it would have been better to evince their conversion by the holiness of their lives. To this I have no ob jection. Yet, if their practice did not contradict their profession, I cannot, in the particular cases referred to by Mr. W., see any rational ground of objection to their modestly declaring that they were "converted from the error of their ways," and "had passed from death unto life." But were it even admitted that such conduct was indecorous, irregular, and disorderly, it certainly did not merit such harsh epithets as those of " enthusiasm, quackery, and imposture.”

To the triumphant end of malefactors you strongly object. I fear with you, Sir, that not only some of these, but many others deceive themselves by false hopes. Death-bed pénitents and gallows penitents, in my estimation, are equally doubtful characters; nor do I believe that God "continually gives to the most depraved individuals, those miraculous intimations, that foretaste of approaching bliss, which we know him to have given sometimes to saints and martyrs:" neither can I believe that "poor wretches, on the suggestions of Methodistical teachers, go to their death rejoicing, perhaps, even in the crimes which rendered them unfit for human society; as if those very offences had indirectly made them fit for the society of angels, and of the souls of just men made perfect." Sir, I have known many more "Methodistical teachers” than you ever knew, but I never knew one who thought that God continually gives, to the most depraved individuals, the foretaste of approaching bliss"-who suggested that criminals were to "rejoice in their crimes"-or

that their offences qualified them for "the society of angels;" nor do I believe that such a "Methodistical teacher" ever existed, notwithstanding the bold assertions of Dr. Valpy and the Rev. the Archdeacon of Stafford. No, Sir: the charge of saying, "Peace peace," where there ought to be no peace, belongs to another order of men, with whom you are much better acquainted-men who do not hesitate to absolve from their sins the vilest debauchees in their parishes, and to administer to them, a little before their exit, (what has frequently been called a passport to heaven) the sacred emblems of the body and blood of Christ.

But although I cannot admit without evidence that such "Methodistical teachers" ever existed, yet I will not deny that among the vast multitude of Methodists there have been some enthusiasts, who have formed a false estimate of their character, and have both spoken and acted extravagantly. But this will no more prove that the Methodistical doctrine of inward feelings is dangerous, than that the doctrine of justification by faith is dangerous, because some "turned the grace of God into lasciviousness," and said, "Let us sin, that grace may abound." Nor can it with any more candour be traced to the influence of Methodistical teachers, than the treachery of Judas to the influence of the Redeemer; or the innumerable public executions of the members of the church of England to the influence of the established clergy.

The Bible, and not inward feelings, is the pole star of the Methodists: to this they "take heed, as to a light shining in a dark place:" by this they try their

G

feelings whether they are of God: here they behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord, and are changed into the same image; and here contemplating the astonishing privileges of the dispensation of the Spiritpeace with God-joy in the Holy Ghost-the Spirit of adoption-the earnest of the inheritance-communion with the Father and the Son-and a lively hope of a blessed immortality, they are by a gracious influence elevated to their enjoyment. Agreeably to the doctrine of our Lord, having done his will, they know by blessed experience that the doctrine is of God.

That the blessings of the dispensation of the Spirit may be increasingly enjoyed by Christians of every denomination, is the earnest prayer of,

Reverend Sir,

Your's in the cause of truth,

J. STANLEY.

LETTER V.

REVEREND SIR,

It appears that the "fatal doctrine of feelings". ❝arose out of another erroneous opinion, in which the rival apostles of Methodism (Wesley and Whitfield) agreed; namely, their exaggerated opinion of the des pravity of human nature. With them, a robber or a murderer was not at all worse than any other human being not converted to their mode of saintship. They spoke of human creatures in general, as if their Maker and Creator had been the Evil Spirit, rather than God. They interpreted the words of our ninth Article in their strongest and most harsh sense, as if every person born was worthy of the worst species of eternal punishment in hell."* Where or when they taught such opinions you have not condescended to inform us; but why you have not done so it is not for me to say: only I would just remark, that you either did or did not know that they had taught such opinions. If you knew that they had, why not quote, or at least refer to the passages in which they are taught? This would have been perfectly satisfactory. But as you have not done this, the presumption is, that you were conscious of your utter inability to produce any such passage. It is but the too common practice of some writers to substitute declamation for argument, and confident asser. tion for proof.

* Page 20.

That they believed in the depravity of buman nature their works abundantly prove, especially Mr. Wa ley's celebrated Anewer to Dr. Taylor's "Doctrine of Original Sin.” A work in which he demonstrates, both from scripture and matter of fact, that man is a fallen creature-falles from knowledge and virtue; that we are born in sin and shapen in iniquity;-that by mature we are children of wrath, and that the thoughts and imaginations of the hearts of the unregenerate are evil, only evil, and that continually. With the ninth Article he places human depravity, not in the "following of Adam," but in the radical corruption of human nature; for out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. To assert that this is an exaggerated" statement of the depravity of human nature” is easy, but to prove it is quite another thing. That all have sinned the scriptures positively assert; but if all have sinned, all are depraved. To deny this would be to admit the production of an effect without a cause; which is a contradiction, and absolutely impossible. But if all are depraved, whence is this depravity? We are sometimes told that we derive this moral contagion from without-from the example of the ungodly. But this will never satisfactorily account for universal depravity. For if men become sinners through the influence of example only, is it not remarkable that some (say five in an age) do not escape the general contagion? Whereas none escape;

Matt. xv. 19.