23. With your two following pages, I have nothing to do. But in the 52d, I read as follows. _A Methodist, says Mr._ Wesley, _went to receive the sacrament――――when_ God _was pleased to let him see a crucified Saviour_. Very well; and what is this brought to prove? Why, 1. That I am an enthusiast: 2. That _I encourage the notion of the real, ♦corporal presence, in the sacrifice of the mass_. How so? Why ¹_this is as good an argument for transubstantiation, as several produced by Bellarmin_. Very likely it may; and as good as several produced by you, for the enthusiasm of the _Methodists_.
♦ “corporeal” replaced with “corporal” per Errata
¹ Page 57.
24. In that _seraphic rhapsody of divine love_, as you term it, which you condemn in the lump, as rant and madness, there are several scriptural expressions, both from the Old and New Testament. At first I imagined you did nor know them; those being books which you did not seem to be much acquainted with. But upon laying circumstances together, I rather suppose, you was glad of so handsome an opportunity, to make as if you aimed at _me_, that you might have a home stroke at some of those old enthusiasts.
25. The next words which you cite from me, as a proof of my enthusiasm, are, ¹_The power of_ God _was in an unusual manner present_. I mean, many found an unusual degree of that peace, joy and love, which St. _Paul_ terms, _the fruit of the Spirit_. And all these, in conformity to his doctrine, I ascribe to the _power of_ God. I know you, in conformity to your principles, ascribe them to the power of nature. But I still believe, according to the old, scriptural hypothesis, that whenever in hearing the word of God, men are filled with peace and love, God _confirms that word by the Holy Ghost given unto those that hear it_.
¹ Page 61.
26. As a further proof of my enthusiasm you mention ¹_special directions, missions, and calls by immediate revelation_. For an instance of which, you cite those words, “_I know, and am assured, that_ God _sent forth his light and his truth_.” I did know this. But do I say, by immediate revelation? Not a tittle about it. This is your own ingenious improvement upon my words.
¹ Page 67.
“However, it was by a _special direction_.” For your own words in the same paragraph are, ¹_From the direction I received from_ God _this day, touching an affair of the greatest importance_.
¹ Pages 68, 99.
What, are these words in the same paragraph with those, _I know, and am assured_, God _sent forth his light and his truth_? Why then do you tear the paragraph in two, and put part in your 67th, part in your 68th and 69th pages? O, for a plain reason: to make it look like two instances of enthusiasm, otherwise it could have made but one at the most.
But you cannot make out one, till you have proved, that these directions were by _immediate revelation_. I never affirmed they were. I now affirm they were not. Now, Sir, make your best of them.
You add, ¹_Let me mention a few directions coming by way of command ――――Mr._ Wesley _says_, “_I came to Mr._ Delamotte_’s, where I expected a cool reception. But_ God _had prepared the way before me_.” What by a command to Mr. _Delamotte_? Who told you so? Not I: nor any one else: only your own fruitful imagination.
¹ Page 69.
27. Your next discovery is more curious still: that ¹“_itinerants order what they want at a public house, and then tell the landlord, that he will be damned, if he takes any thing of them_.”
¹ Page 69.
I was beating my brain, to find out what _itinerant_ this should be! as I could not but imagine, some silly man or other, probably stiling himself a _Methodist_, must some where or other have given some ground for a story so punctually delivered. In the midst of this, a letter from _Cornwall_ informed me, it was I: I myself was the very man, and acquainted me with the place, and the person to whom I said it. But as there are some particulars in that letter (sent without a name) which I did not well understand, I transcribe a few words of it, in hopes that the author will give me fuller information.
“As to the bishop’s declaring, what the landlord of _Mitchel_ says, in respect to your behaviour, I do not at all wonder at the story.” The bishop’s declaring! Whom can he mean? Surely not the Right Reverend Dr. _George Lavington_, lord bishop of _Exeter_! When, or to whom did he declare it? At _Truro_, in _Cornwall_? Or in _Plymouth_, at his visitation? To all the clergy who were assembled before God, to receive his pastoral instructions? His lordship of _Exeter_ must certainly have more regard to the dignity of the episcopal office!