proposed, runs thus: If any such gifts had subsisted in them, or in their days, they must have mentioned them in their circular Epistles to the Churches; (for so their predecessors, the Apostles, did;) but they did not mention any such gifts therein. Sir, your consequence is not of any force; as will easily appear by a parallel argument:-- If such gifts had subsisted in St. Peter, or in his days, he must have mentioned them in his circular Epistles to the Churches. But he does not mention any such gifts therein. Therefore, they did not subsist in him, or in his days. Your argument therefore proves too much : Nor can it conclude against an apostolic Father, without concluding against the Apostle too. If therefore the apostolic Fathers had not mentioned any miraculous gifts in their circular Epistles to the Churches, you could not have inferred that they possessed none; since neither does he mention them in his circular Epistles, whom you allow to have possessed them. Of all the Apostles, you can produce but one, St. Paul, who makes mention of these gifts: And that not in his circular Epis tles to the Churches; for I know not that he wrote any such. 2. All this time I have been arguing on your own suppo sitions, that these five apostolic Fathers all wrote circular Epistles to the Churches, and yet never mention these gifts therein. But neither of these suppositions is true. For, (1.) Hermas wrote no Epistle at all. (2.) Although the rest wrote Epistles to particular Churches, (Clemens to the Corinthians, Ignatius to the Romans, &c.,) yet not one of them wrote any circular Epistle to the Churches, like those of St. James and St. Peter; unless we allow that to be a genuine Epistle, which bears the name of St. Barnabas. (3.) You own they all “speak of spiritual gifts, as abounding among the Christians of that age;” but assert, “These cannot mean anything more than faith, hope, and charity.” (Ibid.) You assert: But the proof, Sir! I want the proof.

4. Yet you courteously add: “If from the passages referred to above, or any other, it should appear probable to any, that they were favoured on some occasions with some extraordinary illuminations, visions, or divine impressions, I shall not dispute that point; but remind them only, that these gifts were granted for their particular comfort; and do not therefore, in any manner, affect or relate to the question now before us.” (Page 10.) I ask pardon, Sir. These do so deeply affect, so nearly relate to, the question now before us, even as stated by your self, (Preface, page 28,) that in allowing these you give up the substance of the question. You yourself have declared, that one great end of the extraordinary gifts conferred on the Apostles was, “to enable them to bear up against the shocks of popular rage and persecution.” Now were not “extra ordinary illuminations, visions, and impressions,” if given at all, given for this very end; “for their particular comfort,” as you now word it? Therefore, in allowing these to the apostolic Fathers, you allow extraordinary gifts which had been formerly granted to the Apostles, to have subsisted in the church after the days of the Apostles, and for the same end as they did before. 5. Therefore the apostolic writers have not left us in the dark, with regard to our present argument; and consequently your triumph comes too soon: “Here then we have an interval of half a century, in which we have the strongest reason to pre sume that the extraordinary gifts of the apostolic age were withdrawn.” (Page 9.) No; not if all the apostolic Fathers speak of spiritual gifts as abounding among the Christians of that age; not if “extraordinary illuminations, visions, and divine impressions still subsisted among them.” For as to your now putting in, “as exerted openly in the Church for the con viction of unbelievers,” I must desire you to put it out again; it comes a great deal too late. The question between you and me was stated without it, above a hundred pages back. Although, if it be admitted, it will do you no service; seeing your proposition is overthrown, if there were “miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles,” whether they were “openly exerted for the conviction of unbelievers” or not. 6.

6. I was a little surprised that you should take your leave of the apostolic Fathers so soon. But, upon looking forward, my surprise was at an end: I found you was not guilty of any design to spare them; but only delayed your remarks till the reader should be prepared for what might have shocked him, had it stood in its proper place. I do not find, indeed, that you make any objection to any part of the Epistles of Ignatius; no, nor of the Catholic Epistle, as it is called, which is inscribed with the name of Barnabas. This clearly convinces me, you have not read it; I am apt to think, not one page of it; seeing, if you had, you would never have let slip such an opportunity of exposing one that was called an apostolic Father. 7. But it would have been strange, if you had not somewhere brought in the famous phoenix of Clemens Romanus. And yet you are very merciful upon that head, barely remarking con cerning it, that “he alleged the ridiculous story of the phoenix, as atype and proof of the resurrection. Whether all the heathen writers treat it as nothing else but a mere fable, I know not.” (Page 55.) But that it is so, is certain; and consequently the argument drawn from it is weak and inconclusive. Yet it will not hence follow, either that Clemens was a wicked man, or that he had none of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. 8. There is no real blemish to be found in the whole character of St. Polycarp. But there is one circumstance left upon record concerning him which has the appearance of weakness. And with this you do not fail to acquaint your reader at a convenient season; namely, “that in the most ancient dispute concerning the time of holding Easter, St. Polycarp and Anicetus severally alleged apostolic tradition for their different practice.” (Page 60.) And it is not improbable,. that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the Apostles varied themselves; some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not.

But none will scruple to risk the fate of the cause upon these.” (Page 19.) Thus far I do not scruple it. I do not doubt but the testimonies of these nine witnesses, added to the evidence of the apostolic Fathers, will satisfy every impartial man with regard to the point in question. Yet I see no cause, if there are nine witnesses more, to give up their evidence; seeing you may possibly raise objections against these which the others are unconcerned in. If then you should invalidate what I have to reply in oehalf of the witnesses now produced, you will have done but half your work. I shall afterwards require a fair hearing for the others also. 16. You close this head with remarking, (1) “That the silence of all the apostolic writers on the subject of these gifts, must dispose us to conclude they were then withdrawn.” (Ibid.) O Sir, mention this no more. I intreat you, never name their silence again. They speak loud enough to shame you as long as you live. You cannot therefore talk with any grace of “the pretended revival of them, after a cessation of forty or fifty years;” or draw conclusions from that which never was. Your second remark is perfectly new : I dare say, none ever observed before yourself, that this particular circumstance of the primitive Christians “carried with it an air of impos ture,” namely, their “challenging all the world to come and see the miracles which they wrought !” (Page 21.) To complete the argument, you should have added, And their staking their lives upon the performance of them. 17. I doubt you have not gone one step forward yet. You have indeed advanced many bold assertions; but you have not fairly proved one single conclusion with regard to the point in hand. But a natural effect of your lively imagination is, that from this time you argue more and more weakly; inasmuch as, the farther you go, the more things you imagine (and only imagine) yourself to have proved. Consequently, as you gather up more mistakes every step you take, every page is more precarious than the former. II. 1.

1. The Second thing you proposed was, “to throw together all which those Fathers have delivered concerning the persons said to have been endued with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.” (Ibid.) “Now, whenever we think or speak with reverence,” say you, “of those primitive times, it is always with regard to these very Fathers whose testimonies I have been collecting. And they were indeed the chief persons and champions of the Christian cause, the Pastors, Bishops, and Martyrs of the primitive Church; namely, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theo philus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius.” Sir, you stumble at the threshold. A common dictionary may inform you that these were not all either Pastors, Bishops, or Martyrs. 2. You go on as you set out: “Yet none of these have any where affirmed, that they themselves were endued with any power of working miracles.” (Page 22.) You should say, With any of those extraordinary gifts promised by our Lord, and conferred on his Apostles. No! Have “none of these anywhere affirmed, that they themselves were endued” with any extraordinary.gifts? What think you of the very first of them, Justin Martyr Either you are quite mistaken in the account you give of him elsewhere, (pages 27, 30,) or he affirmed this of himself over and over. And as to Cyprian, you will by and by spend several pages together (page 101, &c.) on the extraordinary gifts he affirmed himself to be endued with. But suppose they had not anywhere affirmed this of them selves, what would you infer therefrom ? that they were not endued with any extraordinary gifts? Then, by the very same method of arguing, you might prove that neither St. Peter, nor James, nor John, were endued with any such. For neither do they anywhere affirm this of themselves in any of the writings which they have left behind them. 3. Your argument concerning the apostolic Fathers is just as conclusive as this. For if you say, “The writers following the apostolic Fathers do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore they had none;” by a parity of reason you must say, “The writers following the Apostles do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore the Apostles had none.” 4.

And this is no credit to you, if it does not. To that of Lucian and Celsus, you add the evidence of Caecilius too, who calls, say you, these workers of miracles, “a lurking nation, shunning the light.” Then they were strangely altered all on a sudden; for you told us that, just before, they were proving themselves cheats by a widely different method,--by “calling out both upon Magistrates and people, and challenging all the world to come and see what they did l’’ (Page 20.) I was not aware that you had begun “to throw together all which the Fathers have delivered, concerning the persons said to have been endued with those extraordinary gifts.” And it seems you have made an end of it! And accordingly you proceed to sum up the evidence; to “observe, upon the whole, from these characters of the primitive wonder-workers, as given both by friends and enemies, we may fairly conclude that the gifts of those ages were generally engrossed by private Chris tians, who travelled about from city to city to assist the ordinary preachers, in the conversion of Pagans, by the extraordinary miracles they pretended to perform.” (Page 24.) Characters given both by friends and enemies / Pray, Sir, what friends have you cited for this character? or what ene mies, except only Celsus the Jew? (And you are a miserable interpreter for him.) So, from the single testimony of such a witness, you lay it down as an oracular truth, that all the miracle-workers of the first three ages were “mere vagabonds and common cheats,” rambling about from city to city, to assist in converting Heathens, by tricks and imposture! And this you ingeniously call, “throwing together all which the Fathers have delivered concerning them !” 9. But, to complete all, “Here again,” you say, “we see a dispensation of things ascribed to God, quite different from that which we meet with in the New Testament.” (Page 24.) We see a dispensation / Where? Not in the primitive Church; not in the writings of one single Christian; not of one Heathen; and only of one Jew; for poor Celsus had not a second; though he multiplies, under your forming hand, into a cloud of witnesses. He alone ascribes this to the ancient Christians, which you in their name ascribe to God.

Middleton,) “and may with equal reason be charged on Irenaeus. For what other account can be given of his frequent appeals to apostolical tradition, for the support of so many incredible doctrines?” (Page 111.) Why, this very natural one, that in non-essential points he too easily followed the authority of Papias, a weak man, who on slight grounds believed many trifling things to have been said or done by the Apostles. And allowing all this, yet it does not give us so “lamentable an idea of those primitive ages and primitive champions of the Christian cause.” (Page 59.) The same account may be given of his mistake concerning the age of our Lord. (Ibid.) There is therefore, as yet, neither reason nor any plausible pretence for laying forgery to his charge. And consequently, thus far his credit as a witness stands clear and unimpeached. But you say, Secondly, “He was a zealous asserter of tradi tion.” (Page 61.) He might be so, and yet be an honest man; and that, whether he was mistaken or no, in supposing Papias to have been a disciple of John the Apostle. (Page 64.) You say, Thirdly, He supposed “that the disciples of Simon Magus, as well as Carpocrates, used magical arts;” (page 68;) that “the dead were frequently raised in his time;” (page 72;) that “the Jews, by the name of God, cast out devils;” (page 85;) and that “many had even then the gift of tongues, although he had it not himself.” This is the whole of your charge against St. Irenaeus, when summed up and laid toge ther. And now, let any reasonable person judge, whether all this gives us the least cause to question, either his having sense enough to discern a plain matter of fact, or honesty enough to relate it. Here then is one more credible witness of miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles. 18. What you advance concerning the history of tradition, I am neither concerned to defend nor to confute.

7. But “it is very hard to believe what Origen declares, that the devils used to possess and destroy cattle.” You might have said, what Matthew and Mark declare concerning the herd of swine; and yet we shall find you, by and by, believing far harder things than this. Before you subjoined the silly story of Hilarion and his camel, you should, in candour, have informed your reader, that it is disputed, whether the life of Hilarion was wrote by St. Jerome or no. But, be it as it may, I have no concern for either: For they did not live within the three first ages. 8. I know not what you have proved hitherto, though you have affirmed many things, and intimated more. But now we come to the strength of the cause, contained in your five observations. You observe, First, “that all the primitive accounts of casting out devils, though given by different Fathers, and in different ages, yet exactly agree with regard to all the main circumstances.” (Page 91.) And this you apprehend to be a mark of imposture. “It looks,” you say, “as if they copied from each other !” Now, a vulgar reader would have imagined that any single account of this kind must be rendered much more (not less) credible, by parallel accounts of what many had severally seen, at different times, and in different places. 9. You observe, Secondly, “that the persons thus possessed were called sy/aspiu.uffol, ‘ventriloquists;’” (some of them were;) “because they were generally believed to speak out of the belly. Now, there are, at this day,” you say, “those who, by art and practice, can speak in the same manner. If we suppose, then, that there were artists of this kind among the ancient Christians, how easily, by a corre spondence between the ventriloquist and the exorcist, might they delude the most sensible of their audience 1” (Page 92.) But what did the ventriloquist do with his epilepsy in the mean time? You must not let it go, because many of the circumstances wherein all these accounts agree cannot be tolerably accounted for without it. And yet, how will you make these two agree? It is a point worthy your serious consideration. But cheats, doubtless, they were, account for it who can.

2. However, it is the second of these on which you chiefly dwell, (the fifth of those you before enumerated,) taking but little notice of the fourth, “foretelling things to come,” and none at all of the sixth, “discovering the secrets of men.” The testimonies, therefore, for these remain in full force, as you do not even attempt to invalidate them. With regard to visions or ecstasies, you observe, First, that Tertullian calls ecstasy “a temporary loss of senses.” (Page 97.) It was so, of the outward senses, which were then locked up. You observe, Secondly, that “Suidas” (a very primitive writer, who lived between eight and nine hundred years after Ter tullian) “says, that of all the kinds of madness, that of the Poets and Prophets was alone to be wished for.” I am at a loss to know what this is brought to prove. The question is, Were there visions in the primitive Church? You observe, Thirdly, that Philo the Jew says, (Iliterally translate his words, which you do not; for it would not answer your purpose,) “When the divine light shines, the human sets; but when that sets, this rises. This uses to befall the Prophets.” (Page 98.) Well, Sir, and what is this to the question? Why, “from these testimonies,” you say, “we may collect, that the vision or ecstasy of the primitive Church was of the same kind with those of the Delphic Pythia, or the Cumaean Sibyl.” Well collected indeed! But I desire a little better testimony than either that of Philo the Jew, or Suidas, a lexicographer of the eleventh century, before I believe this. How little Tertullian is to be regarded on this head you yourself show in the very next page. 3. You say, Fourthly, “Montanus and his associates were the authors of these trances. They first raised this spirit of enthusiasm in the Church, and acquired great credit by their visions and ecstasies.” Sir, you forget; they did not “raise this spirit,” but rather Joel and St. Peter; according to whose words, the “young men saw visions,” before Montanus was born. 4.

Touching the miraculous gift of expounding Scripture, you say, “Justin Martyr affirms, it was conferred on him by the special grace of God.” (Page 117.) I cannot find where he affirms this. Not in the words you cite, which, literally translated, (as was observed before,) run thus: “He hath revealed to us whatsoever things we have understood by his grace from the Scriptures also.” You seem conscious, these words do not prove the point, and therefore eke them out with those of Monsieur Tillemont. But his own words, and no other, will satisfy me. I cannot believe it, unless from his own mouth. 4. Meantime, I cannot but observe an odd circumstance, --that you are here, in the abundance of your strength, con futing a proposition which (whether it be true or false) not one of your antagonists affirms. You are labouring to prove, “there was not in the primitive Church any such miraculous gift as that of expounding the Scriptures.” Pray, Sir, who says there was ? Not Justin Martyr; not one among all those Fathers whom you have quoted as witnesses of the miraculous gifts, from the tenth to the eighteenth page of your “Inquiry.” If you think they do, I am ready to follow you step by step, through every quotation you have made. 5. No, nor is this mentioned in any enumeration of the miraculous gifts which I can find in the Holy Scriptures. Prophecy indeed is mentioned more than once, by the Apostles, as well as the Fathers. But the context shows, where it is promised as a miraculous gift, it means the foretelling things to come. All therefore which you say on this head is a mere ignoratio elenchi, “a mistake of the question to be proved.” Section VI. 1. The Eighth and last of the miraculous gifts you enumerated was the gift of tongues. And this, it is sure, was claimed by the primitive Christians; for Irenaeus says expressly, “‘We hear many in the Church speaking with all kinds of tongues.’ And yet,” you say, “this was granted only on certain special occasions, and then withdrawn again from the Apostles themselves: So that in the ordinary course of their ministry, they were generally destitute of it. This,” you say, “I have shown elsewhere.” (Page 119.) I presume, in some treatise which I have not seen. 2.

4-6.) Must not every unprejudiced person see, the expressions here used are so strong and clear, that they cannot, without gross and palpable wresting, be understood of any but true believers? “But the Apostle makes only a supposition, ‘If they shall fall away.’” The Apostle makes no supposition at all. There is no if in the original. The words are, ABuvarov re; awa; poria'svlag-- x·x araparsgowla;; that is, in plain English, “It is impossible to renew again unto repentance those who were once enlightened and have fallen away.” “No. The words in the original lie literally thus: ‘It is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and they falling away, to renew them again unto repentance;’ that is, should they fall away, which is, in plain English, if they fall away.” Excuse me for speaking plain English here. “Shall a man lie for God?” Either you or I do; for I flatly aver, (and let all that understand Greek judge between us,) that the words in the original do not lie literally thus, “and they falling away;” (if so, they must be xx wapatitlowlas, in the present tense; not xx, arapatsaowlas, in the indefinite ;) but that they are translated, “and have fallen away,” as literally as the English tongue will bear. Therefore here is no if in the case, no supposition at all, but -a plain declaration of matter of fact. 75. “But why do you imagine these persons were true believers?” Because all the expressions, in their easy, natural sense, imply it. They “were once enlightened;” an expression familiar with the Apostle, and never by him applied to any but believers. So “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ give unto you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his calling; and what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward that believe.” (Eph. i. 17, &c.) So again: “God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Cor. iv. 6) “Nay, ‘they were enlightened’ means only, they were baptized, or knew the doctrines of the gospel.” I cannot believe this, till you bring me a few passages from St.

“Now, here the man, in the former clause, who ‘draws back, is distinguished from him, in the following clause, who lives by faith. “But the Apostle quotes the text from this translation.” True; but he does not “distinguish the man in the former clause who ‘draws back, from him, in the latter, who ‘lives by faith.” So far from it, that he quite inverts the order of the sentence, placing the latter clause of it first. And by this means it comes to pass, that although, in translating this text from the Septuagint, we must insert “a man,” (because there is no nominative preceding,) yet in translating it from the Apostle, there is no need or pretence for inserting it, seeing o Bixalog stands just before. Therefore, such an insertion is a palpable violence to the text; which, consequently, is not rightly translated. It remains, that those who live by faith may yet fall from God, and perish everlastingly. 78. Eighthly. Those who are sanctified by the blood of the covenant may so fall as to perish everlastingly. For thus again saith the Apostle: “If we sin wilfully, after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin; but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adver saries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer punish ment shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the cove nant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing?” It is undeniably plain, (1.) That the person mentioned here was once sanctified by the blood of the covenant. (2.) That he afterward, by known, wilful sin, trod under foot the Son of God. And, (3.) That he hereby incurred a sorer punish ment than death; namely, death everlasting. “Nay, the immediate antecedent to the relative ‘he, is ‘the Son of God.” Therefore it was He, not the apostate, who was sanctified (set apart for his priestly office) by the blood of the covenant.” Either you forgot to look at the original, or your memory fails.

The Origin of Image-Worship Among Christians Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 10 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- WHEN Christianity was first preached in the world, it was supported by such miraculous assistance of the divine power, that there was need of little or no human aid to the propagation of it. Not only the Apostles, who first preached it, but even the lay-believers were sufficiently instructed in all the articles of faith, and were inspired with the power of working miracles, and the gift of speaking in languages unknown to them before. But when the gospel was spread, and had taken root through the world; when Kings and Princes became Christians, and when temples were built and magnificently adorned for Chris tian worship; then the zeal of some well-disposed Christians brought pictures into the churches, not only as ornaments, but as instructors of the ignorant; and from thence they were called libri laicorum,-“the books of the people.” Thus the walls of the churches were beset with pictures, representing all the particular transactions mentioned. And they who did not understand a letter of a book knew how to give a very good account of the gospel, being taught to understand the particular passages of it in the pictures of the church. Thus, as hieroglyphics were the first means of propagating know ledge, before writing by letters and words was invented; so the more ignorant people were taught compendiously by pictures, what, by the scarcity of teachers, they had not an opportunity of being otherwise fully instructed in. But these things, which were at first intended for good, became, by the devil’s subtlety, a snare for the souls of Chris tians. For when Christian Princes, and the rich and great, vied with one another, who should embellish the temples with greatest magnificence, the pictures upon the walls were turned into gaudy images upon the altars; and the people being deceived by the outward appearance of the Priests’ bowing and kneeling, (before those images,) as the different parts of their devotion led them, they imagined that those gestures were designed to do honour to the images, before which they were performed; (which they certainly were not;) and so, from admiring, the people came to adore them. Thus, what were at first designed as monuments of edification, became the instru ments of superstition.

Thus, what were at first designed as monuments of edification, became the instru ments of superstition. This being a fatal oversight in the Clergy, at first neglected, or winked at, by degrees (as all errors have crept into the Church) gathered strength; so that, from being in the beginning the dotage of the ignorant vulgar, the poison infected those of better rank, and, by their influence and countenance, brought some of the Priests over to their opinion, or rather those Priests were the occasion of deceiving the rich and powerful, especially the female sex, for ends not very reputable or agreeable to the integrity of their profession. But so it was, that what the Priests at first winked at, they afterwards gave countenance to; and what they once countenanced, they thought themselves obliged in honour to defend; till, at last, superstition came to be preached from the pulpits, and gross idolatry obtruded upon the people for true devotion. It is true, there were many of the sacred order, whose sound hearts and clear heads were very averse to this innovation; who both preached and wrote against the worship of images, showing both the wickedness and folly of it. But the disease was so far spread, and the poison had taken such root, that the conse quence of opposition was the dividing the Church into parties and schisms, and at last proceeded to blood and slaughter. N. B. Is it not marvellous that what was so simple in the beginning, should degenerate into such idolatry as is scarce to be found in the heathen world! While this, and several other errors, equally contrary to Scripture and reason, are found in the Church, together with the abominable lives of multitudes who call themselves Christians, the very name of Christianity must stink in the nostrils of the Mahometans, Jews, and Infidels.

xvii. 14.) Now, the seal of circumcision was to last among the Jews as long as the law lasted, to which it obliged them. By plain parity of reason, baptism, which came in its room, must last among Christians as long as the gospel covenant into which it admits, and whereunto it obliges, all nations. 3. This appears also from the original commission which our Lord gave to his Apostles: “Go, disciple all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them. And lo # I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” Now, as long as this commission lasted, as long as Christ promised to be with them in the execution of it, so long doubtless were they to execute it, and to baptize as well as to teach. But Christ hath promised to be with them, that is, by his Spirit, in their successors, to the end of the world. So long, therefore, without dispute, it was his design that baptism should remain in his Church. IV. 1. But the grand question is, Who are the proper subjects of baptism? grown persons only, or infants also ? In order to answer this fully, I shall, First, lay down the grounds of infant baptism, taken from Scripture, reason, and primitive, universal practice; and, Secondly, answer the objections against it. 2. As to the grounds of it: If infants are guilty of original sin, then they are proper subjects of baptism; seeing, in the ordinary way, they cannot be saved, unless this be washed away by baptism. It has been already proved, that this original stain cleaves to every child of man; and that hereby they are children of wrath, and liable to eternal damnation. It is true, the Second Adam has found a remedy for the disease which came upon all by the offence of the first. But the benefit of this is to be received through the means which he hath appointed; through baptism in particular, which is the ordi mary means he hath appointed for that purpose; and to which God hath tied us, though he may not have tied himself. Indeed, where it cannot be had, the case is different, but extraordinary cases do not make void a standing rule. This therefore is our First ground.

Preface to a Treatise on Justification, Extracted from Mr. John Goodwin Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 10 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. PERHAPs I should not have submitted, at least not so soon, to the importunity of my friends, who have long been soliciting me to abridge and publish the ensuing treatise, had not some warm people published a tract, entitled, “The Scrip ture Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness Defended.” I then judged it absolutely incumbent upon me to publish the real Scripture doctrine. And this I believed I could not either draw up or defend better than I found it done to my hands by one who, at the time he wrote this book, was a firm and zealous Calvinist. This enabled him to confirm what he advanced by such authorities, as well from Calvin himself, as from his most eminent followers, as I could not have done, nor any who had not been long and critically versed in their writings. 2. A greater difficulty was, to know what notice I ought to take of Mr. Hervey’s treatise, wrote, as the Leeds publisher says, with a “becoming and well-tempered tartness.” The case was peculiar. My acquaintance with Mr. Hervey com menced about thirty years ago, when I was a Fellow, and he was a Commoner, of Lincoln College in Oxford. At my request he was permitted, as was Mr. Whitefield some time after, to make one of a little company who used to spend the evenings together, in reading the Holy Scriptures. And I rejoiced in having many opportunities of assisting him both in his studies and in his Christian warfare; which he acknowledged in very strong terms, by a letter now in my hands, wrote not long after the publication of his “Medita tions among the Tombs.” In my answer to this, I told him frankly, there were one or two passages in that book, which, if I had seen before it was printed, I should have advised him not to insert. He replied, if he printed anything more, he would beg of me to correct it first. Accordingly, he sent me, not long after, the manuscript of his three first Dialogues.

