But to return to an examination of the other part of the author’s preface. After he has taken it for granted, that many irregularities are justly charged upon these itinerant preachers, as “Violations of the laws of church and state,” he adds, “It may be proper to enquire, whether the doctrines they teach, and those lengths they run beyond what is practised among our religious societies, or in any other christian church, be a service or disservice to religion.” The religious societies or any other christian church! What, does our author make the religious societies a church? This is going further than the Methodists, whom he is pleased to stile only a sect. But if the religious societies, my Lords, be a church, may it not be proper to enquire how their doctrines or practices came to be set up as a rule and standard for others to go by, so that persons doing service or disservice to religion must be judged of according as they deviate from or adhere to the religious societies either in doctrine or practice? Or supposing the religious societies were to be a standard for others to go by, was it not incumbent on the author to give the public a short summary and account of their doctrines and practices? For otherwise how can the world possibly judge whether the Methodists do deviate from them; or if so, whether they do thereby service or disservice to religion? Indeed, this author has told us in his first part, how the religious societies behave on _Sundays_; but he has no where acquainted us with the principles they hold, or how they behave on other days. And till he does, I will venture to affirm, that unless these itinerants teach other doctrines than the present religious societies generally hold, and run greater lengths in christianity than the generality of them, it is to be feared, now run, they will be in great danger of never arriving at “the mark for the prize of their high-calling in CHRIST JESUS their LORD.”
I have been the more particular, my Lord, in the examination of the preface, because the author, by annexing these words, “to which purpose the following queries are submitted to consideration,” seems to lay it down as the ground-work and foundation of all the subsequent queries. And if the foundation be so weak and sandy, how slight and superficial must be the superstructure?
I suppose your Lordships will readily grant, that it is the bounden duty of every regular and fair writer (especially when he is charging others with irregularities as violations of the laws of church and state) to take care that he does not violate the laws of christian charity. Or if he puts queries to the public concerning any persons, ought he not to take heed that those queries are founded upon truth, and that the charges therein exhibited are really matter of fact? But our author has notoriously neglected this fundamental rule, and thereby not only cast a lasting blot and odium upon his own character, if his name was known, but also hath done real hurt to the cause he would defend. The query already examined concerning _itinerant preaching_, wherein he has charged the Methodists with instilling into people a few favourite tenets of their own, sufficiently demonstrates this. But this is not all; several of the other queries now coming under consideration are by no means founded on truth, and contain charges against these itinerants, whereby they are as much wronged and unjustly vilified as ever _Stephen_ was, when the _Jews_ suborned men who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against _Moses_ and against GOD, this holy place and the law.”
To prove this, we need only examine the two queries which immediately follow the preface.
_Query 1st._ “Whether notions in religion may not be heightened to such extremes, as to lead some into a disregard of religion itself through despair of attaining such _exalted heights_? and whether others, who have imbibed those notions, may not be led by them into a disregard and disesteem of the common duties and offices of life, to such a degree at least as is inconsistent with that attention to them, and that diligence in them, which providence has made necessary to the well-being of private families and public societies, and which christianity does not only require in all stations and in all conditions, but declares at the same time (_Colossians_ iii. 22. _Ephesians_ ♦v. 6.) that the performance even of the lowest offices in life, as unto GOD (whose providence has placed people in their several stations) is truly serving CHRIST, and will not fail of its reward in the next world.”
♦ “5” replaced with “v” for consistency
_Query 2._ “Whether the enemy of mankind may not find his account in their carrying christianity, which was designed for a rule to all stations and all conditions, to _such heights_ as make it fairly practicable by a very few in comparison, or rather by none?”