GOD only knows what unſpeakable Sorrow of Heart I have felt on your Account ever ſince I left England laſt.—Whither it be my Infirmity or not, I frankly confeſs that never did Jonah go with more Reluctance againſt Ninevah, than I now take Pen in Hand to write againſt you.—Was Nature to ſpeak, I had rather die than do it: and yet if I am faithful to GOD, and to my own and others Souls. I muſt not ſtand Neuter any longer.—I am well aware how our Adverſaries will rejoyce to ſee us differing among our ſelves.—But what can I ſay? The Children of GOD are in Danger of falling into Error, Nay, Numbers have been miſled, whom GOD was pleaſed to work upon by my Miniſtry; and a greater Number ſtill are calling aloud upon me alſo to ſhew my Opinion. I muſt then ſhew that I know no Man after the Fleſh, and that I have no Reſpect of Perſons any farther then is conſiſtent with my Duty to my Lord and Maſter JESUS CHRIST.

This Letter alſo will undoubtedly loſe me many Friends. But for this Cauſe among others, perhaps GOD ſtirs me up to write it, viz. to ſee whether I will forſake all for him or not. I think I have Truth and Scripture on my Side. I think it my Duty to be ſimple and conſiſtent, and leave the Conſequences of all to GOD.

I fear I have been ſinfully ſilent too long. For ſome Time before, and eſpecially ſince my laſt Departure from England, both in publick and private, by preaching and printing, you have been propagating the Doctrine of UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION; and therefore, if Paul reproved Peter for his Diſſimulation, (dear and honoured Sir!) O be not angry with me, if I deliver my Soul in telling you that I think in this you greatly CIT.

'Tis not my Deſign to enter into a long Debate on GOD's Decrees. I refer you to Dr. Edwards's his Veritas Redux; who I think is unanſwerable, except in a certain Point, concerning a middle Sort between Elect and Reprobate, which he himſelf in Effect afterwards condemns. I muſt firſt inform you, that I think you had no Call to be ſo explicit in the Doctrine of univerſal Redemption.

If I miſtake not when at Briſtol, you received a Letter from a private Hand, charging you with not preaching the Goſpel, becauſe you did not preach up Election.—Upon this you drew a Lot.—The Anſwer was, "Preach and print."—I have often queſtioned as I do now, whether in ſo doing you did not tempt the LORD?—Common Prudence without a Lot would have directed you in that Matter.

Beſides, I never heard that you inquired of GOD, whether or not Election was a Goſpel Doctrine? But I fear taking it for granted it was not—you only inquired, Whether you ſhould be ſilent, or preach and print againſt it.—However this be, the Lot came out, Preach and print. Accordingly, You preached and printed againſt Election. At my Deſire you ſuppreſſed the publiſhing the Sermon 'till I left England; but ſoon ſent it into the World after my Departure. Oh that you had kept it in! If that Sermon was printed in Anſwer to a Lot, I can give no other Reaſon why GOD ſhould ſo ſuffer you to be deceived, unleſs that hereby a Door might be opened hereafter for preaching up Election; and that GOD might give me another Opportunity, as he once did, by giving you ſuch another Lot at The Morning I ſailed from Deal for Gibralter, Mr. Weſley ar ••• ed from Georgia—Inſtead of coming on boa • d with me, though the Ship was not far off the Shore, he drew a Lot, and immediately ſet forwards to London. Behind him he leaves a Letter for me, in which were Words to this Effect,— When I ſaw GOD, by the Wind which was carrying you out, brought me in, I aſked Counſel of GOD,—His Anſwer you have incloſed. —This was a Piece of Paper in which were written theſe Words, Let him return to London.—When I received this, I was ſomewhat ſurprized. Here was a good Man telling me he had caſt a Lot, and that GOD would have me return to London. On the other Hand, I knew that my Call was to Georgia, and that I had taken leave of London, and could not juſtly go from the Soldiers who were committed to my Charge.—I betook my ſelf with a Friend to Prayer.—Th •• Paſſage in the firſt Book of Kings, Chap. xiii. where we are told, "that the Prophet was ſlain by a Lion, that was tempted to go back contrary to GOD's expreſs Order, upon another Prophets telling him that GOD would have him do ſo.—This Paſſage, I ſay, was powerfully impreſſed upon my Soul.—I wrote dear Mr. Weſley • ord that I could not return to London. We ſailed immediately. Some Months after I received a Letter from him at Georgia, wherein he wrote in Words to this Effect, "Tho' GOD never before gave me a wrong Lot, yet perhaps he ſuffered me to have ſuch a Lot at that Time to try what was in your Heart." I ſhould never have publiſhed this private Tranſaction to the World, did not the Glory of GOD call me to it. It is plain that dear Mr. Weſley had a wrong Lot given him here; and juſtly, becauſe he tempted GOD in drawing one. And thus I believe it is in the preſent Caſe. And if ſo, Let not the Children of GOD, who are mine and Mr. Weſley's intimate Friends, and are ſuch Advocates for Univerſal Redemption, think that Doctrine true, becauſe dear Mr. Weſley preached it up in Compliance with a Lot given out from GOD▪ Deal, of ſeeing what was in my Heart, and whither I wou'd be faithful to his Cauſe or not. Oh that it may be alſo for the Conviction of dear Mr. Weſley; that we may both think and ſpeak the ſame Things, and conſequently be better qualified to build up thoſe Souls that have been lately awaken'd, in their moſt holy Faith!