Accordingly, he sent me, not long after, the manuscript of his three first Dialogues. I sent them back after some days, with a few inconsiderable corrections; but upon his complaining, “You are not my friend, if you do not take more liberty with me,” I promised I would; so he sent them again, and I made some more important alterations. I was not surprised at seeing no more of the copy, till I saw it in print. When I had read it, I wrote him my thoughts freely, but received no answer. On October 15, 1756, I sent him a second letter, which I here insert, that every impartial person may understand the real merits of the cause. I need only premise, that, at the time I wrote, I had not the least thought of making it public. I only spoke my private thoughts in a free, open manner, to a friend dear as a brother,-I had almost said to a pupil,--to a son; for so near I still accounted him. It is no wonder therefore, that “several of my objections,” as Mr. Hervey himself observes, “appear more like notes and memorandums, tl an a just plea to the public.” (Page 80.) It is true. They appear like what they are, like what they were originally intended for. I had no thought of a plea to the public when I wrote, but of “notes and memorandums to a private man.” DEAR SIR, October 15, 1756. A consider ABLE time since, I sent you a few hasty thoughts which occurred to me on reading the “Dialogues between Theron and Aspasio.” I have not been favoured with any answer. Yet upon another and a more careful perusal of them, I could not but set down some obvious reflections, which I would rather have communicated before these Dialogues were published. In the First Dialogue there are several just and strong observations, which may be of use to every scrious reader. In the Second, is not the description often too laboured? the language too stiff and affected? Yet the reflections on the creation, in the thirty-first and following pages, make abundant amends for this. (I cite the pages according to the Dublin edition, having wrote the rough draught of what follows in Ireland.) Is justification more or less than God’s pardoning and accepting a sinner through the merits of Christ?

You have started an objection which you cannot answer. You say indeed, “Yes, we do need pardon; for in many things we offend all.” What then? If his obedience be ours, we still perfectly obey in him. “Both the branches of the law, the preceptive and the penal, in the case of guilt contracted, must be satisfied.” (Page 309.) Not so. “Christ by his death alone” (so our Church teaches) “fully satisfied for the sins of the whole world.” The same great truth is manifestly taught in the Thirty-first Article. Is it therefore fair, is it honest, for any one to plead the Articles of our Church in defence of absolute predestination; seeing the Seventeenth Article barely defines the term, without either affirming or denying the thing; whereas the Thirty-first totally overthrows and razes it from the foundation ? “Believers, who are notorious transgressors in themselves, have a sinless obedience in Christ.” (Ibid.) O syren song ! Pleasing sound to James Wheatley, Thomas Williams, James Relly | I know not one sentence in the Eleventh Dialogue which is liable to exception; but that grand doctrine of Christianity, original sin, is therein proved by irrefragable arguments. The Twelfth, likewise, is unexceptionable; and contains such an illustration of the wisdom of God in the structure of the human body, as I believe cannot be paralleled in either ancient or modern writers. The former part of the Thirteenth Dialogue is admirable: To the latter I have some objection. “Elijah failed in his resignation, and even Moses spake unadvisedly with his lips.” (Vol. II., page 44.) It is true; but if you could likewise fix some blot upon venerable Samuel and beloved Daniel, it would prove nothing. For no scripture teaches, that the holiness of Christians is to be measured by that of any Jew. “Do not the best of men frequently feel disorder in their affections? Do not they often complain, ‘When I would do good, evil is present with me?’” (Page 46.) I believe not. You and I are only able to answer for ourselves. “Do not they say, ‘We groan, being burdened with the workings of inbred corruption?’” You know, this is not the meaning of the text.

I am, with great sincerity, Dear Sir, Your affectionate brother and servant, 3. After waiting near two years, and receiving no answer to the second any more than the first Letter, in 1758 I printed “A Preservative against Unsettled Notions in Religion.” I designed this at first only for the Preachers who were in connexion with me. But I was afterwards induced to think it might be of use to others that were under my care. I designed it for these, and these alone, though I could not help its falling into other hands. Accordingly, I said, “My design in publishing the following Tracts, is not to reclaim, but to preserve.” To preserve those to whom I had frequently and strongly recommended Mr. Hervey’s Dialogues, from what I disapproved of therein, I inserted the above Letter; and that without any addition, as intending it only “for those who already knew the truth,” whom I wished to preserve from everything wrong, while they profited by what was admirably right, in his Dialogues. No wonder there fore that those notes (as Mr. Hervey remarks in the same page) “have rather the air of a caveat than a confutation.” I never intended them for a confutation; and even when I sent them to the press, I designed them merely as a caveat to my friends against imbibing truth and error together. 4. A considerable time after, I was much surprised by an information, that Mr. Hervey “was going to publish against me.” I immediately wrote a short letter to him, which his friends may easily find among his papers. It was to this effect, and, so far as I can recollect, nearly in these words: “After waiting above a year for an answer to my last letter, I printed it in the close of a larger treatise. If you have anything to object to me, I expect that, as a gentleman and a Christian, you will behave to me as I did to you. Send me the letter first. And if I do not give you a satisfactory answer in a year, then publish it to all the world.” I am inclined to believe, this prevented the publication of these papers during his life. And with his dying breath, (I have it under his brother’s hand,) he desired they might not be published at all. How comes it then to be done now?

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. A tract was published at that very time, entitled, “Serious Thoughts occasioned by the Earthquake at Lisbon.” The thing which I then accidentally mentioned in preaching (twice or thrice; it may be, four times) is there set down at large, much more at large than ever I mentioned it in any sermon. The words are these :-- “Dr. Halley fixes the return of the comet, which appeared in 1682, in the year 1758.” Observe, Dr. Halley does this, not I. On which he adds: “But may the great, good God avert such a shock or contact of such great bodies, moving with such forces, (which, however, is by no means impossi ble,) lest this most beautiful order of things be entirely destroyed, and reduced into its ancient chaos.” (Serious Thoughts, Vol. XI., pp. 8, 9.) “But what, if God should not avert this contact? what would the consequence be?” That consequence I afterwards describe: “Burning up all the produce of the earth, and then the globe itself.” But do I affirm, or suppose, that it actually will do this? I suppose, nay, affirm, at the bottom of the same page, the direct contrary: “What security is there against all this, on the infidel hypothesis? But on the Christian there is abundant security; for the prophecies are not yet fulfilled.” 21. So much for the comet-enthusiasm. We return now to the point of unconditional election: “One would imagine,” says Mr. Hill, “by Mr. W.’s quoting the Thirty-first Article, in contradiction to the Seventeenth, that he thought the Reformers as inconsistent as himself.” (Farrago, p. 54.) I did not quote the Thirty-first in contradiction to the Seven teenth, but in explication of it. The latter, the Thirty-first, can bear but one meaning; therefore it fixes the sense of the former. “Nay, this Article speaks nothing of the extent of Christ’s death, but of its all-sufficiency.” (Pages 54, 55.) Nothing of the extent / Why, it speaks of nothing else; its all-sufficiency is out of the question.

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?

9. For many ages the free natives of Ireland, as well as the Scottish Highlands, when it was convenient for them, made an excursion from their woods or fastnesses, and carried off, for their own proper use, the sheep, and oxen, and corn of their neighbours. This was the liberty which the O'Neals, the Camp bells, and many other septs and clans of venerable antiquity, had received by immemorial tradition from their ancestors. 10. Almost all the soldiers in the Christian world, as well as in the Mahometan and Pagan, have claimed, more especially in time of war, another kind of liberty; that of borrowing the wives and daughters of the men that fell into their hands; sometimes, if they pleaded scruple of conscience or honour, using a little necessary force. Perhaps this may be termed the liberty of war. But I will not positively affirm, that it has never been used in this free country, even in the time of peace. 11. In some countries of Europe, and indeed in England, there have been instances of yet another sort of liberty, that of calling a Monarch to account; and, if need were, taking off his head; that is, if he did not behave in a dutiful manner to our sovereign lords the people. 12. Now, that we may not always be talking at random, but bring the matter to a determinate point, which of these sorts of liberty do you desire? Is it the First sort; the liberty of knocking on the head, or cutting the throats, of those we are out of conceit with ? Glorious liberty indeed ! What would not king mob do to be gratified with it but for a few weeks? But, I conceive, calm, sensible men do not desire to see them entrusted with it. They apprehend there might be some consequences which, upon the whole, would not redound to the prosperity of the nation. 13. Is the Second more desirable; the liberty of taking, when we see best, the goods and chattels of our neighbours? Undoubtedly, thousands in the good city of London (suppose we made the experiment here first) would be above measure rejoiced thereat, would leap as broke from chains.

Thoughts Concerning the Origin of Power Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. By power, I here mean supreme power, the power over life and death, and consequently over our liberty and property, and all things of an inferior nature. 2. In many nations this power has in all ages been lodged in a single person. This has been the case in almost the whole eastern world, from the earliest antiquity; as in the celebrated empires of Assyria, of Babylon, of Media, Persia, and many others. And so it remains to this day, from Constantinople to the farthest India. The same form of government obtained very early in very many parts of Afric, and remains in most of them still, as well as in the empires of Morocco and Abyssinia. The first adventurers to America found absolute monarchy established there also ; the whole power being lodged in the Emperor of Mexico, and the Yncas of Peru. Nay, and many of the ancient nations of Europe were governed by single persons; as Spain, France, the Russias, and several other nations are at this day. 3. But in others, the power has been lodged in a few, chiefly the rich and noble. This kind of government, usually styled aristocracy, obtained in Greece and in Rome, after many struggles with the people, during the later ages of the republic. And this is the government which at present subsists in various parts of Europe. In Venice indeed, as well as in Genoa, the supreme power is nominally lodged in one, namely, the Doge ; but in fact, he is only a royal shade; it is really lodged in a few of the nobles. 4. Where the people have the supreme power, it is termed a democracy. This seems to have been the ancient form of government in several of the Grecian states. And so it was at Rome for some ages after the expulsion of the Kings. From the earliest authentic records, there is reason to believe it was for espousing the cause of the people, and defending their rights against the illegal encroachments of the nobles, that Marcus Coriolanus was driven into banishment, and Manlius Capitolinus, as well as Tiberius and Caius Gracchus, murdered. Perhaps formerly the popular government subsisted in several states.

It is chiefly the women and children who weave fine cotton cloth, which they dye blue and black.” 8. It was of these parts of Guinea that Monsieur Allanson, correspondent of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, 1rom 1749 to 1753, gives the following account, both as to the country and people:--“Which way soever I turned my eyes, I beheld a perfect image of pure nature: An agreeable solitude, bounded on every side by a charming landscape; the rural situation of cottages in the midst of trees; the ease and quiet ness of the Negroes, reclined under the shade of the spreading foliage, with the simplicity of their dress and manners: The whole revived in my mind the idea of our first parents, and I seemed to contemplate the world in its primitive state. They are, generally speaking, very good-natured, sociable, and obliging. I was not a little pleased with my very first reception; and it fully convinced me, that there ought to be a considerable abatement made in the accounts we have of the savage character of the Africans.” He adds: “It is amazing that an illiterate people should reason so pertinently concerning the heavenly bodies. There is no doubt, but that, with proper instruments, they would become excellent astronomers.” 9. The inhabitants of the Grain and Ivory Coast are repre sented by those that deal with them, as sensible, courteous, and the fairest traders on the coasts of Guinea. They rarely drink to excess; if any do, they are severely punished by the King’s order. They are seldom troubled with war: If a difference happen between two nations, they commonly end the dispute amicably. The inhabitants of the Gold and Slave Coast likewise, when they are not artfully incensed against each other, live in great union and friendship, being generally well-tempered, civil, tractable, and ready to help any that need it. In particular, the natives of the kingdom of Whidah are civil, kind, and obliging to strangers; and they are the most gentleman-like of all the Negroes, abounding in good manners toward each other. The inferiors pay the utmost respect to their superiors; so wives to their husbands, children to their parents. And they are remarkably indus trious; all are constantly employed,--the men in agriculture, the women in spinning and weaving cotton. 10.

11. Soon after, it being thought reasonable, that every part of the British empire should furnish its share of the general expense, the English Parliament laid a small duty on the tea imported into America. Again a violent outcry arose, and was studiously propagated through all the provinces It was no less diligently spread throughout England. And as they judged the time was now come to advance a little further, the leading men, both at home and abroad, began more and more confidently to assert, “that the English had no right to tax the American colonies.” The assertors of this new position in England strongly exhorted those in America to withstand what they were pleased to call this “illegal, unconstitutional oppression.” Thus encouraged, the Bostonians, under the auspices of Mr. Hancock, (whose interest was particularly at stake,) scorning to do any thing secretly, paraded the town at noon-day with colours flying, and bravely threw the English tea into the sea. This was the first plain overt act of rebellion, not of a few, but of the town of Boston. Reparation of the wrong was demanded; but it was not obtained. Till it should be obtained, the Parliament ordered Boston harbour to be shut up. 12. But things were not yet ripe for an open rupture: Therefore the Americans still gave the Government good words. They professed their loyalty, their great regard for the King, and their desire of obeying all his legal commands. But all this time they were using all possible art and diligence to blacken, first the Ministry, after a time the Parliament too, and then the King himself. Of this I had a clear and particular account from a friend in Pennsylvania, who then observed a storm rising in the north, and moving on toward the southern colonies. And it moved on apace. A new supreme power, called a Congress, appeared. It openly assumed the reins of government, exercised all the rights of sovereignty, burst all the bands, and totally disclaimed the authority both of King and Parliament. 13. But still the Americans talked of allegiance, and said they desired nothing but the liberty of Englishmen. Many in England cordially believed them; I myself for one.

And the truth of those predictions was shown over and over, by the signal accomplishment of them. But no opposition could hinder him from going on in his Master's work, and suppress ing vice in every possible manner. Those sinners who endeavoured to hide themselves from him, he pursued to every corner of his parish; by all sorts of means, public and private, early and late, in season and out of season, entreating and warning them to flee from the wrath to come. Some made it an excuse, for not attending the Church Service on a Sunday morning, that they could not awake early enough, to get their families ready. He provided for this also: Taking a bell in his hand, he set out every Sunday at five in the morning, and went round the most distant parts of the parish, inviting all the inhabitants to the house of God.- 2. Yet notwithstanding all the pains he took, he saw for some time little fruit of his labour; insomuch that he was more than once in doubt, whether he had not mistaken his place; whether God had indeed called him to confine himself to one town, or to labour more at large in his vineyard. He was not free from this doubt, when a multitude of people flocked together at a funeral. He seldom let these awful opportunities slip without giving a solemn exhortation. At the close of the exhortation which was then given, one man was so grievously offended, that he could not refrain from breaking out into scurrilous, yea, menacing language. But, notwithstanding all his struggling against it, the word fastened upon his heart. At first, indeed, he roared like a lion; but he soon wept like a child. Not long after, he came to Mr. Fletcher in the most humble manner, asking pardon for his outrageous behaviour, and begging an interest in his prayers. This was such a refreshment as he stood in need of; and it was but a short time before this poor broken-hearted sinner was filled with joy unspeakable. He then spared no pains in exhorting his fellow-sinners “to flee from the wrath to come.” 3. It was not long after, when, one Sunday evening, Mr. Fletcher, after performing the usual duty at Madeley, was about to set out for Madeley-Wood, to preach and catechise as usual.

Thoughts on a Single Life Source: The Works of John Wesley, Volume 11 (Zondervan) Author: John Wesley --- 1. THE forbidding to marry, as it is well known the Church of Rome does, and has done for several ages, (in which marriage is absolutely forbidden, not only to all religious orders, but to the whole body of the Clergy,) is numbered, by the great Apostle, among “the doctrines of devils.” And * In the year 1743 Mr. Wesley published a small pamphlet under the title of, “Thoughts on Marriage and a Single Life.” It was afterwards superseded by the truct now before the reader; which embodies the principal sentiments contained in the former publication.-En1T. among the same we need not scruple to number the despising or condemning marriage; as do many of those in the Romish Church who are usually termed Mystic writers. One of these does not scruple to affirm, “Marriage is only licensed forni cation.” But the Holy Ghost says, “Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled.” Nor can it be doubted but persons may be as holy in a married as in a single state. 2. In the latter clause of the sentence, the Apostle seems to guard against a mistake, into which some sincere Christians have fallen; particularly when they have just found such a liberty of spirit as they had not before experienced. They imagine a defilement where there is none, “and fear where no fear is.” And it is possible this very fear of sin may betray them into sin. For it may induce persons to defraud each other, forgetting the express determination of the Apostle: “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.” (1 Cor. vii. 4.) 3. And yet we must not forget what the Apostle subjoins in the following verses: “I say to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them, if they abide even as I. Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife. But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned. Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh. I would have you without carefulness.

1721 To Ambrose Eyre, [Mr. A. H. Tod, one of the masters at Charterhouse, supplies the following facts from Alumni Carthusiani: 'June 23 1698 Ambrose Eyre, admitted pr Lord Chief Justice Holt in the place of Carlos Smith, age 14 years the 25th of July next. Exhibitioner 2 July 1703 (pre-elected); admitted to the Middle Temple 18 November 1702, as son and heir o! William Eyre, of Chelaea, Middlesex, esquire; admitted pensioner of Christ's, Cambridge, 6 April 1703; Receiver of Charterhouse, 20 February 1719-39; admitted a poor brother 1755; died 21 April, buried at Fulham, Middlesex, 28 April 1756. By his first wife, Sarah, he was the father of the Rev. Venn Eyre, admitted 30 June 1726; he married 2nd at Charterhouse, 21 March 1730, Elizabeth Holt.'] Treasurer of Charterhouse [1] CHRIST CHURCH, November 3, 1721 SIR, --I am extremely sorry that an accident should which has given you reason to have an ill opinion of me, but am very much obliged to your civility for putting the most favorable construction on it. I hope this will satisfy you that it was by mistake and not my design that you have twice delivered the exhibition for the first Michaelmas quarter which indeed was through the mistake of my mercer, [The Bank of England had been incorporated in 1694, and for a short time carried on its business in Mercers' Chapel. The 'instant and regular remittance of money' was in its infancy in 1721.] who returns it, or rather through the negligence of his correspondent, who forgot to inform him of his having received the money. This made him suspect that it was detained, in which he was confirmed by receiving no answer from London; and at Lady Day, when I gave him my tutor's bill for that quarter, he told [me] he had not received the exhibition for the first, which he supposed was detained because I had been absent the whole eight weeks in one quarter, and which made him advise me to write a receipt for that and the other due at the end of the year.

DEAR MOTHER,--I must beg leave to assure you that before I received yours I was fully convinced of two things,-first, that Mr. Berkeley's [George Berkeley, D.D. (1685-1753), Bishop of Cloyne 1734. He published his Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous in 1713. The reference is to the early part of the Second Dialogue.] notion, which at first sight appeared very plausible--as, indeed, an ingenious disputant will make almost anything appear--was utterly groundless; and that he either advanced a palpable falsehood, or said nothing at all: and, secondly, that I had been under a mistake in adhering to that definition of Faith which Dr. Fiddes [Richard Fiddes (1671--July 8, 1725). A critical account of him is given by Hearne in his diary for July 15 of this year. He was author of A Body of Divinity (2 vols. folio, 1718-20) and other works. He and his school defined faith as 'an assent to a proposition on reasonable (or rational) grounds.'] sets down as the only true one. Mr. Berkeley's reasons on a second reading I found to be mere fallacy, though very artfully disguised. From one or two you may easily judge of what kind his other arguments are. He introduces Hylas charging Philonous with skepticism for denying the existence of sensible things: to which Philonous replies that, if denying the existence of sensible things constitute a skeptic, he will prove those to be such who assert sensible things to be material; for if all sensible things are material, then, if it be proved that nothing material exists, it will follow that no sensible thing exists; and that nothing material can exist he undertakes to demonstrate. Matter, says he (by which you must mean something sensible, or rise how came you to know of it), you define a solid extended substance, the existence of which is exterior to the mind and does in no ways depend on its being perceived; but if it appear that no sensible thing is exterior to the mind, your supposition of a sensible substance independent on it is a plain inconsistency.

1731 To his Father January 1731. DEAR SIR, -- Though some of the postulata upon which Archbishop King [See letters of Dec. 11, 1730, and Jan. 6, 1791.] builds his hypothesis of the Origin of Evil be such as very few will admit of, yet, since the superstructure is regular and well contrived, I thought you would not be unwilling to see the scheme of that celebrated work. He divides it into five chapters. The sum of the first chapter is this: The first notions we have of outward things are our conceptions of motion, matter, and space. Concerning each of these, we soon observe that it does not exist of itself; and consequently that there must be some first cause, to which all of them owe their existence. Although we have no faculty for the direct perception of this First Cause, and so can know very little more of Him than a blind man of light, yet thus much we know of Him by the faculties we have,--that He is one, infinite in nature and power, free, intelligent, and omniscient; that consequently He proposes to Himself an end in every one of His actions; and that the end of His creating the world was the exercise of His power, and wisdom, and goodness; which He therefore made as perfect as it could be made by infinite goodness, and power, and wisdom. Chapter II. But if so, how came evil into the world If the world was made by such an agent, with such an intention, how is it that either imperfection or natural or moral evils have a place in it Is not this difficulty best solved by the Manichaean supposition that there is an evil as well as a good principle By no means; for it is just as repugnant to infinite goodness to create what it foresaw would be spoiled by another, as to create what would be spoiled by the constitution of its own nature: their supposition therefore leaves the difficulty as it found it. But if it could be proved that to permit evils in the world is consistent with, nay necessarily results from, infinite goodness, then the difficulty would vanish; and to prove this is the design of the following treatise.

DEAR BROTHER,--Considering the other changes that I remember in myself, I shall not at all wonder if the time comes when we differ as little in our conclusions as we do now in our premises. In most we seem to agree already; especially as to rising, not keeping much company, and sitting by a fire, which I always do, if any one in the room does, whether at home or abroad. But these are the very things about which others will never agree with me. Had I given up these, or but one of them rising early, [See letter of March 19, 1727.] which implies going to bed early (though I never am sleepy now), and keeping so little company--not one man in ten of those that are offended at me, as it is, would ever open their mouth against any of the other particulars. For the sake of these, those are mentioned: the root of the matter lies here. Would I but employ a third of my money, and about half my time, as other folks do, smaller matters would be easily overlooked. But I think nil tanti est. ['Nothing is worth such a sacrifice as this.'] As to my hair, I am much more sure that what this enables me to do is according to the Scripture than I am that the length of it is contrary to it. [See letter of Dec. 5, 1726.]

Farther: a sin which easily besets me is unfaithfulness to God in the use of speech. I know that this is a talent entrusted to me by my Lord, to be used, as all others, only for His glory. I know that all conversation which is not seasoned with salt, and designed at least to administer grace to the hearers, is expressly forbid by the Apostle, as corrupt communication, and as grieving the Holy Spirit of God; yet I am almost continually betrayed into it by the example of others striking in with my own bad heart. But I hope, from the moment I leave the English shore, under the acknowledged character of a teacher sent from God, there shall no word be heard from my lips but what properly flows from that character: as my tongue is a devoted thing, I hope from the first hour of this new era to use it only as such, that all who hear me may know of a truth the words I speak are not mine but His that sent me. The same faithfulness I hope to show through His grace in dispensing the rest of my Master's goods, if it please Him to send me to those who, like His first followers, have all things common. What a guard is here against that root of evil, the love of money, and all the vile attractions that spring from it ! One in this glorious state, and perhaps none but he, may see the height and depth of that privilege of the first Christians, 'as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing all things.'

Are you not of a close, dark, reserved temper and behavior Is not the spirit of secrecy the spirit of your community Have you that childlike openness, frankness, and plainness of speech so manifest to all in the Apostles and first Christians To Benjamin Ingham [13] OXON, October 13, 1758.

3. But I may not dismiss this passage yet. It is now my turn to complain of unfair usage; of the exceeding lame, broken, imperfect manner wherein you cite my words. For instance, your citation runs thus: you ‘never knew but one of the Moravian Church affirm that a believer does not grow in holiness.’ Whereas my words are these: ‘I never knew one of the Moravian Church but that single person affirm that a believer does not grow in holiness; and perhaps he would not affirm it on reflection.’ Now, why was the former part of the sentence changed and the latter quite left out Had the whole stood in your tract just as it does in mine, it must have appeared I do not here charge the Moravian Church. I complain also of your manner of replying to the first article of this very paragraph. For you do not cite so much as one line of that answer to which you profess to reply. My words are, ‘You ought not to charge the Moravian Church with the first of these’ errors; ‘since, in the very page from which you quote those words, “There is no justifying faith where there ever is any doubt,” that note occurs (namely, Journal, ii. 492): “In the Preface to the Second Journal the Moravian Church is cleared from this mistake.”’ If you had cited these words, could you possibly have subjoined, ‘I have not charged the Moravian Church with anything, but only repeat after you’ 4. I have now considered one page of your reply in the manner you seem to require. But sure you cannot expect I should follow you thus step by step through an hundred and forty pages! If you should then think it worth while to make a second reply, and to follow me in the same manner, we might write indeed, but who would read I return, therefore, to what I proposed at first -- namely, to touch only on what seems of the most importance, and leave the rest just as it lies.

