BX 6195 .A7 
 
 1838 
 
 c.l 
 
 
 Annan, Will 
 
 iam, 
 
 1805 
 
 -1882. 
 
 The difficu 
 
 Ities 
 
 of . 
 
 Arminian 
 
 Methodism 
 
 
 
 
f,M--. 
 
;5r*^5?^«''^J^S^^ ^ 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Owin; to the writer's distance from the press, a few 
 typographical errors have been sufFered to remain in this 
 work, the most important of which are the following: 
 
 Page 41, 12th Ime from lop, for states, read "aa 
 
 STATES." 
 
 Page 45, 7th Ime from bottom, for reason, read evasion. 
 
 Page 71, 4th line from bottom for now-elect, read non* 
 •Uct. 
 
 Page 209, 5th line from bottom (note) for Hearn,** read 
 I^ave. 
 
 Page 327, loivcst hne, for Discip, p, 9, read Disc, p. 9. 
 
THE DIFFICULTIES 
 
 OF 
 
 ARMINIAN METHODISM; 
 
 EMBRACING 
 
 Striciiires on the Writings of Wesley^ Drs* 
 Clarke, Fish, Bangs, and other s, 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS 
 
 ADDRESSED 
 
 TO THE REV. * * * *. 
 
 BY WIIililAM ANIVAN. 
 
 The prejudice against religious controversy is irration- 
 al and hurtful. Dr. Mason. 
 
 It may be truly affirmed, that the evils of controversy 
 are transient; the good it produces is permanent. 
 
 Rohert Hall. 
 
 Third Edition, revised and enlarged from the Seconds 
 
 PITTSBURGH: 
 
 t>UBLISHED BY LUKE LOOMIS. 
 
 Sold also by J. Whetham, Philadelphia; Ezra Callin, 
 New York; Burgess &, Crane, Cincinnati. 
 
 1838. 
 
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the )'ear 
 18:6, by Rev. William Annan, in the Office of the Clerk 
 of the District Court of the Western District of Penn- 
 sylvania. 
 
 k^nderson ^ Loomis, printen. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 SoMKTHiNG over a year lias elapsed sinee the writer 
 published the following' letters, being- a revised and en- 
 larged form of a tract which had issued from the press 
 some two years previously. The author of the work was 
 unknown to fame, nor did he venture to suppose that, 
 excepting the goodness of his cause, there was aught 
 either in the design, or the execution, adapted to win the 
 approbation of those whose favorable opinion it is always 
 laudable to desire, and honorable to deserve. 
 
 The events of the past year, connected with ike gene- 
 ral subject, and with causes directly opposed to each 
 other, have encouraged him to prepare and publish a third 
 edition of his little book, with such enlargements as may 
 render it more worthy of its title, and better suited to tha 
 object in view. From his ministerial brethren, who are 
 known to harmonize with the writer in theological senti- 
 ment, he has received a degree of countenance, and effi- 
 cient support, which he had not ventured to anticipate, 
 and which may well be supposed to be most grateful to 
 his feelings. And he is happy to number among those 
 whose kind sympathy and friendly aid have been received, 
 individuals of the wise and good, whose names and influ-- 
 ence are a sufficient passport to the confidence of any 
 Christian community. 
 
 But the writer has also been animated in the execu- 
 tion of this work by the Jcind of reception which has been 
 awarded to himself and his labors, on the part of those 
 whose views and usages have been especially the topics of 
 remark. It is a fact familiar to all, that for many years 
 the scheme of theological truth ccmmonly called Cah 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 vinism, particularly as maintained by the Presbyterian 
 church, has been the object of unceasing and unmeasured 
 hostility, directed by the clerical leaders of Episcopal 
 Methodism. Every channel of access to the public mind, 
 from the elaborate volume, and plausible tract, down to 
 the pulpit declamation, and newspaper paragraph, has 
 been put in requisition, to portray in colors of the darkest 
 hue that hated system, and to shake the deep foundations 
 which it has so long and so deservedly held in the public 
 esteem and approbation. But except so far as truth and 
 candor were forgotten or invaded in the crusade, it was 
 regarded only as a good illustration of that perfect free- 
 dom, both in church and state, which is the glory of the 
 present day, and of the government under which we claim 
 and enjoy our mutual rights. With the single exception 
 referred to, no one complained, and for various reasons, 
 almost no one replied. 
 
 After this protracted indulgence, the treatise now pre- 
 sented to the public, made its appearance. And what- 
 ever might be thought of his logic, the writer did suppose 
 that the exercise of a right which had been so liberally 
 employed by our Methodist friends, would be freely con- 
 ceded to otiiers. Judge then of his surprise and regret on 
 discovering that he would be met, not with sober argu- 
 ment, to correct his supposed errors, but with a volley of 
 abuse, for which it is not easy to find a suitable parallel. 
 With one thing, however, he has reason to be satisfied: 
 He has thus obtainsd from a source the least likely to fur- 
 nish it, an involuntary admission that his work has not 
 been altogether like the sliaft of Priam— "feZwm imbelle 
 sine ictuy The dart of the feeble old monarch did not 
 kmdle the ire, or provoke the denunciations of him against 
 
PREFACE. ▼ 
 
 whom it was directed. Its weak and ineffectual stroke 
 excited rather the derision than the anger of the foe. 
 
 It is not intended to offer any justification of the 
 publication of these letters, further than may be found in 
 the work itself, particularly in the introductory letter, 
 and the appendix. Every impartial person who will givo 
 the volume a perusal, will, it is believed, be fully per- 
 suaded that something of the kind was imperiously de- 
 manded, under existing circumstances. In this convic- 
 tion, the writer is happy to have the concurrence of sorao 
 of the wisest and best men of the land.* "We would 
 respectfully entreat Presbyterians," remarks the venera- 
 ble Dr. Green, "who think and say that it were better not 
 to expose the objectionable practices of the Methodists, 
 to consider the insidious nature of error, both in doctrino 
 and practice. It almost always comes in by slow ad- 
 vances, and is always most dangerous when it is asso» 
 ciated with something commendable, especially with ap. 
 parent zeal." Such, too, were the precept and practice 
 of the inspired apostles, and also of their Master, whose 
 life was employed in exposing error and delusion, and 
 establishing the principles of righteousness and truth; and 
 that, too, in direct conflict with those who were the wor- 
 shippers of the true God, and whose zeal would compas* 
 sea and land to make one proselyte to what they believed 
 to be important to the interests of true religion. 
 
 It is proper further to state, that the painful and hu- 
 miliating exposure which has been made of the policy 
 pursued by Methodism, does not apply to the laity of that 
 
 * See particularly Dr. Alexander's letter, on anothw 
 page. 
 
 1* 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 •ommunion. The travelling preachers have constituted 
 themselves the sole depository of ecclesiastical power ; 
 and to them, as the authors, belongs the exclusive merit 
 or reproach which may attach to the measures adopted 
 by that body. In the language of their founder, speaking 
 ecclesiastically, ''they are no republicans, and never in- 
 tend to be. It were better for those who are so minded, 
 to go quietly away^ Accordingly, the people are ex- 
 eluded entirely from the administration of affairs, and 
 are required to receive at the hand of their clerical supe- 
 riors, whatever measure they may choose to mete to tl)em. 
 We cannot hold the laity responsible for the offensive and 
 unchristian proceedings referred to, since the preachers 
 have forbidden them to have any part or lot in the 
 matter. 
 
 It is only necessary to add, that in preparing this 
 edition, the Methodist authorities before cited have been 
 re-examined with much care, and with deepened convic- 
 tions, confirmed by numerous other references, that the 
 most entire justice has been done to the cause of Ar- 
 minianism. If there still are errors in the book, they 
 are such as have escaped the anxious and conscientious 
 diligence of the writer, and which he will cheerfully cor- 
 rect, whenever convinced of their existence. 
 
 October IQth, 1837. 
 
RECOM M END ATIONS. 
 
 The following are a few, among many, recommenda- 
 tions, which the author and publisher have received. 
 
 From the Rev. Dr. Alexander. 
 
 Rev. VV. Annan: 
 
 Dear Sir — I have read v/ith much approbation your 
 little v/ork, entitled, "The Difficulties of Arrainiaii 
 Methodism." So far as the discussion of doctrinal points 
 is concerned, I think tlic subject has been treated in a 
 fair and masterly manner. Tlic book should be widely 
 circulated in our church; and I am disposed to aid in 
 bringing it into notice. But although I am of opinion 
 that the argumentative part of the work is admirably 
 conducted, there are some things which, if removed, 
 would improve the volume.* I am persuaded, however, 
 from the facts which you have stated, that such a defence 
 against the ungenerous attacks of many assailants, was 
 called fur, and will effectually subserve the promotion of 
 evangelical truth.— Respectfully Yours, &c. 
 
 A. ALEXANDER. 
 Princeton, N. J., July 8, 1837. 
 
 * Dr. Alexander, in another part of his letter, makes a 
 number of valuable suggestions, of which the author has 
 availed himself in this edition. 
 
Vlll RECOMMliNDATIONS. 
 
 From the Biblical Repertortj, for July, 1837. 
 "The autlior has, by this production of his pen, proved 
 himself to be a workman that need not be ashamed. 
 Whoever vi^ishes to see the objections commonly made by 
 Arminians to the Calvinistic system, fairly rolled back on 
 their own, will find satisfaction in the perusal of this 
 work." 
 
 From the Rev. George W. Musgrave, pastor of the 2d 
 
 Preshyterian church, Baltimore. 
 
 Dear Sir — I was rejoiced to see the second edition of 
 
 your Difficulties of Methodism, and still niore so, to learn 
 
 that you intend to issue a third edition. It was quite 
 
 time that the slanders and gross misrepresentations of 
 
 that denomination should be repelled and exposed. You 
 
 have "used them up" handsomely, and deserve the thanks 
 
 of all who love truth, honesty, honor, and rational piety. 
 
 I hope you will go on; and if I can aid you in any way in 
 
 the circulation of your useful book, I will cheerfully do so. 
 
 Yours affectionately, 
 
 G. W. MUSGRAVE. 
 Rev. W. Annan. 
 
 F.om an editorial notice in the Presu.lerian of Oct. 29/A, 
 by Rev. Wm. Englcs. 
 Mr. Annan was induced to undertdke this work in self, 
 defence. The Methodist denomination have surpassed 
 all others in the boldness of their attacks on Calvinistic 
 Presbyterianism, and this too in their authorized tracts, 
 which arc carefully circulated in Presbyterian neighbor- 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS. IX 
 
 hoods. Mr. Annan had been an eye-witness of the evil 
 of this practice, and was perfectly justifiable in his pre. 
 sent attempt to counteract it. The author and his book 
 have been assailed with great violence in some of the 
 Methodist Journals ; but we can see no reason for their 
 wrath, in the temper or style in which the difficulties of 
 • Arminian Methodism are pourtrayed. In truth, Mr. A. 
 has furnished a f>opular treatise, which cannot easily be 
 answered. He has carried the war into, the enemy^s ter- 
 ritory, and has put those on the defensive who have hith- 
 erto considered it their right to act on the offensive. We 
 have no unfriendly feelings towards the Methodists; but 
 where they will make their incursions on Presbyterian 
 congregations, we advise the assailed to procure and cir- 
 culate Mr. Annan's book.. 
 
 From the Rev. Joshua Moore, of Mifflin county, Pa. 
 
 Dear Brother — I have finished the perusal of your work 
 upon Arminian Methodism, and in truth and candor, I 
 found it excellent. Almost the only fault I discovered 
 was its extreme brevity. Not only do I feel free to com- 
 mend its matter and style, but its spirit. You indulge a 
 little in irony, but it seems to me no infringement upon 
 the law of neighborly love, since your design is not so 
 much to be humorous at the expense of the feelings of 
 others, as to expose errors which cannot always be reached 
 by mere logic. Your's is not a superfluous work, but 
 subservient to the salvation of souls, and the glory of God 
 
X RKCOMMENUATIONS. 
 
 I bid you, therefore, God speed, and shall take pleasure 
 in giving your work circulation among my people. 
 Your friend and rdlow-laborcr, 
 
 JOSHUA MOORE. 
 Rev. W. Annan. 
 
 From the Pittshvrgh Christian Herald, for Oct. lith. 
 
 Altliough our autlior, in the first instance, stood on the 
 defensive, stili, as the war was begun by his opposers, his 
 successful dcvelopcnicnt of the difiiculties of the Arminian 
 sj'stem, is not only higlily reasonable, but just and expe- 
 dient. It is high time the Presbyterian church should 
 understand the weak points of Methodism; and I honestly 
 aver, that I know of no little volume so well adapted, on 
 the whole, to give the necessary information. Most 
 treatises on the general subject are too prolix for ordinary 
 readers. But in this little volume, the style is too popular 
 and sprightly, the argument too pointed and concise, to 
 permit even tlie possibility of tedium in the most drowsy 
 reader. Calvinists will here find the difficulties of Ar- 
 minian Methodism strongly, fairly, and yet succinctly 
 stated; and perhaps no where else can any thing be found 
 so convenient, portable, neatly executed, and popularly 
 written; so well adapted to strengthen their confidence in 
 their own system, and guard them against the unfounded 
 cluinis of self-conceited Arminians. 
 
 Ma. LooMis : — I have perused, with as much care, as 
 my limited time would permit, the work of Mr. Annan, 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS. XI 
 
 which you placed iu my hands, a few days ago, entitled 
 " The Difficulties of Arminian Methodism." The work 
 is well executed. The author has presented the difficul- 
 ties of the system which he assails, in a clear and forcible 
 manner. The radical authorities which he has intro- 
 duced, greatly enhance the value of the work. Some of 
 these, his opponents cannot disown, and will, doubtless, 
 be slow to controvert. Those who are so fond of exhib- 
 iting the difficulties of Calvinism, will here find room for 
 the trial of their skill in settling the difficulties of their 
 own system. The work is cheerfully recommended to 
 the patronage of an intelligent christian public. 
 Yours, sincerely, 
 
 D. ELLIOTT. 
 Alleghenytown, May 7, 1838. 
 
 For a number of years the Presbyterian church has 
 been assailed on every side ; and by none other with 
 greater violence than brethren of the Methodist church. 
 Instances of successful defence were not altogether want- 
 ing; but they were of an ephemeral character, and passed 
 away with the polemics of the time when they appeared. 
 The course which the author of this book has adopted, 
 has given a momentum as well as a permanency to his 
 effisrt quite beyond what the others attained. It was 
 wise to carry the war into the territory of the assailants, 
 and this Mr. Annan has done with ability and success. 
 I cordially approve of the improvements made in this edi- 
 tion, so far as I have been able to compare them with the 
 former, and cheerfully join in recommending it to the 
 €hri«-tian public. 
 
 T. D. BAIRD. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 Introductory Kemarks. Circumstances which gave rise 
 to the work. Undertaken iu self-dclence. iMisreprc- 
 sentations of our Doctrines on the part of Methodism. 
 Slanderous imputations of her Tracts, authorized by 
 the General Conference. "Dialogue between a Pre- 
 destinarian and his Friend." "Duplicity Exposed," 
 &c. Closing Reflections. This Assault on the part 
 of the Conference, unprovoked, and if successful, could 
 not promote True Religion. Refuted by their own 
 admissions. Specimens of Practical Methodism. 
 Postscript — pp. 17 — 46. 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 Difficulties on the subject of Original Sin. Methodist 
 Article. The Book of Discipline is silent on the 
 Question of the Avithor of Sin. The Preachers and 
 private Members may hold and teach that God is its 
 Author, and stil) be good Methodit-ts. Their Doc- 
 trinal System admits and maintains Unavoidable Sin. 
 Dr, Fisk on the 'Subject. Man a Sinner by Grace. 
 The Gospel the Cause of all the Sin in the World. 
 Strange Inconsistencies of the Scheme of Dr. Fisk, 
 and Richard Watson. God is represented as the 
 Author of all Sin. Men and devils sin, and are pun- 
 ished only by Grace. According to tlic Methodist 
 Scheme, little Children are objects of God's wrath, 
 and in danger of eternal perdition. According to 
 Methodism, no Infant can be saved! Important Ad- 
 missions of Watson and Wesloy — pp. 47 — 78. 
 
CONTENTS. Xlll 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 Difficulties of Methodism in reference to Divine Fore- 
 knowledge, as connected with the doctrine of Predes- 
 tination. Wesley's important Concession. The Ar- 
 minian Scheme cannot be shown to be consistent with 
 Human Liberty, by the admission of its Advocates. 
 Absurd Views of Man's Freedom entertained by 
 Methodists. An act of will precedes the Jirst act. 
 The Soul chooses without choice, &c. vfce. Arminian 
 Liberty irreconcilable \vith the Foreknowledg-e of 
 God. The Book of Discipline recognises no such 
 attribute. Dr. Adam Clarke's wretched attempt to 
 escape from the Difficulties of the Subject. Dr. 
 Fisk's Evasion. Statement of undeniable Truth. 
 True doctrine of Predestination. The Difficulties of 
 Foreknowledge equally numerous and great. The 
 inquiry, "Why does Sin exist?" Calvinistic doctrine 
 of Divine Permission, exhibited in the Presbyterian 
 Confession. Modern Methodism teaches that God 
 would have prevented man's sin, but could not. Dr. 
 Bangs, and R. Watson, on the subject. All might 
 justly have been left to perish in sin — otherwise, 
 grace is no more grace, but debt. Scripture doctrine 
 of Election. Absurd consequences of the opposite 
 view. Renders prayer for the salvation of sinners 
 useless and unmeaning, except addressed to the sin- 
 ner, and not to God. Reprobation. Dr. Fisk's mis- 
 representations exposed. Sectarian artifice, in refe- 
 rence to alleged diffi^rences between ancient and 
 modern Calvinism. Sentiments of Turretine. De- 
 fence of certain passages of the Presbyterian Confes- 
 sion. Reprobation, a Methodist doctrine. Postscript. 
 Defence of Calvin in the case of Servetus — pp. 79 — 
 132. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 Difficulties in connection with Atonement. Methodist 
 article teaches Universalism. Is at variance with the 
 
XIV CONTENTS. 
 
 essential nature of Atonement. Airays the designs 
 ana purposes of God against each other. Important 
 Concession by Watson. True hing-e of the contro- 
 versy, the de.^iirf} or intention of Christ in dying for 
 sinners, not the intrinsic value of his sacrifice. Scrip- 
 tures teach a limitation of tiic former, not of the latter. 
 God has not been disp.ppointed. 'Falling from Grace.' 
 Strange Results of the doctrine. Contrasted with the 
 explicit Declarations of the Holy Ghost. Impious 
 statements of Wesley, in reference to God's covenant. 
 The Arminian View of Atonement represents the 
 Divine Being as both cruel and unjust. True doc- 
 trine. Answer to Objections. God not Partial, «Scc. 
 DiiHculties upon tlie subject of Regeneration. Im- 
 mense importance of tliis topic. Delusive modes of 
 presenting it. Absurd notion of Grace. God needs 
 the sinner's "good leave," before he can convert or 
 sanctiiy hiai. Striking extracts from President Ed- 
 wards on Religious Affections — pp. 133 — 172. 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 DifTiculties on the subject of Sinless Perfection. Admit- 
 ted by Wesley to be a feature of Pelagian ism. Tho 
 doctrine, when fairly stated, refutes itnelf Scheme 
 of Fletcher. Involves the licentious features of Anti- 
 nomianism, by abrogating the moral law, and redu- 
 cing the requirements of Heaven to a level with the 
 sinner's convenience. Its contradiction to the Scrip- 
 tures proved. Opposition of Clarke to \V"esley. Their 
 futile reasoning in defence of the doctrine. Difficul- 
 ties in reference to t!ie evidences of a genuine work 
 of the Holy Spirit. Jumping, shouting, laughing, &C., 
 not true evidences. The preaching of Christ and his 
 apostles, not followed by sucli exercises. Singular 
 attempt to enlist the Bible in their fiivor. Decided 
 testimony of the Fathers, and best friends of Method- 
 ism, against such exhilntions. .John Wesley, Cha'« 
 Wesley, Mr. Fletcher, Dr. A. Clarke. J. Wesley vp. 
 Female Exhorters, &c.— pp. 173—201. 
 
CONTENTS. XV 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 Bifficulties in relation to Camp Meetings, and Abuses of 
 Religious ordinances. Reasons for discountenancing 
 Methodist Camp Meetings. Not the Scriptural me- 
 thod of making men holy, but of the contrary ten- 
 dencies. Interesting extracts from the Christian Ad- 
 vocate, edited by Dr. Green. Erroneous views of the 
 design of Preaching. Little value set upon instruc- 
 tion in Religious Truth. Perverted Taste for Noisy 
 Preaching, Improper notions of Divine Truth. Ex- 
 ample of catching and killing the devil in a Prayer 
 meeting. Tendency to produce Infidelity. Difficul- 
 ties on the subject of Religious ordinances. Baptism 
 profaned by admitting improper subjects. Testimony 
 of Wesley and Watson. Baptism of the Infants of 
 the immoral and profane, sets the seal of Heaven to a 
 blank, or an untruth. The Lord's Supper adminis- 
 tered to unv^orthy subjects. The Book of Discipline 
 requires no previous examination. Example of the 
 gross practice of Pvlcthodism. The posture of kneel- 
 ing, contradictory to Scripture, and Popish in its ori- 
 gin. Tends to foster Superstition. Superstitious im- 
 portance attached to the "Prayer of Consecration." 
 Postscript— pp. 202—228. 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 
 Difficulties on the subject of Church government. Scrip- 
 tural argument against the " divers orders" of the 
 Methodist ministry. New^ Testament deacons, not 
 Preachers of the Gospel, but appointed to "serve 
 tables." "Methodist Episcopacy" not taught in the 
 Bible. Admitted by Dr. Bangs to be a mere human 
 invention. Origin of the system. Excludes the people 
 from any participation in the government of the 
 Church. The Preachers are the legislative, execu- 
 tive, and judicial power. Examples of the clerical 
 aristocracy of the system, extracted from Dr. 
 Schmueker's Letters. All the Church Fropertir 
 
XVI CONTENTS. 
 
 belongs to the Conferences, not to tlie Congregations. 
 Ultimate tendencies of this Popisli system. Wesley's 
 opinions respecting Republics, and particularly of 
 American Independence, as the work of the devil! 
 New Testament Episcopacy. Republicanism of the 
 Bible contrasted with Methodism — pp. 2:29 — 263. 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 Review of the Articles and Discipline. Origin of the 
 Work. Formed from Popish prayer-books. Calvin^ 
 istic Articles, and an Arminian Clergy. Origin of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church. Practice against 
 Theory. Methodist Liberality. "Elect Infants." 
 Reverently obey the Bishop. Auricular Confession. 
 Compensation of the Preachers* Calculations founded 
 on the Discipline. Preachers pay themselves libe» 
 rally. Testimony of Facts. Evidence of one who 
 had been formerly a Methodist Preacher. Steward's 
 Notes given for the unpaid balance of the Preacher'* 
 salary. Reply to the objections made to these state- 
 t.nents. Conclusion — pp .264-=-^308. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 JSxamination of the "Dialogue between a Predestinariart 
 and his Friend." Misrepresentations of the Presby- 
 terian Confession, of Calvin, of Twisse, of Piscator, of 
 Zanchius, and of Peter Martyr. Singular illustration 
 of the prosperity of Methodism, extracted from their 
 Christian Advocate — pp. 309. 
 
LETTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 Spirit of Methodism. Unrighteous Mcciisations, 
 
 To the Rev. . 
 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 It is now a number of months since I had the 
 pleasure of passing an evening of friendly and 
 Christian intercourse at your dwelling near B. 
 Amid the varied conversation which occurred at 
 that time, some remarks were made upon the hos- 
 tile character and improper spirit exhibited in the 
 assaults of the advocates of Methodism, upon 
 the denomination of Christians to which we have 
 the honor and privilege to belong. In speaking 
 of the manner in which these assailants of our 
 beloved church should be met, you said, if my 
 memory serves me, that you would prefer, ( in 
 imitation of Faber's celebrated M^orks on Roman- 
 ism and Infidelity,) a clear and distinct exposure 
 of the numberless difficulties and defenceless 
 points of the very system which is so confidently 
 announced as superior to all others; as possessing 
 all their excellencies and none of their peculiar 
 defects. You seemed to admit that in every 
 scheme of religious belief, there woidd necessari- 
 ly be found some points, like " some things" in 
 
18 THK DIFncULTITES OF 
 
 the Epistles of "our beloved brother Paul," 
 '•'hard to be understood^ but in the system of 
 (loctrhie and discipline, adopted by the Presby- 
 terian Church, there were, in your view, fewer 
 of these difhculties than pertain to any other main- 
 tained among men ; and therefore there could be 
 no hazard that in directing public attention to the 
 weak points in other systems, we should leave 
 unguarded our own. 
 
 Although the idea, thus incidentally suggested, 
 impressed my mind as one of much importance, 
 it certainly did not occur, that in tlie arrangements 
 of Divine Providence, it would ever fall to the lot 
 of him who now addresses you, to extend and ap- 
 ply the principle. But occurrences of a recent 
 date, have called up the remarks of that evening 
 vividly to my recollection, and seem to compel 
 the attempt at least, to give form and substance 
 to the tliought which you then threw out. And 
 though I sensibly feel the importance and diffi- 
 culty of the task, and the demand which it makes 
 for talents of a high order ; yet as I have search- 
 ed in vain for some convenient mamial to place 
 in the hands of tho people of my charge, far tlio 
 purpose of guarding them agamst the peculiar 
 form of delusion designed to be exposed in these 
 letters, my apology must be, the necessity of tlie 
 tase, toj^ether with the hope, that notwithstand- 
 
ARJMINIAN METHODISM. 13 
 
 ing the acknowledged imperfections of this per- 
 formance, it may be of sotne use, until a more 
 able pen shall do full justice to the subject. 
 
 I am not ignorant that the office of publishing 
 the errors and weaknesses of others is altogether 
 a thankless one. But I also know, that it is a 
 christian duty to " contend earnestly for the 
 faith once delivered to the saints," and to obviate, 
 repel, and expose, statements and representa- 
 tions erroneously and unrighteously made. Let 
 it be remembered that we are not commencing 
 this controversy. It has been forced upon us, 
 from another quarter ; and the only alternative 
 left us, is, either quietly to submit to the wrongs 
 which are heaped upon us, to witness the pre- 
 cious truth betrayed and insulted, and her advo- 
 cates placed before the world in the most unjust 
 and injurious light ; or to endeavor, after the ex- 
 ample of prophets, apostles, wise men, and the 
 Redeemer himself, to fight her battles, and uplift 
 her standard in the presence of her foes. This 
 controversy, we repeat, has not been sought by 
 us ; it has been violently driven upon us, contra- 
 ry to our wishes and expectations. Not to dwell 
 upon the oft-repeated efforts, in the public minis- 
 trations of Methodist preachers, to disparage and 
 destroy the character and influence of Presbyte- 
 rians — not to speak of their attempts to impress 
 
20 TUB DIFFICULTIES Oy 
 
 the public mind with the idea, that our ministers 
 are heartless formalists, who preach for the sake 
 of filthy lucre, " without converthif^ a single 
 soul for many years, nor perhaps through their 
 whole ministry,''^ — not to urge the fact of their 
 publicly naming- ou,: ministers in connection with 
 the amount of salary received by them, thus de- 
 signing to make the impression, that while we 
 abound in wealth, they are doomed to perpetual 
 poverty : — not to dwell upon these and many 
 other 16'orse features of practical Methodism, we 
 adduce a single example, which is on record, as 
 fairly representing the whole. A lady, says one 
 of our most respectable ministers, was about uni- 
 ting with the Presbyterian church. " On open- 
 ing the door one morning, the letter from which 
 the following extract is made, was found, directed 
 to herself. The circuit rider was charged to his 
 face with being the author of it, and never denied 
 it." 
 
 '* My Sister — As you are about to take a step 
 which will be of great importance to your future 
 welfare, permit me to ask a few questions — What 
 benefit do you expect in the Presbyterian church, 
 you cannot find in ours ? Slc. Brother li." 
 (meaning himself) " has never got but twenty 
 dollars, whereas the Presbyterians have collect- 
 ed near $100 at one time. Whose labours does 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. ?' 
 
 God bless the most, that of the Methouists or 
 Presbyterians ? Do not the Presbyterians admit 
 of card-playing, going to theatres, &c., &c. ? 
 how then can they be the people of God ? Take 
 heed, my Sister, how you join that church ; you 
 may repent of it, when it is eternally too late. 
 Leaving out of view all the God-dishonoring hor- 
 rors of election and reprobation, I cannot see how 
 you can join that people. Beware, my sister, 
 what you do; farewell till we meet at the judg- 
 ment, where you will know that he who writes 
 this is Your Friend," * 
 
 But to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt, 
 that we are acting on the principle of self-defence, 
 the following facts may suffice. Into the district 
 where Providence has cast my lot, t there was 
 introduced, some months since, a parcel of Me- 
 thodist tracts, which were circulated among the 
 famiUes of my charge ; and, in particular, were 
 carefully conveyed into a part of the congrega- 
 tion (a small villagej where not a Methodist re- 
 sided, but where it was generally known there 
 was some unusual attention to religious things. 
 The same publications, I am informed by a Me- 
 thodist preacher, are scattered in great numbers 
 through our cities, and over the wide extent of 
 
 « See Dr. Green's " Christian Advocate," Vol. 9, p. 23. 
 t The writer then resided in MifHin county, Pa. 
 
 2* 
 
22 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 our country. But before proceeding to quote 
 from tliese tracts, I wish to remind you that the 
 statements about to be given, are published, not 
 by an individual, but by the General Tract Soci- 
 ety of the Methodist Episcopal church, under the 
 care and control of the General Conference. 'JMiey 
 may therefore be regarded as the unanimous ver- 
 dict of that church in reference to Prcybyterian- 
 ism. 
 
 We are accused of believing, (I give tlieir ex- 
 press language,) " that God by an eternal and un- 
 changeable decree, hath predestinated to eternal 
 damnation far the greater part of mankind, icith' 
 out any respect to their works ; that God is the 
 author of all sin, ivorkbig ivlckedness in the 
 tvicked ; that the preaching of the Gospel is a 
 mere mock and illusion ; that men are in a far 
 worse condition than the devils in hell, and that 
 God sends forth his servants with a lie in their 
 mouths ;" that God has taken the work of the de- 
 vil out of his hands and does it more elfectually : 
 the devil tempts, God forces men to sin and to 
 perish." We are cliarged with representing our 
 blessed Lord " as a hypocrite, a deceiver of tlie 
 people, a man void of common sincerity ; as 
 mocking his helpless creatures ; as pretending 
 tlic love Avhicli lie had not ; as weeping croco- 
 dile's tear?, weeping over tlie prey which lie 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 23 
 
 himself had compelled to sin, and then doomed 
 to destruction ; as thus representing the most ho- 
 ly God as worse than the devil, more false, more 
 cruel, and more unjust." 
 
 It is true that these impious statements are not 
 all charged upon Presbyterians by name; yet 
 our doctrines are repeatedly named, and our 
 Confession of Faith is very often quoted in proof, 
 and in some instances, as we will presently show, 
 our very ministers, as a body, are introduced, in 
 infamous connexion with these shocking blasphe- 
 mies. It has indeed been said that Methodists 
 urge these things only as objections to the Cal- 
 \lmsiic sysfein; that they do not suppose that 
 Presbyterians adopt such sentiments ; but only, 
 if they were consistent in following out their the- 
 ological views to their consequences, they must 
 receive them as the inevitable inferences. If 
 this were the light in which these charges are to 
 be viewed, it would, I acknowledge, relieve their 
 authors of much of the guilt of iiaving made them. 
 We will see, 
 
 I confess I once thought so. I thought these 
 sentiments were imputed to us rather as mistakes 
 of judgment, than the errors of a corrupt and dis- 
 honest heart. But those were the days of my ig- 
 norance. Since that period, a ray from tiie bril- 
 liant constellation of Methodism at New York 
 
2 4 Tin: Diri-'cn/riEs ov 
 
 has flashed across my path, and shed ligl>t into 
 the darkest cliambers of my soul. Methodism 
 has gone much further. She insists that we 
 must and do maintain precisely what is given 
 above as a fair exhibition of our views. And 
 when Presbyterians have demurred and hesitated, 
 she has fallen quite into a passion, because we 
 will not take her word for it ; and uses hard epi- 
 thets, and throws out dark insinuations, and mut- 
 ters something about " duplicity and artifice." 
 And unless we openly profess and teach the sen- 
 timents, which she says we hold, she will feel 
 herself in duty bound to expose our dishonesty. 
 
 This is by no means a picture of the fancy. 
 I have now lying before me, a tract, published 
 under the direction of the General Canference of 
 the Methodist church, and entitled " Duplicity 
 Exposed," in which an attempt is made to hold 
 up Presbyterians and Congregationalists to the 
 deep detestation of every honest man. Its very 
 title is a sufiiciont index to its character. John- 
 son defines duplicity, " deceit, doublencss of 
 heart and tonorae." Of course, the design of 
 this tract is to expose the '^fi aud and deceitful prac- 
 tices of Presbyterians and others, by which 
 falsehood is made to pass for truth." But we 
 will let the tract speak for itself. After some in- 
 troductory remarks upon the imporlance of since- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 25 
 
 rity ill religious professions, " Duplicity Expo- 
 sed " proceeds as follows: 
 
 " It never comports with honesty, much less 
 with religious integrity, to dissemble with the 
 public, professing one thing whilst we industri- 
 ously circulate another; However unwilling we 
 are to charge such duplicity on A?n Y BODY of 
 people, yet we are constrained to say the preten- 
 sions and practices of some men are to us unac- 
 countable. We have always understood that the 
 Congregational churches in this country, and all 
 who are associated with them, were in doctrine 
 founded on the Assembly's Catechism, and Say- 
 brook Platform." " Agi'eeably to the peculiar 
 sentiments contained in these confessions, we 
 have thought ourselves autliorized to say the Asso- 
 ciated Congregational and Presbyterian churches 
 believe and teach, that God for his own glory 
 hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass ; 
 that by the decree of God some men cmd angels 
 were predestinated to eterncd life and seme to 
 death, and that the number of the predestinated 
 is so definite that it cannot be either increased 
 or diminished. ^^ "But for several years the pub- 
 lic have been entertained with pitiful complaints 
 against the Arminians and Methodists, for mis- 
 representing their doctrine, and charging them' 
 with principles of fatality, reproliation, &c., all 
 
26 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 which they have gravely affected to deny. And 
 that they may lull the people into favoi\ they 
 have dicelt with seeming earnestness on the ge- 
 neral invitations of the Gospel, free agency in 
 man, and universal atonement of Christ ; but 
 with all their ingenuity they have not been able 
 to conceal from the well-informed, the cloven 
 foot of their peculiar tenets, unconditional elec- 
 tion and reprobation." — pp. 1,2. 
 
 In connection with the foregoing, tlie tract con- 
 tains an abusive attack upon a certain Mr. Weeks, 
 author of -a Scripture Catechism, who is charged 
 in three instances with duplicity. In another 
 place they assert, " it ivas not ignorance in Mr. 
 Weeks. It was an intention to blind the eyes of 
 the people concerning his oivn doctrine,''^ ^-c. — 
 p. 6. 
 
 Again : the author and publishers of this reli- 
 gioui trad state their object to be, "simply to 
 show that the Associated Congregational and 
 Presbyterian churches do lelieve and teach tiie 
 S.ime doctrines as ag eed on at Saybrook, and es- 
 tablished by law in this state more than a hundred 
 years ago. And notwithstanding the pitiful whi- 
 ning about their being misrepresented, they are 
 as high-toned Predestinarians at tliis day as ever 
 they were." '• We say," continues the tract, 
 *' they believe the doctrine of eternal and un- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 27 
 
 changeable decrees, of unconditional election and 
 reprobation, of the uniuersal agency of God, by 
 which he workeih all things in all 7nen, even 
 tvickedness in the wickecV^-^^'' because he choo- 
 ses on the whole that they should go on in sin, 
 and thereby give him a plausible pretext for 
 damning them in the flames of hell forever,''^ 
 "We do not mean to blame any person for be- 
 lieving the above stated doctrine, if they cannot 
 conscientiously disbelieve it; but we do and must 
 blame them, when they dissemble their belief by 
 som,etimes saying they do not believe u^hat we 
 know they industriously teach.''^ — pp. 8, 9. 
 
 "If the associated Congregational and Presby- 
 terian churches have made any material alteration 
 in their doctrine and discipline, we think they 
 owe it to the public to show what articles they 
 have rejected," &;c. "In short, they ought to 
 publish a revised and improved edition of their 
 Confession of Faith" — p. 9. Again they say— 
 "The object of this tract is not to controvert or 
 disprove the horrid sentiments it discloses, but 
 simply to demonstrate that such sentiments are 
 held and propagated, while many who affect to 
 disavow them, are endeavoring to suit them to 
 the popular taste by exhibiting them in a disguis- 
 ing dress. TFe blame 7iot people ivho honestly 
 
28 THE DIFFICl'LTIES OF 
 
 believe, but we blame tliose icho di^bditve what 
 they openli/ profess and teach.'" — pp. 9, 10. 
 
 The substance of these qiiotalions may be col- 
 lected at one view from such passages as the fol- 
 lowing: "Zb dissemble tvith the public, by arti- 
 Jice conceal our real sentiments, professing one 
 thing ivhilc ive industriously circulate another;'^ 
 *Hhat they may lull the people into favor, they 
 have dwelt with seeming earnestness" — ^'•dis- 
 semble their belief" — ^'disbelieve ivhat they pro- 
 fess and teach," Slc, &c. 
 
 Now, at this stage of the evidence, that we arc 
 writing in self-defence, we cannot but pause and 
 inquire — By ^vhat authority has Methodism 
 placed herself upon the judgment-seat, and as- 
 suming the prerogative of Ilim who tries the 
 heart, dared to pass upon others a sentence of 
 this dark character? She has attempted to enter 
 the secret recesses of the soul, to examine the 
 unseen motive, and arraign conscience before her 
 bar. She has thus branded this whole scheme of 
 proselytism with the name of blasphemy. "Who 
 opposeth and cxaltcth herself above all that is 
 called God, so that she, as God, sittelh in the 
 temple of God, showing herself that she is God." 
 What could Popery do more? 
 
 The allegations of deception and fraud con- 
 tained in the foremeniioned trad., ou-jlit not to be 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 29 
 
 rashly or lightly made against any individual, 
 much less against several thousand acknowledged 
 ministers of the Gospel, We admit indeed that 
 it is the right, and even the duly, of those who 
 regard us as maintaining dangerous error, to en- 
 deavor to guide us to the knowledge of what they 
 think to be the truth. But no principle of reli- 
 gion, nor of common justice, will sanction their 
 publishing us as a set of deep and artful deceiv- 
 ers, or their ascribing to us a character and course 
 of conduct, which, if generally regarded as cor- 
 rect, must degrade us from our mmisterial stand- 
 ing, as unworthy of countenance among all hon- 
 orable and righteous men. Not content with en- 
 deavoring to show that our system of doctrine 
 legitimately leads to certain impious consequen- 
 ces, they publish us from Dan to Beersheba, as 
 guilty of deliberate and designed dishonesty, be- 
 cause we are not willing to think with them in 
 this matter, but refuse to adopt a thousand impie- 
 ties of the Arminian brain. Again we inquire — 
 From what revelation of the divine will have 
 Methodists learned that these are the measures 
 approved by Heaven for promoting the cause of 
 religion, and advancing the glory of God? 
 
 We have said that charges of this serious na- 
 ture ought not to be made against large bodies of 
 the ministers of Christ, without some verv clear 
 3 
 
30 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 and substantial evidence in proof. What is the 
 evidence in the case under review? By examin- 
 ing the foregoing extracts from the tract called 
 ♦♦Duplicity Exposed," it will be seen to consist 
 of two parts. 1st. We ♦♦believe and teach" the 
 doctrine of divine decrees, election, and reproba- 
 tion. 2d. We nevertheless have the hardihood 
 to teach ♦♦ the general invitations of the Gospel," 
 ♦♦man's free agency," and the " universal suffi- 
 ciency of the atonement." These are ♦'the head 
 and front of our offending," by the showing of 
 the tract itself; and from these premises the con- 
 clusion is drawn, that we are guilty of ♦♦dissem- 
 bling," ♦♦artifice," and ♦♦duplicity," even whilst 
 ministering at the altar, and under the immediate 
 eye of the Searcher of all hearts. And for what 
 object are we supposed to be willing to act this 
 impious part — for what invaluable benefit are we 
 paying this extravagant price? Why, forsooth, 
 ♦♦to lull the people into favor," and prevent their 
 deserting our congregations, and uniting with 
 Methodists. But it may perhaps contribute 
 somewhat to enable us to survive our calamities, 
 that the other Calvhiistic denominations in the 
 country share equally with the Presbyterian and 
 Congregational in the ♦♦tender mercies" of the 
 preachers. 'I'hc Associate Reformed, the Anti- 
 burgher, the Covenanting, and many of the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 31 
 
 Baptist churches, "believe and teach" uncondi- 
 tional election, and also reprobation on account 
 of sin. These churches do also teach the 
 "general invitations," " free agency," &c. It 
 follows, therefore, that as they are equally guilty 
 in the premises, they are also equally guilty in 
 the conclusion. We shall be ablt; to sympathise 
 with each other. 
 
 Such is a specimen of the means of gi'ctce, pre- 
 pared by the preachers for the use and edification 
 of their flocks. In the ardor of controversy, we 
 can apologise for indiscretions. We consent ta 
 give and take a little. But the cool deliberate 
 composition and publication of "Duplicity Ex- 
 posed," by the Conference, and the managers of 
 their Book concern, are evident fruits of the spirit 
 which is not from above. If indeed we were to 
 consent, (to use their own language,) "/o swallow 
 all their assertions together^ and honestly avow 
 theni,''^ they would then cease to charge us with 
 fraud and falsehood. But on this condition alone^ 
 it seems, can we expect to enjoy their favorable 
 opinion. 
 
 If, however, the preachers can^^^'O^^e the truth 
 of these bold accusations, they will stand justified 
 before the church and the world in this matter. 
 If they cannot prove their truth, we would re- 
 commend them to commit to memory, Dr. 
 
32 THB DirncMLTlES OF 
 
 Barrow's definition of SLANDER, viz: ''Utter- 
 ing false speeches against our neighbor, to the 
 prejudice of his fame, safety, welfare, and that o'.it 
 of malignity, vanity, ill-nature, rashness, or bad 
 design." The preachers will have many friends 
 in this righteous cause. That the trutlis of the 
 Scriptures should incur the "wrath" of such per- 
 sons, and that their advocates should be, as in 
 the days of the apostles, '* every where spoken 
 against,^^ is inspired evidence that Calvinists 
 agree with Him who hath pronounced his bless- 
 ing upon his people, ^'■wlien men say all manner 
 of evil of ihem FALSELY for his sake.^^ And 
 if called in his holy Providence to speak or write 
 in defence of his church or his truth, they. may 
 *'' rejoice and be exceeding ghul.''^ 
 
 If further proof that we have been driven to the 
 necessity of defending ourselves, our doctrines, 
 and our good name, be required, it is at hand. 
 Li another of the publications of the General 
 Conference, through their Tract Society, they 
 give numerous references to our standard authors, 
 with the design of fastening the foregoing blas- 
 phemous sentiments upon our church. This 
 tract is entitled, *'A Dialogue between a Predes- 
 tinarian and his Friend," and refers in two in- 
 stances to the Presbyterian Confession of Faith 
 to support the charge of maintaining the grossest 
 
ARMINIAN MSTHODISir. 3S 
 
 impieties. A few specimens of the candor, fair- 
 ness, and accuracy of these references, must suf- 
 fice for the present.* In attempting to quote the 
 standards of Presbyterianism, they cite "chap- 
 ters 3d and 5th of the Assembly's Catechism." 
 But if these learned gentlemen had inquired of a 
 Sabbath school child, they might have received 
 the important information, that the Assembly's 
 Catechism is not divided into chapters; and been 
 also instructed, that before attempting to quote a 
 book, it is generally prudent^ to say the least, to 
 see and read it. Ttiis blunder might be regarded 
 as a mere mistake of the press, were it not that 
 this unfortunate "mistake" is found in the "works 
 of Wesley," the author of the tract ; and also in 
 the stereotyped volume of Methodist doctrinal 
 tracts ; and also in Dr. Bangs' reply to Ilaskel. 
 They all talk of chapters 3d and 5th of the As- 
 sembly's Catechism; and even Dr. W. Fisk,t 
 the great champion of Arminian Methodism, 
 commits the same blunder. 
 
 Again: The following sentiment is ascribed to 
 Dr. Twisse, who was the presiding officer of the 
 Westminster Assembly. "All things come to 
 pass by the efficacious and irresistible will of 
 
 * See Appendix to this volume. 
 
 t President of the Wesleyan UniverBitj, Conn. 
 3* 
 
34 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 God." Now this was originally the charge of 
 Arminius against Calvinism, "cfficaci Dei volun- 
 tate, et cui resisti nequeat omnia evenire," not 
 the language of Twisse. It is true, Dr. Twisse 
 professes his willingness to adopt this language 
 with certain explanations, the design and purport 
 of which may be learned from his definition of 
 the divine will or decree — "Propositum Dei, ut 
 facial vel pcrmittal aliqiiid;" that is, "//le pur- 
 pose of God to do or permit any things AVould 
 not Christian men be ashamed of such perversion 
 of the sentiments of any author? 
 
 Finally: Zanchius is represented as teaching 
 that " God's first constitution was that some 
 should be destined to eternal ruin; and to this end 
 their sins were ordained, and denial of grace in 
 order to their sins." But there is no such pas- 
 sage in the section of the works of Zanchius re- 
 ferred to in the tract; and the accuracy and fair- 
 ness of the extract may be learned from the fol- 
 lowing, Nvhich are the express words of that 
 author: "Deus, ut quotidie permiltit tarn pios 
 quam impios labi in peccatta; sicquoque ab eterno 
 decrevit ut omnes peccare permitteret, Quare 
 non falso dictum universes homines eo fuisse 
 ordinatos, ut permitterentur peccare;" that is, 
 "God, as he daily permits the good as well as 
 the wicked to fall into sin, so also from eternity 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 35 
 
 decreed to permit all men to sin. Wherefore it 
 is correctly said that all men were so far the ob- 
 jects of ordination, that they might be permitted 
 to sin." Thus much for the learning and can- 
 dor of the advocates of Methodism! The cause 
 which demands such methods of support, must 
 be incapable of legitimate defence. 
 
 On a review of these evidences of the hostile 
 spirit of Methodism, I believe. Rev. Sir, you will 
 agree with me that the Presbyterian ministry 
 must sink very far below its proper level, before 
 it will become necessary to refute or even for- 
 mally deny such calumny, as is contained in 
 "Duplicity Exposed." And as to those who are 
 capable of writing and publishing such tracts, /or 
 the glory of God and the spread of religion^ it 
 is not probable they would be made either wiser 
 or better men by any such denial or refutation. 
 Permit me, therefore, in drawing this letter to a 
 close, to suggest a few very obvious reflections. 
 
 1. Suppose Methodism should succeed in her 
 attempt to fix this stain upon the reputation and 
 character of three or four thousand acknowledged 
 ministers of the Lord Jesus Christ — who would 
 be the gainer? Would it be the cause of true 
 religion? But how can it advantage the cause of 
 religion, to expose four thousand of her ministers 
 to contempt and shame? No! It is on the altar 
 
36 THB DIFPICULTIB8 OF 
 
 of exclusive Methodism that this costly sacrifice 
 must be offered; it is at her footstool, and to ap- 
 pease her unholy jealousies, that religion herself 
 must be cast down wounded, bleeding, disho- 
 nored. 
 
 But what had the ministers of the Presbyterian 
 church done, to call down the vengeance of 
 Methodism? Had they commenced a system of 
 fierce and unrighteous hostility against that 
 church? Had they roused the blood of passion, 
 by nncandid and unchristian misrepresentations? 
 No such thing. The whole of their aggravated 
 crime, according to the showing of the tract itself, 
 was, that they had taken the liberty of laying be- 
 fore the public, their oivn views of their oivn 
 doctrines, in the form and language 7vhich 
 seemed to them most agreeable to Scripture and 
 reason. But for this unpardonable offence forth 
 step the Doctors of Methodism, at the head of the 
 General Conference, and attempt to hold them up 
 to public reprobation, as guilty of a departure 
 from the simplest laws of truth and honesty. 
 And this, too, as part and parcel of those efforts 
 by which religion is to be promoted; and worst 
 of all and most to be lamented, by the best and 
 brightest of the very sect which zealously pro- 
 fesses and advocates the doctrine of "sinless per- 
 fection!" From all such ** perfection" may 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 37 
 
 Heaven preserve us ! Indeed, if v/e were Ar- 
 minians, we should be tempted to think that 
 whenever our Methodist friends lift the pen 
 against Calvinism, they "fyll from grace." But 
 to their own master they stand or fall; nor would 
 we v/ish to be exposed Vv'iih them to the searching 
 interrogatory— "Who art tho^. that jiulgest an- 
 other man's servant?" And as if to render the 
 charge against us of secret plans, motives, and 
 intentions, supremely ridiculous, the men who 
 urge these things are those preachers, who have 
 legislated the entire ecclesiastical power of their 
 church into their own hands — wlio have excluded 
 the people, not only from a seat and a vote in 
 their Conferences, but even from the privilege of 
 spectators — and who meet in secret conclave to 
 transact business, to deliberate and to decide on 
 subjects which fear or shame forbids to meet the 
 eyt^ in public, either of friend or foe! Whatever 
 may be the uiiimate designs of Providence with 
 regard to the agents of this system, the '-prius 
 dementat" stands forth in coloring too glaring to 
 be misunderstood. 
 
 2. An inquiry will naturally arise in every re- 
 flecting mind — " Do Methodists really believe 
 what they have published to our prejudice? Do 
 they believe their own assertions? If they have 
 said and done these things, knowingly to slander 
 
38 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Prosbytoiirins, wc can only say, 'Father, forgive 
 thcin.' But if, on tlic other hand, they are per- 
 suaded of the truth of their assertions, then do 
 they believe that we profess a religion essentially 
 diiTerent from theirs; that we worship anotlicr 
 God;" and that the Gospel we preach is as radi- 
 cally opposed to theirs, as the father of evil to the 
 Father of lights — the god of this world, to the 
 God of infinite mercy. How then can they con- 
 sent to hear tlie preaching of men who entertain 
 such blasphemous views? Why do they charge 
 with bigotry those Presbyterians who refuse to 
 commune with them at the table of the Lord? 
 How is it possible they can desire it? — or to in- 
 vite Methodists to commune with them? How 
 can they venture to drink " the cup of devils,'* 
 with us, if we maintain these profane and im- 
 pious sentiments? Indeed, if they speak the 
 truth of us, we are worshippers of Satan, since 
 we worship a god "more false, more cruel, and 
 more unjust." We have only to add, that the 
 foregoing are difficulties, which we are sincerely 
 thankful we are not required to solve. 
 
 Besides, how altered is their tone and lan- 
 guage, when soliciting the pecuniary aid of Pres- 
 byterians in the erection of their houses of wor- 
 ship, or for the support of their preachers! All 
 is then smooth complaisance, and Christian 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 30 
 
 charity, and special care is taken not to offend 
 our ears with such phrases as "duplicity," "dis- 
 sembling," &LC. &c. After they have secured 
 our contributions, however, it is no uncommon 
 thing for Presbyterians to hear from the very 
 pulpits which they have assisted to build, the 
 sentiments of their Confession misrepresented, as 
 implying "infant damnation," "fatality," and 
 such like ; and their spiritual instructors de- 
 nounced in no measured terms. 
 
 3. However agreeable to the character, tem- 
 per, and spirit of ministers of the Gospel, the 
 above-mentioned tracts are supposed to be ; and 
 however well adapted to recommend and pro- 
 mote that religion which " thinketh no eu^7," 
 which forbids to ^Hake up an evil report against 
 our neighbor,^^ or to bear false witness against 
 him; yet it cannot be denied, that among those 
 who do not recognize the sanctions of religion, 
 nor walk in her light, a transaction of the above- 
 mentioned character would have led to results 
 widely different from the pains and penalties of 
 an ecclesiastical tribunal. The civil court would 
 have afforded redress. The strong arm of justice 
 takes effectual cognizance of him who attempts 
 to deprive his neighbor of his good name. There 
 is a ivay, however, of doing such things, which 
 is at least more safe; though I greatly doubt 
 
40 Tin: DirriciLTiES of 
 
 whether among the men of this wicked world, it 
 is considered mncli more honorable. 
 
 4. But perhaps the most curious feature of iliis 
 singular affair remains to be adduced. The 
 preachers themselves have given, in their stand- 
 ard publications, a description of practical Me- 
 thodism, which, if the colors are correctly ap- 
 plied, will transfer the charges of " duplicity," 
 &c., to their authors ; and could this description 
 be known as extensively as the charges, would 
 completely neutralize their poison. On pages 
 52, 53, of the Book of Discipline, we read as 
 follows: "The world says, ^The Metkodisfs 
 are no better than other people. This is NOT 
 TRUE in the general.' " (-God, 1 thank thee," 
 said the self-righteous Pharisee, " that I am not 
 as other men." After thus publishing their su- 
 perior goodness, we are naturally led to expect 
 from the same source, a very exalted character of 
 that piety, which is so much belter than that of 
 all the world beside. A few lines below, on the 
 same page, we read — "How little faith is there 
 among us! How much love of the world! De- 
 sire of pleasure, of ease, of getting tnoneyJ*^ 
 "What continual judging one another! What 
 gossiping, evil speaking, tale-bearing! WHAT 
 WANT OF MORAL HONESTY!!!" 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 41 
 
 But lest this should be supposed to appertain 
 only to the weak brethren, we next cite Wesley's 
 account of "between three and four hundred who 
 professed to be perfected in love.''^ It is extracted 
 from pages 34S, '49, of their stereotyped voknuc 
 of "Doctrinal Tracts." "What do you think of 
 those in London who seem to have been lately 
 renewed in love?''^ After replying that there 
 was ^^ something very peculiar" in the experience 
 of the greater part of them, (particularly that they 
 were "emptied of sin first, and then filled with 
 love,") states a number of particulars, such as 
 their "resisting evil," their not receiving "reproof 
 or contradiction" well, their "replying in a loud 
 voice, with an angry tone, or in a sharp or surly 
 manner; a want of goodness, kindness, and mil. - 
 ness, in their spirit and temper; a want of tempe- 
 rance," &c. Again we read — "Some are want- 
 ing in/fZc/i/?/; a NICE REGARD to TRUTH, 
 simplicity, and godly sincerity! Their love is 
 hardly without dissimidation. Something lik- 
 GUILE is found in their mouth.'^^ And suc'r 
 are specimens of practical Methodism! It is nc' 
 with feelings of pleasure that we make these 
 statements, but as a necessary means of self 
 vindication from unrighteous assault. 
 
 5. Finally: The unchristian measures up ?: 
 which we have commented, have been for msr r 
 4 " 
 
45 THE DirnCVLTIES OF 
 
 years in active operation, directed not against in- 
 dividuals, but against the interests of the whole 
 Presbyterian Body, without meeting with the re- 
 buke and exposure they so richly deserve. But 
 of late our silence has been urged as evidence of 
 a consciousness of guilt. "If these things are 
 not true," said a Methodist preacher to some of 
 the people of my charge, "why are they not con- 
 tradicted and refuted?" We have been driven, 
 therefore, to the unpleasant alternative, either of 
 standing before tlie public as confounded by a 
 sense of guilt, our forbearance construed to our 
 disadvantage, and our love of peace, made a pre- 
 text for more violent assault; or of taking up the 
 pen to assert and prove our innocence, and to di- 
 rect the course of public justice, so as to strike 
 those who ^re really guilty. The interests of 
 truth will permit us to be silent no longer. To 
 ourselves, our children, and the church of God, 
 we owe it, to let the truth be known. And if in 
 defending the precious cause of onr Master, and 
 vindicating our good name, we are compelled to 
 publish some things which seem to bear heavily 
 upon those whom we wish to call Christians, we 
 appeal to the candor of every reader, to say, who 
 have been the originators and instigators, and of 
 consequence, where must rest the responsibility, 
 af Ibis mkappy oentrovOTsy. "If it be p©gsilil«. 
 
ARMINIAN METK0DISM. 48 
 
 98 much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all 
 men;" but, the authority which enjoins "peace," 
 wherever it is possible, also teaches that there are 
 limits to that "possibility." 
 
 Thus, Rev. Sir, have I endeavored to glance at 
 some of the measures by which Methodism is 
 attempting to fix her foundations amid the ruins 
 of other denominations. We only wish these 
 things to be kept in mind, as determining the atti- 
 tude of attack or defence, of either party, while 
 we proceed to weigh in "the balance of the Sanc- 
 tuary," the value of the system of which these 
 are some of the hopeful fruits; a system, be it re- 
 membered, which as it challenges comparison 
 with others, and proclaims with great vehemence 
 their supposed defects, ought itself to be pre- 
 eminently free from difficulties and well founded 
 objections. 
 
 POSTSCRIPT TO LETTER I. 
 
 As the statements and facts of this letter implj'' 
 a course of conduct by no means honorable or 
 creditable to our Methodist friends, it may be 
 supposed that some kind of vindication has been 
 attempted. When the first edition of this work 
 appeared, it was assailed by a preacher of some 
 popularity and influence, who boldly denied that 
 there was any ''particular deiignation'^ ©f th# 
 
44 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Presbyterian church in any of the tracts above 
 quoted; although "the Presbyterian church," in 
 connection with the Congregational, is three 
 several times distinctly named, in "Duplicity Ex- 
 posed," as the object of attack. It was also said 
 that the tract just named referred to a body 
 of people somewhere in the East, known as 
 "the Associated Congregational and Presbyterian 
 churches;" but as no such sect had ever before 
 been heard of, nor could be shown to exist, this 
 evasion excited only ridicule. These facis, how- 
 ever, are of importance, as showing how gladly 
 even the friends of Methodism would escape 
 from their unenviable position, in relation to the 
 Presbyterian church; and the folly of their expe- 
 dients proves that they feel the truth and force of 
 the argument we have employed. 
 