This I think may ſerve as an Anſwer to the firſt Part of the Preface to your printed Sermon, wherein you ſay, Nothing but the ſtrongeſt Conviction, not only that what is here advanced is the Truth as it is in JESUS, but alſo that I am indiſpenſably obliged to declare this Truth to all the World, &c.

That you believe what you have wrote is Truth, and that you honeſtly aim at GOD's Glory in writing, I do not in the leaſt doubt. But then, honoured Sir, if by tempting GOD, in caſting a Lot, as before mentioned, you have thought yourſelf indiſpenſably obliged to publiſh your Sermon againſt Predeſtination, I think, in this you have been much miſtaken.

But farther; As you have been unhappy in printing at all, ſo you have been unhappy alſo in the Choice of your Text.—Honoured Sir! How could it enter into your Heart to chuſe a Text to diſprove the Doctrine of Election, out of the Eighth of the Romans?—Where the Doctrine is ſo plainly aſſerted, that once talking with a Quaker, upon this Subject, he had no other Way of evading the Force of the Apoſtle's Aſſertion, than by ſaying, I believe Paul was in the Wrong. And another Friend 〈◊〉 , who was once highly prejudiced againſt Election, ingenuouſly confeſs'd, that he uſed to think, St. Paul himſelf was miſtaken, or that he was not truly tranſlated.

Indeed, honoured Sir, it is plain beyond all Contradiction, that St. Paul, thro' the whole Eighth Chapter of the Romans, is ſpeaking of the Privileges of thoſe only who are really in CHRIST. And let any unprejudiced Perſon, read what goes before, and what follows your Text, and he muſt confeſs the Word ALL only ſignifies, thoſe that are in Chriſt; and the latter Part of the Text, plainly proves what I find dear Mr. Weſley will by no Means grant, I mean, the final Perſeverance of the Children of GOD. He that ſpared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how ſhall he not with him alſo freely give us all Things? Viz. Grace to perſevere, and every Thing neceſſary to bring us ſafely Home to our heavenly Father's Kingdom.

Had I a Mind to prove Election and final Perſeverance, I know not that I could chuſe a better Text than you have choſen to diſprove it. One that does not know you, would ſuſpect you. You yourſelf were ſenſible of this. For after the firſt Paragraph, I ſcarce know whether you have mentioned it, ſo much as once, through your whole Diſcourſe.

But your Diſcourſe, in my Opinion, is as little to the Purpoſe as your Text; and inſtead of warping, does but more and more confirm me in the Belief of the Doctrine of GOD's eternal Election.

I ſhall not mention how illogically you have proceeded. Had you wrote clearly, you ſhould firſt, honoured Sir, have proved your Propoſition, That GOD's Grace is free to all; and then, by Way of Inference, exclaimed againſt what you call the Horrible Decree. But you knew People (becauſe Arminianiſm of late, has ſo much abounded among us) were generally prejudiced againſt the Doctrine of Reprobation, and therefore thought, if you kept up their Diſlike of that, you would overthrow the Doctrine of Election entirely. For, without Doubt, the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation muſt ſtand or fall together.