5. You say, ‘With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought that you only found this “in many of them; not in all, nor in most”’ (Second Letter, p. 80). ‘You now would have it thought’! Yes; and always, as well as now. For my original charge was, ‘I have found this in many of you -- that is, much subtlety, much evasion and disguise’ (Journal, ii. 492). But you add, ‘Let the reader judge from the following passages whether you did not charge the Moravians in general with these crimes: “I had a long conference with those whom I esteem very highly in love; but I could not yet understand them in one point, Christian openness and plainness of speech. They pleaded for such a reservedness and closeness of conversation. Yet I scarce know what to think, considering they had the practice of the whole Moravian Church on their side.”’ True, in pleading for such a reservedness of conversation as I could not in any wise approve of; but not in using much subtlety, much evasion and disguise: this I dare not charge on the whole Moravian Church. Those words also, ‘There is darkness and closeness in all their behavior, and guile in almost all their words,’ I spoke, not of all the Moravians, nor of most, but of those who were then in England. I could not speak it of them all; for I never found any guile in Christian David, Michael Linner, and many others. 6. ‘We are next to see how you get over the objection I made good, in three several particulars, that you have prepared the way for spreading of these tenets. The first you say nothing to here; the second you quote very partially thus -- “By countenancing and commending them.” And why would you not add,“And being the occasion of so many of them coming over among us”’ Because I was not the occasion. I was, indeed, the first Englishman that ever was at Herrnhut. But before I was at Herrnhut (I find on later inquiry) the Count himself had been in England.

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.

When you first cited these as proofs of enthusiasm, I answered, 'I will put your argument into form, -- ‘He that believes those are miraculous cures which are not so is a rank enthusiast. 'But you believe those to be miraculous cures which are not so: ‘Therefore you are a rank enthusiast. ‘What do you mean by miraculous If you term everything so which is “not strictly accountable for by the ordinary course of natural causes,” then I deny the latter part of the minor proposition. And unless you can make this good, unless you can prove the effects in question are “strictly accountable for by the ordinary course of natural causes,” your argument is nothing worth.’ You reply: ‘Your answer to the objection is very evasive, though you pretend to put my argument in form. You mistake the major proposition, which should have been, -- ‘He that represents those cures as the immediate effects of his own prayers and as miraculous which are not so is a rank enthusiast, if sincere: ‘“But, This you have done: ergo, &c.”’ To this clumsy syllogism I rejoin: (1) That the words ‘if sincere’ are utterly impertinent; for if insincerity be supposed, enthusiasm will be out of the question. (2) That those words ‘as the effects of his own prayers’ may likewise be pared off; for they are unnecessary and cumbersome, the argument being complete without them. (3) That, with or without them, the proposition is false; unless so far as it coincides with that you reject. For it is the believing those to be miracles which are not that constitutes an enthusiast; not the representing them one way or the other, unless so far as it implies such a belief. 12. Upon my answer to the syllogism first proposed, you observe, ‘Thus’ (by denying the latter part of the minor) ‘you clear yourself from the charge of enthusiasm by acknowledging the cures to be supernatural and miraculous. Why, then, would you not speak out, and directly say that you can work real and undoubted miracles This would put the controversy between you and your opposers on a short foot, and be an effectual proof of the truth of your presences.’ (Second Letter, p. 142.)

4. It is the business of a Visitor of the sick,--To see every sick person within his district thrice a week. To inquire into the state of their souls, and to advise them as occasion may require. To inquire into their disorders, and procure advice for them. To relieve them, if they are in want. To do anything for them which he (or she) can do. To bring in his accounts weekly to the Stewards. [The Leaders now do this.] Upon reflection, I saw how exactly in this also we had copied after the primitive Church. What were the ancient deacons What was Phebe the deaconess but such a visitor of the sick 5. I did not think it needful to give them any particular rules beside these that follow: (1) Be plain and open in dealing with souls. (2) Be mild, tender, patient. (3) Be cleanly in all you do for the sick. (4) Be not nice. 6. We have ever since had great reason to praise God for His continued blessing on this undertaking. Many lives have been saved, many sicknesses healed, much pain and want prevented or removed. Many heavy hearts have been made glad, many mourners comforted; and the Visitors have found from Him whom they serve a present reward for all their labour. XII. 1. But I was still in pain for many of the poor that were sick; there was so great expense, and so little profit. And first I resolved to try whether they might not receive more benefit in the hospitals. Upon the trial, we found there was indeed less expense, but no more good done than before. I then asked the advice of several physicians for them; but still it profited not. I saw the poor people pining away, and several families ruined, and that without remedy.

1. In the beginning of your Introductory Discourse you declare the reasons which moved you to publish it. One of these, you say, was the late increase of Popery in this kingdom (page 41); chiefly occasioned, as you suppose, by the confident assertions of the Romish emissaries that there has been a succession of miracles in their Church from the apostolic to the present age. To obviate this plea you would 'settle some rule of discerning the true from the false, so as to give a reason for admitting the miracles of one age and rejecting those of another' (page 44). 2. This has a pleasing sound, and is extremely well imagined to prejudice a Protestant reader in your favour. You then slide with great art into your subject: 'This claim of a miraculous power, now peculiar to the Church of Rome, was asserted in all Christian countries till the Reformation' (ibid.). But then 'the cheat was detected' (page 45)--nay, and men began to 'suspect that the Church had long been governed by the same arts.' 'For it was easy to trace them up to the primitive Church, though not to fix the time when the cheat began; to show how long after the days of the Apostles the miraculous gifts continued in the Church' (page 46). However, it is commonly believed that they continued till Christianity was the established religion. Some, indeed, extend them to the fourth and fifth centuries (page 50); but these, you say, betray the Protestant cause (page 51). 'For in the third, fourth, and fifth the chief corruptions of Popery were introduced, or at least the seeds of them sown. By these I mean monkery; the worship of relics; invocation of saints; prayers for the dead; the superstitious use of images, of the sacraments, of the sign of the cross, and of the consecrated oil.' (Page 52.) 3. I have nothing to do with the fourth or fifth century. But to what you allege in support of this charge, so far as it relates to the third century, I have a few things to reply.

But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: 'As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians' (prove that!) 'to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty when the Apostles were dead to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them. And when these artful pretenders had maintained their ground through the first three centuries, the leading clergy of the fourth understood their interest too well to part with the old plea of miraculous gifts.' (Page 92.) Round assertions indeed! But surely, sir, you do not think that reasonable men will take these for proofs! You are here advancing a charge of the blackest nature. But where are your vouchers Where are the witnesses to support it Hitherto you have not been able to produce one through a course of three hundred years; unless you bring in those heathen, of whose senseless, shameless prejudices you have yourself given so clear an account. But you designed to produce your witnesses in the Free Inquiry a year or two after the Introductory Discourse was published. So you condemn them first, and try them afterwards; you will pass sentence now, and hear the evidence by-and-by! A genuine specimen of that 'impartial regard to truth' which you profess upon all occasions. 13. Another instance of this is in your marginal note: 'The primitive Christians were perpetually reproached for their gross credulity.' They were; but by whom Why, by Jews and heathens. Accordingly the two witnesses you produce here are Celsus the Jew and Julian the apostate. But, lest this should not suffice, you make them confess the charge. 'The Fathers,' your words are, 'defend themselves by saying that they did no more than the philosophers had always done; that Pythagoras's precepts were inculcated with an ipse dixit, and they found the same method useful with the vulgar' (page 93). And is this their whole defence Do the very men to whom you refer, Origen and Arnobius, in the very tracts to which you refer, give no other answer than this argument ad hominem Stand this as another genuine proof of Dr. Middleton's candour and impartiality!

You proceed: 'If the Scriptures are a complete rule (I reject the word 'sufficient,' because it is ambiguous), we do not want the Fathers as guides, or, if clear, as interpreters. An esteem for them has carried many into dangerous errors: the neglect of them can have no ill consequences.' (Page 97.) I answer: (1) The Scriptures are a complete rule of faith and practice; and they are clear in all necessary points. And yet their clearness does not prove that they need not be explained, nor their completeness that they need not be enforced. (2) The esteeming the writings of the first three centuries not equally with but next to the Scriptures never carried any man yet into dangerous errors, nor probably ever will. But it has brought many out of dangerous errors, and particularly out of the errors of Popery. (3) The neglect in your sense of the primitive Fathers--that is, the thinking they were all fools and knaves--has this natural consequence (which ,I grant is no ill one, according to your principles), to make all who are not real Christians think Jesus of Nazareth and His Apostles just as honest and wise as them. 16. You afterwards endeavour to show how the Church of England came to have such an esteem for the ancient Fathers. There are several particulars in this account which are liable to exception. But I let them pass, as they have little connexion with the point in question. 17. You conclude your Introductory Discourse thus: 'The design of the present treatise is to fix the religion of the Protestants on its proper basis--that is, on the Sacred Scriptures' (page 111). Here again you speak in your personated character; as also when you 'freely own the primitive writers to be of use in attesting and transmitting to us the genuine books of the Holy Scriptures'! (Page 112.) Books for the full attestation as well as safe transmission whereof you have doubtless the deepest concern!

You begin with the apostolic Fathers--that is, those who lived and conversed with the Apostles. 'There are several,' you say, 'of this character, whose writings still remain to us: St. Barnabas, St. Clemens, St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp, St. Hermas. Now, if those gifts had subsisted after the days of the Apostles, these must have possessed a large share of them. But if any of them had, he would have mentioned it in his writings, which not one of them has done.' (Page 3.) The argument, fully proposed, runs thus: If any such gifts had subsisted in them or in their days, they must have mentioned them in their circular Epistles to the Churches (for so their predecessors, the Apostles, did); but they did not mention any such gifts therein. Sir, your consequence is not of any force; as will easily appear by a parallel argument: If such gifts had subsisted in St. Peter or in his days, he must have mentioned them in his circular Epistles to the Churches. But he does not mention any such gifts therein; therefore they did not subsist in him or in his days. Your argument, therefore, proves too much; nor can it conclude against an apostolic Father without concluding against the Apostle too. If, therefore, the apostolic Fathers had not mentioned any miraculous gifts in their circular Epistles to the Churches, you could not have inferred that they possessed none; since neither does he mention them in his circular Epistles whom you allow to have possessed them. Of all the Apostles you can produce but one, St. Paul, who makes mention of these gifts: and that not in his circular Epistles to the Churches; for I know not that he wrote any such.

5. Therefore the apostolic writers have not left us in the dark with regard to our present argument, and consequently your triumph comes too soon: 'Here, then, we have an interval of half a century in which we have the strongest reason to presume that the extraordinary gifts of the apostolic age were withdrawn' (page 9). No: not if all the apostolic Fathers speak of spiritual gifts as abounding among the Christians of that age; not if 'extraordinary illuminations, visions, and divine impressions still subsisted among them.' For, as to your now putting in, 'as exerted openly in the Church for the conviction of unbelievers,' I must desire you to put it out again; it comes a great deal too late. The question between you and me was stated without it above an hundred pages back. Although, if it be admitted, it will do you no service; seeing your proposition is overthrown if there were 'miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles,' whether they were 'openly exerted for the conviction of unbelievers' or not. 6. I was a little surprised that you should take your leave of the apostolic Fathers so soon. But, upon looking forward, my surprise was at an end: I found you was not guilty of any design to spare them; but only delayed your remarks till the reader should be prepared for what might have shocked him had it stood in its proper place. I do not find, indeed, that you make any objection to any part of the Epistles of Ignatius; no, nor of the Catholic Epistle, as it is called, which is inscribed with the name of Barnabas. This clearly convinces me you have not read it--I am apt to think not one page of it; seeing, if you had, you would never have let slip such an opportunity of exposing one that was called an apostolic Father.

7. But it would have been strange, if you had not somewhere brought in the famous phoenix of Clemens Romanus. And yet you are very merciful upon that head, barely remarking concerning it that 'he alleged the ridiculous story of the phoenix as a type and proof of the resurrection. Whether all the heathen writers treat it as nothing else but a mere fable I know not.' (Page 55.) But that it is so is certain, and consequently the argument drawn from it is weak and inconclusive. Yet it will not hence follow either that Clemens was a wicked man or that he had none of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. 8. There is no real blemish to be found in the whole character of St. Polycarp. But there is one circumstance left upon record concerning him which has the appearance of weakness. And with this you do not fail to acquaint your reader at a convenient season--namely, 'that in the most ancient dispute concerning the time of holding Easter, St. Polycarp and Anicetus severally alleged apostolic tradition for their different practice' (page 60). And it is not improbable that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the Apostles varied themselves, some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not. But, be this as it may, it can be no proof either that Polycarp was not an holy man or that he was not favoured with the extraordinary as well as ordinary gifts of the Spirit.

16. You close this head with remarking (1) 'That the silence of all the apostolic writers on the subject of these gifts must dispose us to conclude they were then withdrawn' (ibid.). O sir, mention this no more! I entreat you never name their silence again. They speak loud enough to shame you as long as you live. You cannot therefore talk with any grace of 'the pretended revival of them after a cessation of forty or fifty years,' or draw conclusions from that which never was. Your second remark is perfectly new: I dare say none ever observed before yourself that this particular circumstance of the primitive Christians 'carried with it an air of imposture'--namely, their 'challenging all the world to come and see the miracles which they wrought'! (Page 21.) To complete the argument, you should have added, 'and their staking their lives upon the performance of them.' 17. I doubt you have not gone one step forward yet. You have, indeed, advanced many bold assertions; but you have not fairly proved one single conclusion with regard to the point in hand. But a natural effect of your lively imagination is that from this time you argue more and more weakly; inasmuch, as the farther you go, the more things you imagine (and only imagine) yourself to have proved. Consequently, as you gather up more mistakes every step you take, every page is more precarious than the former. II. 1. The second thing you proposed was 'to throw together all which those Fathers have delivered concerning the persons said to have been endued with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit' (ibid.). 'Now, whenever we think or speak with reverence,'say you, 'of those primitive times, it is always with regard to these very Fathers whose testimonies I have been collecting. And they were, indeed, the chief persons and champions of the Christian cause, the pastors, bishops, and martyrs of the primitive Church--namely, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius.' Sir, you stumble at the threshold. A common dictionary may inform you that these were not all either pastors, bishops, or martyrs.

2. You go on as you set out: 'Yet none of these have anywhere affirmed that they themselves were endued with any power of working miracles' (page 22). You should say, 'with any of those extraordinary gifts promised by our Lord and conferred on His Apostles.' No! Have 'none of these anywhere affirmed that they themselves were endued' with any extraordinary gifts What think you of the very first of them, Justin Martyr Either you are quite mistaken in the account you give of him elsewhere (pages 27, 30), or he affirmed this of himself over and over. And as to Cyprian, you will by-and-by spend several pages together (pages 101, &c.) on the extraordinary gifts he affirmed himself to be endued with. But suppose they had not anywhere affirmed this of themselves, what would you infer therefrom that they were not endued with any extraordinary gifts Then, by the very same method of arguing, you might prove that neither St. Peter, nor James, nor John were endued with any such; for neither do they anywhere affirm this of themselves in any of the writings which they have left behind them. 3. Your argument concerning the apostolic Fathers is just as conclusive as this, For if you say, 'The writers following the apostolic Fathers do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts, therefore they had none,' by a parity of reason you must say, 'The writers following the Apostles do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts, therefore the Apostles had none.' 4. Your next argument against the existence of those gifts is 'that the Fathers do not tell us the names of them which had them.' This is not altogether true. The names of Justin Martyr and Cyprian are pretty well known; as is, among the learned, that of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria. (Pages 106, 212.)

Sir, no man of reason will believe this concerning one of the Fathers upon your bare assertion. I must therefore desire you to prove by more than a scrap of a sentence (1) that Justin himself held this opinion; (2) that he invented it; (3) that it was the common opinion of all the Fathers; and (4) that they all took it on his authority. 15. You affirm, thirdly: 'He says that all devils yield and submit to the name of Jesus; as also to the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob' (page 85). Very likely he may. Lastly. You cite a passage from him concerning the Spirit of God influencing the minds of holy men. But neither does this in any measure affect his credit as a witness of fact. Consequently, after all that you have been able to draw either from himself or any of the primitive writers, here is one witness of unquestionable credit touching the miracles wrought in the primitive Church, touching the subsistence of the extraordinary gifts after the days of the Apostles. 16. But let us come once more to Irenaeus; for you have not done with him yet. 'Forgery,' you say, 'has been actually charged upon Justin' (by John Croius and Dr. Middleton), 'and may with equal reason be charged on Irenaeus; for what other account can be given of his frequent appeals to apostolical tradition for the support of so many incredible doctrines' (page 111). Why, this very natural one, that in non-essential points he too easily followed the authority of Papias, a weak man, who on slight grounds believed many trifling things to have been said or done by the Apostles. And allowing all this, yet it does not give us so 'lamentable an idea of those primitive ages and primitive champions of the Christian cause' (page 59). The same account may be given of his mistake concerning the age of our Lord (ibid.). There is therefore as yet neither reason nor any plausible presence for laying forgery to his charge; and consequently thus far his credit as a witness stands clear and unimpeached.

20. Now to apply. 'A mind,' you say, 'so totally possessed by superstitious fancies could not even suspect the pretensions of those vagrant jugglers, who in those primitive ages were so numerous and so industriously employed in deluding their fellow creatures. Both heathens, Jews, and Christians are all allowed to have had such impostors among them.' (Page 71.) By whom, sir, is this allowed of the Christians By whom but Celsus was it affirmed of them Who informed you of their growing so numerous and using such industry in their employment To speak the plain truth, your mind appears 'to be so totally possessed by' these 'vagrant jugglers,' that you cannot say one word about the primitive Church but they immediately start up before you, though there is no more proof of their ever existing than of a witch's sailing in an eggshell. 21. You conclude this head: 'When pious Christians are arrived to this pitch of credulity, as to believe that evil spirits or evil men can work miracles in opposition to the gospel, their very piety will oblige them to admit as miraculous whatever is pretended to be wrought in defence of it' (ibid.). Once more you have spoken out: you have shown without disguise what you think of St. Paul and the 'lying miracles' (2 Thess. ii. 9) which he (poor man!) believed evil spirits or evil men could work in opposition to the gospel; and of St. John talking so idly of him who 'doeth great wonders . . . and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth' (even though they were not Christians) 'by means of those miracles which he hath power to do' (Rev. xiii. 13-14). 22. You have now finished the third thing you proposed; which was 'to show the particular characters of the several Fathers who attest' that they were eye-and ear-witnesses of the extraordinary gifts in the primitive Church. You named nine of these--Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, and Lactantius; at the same time observing that many other writers attest the same thing. But let the others stand by. Are these good men and true That is the present question. You say, 'No'; and, to prove that these nine are knaves, bring several charges against two of them.

You observe, first, 'that all the primitive accounts of casting out devils, though given by different Fathers and in different ages, yet exactly agree with regard to all the main circumstances' (page 91). And this you apprehend to be a mark of imposture. 'It looks,' you say, 'as if they copied from each other'! Now, a vulgar reader would have imagined that any single account of this kind must be rendered much more (not less) credible by parallel accounts of what many had severally seen at different times and in different places. 9. You observe, secondly, 'that the persons thus possessed were called ejggastrivmuqoi, " ventriloquists "' (some of them were), 'because they were generally believed to speak out of the belly. Now, there are at this day,' you say, 'those who by art and practice can speak in the same manner. If we suppose, then, that there were artists of this kind among the ancient Christians, how easily, by a correspondence between the ventriloquist and the exorcist, might they delude the most sensible of their audience!' (Page 92.) But what did the ventriloquist do with his epilepsy in the meantime You must not let it go, because many of the circumstances wherein all these accounts agree cannot be tolerably accounted for without it. And yet how will you make these two agree It is a point worthy your serious consideration. But cheats, doubtless, they were, account for it who can. Yet it is strange none of the heathens should find them out, that the imposture should remain quite undiscovered till fourteen hundred years after the impostors were dead! He must have a very large faith who can believe this--who can suppose that not one of all those impostors should, either through inadvertence or in the midst of tortures and death, have once intimated any such thing. 10. You observe, thirdly, 'that many demoniacs could not be cured by all the power of the exorcists, and that the cures which were pretended to be wrought on any were but temporary, were but the cessation of a particular fit or access of the distemper. This,' you say, 'is evident from the testimony of antiquity itself, and may be clearly collected from the method of treating them in the ancient Church.' (Ibid.)

Section IV. I. You told us above that 'the fourth miraculous gift was that of prophesying; the fifth, of seeing visions; the sixth, of discovering the secrets of men' (page 72). But here you jumble them all together, telling us, 'The next miraculous gift is that of prophetic visions and ecstatic trances' (ecstatic ecstasies you might have said) 'and the discovery of men's hearts' (page 96). But why do you thrust all three into one Because, you say, 'these seem to be the fruit of one spirit.' Most certainly they are, whether it was the Spirit of Truth or (as you suppose) the spirit of delusion. 2. However, it is the second of these on which you chiefly dwell (the fifth of those you before enumerated), taking but little notice of the fourth, 'foretelling things to come,' and none at all of the sixth, 'discovering the secrets of men.' The testimonies, therefore, for these remain in full force, as you do not even attempt to invalidate them. With regard to visions or ecstasies, you observe, first, that Tertullian calls ecstasy 'a temporary loss of senses' (page 97). It was so of the outward senses, which were then locked up. You observe, secondly, that 'Suidas' [Suidas, placed about A.D. 975-1025, reputed author of a Greek Lexicon which contains many passages from authors whose works are lost.] (a very primitive writer, who lived between eight and nine hundred years after Tertullian) 'says that of all the kinds of madness that of the poets and prophets was alone to be wished for.' I am at a loss to know what this is brought to prove. The question is, Were there visions in the primitive Church You observe, thirdly, that Philo the Jew says (I literally translate his words, which you do not; for it would not answer your purpose), 'When the divine light shines, the human sets; but when that sets, this rises. This uses to befall the prophets' (page 98). Well, sir, and what is this to the question Why, 'from these testimonies,' you say, 'we may collect that the vision or ecstasy of the primitive Church was of the same kind with those of the Delphic Pythia or the Cumaean Sibyl.'

4. Meantime I cannot but observe an odd circumstance--that you are here in the abundance of your strength confuting a proposition which (whether it be true or false) not one of your antagonists affirms. You are labouring to prove 'there was not in the primitive Church any such miraculous gift as that of expounding the Scriptures.' Pray, sir, who says there was Not Justin Martyr; not one among all those Fathers whom you have quoted as witnesses of the miraculous gifts, from the tenth to the eighteenth page of your Inquiry. If you think they do, I am ready to follow you step by step through every quotation you have made. 5. No, nor is this mentioned in any enumeration of the miraculous gifts which I can find in the Holy Scriptures. Prophecy, indeed, is mentioned more than once by the Apostles as well as the Fathers. But the context shows, where it is promised as a miraculous gift, it means the foretelling things to come. All, therefore, which you say on this head is a mere ignoratio elenchi, 'a mistake of the question to be proved.' Section VI. 1. The eighth and last of the miraculous gifts you enumerated was the gift of tongues. And this, it is sure, was claimed by the primitive Christians; for Irenaeus says expressly, '" We hear many in the Church speaking with all kinds of tongues." And yet,' you say, 'this was granted only on certain special occasions, and then withdrawn again from the Apostles themselves; so that in the ordinary course of their ministry they were generally destitute of it. This,' you say, 'I have shown elsewhere.' (Page 119.) I presume in some treatise which I have not seen. 2. But Irenaeus, who declares that 'many had this gift in his days, yet owns he had it not himself.' This is only a proof that the case was then the same as when St. Paul observed long before, 'Are all workers of miracles have all the gifts of healing do all speak with tongues' (1 Cor. xii. 19-30). No, not even when those gifts were shed abroad in the most abundant manner.

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.

