Beneath whofe venerable fhade, For thought and friendly converse made, Whose fhrine is fhaded from the fkies, You are men of more under Now, Gentlemen, can you say between God and your own fouls that these verses deserve the treatment you have given them? I think, you cannot. ftanding. You know they are not contemptible. If any of you will ftrike a real blot, if you will point out even in public (though that is not the most obliging way) any thing juftly reproveable in our Writings, probably we fhall acknowledge and correct what is amifs; at leafl, we fhall not blame you. But every impartial man must blame that method of proceeding, which neither confifts with juftice nor humanity. Perhaps you may fay, "You have been provoked." By whom? "By Mr. Romaine." I anfwer, I am not Mr. Romaine; neither am I accountable for his behaviour. And what equity is this? One man has offended you: therefore you fall upon another. Will it excufe you to fay, but he is called by the fame name? Efpecially, when neither is this his own name, but a term of derifion? Gentlemen, do to others, as you would have them do to you. Then you will no more injure one who never offended you (unless this offend you, that he does really believe Jefus Chrift to be God over all, bleffed for ever) then you will not return hatred for goodwill, even to fo infignificant a person as JOHN WESLEY, LETTER CX.. [From the Rev. Mr. Wefley, to the fame.] October, 5, 1756. REALLY, Gentlemen, you do me too much honour. I could fcarce expect fo favourable a regard from those who are profeft admirers of Mr. Aaron Hill's verse, and Mr. Caleb Fleming's profe. Nevertheless I cannot but observe a few small mistakes in the eight lines with which you favour me. You fay, "We fuppofe the fpecimen of Mr. Wesley's Hymns (the false fpelling is of little confequence) was fent 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 "And if the of the letter wherein those lines were inserted. Moravians pleafe to felect a like fample of what has been done by them, they may expect from us the fame juftice." Another little mistake, thofe lines are not felected; but are found in the very first hymn (as I obferved in my laft) that occurs in the first verfes which my Brother and I ever published. We have received a letter "complaining of our having jumbled the Poetry of the Methodists and Moravians in an indiscriminate cenfure." Not fo. The thing chiefly complained of was, 1. Your "jumbling whole bodies of people together, and condemning them by the lump, without any regard either to prudence, justice or humanity." 2. Your "treating with fuch contempt those who are by no means contemptible Writers, Mr. Norris and Mr. Herbert." The laft and least thing was, your "coupling the hymns of Moravians and Methodists together." It was here I added, "As probably you have never feen the books which you condemn, I will tranfcribe a few lines:" but neither did I give the leaft intimation, of "ap pealing pealing hereby to the public, in proof of our fuperiority over the Moravians." This is another miftake. At first I was a little inclined to fear, a want of integrity had occafioned this misrepresentation. But upon reflection, I would put a milder conftruction upon it, and only impute it to want of understanding. Even bodies of men do not fee all things, and are then especially liable to err, when they imagine themselves hugely fuperior to their opponents, and fo pronounce ex cathedra. Another inftance of this is just now before me. A week or two ago, one put a Tract into my hands, in which I could difcern nothing of the Chriftian, Gentleman or Scholar; but much of Jow, dull, ill-natured fcurrility and blafphemy. How was I furprized when I read in your 315 page, "We have read this little Piece with great pleasure!" When I found you so fmitten with the Author's "Spirit, fenfe and freedom," his Smart animadverfions and becoming severity! Oh Gentlemen! Do not you speak too plain? Do not you discover too much at once? Efpecially when you fo keenly ridicule Mr. Pike's fuppofition, that "the Son and Spirit are truly divine." May I ask, if the Son of God is not truly divine, is he divine at all? Is he a little God, or no God at all? If no God at all, how came he to fay, I and the Father are one? Did any Prophet before from the beginning of the world, ufe any one expreffion, which could poffibly be fo interpreted as this and other expreffions were, by all that heard Jesus speak? And did he ever attempt to undeceive them? Be pleased then to let me know, if he was not God, how do you clear him from being the vileft of men? I am, Gentlemen, Your Well-wisher, tho' not Admirer, JOHN WESLEY. LETTER LETTER TER CXI [From the Rev. Mr. J. Wesley, to Miss H——.] Dublin, April 5, 1758. IT is with great reluctance that I at length begin to write: firft, because I abhor difputing, and never enter upon it, but when I am, as it were, dragged into it by the hair of the head; and next, because I have fo little hope, that any good will arife from the present difpute. I fear your paffions are too deeply interested in the question to admit the force of the frongeft Reason. So that, were it not for the tender regard I have for you, which makes your Defire a motive I cannot refift, I should not spend half an hour in so thankless a labour, and one, wherein I have fo little profpect of fuccess. "The Doctrine of Perfection, you say, have perplexed you much, fince fome of our Preachers have placed it in fo dreadful a light one of them affirming, a Believer, 'till perfect, is under the curfe of God, and in a flate of damnation. Another, if you die before you have attained it, you will furely perish." By Perfection, I mean, perfect love, or the loving God with all our heart, so as to rejoice evermore, to pray without ceafing, and in every thing to give thanks. I am convinced, every Believer may attain this: yet I do not fay, he is in a ftate of damnation, or under the curfe of God, 'till he does attain. No, he is in a flate of grace, and in favour with God, as long as he believes: neither would I fay, "if you die without it, you will perish :" but rather, "'till you are faved from unholy tempers, you are not ripe for glory. There will therefore more promifes be fulfilled in your foul, before God takes you to himself." "But none can attain Perfection, unless they firft believe it attainable." Neither do I affirm this. I know a Calvinift in London, who never believed it attainable, 'till the moment fhe did attain it: and then lay declaring it aloud for many days, 'till her fpirit returned to God. "But you yourself believed eighteen years ago, that we fhould not put off the infection of nature, but with our bodies." I did fo. But I believe otherwife now, for many reasons, fome of which you afterwards mention. How far Mr. Roquet, or Mr. Walsh may have mistaken these, I know not, I can only answer for myself. "The nature and fitnefs of things" is fo ambiguous an expreffion, that I never make use of it. Yet if you ask me, Is it fit or necessary, in the nature of things, that a foul should be faved from all fin, before it enters into glory? I answer, It is. And fo it is written, no unclean thing shall enter into it. Therefore whatever degrees of holinefs they did, or did not attain, in the preceding parts of life, neither Jews nor Heathens, any more than Chriftians, ever did, or ever will enter into the New Jerufalem, unless they are cleanfed from all fin, before they enter into eternity. I do by no means exclude the Old Teftament from bearing witness to any truths of God. Nothing lefs: but I fay, the experience of the Jews is not the standard of Chriftian experience: and that therefore, were it true, the Jews did not love God with all their heart and foul, it would not follow, therefore no Chriftian can. Because we may attain what they did not. "But you fay, either their words do not contain a promise of fuch Perfection, or God did not fulfil this promise to them to whom he made it." I answer, he furely will fulfil it, ta them to whom he made it: namely, to the Jews, after their difperfion into all lands; and to thefe is the promise made: as will be clear to any, who impartially confiders the 30thchapter of Deuteronomy, wherein it ftands. I doubt, whether this Perfection can be proved by Luke vi. 40. From 1 John iii. 9, (which belongs to all the children of |