 When the second edition of the book made its 
 appearance, it was bitterly attacked by the 
 preacher located in Pittsburgh; and in particular, 
 the statements of the foregoing letter were com- 
 mented on. Mr. Cooke (that was his name) did 
 not venture so far to expose himself to ridicule, 
 as to deny that " the Presbyterian cliurch" was 
 intended in " Duplicity Exposed." We will 
 state the substance of his argument, as a literary 
 curiosity. 1. "I presume it was written in New 
 England, and was only intended to expose tlie 
 
ARMK-rlAN MBTM0B15M. 4^ 
 
 dnplicify of the guilty." The first part of thin 
 sentence might be termed <<the geographical ar- 
 gument," as going to shc\v how much more tru: 
 a statement rMist necessarily be, if v/ritten in 
 New England, rather than in Old England, or in 
 'Pennsylvania! Tlie second branch- of the sen^ 
 tence speaks the trutli, but unfortunately is no* 
 .thing to the purpose; for the very question in de- 
 bate is, "Who are the guilty?" referred to in the 
 tract.' 
 
 Again: The ground was taken, that only som9 
 such in the Presbyterian and Congregational 
 churches were designed to be exposed. But 
 when questioned 'through the press what the 
 tract meant by the phrase, "BODY of people;** 
 why the frequent designation of " the Presbyte** 
 rian church," as the object of remark; the men" 
 tion and misrepresentation of her doctrines ; tht 
 sneer about changing her standards, and publish- 
 ing "a revised and improved edition of her Con* 
 fession of Faith" — Mr. C. was silent. 
 
 Another reason was, that " the Old School 
 Presbyterians accuse the New with maintaining 
 doctrines differing from their Confession." But 
 the folly of this is proved, not only by the fa«t 
 that "Duplicity Exposed" was written years be* 
 fore New Schoolism had any distinctive existence 
 in ©UT ehnreh; and the further faet, that it e.vjg 
 
46 TUB DirnCtJLTlES OF 
 
 wot a word .about New or Old School; but it 
 charges falsehood upon tlie Presbyterian church, 
 on the ground of her acknowledged doctrines, as 
 has been already shown; doctrines, too, for the 
 most part, on which Old and New School har- 
 monise. 
 
 Again: It was said that'two of the above-nion- 
 tioned tracts ''were ivrilten to show the incon- 
 sistencies and unscriptural character of Predesti- 
 nation, as taught and believed in the days of 
 their author, and with no reference to the Pres- 
 byterian church at all.^' Bat when interrogated, 
 *♦ What bearing it had upon the subject, when a 
 tract 'was written,' any more than where it 
 originated, provided it was circulated industri- 
 ously among the members of the Prcsbylorinn 
 church, attacked by name lier doctrines, r{ ferrod 
 in proof to her Confession, and garbled and mis- 
 represented some of her most popular writings," 
 the answer was, "expressive silence/' The bad- 
 ness of a cause is often best seen in the weakness 
 of its defence. 
 
 Jo;;"; ;..... ,.i ,. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 47 
 
 LETTER n. 
 
 Original Sin, 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 Having shown, as we believe, to the convic- 
 tion of every candid mind, that we stand, in this 
 discussion, in the attitude of self-defence, we pro- 
 ceed without further delay, to state and illustrate 
 the difficulties of Methodism. 
 
 I. The Difficulties of Methodism in reference to 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SiN. ThE VAGUE, CON- 
 FUSED, AND CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS MADE UPON 
 THIS SUBJECT. 
 
 Among the articles of Religion as pubhshed by 
 VVaiigh & Mason, in 1832, for tlie Methodist 
 Episcopal Churcli, and, (along with the Disci- 
 pline,) recommended to all their people, <'nextto 
 the word of God," the 7th is in the following 
 terms : 
 
 "Original Sin standeth not in the following of 
 Adam, (as the Pelagians vainly talk,) but it is the 
 corruption of the nature of every man, that natu- 
 rally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, 
 whereby man is very far gone from original 
 righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to 
 evil and that continually." 
 
41 Tfis »irri€VLTis« #f 
 
 Tlie corriiplion of nature, taught in lliis article, 
 by wliicli "mau is inclined to evil and tliat con- 
 tinually," is manifestly llie fountain whence flaws 
 all actual sin, tho root of all bitterness, an evil of 
 fearful mngniUide, a curse of tremendous extent. 
 Who then is the guihy author of this dread ca- 
 lamity, by wliicli corruption, and misery, and 
 death, are handed down from generation to gene- 
 ration? Is it the infant or the parent? Must w^e 
 trace it back to Adam, the primitive ancestor of 
 tliG race ; or must we impute it to the Creator 
 himself? In answer to these questions, the Me- 
 thodist Standard of doctrine says not a word; and 
 the members and ministers arc left to believe and 
 teach, upon tliis subject, whatever is right in their 
 own eyes. Men may adept their Articles and 
 Discipline, and yet maintain that God is the au- 
 thor of sin, the originating cause of that "corrup- 
 tion of nature" by which "man is inclined to evil 
 and tliat continually," and thus tlie author of all 
 sin. This, thair religious teachers may hold and 
 inculcate, and yet, so fur as appears, be good 
 Methodists. The whole subject is submitted to 
 the freak, or fmcy, or frenzy, of each individual, 
 whotiier preacher or ordinary member. 
 
 Now, it is well known to be a favorite topic of 
 declamation, among these opposers of Presbyteri- 
 anism, that eiir system leads inevitably to the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 49 
 
 adoption of the fore-mentioned monstrous doc- 
 trine of the origin of sin. Long, and loud, and 
 oft-repeated, are their asseverations to this effect; 
 and they do not hesitate, as we have seen, to 
 charge those among us who reject the thought 
 with abhorrence, as guilty of a want of candor, or 
 something worse. But what says the Confession 
 of Faith of the Presbyterian church upon the sub- 
 ject of the author of sin? "The sinfulness there- 
 of, (viz. of sinful actions,) proceedeth only from 
 the creature, and not from God, who being most 
 holy and righteous, neither is nor can he the au- 
 thor or approver of sin." Ch. v. Sec. 4. And 
 this, be it remembered, is a declaration, to which, 
 all Presbyterian ministers and elders, at their or- 
 dination, solemnly give their assent and approba- 
 tion. A man may be a good preacher of Me- 
 thodism^he will resist no regulation among men, 
 nor violate any ministerial oath, who holds and 
 teaches that God is the author of sin; but the fun- 
 damental principles of the Presbyterian church 
 forever forbid to such a person, an entrance into 
 her ministry or eldership, under the penalty of a 
 conscience perjured before earth and Heaven. 
 
 Again: The "corruption of nature" taught by 
 the Article is necessary and unavoidable, Man 
 brings it into the world with him; and he can no 
 more avoid being the child of sinful parents, and 
 
of course, the child of a corruption by which "ho 
 is inclined to coiiiinual evil," tliaii he can deter- 
 mine the titne and place of his birth. He is 
 therefore necessarily and unavoidably, "without 
 any preceding fault or offence of his," "very far 
 gone from original righteousness, and inclined to 
 evil and that continually." But Dr. W. Fisk, 
 speaking as the organ of the General Conference, 
 and making a mortal thrust at the doctrine of Pre- 
 destination, tells us, "If God holds men respon- 
 sible for what is unavoidable * what more could 
 be said of the most merciless tyrant?" (Disc, on 
 Predes. p. 13.) It follows, therefore, that though 
 "man is inclined to evil and that continually," 
 yet he is not "responsible" for this wickedness, 
 because it is unavoidable: in other words, "Ori- 
 ginal Sin" is no sin, but a very innocent harmless 
 thing which none but a "merciless tyrant" would 
 ever consider deserving of punishment! 
 
 * Let the reader compare, and reconcile, if he can, 
 the following' statements: '■'■Evtry punishment supposes 
 the ofFcnder might have avoided the offence for which he 
 is puni-^hcd; otherwise, to punish him would be palpably 
 unjust.''^ Wesley, quoted by Watson— Tliool. Inst. v. 2, 
 p. 444. Ag-ain: "If they mean that the guilt or the pun- 
 ishment of Adam's sin is charfred vpon his xvhole paste, 
 rity, a main part of which punishment licth in that on- 
 ginal dejilcment wlierein they are all concerned and horn, 
 let it pass." Goodwin, quoted and approved by Watson, 
 Tol. 3, p. 233. 
 
ARSWNIAN METHODISM- 51 
 
 Nevertheless, Dr. Fisk further assures us, 
 (p. 30,) that "all depravity, whether derived or 
 contracted, is damning in its nature." Here we 
 are back on the old ground: Original Sin is uiia- 
 votWaZj/e— therefore it is no sin; but still it is 
 ''damning in its nature!'" How is this? The 
 Dr. will tell us: ''Guilt is not imputed^ until by 
 a voluntary rejection of the Gospel remedy, man 
 makes the depravity of his nature the object of 
 his choice." "By a voluntary rejection of the 
 Gospel remedy?" But, Rev. Dr., does not your 
 7th Article teach " a corruption of nature by. 
 which man is inclined to evil and that continu- 
 ally?" And if he be inclined to continual evil, 
 then is he inclined to this very evil of rejecting 
 the Gospel remedy. It is idle, therefore, on your 
 own principles, to talk of a voluntary (or sinful) 
 rejection of the Gospel remedy, when man is ne- 
 cessarily and unavoidably inclined to reject it. 
 Of course it can be no sin to reject it; and God 
 would be a "merciless tyrant" to "impute guilt" 
 for rejecting the remedy. How then can a de- 
 pravity which none can avoid, which none but 
 "merciless tyranny" could regard as deserving 
 of punishment, be said to be " damning in its 
 nature?" 
 
 In reply to this reasoning, a writer in defence 
 of ©r. Fisk, whilst a«lEuiilinj that maw m by 
 
52 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 nature unavoidably inclined to "continual evil,*' 
 and of course to the evil of rejecting the Gospel 
 remedy — asserting too that this destroys the free- 
 dom of his will, and "that it would be mockery 
 for the Divine Being to set before him life and 
 death, and invite him to choose life, when he teas 
 morally incapable of such a choice''' — yet thinks 
 he relieves the subject of the difficulty, by stating 
 that "Dr. F. assumes man as graciously assisted 
 to make a voluntary choice." In other words, 
 man is by birth the heir of a depravity wliich 
 ^^unavoidably inclines him to continual evil." It 
 follows, therefore, according to Dr. F., that lie 
 has no power of voluntary choice, and is not a 
 free moral agent, until " graciously assisted,'''' 
 and made capable of voluntary choice — and thus, 
 the Dr. continues, "through the grace of the 
 Gospel, all are born free from condemnation" — 
 p. 30. Which is about the same as to say, that 
 man is enabled "6?/ grace''' to escape a condem- 
 nation which, being previously unavoidable, it 
 would have been merciless tyranny to execute. 
 A wondrous act o{ grace, truly, to assist the sin- 
 ner to avoid a punishment which none but a tyrant 
 could inflict! A strange idea of tlie grace of the 
 Gospel, that it comes in to render men capable of 
 sinning, deserving of punishment for their sin, 
 an^ liable to a "condemuation*' which^ but for 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 53 
 
 this grace, a righteous God could not justly exe- 
 cute upon any descendant of the apostate pair! 
 
 Let the impartial inquirer look again at these 
 singular though legitimate resLilts of the doctrinal 
 positions assumed by the Conference and Dr. 
 Fisk. "That Christ died for our sins according 
 to the Scriptures," is a fundamental principle of 
 Christianity. But, according to Dr. F., Christ 
 did not come into the world to "save from sin," 
 but rather to put men into a capacity of sinning; 
 as it is in consequence of his death alone that 
 guilt becomes chargeable upon any individual of 
 the race, excepting only our first parents. If 
 these be not lawful conclusions from the premises, 
 it is hard to say what is the meaning of the lan- 
 guage employed by Arminians. 1. All the child- 
 ren of men are born with "a corruption of nature," 
 whereby they are "inclined to evil and that con- 
 tinually." 2. This corruption and inclination to 
 continual evil are necessary and unavoidable. 
 3. If God should hold them responsible for what 
 is unavoidable, he would be a "merciless tyrant;" 
 for it would be to punish a man who possessed 
 no "freedom of will," and who was "morally in- 
 capable of a good choice." But 4. Through the 
 grace of the atonement, man is born free from the 
 grasp and condemnation of "the merciless tyrant," 
 his " freedom of will" is restored, and he is 
 5 
 
54 THE DIFFICI'LTIES OF 
 
 •'graciously assisted to make a voluntary or sinful 
 choice." But if these things are so, then it is 
 plain that independently of the death of Christ, 
 and the grace of the Gospel, men could never 
 have been chargeable with sin ; and of course 
 Christ did not die to atone for the sins of any of 
 the fallen race, except our lirst parents, since, 
 hut for his death and the grace accompanying 
 it, no others could have sinned, or at least their 
 sins being unavoidable, they would not have been 
 "responsible" for them. But if this is so, it will 
 follow that the ''grace of the Gospel," instead of 
 being any real favor towards mankind, is the 
 greatest curse that could ever befall them. If, 
 without the bestowment of grace, men could not 
 have been held ''responsible^^ for their conduct, 
 they would have remained IVee from criminality, 
 the righteousness of God could never have suf- 
 fered them to be sent to hell ; and his goodness, 
 we may suppose, would have bestowed upon 
 them eternal life. But now, alas! in consequence 
 of the coming of Christ, and o^ grace being given 
 them to deliver them from unavoidable sin and 
 "merciless tyranny" — now they are all expo' ed 
 to inexcusable bhime and endless ruin!!! 
 
 Again : Dr. Fisk and the Conference teach, 
 that it is by " virtue of the atonement," and 
 "throH;rii (lie graec of the Gospel," that "sll ar« 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. &5 
 
 born free from condemnation," and ''guilt is not 
 imputed" — meaning the guilt of "derived de- 
 pravity," or the "corruption of nntiire" derived 
 from Adam, by which "man is inclined to con- 
 tinual evil." But if this corruption be ^'imavoid- 
 abfe,^^ what need of the grace of the atonement 
 to prevent the imputation of guilt on its account? 
 What need of grace to prevent 'merciless tyranny' 
 under the government of a holy and merciful 
 God? 
 
 Again: If this derived depravity be necessary 
 and unavoidable, where was the ^^grace^^ in 
 Christ's dying to "countera t its destructive ef- 
 fects?" If we must suppose "the shedding of 
 blood" in some way necessary to save man from 
 being held "responsible" for unavoidable corrup- 
 tion; or in other words, to save him from "merci- 
 less tyranny," it would seem rather an act of 
 justice, both to God and the creature. The Lord 
 of the whole earth OWES it to himself to DO 
 RIGHT. To say then that "through the grace 
 of the Gospel all are born free from a condemna- 
 tion" which none but a tyrant could execute, is 
 to confound all distinction between those rights 
 which eternal justice exacts, and the unmerited 
 favors which grace freely bestows. It is in fact 
 to resolve the whole scheme of mercy into the 
 payment of a DEBT, at least so far as it respects 
 
56 THB DIFFICULTIES QM 
 
 all the offspring of Adam. But we need not say 
 how utterly subversive is such a view of the first 
 principles of the Gospel, which is continually re- 
 presented as the blessed fruit of the most distin- 
 guished love, as the "unspeakable gift" of pure 
 unmerited mercy. Thus does Dr. Fisk's great 
 argument against tlic doctrine of decrees (whether 
 correcdy or incorrectly applied, we inquire not 
 now,) recoil upon himself. Like him of old, who 
 defied the armies of Israel, Arminiani?m loses 
 her head by the stroke of her own favorite 
 sword. 
 
 Further: The circumstances attending the birth 
 and character of infants under the Gospel, over- 
 throw Dr. F's statement, that "guilt is not im- 
 puted until a voluntary rejection of the Gospel 
 remedy." It must be admitted that they arc 
 "shapen in iniquity," IN SIN they are conceiv- 
 ed, and are ''by nature the children of wrath." 
 Neither can it be denied that they are liable to 
 suffer all the usual wants and woes which attend 
 fallen humanity, and even the most excruciating 
 forms of misery and death. But could these facts 
 exist, under the government of a holy God, if 
 "guilt is not imputed" to them? Can guWless 
 creatures be exposed to all these forms of the 
 CURSE? If it be said that all this falls very far 
 f\\oxi of eternal d«'^ath, we answer, in ths words of 
 
ARfilNIAN METHODISM. 57 
 
 Richard Watson — "If the makhig the descend- 
 ants of Adam liable to eternal death,''^ for una- 
 voidable sin, "be unjust," (an act of "merciless 
 tyranny,") the "infliction of temporal death is so 
 also, the duration of the punishment making no 
 difference in the simple question of justice. If 
 punishment, whether of loss or of pain^ be un- 
 just, its measure or duration may be a greater or 
 less injustice; but it is unjust in every degree." 
 Theol. Inst. vol. 2, pp. 55, 56. On the authority 
 of their own favorite Watson, therefore, it is plain 
 that Dr. F. and the Conference would not more 
 surely charge tlie Creator with injustice, if they 
 held the horrible dogma of "infant damnation," 
 than by maintaining their present views of the 
 corruption, misery, and death of infants, while 
 they are chargeable only with sin which they 
 could not avoidi or rather have no guilt imputed 
 to them at all! 
 
 "It lias been established," says Watson, (vol. 2, 
 p. 67,) "that the FULL PENALTY of Adam's 
 offence passed upon his posterity." And he 
 elsewhere admits that "Paul represents ALL 
 MEN under condemnation, in consequence of 
 their connection with the first Adam;" and again, 
 that "by one man's disobedience many were 
 made, constituted, accounted, and dealt with as 
 sinners, and treated as though they themseh^ 
 
58 TiiK DiTFicrLTrts cwr 
 
 had actually sinned:'' p. 397, 54, 55. The full 
 penally which has passed upon all men to their 
 condemnation, he represents (p. 55) as consisting 
 in three things. 1. "The death of the body." 
 
 2. "Death sjnrituaV — "thus it is the heart is de- 
 ceitful above all things and desperately wicked." 
 
 3. "A third consequence is, eternal death f or, 
 as the language is varied on page 399, "a condi- 
 tional liability to eternal death."* Now, it will 
 scarcely be denied that these are evils of the most 
 awful character that can befall mankind, being 
 nothing less than death temporal, spiritual, and 
 eternal. And we are told that they have passed 
 upon men, as the "full penalty" or righteous 
 "condemnation" of Adam's offence, in conse- 
 quence of a conneclion with him which they 
 could not escape, if they were born at all. Here 
 then is a triple curse, including death temporal, 
 and spiritual, and a liability to eternal death, 
 which no descendant of Adam has power to 
 
 * We liave taken the liberty of examining' with some 
 care, the Institutes of Watson, and in many particulars 
 liave found the work inconsistent with truth, and with 
 itself; yet it is due to candor to state, that compared with 
 the writings of Whitby, and some other Arminians, his 
 scheme may be regarded as approaching the truth. On 
 the doctrine of Original Sin, and on some other points, he 
 employs language wliich, in many particulars, if it is to 
 be understood according to common usage, is substantial 
 Calvinism. 
 
ARMINIAK MSTHODISH. 59 
 
 avoid, and which is visited upon every child of 
 his, ''en account of sin" which is absolutely "un- 
 avoidable," in consequence of his connection with 
 his first parents. We leave Dr. Fisk and his ad- 
 mirers to inform the public, whether this be the 
 arrangement of a most •' merciless tyrant;" or 
 whether, in their zeal against Predestination, they 
 have not digged a ditch and fallen into it them- 
 selves. 
 
 Again : The three-fold penalty which has 
 passed upon all men on account of unavoidable 
 sin, we are further told by Watson, is relieved 
 by the fact that "all are born under a constitution 
 of mercy, which actually existed before their 
 birth:" vol. 2, p. 898. "A constitution of 
 MERCY!" Mercy for what, and for whom? 
 Why, for men who are implicated in sin, for 
 which, Dr. Fisk says, none but a tyrant could 
 hold them "responsible," it being ^ ''Unavoidable J*^ 
 We submit to these gentlemen the task of show- 
 ing the infinite MERCY and grace, of the plan 
 by which men are saved from the penalty and 
 condemnation of the divine law; while at the 
 same time they assure us, that to leave them in 
 that state would be an act of high-handed injus- 
 tice and "tyranny." Truly, ^ace is no more 
 grace, according to this scheme. It is hardly 
 strict juertice, or the payment of a -moral debL 
 
Od THB DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 It supposes the ever-blessed God to create men 
 under an arrangement of his Providence, by 
 which all are plunged into an abyss of unavoid- 
 able sin and condemnation. It then supposes 
 him to provide a "constitution of mercy," by 
 \vhich only soine are saved; whereas, if they had 
 only been let alone, and no constitution of mercy 
 and grace provided, they would have had no 
 "freedom of will," could not righteously have 
 been held "responsible" for their sins, being un- 
 avoidable^ and consequently, they would have 
 been blameless and harmless, without rebuke, 
 and of course, unexposed to misery either here or 
 hereafter. 
 
 It will not relieve the Arminian scheme of these 
 inconsistencies to say, with Dr. Fisk and the 
 Conference, that Adam was our " federal head," 
 and that "by liis unnecessitated sin, he, and in 
 him all his posterity, became obnoxious to the 
 curse of the divine law." This is true; and it 
 affords the Calvinist a strong and consistent 
 ground of defence, that by "one man sin entered, 
 and so death has passed upon all men, in ivhom 
 all have sinned." But what relief will the repre- 
 sentative character of Adam bring the Arminian? 
 Just none at all. It enables him to remove tl.e 
 difficulty only further back, and exhibits the ever- 
 bleslsed God as constituting a federal relationship 
 
JLfeMINIAN liETHODlSM. 01 
 
 between Adam and his posterity, according to 
 which, the ''triple curse^^ is visited upon all his 
 descendants, as the penalty or condemnation of 
 sin which, as to them, was absolutely imavoid- 
 tibh and necessary. Thus the "merciless tyran- 
 ny" which Dr. Fisk so deeply reprobates, is re- 
 duced to a system, is provided for by divine con- 
 stitution;* or, if that be denied, is provided for in 
 the order of nature and Providence originally in- 
 stamped upon creation! And then, to crown the 
 whole scheme of contradiction, "a constitution of 
 ?32crri/" is introduced, the results of which prove 
 to be, according to this theory, a far greater curse 
 than the original calamity! 
 
 That we have not misunderstood the Arminian 
 views on this subject, is further evident from the 
 following argument, which we have abridged 
 from Watson's Institutes — vol. 2, pages 437, '38. 
 "// is not denied that the will, in its purely 
 naiural state, and independent of all GRACE, 
 can incline only to evil. But the question is, 
 whether it is so left; and whether, if this be con- 
 tended for, from whatever cause it may arise^ 
 whether from the influence of circumstances, or 
 co-action, or from its own invincible depravity, 
 it renders him PUISISHABLE who never had 
 
 * Watson, ailer Arminius, calls it a "Covenant:'* 
 Vol, S, p. 78. 
 
65 TI!K DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 the nifiaiis of preventing liis will from lapsing into 
 this diseased atul vitiated state, who was born 
 with this moral disease?" &lc. "We reply," 
 says Watson, '-that this is onli/ true when the 
 time of tri.d is past, as in devils and apostates; 
 and fhen onltj because they are personctUy guilty 
 of havin.ii;' so vitiated tlieir wills," &c. • "They 
 tiiemselves are Jusflij chargeable with this state 
 of their wills, and all tlie evils resulting from it. 
 But the case is widely different with men who, 
 by iheir hereditary corruption, and the fall of hu- 
 man nature, to which they were not consenting 
 parties, are born with a will averse to all good." 
 But if this be a correct view of the subject, it fol- 
 lows necessarily that if men had been left in that 
 "purely natural state," and the children of Adam 
 had been born v/ithout any interference of grace, 
 without any atonement, they could not have been 
 "Ae/./ to he culpahJe;^^ they would not have been 
 "PUNISHABLE" for original depravity, nor 
 "for any of the evils resulting from it." So that 
 if the posterity of Adam had only been so fortu- 
 nate as to have had no grace provided for them, 
 not a soul of tliem could have been cidpable, or 
 punishable. So that to grace we must impute all 
 the guilt and misery wliich have ever hefdlen 
 men, excepting only our lirst parents, who be- 
 came sinners without grace. And even Adam 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 03 
 
 and Eve, as we will presently show, could not 
 have committed, according to tl.is sclieme, more 
 than the first transgression, inasmuch as it is 
 expressly affirmed that they thereby lost their 
 ^'freedom of ivlll,''^ which was restored by grace! 
 From all which it follov/s that "the grace of the 
 Gospel" was indeed a gre?A favor, so far as re- 
 spects the pardon of the first sin, but that ever 
 since, it has been " evil and only evil continu- 
 ally!" 
 
 But perhaps the Arminian will reply, that but 
 for the grace provided in the atonement of Christ, 
 Adam must have spcedil}' perished, and of course 
 could have had no posterity. "Had our first pa- 
 rents," says Watson, (vol. 2, p. 395,) " died '/n 
 the day^ they sinned, v/Iiich, but for the introduc- 
 tion of a system of mercy and long suffering, for 
 any thing that appears, ihey must have done, the 
 human race would have perished with them," &c. 
 And on page 398, he speaks of the opposite 
 opinion as a Calvinistic "assumption" — "one of 
 the great and leading mistakes" of the Calvinists, 
 and as great presumption to assume it as a truth, 
 that they would have multiplied tlieir species only 
 for eternal destruction, liut if Arminians cor- 
 rectly describe their own system, it is obvious 
 that, so far as respects the posterity of Adam, the 
 probability of their existence would havg been at 
 
64 THB DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 least as great without grace as under the provi- 
 sions of the atonement, since in the former case 
 the worst that could have occurred was, that they 
 would have heen neither culpable nor punis/iable 
 for their conduct. And certainly we ma^ as- 
 sume that it would not be less worthy of the Di- 
 vine Being to bring all men into being in a guilt- 
 less state, where they would deserve neither 
 blame nor punishment^ than to create them under 
 an arrangement of GRACE,* in which they are 
 all " conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity," 
 and thousands are infallibly certain to be for ever 
 punished for their sin. And with respect to 
 Adam, even admitting Watson to be right in af- 
 firming that "the sentence of death was to be exe- 
 cuted in the self-same day"t of his transgression, 
 yet as we are told that from that period "he had 
 no freedom of will left," except ''by grace,'' it is 
 
 * It is worthy of remark, that whilst Dr. Fisk tells us 
 that "through the grace of the Gospel all are horn free from 
 condemnation," Watson, on the contrary, affirms that the 
 Gospel provision "■does not affect the state in tohich men 
 are 6orr</" p. 67. And p. 58, that they "are born under 
 the whole male diction!''' Doctors dilFcr. 
 
 t President Edwards has shown conclusively, tliat the 
 use of this expression among the Hehrews, does not ne- 
 cessarily signify that the execution of the sentence should 
 be within 24 hours from the act, particularly not the pun. 
 isbment in its utmost extent. Compare Ezek; 33 :12, 13. 
 I Kinga 2 : 37. Original Sin, pp. 136, '37. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 65 
 
 evident that however long he had lived, he could 
 have committed no more sin. And as by the 
 showing of Watson himself, the original law did 
 not demand instantaneous punishment, but would 
 have been satisfied v/ith the execution of its 
 threatening at any time "in the day" of trans- 
 gression, it can never be shown that the same 
 sovereignty which might justly have granted a 
 respite of a day, could not have added a month, 
 or a year, or many years, to beings who would 
 have been perfectly free from sin during the 
 whole term, and who would have propagated a 
 race of men meriting neither blame nor punish- 
 m,ent. But whatever we may think of this mat- 
 ter, it is plain that Watson's great argument 
 against "the Calvinistic assumption" must fall to 
 the ground. On Arminian principles, it is evi- 
 dent the oflspring of Adam could never have 
 sinned at all, if they had not become sinners by 
 grace! 
 
 Further: The Arminian notion of the freedom 
 of the will implies "indifference;" or, in the lan- 
 guage of President Edwards, "that equilibrium 
 whereby the will is free from all antecedent bias.'* 
 But owing to the full, man becoming "inclined to 
 evil and that continually," could have no such 
 freedom of will; therefore he was no longer a free 
 agent; therefore he could commit no more sin, 
 6 
 
'ilCLLTlLi or 
 
 f ;;' noni but a free a(;ent. can be juslly cliargeall'j 
 \. I'.h I'n.e octiial violation of law. But this i-l;ort 
 IV) J easy metliod of arriving at "sinless perfec- 
 tion/' was iinfortuiialely nipped in the bud by the 
 grace of the Gospel, by which liis freedom \vas 
 rest; r jd, and he graciously enabled to sin! V/at- 
 ioa admits the fact, as above stated. Hence he 
 qtiotos Anuinius, teaching "that the will of man 
 ' i li respect to true good, is captivated, destroy^ 
 . ', niid LOkST, and Jicts ?w powers whatever, cx- 
 i .pt c-uch as are excited by grace;" calls it "an 
 i.jvincible iaclinalion to evil;" and aflirms that the 
 will, "in its purely natural state," "(JAN incline 
 only to evil." He also clearly teaches, that left 
 i:\ ihat state, the children of Adam Would not be 
 ■pii;)l,Ji(ibU for any act i.^Grfornicd in those cir- 
 . ::;K;iances. If it be objected that on this prin- 
 ij>lc Satan and his angels, iiaving lost their l\'ee- 
 C: 5-p, of indilTerence, and having no grace pro- 
 \ idod for them, can sin no more, he^replies, that 
 " i!ift original act being their ovrn and being in 
 their ])ower, they are justly chargeable wiih the 
 estate of their v/ills, and all the evils resulting from 
 i?." I'ut can it be truly said that a servant is 
 gailiy in not using hands which he does not pos- 
 tH.':ss, even supposing Imn to have lost them by 
 ciiiuinul conduct? Or if we suppos-e a man by 
 ^ ■ ■ .' ■^■:f. fault to deprive ]ii;n?elf of reason, can 
 
any person imagine that ho would be alterwarJ^ 
 boon:! to pevforvu moral acts, of which ha has be- 
 come uttevly incapable; or th-at he coiild be pun- 
 ibiied for not performing ihsm, an.l made to siuTer 
 eterna! torments for tlie neglect, just as ihoagli Ijg 
 v/ere in possession of all the necessary pov,'ers of 
 moral agency?* The same reasoning applies to 
 the rase of our first parents, after they had lost 
 'heir freedom of indiflcrenee. Their first siu 
 must have been their last, but for graceJ 
 
 Tliat v/8 have not been drav/ing a carricati'rc 
 of the doctrinal views of Arminian Methodism, in 
 further apparent from the foliowiiig extracts from 
 the stereotyped volume of doetrinal traets, which 
 were originally bound up with the Discipline. 
 '^V/e say, man hath his fi-eodom of will, not natu- 
 rally but bi/ grace,'' '^Wc believe that in th-3 
 moment Adam fell, he had no freedom of tcitl 
 if'.'^ And after quoting Baxter, and the Presby- 
 t'irir.n C( nt''^;ssion of Faith, eh. 1- — ''God hath 
 endowed the vvill t)f man v/ith that natural liberty, 
 that it i.3 neither forced, nor by any absolute ne- 
 cesbity determined to good or evil" — the writer 
 (Wesley) adds — '\Sure here is as much said for 
 
 * For an fibJo discussion of this poirit, the reader iij 
 rcfcjrcd to tho "iiiblic^I Repertory," conducted princi^. 
 rally by tho Profesborii at Princeton, N. J. Soo the July 
 No.j ly3l. 
 
08 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 free will as any man need to say, and perhaps 
 more:'" p. 154. Presbyterians are more liberal 
 in tbeir views of human liberty than Methodist 
 Arminians, or at least say *'as much as any man 
 need to say." We leave it to the Arminians' 
 conscience to reconcile, with this admission, all 
 the "hard speeches" which they have uttered 
 against us, for denying "free agency," and repre- 
 senting man as a mere machine, which acts only 
 as it is acted upon. 
 
 On the same general subject, hear the great 
 Oracle of Methodism, Dr. Adam Clarke. "Had 
 man been left just as he was when he fell from 
 God, he, in all probability, had been utterly un- 
 salvable; as he appears to have lost all his spiritual 
 light and understanding, and even his moral feel- 
 ing.'*^ "As they (Adam and Eve) were, so would 
 have been all their posterity, had not some gra- 
 cious principle been supernaturally restored to 
 enlighten their minds, to give them some know- 
 ledge of good and evil, of right and wrong, of 
 virtue and vice, and thus bring them into a sal- 
 vable state." (Discourses, p. 77.) 
 
 Adam and Eve, therefore, and all their poste- 
 rity, v»'ere brought by the fall into that estate, in 
 which they had "no moral feeling, no knowledge 
 of right and wrong." If so, they were not moral 
 agents, and could perform neither holy nor unholy 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 6P 
 
 acts; they could sin no more, until grace restored 
 their freedom, and enabled mankind to commit 
 all the sin that has flowed from the first trans- 
 gression. Thus God is represented as the author 
 of all sin since the fall! The society of devils, 
 moreover, according to this theory, is as pure, 
 from actual sin, as that of the angels around the 
 eternal throne! Nor is it conceivable that, on 
 this plan, there can be any punishment of a sinful 
 being, who in the act of sin has blotted out con- 
 science, moral feeling, and all sense of right and 
 wrong, unless there be also punishment by 
 grace! 
 
 The result of the whole is, that we have origi- 
 nal sin which is no sin — depravity without fault, 
 " inclination to evil" without criminality, the 
 penalty of the law inflicted upon those who are 
 not subjects of law, and wondrous '-grace" to de- 
 liver us from a punishment which we do not de- 
 serve! Such is the jargon which is published by 
 the highest authority, as the approved doctrinal 
 views of the Methodist church. 
 
 But perhaps there is no view of original de- 
 pravity more important, than its connection with 
 the moral character and future destiny of infants, 
 especially those that die previously to their ar- 
 rival at the age of moral action. It has long been 
 a favorite device of sectarian zeal, to misreprM«nt 
 6* 
 
70 THE DirF'cuLTir.s of 
 
 nnd hold np to abhorrcnro, \hc views of the Vvcf- 
 bylcrian cliurcli upon this topic. Wc arc cliar>;ed 
 M'ith mainiainiiig tlie everlasting perdi'don of help- 
 less mfants,* principally on two grounds: 1 . be- 
 cause our Confession no where expressly arftniis, 
 that all who die in infancy are saved. But docs 
 the Methodist Book of Discipline tciich, l]:at all 
 dying in infancy are saved? No where. Of 
 course it follows by the same argument, tliat llic 
 preachers must hold infant damnation. And 
 what seems to render tliis more probable, is, that 
 in the form of baptism (p. 102, Discip.) they are 
 taught to so that " all men are conceived and 
 born i I sin, ' and "to call upon God the Falh'^r, 
 through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his boun- 
 teous mercy he icill grant to this child (hat 
 
 * "Having pressed the aj;e orfrly," remirlis the Prosi- 
 dent of one of oar Theological Scminario?, "and been coji- 
 vcrsant for thiriy years with tlic most approved Ciilviti- 
 istic writers, and personally acquainted with m.my of the 
 most distinguished Calvinistic divines iu New England, 
 and in the middle, southern, and western st^itc-, I n.iu- 1 
 say that I have never seen or heard of any book wliicli 
 contained such a sentiment, nor a man, minister or lav- 
 man, who believed or taught it. And I feci authcrizcd to 
 say, that Calvinists, as a body, are as far frciu teach iir^ 
 infant damnation as any of those who falsely accuf^e 
 ihcm. And I would earjiestly and airecliun;itcly reeotn- 
 mcnd to all persons ncciu-tomed to propagate t.'iis slander^ 
 that they commit to memory withou deloy the ninth 
 commandment — 'Thou shalt not bear false witncs? ngainst 
 thy noijhbor.'" 
 
ARMIMAN METKODISM. 71 
 
 ti'hh'h by na'iurehc cannot liavef'' that lie would 
 "■iras/i him and ■sancHfy Jtiin ivitli the Holy 
 G/iosi';'^ ami that he (the cliiUi) "may be deliv- 
 ered from GoiPs lorafh.^^ Now, does not all this 
 {)l;Hnly prove that they regard tlie CHILD as an 
 o!>jeet of God's wratli; an;l ihat if lie were to die 
 ia that state, ho v/ould be loisl? Does it not fur- 
 ther prove that th.c preacdiers believe the child in 
 danger of snch an awfid fate? else why should 
 they pray so fervently for his deliverance from it — 
 that is, a deliverance from a fate which conld not 
 poH^hhj befall him? In odier words, why should 
 tiiey pray that God would not hold the child un- 
 der liis v/ratli; diat lie woe.ld not do a thing which, 
 themselves bciisg judges, would be "palpably im- 
 j;ist," and. wiiich wovild exhibit him as a "most 
 merciless tyrant:" A strange ecrt of prayer, 
 truly! Ilow evident, therefore, is it, tl>at what- 
 ever the preachers may say, their own Discipline 
 incidcales " isifant damnation!" 2. A second 
 ground, of the charge against Presbyterians, cf 
 teacidag that some infants dying in childhood are 
 lost, is, tliat our Confession employs the phrase, 
 "elect infants," which is said to imply, that some 
 who die in childhood, are now elect. Not to re- 
 peat what has been often said, that the objected 
 phrase is perfecdy consistent with the persuasion 
 that ciU infants, dvino; in infancy, are elected, or 
 
rZ THK DIFFICILTIKS Of 
 
 saved by grace, from among the guilty family of 
 mankind; and of conrse, that they will not be 
 wanting, when the Son of man shall "gather to- 
 gether his elect from the four winds of heaven:" 
 (Matth. 24 : 31.) Not to urge the fact, that the 
 Bible no where expressly affirms the salvation of 
 all who die in infancy, and is still farther from 
 teaching that any of them are lost, (in these re- 
 spects closely followed by our Confession,) we 
 rather choose to turn this Arminian battery upon 
 those who have erected it, and try its power upon 
 the strong holds of the enemy. The Methodist 
 Book of Discipline employs (Form of Baptism, 
 p. 104) a phrase of precisely the same character 
 with the "elect infants" of our Confession, the 
 only difference being the use of the word "cAi'/rf- 
 ren,''^ instead of infants. "Grant," say they, 
 "that this child, now to be baptized, may ever re- 
 main in the number of thy faithful and elect child- 
 ren.'' We cannot but think our iMethodist friends 
 are rather unfortunate in selecting the weapons of 
 their warfare. Whatever execution their artillery 
 may do among the opposing hosts, it is equally 
 destructive in its recoil upon themselves. A few 
 victories won after this fashion, will ruin them 
 for ever. 
 
 Thus much for the argumentinn ad homineni. 
 We are accused by our opponents with main- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 73 
 
 taining that some infants are for ever lost. We 
 think, however, that on the principles of Arminian 
 Methodism, 7io infant can possibly be saved. 
 What is salvation? Does it not imply deliverance 
 from the gnilt, pollution, and just punishment of 
 sin? Are not infants declared (Meth. Discip. 
 p. 102) to be "conceived and born in sin," and 
 of course, under its guilt and pollution? Are not 
 these evils unavoidable? And is it not repeatedly 
 affirmed in the standard writings of Methodism, 
 •that for God to hold his creatures responsible for 
 what is unavoidable, would be "palpably unjust," 
 and worthy the government only of a "merciless 
 tyrant!" What then are infants to be saved from? 
 From an act of "palpable injustice" on the part 
 of their Judge? From the grasp of a "merciless 
 tyrant?" Most manifestly, therefore, on these 
 principles of Methodism, NO INFANT CAN 
 BE SAVED, simply because no infant needs 
 salvaiion! With respect to all the vast multitude 
 of the human family who have gone down to the 
 grave, not knowing "their right hand from their 
 left," Christ ^'•has died in vain.'''' Their song 
 will not be, "Unto Ilim that loved us, and washed 
 us from our sins in his own blood" — for they 
 never stood in need of "washing." Their song 
 will rather be, "Unto Ilim that by his Provi- 
 dence cut short our davs, and SAVED us from 
 
• I inv. Divvici'i.'vu'.r, or 
 
 ii\iii-^ in '113 {)0:ly nnill b'j corner, we bcc.inie free, 
 re-:^poiisi!)Ie, .'in.riin,?; f mature?, cxpo3Cil to n fear- 
 ful p.ccouritabiliiy nt his jiulgment bar, nnd liubio 
 to lio (iov.-n in evevlasting torment^!"' 
 
 But vvliat gny llio Scriptures upon iho subjrct 
 wliicli is wrapped up in so many contradiction:! 
 nncl iiicoaftistencics? " Oivr first parents bein;:^ 
 kTt to the frGCclom of tlicir own will, fell from 
 their estnte-of innoccncy." "By the disobeJicnco 
 of onn, many were made sinners:" ' Hom. v. "Tn 
 A'.lani all die;" beeanse r.Il have hi hhn deserved 
 to (li;\ "By tiie ofTenco of c^ir?, jndgTient came 
 r.pan -all men to rondemriation.*' Adam was :\ 
 pu!)lic portion; lie acted not for himself alone, but 
 for ills posterity; for diem he was to stand his pro- 
 bation, and purchase the revv-ard of life eternal; or 
 for them to fail, antl entail the penalty of die vio- 
 lated lav,-: "they sinne i in him and fell with him 
 \n his first transgression."* As a part of tho 
 threaten^'^d penrdty, "they arc shapen in iniquity, 
 an.i con.- ?:i!i" — ''by natnrc chiKtron of 
 
 * v/utsni-), tho great ciiampion of nioclcrn ^lethodism, 
 HKikes titc rol]->\vin_q" iinportiut ii(bni-5:aoni: "AJnm is to 
 be rcn-anlcci ;vs a public mm, the head and rcprcseutativo 
 of th« huinm race.": Ag.ii'i: "The threat eninz} ["•<■ 
 nnuncod upon the firr-t pnir, havo all respect to their p 
 toritv n-j v,-.,U :<s It thcni.^clvc?." Thcoi. Inst., vol. :?, 
 
AliJIIMAN ::"]0TitODIfrvr. lO 
 
 wrath."* '''rhoy go a^iniy noni the Vvonil), 
 speaking lies." Still ihey are raorai agents, pos- 
 sessing freedom of v/iil in the liighest sense; lliey 
 act as the,}' clioosc to act, are under no pliysical 
 constraint or coercion, and their '-inclinaiion to 
 evil" is their crime; their love of sin, their cou- 
 demnation.j Tlie stronger their depraved afi'i c- 
 tions, the more intensely they burn svitinn llio 
 corrupt hcait, so mucli more vile is the act, so 
 much more deep and deserved tiie righteous retri- 
 bution. If, in the Providence of God, man it> 
 
 * "Tlie apostle Paul speaks of tlic imputailon of Adam's 
 sin," "and dccl.ircs that by one man's disobedience many 
 were made, constituted, accounted, and deiilt with as sin- 
 nere, and treated as though they themselves had actually 
 sivne.dy "In tiie sense above given' wc m.?}' safely con- 
 tend for the i-oipututiou of Adam's sin." V/i^tsoii, vol. 2, 
 p. 216. 
 
 t "Creatures," says Watson, (vol. 2, p. A?^Q, 'S?.)"!Tioy 
 hse the. power to Vvill what is morally good.'" "The in- 
 ahlity^ liowever, is not a natural but a moral one." "it lias 
 1 ec n contended, that as the evil acts done by thcni are 
 the choice of their corrupt v/il!, tlicy are tlicrcforc done 
 willingly, and are in consequence ;'m«?.s.^a/>/i?, &c. This 
 may he allowed to he true in the case of dttils.^^ The rea- 
 son wliy it is true in the case oT devils, and not in men, 
 excepA these "who have formed in themselves varioue 
 habiis,^^ we hn\e already shown to be of no force, because 
 leading to the absurd conclusion, that a n^san v\'ho hc;d lost 
 hi.s iimbs and seniles, and even his reason, would still l«s 
 ibr ever bound to keep the perfect law of God, and be fcr 
 ever pi'vishahlc in hell ibr not using the faculties which 
 lie did not possess — simply l»€cauKe he had lost them hy 
 
76 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 unavoidably a fallen creature,* "prone to evil as 
 the sparks fly upward" — if he has become so by 
 the act of his original ancestor, appointed his head 
 and representative, let him not repine. Would it 
 have been either more wise, or tnoi^e merciful, to 
 have ordered that each individual should enter the 
 world in the infancy of his being, while yet his 
 faculties of body and soul were in the imperfect 
 and undeveloped state, then, to stand his trial for 
 weal or woe ; or that one should be appointed, 
 strong and vigorous, in all the perfection of that 
 original manhood, which the all-wise God pro- 
 nounced "very good" — that such a one sjiould 
 be given us, in whose hands should be placed our 
 destiny, and by whose conduct should be decided 
 the future character of his posterity? Could every 
 child of Adam have looked on when the scheme 
 was ordained in the councils of eternity, true 
 modesty would have dictated the right answer to 
 these inquiries. And had the result been, the 
 establishment of the whole human family in per- 
 petual holiness and happiness, every tongue 
 
 * "The fact," says Watson, (vol. 2, p. 58,) "of tliis heing 
 horn liable to death, a part of tlie jyenalty, is sufficient to 
 shovv that they were born under the icliolc malctUction.'''' 
 This is sound Calvinism, but sadly at war, as we have 
 seen, with other parts of the Arminian scheme, h penalty, 
 a malediction threatened, and in part executed, against 
 helpless intants who were uiiavoidabti/ born in sin I Pal- 
 pable injusticel! Merciless tyrannylll 
 
AUMINIAN METHODISM. 77 
 
 would have celebrated the wisdom and benevo- 
 lence of the ordination. 
 
 In conclusion of our remarks upon the subject 
 of Original Sin, and in strong confirmation of the 
 Calvinistic view which has just been given, the 
 following extracts from Wesley's Sermon on 
 "God's love to fallen man," merit consideration 
 from the source whence they issue. "Was it not 
 easy for the Almighty to have prevented it (sin)?'* 
 "It was undoubtedly in his power to prevent it; 
 for he hath all power both in heaven and in earth. 
 But it was known to him at the same time, that it 
 was best on the whole not to prevent itJ'^ "Un- 
 less all the partakers of human nature had re- 
 ceived that deadly wound in Adam, it would not 
 have been needful for the Son of God to take our 
 nature upon him." "The greatest instance of 
 his love had never been given, if Adam had not 
 fallen." "There is one advantage more: Unless 
 in Adam all had died, being in the loins of their 
 first parent, every descendant of Adam, every 
 child of man, must have personally answered for 
 himself to God: It seems to be a necessary con- 
 sequence of this, that if he had once fallen^ once 
 violated any command of God, there would have 
 been no possibility of his rising again; there was 
 no help; but he must have perished without re- 
 medy." "Who would not rather be on the 
 7 
 
T8 THE DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 footing lie is now? Who would wish to hazard 
 a whole eternity upon one stake?" "Where then 
 is the man that presumes to blame God for not 
 preventing Adam's sin? Should we not rather 
 bless him from the ground of the heart, for there- 
 in laying the grand scheme of man's redemption!" 
 Slc. "None ever was or can be (ultimately) a 
 loser, but by his own choice:" Serm., vol. 2, pp. 
 235, '40. The strong sense of Wesley occasion- 
 ally bursts his Arminian trammels, though gene- 
 rally at the expense of his consistency. 
 
ARMINIAN METMODiaa. 7f 
 
 LETTER ill. 
 
 Foreknowledge. Predestinaiion . 
 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 Having finished the discussion of one of those 
 points of modern Arminianism, which, as we have 
 seen, hangs like a mill-stone around the neck of 
 the system, we come now to another topic not 
 less fatal in its hearings and results upon the 
 theological consistency of the scheme; a topic, 
 we venture to affirm, which can never be made to 
 harmonize with other features of the system, and 
 wliich, for the sake of preserving a degree of ra- 
 tional connexion betv/een its parts, ought imme- 
 diately to be repudiated from the Arminian creed. 
 I refer to that mysterious perfection of the Divine 
 nature, by which known unto God are all his 
 works from the bccrinnintr of the world. 
 
 II. The Difficulties of Methodism in con- 
 nexion WITH THE doctrine OF DiVINE 
 
 Foreknowledge. 
 
 The Foreknowledge of God seems never to 
 have been a favorite in the body of divinity cur- 
 rent amoiig Methodists. Wesley confounded it 
 
80 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 M'ith Omniscience. In his sermon on Predesti- 
 nation he says, "If we spcah properly^ there is 
 no such thing as Foreknowledge or After-know- 
 ledge in God" — and one of his modern disciples 
 adds doubtfully, »'If v;e may apply the term 
 Foreknowledge to the Deity." We are disposed, 
 however, to think that Peter spoke quite as '■'•pro- 
 7;er/7/" as either, when he said "with the eleven," 
 "Him being delivered by the determinate counsel 
 and Foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and 
 with wicked hands have crucified and slain." 
 And again, 1 Pet. 1:2, "Elect according to the 
 Foreknoudedge of God the Father," &c. The 
 founder of Methodism had sufficient discernment 
 to perceive, that the fact of the Divine mind com- 
 prehending all lime and all eternity at one glance, 
 and as present in one view, does not in the least 
 relieve the difficulties which beset the fuI ject of 
 Foreknowledge. Hence in writing to Dr. IJobcrt- 
 son, in answer to the inquiry, "How is God's 
 Foreknowledge consistent with our freedom?" he 
 candidly replies, ^^ J cannot tell.'''' (IMisc. Works, 
 vol.3, p. 219.) 
 
 This concession on the part of Wesley, of the 
 impossibility of reconciling the infallible Fore- 
 knowledge of Deity with human liberty, would 
 not deserve particular notice, \vere it not that it is a 
 eommon contrivance of his followers to decry and 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. $1 
 
 denounce Calvinism on this identical ground. "It 
 is impossible," they say, "to reconcile the doc- 
 trine of decrees with man's freedom;" and they 
 are exceedingly abi.ndant in pointing out the 
 dreadful consequences which flow from this al- 
 leged fact, and in showing that all Presbyterians 
 should at once forsake the faith of their fathers, 
 and come over to the Arminian camp. But if we 
 were to admit their allegations against our system 
 to be true to the full extent, yet the question re- 
 turns — "What advantage hath the Arminian? or 
 what profit is there in jVIethodisin?" Has not 
 your "great master of logic," as you call him, 
 declared that he "cannot telT' how your own 
 doctrine of Foreknowledge can be reconciled 
 with our freedom? First cast out this beam from 
 your own eye, and then shall you see clearly to 
 extract the mote- from ours. Honestly show us 
 that you hold and teach only doctrines which can 
 be maintained consistently with human liberty, 
 and then tue will believe you sincere, when you 
 attempt to preach down Galvanism as destructive 
 to the doctrine of man's freedom and accounta- 
 bility. 
 
 It is not at all surprising that Wesley, with all 
 his "logic," found it impossible to harmonize his 
 Arminian notions of human freedom with the 
 Divine Foreknowledge. That is a task which 
 
82 TMK DIFFICULTIES QV 
 
 no man nor angel will ever be able to perform. 
 President Edwards lias sliown,* with a force of 
 domonstralion wbicli \vc believe Ariiiinians have 
 never altemplcd to meet, that their notion of lib- 
 erty is "repugnant to itself, and sliuts itself wholly 
 out of the world;" that tlieir notion of a self de- 
 termining- power by which tlie .soul, in the exer- 
 cise of a power of v.illing, or choice, determines 
 acts of will, supposes the gross contradiction of 
 an act of the will preceding the first act of the 
 luill, and directing and determining it; or an act 
 before the tirst act! He has also shown, that as 
 every free act must be performed IN a state of 
 freedom, the Arminian notion tliat freedom of tlie 
 will implies i.idij/erence, leads to the gross ab- 
 surdity that the soul chooses one thing rather 
 than another, at the very time that it has no pre- 
 fcreiics or choice; or that there may be choice, 
 while there is no chcioo. 
 
 Edwaids has also demonstrated, that the idea 
 of con(ini(e}icc, as understood by Arminians to 
 belong to the actions of men, excludes all connec- 
 tion between cause and eifect, (in reference to this 
 matter,) and supposes many events to take place 
 without any ground or reason of their occurring, 
 rather than their not occurring. And that to 
 
 * .Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will. Part 2, 
 f?ec. 1. 
 
AllMINIAN METHODISM. 63 
 
 suppose the Divine Being to have infallible Fore- 
 knowledge of the volitions of men, Avhile there is 
 710 ground or reason of their existence rather 
 tlian their non-existence, is to suppose him to 
 know v/i'.hout evidence, or to know a thing cei'- 
 fidnli/, vvliich is imcertain^ or to know the cer- 
 tainty of an event, while at the same time he 
 knows its uncertainty! Truly, it is not wonder- 
 ful tliat Wesley ^'coidd not telV how to reconcile 
 Foreknowledge with this strange mass of contra- 
 dictions. 
 
 Again: "If an event be certainly foreknown, it 
 must have a certain future existence, of which 
 certain existence there must be some reason or 
 ground. For as every free agent has the lii^erty 
 of acting or not, or of pei-forming a different 
 action frcm tlie one which he eventually per- 
 forms, if tliere existed no reason why the one 
 t .ok place and not the oilier, all knowledge of 
 tlie action before it occurs is necessarily excluded. 
 It v\^ould be to suppose knowledge without the 
 least foundation for that knowledge in the object. 
 God cannot know that something exists, where 
 there is nothing. God cannot see that an effect, 
 yet future, will certainly be produced, if he does 
 not know any cause of its existence:" (Bib. Re- 
 pertory, vgl. 3, No. 2; 1831.) If it be alleged 
 that there fs no other ground or reason of the 
 
84 THE DlFFICULTIEg OF 
 
 future existence of tlie event necessary to be sup- 
 posed, in order to infallible Foreknowledge, than 
 the free agency of the creature, it is the same as 
 to say that it is infallibly known that a creature 
 will choose or prefer one course of action before 
 another, because he is at liberty to choose cither; 
 or in other words, that he will certainly, in a 
 given case, choose to act in a particular manner, 
 because he is at perfect liberty to choose to act in 
 the directly opposite manner, which is absurd. 
 If there be such a thing as Arminian liberty, it is 
 obvious, therefore, that there can be no such at- 
 tribute of the Divine mind, as infallible and uni- 
 versal Foreknowledge. If, on the other hand, we 
 admit with the Scriptures the doctrine of Fore- 
 knowledge, it destroys forever the baseless fabric 
 of Arminian freedom. 
 
 Thus much for the "great raiister." That tho 
 doctrine of the Divine prescience is not in very 
 good odor among the disciples of ilie same school, 
 is inferrible from the fact, that their Articles and 
 Book of Discipline are entirely silent upon the 
 subject; nor is it any where noticed in a volume 
 of near 200 pages, professing to be an exhibition 
 of the faith of Christians. It is said indeed that 
 the book mentions the Divine wisdom, which in- 
 cludes Foreknowledge; but if men who "spake as 
 they were moved by the Holy Ghost*' pjake a 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 85 
 
 distinction between these perfections of God, and 
 give to each its separate pbice and prominence in 
 their system, it would be both safe and motiest 
 not to attempt to improve upon their divinity. 
 
 But whatever may have been the intention of 
 the omission, one thing is certain — such is the 
 headlong zeal with which the advocates of Meth- 
 odism pursue llie doctrine of Predestination, that 
 they are irresistibly led to limit and even to deny 
 this essential attribute. Hence the celebrated 
 Dr. Adam Clarke, following the strange concep- 
 tion of one,* who was first a protectant, then a 
 deist, next a mystic, and finally a papist, has re- 
 commended to his brethren a new and easy doc- 
 trine of Foreknowledge. Accordirsg to this repre- 
 sentation, the Deity makes a dislinction in the 
 universe oi knoic-able ih'ings,heiween those which 
 he will foreknow, and those of which lie will 
 choose to remain ignorant. Among the latter, 
 Dr. Clarke places the free actions of intelligent 
 moral agents. God resolves not to forcknozv 
 these. Thus it seems, that ignorance is a high 
 perfection of an infinite Being, without which it 
 is impossible, according to the Dr., to govern the 
 moral universe! But without entering into a dis- 
 cussion of the merits of this singular opinion, one 
 thing is very worthy of remark. Dr. Clarke felt 
 * Chevalier Ramsey. 
 
S8 THE DiFFicii/nr.s of 
 
 that llie commonly roccived views of Foreknow- 
 ledw-e are ineonsistent with the denial of the doc- 
 trine of Predestination, and that most of tlie ob- 
 jections made to the latter, lie with equal weight 
 aiicins the former. Hen e the necessity of de- 
 vising some mode of escaping the difficulties, 
 M'hich press upon the admission of Foreknow- 
 ledge wiih the rejection of Predestination. In 
 order therefore to be consistent, he has become 
 profane; and has spoken upon this subject with 
 even greater want of consideiation, than when he 
 attempted to prove that the animal vvhich deceived 
 Eve, was not a serpent, but an ourang-outang, or 
 baboon! 
 
 Dr. W. Fisk, too, wlicn ho comes to reply to 
 the argument in favor of l^redestination, drawn 
 from Foreknowledge, very clearly evinces that 
 l]is troubles are somewhat distressing. He as- 
 serts, (Disc, on Pred., p. f),) "that in the moment 
 God ceases to know all that is, or will be, or 
 might be, under any possible contingency, he 
 ceases to be God;" and he admits that "whatever 
 God foreknows will undoubtedly (or certainly) 
 come to pass;" "but the simple question, he tells 
 us, (p. 6,) is, does God know an event becaitse it 
 is cerlain; or docs his knowing it to be certain, 
 make it certain?" But suppose we admit that 
 Foreknowledge rather proves than causes future 
 
ARMINIAN' METHODISM. S7 
 
 certainty; and suppose we agree with Dr. F., that 
 God knows an event, because it is certain — we 
 shouki be glad to be informed, liov/ it will help 
 the Dr. out of his difficulties to say, that the ac- 
 tions of men, good and bad, are fixed in infallible 
 certainty, and are therefore foreknown? If Dr. 
 Fisk admit the fixed infallible certainty of man's 
 moral conduct, he is a predestinarian of no mean 
 stamp; and whether he choose to ascribe this in- 
 fallible certainty of future actions to Foreknow- 
 ledge or to fate, does not ap})ear to be a matter of 
 much consequence to the argument on one side 
 or the other.* 
 
 Besides, as the divine Foreknowledge is eternal 
 as the being of God, if He foreknew the conduct 
 of men, ^'because it icas certain,^^ then must all 
 the evil actions of men have been fixed from eter- 
 nity, in infallible certainty. Will Dr. Fisk in- 
 form us, by ivhom, or by what, they were thus 
 eternally and infallibly fixed? Not by the crea- 
 tures, unless they too were eternal. These 
 
 * "If it be alleged that the purpose influences the ac- 
 tion, and therefore there is a wide difference, we answer, 
 that if the Divine purpose — as ice maintain — has no other 
 influence on the action than to render it certain^ there is 
 DO difterence at all, in this respect, between the theories 
 of Foreknowledge and deci'ee; for on some account and 
 for some reason, the thing is as certain as it can be on 
 the theory of mere Foreknowledge." Biblical Repertorj, 
 Vol. 3, No. 2. 
 