14. Some time after, Mr. Butler removed to Dublin, and began to sing his ballads there. But having little success, he returned to Cork, and in January began to scour the streets again, pursuing all of ‘this way’ with a large mob at his heels, armed with swords, staves, and pistols. Complaint was made of this to William Holmes, Esq., the present Mayor of Cork. But there was no removal of the thing complained of: the riots were not suppressed nay, they not only continued, but increased. 15. From the beginning of February to the end His Majesty's peace was preserved just as before; of which it may be proper to subjoin two or three instances for the information of all thinking men: ‘WILLIAM JEWELL, clothier, of Shundon Church Lane, deposes, ‘That Nicholas Butler with a riotous mob several times assaulted this deponent's house: that particularly on the 23rd of February he came thither with a large mob, armed with clubs and other weapons: that several of the rioters entered the house, and swore the first who resisted they would blow their brains out: that the deponent's wife, endeavoring to stop them, was assaulted and beaten by the said Butler; who then ordered his men to break the deponent's windows, which they did with stones of a considerable weight. 'MARY' PHILIPS, of St. Peter's Church Lane, deposes, ‘That on the 26th of February, about seven in the evening, Nicholas Butler came to her house with a large mob, and asked where her husband was: that as soon as she appeared he first abused her in the grossest terms, and then struck her on the head so that it stunned her; and she verily believes, had not some within thrust to and fastened the door, she should have been murdered on the spot.’ It may suffice for the present to add one instance more: ‘ELIZABETH GARDELET, wife of Joseph Gardelet, corporal in Colonel Pawlet's regiment, Captain Charlton's company, deposes,

MY DEAR BROTHER, -- Your letter is the picture of your heart. It is honest and upright. I believe a journey to London will do you good. If you could borrow an horse to Leeds, you may take my mare from thence, which is in Brother Shent’s keeping. [] As you ride slow, and not many miles a day, I suppose she would bring you hither very well; and when you are here, we can easily find means to supply your other wants. I think it is ill husbandry for you to work with your hands in order to get money, because you may be better employed. But if you will work, come and superintend my printing. I will give you forty pounds for the first year, and it will cost me nothing so to do. Afterwards, if need be, I will increase your salary; and still you may preach as often as you can preach. However, come, whether you print, or preach, or not. Peace be with your spifit. -- I am Your affectionate friend and brother. To Dr. Lavington, Bishop Of Exeter [18] LONDON, December 1751. SIR, -- 1. You have undertaken to prove (as I observed in my former letter, a few sentences of which I beg leave to repeat) that the ‘whole conduct of the Methodists is but a counterpart of the most wild fanaticisms of Popery’ (Preface to the First Part, p. 3). You endeavor to support this charge by quotations from our own writings, compared with quotations from Popish authors. It lies upon me to answer for one. But in order to spare both you and myself, I shall at present consider only your Second Part, and that as briefly as possible. Accordingly I shall not meddle with your other quotations, but (leaving them to whom they may concern) shall examine whether those you have made from my writings prove the charge for which they were made or no. If they do, I submit. But if they do not, if they are ‘the words of truth and soberness,’ it is an objection of no real weight against any sentiment, just in itself, though it should also be found in the writings of Papists -- yea, of Mahometans or Pagans.

Who those other ‘forty were that,’ you say, ‘left them’ I know not. Perhaps you may inform me. Upon the whole, all these quotations prove only this: That about eleven years ago Mr. Cennick, falling into predestination, set the Society in Kingswood a-disputing with each other, and occasioned much confusion for some months. But still you have not gone one step toward proving (which is the one point in question) that the Methodists in general were even then ‘all together by the ears,’ and much less that they have been so ever since and that they are so now. However, you fail not to triumph (like Louis le Grand after his victory at Blenheim): ‘What shall we say now Are these the fruits of Methodism’ No, sir. They are the fruits of opposing it. They are the tares sown among the wheat. You may hear of instances of the same kind both in earlier and later ages. You add: ‘This. is bad enough; but it is not the worst. For consider what becomes of those that leave them’ Why, sir, what if ‘their last end be worse than their first’ Will you charge this upon me By the same rule you must have charged upon the Apostles themselves whatever befell those who, having ‘known the way of righteousness,’ afterwards ‘turned back from the holy commandment once delivered to them.’ 36. You conclude this section: ‘Mr. Wesley will probably say, “Must I be answerable for the Moravians, against whom I have preached and written” True, since he and the Moravians quarreled. But who gives them a box on the ear with the one hand and embraces them with the other Who first brought over this wicked generation Who made a Moravian his spiritual guide who fanaticized his own followers and deprived them of their senses whose Societies (by his own confession) 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 Moravianism so strongly working as in the children of Methodism’

Oh that your latter works may be more and greater than your first! Surely they would, if you could ever be persuaded to study instead of the writings of Tauler and Behmen, those of St. Paul, James, Peter, and John; to spew out of your mouth and out of your heart that vain philosophy, and speak neither higher nor lower things, neither more nor less, than the oracles of God; to renounce, despise, abhor all the high-flown bombast, all the unintelligible jargon of the Mystics, and come back to the plain religion of the Bible, ‘We love Him, because He first loved us.’ To his Wife [2] [LEWISHAM, January 7, 1756.] Wednesday Afternoon. When I saw you, my dear, I did not expect to have so large a demand made so suddenly upon me. I shall be puzzled to answer it without coming to town on purpose, which I am unwilling to do before I have flushed the Address. [The Address to the Clergy is dated Feb. 6 1756. It was written in the first week of January. Wesley probably spent the week at Lewisham, returning to town on Friday, when the Sermon Register shows that he preached at Zoar, the chapel he had taken over in Southwark in November. See Journal, iv. 140, 141, 143; Works, x. 480-500; Green’s Bibliography, No. 175.] I desire you would give John Spencer [Sometimes spelt ‘Spenser’ by Wesley.] (taking his receipt) or Brother Atkinson (unless you choose to pay Mr. Davenport yourself) what note-money remains in your hands. Unless you can help me out for a month or two, I must borrow some more in town. If you can, you will do it with pleasure. My dear, adieu. To Joseph Cownley [3] LONDON, January 10, 1756.

'Tis not unlikely poor Sister Atkinson may talk so. But (unless you heard them with your own ears) do not believe a word of it concerning Jo. Downes or Rob. Windsor. You did well to send G. Whitefield and my brother the Notes. I will trust you; give a copy to any preacher or any other person you judge proper. Pray pay Mr. Wyat and Brother Birket [Birket may be Bowyer, the printer of the Notes.] as soon as you can. The next money should pay our printing debts. If J. Spencer [See letter, May 7.] can spare you for three weeks, go to Bristol by all means. It is an excellent thought. Now, my Molly, overcome evil with good. Indeed, I fear our fleets are bought and sold. Poor King George! where will he find an honest man If I hear of the French landing, or beating our fleet on the 14th of July (the day those sights appeared in the air over Cornwall), I shall endearor to come into England directly; otherwise to go on my way. My brother does not oppose field-preaching in general; but he does not like preaching in Smithfield: though I know not why any should oppose it, unless they are apprehensive of the mob. I am now writing on Original Sin [The Doctrine on Original Sin, a reply to Doctor John Taylor of Norwich, was published in Jan 1757. Wesley decided to write it as early as April 10, 1751. See Journal, iii. 520; Green’s Bibliography, No. 182; and letter of July 3, 1759.]; so the papers came in good time. Jo. Haughton is in Dublin. Michael with his little wit does much good. Watch over Jo. Spencer. It win do him a solid kindness. You may perhaps convince him it is his interest to be honest and to save me all the money he can. Should not one preacher go to Norwich immediately and another to Portsmouth Molly, let us make the best of it. Oh for zeal! I want to be on the full stretch for God! -- My dear Love adieu! Pray put Brother Norton’s [See letter of Sept. 3 to Nicholas Norton, which refers to one from him in July.] into the post. To James Clark [4] CASTLEBAR July 3, 1756.

Nevertheless I cannot but observe a few small mistakes in the eight lines with which you favor me. You say, ‘We suppose the specimen of Mr. Wesley’s Hymns’ (the false spelling is of little consequence) ‘was sent us for this purpose’ - namely to publish. Truly it was not: it never entered my thought; as, I apprehend, may appear from: the whole tenor of the letter wherein those lines were inserted. ‘And if the Moravians please to select a like sample of what has been done by them, they may expect from us the same justice.’ [See letters of Oct. 24, 1755, and Sept. 9, 1756.] Another little mistake: those lines are not selected, but are found in the very first hymn (as I observed in my last) that occurs in the first verses which my brother and I have ever published. ‘We have received a letter complaining of our having jumbled the poetry of the Methodists and Moravians in an indiscriminate censure.’ Not so. The Chief thing complained of was, (1) Your ‘jumbling whole bodies of people together and of condemning them by the lump without any regard either to prudence, justice or humanity.’ (2).Your ‘treating with such contempt those who by no means contemptible writers - Mr. Norris and Mr. Herbert.’ The last and least thing was your ‘coupling the hymns of Moravians and Methodists together.’ It was here I added, ‘As probably you have a never few seen the books which you condemn, I will transcribe a few lines’; but neither did I give the least intimation of ‘appealing hereby to the public in proof of our superiority over the Moravians.’ This is another mistake. At first I was a little inclined to fear a want of integrity had occasioned this misrepresentation; but, upon reflection, I would put a milder construction upon it, and only impute it to want of understanding. Even bodies of men do not see all things; and are then especially liable to err, when they imagine themselves hugely superior to their opponents, and so pronounce ex cathedra.

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.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--Lawrence Coughlan, [Lawrence Coughlan was an Irishman who was afterwards ordained by the Bishop of London and sent to Newfoundland as a missionary. He had done fruitful service in Colchester. He died in 1785. See Journal, iv. 297; Atmore's Memorial, pp.80-3; and letter of March 6, 1763.] who was at first appointed for Whitehaven, is to set out from Colchester on Monday, and to stay at Whitehaven till the Conference in the beginning of August. Till he comes I desire you diligently to inquire whether the bulk of the Society are for or against W. Wilson's preaching. If they are against it, he had better not preach at Whitehaven (but he may preach anywhere else) till I come. If the bulk of them are for it, let him preach at some times: at others Brother Browning [Wilson and Browning were probably laymen beginning to preach.] may read a sermon. But if he does speak, let him take care to conclude the whole service within the hour. Certainly, rather than any flame should have arisen concerning it, Brother Hodgson and the rest ought to have dropped their opposition. What would not one do (except sin) that brotherly love may continue!--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Matthew Lowes, At the Methodist Preaching-house, In Whitehaven. To the Countess of Huntingdon Editor's Introductory Notes: 1759 [5] NORWICH, March 10, 1759.

1760 To George Merryweather BRENTFORD, January 24, 1760. MY DEAR BROTHER,--I received yours with the bill a day or two ago. I wish you would everywhere recommend two books in particular--The Christian Pattern and the Primitive Physick.[Wesley's An Extract of the Christian's Pattern had been published in 1741, and reprinted in 1744, 1746, and 1759. It was an abridgement of his translation of 1735. The eighth edition of his Primitive Physick was issued in 1759.] It is a great pity that any Methodist should be without them. I wonder Brother Mather [Alexander Mather was stationed in the York Circuit, which included Yarm. He became one of the moat powerful preachers and judicious leaders of Methodism, and was President of the Conference in 1792.] does not write to me. He should not forget his friends. I hope the gentleman with whom I breakfasted at Yarm [Probably in July 1759. Mr. Waldy was a landed proprietor in Yarm. See letter of Dec. 28, 1767.] has not forsaken you. Even the rich may enter into the kingdom; for with God all things are possible. See that you stir up the gift of God that is in you. What is our Lord's word to you--'Let the dead bury their dead; but follow thou Me!'--I am Your affectionate brother. To the Editor of 'Lloyd's Evening Post' Editor's Introductory Notes: 1760 [1] WINDMILL HILL., February 18, 1760.

We join in love to you both. My wife gains ground. She is quite peaceable and loving to all. Adieu! To the Editor of the ‘London Chronicle’ WINDMILL HILL, January 7, 1763. SIR,--When I returned to London two or three months ago, I received various accounts of some meetings for prayer which had lately been held by Mr. Bell and a few others. But these accounts were contradictory to each other. Some highly applauded them, others utterly condemned; some affirmed they had done much good, others that they had done much hurt. This convinced me it was requisite to proceed with caution and to do nothing rashly. The first point was to form my own judgment, and that upon the fullest evidence. To this end I first talked with Mr. Bell himself, whom I knew to be an honest, well-meaning man. Next I told him they were at liberty for a few times to meet under my roof. They did so, both in the Society room at the Foundry and in the chapel at West Street. By this means I had an opportunity of hearing them myself, which I did at both places. I was present the next meeting after that, which is mentioned by Mr. Dodd and Mr. Thompson in the Public Ledger. The same things which they blame I blame also; and so I told him the same evening: and I was in hopes they would be done away, which occasioned my waiting till this time. But, having now lost that hope, I have given orders that they shall meet under my roof no more. What farther steps it will be necessary for me to take is a point I have not yet determined. -- I am, sir, Your humble servant. To Thomas Maxfield LONDON, January 26, 1763.

I have waited a fortnight for a passage to Dublin, but am now determined to move toward Scotland first. If you should favour me with a few lines, please to send direct to Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Peace be with you both.--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To the Rev. Mr. Newton, At Oulney, Bucks. To Dr. Erskine [6] EDINBURGH, April 24, 1765.

REVEREND SIR,--1. In the tract which you have just published concerning the people called Methodists you very properly say: 'Our first care should be candidly and fairly to examine their doctrines. For, as to censure them unexamined would be unjust, so to do the same without a fair and impartial examination would be ungenerous.' And again: 'We should in the first place carefully and candidly examine their doctrines.' (Page 68.) This is undoubtedly true. But have you done it Have you ever examined their doctrines yet Have you examined them fairly fairly and candidly candidly and carefully Have you read over so much as the Sermons they have published or the Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion I hope you have not; for I would fain make some little excuse for your uttering so many senseless, shameless falsehoods. I hope you know nothing about the Methodists, no more than I do about the Cham of Tartary; that you are ignorant of the whole affair, and are so bold only because you are blind. Bold enough! Throughout your whole tract you speak satis pro imperio, [Terence's Phormio, 1. iv. 19: 'With authority enough.']--as authoritatively as if you was, not an archbishop only, but Apostolic Vicar also; as if you had the full papal power in your hands, and fire and faggot at your beck! And blind enough; so that you blunder on through thick and thin, bespattering all that come in your way, according to the old, laudable maxim, 'Throw dirt enough, and some will stick.' 2. I hope, I say, that this is the case, and that you do not knowingly assert so many palpable falsehoods. You say: 'If I am mistaken, I shall always be ready and desirous to retract my error' (page 56). A little candour and care might have prevented those mistakes; this is the first thing one would have desired. The next is that they may be removed; that you may see wherein you have been mistaken, and be more wary for the time to come. 3. You undertake to give an account, first, of the rise and principles, then of the practices, of the Methodists.

'I say those who are called Methodists; for let it be well observed that this is not a name which they take to themselves, but one fixed upon them by way of reproach without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford by a student of Christ Church; either in allusion to the ancient sect of physicians (so called from their teaching that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise), or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station.' [Preface to The Character of a Methodist. See Works, viii. 339; and letter of Aug. 24, 1758.] I need only add that this nickname was imposed upon us before 'this manner of preaching' had a being--yea, at a time when I thought it as lawful to cut a throat as to preach out of a church. 'Why, then, will Mr. Wesley so grossly misrepresent his adversaries as to say that, when they speak against Methodism, they speak against the plain, old doctrine of the Church of England' (Tract, p. 169.) This is no misrepresentation. Many of our adversaries all over the kingdom speak against us eo nomine for preaching these doctrines, Justification by Faith in particular. However, 'a fanatic manner of preaching, though it were the doctrine of an apostle, may do more harm to society at least than reviving old heresies or inventing new. It tends to bewilder the imaginations of some, to inflame the passions of others, and to spread disorder and confusion through the whole community.' (Page 169.) I would gladly have the term defined. What is a 'fanatic manner of preaching' Is it field-preaching But this has no such effect, even among the wildest of men. This has not 'bewildered the imagination' even of the Kingswood colliers or 'inflamed their passions.' It has not spread disorder or confusion among them, but just the contrary. From the time it was heard in that chaos, Confusion heard the voice, and wild uproar Stood ruled, . . . and order from disorder sprung. [Paradise Lost, iii. 710-13.]

'"A poor woman" (on Wednesday, September 17, 1740) "said it was four years" (namely, in September 1736, above a year before I left Georgia) "since her son, by hearing a sermon of Mr. Wheatley's, fell into great uneasiness. She thought he was ill, and would have sent for a physician. But he said, No, no; send for Mr. Wheatley. He was sent for, and came; and, after asking a few questions, told her, The boy is mad: get a coach, and carry him to Dr. Monro: use my name; I have sent several such to him." Who this Mr. Wheatley is I know not.' He was lecturer at Spitalfields Church. The event was, after the apothecary had half murdered him, he was discharged, and the lad soon recovered his strength. His senses he never had lost. The supposing this was a blunder from the beginning. 'These are the exploits which M--,--. Wesley calls blessings from God' (page 212). Certainly I do, both repentance and faith. 'And which therefore we may call the good fruits of his ministry.' May God increase them an hundredfold! 'What the Apostle calls "good fruits," namely, doing much good, Mr. Wesley tells us belongs not to true religion.' I never told any man so yet. I tell all men just the contrary. I may then safely leave all mankind to judge whether a single article of the charge against me has yet been made good. So much for the first charge that I am a madman. Now for the second that I am a knave. 5. The proof is short: 'Every enthusiast is a knave: but he is an enthusiast; therefore he is a knave.' I deny both the first and second proposition. Nay, the first is proved thus: 'Enthusiasm must always be accompanied with craft and knavery' (page 213). It is often so, but not always; for there may be honest enthusiasts. Therefore the whole account of that odd combination which follows is ingenious, but proves nothing. (Pages 214-18.)

'The common opinion is that this respects another life, as he enforces his argument by this observation: "Now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: now we know in part; but then shall we know, even as also we are known"' (page 99). 'But the Apostle means charity is to accompany the Church in all its stages, whereas prophecy and all the rest are only bestowed during its infant state to support it against the delusions and powers of darkness' (page 100). 'The Corinthians abounded in these gifts, but were wanting in charity. And this the Apostle here exposes by proving charity to be superior to them all both in its qualities and duration. The first three verses declare that the other gifts are useless without charity. The next four specify the qualities of charity. The remaining six declare its continuance,--"Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away." In the next verse he gives the reason,--"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away": that is, when that Christian life, the lines of which are marked out by the gospel, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity, then the temporary aids, given to subdue prejudice and to support the weak, shall, like scaffolding, be removed. In other words, when that Christian life, wherein the Apostles and first Christians were but infants, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity in their successors, then miracles shall cease.' (Page 102.) But I fear that time is not yet come. I doubt none that are now alive enjoy more of the vigour and maturity of the Christian life than the very first Christians did.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--Two years ago many of our brethren, who considered the number of the people called Methodists and the circumstances which a great part of them were in, believed we should pay off the debt at once. I myself was fully persuaded that between twenty and thirty thousand people were well able to do this; but I was not at all persuaded that they were willing. However, I said little upon that head, being unwilling to weaken the hands of those who were of another mind. It was a good step which was made the first year. Upwards of 5,000 were contributed; by which means the most pressing debts were paid, and many of our brethren were firmly persuaded we should make an end of the whole the second year. I well knew the Methodists could do this; but I saw no reason to think they would. And when the collection was brought in, amounting to above 2,000, it was full as much as I expected. 'But what can be done this third year 5,000 remain unpaid. Are the Methodists able to clear this in one year' Yes; as well as they are able to clear 50. But are they willing That I cannot tell: I am sure a few of them are; even of those who have a large measure of worldly goods; yea, and of those who are lately increased in substance, who have twice, perhaps ten or twenty times, as much as when they saw me first. Are you one of them Whether you are or not, whether your substance is less or more, are you willing to give what assistance you can to do what you can without hurting your family 'But if I do so, I cannot lay out so much in such and such things as I intended.' That is true. But will this hurt you What if, instead of enlarging, you should for the present contract your expenses spend less, that you may be able to give more Would there be any harm in this

If 'Zoroaster and Pythagoras did visit them about the time of Romulus’ (which I do not allow), what then Romulus did not live three thousand years ago; and Zoroaster a late author has sufficiently proved to be no other than Moses himself. The antiquity, therefore, of the Shastah is utterly uncertain, being unsupported by any clear authority. Equally doubtful is the antiquity of that empire. Nay, ' Indostan, by their own account, was peopled as early as most other parts of the known word.' But who can rely on their own accounts This authority is just none at all. But 'the first invaders of it found the inhabitants a potent, civilized, wise, and learned people: Alexander the Great found it so.' No. Arrian and Q. Curtius (the only writers who give us the particulars of that expedition) say quite the contrary. But 'the Gentoo records affirm it, which mention the invasion of a great and mighty robber.' I answer (1) How is it proved this was Alexander the Great There have been more great and mighty robbers than him. But if it was, (2) Of what antiquity was he who died little above two thousand years since (3) Of what authority are the Gentoo records As much as the visions of Mirza. But 'these doctrines were universally professed by the Gentoos, some thousand years before Christ; and the Metempsychosis was held in the most early ages by at least four-fifths of the earth; and the Gentoos were eminently distinguished in the most early times.' Roundly asserted: but that is not enough; a little proof would do well. Here it is at last. 'The Gentoos admit no proselytes to their faith or worship. This proves their great antiquity.' I know not how: the consequence halts sadly. But see another argument. 'This is also proved by the perpetuity of their doctrine through a succession of so many ages.' Right, when that succession is proved. A third proof! ' Pythagoras took his doctrines from them, which the Egyptians took from him.' I am an infidel as to both these facts till I see some proof of them. His true doctrines I believe Pythagoras learned from the Egyptians, and they from the Israelites.

And this strikes at the New Testament also, wherein there are numerous Prophecies. But here, indeed, the mask quite falls off. He laughs at 'the reveries of Paul' (well he might! how unlike those of his apostle, Bramah!); and tells us in plain terms 'that only the words of Christ Himself are the pure, original Scriptures.' Nay, herein he allows too much; for some of His words foretell the actions of free agents. And lest we should urge the death of the Martyrs in favor of Christianity, we are told (which he that can believe may), 'The contempt of death is the character of the Gentoo nation. Every Gentoo meets death with a steady, noble, and philosophical resignation.' And yet 'the Gentoos in general are as degenerate, crafty, and wicked a people as any in the known world.' To complete the contrast between the doctrines of our Bible and his Bible, the Shastah he adds: 'The fundamental points of Religion were impressed on the heart of man at his creation; and he never has and never will be able to efface them. These primitive truths are: (1) the being of a God, the Creator and Preserver of all things; (2) the existence of three prime created beings; (3) the creation of angels; (4) the rebellion of part of them; (5) their fall from heaven; (6) the immortally of the soul; (7) future rewards and punishments; (8) that one angel tempted the other angel, and now tempts men; (9) the necessity of one, or more Mediators, for the expiation of sin; (10) an intermediate state of punishment and purification after death; (11) the existence of a golden age, wherein men used no animal food; and (12) the ministration of angels. These were the primitive truths revealed by God to man, and the only ones necessary to man's salvation!’ Is not this inimitable Hither, ye Eastern Bramins, come! Hither, ye Western Locusts, Monks of Rome! Behold the frontless, all-imposing man, And match him with your Priestcraft if ye can.

To his Brother Charles LONDON, November 3, 1775. DEAR BROTHER,--The Proposals and Preface will be sent on Monday. In the Preface to the new edition of the Address (which I will send with the Proposals) there is, I think, a sufficient answer to Mr. Evan's letter. But Mr. Raikes is right: if it bears no name, it has no title to any answer. No man is a good judge in his own cause. I believe I am tolerably impartial; but you are not (at least, was not some time since) with regard to King Charles I. Come and see what I say. If the worst comes, we can agree to disagree. The History has been some time in the press. The first volume is nearly printed. The paper is good; so is the type; and, what is stranger, the execution too. So much for your first letter. Still I know not whom you mean by Dr. Smyth; unless it be the young clergyman in Ireland, who is a poet, but not of the first magnitude. 'Why were they not taxed for an hundred and fifty years ' How shockingly ignorant of the law are our lawyers! yea, and the whole body of the Lords and Commons into the bargain! to let Lord Chatham, Mr. Burke, &c. &c., so long triumph in this argumentum palmarium! Why, it is a blunder from top to bottom. They have been taxed over and over since the Restoration, by King Charles, King William, Queen Anne, and George II. I can now point out chapter and verse. I think Mr. Madan grows more and more loving. Res ipsa jam reduxit in gratiam. I shall be right glad to see him. I hear nothing from Cornwall; and no news, you know, is good news. Pray tell Brother Southcote I like his treatise well. I am writing something nearly on the subject. I am desired to preach at Bethnal Green Church on Sunday se'nnight, and purpose to print my sermon. You may guess a little of the tenor of it by the text: ' Lo, I have sinned and done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done ' I hope Sally is better. Peace be with you all! Adieu! To James Rouquet [28] LONDON, November 8, 1775.

