صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

:

poor and the afflicted. Yes, these were their compli cated crimes they were "righteous over much;" and therefore were treated with ridicule by other members of the university, against whom no such charges could be substantiated.

"In the year 1735," you say, "John and Charles Wesley had imbibed so much of enthusiastic zeal, that, quitting all prospects in their own country, they embarked for Georgia, to preach the gospel to the American Indians."* Enthusiastic zeal; that is to say, fanatical, irrational seal. But what are the proofs that their zeal was of this description? O, there are two, and two most potent ones. The first is, their "quitting all prospects in their own country"-all prospects of clerical promotion. They were men of learning and talents, especially John Wesley. He was also a man of much application and perseverance; and it is at least possible that, had he tarried at home, and kept his religion within moderate bounds, he might per chance, by the aid of a patron, have passed through the various gradations of clerical office, till, like you, Sir, he might have been designated The Rev. the Archdeacon. And if in that situation he had affected much zeal, not enthusiastic, but rational zeal, for the established church, and published charges against dissenters, it is not the most improbable conjecture that was ever offered, that in due time he might even have worn the mitre. The second proof of their zeal being enthusiastic is, their embarking "for Georgia,

* Page 6.

to preach the gospel to the American Indians." What man in his right mind would ever have done this? To embark at all, how foolish! By so doing they quitted all prospects in their own country, tore themselves from their kindred and acquaintance, and exposed themselves to the danger of a watery grave! Then, to embark for such a purpose! Had it been to collect gold as the dust, and silver as the sand of the sea, their zeal would have been rational; but to go to America to preach the gospel! Who but madmen would ever have done so? And then, to preach the gospel to Indians! Surely they must have been enthusiasts indeed to trouble themselves at all about the souls of Indians !

Ah, Sir, and can you deliberately, in a precomposed address to your clergy, many of whom, instead of being in danger from too much zeal, possess a death-like apathy on divine subjects—can you deliberately mark the apostolical zeal of those men of God with the opprobrious epithet-enthusiastic? A zeal which had for its object, not personal aggrandizement, but the glory of God, and the eternal salvation of myriads of immortal beings-a zeal which, like the apostle's, exposed them to perils by land, perils by water, and perils among false brethren-and a zeal which led them without a sigh to sacrifice the friendship, honour, and pleasures of the world, and not to "count their lives dear unto themselves, so that they might finish their course with joy, and the ministry which they had received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God." Would St. Paul, Sir, have consi

dered this an evil deserving of reprobation? No: he would not have reproved the zeal, but the supineness of ministers of the present age. And had any of the ministers been accused of being too zealous, instead of damping that zeal by censure, he would have increased its action by commendation; and in justification of what might appear eccentricity to frozen-hearted formalists and "gentle theologues," he would probably have said, "Whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God; or whether we be sober, it is for your cause : for the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again." On the subject of Christian zeal, the apostle Paul and his successor, the reverend the archdeacon of Stafford, appear to be completely at issue. The one proclaims that "it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing," and furnishes an illustration of the truth of his doctrine, by "warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom ;" and especially by preaching, at the expense of ease and reputation, "the unsearchable riches of Christ among the Gentiles;" whereas the other furnishes no such example; but on the contrary, designates Christian zeal enthusiastic; and in justification of such designation, tells his clergy that the Wesleys had "quitted all prospects in their

* 2 Cor. v. 13-15.

D

own country, and embarked for Georgia, to preach the gospel to the American Indians !!!"

Wishing Christians universally, and ministers of the gospel in particular, an abundant increase of Christian zeal,

I remain,

Reverend Sir,

Your's in the cause of truth,

J. STANLEY.

LETTER III.

REFEREND SIR,

WHEN I read the following words: "About this time arose a circumstance so remarkable as to be, in my opinion, almost decisive of the whole question,' I rejoiced in hope of "new light." I said to myself, what can this be which is at once to determine whether Methodism is or is not of God? I read on, and found it to be neither more nor less than that Mr. Wesley and Mr. Whitfield did not agree in opinion on the subject of Universal Redemption. Sir, I acknowledge my obligation for "new light," for till now 1 never understood, nor even imagined that such a question could be determined by such a circumstance. But we live and learn. But by what rational process do you attempt to prove such difference of opinion to be conclusive against Methodism's being of God? You tell us that, "Had these men been contented to be received as mere human teachers, there would have been nothing uncommon or extraordinary in such a difference of opinion. But, as both chose afterward to assume the style and manner of the apostles; as they pretended, and perhaps in their enthusiasm sometimes believed, that their thoughts, words, and many of their most trivial actions were suggested by

* Page 6.

« السابقةمتابعة »