88 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 ^vicked actions could not fix themselves; and Dr. 
 F. assures us, (p. 5,) that "Foreknowledge can- 
 not, in the nature of things, have the least possi- 
 ble influence in making an event certain." To 
 say that human liberty lays any ground for this 
 fixed infallible certainty, we have already seen, 
 is extremely absurd. 
 
 A simple statement of undeniable truth, will 
 place this subject in its proper light. The moral 
 actions of men are foreknown of God, hundreds 
 of years before they take place. This no one 
 can doubt who believes the prophecies of the 
 Scriptures. The conduct of men, whether good 
 or evil, is therefore infallibly foreknown, unless 
 the knowledge of God be mere conjecture. It is 
 just as certain, therefore, that it will agree with 
 the Divine Foreknowledge, and be precisely what 
 it is known to be, as it is certain God will not and 
 cannot mistake. Here then is a certainty as fixed 
 and infallible as any that grows out of Predesti- 
 nation. If we reject one of these, on this ac- 
 count, we must, to be consistent, reject both. 
 But to deny the Divine prescience, is to deny 
 God. Thus does Methodism, in her rash haste, 
 direct her course upon the very brink of the dark 
 abyss ©f Atheism. 
 
 But what is Predestination? It is the doctrine 
 of a plaa devised and executed by a God of 
 
ARMiNlAN METHODISM. 89 
 
 infinite wisdom, goodness, and truth, in this 
 plan man occupies the place of a free moral agent, 
 to wiiom the divine decree secures freedom of 
 action in its highest sense. God has ordained 
 that he shall be possessed of liberty, and it must 
 be so.* But man, created free either to stand or 
 fall, abused his liberty by rebelling against God, 
 and lost all that renders existence valuable — his 
 moral purity, and his hope of immortality. To 
 rescue him from this condition of hopeless misery, 
 God has provided a Savior, who is the "author 
 and finisher of the faitli" that saves the soul. 
 Every thing that a merciful God performs for 
 man's redemption, he before determined (or de- 
 creed) to do. He becomes "the author and fin- 
 isher of faith" and salvation to those who are de- 
 livered from hell. He before decreed or deter- 
 mined to become the "author and finisher" of 
 their redemption. This is the doctrine of election 
 
 * "Could not God from all eternity decree that creatures 
 endued with lihcrty should exist; and if this was his pur- 
 pose, will not the event answer to it? Human liberty, 
 thereiore, instead of being destroyed by the decree, is 
 establisl}ed upon an immutable basis. It would be very 
 strange indeed, if the Almighty could not effectually will 
 the existence of a free voluntary act. To suppose the 
 contrary, would be to deny his oninipotence. To say then 
 that the decree by which the certainty of a free act is 
 secured, violates free agency, seems very much like a 
 contradiction." Bib. Rep. 
 8 
 
90 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 to eternal life. But when ditl God first intend 
 to perform these acts of mercy for fallen men? 
 Was there ever a period when He did not intend 
 to redeem them? Manifestly not. This eternal 
 design^ then, or intention, to deliver immortal 
 souls from death, by becoming (through Christ) 
 the "author and finisher of their faith," holines;', 
 and salvation, is the eternal decree of predestina- 
 tion to a life of endless bliss. 
 
 On the other hand, if fallen man live and die 
 impenitent, he fills up the measure of his iniquity, 
 and in the strong language of our Confession, is 
 ♦'doomed to dishonor and wrath for his sin*^ — 
 chap. 3, sect. 7. It is right in the God of justice 
 to doom him. It was also right to ordain or de- 
 termine to doom him to wrath ^^ for his sm." It 
 cannot be wrong to ordain or determine to do a 
 right thing. Every thing which is done by the 
 righteous Rector of the universe, He before de- 
 termined to do. He actually sentences the sinner 
 to sufferybr his sin. He before decreed, ordain- 
 ed, or determined to do so. And this is the vili- 
 fied and misrepresented doctrine of reprobation 
 to eternal death. 
 
 But what is the doctrine of foreknowledge upon 
 the same subject? God creates man, and places 
 him in a state where he infallibly foreknows he 
 will be led by temptation to commit sin. Under 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 91 
 
 thesf circumstances man will sin as certainly and 
 undoubtedly as it is certain the all-knowing God 
 cannot mistake. Man is therefore created with 
 an infallible certainty of sinning against God. His 
 righteous retribution is also infallibly foreknown. 
 Man will infallibly sin, and God will infallibly 
 doom him to wrath for his sin. All this, in the 
 case of every finally impenitent sinner, was as 
 certainly foreknown before his creation, as it is an 
 awful fact after his doom is sealed, or as it will be 
 known at the final consummation. 
 
 The sin and its punishment would as certainly 
 not be different from what they prove to be, as it 
 is impossible God should become an erring, de- 
 ceived Being. How then are the difficulties di- 
 minished in the latter statement of the subject? 
 In predestination, the existence of sin is permit- 
 ted, as the abuse of man's free agency. In fore- 
 knowledge, it is foreseen, and not prevented. In 
 the former, it has a place in the universe, as a 
 mysterious evil, out of which God will bring ulti- 
 mate good. In the latter, it is distinctly and in- 
 fallibly foreknown, and will hold a place in the 
 creation as certainly as God is unerring. In pre- 
 destination, God decrees or determines to permit 
 sin, and to punish the wickedybr their sin. He 
 determines to do the very thing, which all ac- 
 knowledge it is right he should do. In fore- 
 
92 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 knowledge, lie foresees innillihly tlie sin of tho 
 creature, nnd also liis own act by which he will 
 doom him to everlasting destniction; and yet with 
 this infallible certainty of man's sin and perdition, 
 creates him v/ith precisely those faculties and pro- 
 pensities, and places him in that state and under 
 those circumstances, in connection widi which 
 his fall and ruin will as certainly be the conse- 
 quence as God is certainly omniscient. We sub- 
 mit to the candid judgment of every reader, whe- 
 ther those M'ho reject predestination, while they 
 receive the doctrine of foreknowledge, do not 
 "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." Nor 
 need it be thought strange to hear even preachers 
 of this stamp, utler sentiments widi regard to the 
 latter, which wound the feelings and even chill 
 the blood of sober Ciiristians. 
 
 It is foreign to the design of these loiters, to 
 write a lai}ored treatise upon prodostination; yet 
 as this feature of Calvinism, more than all others, 
 has furnislicd modern Methodists with matter of 
 abuse and denunciation, it may be proper to dwell 
 briefly upon its logical bearings upon several dis- 
 tinct topics; in doing which we shall cn;]rnvor at 
 the same time to exhibit the weakness of ihe Ar- 
 minian scheme. 
 
 1. The inquiry, Why does sin exist under the 
 government of a most wise, Jioly, and powerful 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 9$ 
 
 Ruler? has generally been regarded as somewhat 
 difficult, (^alvinists, from the days of the apostle 
 Paul, and of Augustine, down to the times of 
 Luther, Calvin, and the Westminster Assembly, 
 have uniformly answered, ♦'Because God saw 
 proper to permit its existence, determining so to 
 overrule all things as to make 'the M^rath of man 
 to praise him,' and from infinite evil to bring in- 
 finite good." If any one shall question whether 
 this has been the uniform belief of Calvinists, we 
 can only pity his want of information, and send 
 him to tlic authors themselves, before he attemptt 
 to discuss the subject. Thus the Westminster 
 Confession: "This their sin (viz. of our first pa- 
 rents) God was pleased according to hia wise and 
 holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to or- 
 der it to his own glory:" chap. 6, sect. 1. Again: 
 Larger Catechism, Q. 19 — "God by his Provi- 
 dence permitted some of the angels wilfully and 
 irrecoverably to fall into sin and damnation, limit- 
 ing and ordering that and all their sins to his own 
 glory." While, therefore, the Westminster di- 
 vines maintain that "God hath foreordained what- 
 :foever comes to pass," they also admit the im- 
 portant distinction between the efficient and the 
 permissive decrees of God, so that "all things 
 fall out according to the nature of second causes:'* 
 (chap. 5, sect. 2.) "Neither is God the author 
 S* 
 
Si tut: DirnciLTiE? or 
 
 of sin; nor is violence offered to tlic will of tlift 
 creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of 
 second causes taken away, but rather establislied:'* 
 (chap. 3, sect. 1.) This powerful, wise, and 
 good Providence, it is farther said, (ch. 5, sec. 4,) 
 "extendeth itself even to the first fall and all other 
 sins of angels and men, and that ?wl by a hare 
 permission, but such (permission) as hath joined 
 with it a most wise and powerful bounding-, an;l 
 otherwise ordering and governing them, in a mani- 
 fold dispensation, to liis own holy ends; yet SO 
 AS the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from 
 the creature and not from God, who being most 
 holy and righteous, neither is nor can he the au- 
 thor or approver of sin." "Not by a baj^e per- 
 mission;" "not," to employ the illustration v( 
 Calvin, "as though God were seated in a watch- 
 tower, awaiting fortuitous events." The views 
 of the \Vestminster Confession arc in part well 
 expressed b}- Wesley, as before quoted: "It v.-as 
 easy for the Almighty to have prevented sin." 
 "It was undoubtedly in his power to prevv-^nt it; 
 for lie hath all power both in heaven and in earth. 
 But it was known to him at the same time, tluU 
 it was best on the whole not to prevent it." Serm. 
 vol. 2, p. 235. That sin, therefore, which lie 
 saw "on the wlicie to be bcsl^'^ he determined, 
 decreed, or foreordained — not "to 'mfivcTtcc iiicti 
 
ARMINTAX METIIOPISM. 95 
 
 to commlC — not '*lo ivorh in the hearts of fhe 
 ivkked''^ — (as v/e are slanderously reported) — but 
 TO PERiMIT* an I to order or overrule for his 
 own glory. 
 
 Ths Calviiiistic answer to the inquiry, Why 
 does sin exist? may therefore be summed up as 
 follows. I. Sin exists by ihc permission of the 
 Almighty Ivuler. 2. It exists according to his 
 intention. If Tie sufier or permit siii to exist, he 
 douhtle5!S intended to do so. Otherwise he per- 
 milted it iviihovJ intention; that is, without de- 
 sign, plon, or vs'isdoni; or contrary to his inten- 
 tioii. In other words, contrary to what is hGly, 
 wise, and good, as all his designs must be. . 
 
 3. The permitted existence of sin, as a part of 
 the divine plan, was infallibly certain and fixed 
 l;cfore the creation of angels or men; or in other 
 v.x>rds, from eternity. For if it be according to 
 Xhe intention of the Divine Being to sujfer the 
 existence of sin, it was always so, unless God 
 has changed. Further: God from all eternity 
 foreknew that ho would suffer sin to exist. But 
 
 * It is singular that a Doctor of Divinity should so far 
 misunderstand the theologicul meaning of this tern"!, as to 
 talk as followp: "If they mean by permission, that God 
 g-avc a personal permit to Adam and Eve to commit sin," 
 «fec. ^'To say that God gave a permit or license to sin, is 
 bold ; but to say that he docrccd it," &c. Dr. Bangs' 
 Reply to Hasksl, p. ^'2. 
 
96 TIIK DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 if from eternity he certainly knew thai he would 
 permit sin, lie must have certainly determined or 
 purposed to permit it. Otherwise he could not 
 certainly know that he would do that which he 
 had not certainly determined to do. Besides, if 
 the purpose to permit sin be not from eternity, 
 then must it have been formed at some subse- 
 quent period. Then there must have been some 
 reasons suggested to the Divine mind, why He 
 should form it at tliat time and not before. But 
 this supposes new knowledge to be imparted to 
 the Deity, which is absurd. 
 
 4. "Could not God have placed at the head of 
 the human family, on whom the destiny of the 
 rest should depend, one who would not have sin- 
 ned? If he could not, then it follows that sin 
 could not be avoided, if man existed; and the de- 
 termination to create man, involved in it a purpose 
 \o permit tlie existence of sin. But if it be said, 
 God could have created in the place of Adam, one 
 who would not have sinned, but still chose to 
 create one who he knew would sin, it is as evi- 
 dent as any thing can be, that by this selection he 
 did determine to permit sin."* So that whether 
 we suppose God could or could not have created 
 as the federal head of the race, a man who would 
 not have sinned, we are landed in the doctrine of 
 * For this extract, see Bib. Kep., vol. 3, p. 174. 
 
ARMIXIAN METHODISM. 97 
 
 tiio Divine permission of sin: much more, if we 
 admit, (which is the common Calvinistic belief,) 
 that the same power wliich has preserved in pu- 
 rity and fidelity legions of angels, and will forever 
 preserve "the spirits of just men made perfect," 
 could also ^'witli the temptation, have made a 
 7cay of escape''^ for our first parents; to deny 
 which, seems very like denying both the power 
 and the truth of God. 
 
 Very different, however, is the answer of the 
 modern Methodist to the inquiry, "Why does sin 
 exist?" lie maintains, that on the supposition of 
 man's U'gg agency, tlie Almighty coidd not pre- 
 vent his fall; and that after doing all in Ids power 
 to "secure the accomplishment of his will," lie 
 was utterly defeated in his plan! Hear the dis- 
 tinguished Dr. Bangs: "To sny that the power of 
 God was adequate to have prevented man as a 
 free agent, from sinning, is a contradiction." 
 (Reply to Haskel, p, 24.) And "Watson, whose 
 book is published by the IMcth. Book concern — 
 "We may confidently say that He willed tlie 
 contrary of Adam's ofk^nce, and that he used 
 kJAt MEAlNS consistent with his determination 
 to give and maintain free agency to his creatures, 
 to SECURE the (tccomplishment of his tciU.''^* 
 
 * And ynt Wntson naJ before i-emarked — "The obser- 
 vations of Doddridge have a cnmincndahle mode -ty^ Viz.: 
 
98 THE DIFFICULTIES OP 
 
 What a picture is this of the Almighty Sovereign, 
 and of the government whose hehn he holds in 
 his hand! '"My counsel shall stand, and I will 
 do all my pleasure." (Isaiah 46 :10.) *'Not so,'* 
 replies the Methodist; "God often fails to secure 
 the accomplishment of his will and pleasure, and 
 that too after using all means consistent with the 
 nature of the object he was striving to secure V^ 
 *'He doeth according to his will in the army of 
 heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth.'''' 
 (Dan. 4:35.) "However it may be in heaven!'^ 
 answers Watson, "He is often greatly disap- 
 pointed of 'his will' among the 'inhabitants of the 
 earth!'" "We have obtained an inheritance," 
 saith the apostle, '•'hem^ predestinated according 
 to the purpose of Him, who worketh all things 
 after the counsel of his own will.''^ (Eph. 1:11.) 
 "To that statement," replies the Arminian, "I 
 have several olojections. 1. 'Froperh/ spcakingy* 
 God does not 'ivork all things' at all. I would 
 almost as soon believe the Presbyterian Confes- 
 sion of Faith, as to believe that. 2. All things 
 are not 'after the counsel of his own will.' For 
 we may ^confidently say,'' that He used all pro- 
 fit will be demanded, Why was moral evil permitted? 
 Why did not God prevent the abuse of liberty?' One 
 would not willingly say that he was NOT ABLE, with- 
 out violating the nature of liis creatures; nor is it possible 
 to PROVE THIS." Vol. 1, p. 435. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 99 
 
 per means to secure the accompli slim ent of his 
 will, in the case of our first parents, and most 
 signally FAILED! 3. My third objection is, 
 that if we have no better foundation for our hope 
 of the eternal Hiiheritance,'' than 'the ptfrpose of 
 Him who worketh all things after the counsel of 
 his OWN "WILL,' why we may as well strike 
 our colors, and turn Calvinists at once!" "Lord," 
 says the Psalmist, "INCLINE not my lieart to 
 any evil thing, to practise wicked works." (Psl. 
 141: 4.) "I object utterly," says the Arminian, 
 "to any such absurd Calvinistic prayer! What! 
 a Christian pray that God would not incline his 
 heart to evil, nor lead him into temptation, when 
 it is as plain as our best writers can make it, that 
 God could not incline the hearts of our first pa- 
 rents even to good, without destroying their free 
 agency!" '•^Incline my heart unto thy testimo- 
 nies and not to covetousness," repeats the Psalm- 
 ist. (Psl. 119: 36.) "Shocking!" exclaims Wes- 
 ley. "Why does not the Bible ^speak more 
 properly P " 
 
 "Will they deny," remarks Edwards, "that an 
 omnipotent and infinitely wise God could possibly 
 invent and set before men such strong motives to 
 be obedient, and have kept them before them in 
 such a manner as should have influenced all man- 
 kind to continue in their obedience, as the 'elect 
 
100 THE DIFFICLLTIES OF 
 
 angcly' have done, M'illiout destroying their lib- 
 erty? God does not will sin, as sin." "If it is 
 not in the power of God to keep a free agent from 
 sinning, with what propriety can he be directed 
 to pray for restraining grace, or that he may be 
 kept from sin? If it is not in the power of God 
 to control the hearts of free agents, and restrain 
 them from sin, according to his pleasure, dreadful 
 consequences may ensue. They might in every 
 respect cross the will of God, and defeat every 
 valuable end the Divine Being proposed in their 
 formation. The good he aimed at in creation 
 may be prevented, irreparable disorders be intro- 
 duced. The friends of virtue would be filled 
 with lamentation, and the enemies of God and of 
 all good, would triumph and exult. We infer 
 that as God is able to restrain sin among the 
 apostate children of men, who are under the do- 
 minion of powerful vicious habits, so we can 
 much more easily conceive that he was able to 
 have prevented sin in beings made origimilly 
 lioly." (Day's Sermon.) From all which it is 
 plain, that the problem of the existence of sin in 
 the world, must be solved by saying with AVes- 
 ley, that while "it was easy for the Almighty to 
 have prevented sin, he saw that it was best on the 
 whole not to prevent it:" In other words, to 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 101 
 
 permit its entrance, and overrule its event to his 
 own glory.* 
 
 X. The existence of sin in our world, whether 
 we know the manner of its occurrence or not, is a 
 lamentable FACT; and its baneful influence is 
 felt among all classes of the human family. "All 
 have sinned and come short of the glory of God." 
 *'Death has passed upon all men, for that all have 
 sinned." All that die, die because they are 
 guilty, and therefore worthy of death, the wages 
 of sin; and all are shapen in iniquity, and in sin 
 are they conceived. 
 
 Now, if we suppose that it had been the "good 
 pleasure" of God to leave them all to the just re- 
 ward or "wages" of their sin; if, as in the case 
 of the angels that kept not their first estate, he 
 had entertained thoughts of mercy toward none 
 of them; would it have been right or wrong, just 
 
 * To talk of the Divine Being- permitting an event to 
 take place, which he is not able to prevent, is about as 
 wise as to talk of a man permitting the sun to rise, or 
 the wind to blow where it listeth. And yet it is remark- 
 able that Watson seems to adopt this sentiment. "It is 
 obvious," he says, "that by nothing- can we fairly avoid 
 this consequence, (of making God the author of sin,) but 
 by allowing the distinction between determinations TO 
 DO on the part of God, and determinations TO PER- 
 MIT certain things to be done by others." Vol. 2, p. 424. 
 Again: "A decree to permit, involves no such conse- 
 quences." Yet he holds that God could not pevent sin 
 ia free agents! 
 
 9 
 
i02 THE DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 or unjust? If you say it would have been wrong or 
 unjust, to execute the penalty of the violated law 
 upon the whole family of man, then it follows 
 that in respect to that part of mankind toward 
 whom the punishment would have been unjust, 
 *'Christ has died in vain," grace has no meaning 
 nor application, unless it be grace to save those 
 whom it would have been imjiist to punish, and 
 who therefore stood in need of no salvation. If, 
 therefore, as the Arminian vehemently argues, 
 Christ has died for all, and his atonement is a 
 *'free gift" — GRACE in its highest sense — then 
 it inevitably follows that all might justly have 
 been left to perish for their sin, if such had been 
 the good pleasure of God. 
 
 Now let us vary the case a little. Instead of 
 supposing all to receive just punishment for their 
 sin — instead of the Divine Being determining that 
 all should in mass experience their just deserts- 
 He resolves, in a most wise and wonderful man- 
 ner, to rescue from the jaws of death a very large 
 number of these righteously condemned rebels, to 
 stand as everlasting monuments of his conde- 
 scending love and mercy — while, to illustrate for 
 ever his hatred of sin, he permits the law to take 
 its course, and executes its sentence upon the 
 rest — would it ever enter the mind of any intelli- 
 gent person, to complain that God was "partial," 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 103 
 
 because that when they were all deserving only 
 of his wrath, and undeserving of his mercj^, he 
 executed his wrath upon only a part, and most 
 graciously pardons and admits to his favor, the 
 rest of the guilty rebels? Had he punished the 
 whole, all ground of complaint would have been 
 removed; there would be no injustice or caprice; 
 but since he has seen proper to punish only a 
 part, he is charged Vvith partiality! "In matters 
 of grace," says Watson, "no axiom can be more 
 clear, than that he who gratuitously bestows, has 
 the right to do what he will with his own.'* 
 (Vol. 2, p. 443.) "Friei-id, I do thee no wrong. 
 Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" (Matth. 
 20:15.) These plain principles of common sense 
 are so universally admitted, as to have been re- 
 cognized in the practical administration of all 
 good governments; and indeed, are universally 
 acknowledged in all the ordinary walks of life. 
 
 Who then maketh the Christian to differ from 
 his former self, and from his impenitent neigh- 
 bors? And what has he that he did not receive? 
 The answer is, "We are his WORKMAN- 
 SHIP, created in Christ Jesus unto good works." 
 "You hath he quickened^ {or made spiritually 
 alive,) who were DEAD in trespasses and sins." 
 "It is God that worketh in you both TO WILL 
 and TO DO of his good pleasure." "Thy 
 
104 THE diff:culties of 
 
 people shall be willing in the day of THY 
 rOWER." 
 
 But was there not something^ good found in the 
 creature, something of the nature of holiness, or 
 moral excellence, to move or induce God to per- 
 form the work of spiritual quickening, or restora- 
 tion to spiritual life? The answer is, "He hath 
 chosen (or elected) us in him (Christ) before the 
 foundation of the ivorld, (not because he foresaw 
 any thing good or holy in us, but) that ice should 
 be holy and without blame before him in love." 
 "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, 
 being PREDESTIiVATED according to the 
 PURPOSE of Him who worketh all things after 
 the COUNSEL of his own will." "Who hath 
 saved and called us with an holy calling, not ac- 
 cording to our works, but according to his own 
 PURPOSE and grace, which was given us in 
 Christ Jesus before the icorld began/'' To these 
 very individuals did the blessed Savior refer when 
 he said, "All that the Father GIVETH me shall 
 come unto me^ "Tliou hast given him power 
 over all flesh, that he should give eferncd life to 
 as many as thou hast GIVEN ///??-<." Again: 
 "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but 
 for them whom thou hast GIVEN me." "No 
 man can come unto me except it were GIVEN 
 unto him of my Father." "My sheep liear my 
 
AHMIMAN METHODISM. 105 
 
 voice: they shall never perish, neither shall any 
 pluck them out of my hands. ?vly Father vvliich 
 GAVE them me is greater than all, and none can 
 pluck tliem out of my Father's liancl." And to 
 the same covenant transaction does tlie apostle 
 allude, when he speaks of ^^eternai life promised 
 before the world began'''' — (Tit. 1: 2) — promised 
 not to men hut to Christ — for as many as the 
 Father "had GIVEN him." 
 
 But in the arrangements of tliat covenant, v^^ere 
 not faith, repentance, and good works foreseen, 
 as the grounds or reasons why his sheep were 
 given to the Savior? The answer is, "By grace 
 are ye saved, through /<:a7A, and that not of your- 
 selves? it is the GIFT of God."* Christ is "ex- 
 alted to bs a prince and a Savior TO GIVE re- 
 pentance to Israel and remission of sins." These, 
 
 * r\Ir. \Vct^Iey's undcrstandirig- of the manner in which 
 faith is the ghl of God, is sln^riilar enough, lie says, 
 '^Believing is the gift of the God 0/ GRACE, as breath- 
 ing, moving-, and eating, are the gilts of the God of NA- 
 TURE. He gives ine lungs and air, that I may breathe," 
 <feo. Again: '■'■Faith is tlie gift of God to believers, as 
 sight is to you. The Parent of good freely gives you the 
 light of the sun, and organs proper to receive it," &c. 
 But if this be a correct account of the matter, unbelief is 
 as much the gift of God as faith., since the powers and 
 faculties by vi'hich a man discredits divine truth, are the 
 gift of God, as much as those by vi^hich he believes. If, 
 however, Mr. Wesley designed to teach, that besides the 
 faculties of mind, Divine power and grace impart also the 
 9* 
 
100 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 therefore, whicli are the fruits of liis Spirit, and 
 of his covenant love and mercy, cannot be sup- 
 posed to be the grounds or reasons of that of 
 which they are the fruiis or results. Christ 
 liimself is "the AUTHOR and finisher of faith." 
 (Ilcb. 12:2.) And the very question to be settled 
 is, What are the grounds or reasons wliy these 
 and other gifts are bestowed upon Christ's sheep, 
 and not upon others? To say with the Arminian 
 that it is because of foreseen faith, is to make faith 
 the cause of itself, is to say that Christ gives faith 
 and repentance to certain persons, because he 
 finds them already possessing faith and repent- 
 ance! Besides, "God hath from the beginning 
 CHOSEN them unto salvation, through sanctid- 
 cation of the Spirit and belief o^ the truth;" where 
 fnith and holiness are declared to be the means, 
 not the 7noving causes, of their election. Will it 
 be said that sufficient grace is common to all, and 
 that the reason why any one believes and is saved 
 is, because he makes a good improvement of the 
 grace given him? We inquire, Is this ^^improve- 
 ment' ^ a work of righteousness? If so, the apostle 
 declares repeatedly, ^^JVot by ivorks of righteous- 
 dispositions of heart by which a man welcomes and re- 
 ceives gfladly the knowledge of the truth, in the love of it, 
 this is the high Calvinism of Paul. "It is God that xcork- 
 eth in you both TO WILL and TO DO of his good 
 pleasure." Philip. 2 :13. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 107 
 
 ness which we have done, but according lo Ids 
 mercy he saved us;" where he places in strong 
 contrast the two schemes of salvation by works 
 and salvation by mercy or grace. "Not of works, 
 lest any man should boast.''^ "To him that 
 workcth, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but 
 of debt.'' ^ "But if it be of works, then it is no 
 more grace; otherwise work is no more work." 
 (Rom. 11:6.) In such emphatic terms does he 
 teach the impossibility of minghng with salvation 
 by grace, the miserable efforts of man. But if 
 election be founded on man's i?nprove)nent, then, 
 to all intents and purposes, man makes himself to 
 '^ differ, ^^ or elects himself; so that when the apos- 
 tle gave thanks to God for his brethren and for 
 himself, because "God had from the beginning 
 CHOSEN them unto saIvaiio7i,-^ supposing him 
 to have been a sound Methodist, we must under- 
 stand him as follows: "God, I thank thee, that 
 from eternity thou didst foresee that I and my 
 brethren would make a much better improvement 
 of thy grace than many of our neighbors, and that 
 we would choose thee, and therefore thou hast 
 chosen us unto salvation; so that with our ^good 
 leave,'' our consent to do our part of the work, 
 and to make choice of thee in preference to the 
 world, thou hast chosen us; in view of which 
 great mercies, we render thanks to ourselves in 
 
108 TiiK DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 the first plac(», for our faitliAiIness, niul the jrreat 
 ■hnprovcmcnt we liavo made, by which we have 
 furnislied a reason or ground upon wliich God 
 hath chosen ns niito salvation!" 
 
 We freely admit that no j^'ioiis person, how- 
 ever Arminian his creed, will ever be fonnd bold 
 enough to utter such sentiments upon his knees, 
 ill tlie immediate presence of God. It is a re- 
 mark no more trite tlian true, that all good men 
 are Calviuists in their addresses at the throne of 
 grace. But it is demonstrably the fact, that not- 
 withstanding all that is said against Predestina- 
 tion, as destroying the necessity and use of prayer 
 and the other means of grace, tlio objection lies 
 widi ten-fold force? against Arniinianism. The 
 ("alvinist believes, that though ttic means of grace, 
 imlnding prayer, are of themselves entirely inef- 
 ficacious in producing any good result; yet that 
 God has ordained a connection between means 
 and ends, by which, through his power and Spirit, 
 ' 'lencvcr properly employed, his own institu- 
 tions become efficient to accomplish that to which 
 they are sent. But when the Arminian attempts 
 to pray, what can he, consistently with his prin- 
 ciples, ^'inquire for ?^^ He cannot ask God to 
 convert sinners; for, as we have already seen, he 
 could only mean, that God would *^note^' the 
 J aithfidness and improvement which they have 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 109 
 
 made, and according to this knowledge, deal with 
 them righteously; a course which the most Holy 
 will certainly pursue, whether he prays for it or 
 not. Neither can he request that God will re- 
 strain the wickedness of men, and incline them 
 to good; for that, the Arminian thinks, would be 
 such an "efficient control" over t'neir actions, as 
 to destroy their free agency. Nor yet can he 
 pray for grace to enable the sinner to repent and 
 believe; for he contends that every man has al- 
 ready sufficient grace and ability. And as to 
 praying for more grace, he holds that every man 
 receives grace accordingly as he works for it; and 
 by the supposition, those for whom he prays, 
 have been "careless ones from their youth up- 
 ward." The Arminian dare not ask God efftclu- 
 ally to overcorae * the rebellious heart; for thi» 
 
 * The doctrine Ox irresistible grace has been a fruitful 
 topic of discourse to our ArinJaian friends. Will they 
 take the trouble to understand it? Calvinists believe and 
 teach that men may and do "resist the Holy Ghost" — 
 "grieve and even quench the Spirit.'' But the question is 
 not whether men often stifle the operations of the Spirit 
 of grace, but vv^hcther, Vii'hen it is the good pleasure of 
 God to convert and save a sinner, he is able to employ suf- 
 Jicient power to secure his object? In otlicr words, whe- 
 ther God is able to use means and infiucnces v/hich will 
 overcome his depraved heart and all its resistance; or 
 whether the sinner may so resist the Sj)irit and grace of 
 God, as to overcome the Almighty, and defeat his design 
 or purpose of mercy? Calvinists believe that God is able 
 to conquer all resistance. Armiaians take the opposite 
 
110 THE T)IFFICI)LTIT\S OF 
 
 would be askin!^ for efficacious or special grace^ 
 not bestowed upon all men. This would repre- 
 sent the Divine Being as "partial," and a "res- 
 pecter of persons." 
 
 Besides, "What the creature will do," says 
 V/atson, (vol. 2, p. 435,) "in fact is known be- 
 forehand, with a perfect prescience;" "and what 
 God has defcrinined to do, is made apparent by 
 what he actnally does, which can be no new, no 
 sudden thouglu, but biGicn and PURPOSED 
 from cterniiy, in view of the actual circumstan- 
 ces." Now, vv'ill the Arniinian inform us, whe- 
 ther he expects his prayers will reverse the ;;cr- 
 fed foreknowledge and PURPOSE of God, 
 which Watson alTirms to be "from eternity?" 
 Well may the Calvinist bless God that he has 
 been led to adopt a system of doctrines which he 
 13 not obliged to abandon, whenever he opens his 
 lips to plead for the favor of Ucaven upon him- 
 self and all mankind. 
 
 3. A tliird topic demanding a brief notice in its 
 connection Avilh the doctrine of Predestination, 
 
 view, viz., that grace is not so irresistible, but tliat the 
 sinnei' in many cases gets the belter of ODDiipotoncc. Of 
 course it would be tolly to pray to the Divine Being to do 
 what he is unahle to perform. On this scheme, tiio 
 prayers should be offered to the sinner, to obtain his 
 "good leave," as Wesley has it, to be converted, and ihcu 
 the work would bs easy. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. Ill 
 
 relates to the character 7m<\ final dcsilny of those 
 of mankind who will never realize the saving 
 blessings of the Gospel, but will perish under the 
 divine v/rath. The views of Calvinists upon 
 these subjects have furnished abundant matter of 
 denunciation and misrepresentation to our Meth- 
 odist neighbors. "Does it come to pass that 
 some are lost?" inquires Dr. Fisk, (Disc. pp. 26, 
 27.) "Then this v.-as ordained. Was sin ne- 
 cessary as 2. pretence to damn them? Then this 
 was ordamed. They (Calvinists) must believe 
 that Glod determined to create men and angels for 
 the express purpose to damn them eternally; that 
 he determined to introduce sin, and influence men 
 to commit sin, and harden them in it, that they 
 might be fit subjects of his wrath," &c. &c. &c. 
 Not to repeat what has been said in answer to 
 the inquiry, "Why does sin exist?" we cannot 
 conceal our surprise that the Rev. President of the 
 Wesleyan University should seem to be ignorant 
 of the common Calvinistic distinction between 
 ^'-efficient and permissive decrees." Besides, if 
 Dr. Fisk had ever read the Presbyterian Confes- 
 sion, he would have found written, of those who 
 perish, that "God was pleased to pass them by, 
 and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath ybr 
 their sin.^^ (Conf., chap. 3, sect. 7.) And of 
 those "who do never truly come (o Jesus Christ/' 
 
113 THE DIFFICTTLTIE* OF 
 
 that "they are justly left in unbelief, for their 
 wilful neglect and contempt of the grace offered 
 them." (Conf., p. 180.) The reason, therefore, 
 why they are not saved is, that they "^/o not 
 come to Jesus Christ.^^ They do not come to 
 Jesus Christ, because " they are justly left in 
 unbelief. ^^ And they are justly left in unbelief, 
 because of "their ivilful neglect and contempt of 
 the grace offered them." "If they M'ill add new 
 obstinacy and hardness to their minds and hearts," 
 says Dr. Owen, the great advocate of Calvinism; 
 "if they will fortify themselves against the word 
 with prejudice and dislike; if they will resist its 
 operations through their lusts and corrupt affec- 
 tions, God may justly leave them to perish, and 
 to be filled with the fruit of their own ways." 
 "They perish not by a mere continuance in the 
 state wherein the word finds them, but by reject- 
 ing the counsel of God made known to them for 
 their healing and recovery."* Is this the same 
 with ^influencing men to sin, and hardening 
 them in it, as a pretence to damn them?'''' The 
 doctrine of permissive decrees is taught at large 
 by Turretine, Fisher,t Ridgeley, Edwards, and a 
 
 * Expos, of the Heb., vol. 2, p. 354. 
 
 t Take the following specimen from the Exposition of 
 the Assembly's Catecliism, composed by the Erskines of 
 Scotland, and James Fisher. Q. "How does the decree 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. IIS 
 
 liost of Others of our writers. Had the DoCtor^s 
 reading been all on one side? Yet he not only- 
 attempts to quote the Presbyterian Confession, 
 as we shall presently see, but informs us that he 
 is combating a doctrine upon which ^^agree all 
 the Calvinistic divines in Europe and America!" 
 It is easy to reply, that these are "smooth 
 things," adapted to conceal from public view the 
 odious features of genuine Predestination. It is 
 a matter both of surprise and regret, to find even 
 Dr. Fisk giving currency to the stale slanders 
 which aie abroad upon this subjeci, and descend- 
 ing so far as to misquote and grossly misrepresent 
 -our Confession of Faith. Thu&, in his "Dis- 
 ^ouTse on Predestination and Election," p. 15, 
 ihe cites chap. 3, sect. 5, ^as follows: <'Those of 
 mankind that are predestinated unto life, Go4, 
 before the foundation of the world, hath chosen 
 in Christ unto everlasting glory, without any 
 foresight of faith or good works.'' This last 
 clause the Dr. has put m italics, and has entirely- 
 omitted the rest of the passage — ^'without any 
 
 of God extend to things naturally and morally good?" 
 Ans. "Effectively; because God is the author and efficient 
 •cause of all good." Q. "How does it extend to things 
 morally evil?" Ans. '■''Permissively and directively only." 
 Q. "Is the permissive decree a bare inactive permitting 
 of evil?" Ans. "No. It determines the event of the evil, 
 and overrules it to a good end." This was written in 
 1753, '65. The book is a standard among CalvinistSi 
 10 
 
114 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 foresight of faiih or good works" — ^uts CGndi- 
 iions or causes inoving Mm thereto-' — which 
 states simply the fact that as all men are "by na- 
 ture the children of wrath," and merit only ever- 
 lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 
 the design of mercy, the whole plan of salvation 
 in decree and execution, does not flow from any 
 merit or goodness of the sinner, '•^moving HhrC 
 (God) to elect him — the originating cause of elec- 
 tion, and the ground of the determination to save 
 the sinner, was not a ^^foresight of faith or good 
 works, ''^ for of these he would have none until 
 grace should bestow them; but simply the sove- 
 reign mercy of God. And indeed, this seems to 
 be the view of Dr. F. himself, v/hen he tells us, 
 (p. 15,) "God did decree to elect in Christ all 
 that should believe unto salvation; p.nd this decree 
 proceeds from his own goodness, and is not built 
 on any goodness of the creature." But on the 
 next page he abandons this sound Calvinism, and 
 seriously asserts that "the sinner is elected be- 
 cause he receives Christ," v/hich is the same as 
 to say, "he is elected because of something done 
 by himself, some M'ork of his own;" and if Dr. 
 Fjsk admit receiving Christ to be a good work, 
 (and certainly it is not an evil work,) then he is 
 elected because of his own goodness in receiving 
 Christ, although this writer had said, a few lines 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 115 
 
 above, that the decree to elect is not built on any 
 goodness of the creature! Alas, for a system that 
 must be supported by sncli contradictions! 
 
 Another sectarian nianceuvre employed by our 
 Arminian friends is, to represent modern Calvin- 
 ists as having been forced to forsake the old land- 
 marks of Geneva Theology, so called; while (at 
 the same time) the honesty of our new profes- 
 sions is strongly called in question. "Those 
 early defenders of unconditional election," re- 
 marks Dr. Fisk, "came out boldly and fearlessly 
 with their doctrine. \( modern Calvinists would 
 do the same, we should need no other refutation 
 of the system." "At the present day, numerous 
 changes of a more popular cast, and such as are 
 suited to cover up the offensive features of the 
 system, are introduced." " To represent the 
 thing as it is, seems so like accusing our breth- 
 ren of insincerity and duplicity,''^ &c. "And 
 being hard pressed by their antagonists, they have 
 thrown up these new redoubts, and assumed 
 these new positions, not only to CONCEAL 
 their doctrine, but if possible to defend it." (Disc. 
 Predes. and Elec.) 
 
 It is not unworthy of remark, that the Papists, 
 Pelagians, and Socinians, of Turretine's day, era- 
 ployed this same shabby artifice. Thus they ac- 
 cused the orthodox — "reipsa sentire, quod verbo 
 
116 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 profiteri non audent" — ^^ivith holding scplimenis 
 they did not dare openly to profess.^^ And Tur- 
 retine tells us, to such men as Zuingle, Luther, 
 Calvin, Beza, and others, the atrocious injury- 
 was done, (atrocem fieri mjuriam.) 
 
 For the sake of Dr. F., who seems to be in the 
 dark upon this point, we will translate a few 
 passages from the "Institutio Theologiffi" of the 
 forementioned author, premising that he was 
 Professor of Theology at Geneva, born 1623, 
 died 1687. He was one of the brightest orna- 
 ments of that celebrated school of the propliels. 
 His system is now a standard work among Cal- 
 vinists, and is used at Princeton, N. J., as a text- 
 book. 
 
 Decrees. — "Decree is ascribed to God, not 
 as the efTect of deliberation and previous consulta- 
 tion, but as a certain determination respecting the 
 future existence of things." "The decree, in 
 respect of its objects, often includes a certain con- 
 dition, but is nevertheless in its own nature abso- 
 lute; because both the condition and conditional 
 event depend immutably upon God, either in 
 respect of permission in things that are wicked, 
 or of efficiency m things that are good; (vcl quoad 
 pcrmissionem ut in malis, vel quoad cllcctioncm 
 in bonis.") 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 117 
 
 Necessity.— Our author affirms that the divine 
 decree implies the necessity of future events; but 
 he expressly disclaims the idea of an absolute or 
 physical necessity, as also the necessity oi coer- 
 cion or force; and teaches a necessity which res* 
 pects only the certainty of the future existence 
 of the event, which is the object of the decree, 
 (respectu certitudinis eventus et futuritionis ex 
 decreto.) And in reply to the objection that this 
 doctrine makes God tlie author of sin, he says of 
 the decree, *'non est effectivum mali, sed tantum 
 permissivum et directivum" — it is not efficient of 
 evil, but only permissive and directive to prope? 
 ends." In this particular our author follows the 
 great Calvin, (B. 1, chap. 16, sect. 8.) "What 
 God decrees, must necessarily come to pass, yet 
 it is not by an absolute or natural necessity. ^^ 
 
 Election he defines, *'the counsel of God, in 
 which he decreed out of his mere grace to hav« 
 compassion upon certain persons, and being de* 
 livered from their sins tiirough his Son, to bestow 
 upon them eternal salvation." "The decree of 
 eternal life and eternal death has respect to man 
 as fallen, (respicere hominem lapsum.) Other- 
 wise he says, we represent "God as having repro- 
 bated man before by sin he could be the proper 
 object of reprobation; and as having sentenced the 
 innocent to punishment, before any fault was 
 10* 
 
lis THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 foreseen in them.^^ "By the decree of God, the 
 salvation of the elect is established and certain, 
 but by the decree of the same God only in the 
 way -of faith and holiness." 
 
 Reprobation. — This term, though not found in 
 the Presbyterian Confession, is frequently em- 
 ployed by our best writers. Reprobation, ac- 
 cording to Turretine, includes two acts, a nega- 
 tive and a positive. The negative act is that by 
 which the reprobate are passed by, and are not ef- 
 fectually called and regenerated by the grace and 
 Spirit of God. Regarded as involved in the com- 
 mon mass of sin and corruption, being "children 
 of wrath even as others," God is under no obli- 
 gation to save them, nor to bestow any favor up- 
 on them; and the sins of which they are guilty, 
 are the natural fruits of their depraved hearts, and 
 follow the absence of restraining grace as natu- 
 rally as darkness succeeds the absence of the sun. 
 Nor is God the cause or author of their sins, ex- 
 cept as the sun is the cause of cold or darkness. 
 **God denies the grace which they themselves are 
 unwilling to receive, or to retain, and which they 
 voluntarily despise, since they desire nothing less 
 than to be under the control of the Holy iSpirit. 
 He does not deny grace that they may sin, but in 
 just punishment for their sin." 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 119 
 
 The positive act of reprobation, according to 
 our author, "is that by which God has resolved to 
 inflict merited punishment upon persons remain- 
 ing in a state of nature, and having voluntarily 
 abused (sua sponte abuses) the light of nature and 
 of the Gospel ministered unto them." "Sin 
 must necessarily be supposed as the condition in 
 him who is reprobated;" "neither can there be in 
 God the will to punish any but a sinner." 
 
 "Reprobation," he continues, "may be consid- 
 ered absolutely or comparatively. In the abso- 
 lute sense, it is rightly ascribed to the corruption 
 of the natural man, which has made him justly an 
 object of reprobation. When, therefore, it is in- 
 quired why any man is reprobated, it is well re- 
 plied — because, by his sin, he was deserving of 
 such treatment. But when the subject is regard- 
 ed in the comparative light, when it is inquired 
 why one wicked person is reprobated rather than 
 another, (cur unus prae alio reprobatur,) it must 
 be referred to the good pleasure of God, who 
 elects or passes by according to his sovereign 
 will: sin being common to all, cannot be alleged 
 as the ground of this distinction." "God may be 
 said to predestinate to sin and hardness of heart, 
 not efficiently, but permissively, and so as to di- 
 rect and overrule the event" — (non effective, sed 
 permissive et directive, quatenus illam permittere 
 
120 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 et ordinare dsfrevit.) Compare these statements 
 with the impious carricature drawn hy Dr. Fisk. 
 But the Presbyterian Conf. is again summoned 
 as a witness to convict us of the monstrous impiety 
 laid to our charge by Dr. F. "The ahnighly 
 power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite good- 
 ness of God, do so far manifest themselves in his 
 providence, that it cxtendeth itself to the first fall 
 and all other sins of angels and men, and that not 
 by a bare permission, but such as hath joined with 
 it a most wise and powerful bounding, and other- 
 wise ordering and governing of them in a manifold 
 dispensation to his own holy ends." Conf., chap. 
 5, sect. 4. This passage is supposed to assert 
 such an "•efficient controV over all the actions of 
 men and angels, as to represent God as the au- 
 thor of all their sins. Now it might be a suflS- 
 cient reply to this, simply to quote the remainder 
 of the section, viz.: "le/ 50 as the sinfulness 
 (hereof (of wicked actions) proccedeth only from 
 the creature, not from God,'' The very section, 
 adduced in proof that Presbyterians teach that 
 God is the author of sin, utterly disclaims such a 
 sentiment. Is it fair, to attempt to prove us 
 guilty of an impious dogma, by refering to an ar- 
 ticle which expressly disclaims it? Further: 
 Let us insert in the body of the foregoing article, 
 the negative which denies its truth, and how will 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 121 
 
 it read? Thus: "The almighty power, unsearch- 
 able wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, do 
 not so fiir manifest themselves in his providence, 
 as to extend either to the first fall, or to any other 
 of the sins of angels and men, except by a bare 
 permission, which has not joined with it any wise 
 and powerful bounding, (i. e. limiting or restrain- 
 ing;) nor does God order (or overrule) and govern 
 them,. in a manifold dispensation, to any holy 
 end." In the act of sin, therefore, creatures are 
 left beyond the reach" of divine Providence; they 
 are without any overruling power, and beyond 
 the Uinit of any wise and poiverful restraint, for 
 holy and benevolent purposes! Moreover, where 
 there is no government, there is no law, and 
 where there is no law, there is no transgression. 
 In the act oT sin, therefore, it is impossible to sin!! 
 In truth, -this article is only a full expression of 
 the sentiment of the Psalmist — "The wrath of 
 man shall praise thee, and the remainder of wrath 
 thou wilt restrain." Do Methodists deny this! 
 
 Once more our Confession is brought to testify 
 against us. Thus, chap. 3, sect. 2 — "Although 
 God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass, 
 yet has he not decreed any thing because he fore- 
 saw it as future," &c. But can any person of 
 sense maintain the affirmative of this article, viz., 
 "that God ha^ decreed many things because he 
 
122 THK DIFFICT LTIIvS OF 
 
 foresaw them as future?" How will it work with 
 his positive or efficient decrees — say to make or 
 judg-e the world? Has God decreed (or deter- 
 mined) to do either of these great acts, bccauae he 
 foresaw he would perform them? The question 
 answers itself. Let us try it v/ith his permissive 
 decrees. Does God foresee that he will j}ermit 
 certain conduct, and not till then, decree (or de- 
 termine) to permit it? A child would pronounce 
 it nonsense to talk of a Being foreseeing' that he 
 will do certain things, and theji, not before, de- 
 termining- to do them. 
 
 Again it is objected that our Confession of 
 Faith teaches that the angels and men who are 
 predestinated, "are particularly and unchangeably 
 desigjied; and their number is so certain and defi- 
 nite, that it cannot be either increased or dimin- 
 ished." Conf., chap. 3, sect. 4. But what is the 
 language of Methodism in her standard publica- 
 tions, in reference to this subject? ^'I believe the 
 eternal decree concerning both (election and rep- 
 robation) is expressed in these v\^ords, 'He that 
 believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not 
 shall be damned.' And this decree, without 
 doubt, God will not change, and man cannot re- 
 sist." Doct. Tracts, p. 15. Now add to this 
 *' eternal, unchangeable, irresistible decree" of 
 Methodism, the admitted truth, that God infalli- 
 
ARMIMAN METHODISM. 123 
 
 bly foreknotvs^ individually, personally, by name 
 and by number, the identical persons to whom it 
 will secure salvation, and to whom it will secure 
 perdition — that the number of the saved, and the 
 number of the lost, are as certainly known and 
 marked in the divine prescience, as though that 
 precise number of persons had already been ad- 
 mitted to heaven, and that other precise number 
 been cast down to hell. Most manifestly, then, 
 "the number of the predestmated is so definite, 
 that it cannot be either increased or diminished," 
 UNLESS the divine foreknowledge be mere con- 
 jecture, and He who knows all things, has made 
 a mistake. "Whatever God foreknows," says 
 Dr. Fisk, "will undoubtedly (or certainly j come 
 to pass." He foreknows the exact number who 
 will believe and be saved — that exact number will 
 undoubtedly be saved. He foreknows the exact 
 number who will refuse to believe and perish — 
 that exact number will undoubtedly (or certainly) 
 perish. This argument might be extended to a 
 great length, at every step multiplying the embar- 
 rassments of our opponents. We might question 
 the moral honesty, and "expose the duplicity" of 
 those who, notwithstanding this infallible desig- 
 nation, on their own principles, of the number of 
 the saved and lost, do nevertheless urge, exhort, 
 intreat sinners to "flee from the wrath to come." 
 
\^i THE DirricDLTlES 0> 
 
 Do tlicy expect to change a "fixed and infallible 
 certainty?" Or is it "to lull the people into 
 favor?" Slc. &;c. &c. How will they, on these 
 principles, evince the sincerity of God, in makinor 
 the offers of salvation, where they are infallibly 
 certain to be despised, or his mercy in originally 
 creating beings who Mere infallibly certain to be 
 miserable forever; or his grace in giving his well 
 beloved Son to die, to make an atonement and 
 purchase a salvation, by shedding his blood for 
 thousands, for whom these blessings M^ere infal- 
 libly certain to result only in the aggravation of 
 iheir unutterable wo? 
 
 Mr. Wesley, in his notes on 1 Pet. 1: 2, says, 
 "Election, in the Scripture sense, is God's doing 
 any thing that our merit or power have no part 
 in." And elsewhere, "I do not hold God chose 
 any man fo life and salvation for any good which 
 he had done, or for any which was in him before 
 he put it there — the whole of that wdiich is good 
 in him, even from the first moment of his will, 
 being of grace, not of nature." Doct. Tracts. 
 Again he tells us, "God from the foundation of 
 the world foreknew all men's believing or not be- 
 lieving; and according to this his foreknowledge 
 he elected all obedient believers, as such, to sal- 
 vation." "He elected all obedient believers, as 
 such" — but how did they become "5?/c/i.^" Mr. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISftt. 125 
 
 W. assures us that there is no good in man *^till 
 God put it there;'" and if obedient believing be 
 any thing good, then "//e put it there.^^ He 
 made them to differ. But when did God deter- 
 mine to put this good thing in the heart of the 
 sinner? Obviously he determined to do it before 
 he did it* And if before the act, why not from 
 eternity, ''since known unto him are all his works 
 from the foundation of the world?" And it is 
 supreme folly to speak of his infallibly knowing 
 that He would perform an act, without his having 
 determined (or decreed) to perform it. It were 
 easy to fill pages with similar examples, where 
 the zealous opponents of the doctrine of election 
 are driven by the force of truth, to admit in sub- 
 stance, what they earnes'tly denounce in form — an 
 instructive proof that the grand principles of the 
 doctrine, laying out of view the express declara- 
 tions of Holy Writ, are founded in the plainest 
 conceptions of common sense* 
 
 Pressed with these and similar difficulties, the 
 advocates of Metliodism are forced continually 
 into positions in argument, where the total denial 
 of one or more of the divine perfections is most 
 easy, and if logically pursued, inevitable; and the 
 whole tendency of the system is to dethrone the 
 Great Supreme from the government of the uni- 
 verse, and throw the intelligent creation loose 
 11 
 
126 THE DIFFICULTIES OV 
 
 from the control of an all-directing Providence. 
 The omniscient God may indeed foreknow the 
 actions of his creatures, but to circumscribe, regu- 
 late, and fix their place in his all-wise plan, is, in 
 the view of Methodism, to divest them of an es- 
 sential attribute of free agency; and what is mon- 
 strous, beyond conception, is, to charge the thrice 
 Holy God with the authorship of all the sin in 
 the universe! 
 
 POSTSCRIPT TO LETTER III. 
 
 "Calvin burned Servetus," is the common and 
 conclusive reply to all that can be said in defence 
 of the system which bears his name. And epi- 
 thets of infamy are heaped upon his character 
 "without mercy and without end. The following 
 testimonials in favor of the illustrious Reformer, 
 merit consideration from their origin. 
 
 1. The following are the words of Arminius: 
 *'I exhort students to read, after the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, Calvin's Commentaries, who is INCOM- 
 PARABLE in the interpretation of the sacred 
 volume. And his expositions ought to be more 
 highly valued than all the writings of the ancient 
 Christian fathers — so that in a certain eminent 
 spirit of prophecy, I give him the pre-eminence 
 beyond most, nay all others.'' See the trans- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 127 
 
 lator's remarks, prefixed to the American edition 
 of Calvin on Romans. 
 
 2. Rev. John Wesley: "I believe Calvin was 
 a great i istrument of God, and that he was a 
 ivise and PIOUS man." "John Calvin was a 
 pious, learned, sensible man." IMisc. Works, 
 vols. 1 and 2, pages 546, 475. Such were the 
 sentiments of Wesley respecting Calvin: and yet 
 he ventures to affirm, that the doctrinal views of 
 this wise, learned, PIOUS, sensible man, whose 
 Commentaries, by the confession of Arminius 
 himself, excel (dl others, " were the greatest 
 hinderance to the work of God." Works, vol. 3, 
 p. 485. We can have no difficulty in deciding 
 ivhat kind of a work was so much hindered by 
 the sentiments entertained by Calvin, particularly 
 since Arminius has told us that those sentiments 
 were the result of an "interpretation of the sacred 
 volume," which was "incomparable;" of an "ex- 
 position" of the Bible, which was ^'•more highly 
 to be valued than all others." 
 
 3. The following are the sentiments of distin- 
 guished Episcopal writers. Philpot, the martyr, 
 who suffered under the reign of Queen Mary, 
 calls Calvin, "that godly man," and this too when 
 under the examination which issued in his death. 
 Bishop Jewel speaks of Calvin as ^^so worthy an 
 ornament of the church of God." Bishop Hall, 
 
l28 THE DIFFICULTIKS Ot 
 
 *'as among our best and most renowned divines;^* 
 and Hooker calls him "the wisest man that ever 
 the French church did enjoy" — and "a vessel of 
 God's glory." Hooker also says that "his Insti- 
 tutes of the Christian Religion, and his Exposi- 
 tions of Holy Scripture, have deservedly procured 
 him honor throughout the world.^* Dr. Hake- 
 well, chaplain to Charles I., calls Calvin "an ex- 
 cellent instrument of God." Dr. Hoyl, " that 
 great instrument of God's glory." "His works 
 shall praise him for wit, elegance, fulness, and 
 soundness of divinity." And Bishop Andrews 
 speaks of him as "an illustrious person, and never 
 to be mentioned without a preface of the highest 
 honor." This evidence, one would suppose, 
 might satisfy our Methodist EPISCOPAL 
 friends, that Calvin was not such a monster in 
 human shape, as they would persuade the com- 
 munity. 
 
 *'But Calvin burned Servetus." Well, sup- 
 pose he did. Has not the Arminian church of 
 Rome, for ages past, been in the practice of shed- 
 ding the blood of the saints, wherever she had 
 the power? See your own grandmother of Rome, 
 with her garments dyed in blood! And what will 
 you say for your EPISCOPAIi mother, the 
 church of England? Look at the rock whence 
 you were hewn, the hole of the pit whence you 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 129 
 
 were digged, and say no more about Servetus. It 
 is undeniable, that Archbishop Cranmer "pro- 
 cured the burning'' of at least ybi^r persons, two 
 of whom were WOMEN. He was concerned in 
 the burning of John Lambert, and Anne Askew, 
 for those very principles which he himself after- 
 wards embraced! He also "procured the death" 
 of two others, persuading the king to sign their 
 death-warrants, which he finally did with tears 
 in his eyes, telling Cranmer, "he must answer to 
 God for it, if it was wrong." The crimes of 
 which the)^ were accused were, one for denying 
 the divinity, the other the humanity of Christ. 
 (Miller's Letters, 2d Ed. p. 419.) This ought to 
 suffice "to put to silence the ignorance of foolish 
 men," and to quiet their ceaseless prating about 
 Calvin and Servetus. 
 
 But it is by no means admitted that the death 
 of Servetus can be justly imputed to Calvin. 
 Dr. Miller quotes Sennebier, who was no Calvin- 
 ist, asserting that it is "a cruel calumny;" that 
 Calvin's bitterest foes, who were contemporary 
 with him, did not dare to advance it. "Calvin," 
 he says, "was anxious to prevent his death, and 
 warned him against coming to Geneva, as he 
 valued his life, which he concluded he would be 
 deprived of by the laws and civil government of 
 the city." Sennebier also says that after the sen- 
 11* 
 
inO THE DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 tonce was pronouncetl, Calvin labored to procure 
 a mitigation of it, and sincerely deplored his fate. 
 (Miller's Letters, p. 418.) And what renders 
 these statements more probable is, that Calvin 
 himself, commenting on Romans, 13:5, observes 
 that "those who exercise dominion over the con- 
 science, endeavor, without effect, to establish by 
 this text their sacrilegious /yranny.'" 
 