1779 To Mr. -- [1] LONDON, January 4, 1779. SIR, - In September last a gentleman near Bristol showed me a letter which he had received from the Rev. Mr. Fletcher at Paris. I desired him to give a transcript of one part of it, which he immediately did. It was as follows: Mr. Voltaire sent for Mons. Tonchin, first physician to the Duke of Orleans (one of his converts to infidelity), and said to him, 'Sir, I desire you will save my life. I will give you half my fortune if you will lengthen out my days only six months. If not, I shall go to the devil and carry you with me.' This is the man to whom a crowned head pays such a violent compliment! Nay, this is the man whose works are now publishing by a divine of our own Church; yea, a chaplain to His Majesty! Pity but the King should know it! I set my name at length on purpose; and if the publisher of that poor wretch's works writes a panegyric upon him or them, I shall think it my duty to go a little farther and show the real value of those writings. - I am, sir, Your humble servant. To the Society at Keighley [2] LONDON, January 11, 1779. I have a few questions which I desire may be proposed to the Society at Keighley. Who was the occasion of the Methodist preachers first setting foot in Leeds William Shent. Who received John Nelson into his house at his first coming thither William Shent. Who was it that invited me and received me when I came William Shent. Who was it that stood by me while I preached in the street with stones flying on every side Williaam Shent. Who was it that bore the storm of persecution for the whole town and stemmed it at the peril of his life William Shent. Whose word did God bless for many years in an eminent manner William Shent's. By whom were many children now in paradise begotten in the Lord and many now alive William Shent. Who is he that is ready now to be broken up and turned into the street William Shent.

But I am still more glad that you have some thoughts of answering that pernicious book of poor Mr. Madan. Analyse it first with the postscript; then overturn it thoroughly from the beginning to the end. You may steer between the extremes of too much roughness and too much smoothness. And see that you are plain enough for women and pretty gentlemen. I allow you an hundred pages. -- I am, dear Joseph, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Benson [10] WARRINGTON, May 21, 1781. MY DEAR SISTER,--As you are now one of my family, and indeed by a nearer tie than when you were only a member of the Society, I rejoice in doing you any service or giving you any satisfaction that I can. I therefore take the first opportunity of acquainting you that I will appoint Mr. Benson for Leeds the ensuing year. [That means for a second year.] I trust he will be more useful there than ever, and I doubt not but you will strengthen his hands in God. If you desire anything of me that is in my power, you may be assured it will not be refused by, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. PS. -- I am now going to Whitehaven. To Mary Bishop WARRINGTON, May 21, 1781. MY DEAR SISTER, -- I have wrote to Mr. Pawson, [The Assistant at Bristol.] and am in hopes that Keynsham will be neglected no more. I did not expect you would meet with any trial of this kind; but it is well to be prepared for all. When Molly Maddern taught a few children at Kingswood, [John Maddern was English master at Kingswood School in 1760.] I saw a truly Christian school. To make the children Christians was her first care; afterwards they were taught what women need to learn. I saw another Christian school at Leytonstone, under the care of Miss Bosanquet. I do not remember I discovered any defect either in the former or the latter; I observed nothing done which I wished to be omitted, nothing omitted which I wished to have done.

In taking away your expectation of worldly happiness God has been exceeding gracious to you. It is good for you that you have seen affliction and been disappointed of your hope. The removal of Mr. Waller into a better world may be another blessing to you: as is everything which disengages us from transient things and teaches us to five in eternity. If we were first to resign our will to God in order to be in favor with Him, our case would be desperate: nay, but you shall first be conscious of His favor, and then be resigned to Him. First, believe! Christ died for you. He bore your sins. He loves you freely. Come, take Him! His favor! His peace! His love! But without money, without price! Leave all you have and are behind I Then all things are ready. Why not now -- I am, my dear Sally, Yours in tender affection. To Miss Wesley, In Chesterfield Street, Marybone, London. To Ann Loxdale DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN, June 10, 1781. MY DEAR MISS LOXDALE, -- I had much hope that at my last return to Shrewsbury [Where Miss Loxdale’s father, Joseph Loxdale, lived.0] I should have seen you. But we are in the hands of Him who knows what is best for every one that trusts in Him; and if our meeting be hindered for a season, when those hindrances are removed it will be the more blessed to us. That man of God, Gregory Lopez, observes of himself that the large manifestations of God with which he was favored at first overpowered his body and nearly suspended his under-standing--nay, took away the use of his senses; but that after a time they neither interrupted the one nor the other, nor disturbed the operation of any of his faculties. I think, if those manifestations which you had had been continued, the case would have been the same with you; they would no longer have overwhelmed you as they did at first, but have flowed with a calm, even stream.

NEAR M.ANCHESTER, April 3, 1782. DEAR TOMMY, -- Be of good courage. You have had a token for good at Lynn, where it was supposed the case was desperate; and I do not doubt but you will see good days in and about Fakenham, though the people yet do not know much of discipline--and no wonder, if they have never yet had the Rules of our Societies. First explain them at large, and afterwards enforce them, very mildly and very steadily. Molly Franklin and Sister Proudfoot are good women. Deal very gently with them, and lovingly labor to convince those whom it concerns of the evil of buying or selling on the Lord’s Day. -- I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To John Atlay [13] STOCKPORT, April 4, 1782. MY DEAR BROTHER, -- I think two thousand more of the Hymns for the Nation may be printed as soon as is convenient, leaving out the 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 12th, 16th, 21st, and 22nd. When these seven are omitted (which are not of so general use), the remainder will be large enough for a threepenny book. Five hundred of these I would have sent to Sheffield (over and above the five hundred sent to Leeds), and five hundred to Newcastle-upon-Tyne. I hope they will be at Sheffield before the 9th of May. I am poorly provided with fellow travelers. To save John Broadbent’s life I take him with me for a month while George Whitfield supplies his place. But he and T. Simpson together are but half a man. So that it is well I have learnt to serve myself. Do not boast of your riches to T. Olivers. It is enough to make him stark mad. [See letter of April 13.] -- I am Your affectionate brother. [On the back of the letter Wesley adds:] If you print 2,000 Estimates of the Manners of the Times for ed. and send me 500 of them to Leeds as soon as you can, and 500 to Sheffield with the Hymns, I can sell them. [Atlay endorses the latter, ‘Mr. Wesley, April 8, 1782.’] To Francis Wrigley [14] MANCHESTER, April 4, 1782. 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.

DEAR SISTER, -- As the Conference ended yesterday afternoon, my hurry is now a little abated. I cannot blame you for having thoughts of removing out of that large house. If you could find a lodging to your mind, it would be preferable on many accounts, and perhaps you might live as much without care as you did in the great mansion at Garth. I was yesterday inquiring of Dr. Whitehead whether Harrogate would not be better for Sally than the sea water. [Sally went to Ramsgate. See letter of Sept. 1.] He seems to think it would; and I should not think much of giving her ten or twenty pounds to make a trial. But I wish she could see him first, which she might do any day between seven and eight in the morning. Some of the first moneys I receive I shall set apart for you [See letter of Dec. 21.]; and in everything that is in my power you may depend upon the willing assistance of, dear Sally, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mrs. Wesley, In Chesterfield Street, Marybone. To Walter Churchey [9] LONDON, August 8, 1788.

Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. John Taylor, At Gomersal, near Leeds. To Rachel Jones BRISTOL, March 4, 1789. MY DEAR SISTER, -- As you desired it, I cannot but send you a line, although I have not a moment to spare. You have exceeding reason to praise God, who has dealt so mercifully with you. You have reason to praise Him likewise for hearing your prayer and hearing for those of your household. Now be a pattern for all that are around about you. Be a pattern of meekness and lowliness in particular. Be the least of all and the servant of all. Be a companion of them, and them only, that worship in spirit and in truth. Read again and again the 13th chapter of St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. Then shall your light shine more and more unto the perfect day. -- I am, dear sister, Your affectionate brother. To Miss Rachel Jones, Of Barton-le-Willows, Near York. To Adam Clarke, [14] BRISTOL, March 9, 1789. DEAR ADAM, -- If I should live to see you another Conference, I should be glad to have Sister Clarke and you here rather than at most other places, because I spend more time here myself than at any other place except London. I am glad to hear that God has raised up so able a preacher from the islands [On July 15 Adam Clarke says: John De Queteville, ' who has now all the meekness, gentleness and simplicity of the gospel, united with that burning zeal before which mountains shrink into molehills, and aided by that faith to which all things are possible.'' See Dunn's Life, 70.]; but certainly you should spare no pains in teaching him to read and write English by reading with and explaining to him first the Christian [Library] and then the Instructions to Children. And I do not doubt but if he learned with a single eye, he would be largely strengthened by the blessed Spirit. I suppose the cyder would come to London almost as soon as I left it, which was on the first Sunday of the year. It would be a reason for being very wary in choosing names for our children if that old remark were true: That our first tempers from example flow And borrow that example from our names.

11. This is my answer to them that trouble me and will not let my gray hairs go down to the grave in peace. I am not a man of duplicity: I am not an old hypocrite, a double-tongued knave. More than forty years I have frequented Ireland. I have wished to do some good there. I now tell a plain tale that 'the good which is in me may not be evil spoken of.' I have no temporal end to serve. I seek not the honor that cometh of men. It is not for pleasure that at this time of life I travel three or four thousand miles a year. It is not for gain. No foot of land do I possess, No cottage in this wilderness; A poor wayfaring man, I lodge awhile in tents below, Or gladly wander to and fro, Till I my Canaan gain. PS.--At the desire of a friend I add a few words in answer to one or two other objections. First. When I said, 'I believe I am a scriptural bishop,' I spoke on Lord King's supposition that bishops and presbyters are essentially one order. Secondly. I did desire Mr. Myles to assist me in delivering the cup. Now, be this right or wrong, how does it prove the point now in question -- that I leave the Church I ask (2) What law of the Church forbids this and (3) What law of the Primitive Church Did not the priest in the Primitive Church send both the bread and wine to the sick by whom he pleased, though not ordained at all Thirdly. The Observer affirms, 'To say you will not leave the Church, meaning thereby all the true believers in England, is trifling.' Certainly; but I do not mean so when I say, 'I will not leave the Church.' I mean, unless I see more reason for it than I ever yet saw, I will not leave the Church of England as by law established while the breath of God is in my nostrils. To Mrs. Crosby [25] COLERAINE, June 4, 1789.

MY DEAR SALLY, -- Will it not be best for you to spend a little time at Margate [She went there. See next letter.] as soon as possible I hope to be in town on Saturday, October 3. And before the end of October you should be at the City Road, if not [already gone] to Twickenham. I believe sea-bathing will brace your nerves; but I pray [you not to drink] sea-water. [See letter of Sept. 8, 1788.] If you look into the Primitive Physick, you will see what] is the diet-drink [In the Primitive Physick under the head of 'Scorbutick Sores' is given a drink to be taken 'fasting and at four in the afternoon.' This is probably the 'diet-drink' to which he refers. It is called 'a diet-drink' in the later editions. See W.H.S. iv. 72.] therein prescribed for scorbutic sores; though your disorder is not come so far, I expect it would thoroughly purify your blood in a month's time. I shall be right glad to see Mr. Galloway. [For Joseph Galloway, see letter of Aug. 18.] A few such acquaintance as him and Miss Galloway I wish you to have. I wish you was likewise acquainted with that lovely woman Mrs. Wolff [Mrs. Wolff, of Balham. From their house Wesley went home to City Road to die.]; 'the perfect pattern of true womanhood.' Peace be with all your spirits ! -- My dear Sally, adieu! To Miss Wesley, In Chesterfield Street, Marybone, London. To his Niece Sarah Wesley LONDON, October 5, 1790.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 CONTENTS. vii XXX. Page. Thoughts concerning Gospel Ministers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 Thoughts upon Necessity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• * * * * * * 457 A Thought on Necessity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 An Address to the Clergy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480 A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Toogood, of Exeter: Occasioned by his “Dissent from the Church of England fully Justified.” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501 Serious Thoughts concerning Godfathers and Godmothers. 506 Thoughts on the Consecration of Churches and Burial Grounds . . . . . . . . . . .• • e • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * , 509 To January 4, 1748-9. 1. IN your late “Inquiry,” you endeavour to prove, First, that there were no miracles wrought in the primitive Church: Secondly, that all the primitive Fathers were fools or knaves, and most of them both one and the other. And it is easy to observe, the whole tenor of your argument tends to prove, Thirdly, that no miracles were wrought by Christ or his Apostles; and, Fourthly, that these too were fools or knaves, or both. 2. I am not agreed with you on any of these heads. My reasons I shall lay before you, in as free a manner, though not in so smooth or laboured language, as you have laid yours before the world. 3. But I have neither inclination nor leisure to follow you, step by step, through three hundred and seventy-three quarto pages. I shall therefore set aside all I find in your work which does not touch the merits of the cause; and likewise contract the question itself to the three first centuries.

In treating of which, you strongly intimate, -First, that such gifts did never subsist; and, Secondly, that the Apostles were equally wise and good with the “wonder workers” (your favourite term) that followed them. When therefore you add, “My opinion is this, that, after our Lord’s ascension, the extraordinary gifts he had promised were poured out on the Apostles, and the other primary instruments of planting the gospel, in order to enable them to overrule the inveterate prejudices both of the Jews and Gentiles, and to bear up against the discouraging shocks of popular rage and persecution;” (page 28;) I look upon all this to be mere grimace. You believe not one word of what you say. You cannot possibly, if you believe what you said before. For who can believe both the sides of a contradiction? 10. However, I will suppose you do believe it, and will argue with you from your own words. But first let us have a few more of them: “In process of time, as miraculous powers began to be less and less wanted, so they began gradually to decline, till they were finally withdrawn.” (Page 29.) “And this may probably be thought to have happened while some of the Apostles were still living.” These were given, you say, to the first planters of the * Non omnibus omnia-ita tamen cuilibet credenti tune data sit admirabilis Jacultas, quae se, non semper Quidem, sed dalá occasione explicaret.-GROTI Us in Marcum xvi. 17. 6 LETTER. To gospel, “in order to enable them to overrule the inveterate prejudices both of Jews and Gentiles, and to bear up against the shocks of persecution.” Thus far we are agreed. They were given for these ends. But if you allow this, you cannot suppose, consistently with yourself, that they were withdrawn till these ends were fully answered. So long, therefore, as those prejudices subsisted, and Christians were exposed to the shocks of persecution, you cannot deny but there was the same occasion for those powers to be continued, as there was for their being given at first. And this, you say, is “a postulatum which all people will grant, that they continued as long as they were necessary to the Church.” (Page 11.) 11. Now, did those prejudices cease, or was persecution at an end, while some of the Apostles were still living? You have yourself abundantly shown they did not.

This has a pleasing sound, and is extremely well imagined to prejudice a Protestant reader in your favour. You then slide with great art into your subject: “This claim of a miraculous power, now peculiar to the Church of Rome, was asserted in all Christian countries till the Reformation.” (Ibid.) But then “the cheat was detected:” (Page 45:) Nay, and men began to “suspect that the Church had long been governed by the same arts.” “For, it was easy to trace them up to the primitive Church, though not to fix the time when the cheat began; to show how long after the days of the Apostles the miraculous gifts continued in the Church.” (Page 46.) However, it is commonly believed, that they continued till Christianity was the established religion. Some indeed extend them to the fourth and fifth centuries; (page 50;) but these, you say, betray the Protestant cause. (Page 51.) “For in the third, fourth, and fifth, the chief corruptions of Popery were introduced, or at least the seeds of them sown. By these I mean, monkery; the worship of relics; invocation of saints; prayers for the dead; the superstitious use of images, of the sacraments, of the sign of the cross, and of the consecrated oil.” (Page 52.) 3. I have nothing to do with the fourth or fifth century. But to what you allege in support of this charge, so far as it relates to the third century, I have a few things to reply. And, First, you quote not one line from any Father in the third century, in favour of monkery, the worship of relics, the invocation of saints, or the superstitious use either of images or consecrated oil. How is this, Sir? You brought eight accusations at once against the Fathers of the third, as well as the following centuries: And as to five of the eight, when we call for the proof, you have not one word to say ! As to the sixth, you say, “In the sacrament of the Eucharist, several abuses were introduced.” (Page 57.) You instance, first, in mixing the wine with water. But how does it appear that this was any abuse at all?

(3.) You cannot but know it has always been the judgment of learned men, (which you are at liberty to refute if you are able,) that the far greater part of those spurious books have been forged by heretics; and that many more were compiled by weak, well-meaning men, from what had been orally delivered down from the Apostles. But, (4.) There have been in the Church from the beginning men who had only the name of Christians. And these, doubtless, were capable of pious frauds, so called. But this ought not to be charged upon the whole body. Add to this, (5.) What is observed by Mr. Daillé: “I impute a great part of this mischief to those men who, before the invention of printing, were the transcribers and copiers out of manuscripts. We may well presume that these men took the same liberty in forging as St. Jerome complains they did in corrupting books; especially since this course was beneficial to them, which the other was not.” Much more to the same effect we have in his treatise “Of the Right Use of the Fathers,” Part I., chap. iii. N.B. These transcribers were not all Christians; no, not in name; perhaps few, if any of them, in the first century. (6.) By what evidences do you prove, that these spurious books “are frequently cited by the most eminent Fathers, as not only genuine, but of equal authority with the Scriptures themselves?” or, Lastly, that they either forged these books themselves, or made use of what they knew to be forged ? These things also you are not to take for granted, but to prove, before your argument can be of force. 12. We are come at last to your general conclusion: “There is no sufficient reason to believe, that any miraculous powers subsisted in any age of the Church after the times of the Apostles.” (Page 91.) But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: “As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians” (prove that !) “to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty, when the Apostles were dead, to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them.

We are come at last to your general conclusion: “There is no sufficient reason to believe, that any miraculous powers subsisted in any age of the Church after the times of the Apostles.” (Page 91.) But pretended miracles, you say, arose thus: “As the high authority of the apostolic writings excited some of the most learned Christians” (prove that !) “to forge books under their names; so the great fame of the apostolic miracles would naturally excite some of the most crafty, when the Apostles were dead, to attempt some juggling tricks in imitation of them. And when these artful pretenders had maintained their ground through the first three centuries, the leading Clergy of the fourth understood their interest too well to part with the old plea of miraculous gifts.” (Page 92.) Round assertions indeed! But surely, Sir, you do not think that reasonable men will take these for proofs You are here advancing a charge of the blackest nature. But where are your vouchers? Where are the witnesses to support it? Hitherto you have not been able to produce one, through a course of three hundred years; unless you bring in those Heathen, of whose senseless, shameless prejudices you have yourself given so clear an account. But you designed to produce your witnesses in the “Free Inquiry,” a year or two after the “Introductory Discourse” was published. So you condemn them first, and try them afterwards: You will pass sentence now, and hear the evidence by and by A genuine specimen of that “impartial regard to truth,” which you profess upon all occasions. 13. Another instance of this is in your marginal note: “The primitive Christians were perpetually reproached for their gross credulity.” They were; but by whom? Why, by Jews and Heathens. Accordingly, the two witnesses you produce here are Celsus the Jew, and Julian the apostate. But lest this should not suffice, you make them confess the charge: “The Fathers,” your words are, “defend them selves by saying, that they did no more than the philosophers had always done: That Pythagoras's precepts were incul cated with an ipse divit, and they found the same method useful with the vulgar.” (Page 93.) And is this their whole defence? Do the very men to whom you refer, Origen and Arnobius, in the very tracts to which you refer, give no other answer than this argument ad hominem?

An esteem for them has carried many into dangerous errors; the neglect of them can have no ill consequences.” (Page 97.) I answer, (1.) The Scriptures are a complete rule of faith and practice; and they are clear in all necessary points. And yet their clearness does not prove, that they need not be explained; nor their completeness, that they need not be enforced. (2.) The esteeming the writings of the first three centuries, not equally with, but next to, the Scriptures, never carried any man yet into dangerous errors, nor probably ever will. But it has brought many out of dangerous errors, and particularly out of the errors of Popery. (3.) The neglect,. in your sense, of the primitive Fathers, that is, the thinking they were all fools and knaves, has this natural consequence, (which I grant is no ill one, according to your principles,) to make all who are not real Christians think Jesus of Nazareth and his Apostles just as honest and wise as them. 16. You afterwards endeavour to show how the Church of England came to have such an esteem for the ancient Fathers. There are several particulars in this account which are liable to exception. But I let them pass, as they have little connexion with the point in question. 17. You conclude your “Introductory Discourse” thus: “The design of the present treatise is to fix the religion of the Protestants on its proper basis, that is, on the sacred Scriptures.” (Page 111.) Here again you speak in your personated character; as also when you “freely own the primitive writers to be of use in attesting and transmitting to us the genuine books of the holy Scriptures !” (Page 112.) Books, for the full attestation as well as safe transmission whereof, you have doubtless the deepest concern 18. I cannot dismiss this Discourse without observing, that the uncommon artfulness and disingenuity which glare through the whole, must needs give disgust to every honest and upright heart; nor is it any credit at all to the cause you have espoused.

Hermas. Now, if those gifts had subsisted after the days of the Apostles, these must have possessed a large share of them. But if any of them had, he would have mentioned it in his writings, which not one of them has done.” (Page 3.) The argument, fully proposed, runs thus: If any such gifts had subsisted in them, or in their days, they must have mentioned them in their circular Epistles to the Churches; (for so their predecessors, the Apostles, did;) but they did not mention any such gifts therein. Sir, your consequence is not of any force; as will easily appear by a parallel argument:-- If such gifts had subsisted in St. Peter, or in his days, he must have mentioned them in his circular Epistles to the Churches. But he does not mention any such gifts therein. Therefore, they did not subsist in him, or in his days. Your argument therefore proves too much : Nor can it conclude against an apostolic Father, without concluding against the Apostle too. If therefore the apostolic Fathers had not mentioned any miraculous gifts in their circular Epistles to the Churches, you could not have inferred that they possessed none; since neither does he mention them in his circular Epistles, whom you allow to have possessed them. Of all the Apostles, you can produce but one, St. Paul, who makes mention of these gifts: And that not in his circular Epis tles to the Churches; for I know not that he wrote any such. 2. All this time I have been arguing on your own suppo sitions, that these five apostolic Fathers all wrote circular Epistles to the Churches, and yet never mention these gifts therein. But neither of these suppositions is true. For, (1.) Hermas wrote no Epistle at all. (2.) Although the rest wrote Epistles to particular Churches, (Clemens to the Corinthians, Ignatius to the Romans, &c.,) yet not one of them wrote any circular Epistle to the Churches, like those of St. James and St. Peter; unless we allow that to be a genuine Epistle, which bears the name of St. Barnabas. (3.) You own they all “speak of spiritual gifts, as abounding among the Christians of that age;” but assert, “These cannot mean anything more 18 LETTER. To than faith, hope, and charity.” (Ibid.) You assert: But the proof, Sir! I want the proof.

4. Yet you courteously add: “If from the passages referred to above, or any other, it should appear probable to any, that they were favoured on some occasions with some extraordinary illuminations, visions, or divine impressions, I shall not dispute that point; but remind them only, that these gifts were granted for their particular comfort; and do not therefore, in any manner, affect or relate to the question now before us.” (Page 10.) I ask pardon, Sir. These do so deeply affect, so nearly relate to, the question now before us, even as stated by your self, (Preface, page 28,) that in allowing these you give up the substance of the question. You yourself have declared, that one great end of the extraordinary gifts conferred on the Apostles was, “to enable them to bear up against the shocks of popular rage and persecution.” Now were not “extra ordinary illuminations, visions, and impressions,” if given at all, given for this very end; “for their particular comfort,” as you now word it? Therefore, in allowing these to the apostolic Fathers, you allow extraordinary gifts which had been formerly granted to the Apostles, to have subsisted in the church after the days of the Apostles, and for the same end as they did before. 5. Therefore the apostolic writers have not left us in the dark, with regard to our present argument; and consequently your triumph comes too soon: “Here then we have an interval of half a century, in which we have the strongest reason to pre sume that the extraordinary gifts of the apostolic age were withdrawn.” (Page 9.) No; not if all the apostolic Fathers speak of spiritual gifts as abounding among the Christians of that age; not if “extraordinary illuminations, visions, and divine impressions still subsisted among them.” For as to your now putting in, “as exerted openly in the Church for the con viction of unbelievers,” I must desire you to put it out again; it comes a great deal too late. The question between you and me was stated without it, above a hundred pages back. Although, if it be admitted, it will do you no service; seeing your proposition is overthrown, if there were “miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles,” whether they were “openly exerted for the conviction of unbelievers” or not. 6.

6. I was a little surprised that you should take your leave of the apostolic Fathers so soon. But, upon looking forward, my surprise was at an end: I found you was not guilty of any design to spare them; but only delayed your remarks till the reader should be prepared for what might have shocked him, had it stood in its proper place. I do not find, indeed, that you make any objection to any part of the Epistles of Ignatius; no, nor of the Catholic Epistle, as it is called, which is inscribed with the name of Barnabas. This clearly convinces me, you have not read it; I am apt to think, not one page of it; seeing, if you had, you would never 20 LETTER. To have let slip such an opportunity of exposing one that was called an apostolic Father. 7. But it would have been strange, if you had not somewhere brought in the famous phoenix of Clemens Romanus. And yet you are very merciful upon that head, barely remarking con cerning it, that “he alleged the ridiculous story of the phoenix, as atype and proof of the resurrection. Whether all the heathen writers treat it as nothing else but a mere fable, I know not.” (Page 55.) But that it is so, is certain; and consequently the argument drawn from it is weak and inconclusive. Yet it will not hence follow, either that Clemens was a wicked man, or that he had none of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. 8. There is no real blemish to be found in the whole character of St. Polycarp. But there is one circumstance left upon record concerning him which has the appearance of weakness. And with this you do not fail to acquaint your reader at a convenient season; namely, “that in the most ancient dispute concerning the time of holding Easter, St. Polycarp and Anicetus severally alleged apostolic tradition for their different practice.” (Page 60.) And it is not improbable,. that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the Apostles varied themselves; some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not.