But paſſing by this, as alſo your equivocal Definition of the Word Grace, & your falſe Definition of the Word FREE▪ that I may be as ſhort as poſſible, I frankly acknowledge▪ I believe the Doctrine of Reprobation; and that GOD intends only to give a certain Number ſaving Grace, thro' JESUS CHRIST; and that the reſt of Mankind are leſt to periſh under the Imputation of Adam's G • ilt, and will be damned for that and their actual Sins. This is the eſtabliſhed Doctrine of Scripture, and of the XVIIth Article of the Church of England; as Biſhop Burnet himſelf confeſſes. Dear Mr. Weſley abſolutely denies them both. And why?

O dear Sir! What kind of Reaſoning, or rather Sophiſtry, is this? Hath not GOD, who hath appointed Salvation for a certain Number, appointed alſo the preaching of the Word as a Means to bring them to Salvation? Does any one hold Election in any other Senſe? And if ſo, How is preaching needleſs to them that are elected, when it is deſigned by GOD, to be the Power of GOD unto their eternal Salvation? And, ſince we know not who are elect and who reprobate, we are to preach promiſcuouſly to all. If it be uſeleſs to the Reprobate, it is no more than what GOD deſigned to permit. It's enough that all are brought home by it that he intended.

Secondly, You ſay, Page the 11th, That it, viz. the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation, directly tends to deſtroy that Holineſs which is the End of all the Ordinances of GOD.—For, (ſays the dear miſtaken Mr. Weſley) it wholly takes away thoſe firſt Motives to follow after it, ſo frequently propoſed in Scripture. The Hope of future Rewards, and Fear of Puniſhments, the Hopes of Heaven, and the Fear of Hell, &c.

I thought one that carrys Perfection to ſuch an exlated pitch as dear Mr. Weſley does, would know a true Lover of the LORD JESUS CHRIST, would ſtrive to be holy for the ſake of being holy, and work for CHRIST out of Love and Gratitude, without any Regard to the Reward of Heaven or Fear of Hell. You remember, dear Sir, what Scougal ſays,—Love's a more powerful Motive that does them move.—

But paſſing by this, and granting that Rewards and Puniſhments (as they certainly are) may be Motives, from which a Chriſtian may be honeſtly ſtirred up to act for GOD; How does the Doctrine of Election deſtroy theſe Motives? Do not the Elect know that the more good Works they do, the greater will be their Reward? And is not that Encouragement enough to ſet them upon, and cauſe them to perſevere in working for JESUS CHRIST?—And how does the Doctrine of Election deſtroy Holineſs? Whoever preached any other Election than what the Apoſtle preached, when he ſaid, Choſen through Sanctification of the Spirit? Nay, is not Holineſs made a Mark of our Election by all that preach it? And how then can Election deſtroy Holineſs!

The Inſtance which you bring, Page 11, to illuſtrate your Aſſertion, indeed, dear Sir, is quite impertinent; for, you ſay, If a ſick Man knows, that he muſt unavoidably die, or unavoidably recover; though he knows not which, it is not reaſonable to take any Phyſick at all: Dear Sir! What abſurd Reaſoning is here? Was you ever ſick in your Life? If ſo, did not the bare Probability or Poſſibility of your recovering, though you knew it was unalterably fixed that you muſt live or die, encourage you to take Phyſick? For how did you know but that very Phyſick might be the Means God intended to recover you by? Juſt thus it is in the Doctrine of Election—I know that it is unalterably fixed that I muſt be damned, or ſaved. But ſince I know not which, for a Certainty, Why ſhould I not ſtrive, though in a State of Nature, ſince I know not but this ſtriving may be the Means God has intended to bleſs in order to bring me into a State of Grace? Dear Sir! Conſider theſe Things,—Make an impartial Application, and then judge what little Reaſon you had to conclude the 10th Paragraph, Page the 12th, in theſe Words,—So directly does this Doctrine tend to ſhut the very Gate of Holineſs in general, to hinder unholy Men, from ever approaching thereto or ſtriving to enter in thereat. As directly, (ſay you, Paragraph 11th) does this Doctrine tend to deſtroy ſeveral particular Branches of Holineſs,—ſuch as Meekneſs, Love &c.—I ſhall ſay little in anſwer to this Paragraph.—Dear Mr. Weſley, perhaps has been diſputing with ſome warm narrow-ſpirited Men, that held Election, and then infers that their Warmth and Narrowneſs of Spirit are owing to their Principles. Does not Mr. Weſley know many dear Children of GOD who are Predeſtinarians, and yet are meek, lowly, pitiful, courteous, tender-hearted, of a catholick Spirit, and kind, and have Hope even of the moſt vile?—And why? Becauſe they know GOD ſaved them by an Act of his electing Love, and they know not but he may have elected thoſe who are now even the moſt abandoned. But, dear Sir, we muſt not judge of the Truth of Principles in general, nor of this of Election in particular, entirely from People's Practice:—If ſo, I am ſure more might be ſaid againſt you. For I appeal to your own Heart, whether you do not feel a Narrow-ſpiritedneſs towards, and ſome Diſunion of Soul from thoſe that hold particular Redemption. If ſo, then according to your own Rule, Univerſal Redemption is wrong, becauſe it deſtroys ſeveral Branches of Holineſs;—ſuch as Meekneſs, Love &c.