 Nor is this all. If it could be proved beyond 
 the possibility of controversy, that Calvin was the 
 principal agent in the death of Servetus, all edu- 
 cated men know that it must have been not so 
 much the fault of the man, as the universal de- 
 lusion of the AGE in which he lived. It was the 
 twilight of the Reformation from the abominations 
 of Arminian Popery; and liberty of conscience 
 was not either understood or admitted by any de- 
 nomination of Christians. Hence Dr. Miller in- 
 forms us, that the mild and gentle Melancthon, 
 with others of the lights of the age, ajyproved of 
 the death of Servetus. So also did the EPIS- 
 COPAL Cranmer. And Bishop Hall solemnly 
 declared that in that matter Calvin DID WELL 
 APPROVE HIMSELF to God's church. This 
 also was the opinion of the great body of the 
 English Reformers. It appears to have been a 
 common opinion of the day, that blasphemy 
 against tli© Ruler of the universe, like some sins 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 131 
 
 under the Old Testament dispensation, was to be 
 punished by the civil magistrate with death. 
 Servetus himself adopted the same mistaken 
 opinion. 
 
 An allusion is sometimes made to the compara- 
 tive moral tendency of the Arminian and Calvin- 
 istic systems. The following is from the British 
 Encyclopedia, and was written by one who was 
 710 Calvinist. "There is one remark which we 
 think ourselves in justice bound to make. It is 
 this — that from the earliest ages down to our own 
 days, if we consider the character of the ancient 
 Stoics, the Jewish Essences, the modern Calvin- 
 is.ts, and Jansenists, compared with tliat of their 
 antagonists, the Epicureans, the Sadducees, the 
 Jlrminians, and the Jesuits, we shall find that 
 they have excelled, in no small degree, in the 
 practice of the most rigid and respectable virtues, 
 and have been the HIGHEST HONOR to their 
 own age, and the BEST MODELS for imitation 
 to every succeeding cige.^^ Such is the testi- 
 mony of an impartial witness, a first-rate scholar. 
 
 Again: The Edinburgh Review, which has not 
 been suspected of a leaning toward Calvinism, 
 says, "Who were the first formidable opponents 
 of this doctrine (predestination) in the church of 
 Rome? The Jesuits, the contrivers of courtly 
 casuistry, and the founders of lax morality. 
 
132 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Who, in the same cliurch, inclined to the theoloo-y 
 of Augustine? The Jansenists, the teachers and 
 the MODELS of austere morals." 
 
 If any one wishes to know Wesley's judgment 
 respecting the character of the people whom he 
 srathcred under liis care, let him read his sermon 
 on tlie 'Causes of tlie Inefficacy of Christianity,' 
 particularly the Slh section. A dark picture, 
 truly! 
 
ARMIXIAN' MKTHODISM. 
 
 133 
 
 LETTER l¥. 
 
 Jltonp/nunf. Universal tSalvafion. ''Falling 
 from Grace.^' Regeneration. Evidences 
 and Fruits. 
 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 The subject which next dcmnnds our attention, 
 introduces to our notice Konic of the worst 
 features of the Arminian System. 
 
 III. The Difficultif.s of JMKTiioDi'iM im co.vxectio.v 
 WITH THE rtOCTiaiNE OF Atone-me.nt. 
 
 Upon the importance of correct views in refer- 
 ence to this great central truth of the Gospel, we 
 need not enlarge. Error here, like disease of the 
 heart, will circulate its morbid influence through 
 every member and to every extremity of the sys- 
 tem. It may, therefore, be regarded as one of the 
 most exceptionable traits of Methodism, that in 
 her 20th article, she is fairly chargeable with es- 
 pousing the cause of Universal Salvation. "The 
 offering of Christ, it is said, is that perfect re- 
 demption, propitiation, and salisfaction/or all the 
 sins of the whole tvorld, both original and actual." 
 But if the "whole world" was embraced in the 
 
134 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 atonement, so that there was a ^^perfcct satisfac- 
 tion''' made for all tlie sins of all mankind, then 
 must the Savior have died for all the sins of the 
 wicked, who had perished from earth, and were 
 in the prison of despair, at the period of the cru- 
 cifixion; which, besides the palpable absurdity of 
 t' J idea, at once suggests the inquiry, "why then 
 are they compelled to sufliir, since a 'perfect re- 
 demption and satisfaction' have been made for 
 them?" 
 
 Again: If all of every description of character 
 have a "perfect redemption, propitiation, and 
 satisfaction," completed for them, how can any 
 be lost? Wesley has answered, "Because they 
 believe not on the only begotten Son of God." 
 But is this unbelief, this rejection of Christ, a sin? 
 If not a sin, it can do them no harm at the great 
 day of decision. "Nil nisi pcccatum timeo." But 
 if it be a sin, then the ailicle declares that a per- 
 fect satisfaction has been made "for all the sins of 
 the whole world," and of course for unbelief as 
 well as for other sin. How then can it be a cause 
 of perdition? If it be just to punish this sin with 
 everlasting torments, after a "perfect propitiation 
 and satisfaction" have been made for it, it will be 
 equally just and right to punish all bin for which 
 Christ died. Both law and justice, then, will 
 tak-e the redeemed sinner by the throat at the day 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 135 
 
 of judgment, and each urge its demand, "pay me 
 what thou owest,*' as inexorably as though no 
 Savior had ever suffered and died for his salva- 
 tion. Who then can be saved? Here then is the 
 dilemma: If unbelief be not a sin, it cannot be a 
 cause of future misery — it can do the sinner no 
 harm. If unbelief be a sin, a '•'"perfect salisfaC' 
 tiori'^ is made for it, as for all sin, and still it can 
 do the sinner no harm; unless a sin, for which a 
 perfect satisfaction is made and the whole debt 
 paid, can be again called up for satisfaction and 
 the debt again exacted. In the former case, no 
 one can be lost; in the latter, no one can be saved. 
 The doctrine of a "perfect satisfaction" for all the 
 sins of the whole world, must land us either in 
 Universal Salvation, or Universal Perdition. But 
 if Methodism still affirm that unbelief is a sin, 
 and the cause of the perdition of the soul, we 
 again ask, how can it be a ground of righteous 
 condemnation? The article declares that all sin 
 is atoned for by a '•'•perfect satisfaction.^'' How 
 then can the law condemn, when its penalty is 
 perfectly paid? How can justice hold the crimi- 
 nal bound, after he has been perfectly redeemed? 
 How can the judge pronounce sentence when he 
 has been perfectly satisfied? Most manifestly, 
 therefore, this article, when interpreted on Meth- 
 odist principles, teaches the doctrine of the salva- 
 
136 THE DIITICULTIES OF 
 
 tionof all, without exception; and any attempt to 
 escape the difficulty will only lead to the opposite 
 and equally absurd extreme of the final and hope- 
 less ruin of the whole family of mankind. 
 
 The Arminian scheme is therefore totally at 
 "variance with the very nature of the Savior's 
 work. It is an atonement; that is, a reconcilia- 
 tion; and to talk of his making an atonement for 
 such as are never reconciled, is a contradiction in 
 terms; it is to say he makes atonement, (AT 
 ONE-ment, as the word is; makes God and man 
 at one,) and yet makes no atonement, in the case 
 of the same individuals. He is said to give satis- 
 faction for sin; but how can he have given satis- 
 faction for the sins of those on whom the law is to 
 take satisfaction eternally? He is said to appease 
 divine justice; but can the justice of God be ap- 
 peased in the case of those against whom its 
 flaming sword shall awake forever? — to expiate 
 our offences; but how can those sins for which 
 the guilty perpetrators are to suffer everlastingly, 
 have been expiated? — to redeem from the curse 
 of the law; but how can those who are to be kept 
 in eternal thraldom, have redemption through his 
 blood? — to propitiate tlie wrath of God; but how 
 can those be interested in his propitiation who are 
 the objects of Jehovah's unceasing displeasure? 
 It supposes him to be the Savior of those who are 
 
AHMINIAN METHODISM. 18? 
 
 never saved, the Redeemer of those who are never 
 redeemed, the Deliverer of thousands who are 
 never delivered, but remain under eternal con- 
 <lemnation." (Symington.) To say that, al- 
 though made for all, it does not save some, be- 
 cause they do not believe, is to overlook the fact 
 that thousands have never heard the Gospel; and 
 ^'how shall they believe in Him of whom they 
 have not heard?^' — and "how shall they call on 
 him in whom they have not believed?" — and how 
 shall they be saved, if "they call not on the name 
 of the Lord?" (Rom. 10 :13, 14.) The argument 
 is from the pen of inspiration. "Let God be 
 true." 
 
 Further: The scheme we oppose, cannot be 
 supported by its ablest advocates, without array- 
 ing the designs and purposes of God against each 
 other. The Arminian believes that the blood of 
 the Sacrifice was shed with the desigii on the 
 part of God, to save all mankind. But Watson 
 affirms expressly, that "what the creature will do, 
 is known beforehand with a perfect prescience;'* 
 "and what God HAS DETERMINED TO 
 DO in consequence, is knoivn and PURPOSED 
 from eternity in view of the actual circumstances," 
 Well, if Christ perfectly and infallibly kneiv those 
 who would continue in sin and perish, and had 
 
 ''PURPOSED from ^t^rnity" to destroy them, 
 12 
 
188 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 is it reasonable to suppose he died with a design 
 or pmyose to save them? In other words, that 
 he died with a purpose to save the very persons 
 whom he had before purposed to destroy!! And 
 yet "Watson strongly objects to "the Calvinistic 
 opinion," because it implies that God ^^never in- 
 tended^^ to save a sinner whom ^^from eternity^^ 
 he had ^^purposed^^ or intended to destroy!! 
 
 The question of the Extent of the Atonement 
 is not fairly stated by Watson — "Whether our 
 Lord Jesus Christ did so die for all men, as to 
 make salvation attainable by all?" (vol. 2, p. 285.) 
 We maintain the infinite intrinsic value of Christ's 
 finished work; and if this w^riter mean that with 
 the light, teaching, and special influences of the 
 Holy Spirit, salvation is attainable by all at some 
 period during their natural life, (not attainable 
 when Christ died, and thousands were already in 
 the prison of despair,) we have no controversy 
 with him; but if he mean, attainable without the 
 special aid of the Spirit, this is true of no one, un- 
 less it be true that sain .3 beget themselves unto a 
 lively hope, instead of being "begotten of God." 
 The true hinge of the controversy is the design 
 of God in sending his Son into the world, and the 
 intention of Christ in expiring on the cross.* If 
 
 * "Non quseritur," says Turretine, "de pretio et tuffi. 
 tientia mortis Christi. Sed agitur da destinatione Dei 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 130 
 
 the design and intention were to save all, while 
 many are not saved, the plan of the great God 
 has been entirely frustrated, and He has been dis- 
 concerted and disappointed. Besides, if this has 
 occurred in this life, under the mediatorial reign 
 of the Son of God, what certainty can there be 
 that it will not occur in the future world? God 
 indeed designs that saints shall be forever holy 
 and happy; and on the strength of his intentioiii 
 has promised them an eternal inheritance. But 
 if his plan has once met with defeat and disap- 
 pointment, what assurance can we have that it 
 will not be so again? It may be replied, that 
 God's infallible foreknowledge proves it certain 
 that his promise will not fail. But, on the Ar- 
 minian scheme, if the designs and plans of Deity 
 are defeated, and fail, why may not also his fore- 
 knowledge? Besides, God's infallible foreknow- 
 ledge demonstrates the absurdity of the idea, that 
 his designs ever do fail. What can be more de- 
 rogatory to the character of "the only wise God,'* 
 than to suppose him to form designs and plans, 
 and employ means for their execution, while he is 
 infallibly certain that they will be utterly frus- 
 trated and defeated! For example, he designs to 
 save a sinner, whom he infallibly knows will die 
 
 mittentis filium in mnndum, et de inteniione Christi 
 morientis," Loo. Dec. Quart. Quoestio XIV. 
 
140 Tins DiFFieuLTres or 
 
 in sin, and whom he designs, in consequence of 
 his sin, to punish forever! Still he designs to 
 save him, and employs large and expensive means 
 to secure the very result which he designs shall 
 never be secured. Dr. Clarke's is the best 
 remedy here — viz., to suppose that God does not 
 cJiGose to know certain events, when such know- 
 ledge is rather inconvenient to a favorite theory! 
 Carrying with us these principles of common 
 sense, let us appeal to the inspired Oracles. 
 There we discover ilie DESIGN of the Atone- 
 ment revealed in such terms as the following: 
 *^Chvist loved (he CHURCH and gave JiimseJf 
 for IT, tliat he ynight sanrtify and cleanse it — 
 that he might present to hmiself <! glorious 
 church, not having spot or wrinhlc, but that it 
 should be holy and toi'houl blemish.'' (Eph. 5: 
 25, 28.) Again it is, "that He MIGHT redeem 
 lis from all iniquity, and purify unto liimself a 
 peculiar people, zealous of good works." (Titus 
 2:14.) A'lain, *'That we might I AYE through 
 him.'' (1 John 4:9.) Again, "He suffered the 
 just for the unjust, that He I\HGKT bring us to 
 God." (1 Pet. 3:18.) Again, "He was made 
 SIN for us, li at we might be made the righteous- 
 ness of God in Him." (2 Cor. 5:21.) Again, 
 *'He bare our sins in his own body, that we being 
 d^ad to sins, should live imfo righteousness." 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 141 
 
 (1 Pet. 2:24.) And even when God is said to 
 have "SO loved the WORLD," it is, that "WHO- 
 SOEVER BELIEVETH on Him, should not 
 perish." In all these passages, with many more 
 that might be adduced, there is connected with 
 the atonement, a special design of mercy, which 
 can in no way be supposed to pertain to thoso 
 who shall finally perish. For example, did the 
 Savior DESIGN "to sanctify and cleanse" — "to 
 present without spot or wrinkle," "holy and 
 without blemish" — "to redeem from all iniquity, 
 that they might live" — "to bring to God" — and 
 "make the righteousness of God in Him" — did 
 he design these infinite favors for those, who he 
 "knew beforehand with a perfect prescience," 
 would live and die in sin, and whom he had 
 "PURPOSED from eternity in view of the actual 
 circumstances," to destroy^ as Watson himself is 
 compelled to admit? Surely no unprejudiced per- 
 son can suppose that the design of the Redeem- 
 er's death was to save these unhappy ones, equally 
 with those who are purified from sin, and crown- 
 ed with glory, honor, and immortality. 
 
 The limitation is even more strikingly brought 
 into view in the following passages: "For the 
 transgression of my PEOPLE was he stricken." 
 «*By his knowledge shall my righteous servant 
 justify MANY; for he shall bear their iniqui' 
 12* 
 
142 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 ties.'^ (Is. 53 : 8, 11.) "I lay down my life for 
 the SHEEP." (John 10 :15.) "I pray for them; 
 I pray not for the worlds but for them which 
 thou hast GIVEN me." (John 17: 9.) Can any 
 reasonable person hnagine that these texts are 
 consistent with the supposition that Christ 'pray- 
 ed,' 'was stricken,' 'bore the iniquities,' and 'laid 
 down his life,' equally for all mankind? On the 
 principles of the Arminian, Christ's love in giving 
 himself for his people, his church, which is com- 
 pared to the peculiar special affection of the hus- 
 band for his spouse, means after all, nothing more 
 than the universal good will or compassion which 
 he entertained equally for all others. Can this 
 be true? He "shall JUSTIFY many." Why? 
 Because "he shall bear their iniquities." But if 
 he bore the iniquities of all, he will justify all. 
 He is the GOOD SHEPHERD. What is the 
 proof? He lays "down his life for the slieepy 
 But if he laid down his life equally for those who 
 never were, nor ever will be his sheep, what be- 
 comes of the proof of his peculiar care and kind- 
 ness as the good Shepherd? Or will it be said, 
 his sheep mean ail mankind? The Shepherd 
 will himself give a different decision 'at that day.* 
 He prays for them, but '■not for the ivorld.* For 
 whom? For those whom God had given him? 
 For what purpose? "That he should give eternal 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 143 
 
 life to AS MANY as tliou hast given Him." 
 (John 17: 2.) They were not of the world. But 
 were there not others for whom He prayed? 
 "Neither pray Ifor these aloiie, but for them also 
 which SHALL BELIEVE on me through their 
 word." (John 17:20.) And what is the burden 
 of his prayer? "That they also whom thou hast 
 given me, be with me ivhere I am.'''' The Ar- 
 minian believes that Christ died for all, though he 
 prays or intercedes only for some. He gives his 
 life for them, but will not give his prayers! Or 
 if, in express contradiction of the Savior, he as- 
 serts that he prays for the world, or all mankind, 
 then he must believe that his prayer does not pre- 
 vail, in many instances, that they "may be with 
 him where he is" — though He himself has said, 
 "I know that thou hearest me always.''^ 
 
 Another part of the all-prevalent intercession of 
 Christ is, to secure the gift of the Comforter, that 
 he may "abide with his people for ever." (John 
 14 :16.) To his success in procuring this best of 
 all gifts, the apostle alludes, (Gal. 4:4, 6.) "God 
 sent forth his Son to redeem, them that were un- 
 der the law, that we MIGHT receive the adoption 
 of sons." "And because ye are sons, God hath 
 sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts." 
 The Arminian doctrine requires us to believe that 
 Christ hath redeemed thousands, with whom the 
 
144 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Comforter does not abide; who disappoint and 
 frustrate his design that they should receive the 
 adoption of sons. He is unable to conquer their 
 reluctance, and make them "willing in the day of 
 his power." Thus the eflbrts of the persons of 
 the adorable Godhead are represented as crossing 
 each other; and. thousands are redeemed by Christ 
 who are never born of the Spirit, but continue 
 under the bondage of corruption, and lie down in 
 everlasting sorrow. But if this be possible, what 
 reason can be given why the death of Christ 
 might not have been utterly and for ever unavail- 
 ing, with respect to the whole human race? If 
 one sinner may defeat the plans and frustrate the 
 efforts of the Savior, others may do the same. So 
 that the success of the scheme of mercy, the ful- 
 filment of the promise that Christ should "see of 
 the travail of his soul and be satisfied," was sus- 
 pended upon the concurrence of the creature with 
 the designs of the infinite God, and but for that 
 concurrence, (which might have been withheld,) 
 must have been for ever impossible. Besides, so 
 far is it from being true that all are redeemed^ 
 that it is the song of the ransomed in Heaven — 
 *»Thou hast redeemed us to God OUT OF every 
 kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation." 
 (Rev. 5:9.) If it be inquired, why is the atone- 
 ment made effectual for only a part of the race of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM, 145 
 
 mankind? — we inquire in turn, why was it pro- 
 vided for any? why provided for man, and not for 
 the angels who kept not their first fj^tate? "Why 
 is the way of one man hedged up wi;h a thousand 
 means and influences to turn his feet into the path 
 of peace, v/hile another is beset with almost every 
 form of allurement to vice and ruin? "Why is it,'* 
 to employ the lan2;uage of W^atson, "that men are 
 sometimes IRRESISTIBLY awakened to a sense 
 of their guilt and danger by the Spirit of God" — 
 "and sometimes independent of any external 
 means at all" — (vol. 2, p. 447) — while others, in 
 the use of all the ordinary means, remain insensi- 
 ble to the last? Wliy did the Savior give thanks 
 that these things were hid from the wise and pru- 
 dent, from the self-righteous, and the formalist, 
 while publicans and harlots go into the kingdom 
 of grace and glory? "Even so, Father, for so it 
 seemed good in thy sight." 
 
 An attempt has been made to turn the edge of 
 the reasoning employed in the foregoing para- 
 graphs, thus: "The question to be determined is. 
 Was the atonement general or particular? If 
 general, then Christ died for those ivho were in 
 hell when he teas crvcifiedy Desperate indeed 
 must be the cause, that demands the defence of 
 such a position! If Christ died for men in hell, 
 then it was to save them, or it was not. If not to 
 
140 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 save them, for what purpose did he die for them? 
 The only imaginable influence his death could 
 exert upon the finally lost, was to add to their 
 torments, by charging the blood of the Son of 
 God upon them. Was this the object of his dying 
 for them? But if you assert he died to save 
 them, you charge the "only wise God" with the 
 folly of attempting, (at the infinite expense of his 
 own dear Son,) to save those whom he had al- 
 ready doomed to eternal torments, and whom it 
 was impossible to save, because He had deter- 
 mined them to be forever lost! Such are some 
 of the hopeful fruits of the dogma, which asserts 
 the design of the Redeemer's death to have been 
 to save all, as much Cain and Judas, as John and 
 Paul; as much those who were in hell, as those 
 who inherit heaven. If to have the wisest, and 
 best, and most merciful designs thwarted, and the 
 kindest intentions and purposes disappointed of 
 their execution by wicked creatures, can produce 
 vexation and chagrin, the blessed Redeemer, on 
 Methodist principles, must be infinitely mortified 
 and miserable. 
 
 Again it has been said, in reply, that "although 
 a ^perfect satisfaction^ was ofiered for all men, 
 yet it ivas not accepted for their actual sins, (in 
 which is included unbelief,) until men comply 
 with the Gospel conditions." What a degrading 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM, 147 
 
 view of the glorious work of redemption is this! 
 The blessed Jesus came into this world of guilt, 
 lived a life of sorrows, and died a death of infamy, 
 "to finish the work" his Father had given him 
 to do for the salvation of men. *'It is finished," 
 he cried upon the cross, and gave up the ghost. 
 The work was completed; a "perfect redemption, 
 propitiation, and satisfaction," were made for lost 
 sinners. But after all these sufferings, and sor- 
 rows, and groans, and tears, and blood, it avail- 
 eth nothing; "it is not accepted." Why? Be- 
 cause men do not repent and believe!! He hath 
 magnified the law and made it honorable; he hath 
 quenched the flaming sword of justice in his own 
 heart's blood; "God is well pleased for His right- 
 eousness sake ;" He is exalted a Prince and a 
 Savior to give repentance to Israel and remission 
 of sins; and \hd.i faith which is the gift of God, 
 is also a blessed fruit produced by his death and 
 inwrought by his Spirit — but all in vain — "i7 is 
 not accepted^ Is this the scheme of salvation 
 revealed in the Scriptures, as the theme of glad 
 hosannas around the eternal throne? Did he so 
 understand it, who said, "If when we were ene- 
 mies, we were reconciled to C4od by the death of 
 his Son, MUCH MORE being reconciled, we 
 shall be saved by his life. He that spared not 
 hi« own Son, but freely gave him up for us all, 
 
148 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 how shall he not with him freely give us all 
 things?^^ Did He so understand it, who said, 
 *'I lay down my life for my sheep, and they shall 
 never perish^ neither shall any pluck them out of 
 my hand." Do these passages teach an atone- 
 ment offered, but not accepted! Shall sinful man 
 venture to reverse ihese promises of Almighty 
 God, and affirm, "Christ lays down his life for 
 his sheep," (or all mankind,) and thousands of 
 them do perish, and are plucked out of his hand? 
 He that spared not his own Son, but freely gave 
 him up for us all, will not with him freely give us 
 all things — will not grant us faith and repentance, 
 the gifts of his Spirit, through the blood of atone- 
 ment. Shall a sinner, redeemed by the omnipo- 
 tent arm of Jehovah, be a bond-slave of Satan for 
 ever? Shall e bestow tho highest blessing at 
 his disposal, and deny a minor benefit? Shall 
 He perform the greater, but refuse the less? All 
 the perfections of the ever blessed God conspire 
 to answer. No! 
 
 Intimately connected with the unscriptural 
 views of atonement, just exposed, is the strange 
 fancy of "falling from grace." The soul may be 
 formed in the image of Christ, a new creature, 
 and become the temple of the Holy Ghost. She 
 may be interested in the "perfect redemption and 
 satisfaction'* made for all her sins. She may ba 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 140 
 
 justified before the righteous Judge, and have all 
 her transgressions blotted out through the tender 
 compassions of the covenant keeping God. Jus- 
 tice may be satisfied, the law honored and mag- 
 nified, and the new-born spirit placed under the 
 care of the Great Shepherd, who ransomed her 
 with his blood, whose love is immutable, as his 
 power is infinite. But all in vain. To-day, the 
 soul is embraced in the arms of an Almighty 
 Savior, bears his image, and is sealed with his 
 blood — to-morrow, she is the victim of malicious 
 fiends, exulting over her agonies amid the horrors 
 of eternal wo. Yesterday, all her sins were for- 
 given, through a "perfect propitiation and satis- 
 faction" — to-day, all her sins are charged to her 
 account; Christ's perfect atonement avails not; 
 but the dread penalty of the violated law is poured 
 upon her devoted head. Yesterday, the soul was 
 one of Christ's sheep, of whom he has said, 
 *Hhey shall never perish — I know them, and they 
 follow ??2e" — to-day, it is one of those to whom 
 he says, ^^Departye cursed, 1 never knew you ^ 
 Yesterday, she was acquitted and accepted as of 
 the number of the *'good, whose steps are ordered 
 by the Lord; who, though they fall, shall not he 
 utterly cast down, for the Lord upholdeth them 
 with his hand," (Psl. 37:23, 24)— to-day, she is 
 13 
 
150 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 found guilty, rejected as vile, and falls to rise no 
 more ! 
 
 It cannot have escaped the notice of the atten- 
 tive reader, that one of the greatest difficulties of 
 the Arminian scheme is to bend the Scriptures to 
 testify in its favor. Hence it is not surprising 
 that Wesley thought it needful to give his fol- 
 lowers a new translation* of the New Testament; 
 and it is deeply to be regretted that in this respect 
 modern Methodists should lend their countenance 
 to Socinians, Universalists, and the followers of 
 Alexander Campbell. The necessity of convert- 
 ing the Bible to the Arminian faith is sensibly 
 felt in reference to the subject now before us. To 
 prove this, we will place in parallel columns a 
 few of the decided declarations of the Holy Ghost, 
 contrasted w'lih. the interpretation necessary to.be 
 given in order to enlist them in support of Ar- 
 minianism. 
 
 The Bible. 
 
 I will put my fear in their 
 hearts, that they shall not 
 depart from me. Jer. 31:40. 
 
 The righteous shall hold 
 on his way, (Job 17:9)— shall 
 
 Methodist Interpreta- 
 tion. 
 I will put my fear in their 
 hearts, but many of them 
 shall depart from me with 
 an everlasting backsliding. 
 Many righteous shall turn 
 aside from their way, and 
 
 * Dr. A. Clarke, however, the most learned of all the 
 Methodists, says of the commou translation, "The 
 original is alone superior to it." 
 
ARMINIAN laETHODlSM. 
 
 151 
 
 never be removed. (Prov. 
 10:30.) Being confident of 
 this very thing, that he 
 which hath begun a good 
 work in you, will perform 
 it until the day of Jesus 
 Christ. Phil. 1:6. 
 
 The path of the just is as 
 the shining light, which 
 shineth more and more un- 
 to the perfect day. Prov. 
 4:18. 
 
 Father, I thank thee that 
 thou hast heard me; and I 
 know that thou hearest me 
 always. John 11: 41, 42. 
 
 He that heareth my word 
 and believeth on him that 
 sent me, hath everlasting 
 life, and shall not come into 
 condemnation. John 5:34. 
 
 If any man eat of this 
 bread, he shall live for ever. 
 John 6:5!. 
 
 The Lord loveth judg- 
 ment, and forsaketh not his 
 saints : they are preserved 
 for ever. Psl. 37: 28. 
 
 Whosoever is born of 
 God doth not commit sin, 
 for his seed remaineth in 
 him, and he cannot sin, be- 
 cause he is born of God. 
 1 John 3:9. 
 
 Whom he justified, them 
 he also glorified. Rom. 8 : 
 30. 
 
 shall be removed for ever. 
 Having no confidence at 
 all that the good work of 
 grace will be performed in 
 you by Him who hath be- 
 gun it, unless you improve, 
 and are faithful; that is, 
 unless you perform the work 
 yourselves. 
 
 The path of the just is 
 oftentimes as the departing 
 light, which shineth less and 
 less unto the blackness of 
 darkness for ever. 
 
 Father, I thank thee that 
 thou hast heard me ; and I 
 know that tho7x hearest me 
 sometimes. 
 
 Many that hear my word 
 and believe on him that sent 
 me, will fail of everlasting 
 life, and shall come into 
 everlasting condemnation. 
 
 Some who eat of this 
 bread, shall perish for ever. 
 
 The Lord loveth judg- 
 ment, and forsaketh his 
 saints, and sorne of them 
 are lost for ever. 
 
 Persons who are born of 
 God do commit sin, and be- 
 come the seed of the ser- 
 pent. They can commit 
 the sin of final apostacy. 
 
 Some whom God has jus- 
 tified and pardoned, he will 
 condemn and punish for 
 
152 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Who shall lay any thing 
 to the charg'e of God's elect? 
 It is God that justifieth — 
 \vho is he tliat condemneth? 
 Rom. 8 : 33, 34. 
 
 Elect — who are kept by 
 the pov;er of God through 
 faith unto salvation. 1 Pet. 
 1:2,5. 
 
 False Christs and false 
 prophets shall rise, and shall 
 show signs and wondert;, to 
 seduce, if it were poasihle, 
 even the elect. Mark 13:22. 
 
 There is joy in the pre- 
 sence of the angels of God 
 over one sinner that repent- 
 eth. Luke 15:10. 
 
 Let him know that he 
 which converteth the sin- 
 ner from the error of his 
 ways, shall save a soul 
 from death. Jas. 5:20. 
 
 They went out from us, 
 but they were not of us; for 
 if they had been of us, they 
 would no doubt HAVE 
 
 Christ, "ir^o makes con. 
 tinual intercession'^ for his 
 people, will lay their sins to 
 the charge of those who 
 were his elect — will con- 
 demn those whom he justi- 
 fied^ and pronounce his 
 curse on those for whom he 
 prayed. 
 
 Though "kept bj the 
 power of God," man}' once 
 elect persons shall be be- 
 trayed by the power of Sa- 
 tan, through unbelief, into 
 eterufil perdition. 
 
 "We have proved from 
 Scripture, that the number 
 of the elect may he dimin- 
 ished.''''* And it is not only 
 '■'■possihW'' that tlic elect 
 may lie '■'■seduced,'''' but cer- 
 tain that they will be. 
 
 The joy of angels over 
 the repenting sinner is pre- 
 mature; and if they are ca- 
 pable of sorrow, must often 
 be exchanged for mourning, 
 when the same sinner is 
 cast down to hell. 
 
 Let him knoxo that though 
 he may convert the sinner 
 from the error of his ways, 
 he oftentimes shall NOT 
 save his soul from death. 
 
 The apostle does not 
 " speak properly." Many 
 who '■'■icere of zis" have not 
 ^^ continued with us," but 
 
 These are the words of Watson — Vol. 2, p. 340, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 153 
 
 have gone to return no 
 more. 
 
 "God did break the cove- 
 nant of his servant." "He 
 did alter the thing that had 
 g-one out of his lips." "God 
 did also fail David.''''* 
 
 CONTINUED WITH US. 
 IJohn 2: li). 
 
 My covenant w^ill I not 
 break, nor alter the thing- 
 that has gone out of my 
 mouth. Once have I sv\-orn 
 by my holiness that I will 
 not lie unto David. Psl. 8J: 
 34, 35. 
 
 This contrast of Arminian error and inspired 
 truth might be extended to a very great length. 
 But we forbear. It may be proper, however, 
 briefly to notice the method by which these and 
 other texts are evaded. As for example, when 
 Paul inquires, "Wlio shall separate us from the 
 love of Christ?" and adds his persuasion that 
 neither death nor life, &:c. should be able to sepa- 
 rate us from his love. The Arminian adds, Very 
 true, if Christians hold fast their integrity. In 
 other words, if they persevere, they will perse- 
 vere! "My sheep sliall never perish, neither 
 shall any pluck them out of my hand" — that is, 
 replies the Arminian, if they remain Christ's 
 sheep. In other words, the promise is, "If they 
 remain his sheep, they shall remain his sheep!" 
 "I will put my fear in their hearts, that they 
 shall not depart from me;" that is, if they do not 
 depart from God, they shall not depart! "The 
 
 • These are the identical words of Wesley. To what 
 daring extremes will not Error drive her devotees! 
 13* 
 
154 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 righteous shall hold on his way;" i. e., if he does 
 hold on his way! "The steps of a good man are 
 ordered by the Lord: though he fall, he shall not 
 be utterly cast down, for the Lord upholdeth him 
 with his hand." That is, if he continues to be a 
 good man, he shall not be utterly cast down. In 
 other words, if he do not fall, or falling, riseth 
 up again, he shall not remain cast down.' And 
 if he hold himself uip, the Lord will uphold him 
 with his hand! According to Methodist interpre- 
 tation, these consolatory passages, which have 
 filled the Christian's bosom a thousand times with 
 unutterable joy, are nothing more than identical 
 propositions. "If such an event take place, it 
 will take place! T^ 
 
 It need scarcely be said that such views of the 
 perfection and efficacy of Christ's 'finished work,' 
 are no less dishonorable to God, than dangerous 
 and discouraging to men. "If I could believe 
 these things,''^ says the venerable Dr. Miller, "I 
 must consider the character of God as dishonored; 
 his counsels as degraded to a chaos of wishes and 
 endeavors; his promises as the fallible and uncer- 
 tain declarations of circumscribed knowledge and 
 endless doubt; the best hopes of the Christian as 
 liable every hour to be blasted; and the whole 
 plan of salvation as nothing better than a gloomy 
 system of possibilities and peradventurcs ; a 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 153 
 
 system, on the whole, nearly, if not quite, as 
 likely to land the believer in the abyss of the 
 damned, as in the paradise of God." But we 
 are digressing from the subject of the atonement. 
 A further difficulty presses upon the aforesaid 
 article of Methodist faith. It represents the 
 ever blessed God in a light, in which it is impos- 
 sible to shield his character from the charge of 
 cruelty and injustice. It is assuredly with no 
 design to retort the criminations of those who, in 
 assailing Calvinism from the pulpit and the press, 
 ring the changes upon these words, that we make 
 the above assertion. We believe it can be fairly 
 and logically substantiated, that the doctrine of 
 universal atonement, as taught by Methodists, 
 implies a foul aspersion upon the character of 
 Jehovah. For, notwithstanding her avowed be- 
 lief of a ' 'perfect redemption, propitiation, and 
 satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world," 
 Methodism teaches that thousands of the human 
 family will be driven away into unquenchable fire, 
 to satisfy divine justice for sins for which there is 
 already paid a i^erfect satisfaction by the all- 
 perfect Savior. In other words, that a God of 
 infinite mercy, after his holy law and his impar- 
 tial justice have been "perfectly" satisfied for all 
 sin, will demand everlasting sufferings of the sin- 
 ner, as a further satisfaction; which is, to require 
 
156 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 a double payment of the debt; tlie first made by- 
 Christ, full and perfect, yet ?o imperfect, as to 
 require the sufferings of the sinner to all eternity 
 to com})lete it — a satisfaction (made perfect by 
 Clirist) wliich does not sati:;-;fy; and the sinner is 
 condemned to sutler for ever to make perfection 
 perfect; a perfect salisfaL'tion, which shall be per- 
 fectly satisfactory! 
 
 Again: It is not denied, that it was infallibly 
 known to Christ, when about to "die the accursed 
 death," that many would not be saved by his sac- 
 rifice; but that their guilt and punishment would 
 be greatly aggravated, if his blood were charged 
 to their account. What then can be more revolt- 
 ing to every right feeling, than to suppose that 
 the blessed Savior, in that awful and tender hour, 
 when he poured out his soul an offering for sin- 
 ners, was performing for thousands that which 
 he infallibly for ekneto would be of no real benefit 
 to them, but only sink them down under tenfold 
 vengeance to the prison of despair? If this is 
 what Methodism terms xhefreeness of grace and 
 the fulness of divine mercy in the universal 
 atonement, truly her "tender mercies are cruel." 
 These, Rev. Sir, are some of the beauties of that 
 system which is so arrogantly extolled as superior 
 to all other forms of religion. "Consistency is a 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 157 
 
 jewel," which Methodism seems resolved shall 
 never glitter in her diadem. 
 
 What then is the doctrine of atonement taught 
 in the Scriptures? It is that Christ is "the Savior 
 of all men, especially of them that believe," He 
 is the Savior of all — his sacrifice secured import- 
 ant benefits not only to this world, but to the uni- 
 verse. It was an illustrious monument of the 
 divine justice and hatred of sin, and the highest 
 display of infinite grace and mercy. The subjects 
 of God's universal empire looked on and drank in 
 lessons of everlasting wisdom. He is the Savior 
 of all. The exalted character of the Divine vic- 
 tim, and the intensity of his sulierings, impart a 
 value to the atonement sufficient for a thousand 
 worlds. He is the Savior of all, but not in the 
 same sense^ in which he is ^'■specially the Savior 
 of them that believe." The work of obedience, 
 suffering and death, has been well and fully per- 
 formed — the sacrifice of "the Lamb of God" pos- 
 sesses a sufficiency more than commensurate with 
 the ruin and curse introduced by sin. On the 
 ground of this sufficiency the Gospel proclaims, 
 "Ho, every one that thirsteth — Whosoever will, 
 let him come — All things are now ready." The 
 sinner hears this call of merc}^ and despising its 
 invitation, dies a suicide. The gates of mercy 
 were open, and he will have no just cause of 
 
158 THE DIFFICULTIES OP 
 
 cdmplaint, if, whilst turning his back upon the 
 glories of heaven, and freely choosing the road to 
 ruin, his will was not subdued by the Spirit of 
 grace, nor he "compelled to come in." No prin- 
 ciple of tnUh or justice will be violated in per- 
 mitting the rebel, in the exercise of perfect free- 
 dom, to make such a disposition of his time, tal- 
 ents, and active powers, as was most agreeable to 
 himself; nor in inflicting deserved punishment for 
 perversion and abuse of distinguished mercies. 
 If others are '•^made willing in the day of divine 
 power" — if "God works in them both to will and 
 to do of his good pleasure" — it is an act of infi- 
 nite grace to them^ but of no imaginable injury to 
 those that perish — they remain precisely where 
 they were, and tvould have been, if God had per- 
 formed no act of power to make others willing to 
 be reconciled and restored to his favor. If this be 
 ^'partiality," show the injustice or the caprice 
 implied in the charge. If God has "a right to do 
 what he will with his oivn,^^ there is no injus- 
 tice. If he may, for wise reasons in his eternal 
 mind, select from the mass of gidlt and wretch- 
 edness the objects of his infinite charity , there is 
 no caprice. "Who art thou that repliest against 
 God?" 
 
 The most plausible objection to the Calvinistic 
 view of the atonement, is derived from the terms, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 159 
 
 *«//,' ^every man,'' '•the whole world,' employed 
 by the sacred M^riters in connection witli the death 
 of Christ. The soUition is easy. 
 
 1. These terms must often be interpreted in a 
 limited sense. Exod. 9 : 6 — "^// the cattle of 
 Egypt died." Same verse — "Of the cattle of the 
 children of Israel, (which were all in Egypt,) 
 died not one." Matth. 3 : 5, 6 — "Jerusalem, and 
 all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, 
 went out to him (John) and were baptized." Did 
 John baptize every man, woman, and child, in 
 that district? Matth. 10 : 22 — "Ye shall be hated 
 by all men for my name's sake." Does this in- 
 clude the pious, and those who never heard of the 
 apostles? Luke 2 : 1 — "There went out a decree 
 that all the ivorld should be taxed." "And all 
 went to be taxed." Can this literally mean every 
 individual of mankind? Rom. 1 : 8 — "Your faith 
 is spoken of throughout the whole world '^ Surely 
 not among those who had never heard of Chris- 
 tianity, much less of the Christians at Rome. 
 
 2. The Jews had imbibed a strong prejudice, 
 that they were always to continue the peculiar 
 and highly favored people of God, to the exclu- 
 sion of Gentiles. Not so, say the apostles. The 
 Gospel embraces in its large provisions all men, 
 the whole world, without distinction of Jew or 
 Gentile, bond or free. 
 
160 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 3. Calvinists, as we have before stated, strenu- 
 ously maintain that there is a very important 
 sense in which the Savior died for all — that is, 
 sufficiently for all. So that if all had been saved, 
 there would have been required "no more sacri- 
 fice for sin." No soul will perish because of a 
 deficiency in the merits or intrinsic worth of the 
 atonement. 71iat we hold to be, in the strictest 
 sense of the terms, infinite — absolute — all-suffi- 
 cient. By what authority then does Watson af- 
 firm that "on the Calvinian theory the bar to the 
 salvation of the non-elect lies in the ivant of a 
 provided sacrifice for sin?'\ Such hardihood of 
 assertion ill becomes a master in Israel. But our 
 object is to be brief. 
 
 IV. The Difficulties of Methodism, upox 
 the subject of regeneration, and the 
 Evidences of a change of heart. 
 
 That this is a subject of immense importance 
 is obvious to all. Conformity to the divine pat- 
 tern is the only method to ensure either comfort 
 or safety to the soul. This will strike conviction 
 to the heart of the secure and careless, encourage 
 the feeble Christian, confirm the wavering, and 
 expose the hypocrite; but forsaking this infallible 
 guide, we must inevitably wander into the most 
 extravagant forms of delusion. Indeed, upon cor- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 161 
 
 jFectness in this matter are suspended the peace, 
 purity, and general welfare of the Christian 
 church. How then is this subject treated among 
 Methodists?* Enter their houses of worship, 
 attend their camp meetings, class meetings, &c., 
 and truly it will demand a discerning eye to dis- 
 cover the feeblest resemblance to the humility, 
 meekness, docility, acquaintance with Scripture, 
 and knowledge of the human heart and the Chris- 
 tian warfare, required by the Savior and his apos- 
 tles. Inquire of their converts the evidence of a 
 saving change; and instead of that clear, intelli- 
 gent disclosure of the operations of the divine 
 Spirit in awaking, convincing, humbling, per- 
 suading, and pointing to a Redeemer's blood, you 
 will receive a confused statement of "getting re- 
 ligion," amid loud noise, confusion of tongues, 
 praying, singing, and swooning, (more like a re- 
 ligious Babel than the city of God,) through the 
 whole range of fanaticism. Investigate still fur- 
 ther, the ground of their hope, and you will re- 
 ceive, not a statement of Christian faith, a simple, 
 consolatory, heart-purifying dependence upon the 
 Atoning blood and perfect righteousness of Christy 
 
 * It is cheerfully admitted that some parts of the en- 
 «uing picture may be rather strongly colored for certain 
 localities, particularly our cities and large villages. Not- 
 withstoiiding, '^we speak that we do know." 
 U 
 
108 THB DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 but a declaration of bold assurance, of self- confi- 
 dence, and many unequivocal signs of a deceived 
 heart. Instead of self-knowledge, a deep ac- 
 quaintance with the errors, corruptions, and va- 
 rious devices of the human heart, you will hear 
 of Christian perfection and a continual willingness 
 to die. Instead of a meek reliance upon the Sa- 
 vior's merits and the Spirit's aid, you will be told 
 that "God is merciful, and if I only persevere and 
 keep straight on in the path of duty, God will 
 continue to bless me in prayer, and all will be 
 well at last." 
 
 The extensive prevalence in that denomination 
 of the most mischievous errors respecting the new 
 birth, flows principally from the defective and 
 Unscriptural representations made by their reli- 
 gious teachers. What, for example, is better 
 adapted to mislead a serious inquirer, than the 
 Following statements respecting faith. "Faith 
 necessarily implies an assurance that Chxisilovecl 
 me and gave himself for me." Wes. Serm., vol.1, 
 p. 209. Again: "Whoever has « si^re c(7>2y?f/(??ice 
 in God, that through the merits of Christ his sins 
 are forgiven, he is a child of God.^^ Doct. Tracts, 
 p. 300. In the first passage, the young or feeble 
 Christian is told, that until he has a full assur- 
 ance of the love of Christ, he remains an enemy 
 €^f God; and in the second, the formalist and 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. IM 
 
 hypocrite who have worked themselves into a 
 strong confidence of the divine favor, are assured 
 that they are children of God.* Under such in- 
 struction with regard to the "fruits of the Spirit," 
 we need not be surprised at the grossest mistakes 
 respecting his gracious work upon the heart. 
 
 Nor is the doctrine of 'grace,' as taught in that 
 denomination, a whit better adapted to foster 
 aught but a spurious piety. In reply to the posi- 
 tion that "God might justly have passed by all 
 men," Wesley says, "Are you sure he might? I 
 cannot find it in the word of God. Therefore I 
 reject it as a bold, precarious assertion." "That 
 God might justly, for my unfaithfulness to his 
 grace, have given me up long ago, I grant; but 
 this supposes me to have had that grace," &c. 
 Doct. Tracts, p. 25. Which is the same as to 
 say, that God could not justly have .punished 
 mankind without providing a Savior, and through 
 him, sufficient grace for them — that although it 
 will be just in him to punish for "unfaithfulness 
 to his grace," yet to inflict the penalty of his 
 
 * And yet Wesley elsewhere flatly contradicts himself 
 in the above assertion, and writes in the following scrip. 
 tural style: "What is saving faith? I dare not say that it 
 is only helieving conjideiitly my sins are forgiven me for 
 Christ's sake; for if I live in sin, that belief is a destruc- 
 tive conceit.'''' Doct. Tracts, p. 232. A man of Wesley'* 
 loose views and rapid pen, ought to have had at least a 
 good memory. 
 
164 THE DirnCULTIBf OF 
 
 broken law, without first providing grace for sin- 
 ners, would he unjust. In other words, that 
 God's infinite grace in giving his only begotten 
 Son, was not an act of grace at all, but an act of 
 simple justice! Could any thing be more suited 
 to cherish pride and self-suificiency in the human 
 heart? 
 
 What Christian mind but will revolt, and even 
 shudder, whilst perusing the following passage 
 from the same volume. Speaking of Christian 
 perfection, **We know," snys Wesley, *'that God 
 may, with m«u's good leave, cut short his work, 
 in whatever degree he pleases, and do the usual 
 work of many years in a moment." We submit 
 to every candid and intelligent man, whether the 
 spiritual instruction, of which the above is a spe- 
 cimen, may not. u]}riGn, be expsotcd to produce, 
 not the fair and glorious lineaiiicnts of the image 
 of God, but a monstrous abortion of every thing 
 like genuine piety. Nor will the authorized test 
 of such religion, be more rational and scriptural 
 than the thing itself. 
 
 Upon this topic, associated so intimately with 
 all our hopes of immortality, the following ex^ 
 tracts from the treatise of President Edwards, on 
 Religious Affections, are directly in point. "It 
 may be proper to premise, that the illustrious 
 author of this work was not one of those who 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 16^ 
 
 admit the form, but deny the power of vital piety. 
 On the contrary, lie was most extensively en- 
 gaged in those great revivals, which in his day 
 blessed the earth, and was himself a principal in- 
 strument in those thrilling displays of Divine 
 power then exhibited. The favorable opinion of 
 his ministerial character, entertained by Mr. AVes- 
 ley, may be learned from page 4C2, vol. 3, of hii 
 Sermons. Speaking of 'Hhe wonderful work of 
 God in New England," Mr. AV. says, *'It began 
 in Northampton, and in a little time appeared in 
 adjoining towns. A particular and beautiful ac- 
 count of this was published by Mr. Edwards, 
 minister of Northampton. Many sinners were 
 deeply convinced of sin, and many truly convert- 
 ed to God. I suppose there had been no instance 
 in America of so swift and deep a work of grace 
 for a hundred years before; nay, nor perhaps since 
 the English settled there." What then were the 
 lessons of wisdom which this devoted and suc- 
 cessful servant of Christ gleaned from this exten- 
 sive field of experience? (We quote from the 
 edition of his works published in New York, 
 1830.) 
 
 1. Great affections. — "It is no evidence that 
 
 religious affections are of a spiritual nature that 
 
 they are great; as is manifest in the case of th» 
 
 Israelites at the Red Sea and Mount Sinai, who 
 
 14* 
 
166 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 soon forgot his works. Great multitudes were 
 affected with the miracle of raising Lazarus, and 
 were elevated to a high degree, and made a mighty 
 stir when Jesus soon after entered Jerusalem, 
 But Christ had at this time but few disciples, and 
 how quickly was their fervor at an end! How 
 soon is tlie cry changed from hosanna, hosanna, 
 to crucify him, crucify him!" pp. 38, 39. 
 
 2. Much forwardness of conversation about 
 religion. — "This may be from a good cause or 
 from a bad one. False affections, if they are 
 equally strong, are much more forward to declare 
 themselves, than true; because it is the nature of 
 false religion to affect show and observation; as it 
 was with the Pharisees. Hence a man some- 
 times covertly commends himself, and tells you 
 a long story of conversion. Why, the secret 
 meaning is, 'I pray admire me.' Hence he com- 
 plains of wants and weaknesses. *I pray think 
 what a broken-hearted Christian I am.' " p. 44. 
 
 3. "TVic power of Satan may be as imme- 
 diate and as evident in false comforts and joys, as 
 in terrors and horrid suggestions. And where 
 neither a good nor evil spirit has any immediate 
 hand, persons, especially such as are of a weak 
 and vapory habit, may have strange apprehen- 
 sions and imaginations, and strong affections 
 
ARMiMAN METHODISM. 167 
 
 attending them, unaccountably arising, which are 
 not voluntary." p. 48. 
 
 4. ^'■The unmorfified corritplion of the heart 
 may quench the Spirit of God, (after he has been 
 striving,) and lead men to presumptuous and self- 
 exalting hopes and joys, as well as otherwise." 
 p. 62. 
 
 5. *'^n overbearing, high-handed, and vio- 
 lent sort of confidence, affecting to declare itself 
 with 3 most glaring show in the sight of men, 
 has not the countenance of a Christian assurance. 
 It savors more of the spirit of the Pharisees, who 
 never doubted that they were most eminent saints, 
 and were bold to thank God for the great distinc- 
 tion he had made between them and others. Arid 
 when Christ intimated that tliey were blind and 
 graceless, they despised the suggestion: 'Are we 
 blind also?' " p. 74. 
 
 6. The hypocrite's hope. — *'When once a 
 hypocrite is established in a false hope, he has 
 not as many occasions of doubt as the true saint. 
 1st. He has not the same cautious spirit, the 
 dread of being deceived. 2d. He has not the 
 knowledge of his own blindness, and the mean 
 opinion of his own understanding, that the tni6 
 saint has. 3d. The devil does not assault his 
 hope as he does the hope of a true saint. 4th. He 
 bas not the same view of his own corruption; a 
 
168 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 false hope hides corruption, covers it all over, 
 and the hypocrite seems clean and bright in his 
 own eyes. Oftentimes persons of tliis kind are 
 led away by impulses and imagined revelations. 
 A strong confidence is with them the highest 
 virtue. Itence they are bold to say, '/ knoiv 
 this or that — / knoiv certainly — / aj7i as sure 
 as that I have a being'' — and tlie like: and they 
 despise all argument and inquiry into the case." 
 pp. 75, 76. 
 
 7. The appearance of some external shape. — 
 "Some have had lively ideas of some external 
 shape and beautiful form of countenance: and this 
 they call spiritually seeing Christ. Some have 
 had impressed upon them ideas of great light; of 
 Christ hanging upon the cross, and his blood run- 
 ning from his wounds; of a beautiful countenance 
 smiling upon them, <S^c. &c. But these things 
 are owing rather to weakness of body and mind, 
 than to spiritual operations. Nor is the image of 
 ("hrist which men conceive in their imaginations, 
 at all superior in kind to the idea tlie Papists 
 conceive of Christ, by the beautiful and affecting 
 images which they see in their churches." pp. 
 107, '8, '9. 
 
 8. The hearing of voices. — "Satan is trans- 
 formed into an angel of light. Hence some have 
 heard voices; some have seen the very blood of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 169 
 
 Christ dropping on them, and seen the wounds in 
 his side; some have seen a great light shining in 
 the chamber; some in great distress have had in- 
 ward witness, ^Hhy sins are forgiven thee;^* and 
 hence such liberty and joy, that they are ready to 
 leap up and down the chamber. Thus natural 
 men would fain see Jesus, and have him present 
 to give them peace, just as the Papists have his 
 images. Wo to them that have no other mani- 
 fested Christ." p. 109. 
 
 9. The affections of hypocrites. — "They are 
 first much affected with some impression upon 
 their imagination, or some impulse, which they 
 take to be a testimony from God, of his love and 
 their happiness. They fancy a high privilege in 
 some respect, either with or without a text of 
 Scripture; they are mightily taken with this as a 
 great discovery; and hence arise high affections, 
 which they call great and wonderful experiences; 
 and they have- a notion that God is greatly pleased 
 with those affections. This affects them still 
 more. Thus their affections rise higher and 
 higher, until they are sometimes perfectly swal- 
 lowed up. Also, self-conceit and fierce zeal rise; 
 and all is built, like a castle in the air, on nothing 
 but imagination, self-love, and pride." p. 139. 
 
 10. The talk of hypocrites. — "As are their 
 thoughts, so is their talk. They speak much 
 
70 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 about their experiences and the greatness of their 
 attainments. The true saint will speak much of 
 God, his glorious perfections and works, the 
 beauty and amiableness of Christ, and the glori- 
 ous tilings of the Gospel. But hypocrites talk 
 more of the discovery, than of the thing discover- 
 ed. They are full of talk about the wonderful 
 discoveries they have had, how sure they are of 
 the love of God to them, liow safe their condition 
 is, how they know they shall go to heaven," &c. 
 p. 139. 
 
 11. Self -knoivl edge. — "The high affections of 
 many are built on the supposition of their being 
 eminent saints. If that opinion of themselves 
 were taken away, if they thought they were some 
 of the lower form of saints, their high affections 
 would fall to tlie ground. If they saw only a 
 little of the sinfulness and vileness of their own 
 hearts, and their deformity in their best duties, it 
 would destroy tlieir affections. Because they 
 are built on self, self-knowledge would destroy 
 them." p. 140. 
 
 12. Enthusiasm. — *'A11 imaginary sights of 
 God, arid Christ, and heaven; all supposed wit- 
 nessing of the Spirit, by immediate inward sug- 
 gestion; all impressions of future events; all im- 
 pressions and applications of Scripture, as though 
 they were words now immediately spoken by 
 
ARMIMAN METHODISM. 171 
 
 God to a particular person, in a new meaning, 
 and carrying something more in ihem than they 
 contain as they lie in the Bible: these are all to 
 be referred to the head of impressions on the 
 imagination, and consist not in a divine sense and 
 relish of the heart for the holy beauty and excel- 
 lency of divine things. But such sort of experi- 
 ences and discoveries commonly raise the affec- 
 tions of such as are deluded by them to a great 
 height, and make a mighty uproar in both soul 
 and body; and men, especially the common peo- 
 ple, are easily bewitched with such things — they 
 have such a glaring and glistening show of high 
 religion." p. 168. 
 
 These are only a specimen. The work 
 abounds with similar passages, which, although 
 published about the middle of the last century, 
 and of course before the abuses of Methodism 
 had attracted very much notice in this country, 
 seem as if written in the Spirit of prophecy, to 
 brand the wide-spread delusions of that system, 
 and to lift up a standard against the overwhelm- 
 ing flood of wild-fire, enthusiasm, and extrava- 
 gance, which is threatening to submerge the 
 world. 
 
 These errors on the grent doctrine of Regene- 
 ration, we, Rev. Sir, consider higly dangerous. 
 
IfJJ THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 They have been presented as plainly and forcibly 
 as was in my power; but without any design to 
 give unnecessary pain. May **the Author of 
 every good and perfect gift" defeat all that is 
 wrong, and abundantly bless and prosper what- 
 ever is agreeable to his holy will. 
 
AhMINIAN METHODISM. 173 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 Siriless Perfection. Characteristics of a Work 
 
 of the Spirit. 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 Connected with the topic last discussed, as an 
 effect with its cause, the doctiine of Perfection 
 comes next under review. Wesley, it is worthy 
 to be premised, traces this unscriptural sentiment 
 as far back at least as Pelagius, in the fourth cen- 
 tury. "I verily believe," he says, " the real 
 heresy of Pelagius was neither more nor less than 
 this, the holding that Christians may, by the 
 grace of God, go on to perfection." And lest 
 such suspicious ancestry should bring the doc- 
 trine into disrepute, he adds of Pelagius, *'I would 
 not affirm, that he was not one of the holiest men 
 of the age." Let us inquire into the theological 
 relations of this distinguishing characteristic of 
 Pelagianism.* 
 
 * Of Pelagius we learn from the best authorities that 
 he "denied original sin, maintained man's plenary ability, 
 the moral purity of infants, justification by our own right- 
 eousness," with some other unscriptural tenets. And yet 
 of this heretic, Wesley says, "I guess he was both a wise 
 and a holy many "A fellow-feeling makes us wondrous 
 kind." Sefm.v.2,p.323. Misc. Works, v. 3, p. 259. 
 
 15 
 
174 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 V. The Difficulties of Methodism, in refe- 
 rence TO "Sinless Perfection." 
 
 We shall be met at the threshold of this dis- 
 cussion with a stout denial that this is a doctrinal 
 feature of modern Methodism. It is matter both 
 of surprise and regret, that the advocates of the 
 system should seem to expose themselves to the 
 charge of a want of candor in the occasional de- 
 bates which take place-upon this question. Would 
 it ever be imagined by an honest, upright, consci- 
 entious man, that when it is so often and so ve- 
 hemently denied that Methodists maintain the 
 doctrine of "sinless perfection," all that is meant, 
 is, that they reject tlie pliraseology, the icorcls, 
 not that they do not liold and teach the senti- 
 ment? Yet that this is the simple verity, is proved 
 by a reference to their standard authors. Thus: 
 **We are all agreed we may be saved from all sin 
 before death; i. e., from all sinful tempers and de- 
 sires." "Grown Christians are in such a sense 
 perfect as to be freed from evil tempers and de- 
 sires. Ev€ry one of these can say, I am cruci- 
 fied with Christ, nevertheless I live, &c.; words 
 that manifestly describe a deliveremce from in- 
 ward as well as from outward sin.'' Doct. 
 Tracts, pp. 293, 296. These extracts are made 
 from a volume, which, as we are told in the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 175 
 
 advertisement, was originally bound and published 
 with the Form of Discipline, and is now "stereo- 
 typed," for the benefit of the church. Many 
 parallel passages might be added, from the Ser- 
 mons of Wesley and others, but these will enable 
 us to understand what is meant when "sinless 
 perfection" is disclaimed with so much vehe- 
 mence. 
 