I do not doubt but the testimonies of these nine witnesses, added to the evidence of the apostolic Fathers, will satisfy every impartial man with regard to the point in question. Yet I see no cause, if there are nine witnesses more, to give up their evidence; seeing you may possibly raise objections against these which the others are unconcerned in. If then you should invalidate what I have to reply in oehalf of the witnesses now produced, you will have done but half your work. I shall afterwards require a fair hearing for the others also. 16. You close this head with remarking, (1) “That the silence of all the apostolic writers on the subject of these gifts, must dispose us to conclude they were then withdrawn.” (Ibid.) O Sir, mention this no more. I intreat you, never name their silence again. They speak loud enough to shame you as long as you live. You cannot therefore talk with any grace of “the pretended revival of them, after a cessation of forty or fifty years;” or draw conclusions from that which never was. Your second remark is perfectly new : I dare say, none ever observed before yourself, that this particular circumstance of the primitive Christians “carried with it an air of impos ture,” namely, their “challenging all the world to come and see the miracles which they wrought !” (Page 21.) To complete the argument, you should have added, And their staking their lives upon the performance of them. 17. I doubt you have not gone one step forward yet. You have indeed advanced many bold assertions; but you have not fairly proved one single conclusion with regard to the point in hand. But a natural effect of your lively imagination is, that from this time you argue more and more weakly; inasmuch as, the farther you go, the more things you imagine (and only imagine) yourself to have proved. Consequently, as you gather up more mistakes every step you take, every page is more precarious than the former. II. 1.

1. The Second thing you proposed was, “to throw together all which those Fathers have delivered concerning the persons said to have been endued with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.” (Ibid.) “Now, whenever we think or speak with reverence,” say you, “of those primitive times, it is always with regard to these very Fathers whose testimonies I have been collecting. And they were indeed the chief persons and champions of the Christian cause, the Pastors, Bishops, and Martyrs of the primitive Church; namely, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Theo philus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius.” Sir, you stumble at the threshold. A common dictionary may inform you that these were not all either Pastors, Bishops, or Martyrs. 2. You go on as you set out: “Yet none of these have any where affirmed, that they themselves were endued with any power of working miracles.” (Page 22.) You should say, With any of those extraordinary gifts promised by our Lord, and conferred on his Apostles. No! Have “none of these anywhere affirmed, that they themselves were endued” with any extraordinary.gifts? What think you of the very first of them, Justin Martyr Either you are quite mistaken in the account you give of him elsewhere, (pages 27, 30,) or he affirmed this of himself over and over. And as to Cyprian, you will by and by spend several pages together (page 101, &c.) on the extraordinary gifts he affirmed himself to be endued with. ThE REV. DR. MIDDLETON, 25 But suppose they had not anywhere affirmed this of them selves, what would you infer therefrom ? that they were not endued with any extraordinary gifts? Then, by the very same method of arguing, you might prove that neither St. Peter, nor James, nor John, were endued with any such. For neither do they anywhere affirm this of themselves in any of the writings which they have left behind them. 3. Your argument concerning the apostolic Fathers is just as conclusive as this. For if you say, “The writers following the apostolic Fathers do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore they had none;” by a parity of reason you must say, “The writers following the Apostles do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore the Apostles had none.” 4.

And this is no credit to you, if it does not. To that of Lucian and Celsus, you add the evidence of Caecilius too, who calls, say you, these workers of miracles, “a lurking nation, shunning the light.” Then they were strangely altered all on a sudden; for you told us that, just before, they were proving themselves cheats by a widely different method,--by “calling out both upon Magistrates and people, and challenging all the world to come and see what they did l’’ (Page 20.) I was not aware that you had begun “to throw together all which the Fathers have delivered, concerning the persons said to have been endued with those extraordinary gifts.” And it seems you have made an end of it! And accordingly you proceed to sum up the evidence; to “observe, upon the whole, from these characters of the primitive wonder-workers, as given both by friends and enemies, we may fairly conclude that the gifts of those ages were generally engrossed by private Chris tians, who travelled about from city to city to assist the ordinary preachers, in the conversion of Pagans, by the extraordinary miracles they pretended to perform.” (Page 24.) Characters given both by friends and enemies / Pray, Sir, what friends have you cited for this character? or what ene mies, except only Celsus the Jew? (And you are a miserable interpreter for him.) So, from the single testimony of such a witness, you lay it down as an oracular truth, that all the miracle-workers of the first three ages were “mere vagabonds and common cheats,” rambling about from city to city, to assist in converting Heathens, by tricks and imposture! And this you ingeniously call, “throwing together all which the Fathers have delivered concerning them !” 9. But, to complete all, “Here again,” you say, “we see a dispensation of things ascribed to God, quite different from that which we meet with in the New Testament.” (Page 24.) We see a dispensation / Where? Not in the primitive Church; not in the writings of one single Christian; not of one Heathen; and only of one Jew; for poor Celsus had not a second; though he multiplies, under your forming hand, into ThE REV. D.R. MIDDLETON. 27 a cloud of witnesses. He alone ascribes this to the ancient Christians, which you in their name ascribe to God.

Middleton,) “and may with equal reason be charged on Irenaeus. For what other account can be given of his frequent appeals to apostolical tradition, for the support of so many incredible doctrines?” (Page 111.) Why, this very natural one, that in non-essential points he too easily followed the authority of Papias, a weak man, who on slight grounds believed many trifling things to have been said or done by the Apostles. And allowing all this, yet it does not give us so “lamentable an idea of those primitive ages and primitive champions of the Christian cause.” (Page 59.) The same account may be given of his mistake concerning the age of our Lord. (Ibid.) There is therefore, as yet, neither reason nor any plausible pretence for laying forgery to his charge. And consequently, thus far his credit as a witness stands clear and unimpeached. But you say, Secondly, “He was a zealous asserter of tradi tion.” (Page 61.) He might be so, and yet be an honest man; and that, whether he was mistaken or no, in supposing Papias to have been a disciple of John the Apostle. (Page 64.) You say, Thirdly, He supposed “that the disciples of Simon Magus, as well as Carpocrates, used magical arts;” (page 68;) that “the dead were frequently raised in his time;” (page 72;) that “the Jews, by the name of God, cast out devils;” (page 85;) and that “many had even then the gift of tongues, although he had it not himself.” This is the whole of your charge against St. Irenaeus, when summed up and laid toge ther. And now, let any reasonable person judge, whether all this gives us the least cause to question, either his having sense enough to discern a plain matter of fact, or honesty 36 LETTER. To enough to relate it. Here then is one more credible witness of miraculous gifts after the days of the Apostles. 18. What you advance concerning the history of tradition, I am neither concerned to defend nor to confute.

7. But “it is very hard to believe what Origen declares, that the devils used to possess and destroy cattle.” You might have said, what Matthew and Mark declare concerning the herd of swine; and yet we shall find you, by and by, believing far harder things than this. Before you subjoined the silly story of Hilarion and his camel, you should, in candour, have informed your reader, that it is disputed, whether the life of Hilarion was wrote by St. Jerome or no. But, be it as it may, I have no concern for either: For they did not live within the three first ages. 8. I know not what you have proved hitherto, though you have affirmed many things, and intimated more. But now we come to the strength of the cause, contained in your five observations. You observe, First, “that all the primitive accounts of casting out devils, though given by different Fathers, and in different ages, yet exactly agree with regard to all the main circumstances.” (Page 91.) And this you apprehend to be a mark of imposture. “It looks,” you say, “as if they copied from each other !” Now, a vulgar reader would have imagined that any single account of this kind must be rendered much more (not less) credible, by parallel accounts of what many had severally seen, at different times, and in different places. 9. You observe, Secondly, “that the persons thus possessed were called sy/aspiu.uffol, ‘ventriloquists;’” (some of them were;) “because they were generally believed to speak out of the belly. Now, there are, at this day,” you say, “those who, by art and practice, can speak in the same manner. If we suppose, then, that there were artists of this kind among the ancient Christians, how easily, by a corre spondence between the ventriloquist and the exorcist, might they delude the most sensible of their audience 1” (Page 92.) But what did the ventriloquist do with his epilepsy in the mean time? You must not let it go, because many of the circumstances wherein all these accounts agree cannot be tolerably accounted for without it. And yet, how will you make these two agree? It is a point worthy your serious consideration. But cheats, doubtless, they were, account for it who can.

You told us above, that “the fourth miraculous gift was that of prophesying; the fifth, of seeing visions; the sixth, of discovering the secrets of men.” (Page 72.) But here you jumble them all together, telling us, “The next miraculous gift is that of prophetic visions, and ecstatic trances,” (ecstatic ecstasies, you might have said,) “and the discovery of men's hearts.” (Page 96.) But why do you thrust all three into one? Because, you say, “these seem to be the fruit of one spirit.” Most certainly they are, whether it was the Spirit of Truth, or (as you suppose) the spirit of delusion. 2. However, it is the second of these on which you chiefly dwell, (the fifth of those you before enumerated,) taking but little notice of the fourth, “foretelling things to come,” and THE REV. D.R. MiDDLETON. 47 none at all of the sixth, “discovering the secrets of men.” The testimonies, therefore, for these remain in full force, as you do not even attempt to invalidate them. With regard to visions or ecstasies, you observe, First, that Tertullian calls ecstasy “a temporary loss of senses.” (Page 97.) It was so, of the outward senses, which were then locked up. You observe, Secondly, that “Suidas” (a very primitive writer, who lived between eight and nine hundred years after Ter tullian) “says, that of all the kinds of madness, that of the Poets and Prophets was alone to be wished for.” I am at a loss to know what this is brought to prove. The question is, Were there visions in the primitive Church? You observe, Thirdly, that Philo the Jew says, (Iliterally translate his words, which you do not; for it would not answer your purpose,) “When the divine light shines, the human sets; but when that sets, this rises. This uses to befall the Prophets.” (Page 98.) Well, Sir, and what is this to the question? Why, “from these testimonies,” you say, “we may collect, that the vision or ecstasy of the primitive Church was of the same kind with those of the Delphic Pythia, or the Cumaean Sibyl.” Well collected indeed! But I desire a little better testimony than either that of Philo the Jew, or Suidas, a lexicographer of the eleventh century, before I believe this. How little Tertullian is to be regarded on this head you yourself show in the very next page. 3.

Touching the miraculous gift of expounding Scripture, you say, “Justin Martyr affirms, it was conferred on him by the special grace of God.” (Page 117.) I cannot find where he affirms this. Not in the words you cite, which, literally translated, (as was observed before,) run thus: “He hath revealed to us whatsoever things we have understood by his grace from the Scriptures also.” You seem conscious, these words do not prove the point, and therefore eke them out with those of Monsieur Tillemont. But his own words, and no other, will satisfy me. I cannot believe it, unless from his own mouth. 4. Meantime, I cannot but observe an odd circumstance, --that you are here, in the abundance of your strength, con futing a proposition which (whether it be true or false) not one of your antagonists affirms. You are labouring to prove, “there was not in the primitive Church any such miraculous gift as that of expounding the Scriptures.” Pray, Sir, who says there was ? Not Justin Martyr; not one among all those Fathers whom you have quoted as witnesses of the miraculous gifts, from the tenth to the eighteenth page of your “Inquiry.” If you think they do, I am ready to follow you step by step, through every quotation you have made. 5. No, nor is this mentioned in any enumeration of the miraculous gifts which I can find in the Holy Scriptures. Prophecy indeed is mentioned more than once, by the Apostles, as well as the Fathers. But the context shows, where it is promised as a miraculous gift, it means the foretelling things to come. All therefore which you say on this head is a mere ignoratio elenchi, “a mistake of the question to be proved.” Section VI. 1. The Eighth and last of the miraculous gifts you enumerated was the gift of tongues. And this, it is sure, was claimed by the primitive Christians; for Irenaeus says expressly, “‘We hear many in the Church speaking with all kinds of tongues.’ And yet,” you say, “this was granted only on certain special occasions, and then withdrawn again from the Apostles themselves: So that in the ordinary course of their ministry, they were generally destitute of it. This,” you say, “I have shown elsewhere.” (Page 119.) I presume, in some treatise which I have not seen. 2.

Mr. W.'s Letters in Defence of the Protestant Associations in England; to which are prefixed Mr. Wesley's Letters.” Is it by negligence or by design, that there are so many mistakes even in a title page? 1. “To which are prefixed Mr. W.'s Letters.” No : the second of those Letters is not mine. I never saw it before. 2. But where are the two Letters published in the Freeman's Journal P Why is a spurious Letter palmed upon us, and the genuine one suppressed ? 3. “Letters in Defence of the Protestant Associations in England.” Hold ! In my first Letter I have only three lines in defence of a Tract published in London. But I have not one line “in Defence of the Associations,” either in London or elsewhere. If Mr. O'Leary will seriously answer the two following Letters, he may expect a serious reply. But if he has only drollery and low wit to oppose to argument, I shall concern myself no further about him. Lon Don, Dec. 29, 1780. 1. MR. O'LEARY does well to entitle his Paper “Remarks,” as that word may mean anything or nothing; but it is no more an answer to my Letter, than to the Bull Unigenitus. He likewise does wisely in prefacing his “Remarks” with so FIRST LETTER TO THE FREEMAN's Journal. 163 handsome a compliment: This may naturally incline you to think well of his judgment, which is no small point gained. 2. His manner of writing is easy and pleasant; but might it not as well be more serious? The subject we are treating of is not a light one: It moves me to tears rather than to laughter. I plead for the safety of my country; yea, for the children that are yet unborn. “But cannot your country be safe, unless the Roman Catholics are persecuted for their religion?” Hold! Religion is out of the question: But I would not have them persecuted at all; I would only have them hindered from doing hurt. I would not put it in their power (and I do not wish that others should) to cut the throats of their quiet neighbours.

Not only the Apostles, who first preached it, but even the lay-believers were sufficiently instructed in all the articles of faith, and were inspired with the power of working miracles, and the gift of speaking in languages unknown to them before. But when the gospel was spread, and had taken root through the world; when Kings and Princes became Christians, and when temples were built and magnificently adorned for Chris tian worship; then the zeal of some well-disposed Christians brought pictures into the churches, not only as ornaments, but as instructors of the ignorant; and from thence they were called libri laicorum,-“the books of the people.” Thus the walls of the churches were beset with pictures, representing all the particular transactions mentioned. And they who did not understand a letter of a book knew how to give a very good account of the gospel, being taught to understand the 176 oRIGIN or IMAGE-worship AMoNG CHRISTIANs. particular passages of it in the pictures of the church. Thus, as hieroglyphics were the first means of propagating know ledge, before writing by letters and words was invented; so the more ignorant people were taught compendiously by pictures, what, by the scarcity of teachers, they had not an opportunity of being otherwise fully instructed in. But these things, which were at first intended for good, became, by the devil’s subtlety, a snare for the souls of Chris tians. For when Christian Princes, and the rich and great, vied with one another, who should embellish the temples with greatest magnificence, the pictures upon the walls were turned into gaudy images upon the altars; and the people being deceived by the outward appearance of the Priests’ bowing and kneeling, (before those images,) as the different parts of their devotion led them, they imagined that those gestures were designed to do honour to the images, before which they were performed; (which they certainly were not;) and so, from admiring, the people came to adore them. Thus, what were at first designed as monuments of edification, became the instru ments of superstition.

Thus, what were at first designed as monuments of edification, became the instru ments of superstition. This being a fatal oversight in the Clergy, at first neglected, or winked at, by degrees (as all errors have crept into the Church) gathered strength; so that, from being in the beginning the dotage of the ignorant vulgar, the poison infected those of better rank, and, by their influence and countenance, brought some of the Priests over to their opinion, or rather those Priests were the occasion of deceiving the rich and powerful, especially the female sex, for ends not very reputable or agreeable to the integrity of their profession. But so it was, that what the Priests at first winked at, they afterwards gave countenance to; and what they once countenanced, they thought themselves obliged in honour to defend; till, at last, superstition came to be preached from the pulpits, and gross idolatry obtruded upon the people for true devotion. It is true, there were many of the sacred order, whose sound hearts and clear heads were very averse to this innovation; who both preached and wrote against the worship of images, showing both the wickedness and folly of it. But the disease was so far spread, and the poison had taken such root, that the conse quence of opposition was the dividing the Church into parties and schisms, and at last proceeded to blood and slaughter. N. B. Is it not marvellous that what was so simple in the beginning, should degenerate into such idolatry as is scarce to be found in the heathen world! While this, and several other errors, equally contrary to Scripture and reason, are found in the Church, together with the abominable lives of multitudes who call themselves Christians, the very name of Christianity must stink in the nostrils of the Mahometans, Jews, and Infidels. To 1N ANSWER. To A LETTER WROTE BY HIM. BRIsToL, February 10, 1747-8. YoU ask me, “Is there any difference between Quakerism and Christianity?” I think there is. What that difference is, I will tell you as plainly as I can. I will, First, set down the account of Quakerism, so called, which is given by Robert Barclay; and, Then, add wherein it agrees with, and wherein it differs from, Christianity. “1.

4-6.) Must not every unprejudiced person see, the expressions here used are so strong and clear, that they cannot, without gross and palpable wresting, be understood of any but true believers? “But the Apostle makes only a supposition, ‘If they shall fall away.’” The Apostle makes no supposition at all. There is no if in the original. The words are, ABuvarov re; awa; poria'svlag-- x·x araparsgowla;; that is, in plain English, “It is impossible to renew again unto repentance those who were once enlightened and have fallen away.” “No. The words in the original lie literally thus: ‘It is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and they falling away, to renew them again unto repentance;’ that is, should they fall away, which is, in plain English, if they fall away.” Excuse me for speaking plain English here. “Shall a man lie for God?” Either you or I do; for I flatly aver, (and let all that understand Greek judge between us,) that the words in the original do not lie literally thus, “and they falling away;” (if so, they must be xx wapatitlowlas, in the present tense; not xx, arapatsaowlas, in the indefinite ;) but that they are translated, “and have fallen away,” as literally as the English tongue will bear. Therefore here is no if in the case, no supposition at all, but -a plain declaration of matter of fact. 75. “But why do you imagine these persons were true believers?” Because all the expressions, in their easy, natural sense, imply it. They “were once enlightened;” an expression familiar with the Apostle, and never by him applied to any but believers. So “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ give unto you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his calling; and what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward that believe.” (Eph. i. 17, &c.) So again: “God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Cor. iv. 6) “Nay, ‘they were enlightened’ means only, they were baptized, or knew the doctrines of the gospel.” I cannot believe this, till you bring me a few passages from St.

“Now, here the man, in the former clause, who ‘draws back, is distinguished from him, in the following clause, who lives by faith. “But the Apostle quotes the text from this translation.” True; but he does not “distinguish the man in the former clause who ‘draws back, from him, in the latter, who ‘lives by faith.” So far from it, that he quite inverts the order of the sentence, placing the latter clause of it first. And by this means it comes to pass, that although, in translating this text from the Septuagint, we must insert “a man,” (because there is no nominative preceding,) yet in translating it from the Apostle, there is no need or pretence for inserting it, seeing o Bixalog stands just before. Therefore, such an insertion is a palpable violence to the text; which, consequently, is not rightly translated. It remains, that those who live by faith may yet fall from God, and perish everlastingly. 78. Eighthly. Those who are sanctified by the blood of the covenant may so fall as to perish everlastingly. For thus again saith the Apostle: “If we sin wilfully, after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin; but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adver saries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer punish ment shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the cove nant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing?” It is undeniably plain, (1.) That the person mentioned here was once sanctified by the blood of the covenant. (2.) That he afterward, by known, wilful sin, trod under foot the Son of God. And, (3.) That he hereby incurred a sorer punish ment than death; namely, death everlasting. “Nay, the immediate antecedent to the relative ‘he, is ‘the Son of God.” Therefore it was He, not the apostate, who was sanctified (set apart for his priestly office) by the blood of the covenant.” Either you forgot to look at the original, or your memory fails.

And I rejoiced in having many opportunities of assisting him both in his studies and in his Christian warfare; which he acknowledged in very strong terms, by a letter now in my hands, wrote not long after the publication of his “Medita tions among the Tombs.” In my answer to this, I told him frankly, there were one or two passages in that book, which, if I had seen before it was printed, I should have advised him not to insert. He replied, if he printed anything more, he would beg of me to correct it first. Accordingly, he sent me, not long after, the manuscript of his three first Dialogues. I sent them back after some days, with a few inconsiderable corrections; but upon his complaining, “You are not my friend, if you do not take more liberty with me,” I promised I would; so he sent them again, and I made some more important alterations. I was not surprised at seeing no more of the copy, till I saw it in print. When I had read it, I wrote him my thoughts freely, but received no answer. On October 15, 1756, I sent him a second letter, which I here insert, that every impartial person may understand the real merits of the cause. I need only premise, that, at the time I wrote, I had not the least thought of making it public. I only spoke my private thoughts in a free, open manner, to a friend dear as a brother,-I had almost said to a pupil,--to a son; for so near I still accounted him. It is no wonder therefore, that “several of my objections,” as Mr. Hervey himself observes, “appear more like notes and memorandums, tl an a just plea to the public.” (Page 80.) It is true. They appear like what they are, like what they were originally intended for. I had no thought of a plea to the public when I wrote, but of “notes and memorandums to a private man.” DEAR SIR, October 15, 1756. A consider ABLE time since, I sent you a few hasty thoughts which occurred to me on reading the “Dialogues between Theron and Aspasio.” I have not been favoured with any answer.

I am, with great sincerity, Dear Sir, Your affectionate brother and servant, 3. After waiting near two years, and receiving no answer to the second any more than the first Letter, in 1758 I printed “A Preservative against Unsettled Notions in Religion.” I designed this at first only for the Preachers who were in connexion with me. But I was afterwards induced to think it might be of use to others that were under my care. I designed it for these, and these alone, though I could not help its falling into other hands. Accordingly, I said, “My design in publishing the following Tracts, is not to reclaim, but to preserve.” To preserve those to whom I had frequently and strongly recommended Mr. Hervey’s Dialogues, from what I disapproved of therein, I inserted the above Letter; and that without any addition, as intending it only “for those who already knew the truth,” whom I wished to preserve from everything wrong, while they profited by what was admirably right, in his Dialogues. No wonder there fore that those notes (as Mr. Hervey remarks in the same page) “have rather the air of a caveat than a confutation.” I never intended them for a confutation; and even when I sent them to the press, I designed them merely as a caveat to my friends against imbibing truth and error together. 4. A considerable time after, I was much surprised by an information, that Mr. Hervey “was going to publish against me.” I immediately wrote a short letter to him, which his friends may easily find among his papers. It was to this effect, and, so far as I can recollect, nearly in these words: “After waiting above a year for an answer to my last letter, I printed it in the close of a larger treatise. If you have anything to object to me, I expect that, as a gentleman and a Christian, you will behave to me as I did to you. Send me the letter first. And if I do not give you a satisfactory answer in a year, then publish it to all the world.” I am inclined to believe, this prevented the publication of these papers during his life. And with his dying breath, (I have it under his brother’s hand,) he desired they might not be published at all. How comes it then to be done now?

For many ages the free natives of Ireland, as well as the Scottish Highlands, when it was convenient for them, made an excursion from their woods or fastnesses, and carried off, for their own proper use, the sheep, and oxen, and corn of their neighbours. This was the liberty which the O'Neals, the Camp bells, and many other septs and clans of venerable antiquity, had received by immemorial tradition from their ancestors. 10. Almost all the soldiers in the Christian world, as well as in the Mahometan and Pagan, have claimed, more especially in time of war, another kind of liberty; that of borrowing the wives and daughters of the men that fell into their hands; sometimes, if they pleaded scruple of conscience or honour, using a little necessary force. Perhaps this may be termed the liberty of war. But I will not positively affirm, that it has never been used in this free country, even in the time of peace. 11. In some countries of Europe, and indeed in England, there have been instances of yet another sort of liberty, that of calling a Monarch to account; and, if need were, taking off his head; that is, if he did not behave in a dutiful manner to our sovereign lords the people. 12. Now, that we may not always be talking at random, but bring the matter to a determinate point, which of these sorts of liberty do you desire? Is it the First sort; the liberty of knocking on the head, or cutting the throats, of those we are out of conceit with ? Glorious liberty indeed ! What would not king mob do to be gratified with it but for a few weeks? But, I conceive, calm, sensible men do not desire to see them entrusted with it. They apprehend there might be some consequences which, upon the whole, would not redound to the prosperity of the nation. 13. Is the Second more desirable; the liberty of taking, when we see best, the goods and chattels of our neighbours? Undoubtedly, thousands in the good city of London (suppose we made the experiment here first) would be above measure rejoiced thereat, would leap as broke from chains. O how convenient would it be to have free access, without any let or hinderance, to the cellars, the pantries, the larders, yea, and the coffers of their rich, overgrown landlords!

