Chrift? I have the fame doubt concerning what is faid (p. 241.) of "delicately-flavoured tea, finelyfcented coffee; the friendly bowl, the pyramid of Italian figs, and the pistacia-nut of Aleppo." Befide that the mentioning these in such a manner is a ftrong encouragement of luxury and sensuality. And does the world need this? the English in particular? -Si non infaniunt fatis fua fponte, inftiga.

Letter 10. p. 251. "Thofe treasures which spring from the imputation of Christ's righteousness." a word of his atoning blood? Why do fo many men love to fpeak of his righteousness, rather than his atonement? I fear, because it affords a fairer excuse for their own unrighteousness. To cut off this, is it not better to mention both together? at least never to name the former without the latter?

P. 267. "Faith is a perfuafion that Chrift has fhed his blood for me, and fulfilled all righteousness in my stead." I can by no means fubfcribe to this definition. There are hundreds, yea thousands of true believers, who never once thought, one way or the other, of Christ's fulfilling all righteousness in their flead. I perfonally know many who to this very hour have no idea of it; and yet have each of them a divine evidence and conviction, Chrift loved ne, and gave himself for me. This is St. Paul's account of faith: and it is fufficient. He that thus believes, is juftified.

P. 269. "It is a fure means of purifying the heart, and never fails to work by love." It furely purifies the heart-if we abide in it; but not if we draw back to perdition. It never fails to work by love, while it continues; but if itself fail, farewel both love and good works.

"Faith is the hand which receives all that is laid up in Chrift." Confequently, if we make shipwreck of the faith, how much fo ever is laid up in Chrift, from that hour we receive nothing.

Letter 11. p. 270. "Faith in the imputed righteousness of Christ, is a fundamental principle in the gofpel." If fo, what becomes of all those who think nothing about imputed righteousness? How many who are full of faith and love, if this be true, muft perish everlastingly?

P. 282. Thy hands muft urge the way of the deadly weapon, through the fhivering flesh, till it be plunged in the throbbing heart." Are not these defcriptions far too ftrong? may they not occafion unprofitable reafonings in many readers?

Ne puerum coram populo Medea trucidet.

Ibid. “How can he justify it to the world?" Not at all. Can this then justify his faith to the world? P. 290, 291. "You take the certain way to obtain comfort; the rightoufnefs of Jefus Chrift." What, without the atonement? Strange fondness for an unscriptural, dangerous mode of expreffion!

P. 292. So the merits of Chrift are derived to all the faithful." Rather the fruits of the Spirit: which are likewife plainly typified by the oil in Zechariah's vifion.

P. 297. "Has the law any demand? It must go to him for fatisfaction. Suppose, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyfelf." Then I am not obliged to love my neighbour. Christ has fatisfied the demand of the law for me. Is not this the very quinteffence of Antinomianifm?

P. 298. "The righteoufnefs wrought out by Jefus Chrift, is wrought out for all his people, to be the caufe of their juftification, and the purchase of their falvation. The righteousness is the caufe, the purchafe." So the death of Christ is not fo much as named!" For all his people." But what becomes of all other people? They must inevitably perish for ever. The die was caft, ere ever they were in being. The doctrine to pass them by, has.

Confign'd their unborn fouls to hell,

And damn'd them from their mother's womb! I could fooner be a Turk, a Deift, yea an Atheist, than I could believe this. It is lefs abfurd to deny the very being of God, than to make him an al mighty tyrant.

P 306. "The whole world and all its feafons, are rich with our Creator's goodnefs. His tender mercies are over all his works." Are they over the bulk of mankind? Where is his goodnefs to the non-elect? How are his tender mercies over them? "His temporal bleffings are given to them.”

But are they to them bleflings at all? Are they not all curfes? Does not God know they are? that they will only increafe their damnation? Does not he defign they fhould? And this you call goodness! this is tender mercy!

P. 309. May we not difcern pregnant proofs of goodnefs, in each individual object?" No; on your fcheme, not a fpark of it, in this world or the next, to the far greater part of the work of his own hands!

P. 324. "Is God a generous benefactor to the meanest animals, to the loweft reptiles? And will he deny my friend what is nececffary to his present comfort, and his final acceptance?" Yea, will he deny it to any foul that he has made? Would you deny it to any, if it were in your power?

But if you lov'd whom God abhorr'd,
The fervant were above his Lord.

P. 327. The wedding-garment here means holiness. P. 330. "This is his tender complaint, They will not come unto me!" Nay, that is not the cafe; they cannot. He himself has decreed, not to give them that grace without which their coming is impoffible!

P. 331. "The grand end which God propofes in all his favourable difpenfations to fallen man, is to demonstrate the fovereignty of his grace." Not

fo: to impart happiness to his creatures, is his grand end herein. "Barely to demonftrate his fovereignty," is a principle of action fit for the great Turk, not the most high God.

P. 332. "God hath pleasure in the prosperity of his fervants. He is a boundlefs ocean of good." Nay, that ocean is far from boundless, if it wholly paffes by nine-tenths of mankind.

P. 334 "You cannot suppose God would enter into a fresh covenant with a rebel." I both fuppofe and know he did. "God made the new covenant with Christ, and charged him with the performance of the conditions." I deny both these affertions, which are the central point wherein Calvinism and Antinomianifm meet. "I have made a covenant with my chofen."-Namely, with David my fervant. So God himself explains it.

P. 358. "He will wash you in the blood which atones, and invest you with the righteoufnefs which juftifies." Why fhould you thus continually put afunder, what God has joined?

P. 474. "God himself at the laft day pronoun. ces them righteous, because they are interefted in the obedience of the Redeemer." Rather, because they are washed in his blood,and renewed by his Spirit.

Upon the whole, I cannot but wish, that the plan of thefe dialogues had been executed in a different manner. Most of the grand truths of Chriftianity are herein both explained and proved with great ftrength and clearnefs. Why was any thing intermixed, which could prevent any ferious Chriftian's recommending them to all mankind? any thing which must neceffarily render them exceptionable, to fo many thousands of the children of God? In practical writings I ftudiously abftain from the very fhadow of controverfy. Nay, even in controverfial, I do not knowingly write one line, to which any

but my opponent would object. For opinions fhall I destroy the work of God? then am I a bigot indeed. Much more, if I would not drop any mode of expreffion, rather than offend either Jew or Gentile, or the church of God. I am,

With great fincerity,
Dear Sir,

Your affectionate brother and servant,

J. W. I have but one thing more to add, which is, concerning the feafonableness of the following publication. It may, perhaps, be thought a needlefs revival of a difpute, which happened long ago, and which is now probably forgotten. In anfwer to which, I can affure the reader, that the above is printed from an edition of the Prefervative, now on fale at the Foundery. The feasonableness of this publication is therefore apparent; for though my brother died December 25. 1758, the controverfy did by no means die with him, but ftill fubfifts in the daily publication and fale of the Prefervative, which alfo comes with a special recommendation from Mr. Wesley, into the hands of all his preachers, to be by them firft " carefully read, then to be recommended and explained to the feveral focieties where they labour." So that the controversy is, in the most effectual manner, daily and hourly kept alive by Mr. Wefley himself. This proves very fufficiently the seasonableness, and, as things have happened, the expediency, of the prefent appearance of the following letters in public. How pertinent an answer they contain to Mr. Wefley's objections, is now to be left to the confideration of the candid reader.

Miles-Lane,

December 5. 1764.

*

W. HERVEY.

See the last paragraph of a tract, entitled, Reafons again a feparation from the church of England. Printed alfo in the Frefervative, p. 237.