 But perhaps no publication, (if we except the 
 writings of the first apostle of Methodism,) is 
 more popular among modern Arrainians, than the 
 labored and superficial work of Fletcher, which' 
 he entitles, "Checks to Antinomianism;" the ob- 
 ject of which is to cry down Calvinism by an 
 unpopular epithet.* It is a fact, strictly analo- 
 gous to past experience of human weakness and 
 fallibility, that those who urge this unfounded 
 charge of Antinomian tendencies are themselves 
 most guilty. This truth is aptly illustrated in the 
 doctrine under review. It is not that these per-' 
 fectionists imagine they live without transgressing 
 the "moral lav/," but they regard it as no longer 
 
 * TJie late learned Dr. Jas. Gray observes of Fletcher, 
 "He fails in soundness of judgment. He is sometimes 
 the dupe of his own ingenuity; and while he dexterously 
 extricates himself from one difficulty, he not seldom falls 
 into another. He must be read with discriminating at- 
 tention, as he weaves soincjine webs which are good for 
 riQthinrr.^^ Rev. p. 317. 
 
176 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 in force. Christians are not under law, but im- 
 der grace; under a milder code of legislative re- 
 quirement than the decalogue; a form of obliga- 
 tion suited to man's impaired ability; brought 
 down to his capacity as a fallen creature, and to 
 which he may and can yield z perfect obedience, 
 and is therefore sinlessly perfect. Hear upon 
 this topic the standards of Methodism, pp. 123, 
 124: ''Christ is the end of the law — 1. The 
 Mosaic law. 2. The Adamic law, called the law 
 of works, which required that man should use to 
 the glory of God, all the powers with which he 
 was created, and which "was proportioned to his 
 original powers, and required that he should al- 
 ways think, speak, and act precisely right, in 
 every point whatever." "He was well able to 
 do so, and God could not but require the service 
 he was able to pay." Then what follows? Why, 
 •*Adam fell;" and in consequence, "no man is 
 able to perform the service which the Adamic law 
 requires." And now for the conclusion : "And 
 no man is obliged to perform it. God doth not 
 require it of any man. Christ is the end of the 
 Adamic as well as the Mosaic law. By his death 
 he put an end to both. He hath abolished both 
 the one and the other, with regard to man; and 
 the obligation to observe either the one or the 
 other is vanished away. Nor is any man living 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 177 
 
 bound to observe the Adamic more than the Mo- 
 saic law." This, I should suppose, is Anti- 
 nomianism of sufficient "proof" to suit the appe- 
 tite of the grossest devotee of sensuality. This 
 is the modern method of perfection — not by as- 
 cending the steep of moral obligation, but by 
 bringing the requirements of the divine law down 
 to a level with the sinner's convenience! 
 
 But as if to render the doctrine ridiculous and 
 absurd, as well as licentious, Wesley, in his 
 ''Plain Account of Chiistian Perfection," defines 
 it, "the loving God witli all our heart, mind, soul, 
 and strength. This implies, (he says,) that no 
 wrong temper, none contrary to love, remains in 
 the soul; and that all llie thoughts, words, and 
 actions are governed by pure love." But what 
 more than this does the moral law require? Could 
 Adam before his fall do more than this? Can 
 saints and angels in heaven?* Yet he admits 
 that a perfect Christian is not freed from "infirmi- 
 ties, ignorance, and mistake;" but "where every 
 word and action springs from love, a mistake is 
 not properly sin." Still he further assures us, 
 these sinless mistakes "need the atoning blood." 
 Such is a fair specimen of the jargon every 
 
 * Wesley himself affirms — "The loving God with all 
 the heart," "is the most exalted height of man or angel." 
 Misc.Works, vol.1, p.228. 
 15* 
 
178 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 where current among the followers of this great 
 Artninian! 
 
 Be it remembered, therefore, that although "no 
 man living is obliged to observe" the moral law, 
 yet "Christian perfection" surpasses the limits 
 of moral obligation, and performs works of super- 
 erocration, more than can riiihteously be demand- 
 ed. Every perfect Methodist "loves God with 
 all his heart, soul, mind, and strength," and "all 
 his thoughts, words, and actions, are governed by 
 pure love;" and nothing more was ever required 
 by the "moral law." 
 
 But that we may more fully comprehend the 
 mysteries of this smgular subject, let us dwell a 
 few moments farther upon its theological rela- 
 tions. Mr. Fletcher, (afler Wesley,) admits that 
 the most advanced Christian falls short, in this 
 life, of the obedience required by the ip.oral or 
 Adamic law, which he calls "the Creator's onti- 
 evangdicuU paradisaical law of innocence, and 
 which he thinks has been abolished. Instead of 
 that original constitution, lie holds to "a miltler 
 law, adapted to our state and circumstances" — 
 "the evanp^ellcal mediatorial law of our Redeem- 
 er." (See last Clieck.) It is by this milder law 
 that Christians are tried, and by which they are 
 correctly considered "perfect;" that is, as having 
 
ARMIMAN METHODISM. 179 
 
 yielded comphle obedience to the only law which 
 now requires their respect and submission. 
 
 Now, without pausing particularly to inquire, 
 what is the precise meaning of a ^"inilder laio;^^ 
 that is, a law less strict, less perfect, less like 
 God, than the one which Ave know was "holy, 
 just, and good;" witliout too nicely inquiring, 
 whether this new law is less holy, less just, and 
 less good; whether the nature of moral good and 
 evil is changed, so that this new law of God will 
 not condemn (dl sin; whether the "moral law" be 
 indeed "anti-evangelical," '•'■against the promises 
 of God," (Gal. 3:21;) and lastly, ivhere this 
 milder law is revealed in the New Testament, by 
 Him who said, "I am come not fo destroy the 
 lawf^ or by him v/ho inquire?, "Do we make 
 void the law tliroujjh faith.? God forbid!" — or by 
 liim who asserts, "Sin is the transgression of the 
 law^'' — not "p/" a diviie Ima,^^ as r\Ir. Fletdier 
 has it. Passing all these, let us exam.ine nar- 
 rowly the logical consistency of the very ground- 
 work of the scheme. Man, they tvell us, became 
 by his fall morally unable to render the obedience 
 required by the moral law, and "God does not 
 require it of any man;" but in infinite grace, has 
 placed us under "the new evangelical law of our 
 Redeemer," which we are morally able to obey, 
 and are hound to respect in thought, word, and 
 
180 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 deed. It \v:is t!i8 great work which was given 
 Christ to do, to make a '^perfect satisfaction"' for 
 our "original sin," to introduce a jnilder law, 
 and apply the merits of his blood to atone for our 
 deficiencies and shortcomings of obedience to the 
 evangelical laiu, which deficiencies do "need the 
 atoning blood," even in our estate of sinless per- 
 fection. 
 
 Wiiat a rops of sand have we here! In the 
 firat place, liow strange an abuse of language, to 
 say the least, is it, to represent it as a distinguish- 
 ing feature of Gospel GUACE, that Christ should 
 ^^abolish'^ or "/??^/ an emV to a law with regard 
 to man, which law, man having become. unable to 
 obey, was' not in justice bound to observe, nor 
 could jwitly be punished for neglecting to ob- 
 serve!! And in the second place, if Christ has 
 introduced a milder law, requiring no more than 
 imperfect sincere obedience — if the new law is so 
 adapted to our weak and fallen condition, that in- 
 stead of the rigorous exactions of the 'moral law,' 
 we are now bound by milder obligations, and God 
 will accept the less perfect (or imperfect) service 
 we are able to render, and can justly require of 
 us no other — still the inquiry returns, where is 
 the wonderful GRACE discoverable in this ar- 
 rangement? What need of Christ's dying to se- 
 <>nre the acceptance on the part of the Judge, of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 181 
 
 such obedience as it would be unjust for him not 
 to accept? Or in other words, did Christ die to 
 prevent unrighteousness with God? Did he die 
 to avert from our heads punishment for imperfect 
 obedience, when in fact we can be justly bound to 
 obey no law which requires any other than im- 
 perfect obedience? 
 
 The doctrine which we have thus endeavored 
 to state, as nearly as possible in the words of its 
 advocates, would seem to carry with it its own 
 refutation, and it would appear to be altogether a 
 work of supererogation to enter into any further 
 argument to prove its folly. Profound indeed 
 must be the ignorance of the purity, perpetuity, 
 perfection, and spirituality of the divine law, and 
 great must be the inattention to the plain state- 
 ments of the Scriptures, \vhicli will admit such a 
 sentiment into a theological system! *'In many 
 things we offend all;" or all are in many things 
 chargeable with sin. James 3 : 2. "Wliatis man 
 that he should be clean, or he that is born of a 
 woman that he should be righteous." Job 15:14. 
 *'There is not a just man on earth that doeth good 
 and sinneth not." Eccles. 7: 20. "For there is 
 no man that sinneth not." 1 Kings 8 : 4G. And 
 in chap. 9:20, Job asserts, "If I say I am per- 
 fect, it shall also prove me perverse." Paul also, 
 speaking of himself, says, "Not as though I were 
 
183 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 already perfect.'' Phil. 3 : 12. We have reason 
 to suspect that neither of these ancient wortliies 
 knew any tiling about "sinless perfection.'* "The 
 
 perfect Christian, according to the representations 
 of Holy Writ, is he who continually aspires to 
 universal holiness of heart and life, uniformly and 
 habitually endeavoring 'to stand perfect and com- 
 plete in all the will of God;' who daily and fer- 
 vently prays, like the apostles, for increase of 
 
 faith, and strenuoii.sly labors to add to his faith, 
 virtue; to virtue, knowledge; to knowledge, tem- 
 perance; and to temperance, patience; a id to pa- 
 tience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kind- 
 ness; and to brotherly kindness, cliarily." Such 
 was Job, and such was Paul; each of whom would 
 nevertheless willingly confess, "not as thougli I 
 were already perfect." 
 
 Still farther: If one person could be found in a 
 perfectly sinless state, there would be one excep- 
 tion to the use of that universal prayer, taught by 
 our Lord himself, in which, whilst we arc in- 
 structed to say, " Give us (his day our dailt/ 
 brcad,'\\ve are required, with no less frequency, 
 to implore forgiveness of our '■''trespasses, as ice 
 forgive those ivho trespass against lis.'' There 
 would be one who could say, I have no sin daily 
 committed, why should I supplicate daily for- 
 giveness. Thus is the commandment of the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 183 
 
 Most High God made of none effect by the tra- 
 ditions of men. 
 
 And what is even more revolting to every 
 Christian feeling — if the wise King of Israel were 
 now on earth, and should utter that humble ac- 
 knowledgment, " There is not a just man on 
 earth that doeth good and sinneth not," many a 
 Methodist would start from his seat to correct his 
 error, and erase the line from the records of in- 
 spiration. Yes ! whatever fSolomon may have 
 thought, there are noiv just men on earth who 
 can kneel in the presence of God, and thank him 
 that they love him as fervently and constantly as 
 they ought, and obey him as perfectly as they 
 ought; and this too in direct defiance of their own 
 article, which asserts that " good works cannot 
 endure the severity of God's judgment." Art. 10. 
 We, Rev. Sir, had been accustomed to think that 
 such were the "height, and depth, and length, 
 and breadth," of the love of Christ, which passes 
 knowledge, and such the imperfections and cor- 
 ruptions of the body of this death, that no mortal 
 man would return to the Savior a love as strong, 
 and constant, and fervent, as he ought; but it 
 seems we labored under a mistake. We had for- 
 gotten those perfect Christians, who, had they 
 lived in the days of Isaiah, when as yet the pro- 
 phecy was not sealed up, must, for the credit of 
 
184 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 divine truth, have proposed an amendment in the 
 61 ih cliapter — "f/^e are all as an unclean thing, 
 and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags — 
 excepUngafeiv very good jKople called Method- 
 ists:' 
 
 But in reply to the numerous express declara- 
 tions of the writers of the Old Testament in oppo- 
 sition to this doctrine, Wesley affirms that "they 
 lived under a dispensation greatly inferior to the 
 Christian, and that nothing can be argued from 
 their confessions of universal sin. Christ too tells 
 us, Matth. 11:11, "Among them that are born of 
 women, there hath not risen a greater than John 
 the Baptist; notwithstanding, he that is least in 
 the kingdom of heaven, (viz., the Gospel dispen- 
 sation,) is greater than he." This passage he in- 
 terprets as referring to a degree of personal holi' 
 ness, greater than belonged to any of the ancient 
 people of God. But could it have been really the 
 opinion of Mr. W. that ^the leasts or feeblest and 
 most imperfect Christian in Gospel times, is a 
 more holy and heavenly-minded person tlian were 
 David, and Job, and Isaiah? Will any sensible 
 Methodist avow such a sentiment? Dr. Clarke, 
 in his note on the passage, says, "that it is not in 
 holiness or devotedness to God, that the least in 
 the kingdom is greater tlian John, but that it is 
 merely in the diffcroae of the ministry. The 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 185 
 
 testimony of this distinguished Methodist is 
 true. 
 
 Nor do these great leaders of the Methodist 
 host harmonize much better in their views of 
 James 3 : 2 — *'If any man offend not in word, the 
 same is 2^ perfect man." Wesley quotes this text 
 to prove the doctrine of "Christian perfection." 
 But Dr. Claike says, "the words, perfect man^ 
 mean, a md^n fully instructed in divine things — 
 an adult Christian — one thoroughly instructed in 
 the doctrines of the Gospel."* And to show con- 
 clusively how absurd it is to employ this text in 
 proof of 'Christian perfection,' Dr. C. adds, "how 
 a man's cautiousness in what he says can be a 
 proof that he has every passion and appetite un- 
 der control, I cannot see." According to this, a 
 man may indulge all the bad passions in his 
 heart — if he can only manage to conceal them, 
 and not offend in word, he is a perfect Chris- 
 tian! 
 
 These distinguished men^ however, seem to 
 combine their efforts, when they come to parry 
 the point of the argument drawn from James 3:2. 
 The substance of what they have to say is, "that 
 this text proves nothing against sinless perfection, 
 although the apostle does assert, 'in many things 
 toe offend allf for if the apostle includes him»elf 
 
 * The meaning is the same in Heb. 6:1. 
 16 
 
188 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 in the pronoun we, he must also include himself, 
 when, speaking of the tongue, he says, 'There- 
 with bless ive God, and therewith curse we men.' 
 We cannot suppose James was guilty of cursing." 
 But a little attention will show the futility of this 
 reasoning. In the first passage, James says, "we 
 offend «//," or we all oiTend — are guilty of break- 
 ing God's law in many things. But James does 
 not say, "With the tongue we all bless God, and 
 we all curse men." Every one familiar with the 
 common forms of speecli, knows that the pro- 
 noun we is often employed to denote a general 
 prevalence of any thing, or a prevailing tendency, 
 or liability, among men. But could the truth- 
 speaking God have said, that ^^we all sin in many 
 things," if it were true, that many men do not 
 sin in any thing? "If we," says the last of the 
 apostles, "if we say we have no sin, we deceive 
 ourselves,* and the truth is not in us." 
 
 * How widely Mr. Wesley's views of the danger of 
 eelf-deception differed from those of the apostle, may be 
 learned from the following-. Speaking of one of those 
 "mj/jo fancy they have attained (to perfection) when they 
 have not," he says, "but he is deceived. What then? It 
 is a harmless mistake, while he feels nothing but love in 
 his heart. It is a mistake which generaJly argues 
 GREAT GRACE, a high degree both of holiness and 
 happiness." In other words, this ^^sinless mistake,^^ which 
 "needs the atoning blood" to cleanse its lilthiness, is an 
 evidence of superior attainments in religion! -See Wesley 
 •u Christian Perfection. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 187 
 
 We will close this investigation with the fol- 
 lowing extract from Wesley's Sermons, which, 
 after what has been said, will doubtless occasion 
 both surprise and gratification. *'With this con- 
 viction of the sin remaining in our hearts," says 
 Mr. W., "there is joined a clear conviction of the 
 sin remaining in oUr lives, and cleaving to all our 
 words and actions. In the best of these we nov/ 
 discern a mixture of evil, either in the spirit, 
 matter, or manner of them; something that could 
 not endure the righteous judgment of God, were 
 he extreme to mark what is done amiss. Where 
 we least of all suspected it, we find a taint of pride 
 or self-will, of unbelief or idolatry; so that we are 
 now lyiore ashtimed of our best duties, than for- 
 merly of our worst sins. And hence we cannot 
 bat feel, that these are so far from having any 
 thing meritorious in them — yea, so far from being 
 able to stand in the sight of the divine justice, 
 that for those also we should be guilty before 
 God, were it not for the blood of the covenant." 
 Serm. vol. 1, p. 212. You are ready, I am per- 
 suaded. Rev. Sir, to exclaim with me, "Can it be 
 possible that this truly Scriptural passage was dic- 
 tated by the same mind, and transcribed by the 
 same pen that originated the strange incoheren- 
 cies of 'sinless perfection?' " We pass to the 
 sixth head of difficulties. 
 
188 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 VI. The Difficulties of Methodism, with 
 reference to the characteristics of a 
 Genuine Work of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 She encourages her followers to place much 
 confidence in certain wild and disorderly pro- 
 ceedings which, as they are at an infinite remove 
 from the 'reasonable service' of true piety, so are 
 they expressly condemned by the Wesleys and 
 others, the wisest and best of the sect. Refer- 
 ence is here had to those scenes of confusion so 
 common in that denomination — jumping, falling, 
 screaming, swooning, shouting glory, glory, glo- 
 ry, clapping the hands, &c. With these exer- 
 cises, nature is, in frequent instances, completely 
 exliausted; the person lies in a state of collapse 
 for many hours, and is said to be highly favored 
 with the overpowering influences of the Spirit. 
 Some are seen ascending saplings, or whatever 
 object stands most convenient, ''climbing up to 
 heaven to see Jesus." Others are engaged in 
 laughing, throwing back the body, swinging the 
 arms at full sweep, rolling on the ground, <fec. 
 To work the minds of the people up to such a 
 pitch of phrenzy, (I can call it nothing else,) is 
 manifestly a principal object at camp-meetings, 
 and a main design of all the machinery of enthu- 
 siasm employed upon such occasions. But let 
 
ARMIMAN METHODISM. 1S9 
 
 any intelligent reader of the Scriptures pause for 
 a moment, and ask himself, "Where do we find 
 examples of all this in the Bible?" Is it in the 
 case of Saul of Tarsus? But even he was not 
 bereft of his senses, or presence of mind; for he 
 conversed intelligently with Jesus. Nor was he 
 converted until three days after meeting with 
 Christ on the way to Damascus, when visited by 
 Ananias by divine direction. Besides, let Meth- 
 odism exhibit the appearance of the Son of God 
 in the brightness of his glory, a similar miracu- 
 lous splendor, the same supernatural voice, and 
 we will believe her prostrations to be caused by 
 the same power which struck with consternation 
 the p'^rsecuting Saul. Indeed we may safely 
 challenge the advocates of this system to produce 
 a solitary example of conversion, under the 
 preaching of Christ and his apostles, bearing even 
 a distant resemblance to the jumping, jerking, 
 falling down, rolling on the ground, clapping of 
 hands, loud laughing, and swooning away into a 
 senseless or pulseless condition, which are such 
 frequent and distinguishing characteristics of 
 Methodism. But perhaps the Savior and his 
 apostles were not such powerful preachers as 
 some of the present day! We hold steadfastly 
 that all true religion begins and is carried on by 
 the divine Spirit, experienced in the heart; but 
 16* 
 
iOO THE DIFFICILTIF.S OF 
 
 this is perfectly distinct from the natural agitation 
 of the passions, into which it seems the object of 
 
 eMethodist leaders to lash the minds of their 
 members. "We can see no divine power in the 
 mechanical groan, and the periodical 'Amen' — 
 without which they think their meetings lifeless. 
 Nor is there any evidence that Christ and the 
 apostles encouraged those tumultuous assemblies 
 in which numbers are at the same moment utter- 
 ing petitions with stentorian voice, and others are 
 going-about among the people, urging them to cry 
 out till their nerves are wrought upon to screech- 
 ing, swooning, and various hysterical affections. 
 When attempts are made to impose this on the 
 world for religion, serious Christians will be dis- 
 posed to weep, and the rest of mankind to laugh." 
 (Walker's Address, p. 10.) 
 
 It is not intended to follow the defenders of 
 these exercises, in their attempts to enlist the 
 Bible in favor of "confusion and every evil work." 
 A specimen or two of their logic, is all that our 
 limits will permit. For example, they quote a 
 number of passages containing the words "rejoice, 
 shout, shout aloud," &;c.; but they forget that an 
 equal number of texts may be adduced, exliorting 
 "/o keep silence^ be slill,^^ 6ic, The strong 
 imagery of such passages is best explained by 
 others, siich as Psl. 68 : 8 — "The mountains and 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 191 
 
 the hills shall break forth before you into singing, 
 and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands." 
 In like manner, when they cite various texts 
 which represent persons as "leaping and walking, 
 leaping for joy, falling down on the face," &c., 
 they have only shown, what no one will question, 
 "that the expressions of submission, homage, and 
 reverence, always have been, and still are, carried 
 to a great degree of extravagance in the Eastern 
 countries." So also dancing was a common act 
 of devotion under the Old Testament dispensa- 
 tion — but did Christ and his apostles ever dance! 
 But perhaps the most singular specimen of rea- 
 soning from Scripture in defence of these extrava- 
 gancies of Methodism, remains to be stated. A 
 writer refers to the scenes of Pentecost, when 
 some said of the apostles, "these men are full of 
 new wine," and sagely reasons thus: "Now, as 
 drunken men are generally 'wild and disorderly,' 
 there must have been something in the proceed- 
 ings of those referred to, that induced these be- 
 holders to conclude they ivere drunk!^' This, 
 we believe, out-Methodises Methodism ! The 
 apostles acted in such a manner as led the people 
 to think they were drunk! Camp and quarterly 
 meetings will not stand in the comparison; no 
 person ever suspects their extravagance to be the 
 fruit of intoxication. But is it possible this inter- 
 
192 Tin: Diiricri/riKS ok 
 
 preter of Holy Writ can discover no other pre- 
 text for the charge of drunkenness made against 
 the apostles, than that they behaved as if they 
 ivere drimk! Has it eniircly escaped iiis notice 
 that they were empowered to speak in languages 
 different from their vernacular tongue? And that 
 being known as Jews of the common sort, they 
 were supposed to be uttoring the incoherent rav- 
 ings of intemperance, b)- those who understood 
 them not? This solution is at least rather more 
 respectful to that sacred impulse by which they 
 were directed, than the supposiiiim that the apos- 
 tles acted like drunken men! 
 ■ The effects produced by the tremendous en- 
 ginery of conversion, employed upon the great 
 occasions, are surprising only because they are so 
 small. Preaching, praying, singing, loud vocife- 
 ration, earnest exhortation, many tears — all min- 
 gled together and vehemently enforced wiih vio- 
 lent gesticulation — great exhaustion of bodily 
 strength and consequent derangement of the ner- 
 vous system — the darkness and gloom of the 
 scenery at night, contrasting with the bright re- 
 flection from numerous gleaming fires — the oft- 
 repeated representation of the judgment day, as 
 exhibited in the separation of those who crowd 
 the altar, from those who are left without — these 
 and a thousand other devices to strike the iniagi- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 193 
 
 nation, render it only a matter of surprise, that 
 among the mixed multitude who flock to camp- 
 meetings, so few are sufficiently deranged in body 
 and bewildered in mind to go through the exer- 
 cises of camp-conversion. Examples indeed are 
 not uncommon of persons being caught in this 
 whirlwind of the passions, and afterwards con- 
 fessing with shame that they were totally beside 
 themselves, and knew not what they were doing.* 
 That such measures are at least as well adapted 
 to promote the cause of error and fanaticism, as 
 that of truth and righteousness, is evident. The 
 Rev. Dr. Miller, in his letters to Presbyterians, 
 states the fact "that one of the far-famed fanatical 
 Unitarians, called Chrystians, boasted that he had 
 drawn at least fifty persons to anxious seats, 
 merely by the influence of his own singing" — an 
 agent, as is well known, of vast power in Meth- 
 odism. And there is much reason to fear that a 
 large proportion of what is called mourning and 
 conversion in that denomination, is to be traced 
 to a cause equally removed from "the truth as it 
 is in Jesus." 
 
 But what say the wisest and best of the frater- 
 nity upon these subjects? Mr. Fletcher, author 
 of the Checks, thus writes to Charles Wesley, 
 under date of Nov. 22d, 1762: "I liave heard 
 
 * A case of this kind came under my own observation. 
 
194 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 the melancholy news of many of our brethren 
 overshooting sober and steady Christianity in 
 London. Oh! that I coidd stand in the gap, and 
 by sacrificing myself shut this immense abyss of 
 enthusiasm. The corruption of the best things 
 is the worst of corruptions. Allowing but half of 
 the report is true, the rest shows that spiritual 
 pride, presumption, arrogance, stubbornness, 
 party spirit, uncharitableness, prophetic mis- 
 takes — in short, every sinew of enthusiasm is at 
 work in many of that body." The following are 
 the words of Charles Wesley upon the same sub- 
 ject: "To-day, one came, M'ho was pleased to fall 
 into a fit for my entertainment. He beat himself 
 heartily. I thought it a pity to hinder him; so 
 instead of singing over him, as had often been 
 done, we left him to recover at his leisure. A girl 
 as she began to cry, I ordered to be carried out. 
 Her convulsions were so violent as to take aivay 
 the use of her limbs, till they laid her ivithout at 
 the door, when she immediately found her legs 
 and ivalked off. Some very unslill sisters, who 
 all took care to stand near me, and tried who could 
 cry the loudest, have been as quiet as lambs, 
 since I have had them removed out of my sight. 
 The first night I preached tliere, half my words 
 were lost through their ontcries. Last night I 
 gave public notice, that whosoever cried so as to 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 19 
 
 drown my voice, should be quietly carried to the 
 furthest corner of the room. But my porter had 
 no employ the whole night." Would Charles 
 Wesley have spoken thus, if he had considered 
 these things the tokens of a work of God? 
 
 The sentiments of John Wesley upon the same 
 subject may be learned from the following ex- 
 tracts from his writings. Speaking of the Welch, 
 he says, "Some give out a verse, which they 
 sing over and over again with all their might, 
 thirty or forty times. Meanwhile £:ome are vio- 
 lently agitated, and they leap up and down in all 
 'manner of postures for hours.^^ He adds, "I 
 think there needs no great penetration to under- 
 stand this. 'I'hey are honest, upright men, who 
 really feel the love of God in their hearts; but 
 they have litde experience either of the ways of 
 God or of the devices of Satan. So he (Satan) 
 serves himself of their siinplicity, in order to 
 ivear them out and to bring discredit on the 
 work of God.^^ 
 
 Again: 'J'he Rev. John Wesley, in the fifth 
 volume of his Journal, says, "Many have been 
 awakened, justified, and perfected in love; but 
 even while full of love, SATAN drives many of 
 them to extravagance. This appears in several 
 instances: 1st. Frequently //irce or four, yea, 
 ten or twelve, PRAY ALOUD together. 2d. 
 
106 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Some, perhaps many, scream altogether as loud 
 as they possibly can; several drop down as dead^ 
 and are as stiff as a corpse, but in a while they 
 start up and cry GLORY, GLORY, perhaps 
 twenty times together. Just so (he adds) do the 
 French prophets, and very lately the jumpers in 
 Wales, bring the real work into contempt.''^ 
 
 Again: Mr. Wesley objects to such bodily ex- 
 ercises on the score of decency. In his sermon, 
 on "knowing Christ after the flesh," he remarks, 
 *'But some may say, refraining from these warm 
 expressions may check the fervor of devotion. It 
 is very possible it may, such fervor as has passed 
 for devotion. It may prevent loud shoutings 
 horrid unnatural screaming, repeating the same 
 words twenty or thirty times, jumping two or 
 three feet high, throwing about the legs and arms 
 of men and women, not only shocking to religion 
 but to common decency.' Cut it will never check, 
 much less prevent, true Scriptural devotion." 
 Serm. vol. 3, p. 266. What would Mr. Wesley 
 have said, could he have attended some of our 
 Methodist meetings, especially our camp-meet- 
 ings, where all these phenomena, accounted by 
 him disorderly, and the work of the deviU are 
 confidently taken by his professed followers to be 
 indubitable evidence of the power of God? On 
 the subject of the indecency of these things, an- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 197 
 
 Other of the Methodist Society declares, "I my- 
 self have actually witnessed an unconsciousness 
 of the most indelicate female attitudes, even in the 
 house of God.'* These facts, Rev. Sir, and 
 others of the same or equal authenticity, which 
 we suppress, are not reported by the slanderers 
 of Methodism, but by her decided friends and ad- 
 vocates. They are now publislied with feelings 
 very different from those of pleasure; hut the im- 
 perious demands of truth seem to require the full 
 exposure of this corrupt system. It would be 
 easy to quote much more at Inrne from their own 
 standard authors, in condemnation of some of 
 tlieir favorite usages. Let intelligent Methodists 
 consult the following references, if they would 
 furtber learn the sentiments of the father and 
 founder of their system, with regard to hodily 
 exercises and agitations in the solemn business of 
 devotion — viz., vol. I, p. 5. 9; vol.2, pp. 69,67; 
 vol. 3, p. 443 — of the Miscellaneous Works of 
 Wesley. From these and other passages, they 
 will perceive that he ascribes every thing of this 
 sort to the agency of the evil one, and most ex- 
 pressly disavows his belief in these extnvagan- 
 cies, as the fruits of a work of the Spirit.* Let 
 
 * It has been suggested that Wesley, at one period of 
 bis life, "patronized almost gvctj species of disorder in 
 public worship," even "when in England it was carried 
 
 17 
 
198 THE Dirr'CULTIES OJ' 
 
 them ponder, too, the caution contained in his 
 tract on Christian Perfection — "Give no place to 
 a heated imagination. Do not easily suppose 
 dreams, voices, impressions, visions, to be from 
 God. They may be from him ; they may be 
 from nature; they may be from the devil.'" "You 
 are in danger of enthusiasm every hour, if you 
 despise or lightly esteem reason, knowledge, or 
 human learning; every one of which is an excel- 
 lent gift of God, and may serve the noblest pur- 
 poses." Doct. Tracts, p. 353. And let it check 
 that fond dependence upon imaginary visions and 
 voices from above, on which so many build their 
 hopes of divine acceptance, to know that by the 
 same test the author* of one of the worst produc- 
 tions of infidelity, has claimed the seal of heaven 
 to his profane speculations. 
 
 Nor is the judgment of the greatest of modern 
 Methodists at all more favorable to these depart- 
 ures from Scriptural simplicity and sobriety. 
 
 to its greatest extremes." But like a celebrated dignitary 
 of the English church, who in Iiis early life wrote against 
 Episcopacy, though Wesley may have abandoned his for- 
 mer opinions, we believe he never solidly refuted them. 
 We respectfully submit therefore that his change of mind 
 or of practice, in regard to disorders in public worship, 
 does not invalidate his testimony against them. 
 
 * Lord Herbert. See "Leiand'a View of the Deistical 
 Writers," p. 20. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 19 
 
 Dr. Adam Clarke's preaching is thus described 
 by Lorenzo Dow in his Journal of July 20, 1 806; 
 *'The sermon was well delivered in speech, 
 though there appeared much deadness at the be- 
 ginning; but in his last prayer he grew somewhat 
 fervent, until God began to send down his power, 
 and there began a move among the people, when 
 he seemed to lower, as if to ivard off the move 
 and prevent NOISE." * These are understood 
 to be the prevailing feeling and practice among 
 the Methodists of Great Britain. It is also well 
 known that the intelligent and well informed 
 every where are almost entirely exempt from 
 these bodily agitations. ^'Charles Wesley and 
 John Fletcher were converted at their own bed- 
 side and alone: John Wesley while sitting in a 
 church hearing the reading of Luther's preface to 
 the Romans : Dr. Coke in his pulpit while 
 preaching to others. Both Charles Wesley and 
 John Fletcher say they felt no great emotions of 
 
 * Lorenzo also bears the following testimony: "I saw 
 Adam Clarke — he acknowledged to me that he was once 
 in the spirit of the great revival in Cornwall, &lc. 'But 
 now,' said the Dr., '/ see belter.'' His mind was made up 
 against the camp-meetings in America as being impro- 
 per, and the revival attending them as a thing account, 
 able upon natural principles." With respect to NOISE 
 in public worship, it seems " the English connexion in 
 general are determined to prevent it, as appears from their 
 conduct and publication in their magazine." See Journal 
 pf Lorenzo Dow, 
 
300 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 joy; and Dr. Coke and John Wesley were so 
 tranquil, that none but themselves were at the 
 time acquainted with the change." Such is the 
 decided testimony of the early fathers and best 
 friends of the system, against the very abuses 
 which are in this country boldly published and 
 propagated as Christianity; as in fact tlie essence 
 and highest excellence of that religion, which is 
 the noblest oflspring of Him who is "a God of 
 order and not of confusion." We scarcely need 
 notice the feeble attempt which has been made to 
 invalidate this testimony, by alleging the frequent 
 examples of reformation from gross vice, in con- 
 nection with these abuses. The fanatical Unita- 
 rians, called ChrySiians, at their great meetings, 
 have their mourners' benclffes, women pray in 
 ])ublic,* old backsliders are reclaimed, and 
 drunkards reformed. Do these results stamp 
 
 * The Methodists, as is well known, encourag-e their 
 women to pray and exhort in their public assemblies. Tiic 
 following is Wesley's comment on 1 Cor. 14 :34, 35. "Let 
 your women keep silence in the church," Alc. "// ?s a 
 shame Ibr women /o speak in the church." "Robt. Bare- 
 lay indeed says, 'Paul here only reproves the inconsidc. 
 rate and talkative icomcn.'' But the text sai/s no such 
 thing. It cvidenily speaks o^ women in general. Again: 
 The apostle Paul saith to 'J'itnothy, 'I<et )'our wouien 
 learn in silence with all subjection: For I suffer not a 
 woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, 
 (which public teaching necessarily implies,) but to be in 
 silence' " 1 Tim. 2:11, 12. Barclay replies, "We tliink 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 201 
 
 error and extravagance with the image of truth, 
 or sanction the denial of the supreme divinity of 
 Him who is " God over all blessed for ever- 
 more?" 
 
 this not repugnant to this (our) doctrine." "Not repug- 
 nant," retorts Wesley — "I do not suffer a woman to teach? 
 Then I know not what is." See Wesley's Letter to a 
 Quaker. 
 
 17* 
 
20? THE DirriCL'LTIEa OF 
 
 LETTER ¥1. 
 
 Camp Meetings. Abuses of Religious Ordi- 
 nances. 
 
 Rev. Sir; 
 
 We come next to remark upon that which 
 may be denominated the great pillar of Methodist 
 influence among men. 
 
 VII. The Difficulties of Methodism in con- 
 nection WITH Camp Meetings. 
 
 It is not intended to represent as unlawful the 
 mere act of worship in the open air or in the 
 woods. On the contrary, we freely admit that 
 there often occur exigencies in the history of the 
 church, which render such a practice highly com- 
 mendable. Often have the people of God, in 
 days gone by, been driven to the dens and caves 
 of the earth, that they might enjoy the privilege 
 of assembling in some of nature's thick recesses, 
 to worship the God of the whole earth agreeably 
 to the dictates of reason and conscience. And 
 there are doubtless many situations in free and 
 civilized countries, where the homage due to the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 203 
 
 King of heaven may and ought to ascend unitedly 
 from the great congregation, even where no tem- 
 ple nor altar is dedicated to the service. We may 
 even advance a step further: There is something 
 both sublime and beautiful, in thus employing the 
 green earth and the dazzling canopy of heaven, 
 as a temple for the praise of Him who hath said, 
 "Heaven is my throne, and the earth my foot- 
 stool," and whom "the heaven, even the heaven 
 of heavens, cannot contain." 
 
 Why then do we protest against Methodist 
 camp-meetings? 
 
 1. Because they aiTord to the mixed multitude 
 who attend them, unnsual and most abundant ad- 
 vantages for the practice of wickedness in many 
 of its foulest forms. It is well known that whilst 
 the mass of the steady, orderly, and influential 
 men of the community, who give tone to society, 
 and impart a healthfid direction to the current of 
 its manners and customs, take little or no interest 
 in such assemblages, seldom attend, and then for 
 a very short time — on the other hand, persons 
 of almost every shade of color and character are 
 advertised, invited, and expected to attend; and it 
 is of these for the most part that Methodism cal- 
 culates her gain. It is not meant that persons of 
 this description should not have the Gospel 
 preached to them. That is not the question. *'Is 
 
204 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 tlie camp-meeting the best method of bringing 
 them under the purifying influence of the Gos- 
 pel?" Prove this — and then the more you can 
 crowd together on the camp-ground the better. 
 But is it the wisest way to make such men holy, 
 to press them together for several days in succes- 
 sion, and several nights, too, where as " iron 
 sharpenelh iron," and fire kindleth fire, and de- 
 pravity stimulates to sin, so the social principle 
 and the combined energies of vice excite to emu- 
 lation in deeds of enormous wickedness? Is it 
 the best way to bring logetlior in dangerous com- 
 bination for many days and nights, men and wo- 
 m3n in mixed multitudes, where, it cannot be de- 
 nied, great facilities are presented, to kindle un- 
 holy fires in the soul, and practice iniquity in 
 many of its vilest shapes? 
 
 2. For let it be remembered that these meet- 
 ings are generally held in places remote from the 
 habitations of men, frequently at the foot of a 
 mountain — always in the woods; that the night 
 is the time of general leisure from worldly avo- 
 cations — the time, too, when the excitement at 
 the camp is highest — the attention of the mana- 
 gers is then most confined to the exclusive scenes 
 of the meeting — and the best opportunities are 
 then afTorded by the surrounding darkness for the 
 "workers of iniquity to hide themselves;" that 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 205 
 
 hundreds flock to such places for mirth and 
 recreation, and many for much worse purposes; 
 that independently of the indecent postures, (spo- 
 ken of by Wesley and others,) and besides the 
 malign influence of protracted intercourse, the 
 accommodations for lodging at night are such as 
 will commend themselves to no modest person-, 
 particularly to no modest female, as can easily be 
 shown by a reference to facts. These and many 
 other things plainly show that these meetings are 
 not sanctioned by good sense or sound morality, 
 much less by that religion which forbids the very 
 ♦'appearance of evil." And when we add the 
 awful profanation of the holy Sabbath, occasioned 
 by the rush of hundreds from every quarter, as to 
 the festal scenes of a holy-day, or to the merri- 
 ment and dissipation of some great fair, well may 
 the serious Chri.^tian pause and ask, "Can these 
 things be duty in a land like this, where every 
 neigliborhood has or may soon have a convenient 
 house of worship, at which, by travelling a short 
 distance, all may receive instruction in the won- 
 drous mysteries of redeeming love?" Surely it 
 cannot be a work of necessity in any sense, to 
 mingle vv'ith the worship of the Lord of glory, 
 any thing which bears so strong a resemblance 
 to the works of darkness. If indeed the system 
 were so amended, that camp-meetings should be 
 
200 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 held for males and females separately, at different 
 times and places, and were never to extend to 
 the Sabbath, many of the above objections would 
 be removed. But under the application of so 
 powerful a remedy, we greatly fear the patient 
 would expire in our hands; camp-meetings would 
 be no more ! * 
 
 * The writer thinks proper to remark in this connexion, 
 that he does not decide upon the expediency or inexpe- 
 diency of camp-mectin<js in our new settlements, and 
 when properly conducted. The foregoing discussion has 
 reference mainly to the practice of holding these meetings 
 in the vicinity of cities, and large villages, and in neigh- 
 borhoods long settled, and furnished with many churches, 
 and other conveniences, for the orderly worship of God. 
 Their propriety among a sparse population, destitute of 
 suitable house* of worship, would depend in a great mea- 
 sure upon their management. But we are| persuaded 
 there can be no sufficient plea for such assemblages under 
 otlicr circumstances, such as we have mentioned. This 
 view of the subject will also show the propriety of the 
 remarks we have m.ade upon the method of lodging at 
 night. The "log cabins" of the far West are designed to 
 be only a temporary arrangement, to yield with all pos- 
 sible speed to better accommodations. Necessity in such 
 cases knows no law. But we should all feel the indeli- 
 cacy, not to say indecency, o^ voluntarily forsaking sepa- 
 rate chambers, to hudtlle male and llinale into the same 
 apartment; and all from the fervor of our zeal for religion, 
 and the salvation of souls! Paul was himself a '■'■ lent, 
 maker." And though they had no churches to assemble 
 in, we hear of his preaching on "Mars Hill," in an "upper 
 chamber," in his own "hired room," and in an oratory by 
 the river side; but never do we read of his employing his 
 mechanical skill to furnisli a camp-ground, nor that he 
 ever sanctioned any similar practice, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 207 
 
 It will not satisfy the minds of any but those 
 who are already the partial friends of the system, 
 to suffer passion to usurp the throne of reason, 
 and apply harsh epithets to the foregoing state- 
 ment of facts. But as some have been disposed 
 to charge the author of these paragraphs with a 
 breach of decorum, he can only take the liberty 
 of reminding his accusers, that "a polluted imagi- 
 nation is the keenest detector and the most severe 
 ji:dge of impurities in style, as the slightest im- 
 age on hint excites a fermentation of which it 
 is instantly conscious, and the guilt of which 
 it charges on the innocent occasion." (Prof. 
 M'Clelland.) 
 
 In concluding these remarks upon the abuses 
 engrafted on the errors of Methodism, let us 
 glance for a moment at their practical impression 
 upon the church and the world. And here I am 
 happy to have the privilege of embodying in this 
 discussion, some very able and just observations 
 from the 'Christian Advocate,' edited by the vene- 
 rable Dr. Green of Philadelphia. 
 
 1. The kind of preaching which we have de- 
 scribed, and the object intended thereby, make 
 but small demand for talent or education in the 
 Christian ministry. Hence vigorous, discrimin- 
 ating intellect, and a tact for sound instruction in 
 the pulpit, are thrown into the shade, and are 
 
20S THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 compelled to yield tlie precedence to empty vo- 
 ciferation. '*Ilut all history bears its testimony 
 to the deplorable efiecis of an iinqnalified minis- 
 try. Incompetent teacliers of religion have ever 
 been the scourge of the ciiurch, the ab.ettors of 
 error, the tools of wily ecclesiastics and politi- 
 cians, and at once the viclinis and supporters of 
 superstition and fanaticism. And in the face of 
 all this ligiit and evidence, the Met!:odists, as a 
 body, are the stern advocates of an untaught 
 ministry." 
 
 2. "Another of their evil eiTects upon tlie 
 church arises from the little valitc they set irpon 
 Christian instruction in any of its dcjartments. 
 Their system is formed mainly with reference to 
 the passions. Their preaching, praymg, classes, 
 camp-meetings, and love-feasts, are all conducted 
 so as to affect the passions. As respects instruc- 
 tion, a moral famine pervades every thing they 
 do. This might be expected from the character 
 of a large majority of their clergy.* A person 
 
 * Wesley himself assorts — "Wore I to preach three 
 years tog^ether in one place, bolli tlie pco[)le and myself 
 would grow as dead as stones." We may we 1 suspect tlic 
 piety that would die under a three-years' trial ot' this 
 kind. Whatever benefits accrue amonsr the Methodists 
 from "the constant change of preachers," it is certain that 
 it lays a strong temptation in the way of the preacher to 
 neglect the iniprovement of his mind, after he has jyone 
 throxigh a sufficiently extensive course of sermons — which 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 209 
 
 professes conversion to-day, and is admitted to 
 the communion to-morrow; and thus the <• urch 
 is filled with ignorant members; ignorant of the 
 Bible, and in a very lamentable degree of the 
 plan of salvation. And their example is exerting' 
 a deleterious influence upon other portions of the 
 church. Other denominations, to prevent their 
 adherents from becoming Methodists, '■where they 
 can get religion so easily,'' admit them to mem- 
 bership too hastily." 
 
 3. "Another of the evil effects of Methodism 
 upon the church is, the perverted taste it creata 
 for hearing the word of God. 
 
 "Such a taste have they created for clamorous 
 preaching, that now they will be satisfied with 
 nothing else. The great object of preaching 
 surely is, to elucidate and explain the word of 
 God, and to bring it home to the heart and con- 
 science. If in the sacred and divine institution of 
 preaching, a calm, deliberate, rational, and pun- 
 gent exposition of the Scriptures, is to give way 
 to the narration of experience, and of wonderful 
 
 he is at liberty to repeat at each successive chang-e of his 
 circuit. The people too will be fed witli milk, milk, milk. 
 They will not be instructed to leani the principles of 
 Christian doctr ne. Any tiling like systematic discussion 
 of the gr^at truths oi' tiic Scriptures in their connected 
 order, is almost entirely out oi" the question. Abundant 
 facts testify to the truth of these remarke. 
 
 18 
 
210 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 incidents and anecdotes, often to the veriest rant 
 and bombast, what is to become of the church? If 
 the Scriptures cease to shine from the pulpit, what 
 is to enlighten the people?" 
 
 4. "But what is perliaps the greatest evil of 
 Methodism is yet to be named. 1 mean its ef- 
 fect in begetting improper notions of divine 
 truth:' 
 
 *'In regard to the production of proper religious 
 feeling, the influence exerted upon the heart and 
 conscience, by our views of divine truth, is most 
 extensive and powerful. How deplorable, then, 
 the extension which is given to views and notions 
 based on clouds and borne up by vapors, which 
 vanish into thin air before the light of reason and 
 Scripture! Among the Methodists there is very 
 much religious irreverence, arising no doubt from 
 their improper views of the divine character. 
 Hence their boisterous and unmeaning prayers — 
 the great familiarity with which they treat the 
 Most High — their crude notions of 'getting reli- 
 gion,' and of sinless perfection. They seem to 
 suppose that religion can be obtained and lost at 
 any time — that it consists in a boisterous agitation 
 of the passions — that other means than prayer 
 and the avoidance of temptation, are to be em- 
 ployed in overcoming the devil — and tliat reve- 
 rence and order in religious worship are the char- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 811 
 
 acteristics of coldness and formality. A man of 
 my acquaintance a few years since, cried out, in. 
 an evening meeting among tlie Methodists — 
 *Brethren, I have got the devil, and will not let 
 him go till I kill him.' lie continued fisting his 
 Satanic majesty against the wall for half an hour, 
 whilst the cries of *Amen' and *Glory to God' . 
 were rising ail around him." 
 
 5. But what impression do these and similar 
 traits of the system make upon the world? "A 
 man of intelligence is prompted by curiosity to 
 attend one of the boisterous camp-meetings. He 
 goes from tent to tent, from one praying circle to 
 another. He witnesses the fervid enthusiasm of 
 the preachers, which acts upon the mass like a 
 whirlwind upon the ocean. He sees some falling 
 into fits — others exhausted with shouting — others 
 prostrate on the earth and crying out, 'it made 
 no matter to them whether they went to heaven 
 head or heels foremost' — a scene actually wit- 
 nessed. He hears twenty or thirty praying at 
 once, and the less fluent brothers and sisters 
 shouting *Amen.' He hears one exclaim, 'I see 
 the Savior — there he is ; and another, 'I see 
 heaven open and God preparing to descend to us;* 
 and another crying out, *Pray on, brothers and 
 sisters — the blessing will soon come.' He wit- 
 nesses little else but irreverence before Him who 
 
812 THE BifFICULTIES OF 
 
 hath said, 'The Lord is in his holy temple; let all 
 the earth keep silence before him.' If such scenes 
 are not well calculated to make the impression 
 that religion is only fitted for the vulgar — that it 
 is all a matter of blind superstition, I know not 
 what scenes are." That the foregoing statements 
 do not exceed or exaggerate the simple truth, is 
 proved by Dr. Green, who affirms that they are 
 in "exact accordance with the reports which were 
 made to him from various quarters.*' The facts 
 were such as "had either passed under the obser- 
 vation of the reporters, or were narrated by credit- 
 able and pious individuals." 
 
 6. While therefore we cheerfully concede to 
 the Methodists the credit which is due them for 
 conveying a measure of religious and moral in- 
 struction to a large class of mankind, including 
 many of the most depraved and destitute, we can- 
 not but fear that the foregoing errors and disor^ 
 ders are exerting an influence upon society which 
 is any thing but salutary. Religion will generally 
 be estimated by the character and conduct of her 
 professed followers. And when the worship of 
 the God of the whole earth, the infinitely perfect 
 Spirit, the only object of religious homage, is so 
 widely at variance with the plainest dictates of 
 propriety; when instead of that "reasonable ser- 
 vice" which He requires, extravagance and con- 
 
AR MINI AN METHODISM. 213 
 
 fusion prevail; when long and noisy vociferation 
 is substituted for instruction in religions truth; 
 when the object is rather to rouse the animal sen- 
 sibilities than awaken the conscience, enlighten 
 the understanding, and humble the heart; when 
 those in numberless instances are appointed to 
 teach wlio ought first to learn,* and the most in- 
 congruous statements are gravely announced as 
 the sober conclusions of reason and truth; when 
 the results of natural causes, terror, nervous irri- 
 tability, bodily exhaustion, &c., are boldly pro- 
 nounced to be essentials in that "holiness without 
 which no man shall see the Lord:" when all this, 
 (and there is much more of the same character,) 
 is witnessed by men of even ordinary discern- 
 ment, nothing is more easy and natural than to 
 transfer their feelings of disgust from those who 
 
 * The example of the disciples:, "a few illiterate fisher- 
 men," is sometimes adduced in favor of an unlearned 
 ministry. But it seems to be overlooked, that those ^^'s/icr- 
 men had received, besides miraculous powers, and ths 
 inspiration of the Most H0I3', three full years of iiistrvc- 
 tion from the lips of "the I'eacher gent from God;"' the 
 very best of all training for the ministry. Bet'idcs, Paul 
 exhorts Timothy, who, if not himself inspired, seems to 
 have possessed some extraordinary g'iu-s and endowments: 
 "Cive attendance to reading-," ^'■Study to show thyselt 
 approved unto Gcd, a \yorkman that needeth )jot to bs 
 ashamed, rightly dividing the word of God." 1 Tim. 4:13. 
 2 Tim. 2:15. These texts give no countenance to th« 
 doctrine of preaching without preparatory study. And 
 the example of the eleven, is its total overthrow. 
 18* 
 
tl4 THE DlFnCtTLTIBS OF 
 
 practice these abuses of religion, to religion her- 
 lelf. *'\Vhere the Methodist religion," says the 
 Christian Advocate, "has been for any time preva- 
 lent, unchecked by the presence of other denomi- 
 nations, you find the talented and influential mem- 
 bers of society opposed not only to the Method- 
 ists, but to every thing in the form of godliness." 
 "The region in which I live," continues the same 
 writer, "bears a decided testimony to the truth of 
 this fact. Methodism was once dominant. It 
 carried nearly every thing before it; and now the 
 intelligent and influential are generally infidels, 
 or something as bad, and are rarely ever seen 
 within the walls of a church. Methodism is on 
 the wane. The people are becoming tired of it; 
 and that cold chill, the sure precursor of spiritual 
 death, is pervading the whole community." "If 
 this be religion," exclaimed one who was leaving 
 the scenes of a camp-ground, "Heaven preserve 
 me from it." As the scandalous conduct of the 
 Romish clergy has left an eternal stain and stigma 
 upon the very name of priest, so have we reason 
 to fear, will much that Methodism calls religion, 
 prejudice the minds and steel the henrts of thou- 
 sands against the pure and heavenly doctrines of 
 Divine Revelation. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 21 5 
 
 VIII. The Difficulties of Methodism, with regard 
 TO Religious Ordinances. The Gross Abuses 
 
 PRACTISED IN THAT DENOMINATION. 
 
 1. Upon this subject the theory and practice 
 of Methodism seem very well to agree. What 
 are we fo think of "Articles and Discipline," 
 which after stating that the baptism of children is 
 to be retained in the church, contain not one word 
 respecting the character of the parents; and which 
 of course require nothing more, in order to the 
 baptism of their children, from the most profane 
 and vicious, than from the most moral and reli- 
 gious ? The whole subject is left as though it 
 were a matter of the utmost indifference. No ob- 
 ligations of any kind are prescribed; no inquiry 
 of knowledge or of decent deportment ; no de- 
 mand of future obedience to the divine precepts. 
 The great point scejns to be, to get children bap- 
 tized, and as many as possible by the Methodist 
 church, with which tlie parents are thus brought 
 into a kind of connexion and membership. On 
 the principle that " coming to us " is to " get reli- 
 gion " with almost as great certainty, as to unite 
 with others is to be destitute of it, this method of 
 attaching persons of every description to the 
 meeting is adopted without scruple ; and doubt- 
 less the end will fully justify the means. In this 
 
210 Tin: DiiMi Li.Tii:s of 
 
 way, too, the hearts of the unwary are deceived 
 by a show of great liberality ; and an excellent 
 opportunity furnished, to declaim against narrow- 
 minded Presbyterians who believe in the ever- 
 lasting perdition of helpless infants. We admit 
 that the preachers suppose their practice to be 
 consistent with the order of Christ's house; but 
 this Avill not change the essential nature of truth, 
 nor make that right which is wrong, even though 
 like Saul of Tarsus, when persecuting the church, 
 they think they are doing God service. Circum- 
 cision (the Old Testament baptism) was never 
 applied to any but the children of Abraham, and 
 to parents and cluldren who became proselytes 
 to Judaism. Yet that was " tlie seal of the righ- 
 teousness of faith," as much as baptism. Of 
 whose faith? Not surely of the "faith" of t'le 
 infant of eiglit days old, but of die parent who in 
 the exercise of "faith," gave away the child to 
 the expected Savior, and came under the obliga- 
 tions implied in tuch a gift, to bring it up in '• the 
 nurture and admonition of t)ie Lord." " Cir- 
 cumcision," says Wesley, "being abolished, and 
 baptism coming in the room of it, baptism should 
 be applied to all those who have any interest in 
 the covenant — this seems to manifest the right 
 of the children of Chrisiiaas to these blessings, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 217 
 
 or that they have an interest in this covenant." * 
 Doct. Tracts, p. 267. Hence also we find that 
 "when the apostles received into church fellowship 
 the parents, it is generally added they baptized 
 their household — but we never read of their bap- 
 tizing the household or the children of any who 
 did not profess faith in Christ. The reason was 
 precisely the same for refusing baptism to the off- 
 spring of unbelievers, as for denying circumcision 
 to those who were not Jews — " The seal of the 
 righteousness of faith," (applied in either form,) 
 implied the existence of faith — the seal of the 
 covenant, — that the covenant had been entered 
 into. "Where, therefore, there is no "faith" in 
 exercise, and no covenant embraced and agreed 
 to, to apply the seal of the covenant, is to seal a 
 blank. It is plain, therefore, from the nature of 
 the ordinance, from the nature of the covenant, 
 (of which it is a seal,) as well as from the char- 
 acter and extent of its obligations, that in the bap* 
 
 * Watson takes the same view. "The question is, 
 whother the infant children of believing parents are enti- 
 tled to he made parties to the covenant of grace by the 
 act of their parents?''^ "The apostolic practice was to 
 baptize the Jiouses (households) of them that believed,^'' 
 "On the supposition that baptism was administered to the 
 children of the parents who thus believed, at the same 
 time as themselves and IN CONSEQUENCE OF 
 THEIR BELIEVING, it may be asked," «fcc. (Vol. 2, 
 pp. 630, 639.) 
 
218 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 tism of the infants of the vicious and profane, 
 " who are strangers to the covenants of promise," 
 the great seal of High Heaven, the solemn ratifi- 
 cation of God's covenant, is appended to a nulli- 
 ty, or what is worse, to an untruth. Something 
 indeed is said about an *' unconditional charter," 
 entitling all infants to the blessings of tlie cove- 
 nant, without respect to their parentage, and se- 
 curing to them unconditionaUy^ the right of bap- 
 tism. But why were the blessings of this " mz- 
 conditional charter" limited, in the case of the 
 Jews? Why did it not secure the right of cir- 
 cumcision to the infants of Gentiles ? And why 
 was it restricted to those who were united to the 
 prcfessing people of God, either by birth or pro- 
 selytism ? Dr. Clarke on Acts lo:32, tells us, 
 *' the Jewish practice was invariably to receive 
 the heathen children Avith (not without) their 
 proselyted parents." x\.nd Wesley informs us 
 that " in the Christian church, from its earliest 
 ages, and we think from the apostles' time, it has 
 been the custom to baptize the infant children of 
 professed Ckrislians.^^ Doct. Tracts, p. 275. 
 The father of Methodism, tlien, no less than the 
 word of God and tlie example of the apostles, 
 condemns the practice of administering baptism 
 to the infiint children of those who give no scrip- 
 tural evidence of piety, Man cannot search the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 219 
 
 heart, but reason may learn and apply the princi- 
 ples of holy writ, by which we are " to try the 
 spirits" and test the character and fitness of those 
 who claim for themselves or their offspring, the 
 ** sign and seal " of the covenant of grace. To 
 neglect this, is to declare it to be a matter of no 
 importance that institutions of divine authority 
 should be celebrated in "truth and ri^hteou-nass." 
 *' The ordinance is inseparably connected with 
 the incumbent duty of 'bringing up the children 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.' If 
 this connexion is lost sight of — if it is not con- 
 templated at the time, and is practically disre- 
 garded afterwards, the ordinance becomes no- 
 thing better than a useless ceremony and an idle 
 and profane mockery of its Divine author." * 
 
 * This extract is from the pen of the disting-uished 
 Dr. Wardlaw, of Glasgow. The Dr adds — "The profit 
 to the child must be through the medium of the parent; 
 and it has long- appeared to me, that it is to the parent, 
 rather than to the child, that infant baptism is in the first 
 instance to be reckoned a privilege." "That multitudes 
 wiiohave their children baptized, never think of the ordi- 
 nance in any such light, and arc quite regardless of the 
 obligations which, I will not say it imposes, but which it 
 implies and brings to mind, is a melancholy truth. And I 
 would earnestly admonish those parents, of the guilt they 
 are contracting by their solemn mockery of Heaven, in the 
 careless profanation of a divine institution." (Woods on 
 Baptism, p. 211.) President Edwards, nearly a century 
 ago, abundantly insisted that "this way of proceeding 
 tends to establish the stupidity and irreliffion of children, 
 as well as the negligence of parents." (Wks. vol. 4, p. 427.) 
 