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. 1. By power, I here mean supreme power, the power over life and death, and consequently over our liberty and property, and all things of an inferior nature. 2. In many nations this power has in all ages been lodged in a single person. This has been the case in almost the whole eastern world, from the earliest antiquity; as in the celebrated empires of Assyria, of Babylon, of Media, Persia, and many others. And so it remains to this day, from Constantinople to the farthest India. The same form of government obtained very early in very many parts of Afric, and remains in most of them still, as well as in the empires of Morocco and Abyssinia. The first adventurers to America found absolute monarchy established there also ; the whole power being lodged in the Emperor of Mexico, and the Yncas of Peru. Nay, and many of the ancient nations of Europe were governed by single persons; as Spain, France, the Russias, and several other nations are at this day. 3. But in others, the power has been lodged in a few, chiefly the rich and noble. This kind of government, usually styled aristocracy, obtained in Greece and in Rome, after many struggles with the people, during the later ages of the republic. And this is the government which at present subsists in various parts of Europe. In Venice indeed, as well as in Genoa, the supreme power is nominally lodged in one, namely, the Doge ; but in fact, he is only a royal shade; it is really lodged in a few of the nobles. 4. Where the people have the supreme power, it is termed a democracy. This seems to have been the ancient form of government in several of the Grecian states.

It prevailed particularly among the Jews, the Greeks, the Romans, and the ancient Germans; and was transmitted by them to the various kingdoms and states which arose out of the Roman Empire. But after Christianity prevailed, it gradually fell into decline in almost all parts of Europe. This great change began in Spain, about the end of the eighth century; and was become general in most other kingdoms of Europe, before the middle of the fourteenth. 4. From this time slavery was nearly extinct till the commencement of the sixteenth century, when the discovery of America, and of the western and eastern coasts of Africa, gave occasion to the revival of it. It took its rise from the Portuguese, who, to supply the Spaniards with men to cultivate their new possessions in America, procured Negroes from Africa, whom they sold for slaves to the American Spaniards. This began in the year 1508, when they imported the first Negroes into Hispaniola. In 1540, Charles the Fifth, then King of Spain, determined to put an end to Negro slavery; giving positive orders that all the Negro slaves in the Spanish dominions should be set free. And this was accordingly done by Lagasca, whom he sent and empowered to free them all, on condition of continuing to labour for their masters. But soon after Lagasca returned to Spain, slavery returned and flourished as before. After wards, other nations, as they acquired possessions in America, followed the examples of the Spaniards; and slavery has taken deep root in most of our American colonies. II. Such is the nature of slavery; such the beginning of Negro slavery in America. But some may desire to know what kind of country it is from which the Negroes are brought; what sort of men, of what temper and behaviour are they in their own country; and in what manner they are generally procured, carried to, and treated in, America. 1. And, First, what kind of country is that from whence they are brought? Is it so remarkably horrid, dreary, and barren, that it is a kindness to deliver them out of it? I believe many have apprehended so; but it is an entire mistake, if we may give credit to those who have lived many years therein, and could have no motive to misrepresent it. 2.

These three nations practise several trades; they have smiths, saddlers, potters, and weavers; and they are very ingenious at their several occupations. Their smiths not only make all the instruments of iron which they have occa sion to use, but likewise work many things neatly in gold and silver. It is chiefly the women and children who weave fine cotton cloth, which they dye blue and black.” 8. It was of these parts of Guinea that Monsieur Allanson, correspondent of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, 1rom 1749 to 1753, gives the following account, both as to the country and people:--“Which way soever I turned my eyes, I beheld a perfect image of pure nature: An agreeable solitude, bounded on every side by a charming landscape; the rural situation of cottages in the midst of trees; the ease and quiet ness of the Negroes, reclined under the shade of the spreading foliage, with the simplicity of their dress and manners: The whole revived in my mind the idea of our first parents, and I seemed to contemplate the world in its primitive state. They are, generally speaking, very good-natured, sociable, and obliging. I was not a little pleased with my very first reception; and it fully convinced me, that there ought to be a considerable abatement made in the accounts we have of the savage character of the Africans.” He adds: “It is amazing that an illiterate people should reason so pertinently concerning the heavenly bodies. There is no doubt, but that, with proper instruments, they would become excellent astronomers.” 9. The inhabitants of the Grain and Ivory Coast are repre sented by those that deal with them, as sensible, courteous, and the fairest traders on the coasts of Guinea. They rarely drink to excess; if any do, they are severely punished by the King’s order. They are seldom troubled with war: If a difference happen between two nations, they commonly end the dispute amicably. The inhabitants of the Gold and Slave Coast likewise, when they are not artfully incensed against each other, live in great union and friendship, being generally well-tempered, civil, tractable, and ready to help any that need it. In particular, the natives of the kingdom of Whidah are civil, kind, and obliging to strangers; and they are the most gentleman-like of all the Negroes, abounding in good manners toward each other.

The Christians, landing upon their coasts, seized as many as they found, men, women, and children, and transported them to America. It was about 1551 that the English began trading to Guinea; at first, for gold and elephants’ teeth; but soon after, for men. In 1556, Sir John Hawkins sailed with two ships to Cape Verd, where he sent cighty men on shore to catch Negroes. But the natives flying, they fell farther down, and there set the men on shore, “to burn their towns and take the inhabitants.” But they met with such resist ance, that they had seven men killed, and took but ten Negroes. So they went still farther down, till, having taken enough, they proceeded to the West Indies and sold them. 2. It was some time before the Europeans found a more compendious way of procuring African slaves, by prevailing upon them to make war upon each other, and to sell their prisoners. Till then they seldom had any wars; but were in general quiet and peaceable. But the white men first taught them drunkenness and avarice, and then hired them to sell one another. Nay, by this means, even their Kings are induced to scll their own subjects. So Mr. Moore, factor of the African Company in 1730, informs us: “When the King of Barsalli wants goods or brandy, he sends to the English Governor at James's Fort, who immediately sends a sloop. Against the time it arrives, he plunders some of his neigh bours towns, selling the people for the goods he wants. At other times he falls upon one of his own towns, and makes bold to sell his own subjects.” So Monsieur Brue says, “I wrote to the King,” (not the same,) “if he had a sufficient number of slaves, I would treat with him. He seized three hundred of his own people, and sent word he was ready to deliver them for the goods.” He adds: “Some of the natives are always ready” (when well paid) “to surprise and carry off their own countrymen. They come at night without noise, and if they find any lone cottage, surround it and carry off all the people.” Barbot, another French factor, says, “Many of the slaves sold by the Negroes are prisoners of war, or taken in the incursions they make into their enemies’ territories. Others are stolen.

11. Soon after, it being thought reasonable, that every part of the British empire should furnish its share of the general expense, the English Parliament laid a small duty on the tea imported into America. Again a violent outcry arose, and was studiously propagated through all the provinces It was no less diligently spread throughout England. And as they judged the time was now come to advance a little further, the leading men, both at home and abroad, began more and more confidently to assert, “that the English had no right to tax the American colonies.” The assertors of this new position in England strongly exhorted those in America to withstand what they were pleased to call this “illegal, unconstitutional oppression.” Thus encouraged, the Bostonians, under the auspices of Mr. Hancock, (whose interest was particularly at stake,) scorning to do any thing secretly, paraded the town at noon-day with colours flying, and bravely threw the English tea into the sea. This was the first plain overt act of rebellion, not of a few, but of the town of Boston. Reparation of the wrong was demanded; but it was not obtained. Till it should be obtained, the Parliament ordered Boston harbour to be shut up. 12. But things were not yet ripe for an open rupture: Therefore the Americans still gave the Government good words. They professed their loyalty, their great regard for the King, and their desire of obeying all his legal commands. But all this time they were using all possible art and diligence to blacken, first the Ministry, after a time the Parliament too, and then the King himself. Of this I had a clear and particular account from a friend in Pennsylvania, who then observed a storm rising in the north, and moving on toward the southern colonies. And it moved on apace. A new supreme power, called a Congress, appeared. It openly assumed the reins of government, exercised all the rights of sovereignty, burst all the bands, and totally disclaimed the authority both of King and Parliament. 13. But still the Americans talked of allegiance, and said they desired nothing but the liberty of Englishmen. Many in England cordially believed them; I myself for one.

The elder of them died about the time of his coming of age; the younger first represented the town of Salop, as his father had done, and afterwards the county; till he took his seat in the House of Peers, as Baron Berwick, of Atcham-House: This is now the name that is given to what was formerly called Tern-Hall. FROM HIS SETTLING AT MADELEY, To HIs LEAVING 1. HE settled at Madeley, according to his desire, in the year 1760. And from the beginning he was a laborious workman in his Lord's vineyard. At his first settling there, the hearts of several were unaccountably set against him; insomuch that he was constrained to warn some of these, that if they did not repent, God would speedily cut them off. And the truth of those predictions was shown over and over, by the signal accomplishment of them. But no opposition could hinder him from going on in his Master's work, and suppress ing vice in every possible manner. Those sinners who endeavoured to hide themselves from him, he pursued to every corner of his parish; by all sorts of means, public and private, early and late, in season and out of season, entreating and warning them to flee from the wrath to come. Some made it an excuse, for not attending the Church Service on a Sunday morning, that they could not awake early enough, to get their families ready. He provided for this also: Taking a bell in his hand, he set out every Sunday at five in the morning, and went round the most distant parts of the parish, inviting all the inhabitants to the house of God.- 2. Yet notwithstanding all the pains he took, he saw for some time little fruit of his labour; insomuch that he was more than once in doubt, whether he had not mistaken his place; whether God had indeed called him to confine himself to one town, or to labour more at large in his vineyard. He was not free from this doubt, when a multitude of people flocked together at a funeral. He seldom let these awful opportunities slip without giving a solemn exhortation. At the close of the exhortation which was then given, one man was so grievously offended, that he could not refrain from breaking out into scurrilous, yea, menacing language.

8-10.) “And such a distinction ought to be made by the best methods of interpreting the Scriptures; which most certainly are an attentive consideration of the occasion and scope of those passages, in concurrence with the general sense of the primitive Church.” (P. 11.) “I propose, Thirdly, to specify some of the chief passages of Scripture that are misapplied by modern enthusiasts, and to show that they are to be interpreted chiefly, if not only, of the apostolical Church; and that they very little, if at all, relate to the present state of Christians.” (P. 12.) “I begin,” says your Lordship, “with the original promise of the Spirit, as made by our Lord a little before he left the world.” I must take the liberty to stop your Lordship on the threshold. I deny that this is the original promise of the Spirit. I expect his assistance, in virtue of many promises some hundred years prior to this. If you say, “However, this is the original or first promise of the Spirit in the New Testament:” No, my Lord; those words were spoken long before: “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.” Will you reply?--“Well, but this is the original promise made by our Lord.” I answer, Not so, neither; for it was before this Jesus himself stood and cried, “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink: He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. And this he spake of the Spirit, which they should receive who believed on him.” (Ov eple}\}\ov Aap gavew ot tria Tevovres eus avtov.) If I mistake not, this may more justly be termed, our Lord’s original promise of the Spirit. And who will assert that this is to be “interpreted chiefly, if not only, of the apostolical Church 7” 5. Your Lordship proceeds: “It occurs in the fourteenth and sixteenth chapters of St. John’s Gospel; in which he uses these words.” In what verses, my Lord?" Why is not this specified ?

The same rule I follow now, both at London, Bristol, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne; concluding the service at every place, winter and summer, before six in the morning; and not ordinarily beginning to preach till near seven in the evening. Now, do you who make this objection work longer, through out the year, than from six to six? Do you desire that the generality of people should? or can you count them idle that work so long? Some few are indeed accustomed to work longer. These I advise not to come on week-days; and it is apparent, that they take this advice, unless on some rare and extraordinary occasion. But I hope none of you who turn them out of their employ ment have the confidence to talk of my making them idle ! Do you (as the homely phrase is) cry wh-- first? I admire your cunning, but not your modesty. So far am I from either causing or encouraging idleness, that an idle person, known to be such, is not suffered to remain in any of our societies; we drive him out, as we would a thief or a murderer. “To show all possible diligence,” (as well as frugal ity) is one of our standing rules; and one, concerning the observance of which we continually make the strictest inquiry. 11. “But you drive them out of their senses. You make them mad.” Nay, then they are idle with a vengeance. This objection, therefore, being of the utmost importance, deserves our deepest consideration. And, First, I grant, it is my earnest desire to drive all the world into what you probably call madness; (I mean, inward religion;) to make them just as mad as Paul when he was so accounted by Festus.

4. It is the business of a Visitor of the sick, To see every sick person within his district thrice a week. To inquire into the state of their souls, and to advise them as occasion may require. To inquire into their disorders, and pro cure advice for them. To relieve them, if they are in want. To do any thing for them, which he (or she) can do. To bring in his accounts weekly to the Stewards.” Upon reflection, I saw how exactly, in this also, we had copied after the primitive Church. What were the ancient Deacons? What was Phebe the Deaconess, but such a Visitor of the sick? 5. I did not think it needful to give them any particular rules beside these that follow : (1.) Be plain and open in dealing with souls. (2.) Be mild, tender, patient. (3.) Be cleanly in all you do for the sick. (4.) Be not nice. 6. We have ever since had great reason to praise God for his continued blessing on this undertaking. Many lives have been saved, many sicknesses healed, much pain and want prevented or removed. Many heavy hearts have been made glad, many mourners comforted: And the Visitors have found, from Him whom they serve, a present reward for all their labour. XII. 1. But I was still in pain for many of the poor that were sick; there was so great expense, and so little profit. And * The Leaders now do this. first, I resolved to try, whether they might not receive more benefit in the hospitals. Upon the trial, we found there was indeed less expense, but no more good done, than before. I then asked the advice of several Physicians for them; but still it profited not. I saw the poor people pining away, and several families ruined, and that without remedy. 2. At length I thought of a kind of desperate expedient. “I will prepare, and give them physic myself.” For six or seven and twenty years, I had made anatomy and physic the diversion of my leisure hours; though I never properly studied them, unless for a few months when I was going to America, where I imagined I might be of some service to those who had no regular Physician among them. I applied to it again.

The love of Christ constraineth him. After this, he may obey, or he may not; no constraint being laid upon him Q. 12. Can faith be lost, but through disobedience? A. It cannot. A believer first inwardly disobeys, inclines to sin with his heart: Then his intercourse with God is cut off; that is, his faith is lost: And after this, he may fall into out ward sin, being now weak, and like another man. Q. 13. How can such an one recover faith? A. By “repenting, and doing the first works.” (Rev. ii. 5.) Q. 14. Whence is it that so great a majority of those who believe fall more or less into doubt or fear? A. Chiefly from their own ignorance or unfaithfulness: Often from their not watching unto prayer: Perhaps some times from some defect, or want of the power of God in the preaching they hear. Q. 15. Is there not a defect in us? Do we preach as we did at first? Have we not changed our doctrines? A. (1.) At first we preached almost wholly to unbelievers. To those therefore we spake almost continually of remission of sins through the death of Christ, and the mature of faith in his blood. And so we do still, among those who need to be taught the first elements of the gospel of Christ. (2.) But those in whom the foundation is already laid, we exhort to go on to perfection; which we did not see so clearly at first; although we occasionally spoke of it from the beginning. (3.) Yet we now preach, and that continually, faith in Christ, as the Prophet, Priest, and King, at least, as clearly, as strongly, and as fully, as we did six years ago. Q. 16. Do we not discourage visions and dreams too much, as if we condemned them toto genere? A. We do not intend to do this. We neither discourage nor encourage them. We learn from Acts ii. 17, &c., to expect something of this kind “in the last days.” And we cannot deny that saving faith is often given in dreams or visions of the night; which faith we account neither better nor worse, than if it came by any other means. Q. 17. Do not some of our assistants preach too much of the wrath, and too little of the love, of God? A.

It is now my turn to complain of unfair usage; of the exceeding lame, broken, imperfect manner wherein you cite my words. For instance, your citation runs thus: You“never knew but one of the Mora vian Church affirm, that a believer does not grow in holiness.” Whereas my words are these: “I never knew one of the Mora vian Church, but that single person, affirm, that a believer does not grow in holiness; and perhaps he would not affirm it on reflection.” Now, why was the former part of the sentence changed, and the latter quite left out? Had the whole stood in your tract just as it does in mine, it must have appeared I do not here charge the Moravian Church. I complain also of your manner of replying to the first article of this very paragraph. For you do not cite so much as one line of that answer to which you profess to reply. My words are, “You ought not to charge the Moravian Church with the first of these” errors, “since in the very page from which you quote those words, “There is no justifying faith where there ever is any doubt,’ that note occurs, (viz., Vol. I. p. 328,) “In the preface to the Second Journal, the Moravian Church is cleared from this mistake.” If you had cited these words, could you possibly have subjoined, “I have not charged the Moravian Church with anything; but only repeat after you?” 4. I have now considered one page of your reply, in the man ner you seem to require. But sure you cannot expect I should follow you thus, step by step, through a hundred and forty pages! If you should then think it worth while to make a second reply, and to follow me in the same manner, we might write indeed, but who would read? I return therefore to what I proposed at first, viz., to touch only on what seems of the most importance, and leave the rest just as it lies. 5. You say, “With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought, that you only found this ‘in many of them; not in all, nor in most.” (Page 80) “You now would have it thought !” Yes, and always, as well as now.

You say, “With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise, you now would have it thought, that you only found this ‘in many of them; not in all, nor in most.” (Page 80) “You now would have it thought !” Yes, and always, as well as now. For my original charge was, “I have found this in many of you; that is, much subtlety, much evasion and disguise.” (Vol. I. p. 327.) But you add, “Let the reader judge from the following passages, whether you did not charge the Mora vians in general with these crimes: ‘I had a long conference with those whom I esteem very highly in love; but I could not yet understand them in one point, Christian openness and plain ness of speech. They pleaded for such a reservedness and close ness of conversation. Yet I scarce know what to think, con sidering they had the practice of the whole Moravian Church on their side.” True, in pleading for such a reservedness of conversation as I could not in any wise approve of; but not in using much subtlety, much evasion and disguise: This I dare not charge on the whole Moravian Church. Those words also, “There is darkness and closeness in all their behaviour, and guile in almost all their words,” I spoke, not of all the Mora vians, nor of most ; but of those who were then in England. I could not speak it of them all; for I never found any guile in Christian David, Michael Linner, and many others. 6. “We are next to see how you get over the objection I made good, in three several particulars, that you have prepared the way for spreading of these tenets. The first you say nothing to here; the Second you quote very partially thus: “By coun tenancing and commending them.’ And why would you not add ‘And being the occasion of so many of them coming over among us?” Because I was not the occasion. I was in deed the first Englishman that ever was at Hernhuth. But before I was at Hernhuth, (I find on later inquiry,) the Count himself had been in England.

You remarked, “It will be difficult to persuade any sober person, that there is anything supernatural in these disorders.” (Remarks, p. 69.) The remainder of that paragraph I abridged thus: You attempt to account for those fits, by “obstructions or irregularities of the blood and spirits; hysterical disorders; watchings, fastings, closeness of rooms, great crowds, violent heat;” and lastly by “terrors, perplexities, and doubts, in weak and well-meaning men; which,” you think, “in many of the cases before us, have quite overset their understand ings.” (Remarks, p. 43.) Ianswered, “As to each of the rest, let it goas far as it can go.” (Let it be supposed to have some influence in some cases; per haps fully to account for one in a thousand.) “But I require proof of the last way whereby you would account for these disorders.” Why, “the instances,” you say, “ of religious madness have much increased since you began to disturb the world.” I doubt the fact. You reply, “This no way disproves it.” (Second Letter, p. 137.) Yes, it does, till you produce some proof. For a bare negation is the proper and sufficient answer to a bare affirmation. I add, “If these instances had increased daily, it is easy to account for them another way,” as is done in the First Part of the Farther Appeal, at the one hundred and thirty-first and following pages. You say, “Most have heard of or known several of the Methodists thus driven to distraction.” I answered, “You may have heard of five hun dred. But how many have you known P Be pleased to name eight or ten of them. I cannot find them, no, not one of them to this day, either man, woman, or child.” (Page 411.) You reply, “This” (the naming them) “would be very im proper and unnecessary.” Second Letter, p. 138.) However, Sir, it is extremely necessary that you should name them to me in private. I will then, if required, excuse you to the public; which till then I cannot do. The person I mentioned, whom you threw into much doubt and perplexity, then lived in the parish of St. Ann, West minster. I related the case just as she related it to me. But she is able and ready to answer for herself. 9.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238, AN ANswer. To DR TAYLOR’s suPPLEMENT. SECTION I. Of Imputed Guilt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .314. II. Of the Nature and Design of our Afflic tions and Mortality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 State University of Iowa Ll BRARIES vi CONTENTS Page. SECTION III. The Argument taken from the Cala- £ mities and Sinfulness of Mankind, considered . . . . 320 IV. Some Consequences of the Doctrine of Original Sin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 - V. A General Argument taken from what God has declared concerning Mankind, at the Restoration of the World after the Deluge . . . . . . . 328 VI. The notion of Adam's being a Federal Head, or Representative of Mankind, considered .. 332 -- VII. Of the Formation of our Nature in the Womb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334. VIII. Of Original Righteousness. . . . . . . . 339 HIs APOSTASY FROM GoD 2- ESSAY SECOND. THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 WINDICATED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415 MR. BosTON’s FOURFold stATE or MAN. . . . . . . . . . 43.4 A Letter to the Rev. John Taylor, D.D. . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 An Extract of a Letter to the Rev. Mr. Law. . . . . . . . . ... 466 Thoughts upon Jacob Behmen. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

But what is it you are endeavouring to prove? Quorsum haec tam putida tendant * * The paragraph seems to point at me. But the plain, natural tendency of it is, to invalidate that great argument for Christi anity which is drawn from the constancy of the martyrs. Have you not here also spoken a little too plain? Had you not better have kept the mask on a little longer? Indeed, you lamely add, “The solid and just comforts which a true martyr receives from above are groundlessly applied to the counterfeit.” But this is not enough even to save appear ancéS. 18. You subjoin a truly surprising thought: “It may more over be observed, that both ancient and modern enthusiasts always take care to secure some advantage by their sufferings.” (Page 40.) O 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? 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 * Thus translated from the Latin of Horace by Francis : “Whither tends This putid stuff?”--EDIT. 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.

p. 269.) Your Ninth is this: “I went to the society, but I found their hearts were quite estranged. Friday, 4. I met a little handful of them, who still stand in the old paths.” (Ibid. p. 280.) Thus far you have been speaking of the Methodists in London. And what have you proved concerning them? Only that the Moravians, mixing with them twelve years ago, while they were young and unexperienced, set them a disputing with each other, and thereby occasioned much confusion for several months. But you have not proved that the Methodists in general were, even them, “all together by the ears; ” and much less, that they have been so ever since, and that they are so now. 35. I now attend you to Kingswood. Not to “Bristol and Kingswood,” which you artfully join together. The society at Bristol was no more concerned with the disputes in Kingswood, than with those in London. Here the First quotation, though containing but two lines, is extracted from three different paragraphs; in one of which I say: “I had many unpleasing accounts (in December, 1740) concerning our little society in Kingswood.” In the Second: “I went to Kingswood, if haply I might repair the breaches which had been made ’’ by the Predestinarian Preachers. In the Third: “I laboured to heal the jealousies and misunder standings which had arisen.” (Vol. I. p. 293.) The Second passage, part of which you quote, is this: “I returned early in the morning to Kingswood; but my con gregation was gone to hear Mr. C.; so that I had not above two or three men, and as many women.” (Ibid. p. 294.) The Third is, “January 1. I explained, “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. But many of our brethren had no ears to hear, having disputed away both their faith and love.” (Ibid. p. 295.) The Fourth, “February 21. I inquired concerning the divi sions and offences which began afresh to break out in Kings wood. In the afternoon I met a few of the Bands; but it was a cold, uncomfortable meeting.” (Ibid. p. 299.) You have picked out here and there a word from several pages, in order to furnish out a Fifth quotation. The most material part of it is this: “Saturday, 28.

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.

Com plaint was made of this to William Holmes, Esq., the present Mayor of Cork. But there was no removal of the thing complained of; the riots were not suppressed: Nay, they not only continued, but increased. 15. From the beginning of February to the end, His Majesty’s peace was preserved just as before; of which it may be proper to subjoin two or three instances, for the information of all thinking men -- “WILLIAM JEwBLL, clothier, of Shandon Church-Lane, deposes, “That Nicholas Butler, with a riotous mob, several times * A name first given to Mr. Cennick, from his first preaching on those words: “Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.” assaulted this deponent’s house: That particularly on the 23d of February, he came thither with a large mob, armed with clubs and other weapons: That several of the rioters entered the house, and swore, the first who resisted, they would blow their brains out: That the deponent’s wife, en deavouring to stop them, was assaulted and beaten by the said Butler; who then ordered his men to break the deponent's windows, which they did with stones of a considerable weight. “MARY PHILIPs, of St.

