29. I have now considered the most material objections I know, which have been lately made against the great doctrines I teach. I have produced, so far as in me lay, the strength of those objections, and then answered them, I hope, in the Spirit of meekness. And now I trust it appears, that these doctrines are no other than the doctrines of Jesus Christ: that they are all evidently contained in the word of God, by which alone I desire to stand or fall; and that they are fundamentally the same with the doctrines of the church of _England_, of which I do, and ever did profess myself a member.
But there remains one objection, which though relating to the head of doctrine, yet is independent on all that went before. And that is, “You cannot agree in your doctrines among yourselves. One holds one thing, and one another. Mr. _Whitefield_ anathematizes Mr. _Wesley_; and Mr. _Wesley_ anathematizes Mr. _Whitefield_. And yet each pretends to be led by the Holy Ghost, by the infallible Spirit of God! Every reasonable man must conclude from hence, that neither one nor the other is led by that Spirit.”
I need not say, how continually this has been urged, both in common conversation and from the press: (I am grieved to add, and from the pulpit too: for, if the argument were good, it would overturn the bible.) Nor, how great stress has been continually laid upon it: whoever proposes it, proposes it as demonstration, and generally claps his wings, as being quite assured, it will admit of no answer.
And indeed I am in doubt, whether it does admit (I am sure, it does not _require_) any other answer, than that course one of the countryman to the _Romish_ champion, “_Bellarmine_, Thou liest.” For every proposition contained herein, is grossly, shamelessly false. 1. “You cannot agree in your doctrines among yourselves.”――Who told you so? All our fundamental doctrines, I have recited above. And in every one of these we do and have agreed for several years. In these we hold one and the same thing. In smaller points, each of us thinks, and lets think. 2. “Mr. _Whitefield_ anathematizes Mr. _Wesley_.” Another shameless untruth. Let any one read what Mr. _Whitefield_ wrote, even in the heat of controversy, and he will be convinced of the contrary. 3. “And Mr. _Wesley_ anathematizes Mr. _Whitefield_.” This is equally false and scandalous. I reverence Mr. _Whitefield_, both as a child of God, and a true minister of Jesus Christ. 4. “And yet each pretends to be led by the Holy Ghost, by the infallible Spirit of God.” Not in our private opinions: nor does either of us pretend to be any farther led by the Spirit of God, than every Christian must pretend to be, unless he will deny the bible. For only _as many as are led by the Spirit of |God|, are the sons of |God|._ Therefore, if _you_ do not pretend to be led by him too, yea, if it be not so in fact, _you are none of his_.
And now, what is become of your demonstration? Leave it to the car-men and porters, its just proprietors: to the zealous apple-women that cry after me in the street, “This is he that rails at the _Whole Dutyful_ of Man.” But let every one that pretends to learning or reason, be ashamed to mention it any more.
30. The first inference, easily deduced from what has been said, is, “That we are not _false prophets_.” In one sense of the word, we are no prophets at all; for we do not foretel things to come. But in another (wherein every minister is a prophet) we are. For we do speak in the name of God. Now a false prophet (in this sense of the word) is one, who declares as the will of God, what is not so. But we declare (as has been shewn at large) nothing else as the will of God, but what is evidently contained in his written word, as explained by our own church. Therefore, unless you can prove the bible to be a _false book_, you cannot possibly prove us to be _false prophets_.