220 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 2. Nor is the practice with regard to the other 
 sacrament of Christ's house at all more agreea- 
 ble to reason and Scripture. The Book of Disci- 
 pline prescribes examination for admission to the 
 Lord's Supper, but as it says nothing about the 
 topics, every preacher is left to do just what 
 seemeth right in his own eyes. Hence the very 
 superficial investigation of faith and practice at 
 camp-meetings, &c. Hence the common usage 
 of receiving an appearance of tenderness, as suf- 
 ficient recommendation, without inquiry whether 
 the person has been baptized, or whether his cha- 
 racter and habits are not scandalous, and will not 
 render him a disgrace to the ordinance, and a just 
 object of contempt to the infidel and scoffer. A 
 member of my church, (from whose lips I had 
 the fact,) whilst travelling through one of the 
 western counties of Pennsylvania, was present at 
 a quarterly meeting when the communion was 
 celebrating. When the services were nearly 
 completed, a rough, uncouth person pressed for- 
 ward toward the altar, and demanded the ele- 
 ments, saying, " I came here to get religion, and 
 like to forgot it." After some consultation among 
 the preachers, the bread and wine were presented 
 to him. This, we readily admit, is an extreme 
 though by no means a solitary case. But where 
 in the authorized Book of Discipline and stan- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 221 
 
 dard of doctrine, will you find one syllable which 
 condemns such scandalous proceedings. The 
 volume therefore which contains the confession 
 of faith and forms of worship adopted by Metho- 
 dists, tacitly gives its consent and approbation to 
 this gross outrage upon decency. It will be rea- 
 dily admitted that in the purest churches and 
 under the most cautious discipline, unworthy 
 persons may intrude into the holy mysteries ; but 
 this furnishes no apology for unforbidden practi- 
 ces, which reflect dishonor upon the very name 
 of religion. 
 
 In reply to these statements and objections it 
 has been said, " that an individual who had pre- 
 viously been very wicked might, on the occasion 
 of a camp-meeting, become truly penitent and in- 
 tend to lead a new life ; and it is better to be im- 
 posed upon than to stand in the way of one sin- 
 cere soul in fulfiUing the command of Christ." 
 In other words, the apostle says, *' Let a man ex- 
 amine himself and so let him eat " — The preach- 
 er replies, " Let him become truly penitent, and 
 intend to lead a new life ; and leave the exami- 
 nation to a more convenient seasonV The 
 aposde says, " He that eateth and drinketh un- 
 worthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to him- 
 self, and is guilty of the body and blood of the 
 Lord, not discerning the Lord's body " — " It is 
 19 
 
t2t THB DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 better for us to be imposed upon," replies the 
 preacher, " and that sinners should risk these aw- 
 ful consequences, than that we should stand in 
 the way of one sincere soul in fulfilling the com- 
 mand of Christ." It cannot be proved that Christ 
 ever commanded any man to rush from the bois- 
 terous excitement of the camp-ground, without 
 time for self-recollection and self-examination, to 
 the tender and most solemn exercises of the com- 
 munion. There is no example of any such prac- 
 tice in the Scriptures ; and the language of Paul 
 plainly implies the direct contrary. Wesley, 
 however, asserts that our Lord commanded the 
 very men who were unconverted, (his disciples,) 
 who (in the full sense of the word) were not be- 
 lievers, " to do this in remembrance of him^\' 
 He adduces this to show "the falsehood of the 
 assertion that none but the converted, those who 
 are believers in the full sense, ought to commu- 
 nicate." 
 
 3. A third head of abuses is the practice of 
 kneeling in the act of communion, and much of 
 the language employed in administering the or- 
 dinance.. The Savior and his disciples celebra- 
 ted the first supper (** the Lord's Supper,'' as 
 Paul calls it, 1st Cor. 11:20) in the common ta- 
 ble posture. " Now when the even was come," 
 says the evangelist Matthew, " he sa-f down with 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 223 
 
 the twelve." " And as they were eating, Jesus 
 took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave 
 to the disciples, and said — Take eat, this is my 
 body." So also Luke (22:14) " He sat down,'' 
 &c. And to render the custom of the primitive 
 church still more evident, Paul characterises the 
 ordinance as " Me /.or<Y's fable.'" 1 Cor. 10:21. 
 It is admitted that they sat in a leaning attitude, 
 as was then usual, but this does not in the least 
 abate the force of the testimony. Now if the 
 Blessed Redeemer has set us the example in 
 adopting this posture, even in instituting the 
 sacrament, by what authority do men venture to 
 change what he has ordained ? If Christ and 
 his disciples sat down, who shall authorize a dif- 
 ferent attitude ? 
 
 Further : The practice oi kneeling in receiving- 
 the sacramental elements, originated in supersti- 
 tion. Pope Ilonorius the Second is believed to 
 have been the first that ordained this posture; and 
 it grew out of the doctrine of transubstantiation 
 and the sacrifice of the mass, which had some time 
 previously received the infallible sanction of Pope 
 Innocent the third. " The most ardent friends 
 of kneeling," says Dr. Miller, *' do not pretend 
 to find any example of this posture in the whole 
 history of the church, prior to the thirteenth cen- 
 tury. And accordingly in the Greek church, 
 
224 THE DIFF'CULTIES OF 
 
 which separated from the Latin before the doc- 
 trine of Transubstantiation arose, kneeling at the 
 communion is iinivnown." It must be regarded 
 therefore, as a part of that'* will worship and vol- 
 untary humility,'* which characterise the corrup- 
 tions of the Romish church. Besides, the ordi- 
 nance is a feast — a feast of confidence, fellowship, 
 joy and thanksgiving ; and there is something ut- 
 terly incongruous in such a posture in such cir- 
 cumstances. '» In what nation is it thought suit- 
 able to kneel at banquets ? Where do men eat 
 and drink upon their knees ?" It is admitted that 
 it is not done superstitiously among Protestants ; 
 but it is undoubtedly adapted to nourish error and 
 superstition, and is liable to great and continual 
 misapprehension by the weak and ignorant. And 
 if the door be thrown open — if the precedent be ' 
 set of improving; upon divine institutions, the 
 way is clear to admit all the worst abominations 
 of the church of Rome. 
 
 We are constrained also to object to ** the 
 prayer of consecration" which the elder is required 
 *' /(? 5(7?/" before he distributes the bread and 
 wine. Our " Lord Jesus took bread and blessed 
 it," or ^^ gave thanks i'*'' as it is recorded by Paul, 
 and as many of the Greek copies of Matthew's 
 Gospel have it. Why will men venture to change 
 the language of Him who instituted this ordi- 
 
ARMIMAX METHODISM. 225 
 
 nance ? And our objections are still stronger 
 when we find the undue importance which is at- 
 tached to this "prayer of consecration." We aie 
 particularly informed that " if the consecrated 
 bread and winehe all spent, the Elder may C07Z- 
 secrate more by repeating the prayer of cGnse- 
 cniiion " / And again, that "if the Elder be strai- 
 tened for time, he may omit any part of the ser- 
 vice, EXCEPT THE PRAYER OF CONSE- 
 CRATION." But where is all this found in the 
 New Testament ? Where has the Saviour in- 
 timated that if the Elder have not laid his hands 
 upon a sufficient quantity of bread and wine, 
 when he first " gives thanks," (or offers " the 
 prayer of consecration,^') he must '^lay his hands'* 
 upon more, and " give thanks" over again ! * 
 " Who hath required this at your hands ? Does 
 it not savour strongly of the Mass to give such 
 prominence to a form prescribed by man ? *'EX- 
 CEPT the prayer of consecration'"! The Holy 
 Mother Church has it, " EXCEPT all be said 
 and done by a regularly ordained priest in com- 
 munion with the See of Rome, empowered to 
 
 ^It is remarkable that although our Savior is said to 
 nave "given thanks," just before he distributed the elc- 
 aients, "the prayer of consecration" contains not one syl- 
 juhle properly of the nature of thanksgiving! 
 
 19* 
 
M6 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 consecrate the bread or wafer imo " the body, 
 blood, soul and divinity" of Christ! 
 
 Finally : The unscriplural character of this part 
 of the Methodist Discipline is also manifest in the 
 act of distribution. Paul tells us that he "received 
 of the Lord" that the Lord Jesus said, " Take 
 eat — this is my body," &c. " This cup is the 
 New Testament in my blood," &;c. (I Cor. 1 J: 
 24, 25.) And v/ith a few unimportant variations, 
 the same is the record by Matthew and Luke. But 
 here in the " Discipline," the form used by the 
 Savior of men, and specially revealed to the apos- 
 tle Paul, is crowded into the '-^prayer of conse- 
 cration,'^ and instead thereof, the Elder is to say 
 the following: "The body of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy 
 soul and body unto everlasting life. Take and 
 eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, 
 and feed on him by faith with thanksgiving." 
 And a similar form is used when he distributes 
 the wine, only with the necessary adaptation to 
 the change of the elements. But it is obvious 
 that this, to say the least, is a needless and unau- 
 thorized departure from Christ's own teaching 
 and direct example. If the Savior himself selec- 
 ted and used a certain form of words, who will 
 venture to say it is not most agreeable to his will? 
 
ARMIXIAN" METHODISM. 227 
 
 Can it be right to substitute a different one ? And 
 especially is this inquiry important, when the 
 sitbstiluted form employs a phraseology with 
 regard to the "body and blood" of the Savior 
 ill the act of prayer, which has no parallel in the 
 Scriptures, but is strongly tinctured with idolatry, 
 " The body of our Lord, &l(:.^ preserve thy soul 
 and body unto eveilasting life." The Romanist 
 could consistently use such a prayer, because he 
 believes that the bread or wafer is " the body, 
 soul and divinity " of the Savior. But the sober 
 Christian will say — " Let me employ as nearly as 
 possible, the gracious words which proceeded 
 from the lips of Him who spake as never man 
 spake, and who has a right to say what shall 
 be the form ofadministeiing the most solemn ordi- 
 nance of his own house." 
 
 POSTSCRIPT TO LETTER VL 
 
 Some may perhaps think that too much impor- 
 tance is attached to the form of words used by 
 the Savior and his apostles. But would they 
 not revolt, if any uninspired man should take the 
 liberty cf changing the baptismal form ? Yet 
 why should the one phraseology be esteemed 
 more sacred than the other ? Why would it not 
 be lawful to say — " I baptize thee in the name of 
 thfi Trinity " ? Yet this change would not be so 
 
t^S TTIK PirFICITLTIKS OF 
 
 great as has been usual in the form of the other 
 sacrament. The form of baptism is but once re- 
 corded, (Matth. 28:19,) yet we believe there is 
 almost entire uniformity with respect to it, in the 
 Christian world. Whence the unwarranted lib- 
 erty taken with the other form ! 
 
 The writer is also aware that in this letter, and 
 perhaps in some otliers, he crosses the path of 
 one or two denominations of Christians with 
 whom he wishes to have no controversy, and to- 
 ward whom he entertains only feelings of frater- 
 nal regard. Having been violently assailed, and 
 challenged, and thus forced into collision with 
 Methodism, he felt it to be his duty as far as in 
 him lay, to make a pretty full exposition of what 
 he believes to be the unscriptural tenets and prac- 
 tices of that system. If in so doing, he has oc- 
 casionally touched a point in which it harmoni- 
 ses with the views and usages of other sects, 
 while he asks for a candid perusal of what he 
 may write, he can only express his regret at the 
 necessity which has been laid upon him, of en- 
 croaching to some small extent upon neutral ter- 
 ritory. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 229 
 
 LETTER ¥!I. 
 
 Methodist Episcopacy. Exc.hisiGn of Laymen^ 
 Right of Property. 
 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 In the progress of this discussion, we are 
 broiig-ht to the subject of Church Government, as 
 administered among Methodists. 
 
 IX. The DtFFicuLTiES of Methodism in regard to 
 HER Form of Government — it is unscriptural, an- 
 ti-republican, UNJUST AND tyrannical. 
 
 On page 144 of the Book of- Discipline is a 
 prayer to " Ahuighty God," in which the ap- 
 pointment of" divers orders " of ministers in his 
 church, is distincdy ascribed to Him. On pages 
 25, 31, 32, of the same vokime, three forms of 
 consecration and ordination are laid down, for 
 Bishops, Elders, and Deacons, respectively. In 
 the appendix to Buck's Theological Dictionary^ 
 written by Dr. Bangs, it is said that in Methodism 
 " three orders of ministers are recognized, and 
 the duties peculiar to each are clearly defined.'*" 
 Dr. Clarke, in commenting on 1 Tim. chap. 3, 
 
230 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 V. 1, States that "Episcopacy in the church of 
 God is of divine appointment, and should be 
 maintained and respected. Under God there 
 should be supreme governors in the church as 
 well as in the state. 'J'he state has its monarch: 
 the church has its bishop.^' " The office of a 
 bishop is from God." Note, Acts 20:28. 
 
 Now that these " divers orders " are the inven- 
 tion of men, and not the appointment of God, 
 has been often and most abundantly proved. 
 For, 
 
 1. There is no Scriptural evidence whatever 
 ihat the office of Deacon embraced the duty ei- 
 ther of teaching or ruling in the church. In 
 support of this position, we refer to the original 
 appointment as recorded in the 6th chapter of 
 Acts, where the object is distinctly declared to 
 be, not the establishment of another order of min- 
 isters or teachers, but of a class of men whose 
 business it should be to " serve tables,''^ or attend 
 to the secular aflfairs of the church ; " but we," 
 say the apostles, " will give ourselves to prayer 
 and to the ministry of the ivord.''^ That some 
 of those who were first appointed deacons, did af- 
 terwards preach the Gospel, and act as evange- 
 lists, is not denied ; but there is no evidence 
 whatever that they were either ministers or evan- 
 gelists, in consequence of their appointment to 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 231 
 
 ** serve tables.'^ " It is not reason," say thd 
 apostles, " that we should LEAVE the word of 
 God and serve tables.^^ 
 
 Dr. Bangs, in his " Vindication of Methodist 
 Episcopacy," p. 14, derives an argument from 
 1 Tim. 3:8, in support of the ministerial charac- 
 ter of deacons : " Likewise must the deacons be 
 grave^^ — But just three verses farther on, the 
 apostle adds, "even so must their ivives be grave." 
 Were the deacons' wives ministers of the Gospel? 
 And when Paul subjoins two verses farther down, 
 >' For they that use the office of deacon well, pur- 
 chase to themselves a good degree, and great 
 boldness in the faith " — Dr. Clarke well expres- 
 ses the meaning — " they are here said to pur- 
 chase to themselves a good degree ; for instead 
 of having to minister to the bodies and bodily 
 wants of the poor, the faithful deacons were 
 raised to minister in holy things : and instead of 
 ministering the bread that perisheth, they were 
 raised to minister the bread of life to immortal 
 souls." This no doubt was often exemplified 
 when persons exercising the office of deacon dil- 
 igently and faithfully, were elevated to the higher 
 office of ministers of the everlasting Gospel. 
 " It is evident," says Dr. Scott, an Episcopalian, 
 *' that they were appointed to take care of the 
 property of the church, and not to the pastoral 
 
232 THE DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 office.''^ " It seems unclenial)le that they were ap- 
 pointed solely to take care of the temporal con- 
 cerns of the church ; and not, as deacons^ to 
 preach, or to administer sacred ordinances." ♦' It 
 appears to me very likely," continues Dr. Scott, 
 " that both at this and future periods, many who 
 were appointed deacons in the Jirst instance, af- 
 terwards became evangelists or pastors ; and when 
 they were fully employed, other deacons were 
 appointed." Com. on Acts 6:2 — 6. Since then 
 not a particle of evidence can be gathered from 
 the New Testament, that the first deacons were 
 ministers of the Gospel at all, we need not trou- 
 ble ourselves to disprove the other feature of the 
 system, which places them in an "order" infe- 
 rior to elders and bishops.* It is a subject of 
 much curiosity with some persons, to have a dis- 
 tinct reference made to the identical passage or 
 passages of Scripture, upon which the preachers 
 of Methodism rely to establish this difference of 
 
 * The "Discipline," (p. 32,) authorizes the deacon ''to 
 baptize"; but it appears that one ordination hy " the lay- 
 ing' on of the hands of a bishop," is not sufficient to qual. 
 ify for administering- the other sacrament. But where 
 has the Master said that some of his servants are author- 
 ized to officiate in the one ordinance, and not qualified 
 for the other? A distinction of this kind, in the lawful 
 administration of the sacraments, is very well in Popery, 
 with her ''blasphemous fable" of "the body, soul and di- 
 vinity " ; but is unworthy of any church emancipated 
 from her thraldom. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM.,. 29^ 
 
 "order" among the ministers of Christ. Show 
 us the chapter and verse, and then we will believe 
 that regularly ordained ministers of the Gospel, 
 who are called deacons, having received the lay- 
 ing on of hands but once, are quite inferior to 
 another set of regularly ordained ministers who 
 are called elders, having received the laying on 
 of hands more than once. If the distinction of 
 " order " consists in this, that two ordinations 
 are better than one, then three, four and five, by 
 the same reasoning, would be better still ; and 
 thus may the humble deacon of Methodism grad- 
 ually ascend in the numerical scale, until he shall 
 seat himself in the chair of St. Peter, and nobody 
 knows how far above Pontifex Maximus him- 
 self.* 
 
 2. With regard to the '• orders '* of bishop and 
 elder, these names are uniformly used in the 
 New Testament as convertible terms, the one or 
 
 * A few illustrations of the practice in the primitive 
 church may not be out of place. Origen tells us — "The 
 deacons were appointed to preside over the tables of the 
 church, as we are taught in the Acts of the Apostles.'* 
 Ambrose in the fourth century says — *' The deacons or- 
 dinarily were not authorized to preach." Jerome calls 
 the deacon, " a minister of tables and widows." And the 
 sixth general Council of Constantinople decided that "the 
 Scriptural deacons were no other than overseers of the 
 poor, and that such was the opinion of the ancient fath- . 
 res."— (Dr. Miller.) 
 20 
 
8S9 run DlFFICULTIEt OF 
 
 the other being employed just as convenient to 
 the writer. And what is mi.ch more conclusive, 
 the very same character and powers are ascribed 
 to elders as to bishops, thus proving that they are 
 the same, not difTerent orders of ministers. In 
 proof of these positions we cite Acts 20:17 — 28. 
 ** And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and call- 
 ed the elders of the church." *' Take heed to 
 yourselves and to all the flock over which the 
 Holy Ghost hath made you overseers," (or bisb- 
 ops.) The very same persons are denominated 
 by the inspired apostle, bishops and elders, and 
 that within a few sentences. Philip. 1:1. '*The 
 bishops and deacons " of Philippi are addressed. 
 Titus 1:5, 7. " For this caiise I left thee in Crete 
 that thou shouldest set in order the things that 
 are wanting, and ordain elders in every city — for 
 a BISHOP must be blameless," &;c.; where, be- 
 sides the manifest fact that Paul's elders were 
 the same with Paul's bishops, we have here, as 
 in the previous cases, proof beyond controversy, 
 that in apostolic times, several bishops such as 
 the New Testament sanctions, were accustomed 
 to reside in a single city. Titus is directed to 
 ordain a number of them in every city. But 
 could these have been such bishops as Method- 
 ism '* consecrates ^^^ of whose employment a great 
 part leems to be ♦♦ to travel at large among the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 534 
 
 people," and who cannot in any instance ceasa 
 *' to travel through the connexion at large" with- 
 out permission of the general conference, under 
 the penalty of being deprived of their office ? 
 (Discip. p. 28.) 1 Pet. 1:1,2. " The elders 
 which are among you 1 exhort — feed the flock of 
 God — taking the oversight thereof,'''' or as the 
 word in the original signifies, " exercising the 
 office and performing the duties of a bishop." 
 Whether Paul and Peter thought it needful, when 
 about to confer the office of a Scriptural bishop, 
 first to ordain the man a deacon; secondly to or- 
 dain him an elder ; and thirdly and lastly^ to 
 ** consecrate " him a bishop, we leave the candid 
 reader to judge. We rather opine they were 
 belter instructed by Him, who, when the disci- 
 ples strove which should be the greatest^ set a 
 little child in the midst, and bade them take him 
 for a pattern of true greatness ; and who hath 
 left on record the memorable sentence, *' The 
 princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over 
 them, but it shall not be so among youJ*^ And 
 as regards the judgment of Wesley, he expressly 
 asserts — " Lord King's account of the primitivt 
 church convinced me many years ago, that bish- 
 ops and elders are the same order.'^ 
 
 The evidence against Episcopacy is so conclu- 
 sive that Watson affirms—" The argument drawn 
 
!835' THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 by tlie Presbyterians from the promiscuous use 
 of these terms (bishop and elder) in the New Tes- 
 tament is incontrovertible." (Vol. 2, p. 575.) 
 And even Dr. Bangs, who, in the appendix to 
 Buck's Theological Dictionary, has spoken so 
 largely of the " three orders " and " the duties 
 peculiar to each," elsewhere admits that " if any 
 choose to say that we acknowledge two orders 
 only, and a superior minister possessing a dele- 
 gated jurisdiction, &c., he has my full consent.^* 
 Here then we have a plain acknowledgement 
 that the office of the Methodist bishop is of 1m- 
 man origin — that it is superior to that of elder 
 Folely by the consent and delegation of man. Of 
 course all that is left to Methodist Episcopacy is 
 a mere human invention. And the " divei^ or- 
 ders " of the ministry appointed by "Almighty 
 God " are reduced to two, deacons and elders ! 
 AVhether the number might not be still further re- 
 duced, must be decided by those who have exam- 
 ined the evidence of the ministerial character of 
 the New Testament deacons. 
 
 It is an inquiry also of much interest — when 
 did Methodist Episcopacy arise ? The Scriptures 
 know nothing about it — from what causes did it 
 originate ? The opinion of Wesley upon the 
 subject of its introduction may be learned from a 
 ^^tter to Mr. Asbury, dated Sept. 20, 1758, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 23C 
 
 •♦ How can yon," says the great apostle of the 
 system, " how dare you suffer yourself to be 
 called a bishop ? I shudder, I start, at the very 
 thought. Men may call me a knave, or a fool, 
 a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content ; but they 
 shall never with my consent call me a bishop. 
 For my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, 
 put a full end to this." It is obvious from thia 
 extract, that the flattering title which chimes so 
 sweetly in the ear of ambitious ecclesiastics, was 
 at that time just beginning to be employed in the 
 Methodist church. And whether it is probable, 
 that a man of Wesley's strong sense would make 
 all this ado about a mere name, if there had not 
 been connected with it much of the arrogant as- 
 sumption of the office, we submit to the decision 
 of candor. Both Scripture and Wesley refuse 
 their countenance to Methodist episcopacy. How 
 then did it originate ? We reply, from the love 
 of title and distinction wliich is native in the hu- 
 man heart. It appears that Mr. Wesley first ap- 
 pointed Dr. Coke, who was directed to appoint 
 Mr. Asbury, svperintcndent of the Methodist 
 churches in America; but this humble title did 
 not long satisfy these reverend gentlemen. In 
 four or five years, they began to employ the term 
 bishop in the minutes of conference ; and at this 
 time it was that Wesley wrote the letter we havt 
 20* 
 
287 THE DIFFICULTIPS OF 
 
 quoted above, expressing his indignation, and ab- 
 horrence of the substitution. It seems, moreo» 
 ver, that at least one of these gentlemen had some 
 occasional misgivings respecting the validity of 
 his episcopal ordination. In 1804, Dr. Coke ap- 
 plied to Bishop White of the Protestant Episco- 
 pal Church, to have himself and others admitted 
 to the episcopacy; thus acknowledging his claim 
 to the office to be utterly destitute of foundation. 
 He tells Bishop White, " that Mr. Wesley had 
 invested him with episcopal authority, so far as 
 he had a right to do so ; '' but as Wesley never 
 held higher than the priest's office m the Church 
 of England; it is plain that Coke had as good a 
 ifight to ordain to the episcopal office as Wesley ! 
 In view of these facts, it is adapted to provoke 
 ft smile, to peruse the statement of the origin of 
 the Methodist Church, prefixed to the Book of 
 Discipline. " Mr. Wesley," they tell us, *^ pre- 
 ferring the episcopal mode of church government 
 to any other, in 1784 solemnly set apart Thomas 
 Coke for the episcopal office" — a priest ordain- 
 ing a bishop — That Mr. Wedey ''delivered to 
 Dr. Coke letters of episcopal orders, and directed 
 him to set apart Francis Asbnry to the office of a 
 bishop after arriving in America" — Tn conse- 
 quence of which, Mr. Asbury appears to have 
 b^en hurried through the probationarv degrees of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 238 
 
 deacon and elder — or in the language of Dr. 
 Bangs, (Appendix to Buck,) " was ordained by 
 Dr. Coke,^rs^ to the ofRce of deacon, then elder, 
 and then superintendent or bishop; " and all, it 
 seems, at the same meeting of conference ! And 
 last, not least, we are told that " the general con- 
 ference did unanimously receive the said Thomas 
 Coke and Francis Asbury as their bishops, being 
 fully satinjied of the validity of their episcopal 
 ordination ! ^^ 
 
 We cannot help congratulating the ministers of 
 Methodism upon the firmness of the foundation of 
 tlieif ministerial authority. Faith at least will 
 have abundant room for exercise and improve- 
 ment. They must believe that priest Wesley 
 consecrated Bishop Coke, imparted an authority 
 he did not possess. They must believe that by 
 this means Thomas Coke becapie invested with 
 all the rights, titles, and appurtenances of a bish- 
 op — although the way Methodist bishops are no^ 
 "constituted" is quite different.* They must 
 believe^ nevertheless, that both inventions for ma- 
 king a bishop are right — that Thomas Coke was 
 well and truly made a bishop by Mr. Wesley, 
 
 * A Methodist bishop is now made " by the election of 
 the General Conference, and the laying on of the hands 
 of three bishops^ or at least of owe bishop and two elders.^* 
 Discip. p. 25. 
 
230 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 only four years before he wrote, ♦' call me knave, 
 fool, rascal, scoundrel, but never call me bishop:" 
 and they must believe that the letter (of which 
 this is an extract) was directed (in VthS) to Mr. 
 Asbury, and conveyed a most pungent reproof 
 for permitting himself to be clothed with an of- 
 fice, and addressed by a tide, which Mr. Wesley 
 himself, only four years previously (17^4) had 
 expressly ialended for him ; and for this purpose 
 priest Wesley had consecrated Bishop Coke, and 
 Bishop Coke was to consecrate Bishop Asbury. 
 (See Doct. and Discip. M. E. (.'hurch, p. 6.) 
 
 But it were well if this ridiculous burlesque of 
 episcopacy terminated here. 'J'h.ere is a much 
 more serious aspect of tl e r.flair. Bishc ps, ci- 
 ders, and deacons, have seated themselves in the 
 high places of the church ; and it be (;omes an in- 
 quiry of much importance — How have they dis- 
 posed of the laity? We reply — they are so dis- 
 posed of as to be charitably relieved of the whole 
 burden of saying or doing any thing in the secular 
 or spiritual administration of the church. All 
 they have to do is to contribute liberally, and sub- 
 mit implicitly to the dictation of their superiors. 
 The preachers have legislated the whole power 
 over the temporal and spiritual concerns of the 
 church out of the people's hands, &m\Jnfo their 
 own. This Wesley candidly avowed as his ori- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 840 
 
 ginal intention. In a letter to I. Mason, dated 
 near London, January 13, 1790, "As long," 
 says he, "as I live, the people shall have no 
 share in choosing either stewards or leaders among 
 the Methodists. We have not, and never had 
 any such custom. TVe are no republicans, and 
 never intend to be. It would be better for those 
 that are so minded to go quietly away." Accor- 
 dingly, when in 1797, the people in some parts 
 of England began to take the alarm, and petition- 
 ed in large numbers " that they might have a 
 voice in the formation of their own laws, the 
 choice of their own officers, and the distribution 
 of their oivn property,'' (see Buck's Theological 
 Dictionary, art. Methodists,) the love of power 
 conquered the sense of right, and these petition- 
 ers were denied those privileges, which both rea- 
 son and Scripture teach every man, are the fun- 
 damental principles of all freedom, civil as well 
 as religious. In tliis country, too, the free spirit 
 of our civil government lias extended its reforming 
 hand to the oppressions of religious tyranny. A 
 large and respectable body of Methodists have be- 
 gun to feel and act like Christian freemen. 7'he 
 rights and privileges for which they have been 
 contending, are the same for which their brethren 
 in England petitioned in 1797. And how have 
 ^heir efforts toward emancipation been received ? 
 
241 THE DIFFICULTIES Ot 
 
 Just as might have been expected from a clerical 
 aristocracy which hohls all the power in its own 
 hands, and wields the sword of discipline agreea- 
 bly to its sovereign pleasure. The advocates of 
 the people's rights were excommunicated — ex- 
 communicated for insisting upon those very rights 
 in ecdesiasiical matters, for which, in slate poli- 
 cy, our fathers fought and bled in the great revo- 
 lutionary struggle — viz : " A voice in making 
 their own laws, electing their otvn rulers, and 
 distributing their own property ^ 
 
 To these statements it has been replied, '* that 
 as every preacher before he can be admitted by 
 the conference, must be recommended by the la- 
 ity, and as the conference cannot move a single 
 step towards his admission, without such recom- 
 mendation, it follows that the laity are the origin 
 and source of all power in the church." But Dr. 
 Bangs, in the Appendix to Buck, informs us that 
 *' a person thinking himself moved by the Holy 
 Ghost to preach the Gospel, first makes known 
 his views and exi^rcises to the preacher having 
 charge of the circuit, who if he consider the ap* 
 plicant a fit person, (hereis the origin of all pow- 
 er,) grants him license to exhort," &c. Besides, 
 if it were correct, that the laity must recommend 
 the candidate to the conference, before he can be 
 received, it would be a marvellous proof of their 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 
 
 242 
 
 holding all the power in their hands, becaufc, 
 forsooth, a man who wishes to turn preacher, 
 must get a few of his friends to recommend him! 
 The quarterly conferences, it is further said, are 
 composed partly of laymen; and these bodies 
 are the door of entrance to the ministry. Sic. But 
 these laymen, according to Dr. Bangs, "are the 
 stewards, leaders, and exhoriers^^ of the circuit, 
 appointed directly or indirectly .by the preachers, 
 and mere tools to do their pleasure. 
 
 Indeed, we may fearlessly affirm that there is 
 not a form of church government on earth, (the 
 Papacy excepted,) so radically opposed to repub- 
 licanism as Methodism. The legislative, execu- 
 tive, and judicial powers are all placed in the hands 
 of a privileged aristocracy — the preachers ; and at 
 their sovereign nod, both men and money are dis- 
 posed of, to promote whatever purposes piety, 
 ambition, proselytism, or whim, may dictate. 
 *' The powers of the travelling preachers have 
 been pronounced aristocratic by some of the most 
 distinguished adhering and seceding ministers of 
 the Methodist church. Dr. Coke termed the sys- 
 tem an " arbitrary aristocracy." (Meth. Prot. p. 
 244.) »' Bishop M'Kendree and Mr. O. Kelly 
 actually withdrew, because of the unwarrantable 
 assumptions of the conference." (Ibid. p. 244.) 
 *' And Ezekiel Cooper, of the Philadelphia con 
 
248 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 ferencGj asserts, that in debate Mr. M'Kendree 
 observed, * // is an insult to my understandings 
 and such an arbitrary stretch of power, so tyran- 
 nical (or despotic) that I cannot (or will not) sub- 
 mit to it.'" (Ibid. p. 244.) But the- following 
 particulars, extracted from a letter of Dr. S. S. 
 Schmucker, Professor of Theology in the Ger- 
 man Lutheran Seminary at Gettysburg, will set 
 the question of Methodist clerical aristocracy at 
 rest. After defining an aristocracy to mean, 
 " the exclusive assumption or possession, ly a 
 feuu of those rights and privileges, to which oth- 
 ers have a just claim," Dr. S. enumerates the fol- 
 lowing examples of Methodist clerical usurpa- 
 tion: 1. ^^ The exclusive right of suffrage in 
 the election of delegates to the general conference 
 and of bishops." A thing unknown in any other 
 protestant church. 
 
 2. '* Exclusive eligibility both to the annual 
 und general conferences.^^ In all other protes- 
 tant churches, laymen are eligible to the church 
 courts. 
 
 3. *' The exclusive unlimited power to legislate 
 for the whole church in matters of doctrine, dis- 
 cipline, and forms of worship and minor regula- 
 tions. The travelling preachers can change and 
 reverse whenever they please, avery item of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODlSItf. 944 
 
 doctrine,* discipline, and forms of worship, and 
 no layman, nor even local pieacher, can have a 
 word to say in it. 
 
 4. "TVie exclusive right to sit in judgment on 
 the moral conduct of travelling preachers.'* In 
 other churches such trials are conducted by lay- 
 men and ministers jointly. 
 
 5. " The exclusive right of appointing all com- 
 mittees for the trial of lay members, without the 
 power on the part of the accused, to challenge 
 any member of such committee, though he could 
 prove him his bitterest enemy. 
 
 6. " The exclusive right to conduct and con- 
 trol the book concern, and appropriate its exten- 
 sive profits exclusively to their own benefit. 
 
 7. *' The exclusive rigLt of eligibilily to the 
 editorship of the periodicals of the Methodist 
 
 * It may perhaps be questioned by some whether the 
 preachers have power, according' to the Discipline, to 
 change the doctrines of the MctJiodist church. It is ad. 
 mitted that among the provisions for altering and amen- 
 ding the Book of Discipline, it is said, '^excepiing the 
 Jirst article" which relates to doctrine. But cannot the 
 same power which inserted that exception, strike it out ? 
 Cannot a majority ot the General Conference erase that 
 exception whenever they please ? The way is then open 
 to abolish every doctrine of the system, and substitute in 
 its stead any othsr ism which pleases them best. The 
 people are therefore absolutely dependent upon the preach- 
 ers, whether the Methodist Episcopal < hurch is Univer- 
 salist, Socinian, or Popish in her doctrinal testimony' 
 21 
 
S4S THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 church : local preachers and laymen are excluded 
 by the Discipline. 
 
 S. " The exclusive right to hold and control 
 all the Methodist churches and parsonages, deed- 
 ed a-^cordin^ to the Discipline — to say who shall 
 and who shall not occupy them, without consult- 
 ing the wishes of the laity wlio paid for them. 
 Even the trustees are nominated exclusively by 
 the travelling preachers. In every other protes- 
 lant church in the land, each congregation has 
 control of its own parsonage and church proper- 
 
 0. ««77ie exclusive right to fix their owh sala- 
 ry, that is, the amount to which they may retain 
 possession of their collections, and receive divi- 
 dends from the several funds. In every other 
 church, the people decide for themselves what 
 sum they will allow their minister. 
 
 10. "77ie exclusive right of their bishops to 
 determine what minister each congregation shall 
 have, without consulting the wishes of the peo- 
 ple. In all other churches of our land, the con- 
 gregation invites the person they think best suited 
 to them. 
 
 11. "./^;i entire irresponsibility to the people 
 for all their acts, legislative, judicial, and execu- 
 tive, and for the distribution of the extensive 
 funds possessed by them. They print no min- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 24tf 
 
 utes of their discussions, (except the mere ap- 
 pointment of ministers to circuits,) — they do not 
 admit the laity even as auditors of their delibera- 
 tions ; and no power on earth can call them to 
 account." Thus far Dr. Schmucker. We are 
 now prepared to understand Dr. Bangs, when he 
 asserts in his "Vindication" — *' Every part of 
 our government is elective." But who are the 
 voters? The recerend clergy. And is not the 
 Pope elected by his reverend cardinals ? 
 
 There is one point, liowever, in the above cat- 
 alogue of usurpations, which demands a more spe- 
 cial notice. It is the 8th head, respecting the 
 right of church property, which is deeded away 
 to the preachers, and is placed entirely beyend 
 the control of the people. It is true, the form of 
 deed in the Discipline, (p. 1G2,) conveys the 
 property to trustees in the first instance — But 
 mark! It is "in trust that they shall build a 
 house or place of worship for the use of the mem^ 
 bers of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the 
 United States, according to the rules and disci- 
 pline c'jhich, from time to time, may be agreed 
 on and adopted by the preachers of said church.** 
 " And in farther trust that they shall at all times 
 permit such preachers''^ — "to preach and ex- 
 pound God's holy word therein," &c., &c. 
 The property, then, is for the use of the people 
 
847 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 according to the rules adopted by the preachers^ 
 and they can have the use of it no h>nger than 
 they quietly submit to those rules, however un- 
 just or oppressive they may be. All that is ne- 
 cessary, therefore, to enable an avaricious priest- 
 hood to take quiet possession of the immense 
 and accumulating property of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, is to enact rules sufficieiitly op- 
 pressive to force away the people, and the whole 
 wealth of the church is theirs, deeded, and con- 
 firmed to them forever.* Besides, without sup- 
 posing an act of tyranny so high-handed, if a Me- 
 thodist Episcopal congregation unanimoitsly re- 
 solve to unite with another denomination of Chris- 
 tians, say the Protestant Methodists, they are 
 obliged to surrender their house of worship, to 
 forsake the temple v, hich their labors and wealth 
 had reared for their accommodation, to letive aU 
 
 * In defence of tins feature of the system, it Iras been 
 eaid, that if "the preachers cease to be Method\sts, they 
 have no riglit to the use of the meeting iiousvs, and the 
 same is true of the mpiniersV But is it trvie that any 
 conferejicc of pre:.eKers have the right to njuke laws, ine 
 purport of which is — "If vou,the peopl'j, exerci e yrur 
 rights of conscience, and '■cease to he Methcdis!s,'' you 
 must leave your propert}' iji our ha^.ids — it is yours no 
 longer"? Is this tolcrution or rer.gions liberty ? Who 
 gives the preachers a right to impose a tax of this kind 
 upon as many of their people a-^ become tired of their ec- 
 cicsiastical supervision? TKc law of God will regard 
 property thus obtained as "t,iie wages of unrighteousnep," 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 248 
 
 in tlie hands of Methodist Episcopal preachers^ 
 and commence anew from the foundation. They 
 cannot touch a cent of it. The property is theirs 
 no longer than they continue obedient and faith- 
 ful servants of the preachers, and submit to be go- 
 verned by their rules. And if every Methodist 
 congregation in the land were successively to re- 
 nounce the system, unanimously renounce it, 
 they could not keep possession of a cent of their 
 property — it must lie in the hands of the preach- 
 ers to be disposed of according to their "rw/es.'* 
 A congregation may wish to make sale of the 
 house they have erected out of their own funds : 
 but no ! they dare not. And even when, in case 
 of debt, the trustees are authorized to sell the pro- 
 perty to pay it, the surplus is deposited (not in 
 the hands of the trustees, or returned to those who 
 are its lawful owners, but) " i/i the hands of the 
 steward, to be at the disposal of the next annual 
 conference''^ — It is added, indeed, "yb?' the use 
 of said society''^ — as much as to say, ^^ we, the 
 preachers, think you, the rightful owners, do not 
 knoiv what use to make of your money — we will 
 kindly relieve you of the burden of it." To al- 
 lege that the preachers of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church will always be men of too much pro- 
 bity and uprightness to abuse the power placed in 
 their hands, is only to show the extreme credu- 
 21* 
 
1240 THE DIFFICULTIKS OF 
 
 lity of the objector. All history testifies that the 
 direct method to corrupt the best of men, is to 
 place at their disposal unlimited and uncontrolled 
 power, whether of wealth, or any other kind of 
 influence. 
 
 But it has been replied, that the travelling prea- 
 chers cannot righteously be charged with being a 
 clerical aristocracy, because " they have left in 
 the hands of the laity the all-important power of 
 withholding every cent of pecuniary support." 
 And Dr. Bangs, in his "Vindication," chap. 10, 
 on ♦' the privileges of members of our church," 
 states the third to be, that " no member can be 
 censured for not conliibuting to the support of 
 the ministry." Is it indeed so ? On page 171 
 of tlie Book of Discipline, (cd. 1S3'2,) is a rule re- 
 quiring ^^ weekly class coUeelions whenever it is 
 practicable," to meet the allowances to the preach- 
 ers, (fee. And on page 90, they say, that in " ca- 
 ses of neglect of duties o{ any kind — or disobedi- 
 ence to the order and discipline of the church," 
 the oilender is on the third offence to be "cut 
 off" or excommunicated. Now is it a duty of 
 *♦ any kind^'''' or any part of the " order and dis- 
 cipline " to contribute at the class collections ? 
 Then, on the third instance of neglect to pay the 
 preacher, all orthodox Methodists enjoy the pre- 
 '-^ous privilege of being regularly excluded from 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 250 
 
 the church! No! Rely upon it. The trouble 
 of making and executing laws for the government 
 of the brethren, is not to go unrewarded — the la- 
 borer is worthy of his hire. The preachers bear 
 the burden of exclusive legislation — they relieve 
 the people of all part and lot in that matter. Is 
 it not right that they should be punished, if they 
 refuse to be taxed for these inestimable " privile- 
 ges"? 
 
 The ultimate tendencies of a system such as 
 we have been examining, present to the inquisi- 
 tive mind a melancholy prospect. The experi- 
 ence of all popish countries proves, that the most 
 direct metliod of enslaving any people in a ])olili- 
 cal point of view, is, to take from them their in- 
 dependence in religion. Bring them to commit 
 the safe-keeping of their consciences to the priests, 
 and to suffer the privilege and right of self-gov- 
 ernment in religion to pass into the hands of oth- 
 ers — persuade them to surrender the right of think- 
 ing and acting like Christian freemen, and you 
 have a people prepared, on the first opportunity, 
 to submit the trouble of political rule to any aspi- 
 ring demagogue who mny volunteer his services. 
 The habit of implicit submission to the dictation 
 of others, is soon formed ; and what vi^as at first 
 esteemed a precious right, will soon come to be re- 
 warded as an oppressive burden. The spirit of 
 
251 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 lofty independence will he broken, and ihe man 
 will be merged in the abject slave. The British 
 monarch, James I., had some skill in this mailer. 
 When assigning a reason for wishing to put down 
 presbytery, and elevate episcopacy, he delivered 
 the royal maxim — " no bishop, no king " — lie ut- 
 tered a sentiment which has been repeated a thou- 
 sand times as a favorite and acknowledged princi- 
 ple, by the enemies of civil and religious liberty. 
 So also a writer in the London Quarterly Review, 
 a work devoted to the interests of episcopacy and 
 toryism, uses the following strong language: 
 *' Certain it is that monarchy and episcopacy are 
 much more nearly connected than "writers of had 
 
 faith or little reflection have sought to persuade 
 mankind." " There is an insensible, but natural 
 inclination towards democracy,''' says the same 
 writer, " which arises from the principles of a 
 
 popular church government.^' * On the other 
 hand, the natural alliance between a popular 
 
 * The unhappy Charles, during his conflicts witli the 
 Parliament, was urged to give his consent to abolish 
 Episcopacy. This lie reiu.'<;cd, because, among other 
 things, Episcopacy was more friendly to monurchy than 
 Preshytery. "Show nic," said he, "any precedent where 
 presbyterial government and regal were together, without 
 perpetual rebellions." "And it cannot be otherwise for 
 the ground of their fZocfrine is anti-monarchical." "There 
 was not a wiser man since Solomon, than he who said, 
 •no bishop, ho king.' " (Miller's Letters, p. 24.) 
 
 J 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 252 
 
 church government and civil liberty, has been al- 
 ternalely the theme of prai^-se from its friends, and 
 of reproach from its enemies, from time immemo- 
 rial. Clarendon and Hums acknowjedge it in 
 all the bitterness of their hostility. (See Dr. Mil- 
 ler's letter to a gentleman of Baltimore, pp. 74, 
 75.) 
 
 In the light of these observations, we are pre- 
 pared to appreciate the zeal with whi<-h, some 
 years since, Methodist preachers re-echoed the 
 hue and cry of infidels, that t!ie civil a id religions 
 liberty of the country was in danger f.om Presby le- 
 rianism.* The communiiy seem to have forgotten 
 
 * M.iny persfn". will remember the lime and eircam- 
 stances o" this disgrace. ul vAWir. Tiicir great paper, 
 The C;in-i.-tian Advocate and .Tournal, published an article 
 entitled, ''Mirdtr vill ovi,'''' proiest^ing to discover to the 
 world some dreadul C(.n;pir. cy which tlie Presbyterians 
 were plotting against the civil and religious liberties of 
 the country — designing to unite the Presbyterian church 
 with the civil government, and hold the posts of honor 
 and emolument in their own h^nds. Oi" course their 
 Clergy were to reap the rich rewards of the successful 
 execution of this scheme! Twenty or thirty thousand 
 copies of this infidel publicntion immediately issued from 
 New York, and the circuit riders were tiyj'ig from one 
 end of the land to the other, bearing the important news. 
 Their pulpits and even the day of rest were employed to 
 trumpet the wonderful discovery! '' I do believe," said 
 one of these ardent patriots, " they are secretly combi- 
 ning to get their religion cstabhshed; and I would have 
 no hesitancy in advancing the above ideas and language 
 from the pulpit." (Letter of a circuit rider, dated August 
 5. 1829.) 
 
263 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 that this crusade was preached l)y the very men 
 whose form of ecclesiastical government is in di- 
 rect contrast with our republican institutions ; and 
 whose spiritual forefathers were those preachers 
 who, wliilst Dr. AVitherspoon and a host of kin- 
 dred spirits were nobly stemming the tide of op- 
 pression, basely fled from the land of their adop- 
 tion, and consigned her sons to tlie sword of ty- 
 ranny, the doom of rebels. " During the revolu- 
 tionary war," says Dr. Bangs, " all the preach- 
 ers, except Mr. Asbury, returned to their native 
 land." * Yes, they loved their <' native land " 
 too well to find rest for tlie sole of their foot in a 
 country where grinding oppression had roused 
 the spirit of independence, and tories had fallen 
 into disrepute. " All the MeiJiodists there," says 
 Wesley, " were firm for the government, (that is, 
 were all tories,) and on that account were perse- 
 cuted by the rebch. Wesley's Works, vol. 3, p. 
 
 * Mr. Asbury, it is understood, concealed himself 
 among' the tories of the State of Delaware. And yet 
 when the storm had scarce blown over, tlieir patriotism 
 bursts into a blaze ; and brshops Coke and Asbury ])re- 
 sent an address to General \Vashi igton, in which they 
 speak of "our civil and religious liberties transmitted to 
 us by the Providence ofGod and the glorious revolution''''! 
 And '■■the viost excellent constitution of these States, at 
 present tlie admiration of the world, and its great exem- 
 -plar for iijiitation'''' I ! (Sec Armiuian Mag-azinc, vol, 1, 
 p.?JS4.) 
 
 i 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM, 254 
 
 411. Yet this is the sort of men who are so jea- 
 lous for our liberties, and so prompt to detect and 
 expose Presbyterian encroachmenls ! 
 
 Nor should it be forgotten, that these pr^triotic 
 preachers, who, in the language ofihe founder of 
 their system, ^^ are no republicans (in ecclesiasti- 
 cal matters) and never intend to 5e," are in the 
 constant practice o^ circulating, by means of their 
 book concern, sentiments which are high tory 
 and 'treasonable. The following passages from 
 the third volume of Wesley's Sermons, pp. 406, 
 40S, will illustrate our meaning — " Thus," says 
 he, " we have observed each of these wheels 
 apart — on the one hand, trade, wealth, luxury, 
 sloth, and Avantonness, spreading far and wide 
 through the American provinces ; on the other, 
 the spirit of independency diffusing itself from 
 north to south. Let us observe how the wise 
 and grxicious providence of God uses one to check 
 the other, and even employs, (if so strong an ex- 
 pression may be allowed) Satan to cast out Sa- 
 tan. Probably that subtle spirit (the devil) ho- 
 ped by adding to all those other vices the sinrlt of 
 independency, to have overturned the whole work 
 of God, as well as the British government in 
 North America." So it seems that independence 
 and the overthrow of the British government in 
 this country, were the works of the devil! Again: 
 
255 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 *♦ The spirit of independence which our poet so 
 justly terms * the glorious fault of angels and of 
 gods,' (that is in plain terms, of devils,) the same 
 which so many call liberty, is overruled by the 
 justice and mercy of God." This is truly a bright 
 picture of our glorious revolution, and of the 
 principal actors in its trying scenes. Their love 
 of liberty was after all, only " the glorious fault 
 of devils" ! We could cover with the mantle of 
 charity the weakness and errors of John Wesley, 
 a British suliject, and a staunch royalist; but 
 when we behold these self-constituted guardians 
 of our liberties, these zealous watchmen, eager to 
 sound the alarm of approaching danger, from the 
 ambitious design-^ of Presbyterians — when we 
 find these incorruptible patriots sending out, as 
 on the wings of the four winds of heaven, thou- 
 sands and tens of thousands of copies of a work, 
 which breathes the very spirit of toryism and 
 treason^ it is difficult to find' a covering wide 
 enough to hide their guilt and shame. 
 
 Further: If the overthrow of the British prw- 
 cr and the establishment of American indepen- 
 dence, were the WORKS OF THE DEVIL, as 
 Wesley affirms, and the preachers print and pub- 
 lish to the world, must they not feel themselves 
 bound to destroy the works of the devil ? Are 
 "we then to understand that the Methodist hierar- 
 
ARailNIAN METHODISM. 8&5 
 
 ehy is leagued together to overthrow our repub" 
 lican institutions ? And are we farther to un- 
 derstand that the charge against Presbj'^terianism 
 of "secretly combining" against the liberties of 
 the country, Avas only a piece of generalship, a 
 skilful diversion in favor of their ovi^n deep con- 
 spiracy ! ! 
 
 But if the preachers really disapprove of ascri- 
 bing our independence to the agency of Satan, 
 why do they print and circulate such sentiments? 
 *' Behold," says one of their number,* "because 
 the publishers of his (Wesley's) sermons have 
 not seen fit to mutilate the volumes^ they are de- 
 nounced as anti-republican, &;c." To mutilate 
 the volumes ! To mutilate is " to deprive of 
 some essential part.^^ And are those " essential 
 parts " of a volume of sermons, which ascribe 
 our liberty and independence to the devil ! We 
 should like to inquire whether the preachers re- 
 gard the tory and treasonable sentiments uttered 
 by Wesley, as true or false ? If they say they 
 are true, then do they confess themselves as 
 staunch tories as ever their spiritual forefathers 
 were. But if they say they are falsei then we 
 ask, would it mutilate a volume of sermons to 
 omit its falsehood! Or do these preachers and 
 
 * Rev. Charles Cooke, stationed preacher in Pitted 
 burgh. 
 
838 THB DIFFICULTIES Of 
 
 publishers regard falsehood as ^n^' essential parV 
 of a volume of sermons ? But are these gentle- 
 men always so excessively scrupulous in the mat- 
 ter of mutilating volumes ? Do they not publish 
 the works of Calvinistic authors, retaining their 
 names, whilst every shred of the peculiarities of 
 Calvinism is eviscerated and suppressed ? Or is 
 it only Arminian toryism that must not be mutila- 
 ted? 
 
 We cannot but hope that the foregoing state- 
 ment of facts, will henceforth impose silence on 
 the preachers in regard to the dark designs of 
 Presbyterians. And if they should commence 
 the work of" mutilation,''^ we would suggest the 
 following additional passages as not unworthy of 
 their attention, along with the extracts from the 
 Sermons — viz : ** The supposition that the peo- 
 ple are the origin of power, is every way indefen- 
 sible." *' You (Aanericans) profess to be conten- 
 ding for liberty, but it is a vain, empty pro- 
 fession,''^ &c. But the best is yet to come. ''No 
 governments under heaven are so DESPOTIC 
 as the REPUBLICAN : no subjects are govern- 
 ed in so arbitrary a manner as those of a common- 
 wealth.'* *♦ Should any man talk or write of the 
 Dutch government as every cobbler does of the 
 English, he would be laid in irons before he knew 
 whera h« wa«. And wo be to him. REPUB- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. £57 
 
 Lies SHOW NO MERCY." These tory sen- 
 timents are scattered among the families of thia 
 republic as the opinions of the man who, they 
 are taught to believe, was only not infallible. 
 (See Works of Wesley, Vol. 3, pp. 130—134. 
 
 In contrast with this singular medley of Metho- 
 dist Episcopacy, let us hear the venerable Di*. 
 Miller describe the episcopacy of the New Tes- 
 tament and of good sense : 
 
 " We suppose," remarks Dr. M., " thatthera 
 is properly speaking, but one order of gospel mi- 
 nisters ; that every regular pastor of a congrega- 
 tion is a Scriptural bishop; or that every presby- 
 ter who has been set apart " by the laying on of 
 the hands of the presbytery,''^ (1 Tim. 4:14,) who 
 has the pastoral charge of a particular church, is, 
 to all intents and purposes, a bishop; having a 
 right, in company with others, his equals, to or- 
 dain and to perform every service pertaining to the 
 episcopal office." *' We suppose that there are 
 indeed, two other classes of church officers, viz., 
 ruling elders and deacons; but that neither of 
 these are authorized to labor in word and doctrine, 
 or to administer the Christian sacraments. We 
 suppose there is a plain distinction made in Scrip- 
 ture between elders who only rule, and eldera 
 who also ^labor in word and doctrine,^ (I Tim. 
 6:17:)" Letters, p, 5. 
 
258 THK DIFFICCLTIES OF 
 
 *' Our judicatories, from the highest to the low- 
 est, are all made up of laymen as well as clergy- 
 men ; and in all of them, excepting the highest, 
 if the laity exercise their rights, there will be a 
 larger number of the former than of the latter; 
 and io the highest judicatory, an equal number. 
 This, of course, gives to the laity of our commu- 
 nion constant and intimate access to all our plans 
 and measures, and all the opportunity that can bo 
 desired to exercise their full share of power in 
 controlling those measures. The people cannot 
 be oppressed, unless they conspire to oppress 
 themselves ! " (Letter to a gentleman of Balli- 
 more, p. 72.) This"conclusive reasoning would 
 doubtless lack most of its force, if the laym.en of 
 whom Dr. M. speaks, were, like the " class lead- 
 ers, stewards, trustees, and exhorters, " of Me- 
 thodism, indebted exclusively to the preachers 
 for their appointment or nomination : But this is 
 80 far from being the fact, that the laymen who 
 participate in all the councils of Presbyterianism, 
 are the representatives of the congregations, cho- 
 sen by a majority of votes, and delegated by their 
 own deliberate, uncontrolled choice and designa- 
 tion, to this special <luty. This is literally the 
 fact in every instance, in regard to the three low- 
 er forms of judicatory : and may be literally true 
 of their appointment to the highest, whenever tho 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 259 
 
 Jaity exercise^their constitutional right to have a 
 majority in the presbyteries"which elect the dele- 
 gates. 
 
 But the inquiry'may here arise — Is there any 
 Scriptural warrant for a system of church govern- 
 ment so thoroughly republican as this ? Does 
 the w^ord of God authorize the commitment of ec- 
 clesiastical power so entirely into the hands of 
 the people ? In reply we refer to the record of 
 the appointment of deacons, in the 6th chapter of 
 Acts. Let the inquirer open his Bible and read — 
 ** The twelve called the multitude of the disciples 
 unto them and said — Brethren, look YE out 
 among you seven men, whom we may appoint 
 over this business. And the saying pleased the 
 whole multitude, and THEY CHOSE Stephen 
 and Philip," &;c. (Not the preachers, nor bish- 
 ops, nor even the apostles chose them : not even 
 inspired apostles would venture to take the right 
 of election out of the hands of the people.) 
 <' "Whom," continues the record, " THEY set 
 before the apostles, and when they had prayed, 
 they laid their hands on them." Can any thing 
 be more evident than that the first deacons were 
 elected by the voice of the people, or by « the 
 whole midtitude of the disciples'' ? "Now turn 
 to the 32d page of the Methodist Book of Disci- 
 pline — " How is a travelling deacon constituted?" 
 22* 
 
230 THT r;fl'lcrf.TlCS OF 
 
 *• By the election " — of the people ? of the whole 
 multitude of the disciples? No! but '*of the 
 majorily of the yearly conference^'''' which is com- 
 posed exclusively o{ preachers; not a solitary lay- 
 man holding a scat among them. The unscrip- 
 tural character of this feature of the system must 
 therefore be obvious to all. In the days of ihe 
 apostles, the people chose their own deacons, but 
 Methodism has ventured to improve upon the 
 primitive plan, and her preachers exercise a pow- 
 er which apostles did not dare lo aspume.* 
 
 Again: we refer the reader to ihe 15lh chap- 
 ter of Acts, for further proof of Scriptural repub- 
 licanism : *♦ Certain men which came down from 
 Judea taught the brethren — ' Except ye be cir- 
 cumcised,' (fcc; they (the brethren) determined 
 that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them 
 (the brethren) should go up to Jerusalem — they 
 were received of Me church, and of the apostles, 
 and elders — And the apostles and elders came to- 
 gether to consider of this matter. Then pleased 
 it the apostles and elders, unth the whole churchy 
 to send chosen men of their own company — The 
 
 • It is worthy of remark that Cyprian, about the mid, 
 die of the third century, quotes the same passage from 
 the 6th chapter of Acts, to prove that the chief power of 
 choosing worthy priests, or refusing unworthy ones, ia 
 lodged with the people ; which power, he says, j)roctede4 
 •riginalhj from God's authority. (D\. Millei;. 
 