“MARY PHILIPs, of St. Peter's Church-Lane, deposes, “That on the 26th of February, about seven in the evening, Nicholas Butler came to her house with a large mob, and asked where her husband was: That as soon as she appeared, he first abused her in the grossest terms, and then struck her on the head, so that it stunned her; and she verily believes, had not some within thrust to and fastened the door, she should have been murdered on the spot.” It may suffice for the present to add one instance more -- “ELIZABETH GARDELET, wife of Joseph Gardelet, Corporal, in Colonel Pawlet’s regiment, Captain Charlton’s company, deposes, “That on February 28, as she was going out of her lodgings, she was met by Butler and his mob : That Butler, without any manner of provocation, immediately fell upon her, striking her with both his fists on the side of the head, which knocked her head against the wall: That she endeavoured to escape from him; but he pursued her, and struck her several times in the face: That she ran into the school-yard for shelter; but he followed, and caught hold of her, saying, ‘You whore, you stand on consecrated ground,’ and threw her with such force across the lane, that she was driven against the opposite wall: That when she had recovered herself a little, she made the best of her way to her lodging; but Butler still pursued, and overtook her as she was going up the stairs: That he struck her with his fist on the stomach; which stroke knocked her down backwards; that falling with the small of her back against the edge of one of the stairs, she was not able to rise again: That her pains immediately came upon her, and about two in the morning she miscarried.” 16. These, with several more depositions to the same effect, were, in April, laid before the Grand Jury. Yet they did not find any of these bills | But they found one against Daniel 74 LETTER. To Sullivan, the younger, (no Preacher, but a hearer of the people called Methodists,) who, when Butler and his mob were dis charging a shower of stones upon him, fired a pistol, without any ball, over their heads.

Throughout your whole Tract, you speak satis pro imperio,"-- as authoritatively as if you was, not an Archbishop only, but Apostolic Vicar also; as if you had the full papal power in your hands, and fire and faggot at your beck! And blind enough; so that you blunder on, through thick and thin, bespattering all that come in your way, according to the old, laudable maxim, “Throw dirt enough, and some will stick.” 2. I hope, I say, that this is the case, and that you do not knowingly assert so many palpable falsehoods. You say, “If I am mistaken, I shall always be ready and desirous to retract my error.” (Page 56.) A little candour and care might have pre vented those mistakes; this is the first thing one would have desired. The next is, that they may be removed; that you may see wherein you have been mistaken, and be more wary for the time to come, 3. You undertake to give an account, First, of the rise and principles, Then, of the practices, of the Methodists. On the former head you say, “Our Church has long been infested with these grievous wolves, who, though no more than two when they entered in, and they so young they might rather be called wolflings,” (that is lively and pretty!) “have yet spread their ravenous kind through every part of this kingdom. Where, what havoc they have made, how many of the sheep they have torn, I need not say.” (Pages 4, 5.) “About twenty five years ago, these two bold though beardless Divines,” (pity, Sir, that you had not taught me, twenty-five years ago sapientem pascere barbam,t and thereby to avoid some part of your displeasure,) “being lifted with spiritual pride, were * With authority enough.--EDIT. + This quotation from Horace is thus translated by Boscawen : “What time, by his instructions cheer'd, He bade me train his sapient beard.”-EDIT. 98 LETTER. To presumptuous enough to become founders of the sect called Methodists.” (Page 6.) “A couple of young, raw, aspiring twigs of the ministry dreamed of a special and supernatural call to this.” (Page 25.) No, Sir; it was you dreamed of this, not we. We dreamed of nothing twenty-five years ago, but instructing our pupils in religion and learning, and a few prisoners in the common principles of Christianity.

The man in whom they are not found hath not the “wisdom from above.’ But we are not to conclude, that he has it in whom any or all of them are found.” (Page 118.) We are not to conclude that he is a Prophet, for the Apostle says nothing about Pro phets; but may we not conclude, the man in whom all these are * Thus translated from Juvenal by Gifford:-- “The selfsame subject, in the selfsame words.”--EDIT. found has “the wisdom from above?” Surely we may; for these are the essential parts of that wisdom; and can he have all the parts and not have the whole? Is not this enough to show, that the Apostle is here giving “a set of marks,” not “to detect impostor-prophets,” but impostor-Christians? those that impose either upon themselves or others, as if they were Christians when they are not? In what follows, I shall simply consider the argument, without directly addressing your Lordship. “Apply these marks to the features of modern fanatics, especially Mr. John Wesley. He has laid claim to almost every apostolic gift, in as full and ample a manner as they were possessed of old.” (Page 119.) The miraculous gifts bestowed upon the Apostles are enumerated in two places: First, Mark xvi. 17, 18: “In my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Second, 1 Cor. xii. 8-10: “To one is given the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge; to another faith; to another the gifts of heal ing; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another the discernment of spirits; to another tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues.” Do I lay claim to almost every one of these “in as full and ample a manner as they were possessed of old?” Five of them are enumerated in the former catalogue; to three of which--speaking with new tongues, taking up ser pents, drinking deadly things--it is not even pretended I lay any claim at all. In the latter, nine are enumerated.

“I say, those who are called Methodists; for, let it be well observed, that this is not a name which they take upon them selves, but one fixed on them by way of reproach, without their approbation or consent. It was first given to three or four young men at Oxford, by a Student of Christ's Church; either in allu sion to the ancient sect of Physicians, (so called from their teaching that almost all diseases might be cured by a specific method of diet and exercise,) or from their observing a more regular method of study and behaviour than was usual with those of their age and station.” (Preface to “the Character of a Methodist.”) I need only add, that this nick-name was imposed upon us before “this manner of preaching” had a being; yea, at a time when I thought it as lawful to cut a throat, as to preach out of a church. “Why then will Mr. W. so grossly misrepresent his adver saries, as to say, that, when they speak against Methodism, they speak against the plain, old doctrine of the Church of Eng land?” (Tract, p. 169.) This is no misrepresentation. Many of our adversaries, all over the kingdom, speak against us, eo nomine,” for preaching these doctrines, justification by faith in particular. However, a “fanatic manner of preaching, though it were the doctrine of an Apostle, may do more harm to society at least, than reviving old heresies, or inventing new. It tends to bewilder the imaginations of some, to inflame the passions of others, and to spread disorder and confusion through the whole com munity.” (Page 169.) I would gladly have the term defined. What is a “fanatic manner of preaching?” Is it field-preach ing? But this has no such effect, even among the wildest of men. This has not “bewildered the imagination” even of the Kingswood colliers, or “inflamed their passions.” It has not spread disorder or confusion among them, but just the contrary. From the time it was heard in that chaos, Confusion heard the voice, and wild uproar Stood ruled, and order from disorder sprung. “But St. James, who delivers the test for the trial of these men's pretensions,” (the same mistake still,) “unquestionably * On this account.--EIDT.

Whitefield, to inquire of him whether she was not a Papist. But he quickly perceived she was only a lunatic; the nature of her disorder soon betraying itself.” Certainly then my allowing her to be mad is no proof of my partiality. I will allow every one to be so who is attended with “all these circumstances of madness.” (4.) “He pronounces sentence of enthusiasm upon another, and tells us wherefore, without any disguise: ‘Here I took leave of a poor, mad, original enthusiast, who had been scattering lies in every quarter.’” It was the famous John Adams, since confined at Box, whose capital lie, the source of the rest, was, that he was a prophet, greater than Moses, or any of the Apostles. And is the pronouncing him a madman a proof of my partiality? (5) “I had much conversation with Mr. Simpson, an ori ginal enthusiast. I desired him in the evening to give an ex hortation. He did so, and spoke many good things, in a manner peculiar to himself: ”--without order or connexion, head or tail; and in a language very near as mystical as that of Jacob Behmen. “When he had done, I summed up what he had said, methodizing and explaining it. O what a pity it is, this well-meaning man should ever speak without an inter preter!” (Page 223.) Let this passage likewise stand as it is, and who can guess how it is to prove my partiality? But by a sleight-of-hand the thing is done. “How differently does Mr. Wesley treat these two enthusiasts ! The first is accused of spreading lies of his master.” (No, he never was any disciple of mine.) “On which lfr. W. took his leave of him;--a gentle expression, to signify the thrusting him out, head and shoulders, from the society of saints.” It signifies neither more nor less than that I went out of the room and left him. “The other’s enthusiasm is made to consist only in want of method.” No. His enthusiasm did not consist in this. It was the cause of it. But he was quite another man than John Adams; and, I believe, a right honest man. (6) “I was both surprised and grieved at a genuine instance of enthusiasm. I.

xiii. 8, &c.)” “The common opinion is, that this respects another life, as he enforceshis argument by this observation: “Now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: Now we know in part; but then shall we know, even as also we are known.” (Page 99.) “But the Apostle means, charity is to accompany the Church in all its stages; whereas prophecy and all the rest are only bestowed during its infant state, to support it against the delusions and powers of darkness.” (Page 100.) 152 LETTER. To THE “The Corinthians abounded in these gifts, but were wanting in charity. And this the Apostle here exposes, by proving charity to be superior to them all, both in its qualities and dura tion. The three first verses declare that the other gifts are use less without charity. The next four specify the qualities of charity; the remaining six declare its continuance: “Charity never faileth: But whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. In the next verse he gives the reason: ‘For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away: 'That is, when that Christian life, the lines of which are marked out by the gospel, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity, then the temporary aids, given to sub due prejudice, and to support the weak, shall, like scaffolding, be removed. In other words, when that Christian life, wherein the Apostles and first Christians were but infants, shall arrive to its full vigour and maturity in their successors, then miracles shall cease.” (Page 102.) But I fear that time is not yet come. I doubt, none that are now alive enjoy more of the vigour and maturity of the Christian life than the very first Christians did. “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 !

But I would first observe in general, with Dr. Jennings, that there are two kinds of texts in the ensuing collection: Some that directly prove, others that properly illustrate, the doctrine of original sin. And there are so many in which it is either directly spoken of, or evidently implied, that the author might well have spared his observation, “The Scripture speaks very sparingly of the consequences of Adam’s sin upon us, because as these are freely reversed to mankind by Christ, we are not so much concerned to know them.” (Page 50.) The fact here affirmed is equally true with the reason assigned for it. 2. The First proposition in the Catechism, which relates to original sin, is this:-- “The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descend ing from him by ordinary generation, sinned with him, and fell with him, in that first transgression. “‘God hath made of one blood all nations of men.” (Acts xvii. 26.)” (Pages 91, 92.)--I believe Dr. Jennings's remark here will suffice:-- “This is quoted to prove that all mankind descend from Adam. But Dr. Taylor adds, “That is, hath made all the nations of the world of one species, endowed with the same facul ties.’” (Jennings’s Vindication, p. 49, &c.) And so they might have been, if all men had been created singly and separately, just as Adam was; but they could not then, with any propriety of language, have been said to be of one blood. This Scripture, therefore, is very pertinently quoted to prove what it is brought for. That ‘Adam was a public person, including all his pos terity, and, consequently, that all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in his first transgression, the Assembly have proved very methodically and substantially: First, from Gen. ii. 16, 17, where death is threatened to Adam in case of his sinning; then from Romans v. 12-20, and l Cor. xv. 21, 22, where we are expressly told that “all men die in Adam;” and that, “by his offence, judgment is come upon all men to condemnation.” Proposition. “All mankind sinned in him, and fell with him in that first transgression.” Which they prove by Gen. ii. 16, 17, compared with Romans v. 15-20.

5. Their Fourth proposition is, “The sinfulness of that state into which man fell consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin; the want of that righteousness wherein he was created; and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is utterly indis posed, disabled, and made opposite to all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to evil, and that continually; which is commonly called original sin, and from which do proceed all actual transgressions.” On the first article of this you say, “Adam’s first sin was attended with consequences which affect all his posterity. But we could not, on account of his sin, become obnoxious to punishment.” (Page 99.) By punishment I mean evil, suffered on account of sin. And are we not obnoxious to any evil on account of Adam’s sin? To prove the rest of the proposition, they cite first, Rom. iii. 10-20. On which you remark, “The Apostle is here speaking of Jews and Gentiles, not in a personal, but in a national, capacity. “The mouth, says he, of all sorts of peo ple is ‘stopped, and both Jews and Gentiles are brought in guilty; for I have proved that there are transgressors among the Jews, as well as among the Gentiles.” (Page 102.) Not at all. If he proved no more than this, not one person would “become guilty before God.” Not one “mouth” of Jew or Gentile would “be stopped,” by showing, “there were Jewish as well as Heathen transgressors.” I proceed to your observations:-- (1) “In this whole section there is not one word of Adam.” There is enough in the next chapter but one. The Apostle first describes the effect, and afterwards point out the cause. (2.) “He is here speaking, not of all men, but of the Jews; of those alone who were “under the law,’ (verse 19,) and proving from their own writings that there were great cor ruptions among them as well as other people.” (Page 103.) He is speaking of them chiefly; but not of them only, as appears from the ninth verse: “We have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin: As it is written, There is none righteous,” (neither among the Jews nor Gen tiles,) “no, not one.” Does this respect them in their na tional only, not personal, capacity?

Paul, “there” was “none” good or “righteous, no, not one;” every individual, whether Jew or Heathen, was guilty before God. “I conclude, therefore, (i.) That none of those texts refer to any corruption common to all mankind.” (Page 106.) Perhaps they do not, as spoken by David; but they do as spoken by St. Paul. “I conclude, (ii.) Such a general cor rūption as admits of no exception was not necessary to the Apostle’s argument.” (Page 107.) Absolutely necessary; had it not included every individual person, no person’s “mouth” would have been “stopped.” These texts, therefore, do “directly and certainly prove” that, at the time when the Apostle wrote, every individual Jew and Gentile (excepting only those who were “saved by grace”) “were all under sin; ” “that there was none” of them “righteous, no, not one; none that understood or that sought after’” God. This was the fact: And who can find out a more rational way of accounting for this universal wickedness, than by a universal corruption of our nature, derived from our first parent? 6. The next proof is, Eph. ii. 1-3 : “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein, in time past, ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom, also, we all had our conversation in times past, in the desires of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” (Page 108.) (1) “Nothing is here intimated of any ill effects of Adam's sin upon us.” No ! Not if we are “children of wrath by nature?” (2.) “The Ephesians were Gentiles converted to the faith.” Yea, and Jews also. In this very passage the Apostle speaks of both ; first, the Gentile, then the Jewish, converts. (3.) “In these verses he is describing their wretched state, while they were in Gentile darkness,”--and while they were in Jewish darkness; the Jews having been just as wicked be fore their conversion as the Heathens.

There was the less need of our Lord’s speaking much on this head, because it was so fully declared in the Old Testament, and was not questioned by any of those false teachers against whom he was chiefly concerned to warn his disciples. You add: “It has been delivered as a fundamental truth, that no man will come to Christ, the Second Adam, who is not first throughly convinced of the several things he lost in the first Adam.” (Taylor's Doctrine, &c., p. 243.) This is a fundamental truth; none will come to Christ as a Redeemer until he is throughly convinced he wants a Redeemer. No man will ever come to him as a Saviour, till he knows and feels himself a lost sinner. None will come to the “Physician” but “they that are sick,” and are throughly sensible of it; that are deeply convinced of their sinful tempers, as well as sinful words and actions. And these tempers, they well know, were antecedent to their choice, and came into the world with them. So far “every man who comes to Christ is first convinced of the several things he lost by Adam;” though he may not clearly know the source of that corruption whch he sees and feels in his own heart and life. “But why does our Lord never mention Adam, or the corrup tion of our nature through him?” He does mention this corruption, and he presupposes it in all his public discourses. He does not mention it largely and explicitly, for the reasons above recited. “But the Apostles are wholly silent on this head, in their sermons recorded in the Acts, and in their Epistles too.” (Pages 243, 244.) Are they wholly silent in their Epistles? This is a violent mistake. And as to their sermons, it may be observed, 1. That we have not one whole sermon of any one Apostle recorded in the Acts; nor, it may be, the twentieth part of one. 2. That it was not needful for them to prove what none of their hearers denied: No, not even the Heathens; even these allowed the corruption of human nature.

Now, let us view it more closely: “Adam cculd not sin without a sinful inclination.” The sentence is ambiguous. Either it may mean, “Adam could not choose ill, without some sinful temper preceding;” and in this sense it is false; or, “He could not commit outward sin, without first inclining, that is, choosing so to do.” 2. “This his sinful in clination (or temper) was so strong as to overcome his inbred propensity to holiness.” It was not any sinful inclination (in this sense) which overcame his propensity to holiness; but strong temptation from without: How strong we know not, and the circumstances of it we know not. 3. “This his sinful inclination was so malignant, as to expel that principle at once, and totally.” Not by any sinful inclination, but by yielding to temptation, he did lose the love and image of God. But that this was totally and at once, we have no authority to affirm. 4. “Consequently, original righteousness in Adam was consistent with a sinful propensity, vastly stronger, and more malignant, than ever was or can be in any of his posterity.” It was consistent with no sinful propensity at all, but barely with a power of yielding to temptation. It declined in the same proportion, and by the same degrees, as he did actually yield to this. And when he had yielded entirely, and eaten the fruit, original righteousness was no more. Therefore, the Fifth proposition, “Thus original righteousness proves to be far worse than original sin,” is flourish. What a figure does this fair argument make, now it is turned inside out ! From all this it may appear, that the doctrine of original righteousness (as well as that of original sin) hath a firm foun dation in Scripture, as well as in the attributes of a wise, holy, and gracious God. As you do not offer any new argument in your conclusion, I need not spend any time upon it. You subjoin Remarks on Dr. Watts's Additions to his book. Some of these deserve a serious consideration: 1. Either the new-created man loved God supremely, or not. If he did not, he was not innocent ; since the very law and light of nature require such a love to God. If he did, he stood disposed for every act of obedience. And this is true holiness of heart.

And is a rational creature good, unless all its powers are devoted to God? Was not man duly qualified at first to exercise dominion over the other creatures? And could he be so qualified without a principle of love and obedience to their common Lord? Lastly: Can any man prove, either that man could be innocent if he did not love the Lord his God with all his heart; or that such a love to God is not ‘righteousness and true holiness?’” (Page 15.) “From the doctrine of man’s original righteousness we may easily conclude that of original sin. For this reason it is, that some so earnestlyprotestagainstoriginal righteousness, because they dread looking on themselves as ‘by nature’ fallencreatures, and ‘children of wrath. If man was not holy at first, he could not fall from a state of holiness; and, consequently, that first transgression exposed him and his posterity to nothing but tem poral death. But, on the other hand, if ‘man was made upright,’ it follows, (1.) That man, when he fell, lost his original righte ousness, and therewith his title to God’s favour, and to commu nion with God. (2.) That he thereby incurred not only tem poral but spiritual death. He became dead in sin, and a child of wrath. And, (3.) That all his posterity are born with such a nature, not as man had at first, but as he contracted by his fall.” (Pages 20, 21.) “And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thow mayest freely eat: But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it : For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Gen. ii. 16, 17. “GoD forbade man to eat of this tree, in token of his sove reign authority, and for the exercise of man’s love, and the trial of his obedience. The words added, ‘In the day thou eatest thereofthou shalt surely die, or literally, “In dying thou shalt die, mean, not only, ‘Thou shalt certainly die, but, ‘Thou shalt suffer every kind of death:” Thy soul as well as thy body shall die.

Unto whom, with God the Father, and the sanctifying, comforting Spirit, be ascribed all praise for ever !” (Page 83.) “THE phrase, original sin, so far as we can discover, was first used in the fourth century. The first who used it was either St. Chrysostom, or Hilary, some of whose words are these: ‘The Psalmist says, Behold, I was conceived in iniqui ties, and in sins did my mother conceive me. He acknow ledges that he was born under original sin and the law of sin.” Soon after Hilary’s time, St. Augustine, and other Christian writers, brought it into common use.” (Pages 2, 3.) “The scriptural doctrine of original sin may be comprised in the following propositions:-- “I. Man was originally made righteous or holy. “II. That original righteousness was lost by the first sin. “III. Thereby man incurred death of every kind; for," “IV. Adam’s first sin was the sin of a public person, one whom God had appointed to represent all his descendants. “W. Hence all these are from their birth ‘children of wrath,’ void of all righteousness, and propense to sin of all sorts. “I add, WI. This is not only a truth agreeable to Scripture and reason, but a truth of the utmost importance, and one to which the Churches of Christ, from the beginning, have borne a clear testimony.” (Page 8.)- “I. Man was originally made righteous or holy; formed with such a principle of love and obedience to his Maker as disposed and enabled him to perform the whole of his duty with ease and pleasure. This has been proved already; and this wholly over turns Dr. Taylor's fundamental aphorism, ‘Whatever is natural is necessary, and what is necessary is not sinful. For if man was originally righteous or holy, we may argue thus: It was at 416 ThE DOCTRINE OF first natural to man to love and obey his Maker; yet it was not necessary; neither as necessary is opposed to voluntary or free; (for he both loved and obeyed freely and willingly;) nor, as necessary means unavoidable; (this is manifest by the event;) no, nor as necessary is opposed to rewardable; for had he continued to love and obey, he would have been rewarded with everlasting happiness.

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.

And God’s special care of his innocent creature secured him against outward violence. Such were the holiness and the happiness of man in his original state. “But there is now a sad alteration in our nature. It is now entirely corrupted. Where at first there was nothing evil, there is now nothing good: I shall, “First, prove this. “Secondly, represent this corruption in its several parts. “Thirdly, show how man’s nature comes to be thus cor rupted. “First, I shall prove that man's nature is corrupted, both by God’s word, and by men’s experience and observation. “1. For proof from God’s word, let us consider, “(1.) How it takes particular notice of fallen Adam’s com municating his image to his posterity. ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image.” (Gen. v. 3.) Compare this with verse 1: “In the day that God created man, in the image of God made he him. Behold here, how the ‘image’ after which man was ‘made,’ and the ‘image’ after which he is be gotten, are opposed. Man was ‘made’ in the likeness of God; a holy and righteous God “made a holy and righteous creature: But fallen Adam ‘begat’ a son, not in the likeness of God, but in his ‘own likeness; corrupt, sinful Adam begat a corrupt, sinful son. For as the image of God included ‘righteousness’ and “immortality, so this image of fallen Adam included ‘cor ruption’ and ‘death. Moses, giving us in this chapter the first bill of mortality that ever was in the world, ushers it in with this observation,-that dying Adam begat mortals. Having sinned, he became ‘mortal, according to the threatening. And so he ‘begat a son in his own likeness, sinful, and therefore mortal; and so “sin and death passed on all.’ “Let us consider, (2.) That text, ‘Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean P. Not one.” (Job xiv. 4.) Our first parents were unclean; how then can we be clean? How could our immediate parents be clean? Or how shall our children be so? The uncleanness here mentioned is a sinful uncleanness; for it is such as makes man’s days ‘full of trouble.’ And it is natural, being derived from unclean parents.

There were seventy-four churches, besides chapels, and fourteen monasteries, with as many more hospitals and infirmaries, which were in all instant reduced to a ruinous heap, and their immense riches buried in the earth! But though scarce twenty houses were left standing, yet it does not appear that the number of the dead amounted to much more than one thousand one hundred and forty-one persons; seventy of whom were patients in an hospital, who were buried by the roof falling upon them as they lay in their beds, no person being able to give them any assistance. Callao, a sea-port town, two leagues distant from Lima, was swallowed up by, the sea in the same earthquake. It vanished out of sight in a moment; so that not the least sight of it now appears. Some few towers, indeed, and the strength of its walls, for a time, endured the whole force of the earthquake: But scarcely had its poor inhabitants begun to recover their first fright which the dreadful ruin had occasioned, when, suddenly, the sea began to swell, and, rising to a prodigious height, rushed furiously forward, and overflowed, with so vast a deluge of water, its ancient bounds, that, foundering most of the ships which were at anchor in the port, and lifting the rest above the height of the walls and towers, it drove them on and left them on dry ground far beyond the town. At the same time, it tore up from the foundations everything therein of houses and buildings, excepting the two gates, and here and there some small fragments of the walls themselves, which, as registers of the calamity, are still to be seen among the ruins and the waters, -- a dreadful monument of what they were! In this raging flood were drowned all the inhabitants of the place, about five thousand persons. Such as could lay hold on any pieces of timber, floated about for a considerable time; but those fragments, for want of room, were continually striking against each other, and so beat off those who had clung to them.

Should he beckon the man on the red horse to return, and say, "Sword, go through this land;" can we complain he gave us no warning Did not the sword first bereave abroad; and did we not then see it within our borders Yet the merciful God said, "Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further;" he stopped the invaders in the midst of our land, and turned them back again, and destroyed them. Should he send the man on the pale horse, whose name is Death, and the pestilence destroy thousands and ten thousands of us; can we deny that first he warned us by the raging mortality among our cattle So, if we provoke him to lay waste our earth, and turn it upside down, and overthrow us, as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah; shall we not have procured this unto ourselves Had we no reason to expect any such calamity; no previous notice; no trembling of the earth before it clave; no shock before it opened its mouth Did he set no examples of so terrible a judgment before our eyes Had we never heard of the destruction of Jamaica, or Catania, or that of Lima, which happened but yesterday If we perish at last, we perish without excuse; for what could have been done more to save us