AnifflXIAN METHODISM. 261 
 
 apostles, elders, and brethren, send greeting — It 
 seemed good unto us, (the apostles, elders, and 
 brethren,) being assembled with one accord, to 
 send chosen men unto you," &;c. If these pas- 
 sages do not prove the fact, that under the direc- 
 tion of inspired apostles, the people did partici- 
 pate in the deliberations and legislative acts of the 
 Synod of Jerusalem — if they do not determine 
 the divine right of private members of the church 
 to a share in its government, it is difficult to say 
 what evidence would suffice. Bui suppose these 
 things had been transacted by a Methodist confe- 
 rence, annual or general, How would it have 
 read ? The reverend travelling pnachers, (al- 
 though the ^^ brethren^* had not '•<' chosen^^ one 
 of them '• to go up " to conference,) came to^geth- 
 er for to consider of this miitter. Then pleased 
 it the reverend travelling preachers to exclude 
 from their conference all local preachers, to allow 
 them no seat nor vote in their meeting. It pleased 
 them also to close the doors against " the whole 
 multitude of the disciples,*' " with the whole 
 church ; " who were not only denied the right of 
 deliberating and voting, but were forbidden to be 
 present in the assembly even as spectators. And 
 when there had been much disputing, a certain 
 bishop, surnamed Peter, rose up, and addressed 
 the preachers. *'Then all the multitude^* (of 
 
263 TnB DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 the preachers) kept silenceTand gave audience — 
 and after he had held his peace, bishop James de- 
 livered a speech to \\\eT^^ whole jfuullitude'" of 
 preachers. Then pleased it the reverend travel- 
 ling preachers, «' ivith the whole church " of tra- 
 velling preachers, to send chosen men to Antioch. 
 And they wrote letters—" The travelling preach- 
 ers, with * the hrethren,' who are also travelling 
 preachers, send greeting — It seemed good unto 
 US, the travelling preachers,''^ <kc., &c. Now 
 in this portrait, we have merely supposed the 
 aposdes to have been good Methodists — that they 
 sat in conference with closed doors, excluded all 
 laymen and local preachers from a seat and vote 
 in their councils, and after having been self-ap- 
 pointed to conference, that they took the whole 
 business of legislation out of the hands of the peo- 
 ple. We have also substituted the words " trav- 
 elling preachers " in the place of " the brethren," 
 " all the multitude," " the whole church," &c., 
 as they occur in the 15th chapter of the Acts of 
 the Apostles. It would be manifestly absurd to 
 speak of "all themultitude," "thejwhole church," 
 *Hhe brethren," as being present, " giving audi- 
 ence," and uniting in the business of legislation, 
 in a Methodist conference, where they are not 
 permitted to be present, even as a part of the au- 
 dience. In this mirror, then, the candid inqui- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 263 
 
 rer may see at one view, the republicanism of 
 Scripture, and the aristocracy of Methodism. 
 Nor will he feel surprise to find Dr. Bangs in his 
 *' Vindication," express his fears for a " ministry 
 under the control and at the mercy of the peo- 
 ple,'" p. 158. Doubtless Dr. B. thinks it much 
 safer to have the peojjle under the control and at 
 the mercy of the preachers ! 
 
 Such then, in the language of another, is Epis- 
 copal Methodism — an anomaly in the midst of 
 our free institutions. Her mother, the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church, it is well known, admits the 
 principle of lay representation. So that excep- 
 ting her grandmother of Rome, she is the only 
 church in America that is not blessed with ** the 
 liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free,** 
 
864 TUB DirFicuLTiEs or 
 
 LETTER Vill. 
 
 Articles and Discipline. Origin of the TFork\ 
 Auricular Confession. Compensation and 
 Support of Preachers. 
 
 Rev. Sir: 
 
 We have had occasion in previous letters, to 
 mention repeatedly the " Book of Discipline " of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church, for the purpose 
 of directinof attention to some of its singrular state- 
 ments. We are not done with the subject; but 
 as it is one of considerable interest, we propose 
 to confer upon it the distinction of a separate in- 
 vestigation. This seems the more proper, as it 
 is but repaying a debt of long standing, and due 
 to Methodism for the notice she has been pleased 
 to bestow upon the Presbyterian Confession of 
 Faith. • 
 
 X. Review of the Methodist Articles and Book of 
 Discipline. 
 
 1. The origin cf the TVork. It will be found 
 upon examination, to be neither more nor less 
 than the Liturgy and Articles of the Church of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 265 
 
 England, in a mutilated and deformed condition. 
 The original was formed, as Dr. Miller tells us, 
 on the basis of five Romish missals, or prayer- 
 books, which had been in use in the same num- 
 ber of popish bishoprics. This liturgy at first 
 contained a number of things grossly popish ; and 
 even after undergoing a "considerable purgation," 
 as Dr. M. has it, by Calvin and others, still re- 
 tained a " number of articles, adopted from the 
 missals of the Church of Rome, which exceed- 
 ingly grieved the more pious and evangelical part 
 of the church, but which the Queen (Elizabeth) 
 and her clergy refused to exclude." These facts 
 will fully account for the savor of popery which, 
 in previous letters, we detected in the form of ad- 
 ministering the Lord's Supper and in some other 
 particulars. 
 
 The dilapidated state in which we find this 
 book in the hands of Methodists, was the work 
 of John Wesley. He confessed that he had made 
 some slight alterations — but these alterations are, 
 (besides many important additions and omissions* 
 
 * Mr. Wesley himself says, there were '• many psalms 
 left out, and many parts of the others, as being highly im- 
 proper for the mouths of a Christian congregation'''' 1 No- 
 thing can justify such language respecting the inspired 
 word of God. " All Scripture is given by inspiration, and 
 \B profitable." It may be supposed, moreover, the 17th 
 Article of the original work would not euit the Arminian 
 
266 TH£ DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 in other parts,) a reduction of the thirty-nine ar- 
 ticles to twenty -Jive. The book in its original 
 form was entirely too Calvinistic for Mr. Wesley: 
 hence he thought proper to expurgate fourteen 
 of its doctrinal articles. Among those rejected 
 are the fifteenth, which asserts " that Christ alone 
 was without sin ; " and the eighteenth, which 
 condemns the assertion that " every man shullbe 
 saved by the law or sect ivhich he professeth,*' 
 and which further affirms " that holy Scripture 
 doth set forth only the name of Jesus Christ, 
 whereby rhen must be saved." "The name of 
 Jesus Christ," implies the belief of certain doc- 
 trines, respecting the nature of the Savior and the 
 religion which he taught ; but it is manifest that 
 Mr. Wesley considered doctrines or right opin- 
 ions as of little value, and the religious feelings 
 
 taste of Wesley — it still remains, however, in the Book 
 of the Protestant Episcopal Church. It is as follows: — 
 ♦* Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, 
 whereby, before the foundations of the world were laid, 
 he hath constantly decreed by his counsel, secret to us, 
 to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath 
 chosen in Christ out of mankind^ and to brins^ them by 
 Christ to everlasting salvation^ as vessels made to honor. 
 Wherefore, they which are endued with so excellent a 
 benefit of God, be called according to God''s purpose, by 
 his Spirit working in due season : they through grace 
 obey the calling ; they be justified freely," «fcc. Calvinis 
 tic election and predestination are not more clearly taught 
 in the Westminster Confession than in this artielc. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 267 
 
 of the true Methodist as the only sure pledge and 
 passport of salvation. Thus in his third appeal, 
 p. 185 : "I will not quarrel wiih you about any 
 opinions ; believe them true or f ilse." And again 
 he states, " the points we chiefly insisted upon 
 were, that orthodoxy or right opinions is at best 
 but a very slender part of religion, if it can be al- 
 lowed to be any part of it at all." And in his 
 sermon on the wedding garment, he calls ortho- 
 doxy or right opinions, *- trifles, which it is not 
 a little sin to represent as necessary to salvation^ 
 It is true Mr. W. states his meaning to be simply 
 that it is possible to possess right views, of doc- ' 
 trine, without right affections, as in the case of 
 the devils who." believe and tremble." But it is 
 one thing to say, that persons may entertain cor- 
 rect doctrinal sentiments, and be destitute of piety; 
 and quite another thing to say that right opini' 
 ons form no part of piety. There may indeed 
 be orthodoxy without religion, but no religion 
 without orthodoxy, at least in the great essentials. 
 Such was the origin, and such the author of the 
 *' Book of Discipline " of the Methodist church.* 
 
 * After what has been said, it is not at all surprising 
 to find Mr. Wesley shaking hands with the Papists in 
 the following cordial style: "Can nothing be done, even 
 allowing us on both sides to retain our own opinions, for 
 the softening our hearts towards each other." "My dear 
 friend, consider I am not persuading you to leave or 
 23 
 
268 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 2. Calvinistic Articles and an drminian 
 Clergy ! We have already stated that the origi- 
 nal work, from which the English Episcopal Li- 
 turgy was derived, and which is the parent stock 
 of the Methodist "Articles and Discipline," was 
 submitted to the inspection of Calvin and some 
 other divines of the continent, and by their influ- 
 ence was purged of a number of its popish ex- 
 crescences. This fact will also in part account 
 for the strong Calvinism of many of its doctrinal 
 articles. But what we wish particularly to re- 
 mark, is that Wesley, when he undertook to Me- 
 thodise the English Liturgy and Articles, either 
 from not understanding his own system, or 
 through inadvertence, retained a number of the 
 peculiarities of the Calvinistic theology, which 
 are still found in the Methodist standards. The 
 doctrine of " original sin," taught in Article VIL, 
 we have already seen (Letter IL) is utterly irre- 
 concilable with other features of the Arminian 
 system. So also *' the condition of man," in Ar- 
 ticle VIIL is said to be such, *' that he cannot 
 turn and prepare himself, by his own natural 
 
 change your religion '"' &c. "Wc ought withoutthis end- 
 less jangling about opinions, to provoke one another to 
 love and to good works. Let the points wherein we dif. 
 fer, stand aside. Here are enough wherein we agree. 
 O brethren, let us not still fall out by the uay'\' (Letter 
 to a Roman Catholic.) 
 
 i 
 
AR3IIN1AN METHODISM. 269 
 
 Strength and works, to faith and calling upon 
 God; wherefore we have no power to do good 
 works " — " without the grace of God by Christ, 
 preventing (or going before) us, that we may 
 have a good will, and working with us when we 
 have that good will " Did the most rigid 
 Calvinist ever teach human hjability in sivonger 
 terms than these ? " Cannot, by his own natural 
 strength, turn " / — nay, more ; " cannot even 
 prepare himself to faith " ! And what is strong- 
 est — " Cannot even prepare himself to calling 
 upon God''!. Further — "The grace of God 
 must prevent (or go before) us, that ive may 
 have a good will and power to do good works ; 
 and work with us when we have that will.'' 
 Why Paul himself did not preach stronger Calvin- 
 ism than this, when he said, "It is not of him 
 that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God 
 thatshoweth mercy." So also in Art. IX.: *'We 
 are accounted righteous before God only for the 
 merit of our Lord, &c., and not for our own works 
 and deservings." And in Article X. we are 
 XoXAxhai ^^ good works, which, are the fruits of 
 faith, cannot endure the severity of God's judg- 
 ments." All this, it must be admitted, is sound 
 Calvinism, and m one point, ultra-Calvin- 
 istic. B.it \\i\y hsar Wesley] on the | subject 
 oi ''merit and good works," "As to merit it- 
 
870 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 self, of which we have been so dreadfully afraid: 
 We are rewarded according to our loorks; yea, 
 because of our ivorks. How does this differ from 
 ^for the sake of our works ' ? And how differs 
 this from secundum merita operum — as OUR 
 WORKS DESERVE! Canyon split this hair? 
 I doubt I cannot." (Minutes of 1770.) But this 
 is unmitigated Arminianism, or rather Pelagian- 
 ism. So that with a few slight improvements, 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church may answer to 
 the sarcastic description drawn by a distinguished 
 statesman of England, of the established church 
 of that country, viz : "Calvinistic Articles, a Po- 
 pish Liturgy, and an Arminian (Clergy ! " 
 
 3. Statement of the origin of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church in Jlinerica. We are told on 
 page 6 of the Book of Discipline, that "Mr. Wes- 
 ley, preferring the episcopal mode of church go- 
 ver,.menf, solemnly set apart by the imposition 
 of his hands and prayer, Thos. Coke to the epis- 
 copal office ; and having delivered to him letters 
 of episcopal orders, commissioned and directed 
 him to set apart Francis Asbury to the same epis- 
 copal office." Now besides the intrinsic absur- 
 dity already pointed out, of a priest ordaining a 
 bishop, and the exceeding doubtfulness of the 
 matter of fact, that Wesley, who declared he 
 would rather be called " fool, knave, villain," 
 
ARMINL\N METHODISM, 271 
 
 than bishop, should designate another to bear the 
 office and tide he so much abhorred:^Besides all 
 this, observe with what authority the doctors of 
 Methodism speak when writing for the special 
 use and benefit of the sect. Mark their language 
 — " episcopl mode of church government" — 
 ♦« episcopal office" — '* letters of episcopal orders" 
 '* episcopal ordination," &c. But with what 
 commendable modesty does Dr. Banc's relate the 
 same story in the appendix to Buck's Theological 
 Dictionary? How do these proud pretension 
 dwindle, when about to be laid more fairly before 
 the public? The Doctor tells ns " that being as- 
 sisted by other presbyters of the Church of Eng- 
 land, by prayer and imposition of hands, he 
 (Wesley) set apart Thomas Coke, a presbyter 
 of said church, as a superintendent of the Meth- 
 odist societies in America," (not a word about 
 his being made a bishop, or receiving tlie episco- 
 pal office.) Again , " Mr. Asbury being first 
 elected by the unanimous voice of the preachers, 
 was ordained by Dr. Coke, first to the office of 
 deacon, then elder, and then superintendent or 
 bishop.''' In the Book of DiscipHne, the state- 
 ment says nothing about " superintendent^'^ it is 
 nothing but episcopal mode of church govern- 
 ment, episcopal ofiice, episcopal orders, episco- 
 pal ordination. But here in the Appendix to 
 23* 
 
272 THE DIFFrCULTIES OF 
 
 Buck, it is all superintendent, and the poor bish- 
 op comes lagging -in the rear, in the shape of an 
 alias, just as though he had been smuggled into 
 his present position as slyly as possible to es- 
 cape detection ! The very term from which the 
 church derives the name " episcopal," is intro- 
 duced so modestly that it might be supposed a 
 thing of almost no importance, and not a word is 
 uttered of those high sounding titles enumerated 
 above. 
 
 If moreover, in the'^Methodist" system, the 
 terms bishop and superintendent be'synonymous, 
 and both imply merely that their possessor is an 
 elder, who on account of age or talents has re- 
 ceivedy?*om man a more extensive superintend- 
 ence of ecclesiasticaFaffairs, than ordinarily be- 
 longs to the eldership ; why all this pompous 
 talk of '* episcopal ordination," " episcopal of- 
 fice," "letters of episcopal orders," &c.? Why 
 this puerile affectation of high sounding tides — 
 this ludicrous mimicry o-f the English hierarchy? 
 How would it be more absurd to spenk of Pres- 
 byterian episcopacy, since every pastor superin- 
 tends a portion of the church of Christ ? And 
 especially, is there not something profane in the 
 repetition of the solemn divine rite of ordination, 
 (the New Testament knows nothing about " con- 
 secratir"?. to the ministry,") whenever an elder is 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 273 
 
 appointed to a largev sphere of superintendence, 
 than formerly he occupied? With about as much 
 propriety might every Presbyterian minister be 
 re-ordained, whenevei he is removed from a nar- 
 row, to an extensive circuit of influence. Wheth- 
 er therefore we consider the Methodist bishop as 
 holding an office of divine origin, essentially dis- 
 tinct from and superior to that of elder — or re- 
 gard these offices as identical, with only enlarged 
 powers received of men on the part of the bishop, 
 it is obvious that the whole subject is involved 
 in a labyrinth of inconsistencies. 
 
 4. Practice against Theory. On page 72, 
 (edition of 1832,) it is said, " No person shall be 
 admitted to the Lord's supper among us, who is 
 guilty of any practice for which we would ex- 
 clude a member of our church." But from page 
 41 we learn that one of the grounds of excluding 
 members of the Methodist church, is, " removing 
 from one circuit to another without a note of 
 recommendation from the preacher." But the 
 case is materially altered when persons are en- 
 ticed away from other churches, without any 
 certificate or note of recommendation. They are 
 freely and with open arms admitted, and that 
 too in many instances where they would be de- 
 nied, even if they requested a note of recommen- 
 j^»ation. Indeed the usage of Methodism in this 
 
274 THE DirncuLTiEs of 
 
 particulnr, is subversive of every thing like order 
 and discipline in the Christian church. Let a 
 member of any other denomination suffer the just 
 reward of his deeds and be cut off, he at once 
 takes refuge by the altar of xMethodism ; he is 
 considered lawful prey and clear gain by his 
 new associates; and is readily admitted to their 
 confidence and fellowship. Hence a total pros- 
 tration of successful discipline in tlie liouse of 
 God. 
 
 5. Methodist Liberality. Rule 4, p. 75: "Let 
 it be recommended to our people not to attend 
 the singing schools, which are not under our di- 
 rection." The very singing schools of other 
 sects, it seems, are contamination to good Meth- 
 odists. 
 
 On pp. 79, SO, we find the following; "It is 
 expected of all who continue in those societies, 
 that they should evidence their desire of salva- 
 tion." Very well. But how are they to evi- 
 dence their desire of salvation ? Among other 
 things, the fourtli paragraph from the above, reads 
 as follows; "By doing good, especially to them 
 that are of the household of faith, or groaning to 
 be so; employing them preferably to others, buy- 
 ing one of another, helping each other in busi- 
 ness^^ — And this, be it remembered, is one of 
 those " general rules" which on the next page, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 275 
 
 are said ^^ to he all taught of God,'" even in his 
 written word;" and ^^ which his Spirit wrUes 
 on truly awakened hearts.''^ " If there be any 
 among us," adds the Book of Discipline, '^ who 
 habitually break any of them, we will admonish 
 him of the error of his ways, we will bear with 
 him for a season. But if then he repent not, he 
 hath no more place among us. TVe have deliv- 
 ered our oum souhr^ In other words, if any 
 Methodist shall employ ha'M ually, any person 
 not " of the household of faith, or groaning to be 
 so," or shall habitually, bicy of such a person, 
 preferably to a brother Methodist; if he repent 
 not, he is twrned out — that the conscientious 
 preachers may '^deliver their own souhr^ 
 
 We have two rules (pp. 77, 85,) forbidding 
 buying and selling on the Sabbath ; but no pro- 
 hibition of amusements on that day. This in- 
 deed might be regarded merely as' an oversight, 
 were it not that we have line upon line, and pre- 
 cept upon precept, about rings, ear-rings, neck- 
 laces, lace, ruffles, &c., and the preachers are ex- 
 pressly forbidden to admit to class ''any who 
 wear high heads, enormous bonnets, ruffles or 
 rings." Momentous topics these, touching the 
 •' heights and distances" of ladies' heads, and 
 the altitude, diameter, longitude, and circumfer- 
 ence of bonnets and head-dresses ! A little com- 
 
276 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 mon sense, however will dictate that pride as fre- 
 quently dwells beneath a plain exterior, as in 
 connection with gay clothinc^; yea, that often 
 persons are proud of 'heir plainness and humili- 
 ty: One thing at least is certain — " cleansing 
 the outside of the cup and platter," was not the 
 Saviour's method of making the vessel really 
 clean. 
 
 On page 86, the members of the "Band So- 
 cieties" are required to " attend constantly on all 
 the ordinances of God;'' and the fourth subdi- 
 vision under this head, is — " lo observe as days 
 of fasting or abstinence, all Fridays in the year." 
 To fast every Friday one of the ordinances of 
 God I Their good old grand mother of Rome, has 
 an " ordinance" requiring all genuine sons of the 
 church, to eat no meat on Friday; but where to 
 open my Bible to find such an ordinance is an 
 entire mystery. We strongly suspect that this 
 is one of the things that ought not to have escap- 
 ed the "considerable purgation" spoken of by 
 Dr. Miller. The blessed Redeemer enjoined 
 fasting, but specified no particular time for the 
 discharge of the duty ; but Methodism would be 
 wiser and specifies one day in each week ! And 
 this, too, is one of those rules, and a part of that 
 discipline, in regard to which, neglect or diso- 
 bedience subjects the person on the third offence, 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 277 
 
 to excommunication, p. 92. No doubt it would 
 be a mortal sin to partake of a hearty meal three 
 Fridays in succession ! So thinks their most 
 prudent and teiider relative over the seas. The 
 same wise and compassionate matron not only 
 ^^ commands to abstain from wea^^," but also 
 forbids to marry in certain cases, Equally in- 
 fallible is the regulation of the Methodist discip- 
 line, which forbids the preacher to marry, until 
 four years after entering upon his office, on pain 
 of having no provision made for the support of 
 the partner of his cares — " this provision, ($100) 
 shall not apply to the wives of such preachers."* 
 p. 169. 
 
 5. Elect Infants. We have already noticed 
 the prayer, (p. 104) that " the child now to be 
 baptized may ever remain in the number of thy 
 faithful and elect children.''^ From the parallel 
 phrase in the Westminster confession, viz: " elect 
 infants," Presbyterians have been denounced as 
 teaching *' infant reprobation," " infant damna- 
 tion," and *' that there are infants in the prison 
 of despair, not a span long !" It is true when- 
 ever our calumniators have been challanged to 
 
 *Since this paragraph was written, this popish feature, 
 we understand, has been expunged from the Discipline. 
 The preachers are no longer '•''forbidden to marry " until 
 the church grants tliem permission. 
 
278 THE DIFFICULTIKS OF 
 
 name the individual or individuals who had ut- 
 tered such a sentiment, they have been silenced, 
 at least for the time. Suppose that Presbyteri- 
 ans were to serve them with a specimen of their 
 own logic, and procl-aim to the world that as they 
 hold and speak the doctrine of " elect children," 
 they must necessarily believe " infant damna- 
 tion," (fee. There would be as much ground for 
 the charge in one case as in the other, and cer- 
 tainly not less truth in it. 
 
 7. Reverently obey the bishops. ♦' Will you 
 reverently obey your chief ministers," is a ques- 
 tion put at the ordination of elders, and another of 
 the same import at the ordination of deacons. 
 T'here is a considerable improvement practised 
 at Rome. There they kneel and reverently kiss 
 the toe of his holiness ! See this identical form 
 of expression in the Bull of Pope Innocent VIII. 
 for exterminating the Waldenses — '-'•Reverently 
 to obey the apostolical mandates," &;c., viz : the 
 bloody edicts of his anti-christian majesty ! 
 
 But perhaps the most curious illustration of the 
 reverence and obedience exacted of the lower or- 
 ders of the Methodist ministry, is found on pages 
 3G, 37. In answer to the question — " What is 
 the duty of a preacher? " we have twelve specifi- 
 cations, and among others, ♦» Be diligent " — ^'Let 
 your motto be holiness to the LorcV^ — "Be 
 
ARUilNUN A^ETHOPXSAt. 2t9 
 
 ashamed of nothing but sin " — *« Yoii have hd- 
 thing to do but to save souls : therefore spend and 
 be spent in this work "— " Save as many as you 
 can " — *' It is your duty to employ yout time in 
 the manner in which we direct; in preaching and 
 visiting from house to house ; in reading, medi- 
 tation and prayer." When we had read thus 
 far, we almost involuntarily exclaimed — -Admira- 
 ble ! What could be more scriptural and excel- 
 lent! But alas ! alas ! The very next sentence 
 was a dead fly in the ointment — " A.BOVE ALL, 
 if you labor with us in the Lord's vineyard, it is 
 needful you should do t/iat part of the work 
 which WE advise, at those times and places 
 which WE judge most for his glory<'* Move 
 all! Above preaching, and visiting, and reading, 
 and meditation and prayer ! Move spending 
 and being spent for Christ, and holiness, and the 
 salvation of souls ! Above all these, " reverent- 
 ly OBEY your chief ministers." Truly, it 
 would seem that in the Methodist catalogue of 
 ministerial virtues, TO OBEY is the highest at- 
 tainment of Christian perfection — the pearl of 
 great price — the summum bonum — the one thing 
 needful— not only *'better than sacrifice," but 
 better than holiness and salvation ! Rebellion is 
 as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as 
 iniquity and idolatry ! In the light of thes« faeii 
 
280 THE DIFFICULTIKjS Of 
 
 we may readily credit the testimony of one, who 
 had himself heen a Methodist, " that nearly all of 
 the inferior clergy are kept in a state of spiritual 
 bondage, so that on many occasions, they dare 
 not speak or act as the Scriptures prescribe and 
 their consciences dictate, lest ihey should offend 
 the men in power, and be chastised by a remove 
 to a disadvantageous circuit, by a breaking down 
 in worldly business, or by excommunication." 
 An excellent school doubtless, in which the refrac- 
 tory may * 'learn obedience by the things they 
 suffer." 
 
 8. Auricular Confession. A Methodist "band" 
 we are told (p. 83) consists of "two, three, or 
 four believers, who have confidence in each oth- 
 er." Only it is particularly observed that "in 
 one of these bands, all must be 7nen, or all wo- 
 men; and all married or all unmarried." The 
 wisdom of this precaution will appear directly. 
 The fourth article on which the members of the 
 *♦ band " agree, is *' to speak each of us in order, 
 freely and plainly, the true state of our souls, 
 with the faults we^have committed in tempers, 
 words, or actions, {\n " thought, word or deed," 
 Wesley originally wrote it,) and the temptations 
 we have felt since our last meeting." The sixth 
 article is "to desire some person among us to 
 speak his own state first, and then to ask the 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 281 
 
 rest in order as many and as searching ques^ 
 tions as may be concerning their state, sinSy and 
 temptations.''^ They manage this matter a little 
 differently at Rome, but it is doubtful whether 
 they have a better conjessional than this. But 
 there is more to come : among "/Ae questions 
 proposed to one before he is admitted^^ to tha 
 band, we find (p. 84) the following : ♦' Is it your 
 desire and design to be on this and all other oc- 
 casions entirely open, so as to speak without dis- 
 guise and without reserve, ^^ Thus the article 
 stands in the Discipline ; but Wesley wrote tha 
 Latter part originally as follows : "50 as to speak 
 every thing that is in your heart without EX- 
 CEPTION, without disguise, and without re- 
 serve*^ ! Popery herself demands no more tho- 
 rough confession than this. And besides, tha 
 following questions are required to be asked "af 
 every meeting,^^ viz : " What known sins have 
 you committed since our last meeting? What 
 particular temptations have you met witht 
 »' Confession, as managed by the Church of 
 Rome," to use the language of another, " is infi- 
 nitely preferable to confession as conducted under 
 the auspices of Mr. Wesley, lithe priest divul- 
 ges what is made known to him under the char- 
 acter of confessor, he is liable by law to suffer 
 
282 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 death, at least where Popery is established. But 
 in these Band-Societies, the most open and unre- 
 Bcrvcd confession is made in the hearing of a do- 
 zen or twenty women and boys, who are at liber- 
 ty to expose publicly all they hear, without being 
 obnoxious to any penalty at all." After what we 
 have seen, it is not surprising that Mr. Wesley 
 should write a highly commendatory life of Mr. 
 De Renty, (a Roman Catholic,) nor that the fol- 
 lowiig passages should proceed from his pen : 
 " One day he visited a person, who from ground* 
 less suspicion had cruelly used his wife. Mr^ 
 De Renty accosted him with such language, that 
 lie toas persuaded at length to go to confession!! 
 which he had not done in twelve years before.'* 
 (See Toplady's letter to Wesley.) And of De 
 Renty himself, he says — " He made his confcs^ 
 sion (toa priest) almost every day till his death"!! 
 This biography of a thorough papist, "Wesley 
 placed in his *' Christian Library," and recom- 
 mended to his followers. '• He had great respect 
 (he adds) for holy persons, especially for priests. 
 Whenever he met them, he sahited them with 
 profound humility: and in his travels, he would 
 alight off his horse to do it." "And without 
 fcply or disputing, with the utmost respect and 
 fubmission, ho exactly follofved the qrdcr of his 
 
 I 
 
ARMINIAN MBTHODISM. 283 
 
 director," (or confessor.) The reader will re- 
 collect — ''Reverently obey your chief minis- 
 ters'' '! 
 
 9. Compensation and support of the Preach- 
 ers. — It is the deliberate conviction of our mind, 
 after a pretty careful examination, that in rela- 
 tion to this matter, the preachers of Methodism 
 are dealt with more generously (or rather have 
 provided for themselves more liberally) than the 
 ministers of any other branch of the American 
 church. In this they have only practised upon 
 the principle avowed by the founder of their syi- 
 teni. "1 know," says Wesley, (Works, vol. 1, 
 p. 78,) "the spiritual laborer is worthy of his re- 
 ward ; and that if we sow to our flock spiritual 
 things, it is meet that we reap of their c-arnal 
 things : I do not therefore blame, no, not in any 
 degree^ a minis fer's taking a yearly salary.'^ 
 It is true the impression is often made that whilst 
 the ministers of other denominations are abun- 
 dantly paid for their labors, the Methodist preach- 
 ers not only receive no pecuniary compensation, 
 but indignantly spurn the thought, as degrading 
 them down to a level with hireling priests. Whe- 
 ther this impression is intentionally left upon the 
 minds of the people, we know not ; we only state 
 the fact. It should be kept in mind, moreover, 
 
 that when we speak of the compensation of Me- 
 
 34* 
 
^4 THE DirnCULTIEi Of 
 
 thodist preachers, we mean the travelling prea- 
 chers and circuit riders: the local preacher re- 
 ceives no pay by the rules of the Discipline, ex- 
 cept when he " fills the place of the travelling 
 preacher.'* 
 
 Let us now examine what provision is made 
 in the Book of Discipline for remunerating the 
 travelling ministry for their toils, always bearing 
 in mind, that be it scant or liberal, it is precisely 
 what these preachers have legislated into their 
 own pockets ; and that at their pleasure it may 
 be increased to any practicable extent, without 
 consulting the people who pay it. 
 
 I. " The annual allowance of the travelling 
 preachers shall be one hundred dollars, and their 
 travelling expenses. 
 
 II. The annual allowance of the tvives of tra- 
 velling preachers, shall be one hundred dollars. 
 
 III. Each child of a travelling preacher shall 
 be allowed sixteen dollars annually to the age of 
 seven years ; and twenty-four dollars annually 
 from seven to fourteen. And those preachers 
 whose wives are dead, shall be allowed for each 
 child a sum sufficient to pay the board of such 
 child or children for the above term of years. 
 Nevertheless, this rule shall not apply to the chil- 
 dren of preachers whose families are provided 
 (•r by other njiJana, in their circuits respectively. 
 
ARMINIAN METFTODISM. 285 
 
 IV. The allowance of superannuated, worn 
 out, and supernumerary preachers, shall be one 
 hundred dollars annually. 
 
 V. The annual allowance of their wives shall 
 be one hundred dollars. 
 
 VI. The annual allowance of their widows 
 shall be one hundred dollars. 
 
 VII. Their orphans shall be allowed the same 
 sums respectively which are allowed to the chil- 
 dren of living preachers. And on the death of a 
 preacher, leaving a child or children without so 
 much of worldly goods as should be necessary 
 to his, or her, or their support, the annual confe- 
 rence shall raise a yearly sum for the subsistence 
 and education of such orphan child or children, 
 until he, she, or they shall be fourteen years of 
 age." (These eeven items are extracts from the 
 Discipline, pp. 1G9, 170. Edition 1832.) 
 
 Again : " It shall be the duty of said committee 
 or one appointed for that purpose, to make an es- 
 timate of the amount necessary io furnish fuel 
 and table expenses for the family or families of 
 preachers stationed with them, and the stewards 
 shall provide by such means as they may devise, 
 to meet such expenses, in money or otherwise.'' 
 Discip. p. 178. 
 
 Again; p. 178: "It is recommended by the 
 general conference to the travelling preachers, to 
 
286 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 advise our friends in general, to purchase a lot 
 of ground in each circuit, and to build a preach- 
 er^ 8 house thereon, and to furnish it with at least 
 the heavy furniture." ♦' The general conference 
 recommend to all the circuits, (if not able to build 
 a preacher's house,) to rent a house for the mar- 
 ried preacher and his family, and that the annual 
 conferences do assist to make up the rents of such 
 liouses as far as they can, when ihe circuits can- 
 not do it." pp. 170, 177. 
 
 Thus far the Discipline. Now let us sura up. 
 We will take an average case, gay a preacher 
 with a wife and fire children, two above and three 
 under seven years of age. The account will 
 stand as follows : 
 
 Annual allowance to the preaclier, §100 00 
 
 Do. do. to the prcaciier's wife, 100 00 
 
 Two children above seven, .5.94 each, 48 00 
 
 Three children under seven, ^j 6 each, 48 00 
 
 Tabic ex[)ensGs, or boarding-, at 75 cents each per 
 
 week, for six persons, omitting the youngest 
 
 child, and onuttingf domestics, 234 00 
 
 House rent, 45 CO 
 
 Travelling expensos to conference, &c., 25 00 
 
 eCOO 00 
 
 This allowance oi six hundred dollars is great- 
 ly increased, if the preacher's family numbers 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 287 
 
 eight or ten* And should he become disabled by 
 accident or infirmity, the allowance is continued 
 to him and his children, even though he should 
 be laid aside in the early part of his ministry ; 
 so that for a few years, or weeks, or days service, 
 he and his family may receive their allowance 
 for half a century. And when he goes to rest 
 from his labors, he has the consolation of know- 
 ing that his widow and children will not be cast up* 
 on the cold charity of an unfeeling world, but will 
 be provided with a very respectable annual allow- 
 ance. Well may we inquire with Dr. Schmuck- 
 er, " What denomination of Christians is there in 
 our land, whose ministers would not gladly ac' 
 cept this provision ? 
 
 Nothing but the necessity of defendiag our- 
 selves agaiast the ungenerous assaults of our ad- 
 versaries, would constrain us to enter into these 
 minute calculations. Since however they have 
 provoked the discussion, we esteem it to be our 
 duty to let the Christian public know the whole 
 truth. It should be remembered therefore that 
 the foregoing estimates are made for a region of 
 country where the ordinary salaries of the minis- 
 ters of other denominations rate fiiom S400 to 
 $500 — rarely above the latter sum, except in a 
 few instances in large and expensive villages, and 
 their vicinity : and often less thai the former 
 
288 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 amount — $400. With what shadow of truth or 
 justice, then, are these men denounced by the 
 *' preachere," whose allowance by their own dis- 
 cipline, is considerably larger ? This their most 
 zealous jidvocates are compelled to admit. The 
 Discipline moreover is the handy work of the 
 preachers exclusively. This sum, therefore, 
 ($500,) is the annual compensation which /Act/ 
 have ordained to be due for their ministerial ser- 
 vices. This is the sum they will receive, if they 
 can get it, and which they have passed the requi- 
 site laws to secure, provided the people will sub- 
 mit to be taxed to this amount. What then be- 
 comes of their voluntary poverty ? Ought they 
 not to blush for the outcry which they have raised 
 respecting the large salaries of the clergy of oth- 
 er branches of the church ? Is it fair, is it honest, 
 to indulge in harsh reflections and taunting insin- 
 uations against ministers who do not receive, in 
 numberless instances, so large a salary as Metho- 
 dist preachers have decreed to be not too large a 
 sum for a clergyman with a certain family ? 
 
 In confirmation of the above estimate, the Rev. 
 R. S. Storrs in a letter to the editor of the »*Home 
 Missionary," speaking of Lower Canada, writes 
 as follows : " The salary of the Methodist minis- 
 ters is fixed at one hundred guineas per annum, 
 \eith a furnished dwelling house; and thirty gui- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODIiSM. 289 
 
 neas are added when there are three children ; 
 and ten guineas more on the addition of each 
 child to the family." So that a preacher with 
 four children, would receive one hundred and for- 
 ty guineas, which, with a furnished dwelling 
 house, would be worth between seven and eight 
 hundred dollars. And yet Mr. Storrs says, "the ex- 
 pense of living in Canada is comparatively small." 
 We are not sufficiently in possession of the 
 facts to form a detailed estimate for our largest 
 sized towns and cities. The following statements 
 however will afford a clue to explain how these 
 matters are managed there. In the trial of an ac- 
 tion for libel in New York, brought by Azor 
 Hoyt against Rev. Messrs. Waugh, Emory, 
 Bangs, and J. CoUard, Rev. Mr. Durbin (now 
 President of Dickinson College) testified as fol- 
 lows : " My salary is twelve hundred and fifty 
 dollars annually; that of Mr. Bangs, I think, 
 fifteen hundred or upwards — that of Mr. Merritt, 
 about twelve Httyidred — that of Mr. Waugh, six- 
 teen hundred — that of Mr. Mason is, I think, 
 ovOT one thousand and under fifteen hundred 
 dollars.''^ Now whether it is understood that 
 besides this monied compensation, theae gentle- 
 men receive a furnished house, rent free, table ex- 
 penses, <fcc., according to the discipline, we are 
 not informed. If so, the foregoing sums would be 
 
290 tHE DIFFICULTIES 5F 
 
 swelled to a very handsome remuneralioft for 
 their toils. 
 
 We have also received from a clerical friertd 
 and brother, in Baltimore, the following state- 
 iftent : ♦' In regard to this city, I have no doubt 
 you might safely estimate ♦table expenses,* <S'c-.-, 
 at from seven to eight hundred dollars, and the 
 average of their house rent at three hundred.^'' 
 Indeed one preacher's family was understood to 
 have cost the society in Baltimore upwards oUivo 
 thousand dollars per annum I 
 
 But to return to our estimate for the country. 
 If the preachers, as we liave shown, have or- 
 dained six hundred dollars as their annual sala- 
 ry, it is justly due^ or it is not. If not justly 
 due, then it is "the wages of unrighteousness:" 
 but if it be justly due to the preacher, why are 
 Presbyterian ministers denounced fof receiving 
 generally a much smaller sum, particularly as it 
 is always the voluntary offering of the people to 
 the man of their choice, not a preacher sent by 
 the bishop and saddled on the congregation whe- 
 ther they will or not ? 
 
 But it has been retorted with much warmth, 
 *' The preachers do not get the sums allowed by 
 the Discipline." Very probably in many cases 
 it is so. We should think it strange if it were 
 otherwise. There is some reason however to 
 
ARAfiNiAN Methodism. 291 
 
 believe, as will be shown presently, that the pay- 
 ment of the allowance is the ordinary practice, 
 its non-payment the exception. But admitting 
 that the preachers *' do not get" what their rules 
 allow, it must be because the people will not 
 submit to be taxed to the full amount agreed 
 upon by their spiritual rulers. We have already 
 cited the rule on page 90 of the Discipline, de- 
 claring, " the offender must be cut off" on the 
 third instance of ^* neglect of duties of any kind,''* 
 or "disobedience to the order and discipline of 
 the church;" that is, *' if there be no sign of hu- 
 miliation.'''' Of course it follows, that if this rule 
 were put in force, every third instance of " ne- 
 glect" to pay the preacher would be followed by 
 excommunication, if there were no signs of re- 
 pentance ! And on page 36 we read — " Remem- 
 ber a Methodist preacher is to mind every point 
 great and small in the Methodist Discipline." 
 If the preacher's salary is not paid, what does it 
 prove ? Why only that they have gone a little 
 too fast and too far in passing the laws which 
 impose the tax upon the people, or in common 
 phrase "have reckoned without their host." 
 The people will not submit to their rules, and the 
 preachers dare not enforce them; and there they 
 stand recorded evidence against their authors of 
 their disposition to take much more than they 
 25 
 
292 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 cai get, without risking'Hhe loss of many of their 
 members. Tlie tax laws are there, a terror to 
 evil doers who might neglect to pay the preacli- 
 er, and no doubt thousands are thereby collected 
 from the weak and credulous who would rather 
 give their money than cause strife, or run the 
 hazard of being excluded from the church. 
 
 But what is the testimony of facts respecting 
 the payment of the preachers' salaries ? ^\ejirst 
 quote the direction on page 171 — "Let there be 
 made tveekly class collections in all our Sccieties 
 where it is practicable." On the next page 
 *' every preacher" having charge of a circuit is 
 required to "make a yearly collection, and if ex- 
 pedient a quarterly one, in every congregation 
 where there is a probability the people will be 
 willing to contributed And on same page it is 
 admitted there is sometimes "a surplus in the 
 hands of the stewards, after paying the allowan- 
 ces of the preachers in the circuit." Secondly, 
 we adduce the following testimony extracted 
 from the Religious Intelligencer of New Haven, 
 (for 1823, p. 79.3.) " I was brought up a Metho- 
 dist," remarks this witness, "and my parents are 
 to this hour members of that Society. I have 
 been a preacher in that denomination a number 
 of years. In the year — I thought it my duty to 
 request a dismission from that body: and as there 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 293 
 
 was nothing against my religious and moral char- 
 acter, I was accordingly dismissed, and united my- 
 self to a respectable association of Congregational 
 ministers in New England. Soon after this I 
 had a call to settle with the congregation of which 
 I am now pastor. From this statement, you will 
 easily conclude that I must be well acquainted 
 with the doctrine and discipline of the metho- 
 dists. It is with the utmost satisfaction I bear 
 witness, as respects the salaries of Methodist 
 preachers. To the honor of the Methodists I 
 can say [ always received my salary with great 
 punctuality." (Here he makes some calculations, 
 which are precisely like those given above, ex- 
 cept that he actually retoived four dollars per 
 week boarding for himself and wife, whilst we 
 have stated it at seventy-hve cents each in the 
 foregoing calculation.) "As respects their ftot 
 getting what the Discipline allows," adds this 
 writer, it may be true in some few cases; but 
 without any reflection upon the Methodist preach- 
 ers as a body, most of these men are of that class 
 who would get far less in almost any other situ- 
 ation. I have made the proposal several times 
 to my society, to place my salary on the plan of 
 the Mcth )dist discipline." (Here he compares 
 his^ salary with what it would be in the^Metho- 
 dist church, and finds that for his family oi seven 
 
294 THE DifFICULTIES OF 
 
 persons, his salary would be raised iictniy-eight 
 dollars and the house rent.) " That the respec- 
 table Methodist preachers do get their salaries, 
 (he continues,) we cannot doubt. I can at any 
 lime bring forward cases in which Methodist 
 preachers have received the notes of the circuit 
 stewards on interest for the balance of their sala- 
 ry for the year, when it has not been promptly 
 paid." Such then is the unvarnished tale of a 
 "prophet of their own," satisfactorily proving 
 that the statutes, by which the preachers have 
 effectually repelled the charge of " denying the 
 faith, because they make not provision for their 
 own," are not a " dead letter," but a living prin- 
 ciple, securing in the majority of cases (if this 
 witness speak the truth,) ample provision for 
 themselves and " those of their own household." 
 The monied allowance {ox themselves and wives, 
 (independently of house rent, table expenses and 
 other items,) has several times been enlarged, 
 but never reduced. A principal member of the 
 church stated to Dr. Schmucker, that it was at 
 first sixty-four dollars each, then eighty dol- 
 lars, and now one hundred dollars. And even 
 the collection of then- liberal saliirics, as Dr. 
 Schmucker observes, is not attended with the 
 same trouble as in other churches, among other 
 reasons, bccauoe a larore income is annually de- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 395 
 
 rived from general funds. " The chartered fund'^ 
 was established in 1796, at which time the pre- 
 viously existing " stock of the preachers'' fimd^^' 
 together with the profits of the book concern, 
 were thrown into this fund/ and the interest of 
 the whole applied to the preachers' \srdaries. 
 That this stock was profitable more than forty 
 years ago, is seen from the following extract 
 from the Discipline of 1797, (9th edition.) 
 
 "Qaestion. What sum of money shall be al- 
 lowed distressed preachers out of the bock fund ? 
 
 Answer, 'c'66.} dollars annually. 
 
 Subsequently the profits of the book concern 
 were no longer thrown into the chartered fund on 
 interest, but were wholly '^applied from year to 
 year in making up the preachers' salaries. " The 
 chartered fund alone amounted in January, 1S2D, 
 to twenfy-seven thousand dollars ! The annual 
 profits of the book concern, we believe, are nev- 
 er published to the churclies, but must from tJie 
 nature of tb.e case be very great. They have 
 several religious periodicals, one of which, (a 
 weekly paper.) boasts thirly thousand subscri- 
 bers. Each of these pays two dollars per year, 
 which on so large an edition, must yield not less 
 than thirty thousand dollars annually. Besides, 
 every preacher is oiiicially a book agent, «' who 
 is to see that his circuit be duly supplied with 
 25* 
 
t96 THJS DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 books, and to take ciinrge of all books sent him." 
 (Discip. p. 166. Eiiiiit/n b25.) Thus they car- 
 ry on an immense book trade over the wide ex- 
 tent of our country, the profits of which they ap- 
 ply to their own salary and the support of their 
 widows and orphans. With near tivo thousand 
 preachers, agents in this business, and '• six or 
 eight hioidred thousand''^ members, who are 
 cautioned " jiot to purchase any books which tve 
 publish^ of any other persons, than the aforesaid 
 D. hilt and T. Ware, and the Methodist minis- 
 ters, or such persons as sell thevi by their con- 
 sent,''^ (Portrait of Methodism,) the annual pro- 
 fits must be enormous in a concern of such un- 
 paralelled extent.* And all the proceeds are ap- 
 j-ropriated by statute, after retaining the necessa-? 
 ry capital to carry on the business, to no other 
 purpose than the payment of the preacher^s al- 
 lowance. In what other denomination is there a 
 security like this for ample compensation to their 
 ministers for their self-denying toils ? And in 
 the light of these facts, how must we regard the 
 outcry of Methodists against the clergy of other 
 sects in regard to salary, when in fact no branch 
 of the church on earth has a ministry placed on 
 such high and independent footing in this respect 
 as their own. INot only do they require their 
 
 * See Dr. Schmucker's letters to R«v. Mr. Young. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 297 
 
 membei-R, even in straitened circumstances, ta 
 contribute liberally, (it is well known that house 
 maids p\ij four dollars a year,) but by a migh- 
 ty machinery, reaching its hundred hands to eve- 
 ry nook and corner of the land, they manage an. 
 unexampled triifiic, which pours into their treas- 
 ury its thousands and tens of thousands annually. 
 But perhaps the worst feature of the system is 
 the secret agency by which the people who pay 
 this money are excluded from all part or lot in. 
 its distribution. Preachers pass the revenue 
 laws — preachers collect the tax — preachers meet 
 in secret conclave and divide the spoil; in other 
 words, fix the amount of their own salary, and 
 allow themselves the sums they in their wisdom 
 may consider lawfully due for their important 
 services — but no eye or hand of a layman must 
 presume to interfere in these transactions ! In 
 proof of these statements we refer to the Disci- 
 pline, (pp. 167 — 172.) The conference, com- 
 posed exclusively of preachers, fix the amount of 
 salary, and the preacliers take up the collections, 
 which are ordered " to be brought or sent to the 
 annual conference'''' (p. 172) to be disposed of 
 exclusively by preachers ! It is true the mo- 
 neys are in the first instance " to be lodged with 
 the stewardsj^^ who are laymen, and this is an 
 apparent exception to the above remarks ; but 
 
298 THK DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 on examination it will be found to be only appa- 
 renU ""^ i'Q'd\. Who noiniiialc the stewanls ? 
 The preachers exclusively. Who elect them? 
 The quarterly conferonce. Who compose this 
 oonference ? Preachers, who are self-appointed; 
 " cxhorters,'''' appointed exclusively by the prea,- 
 chers; " leaders,'''' also appointed only by the 
 preachers; and " sfeicard><,^' nominaled by llie 
 preachers. This is the body wliich elects the 
 sicward, after he is nominated by the preacher ! 
 'JMus is one feature of Dr. Hangs' '• clcciive sys- 
 tem ".' We respectfully sui)mit that it would be 
 quite as republican and fair, and certainly much 
 more open and candid, for the preaclicr to take 
 the appointment of the steward directly into hi.s 
 own hands, or himself perform the duties o{ trea- 
 si'rer of the circuit. 'I'liese stewards, be it also 
 rGmembercd, are bound to pay the preachers just 
 the sums they have awarded to thinisclves for 
 quarterage, and the surplus, if any, goes into 
 the hands of the preachers in conference assem- 
 bled ; and one of the " duties " of tlie steward, 
 (on the third ♦• neglect" of whicli he may be ex- 
 communicated.) is " to be subject to the biishops, 
 the presiding elder, and the elder, deacon, and 
 travelling preachers of the circuit,'' (p. 169.) So 
 that he is not only the creature of their will, but 
 the mere tool of their pleasure. 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 299 
 
 But it is replied with great indignation, "that 
 not a cent can be had for tabic expenses and 
 house rent v/ithoiit the consent and authority of 
 a lay committee." But not to insist upon the 
 f^ict that the conference (of preachers) can dis- 
 pense with this committee whenever it pleases 
 them — we inqwire, Who are the members of this 
 lay committee ? The stewards ! It is '^ a com- 
 mittee of stewards ;" and, as we have just shown, 
 might with about the same propriety be " a com- 
 mittee of preachers " ! 
 
 Again it is argued that the preacher's salary 
 cannot be rated at six hundred dollars, because 
 ♦' It is impossible to tell hov/ much such a com- 
 mittee, in any given case, will allow for hors3 rent 
 and table expenses," and it is even suggested 
 that they may refuse to ailov/ any thing. But 
 what saith the Discipline? ''It shall be THE 
 DUTY of said committee to make an estimate of 
 the amount necessary to furnish fuel and table 
 expenses " — '• And the stev/ards shall provide 
 by such means as they may devise, to meet such 
 expenses in money or otherv/ise." p. ITS. But 
 the rule p. 90, before referred to, expressly de- 
 clares that " in cases of i.cglccl cf DUTIES of 
 any kind,^^ or " disobedience to the order and 
 discipline of the church,^' the guilty person is on 
 the third oj^cncs, to be " cut cf/Y' v/hether he be 
 
300 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 Steward, member of committee, or ^v])at not. 
 They are bound on pain of excommunication, to 
 make an estimate of " the amount necessary,'''' 
 not any amount they may please to allow the 
 preacher, but that precise ainnunt which, accor- 
 ding to ordinary rates of expenditure, is " jieces- 
 sary " for fuel and table expenses, and '■'■ provide 
 to meet such expenses in money or otherwise." 
 In view of such facts, it is folly to talk of this 
 committee having power to allow sixty cents in- 
 stead of six hundred dollars ! ! * And to make 
 assurance doubly sure, it is declared to be " the 
 duty of the presiding elders and preichers to 
 use their influence to carry the rules respecting 
 building and renting houses for the preachers in- 
 to etTect." " And it is recommended to the an- 
 nual conference to make a special inquiry of 
 their members respecting this part of their duty.'" 
 p. 177. The preachers are *' to use their influ- 
 ence" ! What kind or degree of influence the 
 preachers and the conference are empowered to 
 exert over the stewads, when it is known that 
 if they "neglect their duty" in making- up ihe 
 preachers' ?alaiies, and securing them (onforta- 
 ble and well-furnished houses, on the t drd of- 
 fence "they must be cit off',''' except they repent 
 
 * See Mr. Cook's " Refutation," and " Rejoinder," 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 
 
 301 
 
 and mend their ways, it is not difficult to under- 
 stand ! ! 
 
 On the whole it is obvious that our Methodist 
 friends of the clerical order, possess very consid- 
 erable Jinancial skill. This we think has been 
 fully proved in the previous discussion, and may 
 be made still more plain by one or two additional 
 facts. " It is contrary to the Methodist economy 
 to build houses with pews to sell or rent." (Dis- 
 cip. p. 159.) But, as has been well remarked by 
 my correspondent in Baltimore, " more money is 
 a^n lally paid by many families in their weekly tax 
 ii cliss meeting, than they would be required to 
 pay for a pew in one of our churches. Multitudes 
 are deceived by the smallness of the periodical 
 sum, and have no idea of the amount in the course 
 of the year." * Besides, there is another very 
 important reason why they are opposed to the 
 pew system. If the people owned the pews, they 
 could control the house, which would be an utter 
 
 * The following facts came within my own knowledg-e. 
 A person who had been in the habit of worshipping with 
 Presbyterians, united with the Methodists, together with 
 his family. He very candidly acknowledged that where- 
 as tie used to pay six or seven dollars annual pew rent, he 
 was taxed by the Methodist preachers at the rate of a dol- 
 lar per head, per quarter, for himself and family; amoun- 
 ting during the year to upw^ards o^ twenty dollars. And 
 he very honestly declared, the " preachers" should hold 
 their peace on that topic. 
 
302 THE DIFFICULTIES OF 
 
 abomination in the eyes of the preachers ! The 
 conference would no longer have the power to 
 use the property for their own purposes, contrary 
 to the unanimous wish of the contributors and 
 real owners. Therefore j^etf^s would be a dange- 
 rous innovation ! 
 
 In connection with these statements, let the 
 reader recur to the evidence adduced in a forego- 
 ing letter, that the ownership of every Methodist 
 church and parsonage is vested in the conference. 
 The authorized deed makes no mention of the 
 particular congreg'alion as a party in the transac- 
 tion, but only of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 in the United States ; and the principle has been 
 actually decided by the Supreme Court of Penn- 
 sylvania, in the case of an appeal, by a minority 
 of trustees or agents of the conference, from the 
 verdict of a jury previously given in favor of the 
 majority both of the congregation and of the trus- 
 tees, who had joined the Protestant Methodists 
 or Radicals. The Supreme Court therefore has 
 settled the principle that a minority, however 
 smalU of the faithful servants of the conference, 
 may, on the ground of the only authorized form of 
 deed, dispossess a majority, however large, of 
 their property in a church or parsonage. Submis- 
 sion to the sovereign authority of a conference of 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 303 
 
 preachers is the only legal title to funds thus ves- 
 ted. *'It is therefore undeniable that if every 
 member and every trustee of a church thus deed- 
 ed, were to regard any future measures of the 
 conference as tyrannical, and should desire to . 
 M'^ithdraw and introduce other preachers, the con- 
 ference could turn the key on them, and they 
 would be compelled to submit." In proportion, 
 therefore, as the members of the church secede, 
 and vacate the houses and lands which they have 
 occupied, will an immense and accumulating re- 
 venue of this sort, be placed in the hands of the 
 preachers composing the conference. The Pro- 
 testant Methodists may get the men, but the 
 Episcopal Methodists hold fast the money. If 
 the apathy or fond credulity of a portion of the 
 American people shall permit this system to pur- 
 sue its course as in former years, half a century 
 will develope results which will impart to state- 
 ments of this sort the character of history, rather 
 than that of prediction. 
 
 In conclusion : If such be the poverty of the 
 ministry of Methodism, I presume there are but 
 few who, in relation to themselves, would refuse 
 to write upon it, " perpetua esto." Six or se- 
 ven hundred dollars secured in compensation of 
 labors, for the right performance of which there 
 has not been any preparatory expenditure worthy 
 26 
 
304 THE DIFFICtLTlEi Of 
 
 of notice, is no mean provision for the good things 
 of this life. In most other denominations, the 
 intended minister is required to pass through a 
 course of training, from seven to twelve years in 
 duration, in which he must expend a small es- 
 tate before he can enter upon the duties of his 
 profession ; and if, in the providence of God, he 
 is disabled by disease or accident after the few 
 first years or weeks of his ministry, he must re- 
 sign his charge, and of course his means of sub- 
 sistence, to some more favored occupant. Not 
 so the preacher of Methodism. After the expi- 
 ration of the few first years or weeks of his min- 
 istry, even though reduced by llic visitation of 
 Heaven to a state of utter helplessness, lie is en- 
 titled to a clear income for himself and wife of 
 two hundred dollars, or the interest of three tlioU' 
 sand three hundred and thirly-ihree dollars; 
 and his children are also provided for. It may 
 be questioned whether any man, minister or lay- 
 man, would be considered far from the pathway 
 of wealth, who, mfour years, or as it may be, in 
 four days, with scarce any previous expenditure, 
 and with no risk of pecuniary loss, could realize 
 an annual income of equal magnitude. And 
 should the preacher survive for fifty years in a 
 state of incapacity, and his wife be also spared, 
 they will be entitled to draw the sum of ten thou- 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 306 
 
 sand dollars, besides the support of their chil- 
 dren. 
 
 Such, Rev. Sir, are some of the weak point* 
 of Arminian Methodism. We have written some 
 things which it has given us pain to publish, and 
 may, perhaps, give pain to others to peruse , but 
 we have made no statement of the truth of which 
 we have the least doubt. Our motive has not 
 been a spirit of proselytism. That is an employ- 
 ment we freely surrender into the hands of those 
 who may perchance see their own likeness in the 
 following facts, taken from Dr. Green's Chris- 
 tian Advocate, vol. 8, p. 518 : " At the distance 
 of a few miles from my residence is a very plea- 
 sant county town. In that town there is a large 
 Baptist and Presbyterian churcli, in each of 
 which there are two sermons delivered every 
 Lord's day, and one or more lectures during the 
 week. The town contains one member of the 
 Methodist church, and she an old lady, so infirm 
 that she can rarely attend on preaching. And 
 yet in that town for a year and upwards, one of 
 their most polite and declamatory '* riders " has 
 been preaching; whilst many parts of the sur- 
 rounding country are as destitute as you can well 
 imagine. This rider has been using every ef- 
 fort to make Methodists, but hitherto without 
 
306 THB DIFFICULT 112 S OF 
 
 success. When I last visited the place, the good 
 old woman ♦ stood alone.' " 
 
 Neither has it been our desire to render odious 
 the Methodist ministers as a body. That is an 
 employment, the entire monopoly of which we 
 cheerfully resign to those who are the authors 
 and distributors of the slanderous tracts on which 
 we have commented, and who are correctly de- 
 scribed in the following extract from the " pasto- 
 ral letter of the Presbytery of Lexington, Va., 
 1827." " How frequently in the midst of their 
 charitable professions, have even their pulpits re- 
 sounded with severe denunciations against us, 
 representing us as a set of hypocritical formalists 
 — as holding doctrines which came from hell and 
 lead to hell. Have they not times innumerable 
 reviled our ministers as avaricious hirelings,'* 
 &c. 
 
 Nor have we indulged a wish of the feeblest 
 kind, to throw obstacles in the way of Methodism 
 in the performance of the work of benevolence 
 and mercy to the bodies and souls of men. So 
 far as she publishes, and by every Scriptural me- 
 thod, promotes the salvation of immortal men, we 
 bid her " God speed." One principal design of 
 what we have written has been to render her 
 more " thoroughly furnished unto every good 
 
ARMINIAN METHODISM. 307 
 
 work;" that having put on the armor of truth 
 and righteousness, and having laid aside every 
 weight, and all her easily besetting sins, she may, 
 under the Captain of Salvation, successfully fight 
 the battles of the Lord. That the prominent 
 leaders of the system will be persuaded by one 
 whom they may possibly regard as their enemy 
 because he tells them the truth, we do not strong- 
 ly anticipate : but that the statements and reason- 
 ings of the foregoing pages present to view a 
 scheme of doctrinal sentiment and ecclesiastical 
 supervision incumbered with many difficulties, 
 will not be denied by any candid friend of Meth- 
 odism. If the Scriptures were designed to be 
 our pattern in all things pertaining to truth and 
 godliness — if the decisions of reason founded 
 upon the word of God, demand our respect, next 
 to the inspired oracles themselves, we are com- 
 pelled to believe that much remains to be done to 
 fashion Arminian Methodism agreeably to •' the 
 pattern shewed in the mount." And whatever 
 else may have been done or left undone, one 
 thmg, we think has been fully established, viz : 
 that there are vulnerable points connected with 
 the Arminian scheme, which are far from justify- 
 ing the air of arrogance and tone of denunciation 
 so common with its modern advocates. Hoping 
 to meet many in Heaven, from whom on some 
 
308 THE DIFFICULTIES 0¥ &:c. 
 
 points the writer differe'l on earth, he concludes 
 by subscribing himself 
 
 Yours, &c., 
 
 WILLIAM ANNAN. 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 In this appendix we propose to examine the reterenCeB 
 to the Presbyterian standards, and to several approved 
 writers among Presbyterians, as the}' appear in a popular 
 Methodist tract, entitled "A Dialogue between a Predes- 
 tinarian and his Friend," to which allusion is made in 
 the intfoductory letter. This tract, a favorite instrument 
 of sectarian zeal, was written by Mr. Wesley, and it is 
 cited by Drs. Bangs, Fisk, and others, with such frequen- 
 cy, and its blunders are copied and circulated with so 
 much confidence and industry, as to justify an investiga- 
 tion of its merits. We have already seen (Letter I.) 
 that by blindly following the authority of this publication, 
 these learned gentlemen have quoted the chapters of the 
 Assembly's Catechism, and thus exposed themselves to 
 the correction of any well instructed Sabbath scholar. 
 
 This publication we suppose to be one of those meth- 
 ods by which the father of Methodism purposed "to stop 
 the mouths of Calvinists," as he mildly expresses it. 
 (Works, vol. 3, p. 405.) And as it stands in the sterec- 
 typed volume of tracts, it is graced with the following 
 line: "Out of thine own mouth" ! The truth of the mot- 
 to, and the suitableness of the tract to ansA'er the design 
 of its author and distributors, will appear as we pass 
 along. We will first notice the references to the Assem- 
 bly's Confession, or Catechis7ii, as they call it. 
 
 Friend. "Sir. I have heard that you make God the 
 author of all sin, and the destroyer of the greater part of 
 mankind without mercy." 
 
310 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 PREDESTINARIAN. "I deny it; I only say, *God did from 
 all eternity unchangeably ordain whatsoever conies to 
 pass.' " (Assembly's Catechism. Chap. 3.) 
 
 Here it is supposed that we are convicted ^^out of our 
 own mouthy" of making "God the author of all sin." 
 But besides that the very next words in the Confession 
 are — "yet so as neither is God the author of sin," — we 
 refer to the Confession itself, (quoted Letter III.,) and 
 to the uniform testimony of Calvinistic writers to prove 
 that they maintain the distinction between the efficient 
 and the permissive decrees of God. The advocates of 
 this tract know this, or they do not. If they do not know, 
 then they are not prepared to write or reason upon the 
 subject. If they do know it, we can only pray that they 
 may not receive judgment according to their deserts. 
 And as to our holding that "the greater part of mankind 
 are destroyed without mercy," the quotation from tlic 
 Confession says nothing upon that subject; and until the 
 proof is adduced, it must be considered as a groundless 
 assertion. 
 
 F. Does sin necessarily come to pass? 
 
 P. Undoubtedly. For "the almighty power of God ex- 
 tends itself to the first fall, and all other sins of angels 
 and men." (Assem. Cat. chap. 5.) 
 
 This extract is erroneous and unfair in two respects. 
 
 1. It is giren as a continuous quotation, whereas two 
 whole lines are omitted, which are essential to the sense. 
 
 2. The Confession does not say "the almighty power of 
 God extends itself to the first fall," &.c. There is no 
 such sentitment in the passage, which is as follows: — 
 "The almighty power, unsearchable icisdom, and infinite 
 goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his provi- 
 
APPENDIX. Sli 
 
 dence, that IT (his providence) extendeth itself," &Ci 
 We greatly fear that tJiis method of stopping the mouths 
 of Calvinists will not redound to the honor of its autlior 
 and advocates. 
 
 We next examine the references to Calvin's InstituteSi 
 1st reference. Book 1, chap. 16, sect. 8.) "Nothing is 
 more absurd than to think any thing at all is done but by 
 the ordination of God." Allen, whose translation is used 
 by Watson, renders it as follows: "Nothing could be 
 more absurd than for any thing to happen independently 
 of the ordination of God, because it would happen at ran- 
 dom, or by chance." The object of Wesley was to con- 
 vict Calvin of teaching that ^in was sO ordained as that 
 God was its author. But besides the mistranslation, "by 
 the ordination of Godj" as though that were the efficient 
 cause of all things, instead of ^^independently qf ike ordi- 
 nation of God;'''' just six lines farther down, Calvin quotes 
 Augustine with approbation, as proving that "God is the 
 supreme and first (or highest) cause of all things, because 
 nothing happens hut by his cominand or permission. He 
 docs not suppose God," continues Calvin, "to remain an 
 tfZZgs/)eciafor, determining to permit any thing" [and every 
 thing] — that is, to look listlessly on and resign the helm 
 of the miiverse to be controlled by contingence or chance. 
 "There is an intervention of actual volition (that is, a 
 will to permit) which otherwise could never be consider, 
 ed as a cause." The reader can now judge whether Cal- 
 vin meant to teach that God is the author or efficient cause 
 of sin, and whether the above quotation by Wesley is 
 consistent with candor and truth. 
 
 2d. (Book 1, chap. 15 (16) sect. 3. "Every action and 
 motion of every creature is governed by the hidden coun- 
 27 
 
312 APPENDIX. 
 
 eel of God, that nothing caii come to pass but what was 
 ordained by him.'' The following is the translation of 
 Allen; "In the creatures there is no erratic power, or ac- 
 tion, or motion; but they are so governed by the secret 
 counsel of God that nothing can happen but what is sub- 
 ject to his knoioledgea.nd decreed hy his wilV — that is, as 
 explained above, nothing can happen but by his command 
 or permission. Calvin is speaking of '■'■the stars^ arid 
 comets, and signs of heaven,^'' and rebukes "immoderate 
 and superstitious fears," as though these "creatures had 
 of themselves poicer to hurt us, or could fortuitously in- 
 jure us." And though his language admits of being ex- 
 tended to intelligent moral agents, yet as explained above 
 by himself, it is obviously perverted by Wesley from its 
 original and true meaning. 
 
 3d. (Book 1, chap. 15 (16) sect. 8.) "The wills of men 
 are so governed by the will of God, that they are carried 
 on straight to the mark which he has foreordained." 
 This is designed to show that Calvin taught that God 
 works on the wills of men, so as to work ■wickedness iri 
 the wicked, and so must be the author of sin. But look a 
 moment at the language of Calvin in its connexion: "Not 
 only the heavens and the earth, but also the deliberations 
 and volitions of men, are so governed by his providence, 
 as to be directed to the end appointed by it. What then? 
 You will say, does nothing h-dppcn fortuitously or cintiTi- 
 gently?'" He had set himself to prove that there could 
 "6e no such thing as fortuitous contingence,''^ or chance; 
 (sect. 4;) and in the passage referred to by the author of 
 the tract, he was showing that not even the minds, 
 thoughts, and volitions of men are exerted "independent- 
 ly of God, whilst they cannot even speak a u^ord but what 
 
APPENDIX. 313 
 
 he chooses." (Sect. 6.) But what has this to do with the 
 author of sin, or the cause of wickedness in heart and 
 life? How dees God's holding the hearts of men in his 
 hand and turning them as rivers of water are turned — 
 (that is, overruling, restraining, and limiting their exerci- 
 ses, and especially their wickedness) — how does this 
 prove, as the tract affirms, that "aZZ must do just what 
 they do" so that they are deprived of liberty of will and 
 free agency? The passage is shamefully misrepresented 
 and perverted from its plain and obvious meaning, to 
 teach what Calvin never taught, as will yet more fully 
 appear. The scope of the passage is to overthrow the 
 atheistical notion of fortune or chance. Not a sparrow 
 falls, nor a thought or volition of the mind arises, but 
 what is under the superintendence of the Divine Provi- 
 dence. God has his own appointed ends in his all-wiso 
 plan, to promote, even by the wickedness of the wicked, 
 and therefore it does not occur by chance, but by his per. 
 mission, purposing so to control and "restrain" it as to 
 make it subserve his own wise and holy purposes. This 
 is the meaning of Calvin. "Augustine," says Calvin, 
 "makes the following correct distinction. — 'that they sin 
 proceeds from themselves; that in sinning they perform 
 this or that particular action, is from the power of God, 
 who divideth the darkness according to his pleasure.' " 
 Book 2, chap. 4, sect. 4. Is this the same as saying 
 *Hheir sins proceed from God" ? 
 
 4th. (Book 3, chap. 24, sect. 8.) "I will not scruple to 
 own that the will of God lays a necessity on all things, 
 and that every thing he wills necessarily comes to pass." 
 
 The reference is probably to a passage in chap. 23, 
 8cct. 8. "I shall not hesitate to confess with Augustine, 
 
314 APPENDIX. 
 
 that the will of God is the necessity of things, and tliat 
 what he has willed necessarily comes to pass, as those 
 things are really about to hapnen which he has fore. 
 9e€n." 
 
 To say that men are under a necessity of committing- 
 sin, is, in the common popular acceptation of the terms, 
 both absurd and impious: and this is what Wesley la- 
 bors to prove against Calvin. But it is a very important 
 question — "What did Calvin mean by necessity?" This 
 wc discover by comparing other passages — thus — "A dis- 
 tinction has prevailed in the schools, of three kinds of li- 
 Jyerty: the first, freedom from necessity; the second, free- 
 dbm from sin; the third freedom from misery; of which 
 ihoJirSt is naturally inherent in mctn, so that nothing 
 can ever deprive him of it; the other two are lost by sin, 
 TTiis distinction,'''^ a.dds Calvin, '^'^I readily admit, except 
 that it improperly confounds necessity n'ith coaction. 
 And the wide difference between these things will appear 
 in another place'." (Book 2, chap. 2, sect. 5, &c.) "When 
 man subjected himself to this necessity, he was not de- 
 prived of will, but of soundness of will." '^Augustine 
 thus expresses himself: 'The will being changed for the 
 worse, I know not by what corrupt and surprising means, 
 is itself the author of (he ntcessily to which it is subject,'' 
 &c. Afterwards he says that we are oppressed wi*h a 
 yoke, but no other than that of a voluntary servitude,^'' 
 &.C., «fcc. Again, Book 2, chap. 5, sect. 5. "Let them 
 not suppose themselves excused by necessity, in which 
 very thing they have a mo^t evident cause of their con- 
 demnation." "For if wc are bound by our own passions, 
 which are under the government of sin, so that we are 
 not at liberty to obey our father, there is no reason why 
 
APPENDIX. 315 
 
 we should plead this necessity in our defence, the crimi- 
 nality of which is within ourselves, and must be imputed 
 to us." Book 2, chap. 8, sect. 3. "Nor can we pretend 
 to excuse ourselves by our want of ability — our inability 
 is our own fault." Ibid. From these passages it is evi- 
 dent that the meaning of the term "necessity" in Cal- 
 vin's work, is the same with certainty, or what Edwards 
 calls "philosophical necessity.'''' (Edwards on the Will, 
 part 1, sect. 3.) So also Book 1, chap. 3, sect. 9. "What 
 God decrees, must necessarily come to pass, yet it is not 
 by an absolute or natural necessity." He cites the ex- 
 ample of the "bones of Christ," which were capable of 
 being broken," ' yet that they should be broken was im- 
 possible;" because the Scripture must certainly be fulfil- 
 led — "a bone of him shall not be broken." It seems that 
 prophecy gives rise to necessity as understood by Cal- 
 vin. 
 
 That Calvin is greatly misrepresented in this tract, as 
 teaching necessity in such a sense as "that all things 
 come to pass by the efficacious and irresistible will of 
 God," is further proved by his representing men as under 
 Ihe restraining influence of divine grace. Thus Book 2, 
 chap. 2, sect 3. "Should the Lord permit the minds of 
 men to give up the reins to every lawless passion, there 
 certainly would not be an individual in the world who 
 would not evince all the crimes for which Paul condemns 
 human nature." This does not look like impelling the 
 will of man to sin by inevitable necessity!! Indeed th« 
 early reformers seem to have been is the habit of em- 
 ploying the term necessity to mean "certainty." Thus 
 Luther, (de servo arbitrio, translated by Milner, Ecc. 
 Hist. vol. 5.) "So long as the operative grace of God is 
 27* 
 
SIG APPENDIX. 
 
 absent from us, every thing- we do has in it a mixture of 
 evil; and therefore of necessity our works do not avail to 
 salvation. Here," continues Luther, "I do not mean a 
 necessity of compulsion, but a necessity as to the certain- 
 ty of the event." Indeed in the very passage to which 
 we suppose reference is made in the tract, Calvin explains 
 the meaning of the term "necessity" as used by himself, 
 to imply '^that those things are really about to happen 
 which God has foreseen," It is not our business to de- 
 cide whether Wesley's misrepresentation of the passage 
 was the result of a want of information, or of something 
 else. 
 
 5th. (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 7.) "God not only foresaw 
 that Adam would fall, but also ordained that he should." 
 The design of this is obviously to convict Calvin of teach- 
 ing foreordination in such a sense as to impl}' that sin Ib 
 brought about or efficiently caused by the divine decree. 
 But no person of candor would ever understand Calvin 
 thus. "God," says Calvin, not only foresaw the fall of 
 the first man, and the ruin of his posterity in him, but al- 
 so arranged all by the determination of his own will." 
 "It belongs to his power to rule and govern all things b}' 
 his hand." "He knew that it was more suitable to his 
 Almighty goodness to bring good out of evil, than not to 
 suffer [or pern i'] evil to exist," and therefore "ordauied 
 the life of angels and men in such a manner as to exhibit 
 in it, first, what free will was capable of doing, and after- 
 wards, what could be effected by the blessings of his grace 
 and the sentence of his justice." Here the very section 
 which is perverted to mean that Adam sinned nocessari- 
 ly, by force of the divine decree — this very section affirms 
 that Adam was an example of '■'what free agency icasca- 
 
APPENDIX. 817 
 
 pahle of doing"! We should be glad to indulge the 
 thought that this was the effect of ignorance. 
 
 6th. (Book 3, chap. 24, sect. 8.) "He sinned, because 
 God so ordained" — "because the Lord saw good." The 
 object of this reference is the same with the previous 
 one. There is nothing in the place referred to, bearing 
 even the most distant resemblance to the professed ex- 
 tract. In chap. 23, sect. 8, we read — "The first man 
 fell because the Lord had determined it should so hap- 
 pen,'' "He determined thus, only because he foresaw it 
 would tend to the just illustration of the glory of his 
 name." But no person willing to do justice to Calvin, 
 would ever think of interpreting this to mean that Adam 
 sinned necessarily by .force of God's decree. For besides 
 the proof already given, that Calvin taught that sin was 
 ordained pennisswely, (though not by a bare permission,) 
 in the very sarne section, and within a few lines of the 
 supposed extract, we read — "Man falls according to the 
 (permissive) appointment of Divine Providence; but he 
 falls by his own fault." "They insist that God permits 
 the destruction of the impious, but does not will it, But 
 what reason shall we assign for his permitting it, but be- 
 cause it is his will (to pcrnjit it.) It is not probable, how- 
 e.ver, that man procured his own destruction by the mere 
 permission, without any appointment of God." (In other 
 words, without his having appointed to overrule the fall 
 of man to his own glory,) "Besides," continues Calvin, 
 "their perdition depends on the divine predestination in 
 such a manner that the cause and matter of it are found 
 in themselves." "Wherefore, let us rather contemplate 
 the evident cause of condemnation in the corrupt nature 
 of mankind, than search after a hidden and altogether 
 
318 APPENDIX. 
 
 incomprehensible one, in the predestination of God." 
 These passages, Wesley, if he had ever read the book, 
 must have known to be there. The very section sup- 
 posed to be quoted by the tract to convict Calvin of hold- 
 ing that God appoints or decrees sin, so that it comes to 
 pass by his efficacious and irresistible will, — this very 
 section affirms that "man sinned by his own fault" — and 
 that the cause and matter of his perdition is in himself!! 
 7th. (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 7.) They deny that the 
 Scripture says God decreed Adam's fall. They say he 
 might have chosen either to fall or not: and that God 
 foreordained only to treat him according to his desert. 
 As if God had created the noblest of all his creatures, 
 without foreordaining what sliould become of him." The 
 design of this reference, as of the previous ones, is to con- 
 vict Calvin of teaching that sin comes to pass necessari- 
 ly, that men must do just what they do, and that they 
 sin under the impelling influence of God's will, necessa- 
 rily and irresistibly. But this is an utter misrepresenta- 
 tion of Calvin's meaning. "They maintain," he says, 
 "that he (Adam) was possessed of free choice, that he 
 might be the author of his own fate; (this Calvin does 
 not dispute;) but that God decreed NOTHING MORE 
 than to treat him according to his desert." Calvin ad- 
 mits that Adam was possessed of free choice. Thus, 
 Book 1, chap. 15, sect. 8. "Adam could have stood if he 
 would, since he fell merely by his own will." "His 
 choice of good and evil was free." "He was the volun- 
 tary procurer of his own destruction." But he utterly 
 denies that God decreed "nothing more than to treat him 
 according to his desert." And in the very same section 
 he goes on to explain his meaning — that "it belongs to 
 
 J 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 319 
 
 divine power to rule and govern all things by his hand," 
 and "to bring good out of evil." And he rejects the idea 
 that "God had created (he noblest of his creatures with- 
 out any determinate end" — that is, foreseeing his fall, he 
 determined so to rule and govern his apostacy and its ef- 
 fects by his hand, as in the end to make the wrath of man 
 to praise him, and the remainder to restrain, to the glory 
 of his great name. Every one must perceive what an ut- 
 ter perversion of the passage is made by the author qf 
 the tract, 
 
 8th. (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 7.) "I confess it is a har- 
 rihle decree: yet no one can deny but God foreknew Ad- 
 am's fall, and therefore foreknew it because he had or- 
 dained it by his own decree." The following is Allen's, 
 translation: "It is an awful decree, I confess; but no one 
 can deny that God foreknew the future final fate of man 
 before he created him, and that he did foreknow it because 
 it was appointed (permissively) by his own decree." 
 There is a two-fold misrepresentation in the version of 
 Wesley, 1. Calvin is speaking ofthe awful fact that the 
 fall of Adam involves so many nations and generations 
 of men in sin and misery: it is of this tremendous fact he 
 says — "It is an awful decree, (or arrangement; see above 
 reference 5th,) I confess." But the tract represents him 
 as speaking simply of the fall of Adam, without respect 
 to its consequences upon the human family. 2. Calvir^ 
 does not say it is "a horrible decree," as those terms are 
 com-monly understood. That Allen has correctly trans- 
 lated — "awful decree" — is evident for two reasons. 1st. 
 The latin term employed may with equal propriety b^ 
 thus rendered. 2d. The question is simply one oi fact. 
 Did Calvin deeign to represent Predestination or the de- 
 
320 APPENDIX. 
 
 crees of God as a "horrible" doctrine, implying the ideaa 
 conveyed by the terms shocking, hideous, revolting, odi- 
 ous? Let Calviu answ^er for himself, and give his ovm 
 views of the subject. Thus Book 3, chap. 21, sect. 1. 
 "We shall never be clearly convinced as we ought to be, 
 that our salvation flows from the fountain of God's free 
 mercy, till we are acquainted with his eternal election, 
 which illustrates the grace of God," ifec. "Ignorance of 
 this principle evidently detracts from the divine glory, 
 and diminishes real humility." Again he speaks of pre- 
 destination as "the inmost recesses of divine wisdom," 
 and as "that sublimity of wisdom which God would havo 
 us to adore, and not to comprehend, to promote our admi- 
 ration of his glory." And in a passage already quoted, 
 "He determined thus, because he foresaw it would tend 
 to the just illustration of the glory of his name." To say 
 that Calvin represented the decree of God as "horrible," 
 is contrary to his uniform declarations, — is to represent 
 him as falling under his own solemn rebuke — Book 3, 
 chap. 21 , sect. 4. "Whoever endeavors to raise prejudices 
 against the doctrine of predestination, openly reproaches 
 God," «fec. In the light of these and many other passa- 
 ges, it is obvious that Wesley's translation is contrary 
 to the truth. 
 
 9th. (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 1.) "Many indeed, (think- 
 ing to excuse God,) own election, and yet deny reproba- 
 tion; but this is quite silly and childish. For without 
 reprobation, election itself cannot stand; whom God pass- 
 es by, those he reprobates." 
 
 This passage is not materially mistranslated. It is 
 adduced by Wesley to prove that "God has, according to 
 Calvin, by his own positive decree, not only elected some 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 321 
 
 Hien to life, but also reprobated all the rest." The pass- 
 age is indeed so strongly tinctured with reprobation, that 
 one might almost imagine himself reading John Wesley's 
 treatise on "Predestination, Election, and Reprobation." 
 "God," says Wesley, ^^predestinates or foreappoints all 
 disobedient unbelievers to DAMNATION, not without, 
 but according to, his foreknowledge of ^11 their works 
 from the foundation of the world." "And according to 
 this his foreknowledge, (viz. from the foundation of the 
 world, or from eternity,) he refused or reprobated all dis- 
 obedient unbelievers, as such, TO DAMNATION." 
 What a "horrible decree' ' of Reprobation! • "To refuse" 
 or "reprobate" a man "to damnation" "from the founda- 
 tion of the world," before "he had done either good or 
 evil," yea, "before he was born" I! (See Doct. Tracts, pp. 
 139, 140.) Here it would be in order to declaim about 
 "cruelty," "injustice," "crocodile's tears," &.c., «fec. The 
 doctrine of "eternal reprobation" is plainly a Methodist 
 doctrine! Are our Methodist friends atraid or ashamed 
 to avow this their real sentiment! 
 
 10th. (Book 3, chap. 31, sect. 1.) "All men are not 
 created for the same end; but some are foreordained to 
 eternal life; others to eternal damnation. So according 
 as every man was created for the one end or the other, 
 we say he was elected or predestinated to life, or reproba- 
 ted." This reference is to chapter 31, whereas there are 
 only 25 chapters in the book. The stereotyped volume 
 of tracts has it chap. 21, sect. 1 — but this too is a blunder. 
 After considerable search, we found in chap. 21, sect. 5, 
 a passage which bears a strong resemblance to the pro- 
 fessed extract; but from the numerous gross errors in 
 these references, we must suppose that the author of the 
 
322 APPENDIX. 
 
 tract liad never seen the original work, but was the hum* 
 ble copyist of some preceding bungler. It must be ad- 
 mitted that Calvin employs very strong language, though 
 perhaps not stronger than the apostle Jude, speaking nC 
 "certain men crept in unawares," "ungodly men," "who 
 were of old ordained to this condemnation: (Jude 4:) nor 
 stronger than .Peter, (1 Pet; 2:8,) "Being disobedient, 
 Whcreunto also they were appointed:" nor stronger than 
 Wesley — "God foreappointed all disobedient unbelievers 
 to damnation, not without, but according to their works, 
 from the foundation of the world:" or as he afterwards 
 explains himself— God eternally reprobated all disobedient 
 unbelievers, as such, to damnation*" If our Methodist 
 friends exclaim, "horrible"! "most horrible"! we cannot' 
 help it. There it stands in tlieir own approved standard 
 writings. ' No Calvinist teaches reprobation in stronger 
 terms than those, and as to the Presbyterian Confession, 
 it does not even employ the term "reprobation. See also 
 reference 15, for Calvin's views of man's being created 
 for a certain end." 
 
 11th. (Book 3, chap. 21, sect. 7.) "God hath once for 
 all appointed by an eternal and unchangeable decree, to 
 whom he would give salvation, and whom he would de- 
 vote to destruction." We have just seen how plainly and 
 forcibly Mr. Wesley and his followers teach "eternal rep- 
 robation," or reprobation to "damnation," of "all disobe- 
 dient unbelievers, according to God's foreknowledge ot 
 all their works, from the foundation of tiie world." And 
 what is still more remarkable, in the tract, "Predestina- 
 tion calmly considered," they say — "This decree (of rep- 
 robation) without doubt God will not change, and man 
 cannot resist." (Doct. Tracts, p. 15.) So that they teach 
 
APPEj\i/i-K 
 
 32S 
 
 not only that "reprobation to damnation" is eternal, but 
 that it is unchangeable and irresistible! 
 
 12th. Book 3, chap. 22, sect. 1.) "So the vulgar tliink, 
 that God as lie foresees every man will deserve, elects 
 them to life, or devotes them to death and damnation." 
 Allen has it — "It is a notion commonly entertained, that 
 God adopts as his children such as he foreknows will be 
 deserving of his grace; and devotes to the damnation of 
 death others whose dispositions he sees will be inclined 
 to wickedness and impiety." With regard to man's "de- 
 serving divine grace," we need only quote Article 9 of 
 the Methodist standards, viz: "We are accounted righ- 
 teous only for the merit of our Lord, and not for our own 
 works or deservings"! But that Calvin did maintain 
 that the wicked are "devoted to death for their evil de- 
 serts," has been already showUi "Their perdition de- 
 pends on the divine predestination in such a manner that 
 the cause and matter of it are found in themselves. "The 
 evident cause of condemnation," he says, "is the corrupt 
 nature of mankind." (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 8.) "It 
 remains now to be seen why the Lord does that which it 
 is evident he does. If it be replied tliat (his is done be- 
 cause men have deserved it by their impiety, wickedness 
 and ingratitude, it will be a just and true observation." 
 (Book 3, chap. 24, sect. 14.) The prominent object be- 
 fore Calvin's mind, in the passage quoted in the tract, is 
 "the distinction between different persons, as it appears in 
 the grace and providence of God. He is speaking of 
 what Turretine and modern Calvinists call "comparative 
 election and reprobation" — in other words, of the reason 
 why from the mass of mankind, all by nature equally and 
 utterly undeserving, God subdues, converts, and saves 
 28 
 
324 APPENDIX. 
 
 one, and that one oftentimes the publican or liarlot, tlie 
 most abandoned or profane; while others are left, in many 
 casosj the most moral and decent in their outward de- 
 portmcnt. In this view of the subject, the passage has al- 
 tdgether a different meaning from what it is made to 
 bear in Wesley's tract. Calvin takes for granted that all 
 are "corrupt," and justly exposed to divine wrath; where-- , 
 as he is quoted as teaching that men are devoted to death ' 
 without any respect to their deserts. "We teach," adda 
 Calvin, "nothing but that God has always been at liberty 
 to bestow his grace on whom he chooses." But the very 
 fact of his bestowing grace, supposes the recipients to be 
 undeserving, or deserving of death. By wresting a sen- 
 tence or part of a sentence out of its connexion, the Bible 
 can be made to teach Atheism! 
 
 13th. (Book 3, chap. 23, sect. 6.) "God of his own good 
 pleasure ordains that many should be born, who are from 
 the womb doomed to inevitable damnation." The origi* 
 nal latin of this last phrase is "certoe morti," which every 
 school boy knows to mean "certain death," and is a very 
 different thing from "inevitable damnation." An event 
 which is infallibly foreknov^'n, is "certainj" but as respects 
 the agents in its accomplishment, it may not be "incvi. 
 table;" that is, they may bring it about in the exercise of 
 perfect freedom of choice, and may act otherwise if they 
 choose so to act; although it is infallibly foreknown how 
 they will choose to act. Besides, if it be true, as Wcsky 
 says, that "God foreappoints or predestinates all disobcdi- 
 ent unbelievers to damnation, according to his foreknow- 
 ledge of all their works, from the foundation of tlic 
 world," — "if (from eternity) he refuses or reprobates all 
 disobedient unbelievers, as such, to damnation, how d jcj 
 
APPENDIX. 325 
 
 (his differ from ^'dooming them to certain death from 
 the womb"? "Can you split this hair?" 
 
 14th. (Ibid.) "If any man pretend that God's fore- 
 knowledge lays thera under no necessity of being damn- 
 ed, but rather that he decreed their damnation because 
 he foresaw their wickedness; I grant that God's fore- 
 knowledge alone lays no necessity on the creature; but 
 eternal life and death depend on the will rather than the 
 foreknowledge of God." This passage is quoted by Wes- 
 ley, in immediate connexion with the foregoing, and sev- 
 eral lines are added in such a manner as to make the im- 
 pression that it is a continuous quotation. But it is not 
 so. Besides, the passage is grossly misrepresented to 
 teach that reprobation, in Calvin's sense of the term, 
 does not imply the foreknowledge of man's sin, or that 
 man is not considered in the decree as fallen and deser- 
 ving of punishment. But we trust enough has already 
 been said to settle that point. As to the meaning of the 
 term "necessity" in Calvin's writings, it has been alrea, 
 dy explained, (See reference 4.) When Calvin says "life 
 and death are acts of God's will rather than of his fore- 
 knowledge," as Allen renders it, we would just inquire 
 whether Wesley means to teach that Arminian "reproba- 
 tion to damnation of unbelievers, as such," is an act of 
 foreknowledge! And when it is added that "God foreseeg 
 future events in consequence of his decree that they shall 
 happen," we refer the reader to reference 1, to prove that 
 Calvin taught the doctrine of the '■'■permissive decree" of 
 sin. And a passage will presently be quoted, proving that 
 he held that "the cause of sin does not arise from God." 
 (Sec liis Com. on Rom. 1:24.) In proof he quotes Hosesi, 
 J3;9 — "Oh Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself:^ 
 
326 APPENDIX. 
 
 15th. (Book 3, chap. 24, sect. 12.) "God has his judgf- 
 nieiits toward the reprobates, whereby he executes his de- 
 cree concerning- them. (In other words, he refuses or rep- 
 robates all disobedient unbelievers, as such, to damna- 
 tion.) As many therefore as he created to live miserably 
 and then perish everlastingly, these that Ihey may be 
 brought to the end for which they were created, (may 
 "reach their appointed end" — Allen,) he sometimes de- 
 prives of the possibility ("opportunity" — Allejt) of hear- 
 ing the word, and at other times, by the preaching there- 
 of, blinds and stupifies them the more." The first im- 
 portant inquiry, in order to aright understanding of this 
 passage, is, what did Calvin mean by man being "created 
 for a certain end"? If it can be shown that he employs 
 language equally strong, almost the very same terms, in 
 reference to all, both elect and reprobate, the force of the 
 objection will be done away. Well, look at Book 2, 
 chap. 16, sect. 3. "In respect of our corrupt nature, and 
 the succeeding depravity of our lives, WE ARE ALL. 
 really offensive to God, guilty in his sight, and BORN 
 TO THE DAMNATION OF HELL!" The meaning 
 evidently is; that men without exception, (one only ex- 
 cepted,) are justly exposed to that awful doom, sin having 
 been fprmitled to enter the world, "and so death has 
 passsed upon all men, for that all have sinned." That 
 God oftentimes "deprives men of the opportunity of hear, 
 ing the gospel;" that he sometimes "removes the candle- 
 stick out of his place" (Rev. 2:5) in just punishment for 
 misimprovcment of past privilege?, we did not suppose 
 was denied by any Christian; nor that, for the same rea- 
 son, he sometimes permits the Gospel to become a savor 
 o*^ '^cath unto death, so as "to blind and stunify Ike iUi?rfi»!! 
 
APPENDIX. 327 
 
 Do Methodists deny this? If any thing further need be 
 said, to explain the extract from Calvin, we refer to the 
 section before quoted for the following: "For notwith- 
 standing we are sinners through our own fault, yet we 
 are still his creatures; notwithstanding we have brought 
 death upon ourselves, yet HE HAD CREATED us for 
 life. 
 
 16th. (Book 3, chap. 24, sect, 13.) "He calls to them, 
 that they may be more deaf; he kindles a light, that they 
 may be more blind; he brings his doctrine to them, that 
 they may be more ignorant," Sec. In this passage, Cal- 
 vin is expounding Isajah 6:9, 10. "Go and tell this people 
 (saith God to the prophet) hear ye indeed, but understand 
 not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart 
 of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut 
 their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with 
 their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, 
 and be healed." See also Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 
 12:40. If Calvin has erred in the use of language, he is 
 certainly in very good company. But the tract represents 
 liim as intending to convey the idea that God by direct 
 and positive inliuence upon the minds of the wicked, 
 "hardens, blinds, and stupifies" their souls in sin, so that 
 he is the author of their wickednes. But he himself else- 
 where interprets his language to mean, "the righteous 
 judgment of God," or "the righteous vengeance of God, 
 in abandoning the hearts of the stubborn and rebellious 
 to Satan, to be confirmed in obstinacy." But Dr. W. 
 I'isk, speaking in the name of the General Conference, 
 says — "Ged blinds men and hardens their hea.rts judicial- 
 ly, as a just punishment lor their abuse of their agency." 
 Discip. p. 9. Speaking of Satan, Calvin observes — "He 
 28* 
 
828 APPENDIX. 
 
 being naturally wicked, has not the least inclination to- 
 wards obedience to the Divine will, but is \vholly bent on 
 insolence and rebellion. It therefore arises from himself 
 and his wickedness that he opposes God — but since he 
 holds him tied and bound witli the bridle of his power, he 
 executes only those things wliich are divinely permitted; 
 and thus whether he will or not, lie obeys his creator, be- 
 ing constrained to fulfil any service to which he impels 
 Piim." Book 1, chap. 14, sect. 17. "Tliey (the wicked) 
 can lay no blame upon God, for they find in themselves 
 nothing but evil; and in him only a legitimate use of their 
 wickedness," Chap. 17, sect. 5. ''This exception must 
 alwaj's be made, that the cause of sin, whose roots perpe- 
 tually dwell in the sinner himself, docs not arise from 
 Codr Com. on Rom, 1:21. 
 
 17th, (Book 1, chap. 17, sect. 5.) "Thieves, murderers, 
 and other malefactors, are God's instruments which he 
 uses to execute what he hath decreed in himself." The 
 design of this extract is to convict Calvin of teaching that 
 *'God by his present irresistible power and will, is the au- 
 thor of those actions which are sins, and of tlie sins them- 
 selves." "I admit," says Calvin, "that thieves, homi- 
 cides, and other malefactors, arc instruments of Divine 
 Providence, whom the Lord uses for the execution of the 
 judgments which he hath appointed." By examining 
 the scope of the passage, it will be found that the design 
 of Calvin was directly the opposite of that which Wesley 
 charges upon him. "Persons," he says, "inconsiderately 
 and erroneously ascribe all past events to the absolute 
 Providence of God." '*Since neither thefts, nor adulte- 
 ries, nor homicides are perpetrated without the intervcn- 
 *'on of the divine will, ' .vhy,' they ask, 'shall a homicide 
 
APPENDIX. 32^ 
 
 be punished for having- slain him whose life the Lord had 
 terminated. If all such characters are subservient to the 
 Divine will, why shall they be punished?' 'But I deny," 
 replies Calvin, "that they serve the Divine Aviil. For we 
 cannot say that he who is influenced by a wicked heart, 
 acts in obedience to God." But it is said if he would 
 not permit it, we should not do it. This I grant. But 
 do we perform evil actions with the design of pleasing- 
 him? We precipitate ourselves into them," &c. Is this 
 the same as saying "men commit sinful actions by the 
 present irresistible power and will of God""? See also the 
 quotations in the previous reference. Calvin is speaking' 
 of "the legitimate use" which God makes of his unholy 
 creatures, and not at all of his irresistible power in cau- 
 sing their actions, "So when the matter and guilt of 
 evil resides in a bad man, why should God be supposed 
 to contract any defilement, if he uses his service accor- 
 ding- to his own pleasure;"' in other words, if he "makes 
 liis wrath to praise him," &c. The use which the au- 
 thor of the tract makes of Calvin's language "can hardly 
 be reconciled with a guileless Christianity.*' 
 
 18th. (Book 1, chap. 17, sect. 11.) "The devil and wick- 
 ed men are so held in on every side with the hand of God, 
 that they cannot conceive, or contrive, or execute any 
 mischief any farther than God himself doth not permit 
 only, but command. Nor are they only held in fetters, 
 but compelled also with a bridle to perform obedience to 
 those commands. T his is given as a Calvinistic answer 
 to the question — "How does God make angels and men 
 sin?" and is designed to convict Calvin and Calvinists of 
 holding that "God procures adultery, cursings, lyings, 
 and by his working on the hearts of the wicked, bends 
 
330 APPENDIX. 
 
 and stirs them to do evil." IJut the author of 't'le Insti- 
 tutes' is grossly slandered in this representation. "It is 
 remarkable that the Socinians, Papists, and Pelagians of 
 Turretine's day, employed the same passage to bring 
 odium upon Calvin and his theological sentiments. Tur- 
 rctine replies that it was cited dishonestly, ['mala fide,'] 
 *and contrary to the mind of the^author.' 'For the scope 
 of the passage is to fortify the minds of the pious against 
 ft^ar and anxiety, inasmuch as they know that the devil 
 and wicked men are not permitted to roam without re- 
 straint, but are under the government and direction of di- 
 vine providence.' Calvin has no reference at all to the 
 cause of sin, but is speaking of the limits which God in 
 his providence sets to the rage and malice of the wicked; 
 and thence he derives a topic of consolation to the pious, 
 'when they recollect that the devil and the whole army 
 of the wicked are so restrained by divine power, that they 
 can neither conceive of any hostility against us, nor after 
 having conceived it, form a plan for its accomplishment, 
 nor even move a finger towards the execution of such 
 plan, any faither than he hath permitted and even com- 
 manded them. They are not only bound by his chain 
 but compelled to do lam service.' Is this the same as 
 saying that 'God bends and stirs them to commit adulte- 
 ries, cursings, lyings'? It is to be hoped that Wesley 
 liad repented of his sin in composing this tract, before he 
 was called to render his account to the Judge of all. 
 
 But it is proper to inquire, what is the meaning of Cal- 
 vin when he represents Satan and wicked men as so con- 
 trolled and restrained by divine power, as to do what God 
 not only ^permits, but commands. He doubtless refers to 
 such cases as that of Job. God said — "Behold all that he 
 
APPENDIX. 331 
 
 hath is in thy power." This was said to Satan, in answer 
 to his insolent challenge — 'Doth Job fear God for nought? 
 Put forth thy hand, iVc. and he will curse thee to thy 
 face.' And the pious sufferer himself ascribes his afflic^ 
 tion, not to Satan, but to God. 'The Lord gave, and the 
 Lord taketh away,' &,c. And again, "the Lord said un- 
 to Satan — 'Behold, he is in thine hand, but save his life." 
 (chap. 2:6.) 'Even the devil himself,' remarks Calvin, 
 'dared not to attempt any thing against Job, without his 
 permission and command.' (Bock 1, chap. 17, sect. 7.) 
 The conduct of Shimci in cursing David, is another ex-, 
 ample, 'So let him curse,' said the afflicted monarch, 
 ♦because the Lord hath said unto him, 'curse David.' 
 Let him alone, and let him curse, for the Lord hath bid^ 
 den him.' (2 Sam. 16j10, 11.) «^When he confesses Shi- 
 mei's maledictions to proceed from the divine command,^ 
 remarks Calvin, he by no means commends his obedience 
 as fulfilling adivineprecept; but acknowledging his tongu© 
 as the scourge of God, he patiently submits to the chas^ 
 tisement. Let it be remembered that whilst God, by- 
 means of the impious, fulfils his secret decrees, they aro 
 not excusable as though they were obedient to his pre- 
 cepts, which they wantonlj' and intentionally violate.* 
 (Book 1, chap. 18, sect. 4.) 'Augustine somewhere 
 makes the following correct distinction: that they sin 
 proceeds from themselves; that in f-inning they perform 
 this or that particular action, is from the power of God, 
 who divideth the darkness according to his pleasure.' 
 (Book 2, chap. 4, sect. 4.) Is this the same as saying 
 that God makes angels and men sin! Is it consistent 
 with truth or righteousness to charge Calvin with tea-att 
 
332 APIMCXDIX. 
 
 iiig that 'vj!oil makes men and angels ahx by his pre- 
 sent irrcs stiblc power'? 'Oh, shame! where is thy 
 blushl' 
 
 Wc have felt it to be our duty to vindicate the charac 
 tcr of Calvin from the unfounded allcg;;tions of Wesley 
 and his followers, not because wc as Presbyterians, con- 
 sider ourselves obliged to adopt and defend every expres- 
 sion, or every shade of thought which he may have em- 
 ployed upon theological subjects. We have the public 
 symbols of our faith in our Confession and Catechisms; 
 and although we feel it to be no reproach to be callccl 
 Calvinists, yet we call no man master. This defenco 
 (would that it were much more perfect) we believe to bo 
 due to the cause of truth — to the character of the dead, 
 which has been unjustly assailed — and to the dearest in, 
 torests of the living, who are attempted to be held up to 
 public odium, disgust, and abhorrence, by means of dis, 
 torted and false representations of the sentiments of those 
 men, whom they have been accustomed to regard with 
 profound respect and reverence. No sane person will 
 imagine that t!ic wide circulation of the forementioned and 
 similar tracts, is intended for any other purpose than tq 
 fasten the designed reproach qf their injurious statements 
 and misrepresentations upon thosfc who are now called 
 Calvinists. Every candid reader will, we hope, be now 
 qualified to decide where the ignominy should fall, whe- 
 ther they or their slanderers should be regarded with pub, 
 lie detestation. 
 
 We next examine the professed quotations from the 
 writings of Dr. Twissc; and I gratefully acknowlcdgo 
 the assistance afforded by rhj' friend, Kev. M. IJ. Hupk^ 
 
APPENDIX. 333 
 
 (late of the Tlieological Seminary, Princeton, N. J., now 
 Missionary of the American Board,) in investigating the 
 works of this and other scarce authors, in the Libraries 
 of the Seminary. 
 
 1st (Vindicise Gratise &.c. pars 3, p. 19.) 'It is impos- 
 sible any thing should ever be done but that to whicl* 
 God impels the will of man." We have already seen 
 (Letter I.) that Dr. T. defines the will of God to be 'his 
 purpose to do or permit any thing-/ He does not admit that 
 the divine will (voluntas dei) is necessarily efficient, in 
 the sense of being the cause of ail events; but he asserts 
 merely that nothing can come to pass without the will 
 (either efficacious or permissive) of God. Dr. T. also takes 
 much pains to show that the divine will does not inter-' 
 fere with the perfect freedom of men in any of their mo-* 
 ral actions. 'Ego constanter nego,' says he, 'energetic 
 cum Dei decretum, quicquam prsejudicare libertati crea-^ 
 tura3, sed potius stabilire et corroborare.' In connection 
 with Wesley's extract. Dr. Twissc also largely explain® 
 the distinction between what is physical in moral action, 
 and what is moral, 'bonum ant malum.' Of the act, con- 
 sidered as physical, he admits that God is the author,, 
 'for in him we live, and move, and have our being.' But 
 this is another and a very different thing from 'impelling' 
 the will of man to wickedness, which he utterly disclaims 
 and strenuously denies to be a part of his scheme,- as wilt 
 more fully appear under the next reference. This dis- 
 tinction will also explain what Dr. T. means by saying 
 'God is the author of that action which is sinful,' &c. 
 He is the author of the action, (physically considered,) 
 but not the author of that which is sinful in the ac ion. 
 If Wesley and his followers have found out some other 
 
SS4 APPENDIX. 
 
 god, 'in wliom \vc live, move, and havo our being,' than 
 the apostle Paul know and worshipped, the world may ex* 
 pect to be put in possession of the discovery. 
 
 2d. (Vindicia? pars 3, p. 22.) 'God necessitates them 
 only to the act of sin, not to the deformity of sin." This 
 is not a fair translation of any passage we have been able 
 to find. And the latter part of the professed quotation^ 
 'when God makes angels or men sin,' &c., we are persua- 
 ded is a gross misrepresentation. 'Quid quodhodie,' says 
 Twissc, 'satis constat inter theologos, impossible esse 
 quicquam fieri, cujus auctor non sit Dcus, quoad subsian- 
 tiam actus. Neque minus luculertum est Jieri non posse 
 ut Deus sit auctor malitics aut peccati, qua peccatum 
 est.' That is, 'It is satisfactorily proved among theolo- 
 gians of the present day, that nothing can take place of 
 which God is not the author, as respects the substance of 
 the act. Nor is it less evident that it cannot he that God 
 should be the author of evil or sin, as respects its moral 
 turpitude.' Is this the same as to say, 'God makes an- 
 gels and men sin'! And in regard to the views of Dr. 
 Twisse on the subject of necessity, the fallowing are his 
 own words: 'Whereas we see some things come to pass 
 necessarily, some contingently, so God hath ordained that 
 all things shall come to pass: but necessary things neces- 
 sarily, and contingent things contingently, that is, avoid- 
 ably, and with a possibility of not coining to pass — for 
 every university scholar knows this to be tlic notion of 
 contingency.' Ch. Spec, vol 7, p. 165. Is this equivalent 
 to saying that 'all things come to pass by the efficacious 
 and irresistible will of God'? 
 
 Piscator is the next author who suffers the process of 
 misrepresentation and distortion. He is professedly quo- 
 
APPENDIX. 335 
 
 ted as follows: 'God made Adam and Eve for this verv 
 purpose, that they might be tempted and led into sin; 
 and by force of his decree it could not otherwise be, but 
 they must sin.' 'The reprobates more especially, who 
 were predestinated 1o damnation^'' &c. 'We neither can 
 do more good than we do, nor less evil than we do: be- 
 cause God from eternity has precisely ordained that both 
 the good and the evil should be so done.' One part of 
 these extracts, which we have put in italics, reminds us 
 of Wesley's 'horrible' decree of reprobation, viz: 'God 
 predestinates or foreappoints all disobediert unbelievers 
 to damnation, according to his foreknowledge of all their 
 works from the foundation of the world. The writings 
 of Piscutor referred to, we have not been able to procure, 
 but the following extract from his commentary on Acts 
 2:23, will exhibit his real sentiments: 'Impiorum scelera 
 pendent a decreto Dei, quia Deus decrevit permittere Sa- 
 tauEB, ut eos ad scelera impellat. Nee Deus malitiam in. 
 stillet, nee illi respiciant ad volentatem Dei, sed ad ex- 
 plendum libidines suas, idque contra expressa interdicta 
 Dei.' That is, 'The wicked actions of impious men de- 
 pend upon the divine decree; because God has decreed to 
 per7nit Satan to instigate them to deeds of crime. Nei- 
 ther does God instil evil into their minds, nor do they 
 have respect to the divine will, but to the fulfilment of 
 their evil desires and lusts, and that contrary to his ex- 
 press prohibition.' Is this the same as — 'God procures 
 adultery, cursings, lyings,' and 'by force of his decree it 
 could not otherwise be but they must ein'? Oh shame! 
 
 Zanchius (De natura Dei, pp. 553 — 554) is next quoted 
 as follows: 'Both the reprobates and the elect were foreor- 
 dained to sin, as sin, that the glory of God might b« decla= 
 29 
 
336 AI'PKNDIX. 
 
 red tliereby.' We have already in our introductory let- 
 ter shown that this author taught directly the reverse of 
 the sentiment charged against him, viz: that 'all men are 
 so far the subjects of foreordination as to he permitted to 
 Bin,' Hear him still farther: 'Deus ut in nomine autor 
 st peccati, quatenus peccatum est; ita neminem ad pcc- 
 catum quatenus peccatum est, admittendum predestina- 
 vit. Nam odit peccatum Dcus, ut peccatum est. Ac 
 proinde ad illud quatenus tale est neminem dicendus pre» 
 deetinasse,' &c. In these extracts the author asserts, di- 
 rectly in the face of Wesley's quotation, that God does 
 not foreordain sin, as eini! The following passages arc 
 from his treatise on 'Absolute Predestination,' translated 
 by Toplady: 'By the purpose or decree of God, we mean 
 hie determinate counsel whereby he did from all eternity 
 preordain whatever he should do, or would permit to bo 
 done in time.' 'Predestination, as regards the reprobate 
 18 that eternal, most holy, sovereign, and immutable act 
 of God's will, whereby he hath determined to leave (or 
 permit) some men to perish in their sins, and to be justly 
 punished for them.' 'God does not (as we are slander- 
 ously reported to affirm) compel the wicked to sin, as the 
 rider spurs on an unwilling horse. God only says in ef- 
 fect that tremendous word, LET THEM ALONE.' "Tis 
 most certainly his will to permit sin, but he cannot be 
 himself the author of it.' 'He alone is entitled to the 
 name of the true God, who governs all things, and with- 
 out whose will (efficient or permissive) nothing can be 
 done.' 'From what has been said,' continues Zanchiug, 
 'it follows that Augustine, Luther, Buccr, and other learn- 
 ed divines, are not to be blamed for asserting that God 
 may in iome sens« be said to will the being and com- 
 
APPENDIX. 337 
 
 mission ofein. For was this contrary to his determining^ 
 will of permission, either he would not be omnipotent, or 
 fin could have no place.' 'No one can deny that God 
 permits sin; but he neither permits it ignorantly nor un- 
 willingly; therefore knowingly and willingly. Luther 
 stedfastly maintains this in his book, 'De Servo Arbitrio.' 
 (The will a slave.') However it should be carefully no= 
 ticed, 1st. That God's permission of sin does not arise 
 from his taking delight in it. Sin, as sin, is the abomi- 
 nable thing that his soul hateth. 2. That God's free and 
 voluntary permission of sin, lays no man under any forci- 
 ble or compulsive necessity of committing it. Nor is he 
 in the proper sense accessary to it, but only remotely 
 and negatively so, inasmuch as he could, if he pleased, 
 absolutely prevent it.' In view of these extracts, we 
 leave the reader to decide whether Zanchius has been fair- 
 ly dealt with by Wesley and his Arminian followers, 
 
 Peter Martyr (Comment in Rom. pp.36 — 413) comes 
 next, as follows: 'God supplies wicked men with oppor- 
 tunities of sinning, and inclines their hearts thereto. He 
 blinds, deceives, and seduces them. He, by his working 
 on their hearts, bends and stirs them to do evil.' Now 
 with this compare, or rather contrast the following: 'God 
 doth not properly stir up men unto sin; but yet he useth 
 the sms of wicked men, and also guideth them, lest they 
 should pass beyond their bounds.' 'The defect, which 
 properly is sin, proceedeth not of God; but the action, 
 which is a natural thing, wherein the defect sticketh, 
 cannot be drawn forth but by the common influence of 
 God.' Is this the same as to say, 'God, by his working 
 on their hearts, bends and stirs them to evil,' &.c. Our 
 quotations are from his 'Common Places.' His comment 
 
338 APPENDIX. 
 
 on Romans, as also thg works of Zuin^^leon 'Providence,* 
 we have not been able to procure. But from the speci- 
 mens which have passed before up, we may readily sup- 
 pose they have not been handled more fairly than the 
 others. 
 
 We have now finished our examination of the tract, 
 'A Dialogue between a Prcdestinarian and his Friend,' 
 We can only say that it exhibits a melancholy view of 
 men and measures professedly aiming- at the promotion 
 of truth. The slumbers of the dead will not be broken,- 
 even though they should be made to tench sentiments 
 which, while employed in the active scenes ofearth, they 
 abhorred. And as respects the living, whose character 
 and influence have been invaded, and attempted to be 
 destroyed they have long since learned from the highest 
 authority, to expect that men will 'say all manner of evil 
 of them.' From Alexander Campbell, who affirms that 
 'Calvinism is worse than Atheism,' we receive it as an 
 evidence and result of that conflict which must always 
 exist between light and darkness: but from those who 
 p|_ofess to believe that 'Calvinism contains all that truth 
 by which men may be saved,' (Watson, vol. 2, p. 149,) wo 
 did exfcct better things! 
 
 We cannot close the discussion, already protracted much 
 beyond its original design, without noticing the fact, th:it 
 besides the instrumentality of their Tract Society, the 
 Sabbath School and the day of sacred rest are made to 
 contribute to the same unhallowed enterprize. In No. 
 32, p. 9(), of the 'Methodist Sunday School and Youth's 
 Ivibrary,' they state the doctrine of predestination as fol- 
 lows: ^ riiA God has by an eternal and unchrmgoaHe dr. 
 crcc, predestinated to eternal dam-nation by far the grca- 
 
APPEND'X. 339 
 
 ter port of mankind, and that absolutely, without any re- 
 spect to their works, but only for the showing of he glor 
 ry of his justice. And that for the bringing this about, 
 he hath appointed these miserable souls necessarily to 
 walk in their wicked ways, that so his justice may.lay 
 hold of them.' To those who have read the foregoing 
 letters, and the previous parts of this appendix, we need 
 not say that this is not the doctrine taught in the Presby- 
 terian Confession, and by our approved writers. The 
 minister who should dare broach such a sentiment in the 
 Presbyterian Church, w^ould, we doubt not, be biouglit to 
 trial for heresy and impiety. The author of the Sunday 
 School book puts the passage in quotation marks; but ex- 
 cept by such unfair and dishonorable treatment as w© 
 have already exposed, we challenge the preachers to pro- 
 duce such a passage from any of our approved authors. 
 
 To fasten the impression upon the minds of the young 
 and unsuspecting that this is a true exhibition of the doc- 
 trine, they are presented with the usual array of referen- 
 ces to Calvin and others. And lest the point and direc- 
 tion of tl.ie whole should be misunderstood, the Presbyte- 
 rian Confession of Faith comes in for its share of perver- 
 sion and misrepresentation. We have a repetition of Dr. 
 Fisk's unrighteous quotation of chap. 3, sect. 5: 'Chosen 
 in Christ unto everlasting glory, without any ^foresight of 
 fuith or good works, as conditirms or causes mocing him 
 thereto.^ The clause in italics. Dr. Fisk and the Sunday 
 School book both carefully omit, for a very obvious reason, 
 "The phrases 'eternal election,' and 'eternal decree of 
 election,' " remarks Watson, "can in common sense mean 
 only an eternal purpose to elect or choose out of the world 
 and sanctity ia time by the ^rpirit and blood of Christ." 
 
340 APPE\DI\'. 
 
 'This is a doctrine which no one will contend with them.* 
 Very well. Is it supposed then that this eternal purpo8<» 
 •to choose and sanctify' was founded on a foresight of 
 faith and good works, in other words, on a foresight of 
 sanctification? That is, that God foresaw the sanctifica 
 tion of certain persons, and then purposed to choose.^and 
 sanctify them? Truly it is a useless kind of election this, 
 to^purpose to sanctify those whom he foresaw to be pre- 
 viously sanctifiedl 
 
 Again: They suppress the clause which wc italicise, 
 in chap. 3, sect. 7 of the Confession. Thus: 'The rest of 
 mankind, God was pleased for the glory of his sovereign 
 power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain to dis- 
 honor and wrath, for their sin^ to the praise of his glori- 
 ous justice.^ 
 
 Other equally humiliating examples might be adduced 
 from this volume ul" instruction fur youth, of the strange 
 methods adopted by some professedly Christian men, to 
 promote Christianity. We can only say, whether these 
 things be the alphal)et or the higher branches of 'sinless 
 perfection,' 'O my soul, come not thou into their secret, 
 unto their assembly, n~iine honor, be not thou unitedl' 
 
 The line of policy, of which these unrighteous doings 
 arc prominent features, deserves a moment's further no- 
 tice. The Tract Society of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church is employed to deluge our country with such pub- 
 lications as those which have passed under review. This 
 they tell the people is Calvinism, and these the genuine 
 doctrines believed by Calvinists. But lest they should 
 be speedily convicted of bearing 'false witness against 
 their neighbors,' they have mvented 'Duplicity Exposed,' 
 the topBtone of the system. If Presbyteriansi, Congrega- 
 
APPENDIX. 341 
 
 tionaliats, and other Calvinists, indignantly resent thia un- 
 hallowed attempt to fasten upon them the most impiouB 
 and abominable sentiments, their 'duplicity' must be ex- 
 posed — they are afraid or ashamed to publish their real 
 views on certain points — they teach and preach what 
 they believe to he false, &,c. &c. Surely the cause must 
 be bad which is supposed to require the use of such des- 
 perate supports and remedies. And yet the authors and 
 zealous advocates of these publications will talk in eleva- 
 ted style, of Hhelr friendship and high regard for the 
 Presbyterian Church, and of their valued acquaintance 
 with many of her ministers, and not a few of her mem- 
 bers.' 'Such, they v»'ill say, 'are their good Presbyterian 
 brethren,^ &c., &c. (See Cook's 'Refutation.') We make 
 no pretentions to the power of trying the heart, and there- 
 fore will not say this is 'duplicity.' But there is a mys- 
 tery about the matter which we shall not attempt to un- 
 veil. 
 
 The following extract from their weekly paper, 'The 
 Christian Advocate «fe Journal,' will form a not inappro- 
 priate conclusion to the whole. The author of the ensu- 
 ing statements signs his name G. Coles. He was the 
 preacher in Poughkeepsie, N. Y., for the two years pre- 
 vious to April 20, 1835, the date of his letter. See Jour, 
 nal for May 8, 1835. Mr Coles tells us that at the com- 
 mencement of his term, two years previously, the whole 
 number of members was about 400. 
 Moved away without certificate, and otherwise 
 
 LOST from the classes, 48 
 
 Probationers dropped, 29 
 
 Members expelled, 10 
 
 Members withdrawn, 5 
 
 Total, 92 
 
342 APPKNDIX. 
 
 Of these 92, be it remembered, 48 are said cither to 
 liave removed 'without certificate,' (and thus are out of 
 the church, being excluded from other circuits by the Dis- 
 cipline, p. 41,) or are embraced in the mysterious desig- 
 nation, 'LOST from the classes'! The remaining 44 were 
 'dropped' as unpromising, 'expelled' as unsavory, or with- 
 drew in disgust. So that as Mr. Coles himself testifies, 
 notwithstanding the church had received an accession of 
 177 persons from other circuits and on probation, and 
 there had been only 18 deaths, yet the whole numUer was 
 LESS by just 17, than two years previously, at the com- 
 mencemeht of his labors! What a picture is this! One 
 hundred (nearly) separated from the institutions of reli- 
 gion, bearing the mark of disgrace! Nearly one-fourth 
 of the whole Methodist host (supposing the prospeHty of 
 the church to be equally great elsewhere) dismissed un- 
 der the stigma of eccleaiaslical dishonor every two j'ears! 
 By the last returns (in 1836) they reported upwards of 
 650,000; which, by the foregouig calculation, would give 
 upwards of 160,000 ex-communicants every two years, or 
 more than 80,000 annually! Is there not reason to fear 
 that the light which so shines is darkness? 
 
M