The Apoſtle St. Paul was not of your Opinion,—For, Col. iii. 12. 13.—He ſays, Putting on therefore (as the Elect of GOD, Holy and beloved) Bowels of Mercy, Kindneſs, Humbleneſs of Mind, Meekneſs, Long-ſuffering; forbearing one another and forgiving one another, if any Man have a Quarrel againſt any; even as CHRIST forgave you, ſo alſo do ye. Here we ſee that the Apoſtle exhorts them to put on Bowels of Mercy, Kindneſs, Humbleneſs of Mind, Meekneſs, Long-ſuffering &c. Upon this Conſideration, namely, becauſe they were the Elect of GOD. And all who have experimentally felt this Doctrine in their Heart, will feel that theſe Graces are the genuine Effects of their being elected of GOD.

But perhaps dear Mr. Weſley may be miſtaken in this Point, and call that Paſſion, which is only Zeal for GOD's Truths. You know, dear Sir, the Apoſtle exhorts us to contend earneſtly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints; and therefore you muſt not condemn all who appear warm for the Doctrine of Election, as narrow-ſpirited, or Perſecutors, becauſe they think it their Duty to oppoſe you. I am ſure I love you in the Bowels of JESUS CHRIST. I think I could lay down my Life for your Sake; but yet, dear Sir, I cannot avoid oppoſing you ſtrenuouſly in this Point, becauſe I think you warmly, tho' I really believe not deſignedly, oppoſe the Truth as it is in JESUS.—May the LORD remove the Scales of Prejudice from off the Eyes of your Mind, and give you a Zeal according to true Chriſtian Knowledge!

Thirdly, Says your Sermon, Page 13, Paragraph the 12th; This Doctrine tends to deſtroy the Comforts of Religion, the Happineſs of Chriſtianity.

But how does Mr. Weſley know this, who never believed Election? I believe they who have experienced it will agree with our XVIIth Article, That the godly Conſideration of Predeſtination and our Election in CHRIST, is full of ſweet Pleaſures, and unſpeakable Comfort to godly Perſons, and ſuch as feel in themſelves the Working of the Spirit of CHRIST, mortifying the Works of the Fleſh, and their earthly Members, and drawing their Minds to high and heavenly Things; as well becauſe it does greatly eſtabliſh and confirm their Faith of eternal Salvation, to be enjoyed through CHRIST; as becauſe it doth firmly kindle their Love towards GOD: Which plainly ſhews that our godly Reformers did not think Election deſtroyed Holineſs or the Comforts of Religion.—As for my own Part, this Doctrine is my daily Support,—I ſhould utterly ſink under a Senſe of my impending Tryals, was I not firmly perſuaded CHRIST had choſen me from before the Foundation of the World, and therefore will ſuffer nothing to pluck me finally out of his almighty Hands.

You proceed thus, This is evident to all thoſe that believe themſelves to be Reprobate; or only ſuſpect or fear it. All the great and precious Promiſes are loſt to them;—They afford them no Ray of Comfort.

And would dear Mr. Weſley give Comfort, or dare to apply the precious Promiſes of the Goſpel, (that Children's Bread) to Men in a natural State? GOD forbid! What if the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation does put ſome upon doubting? Is not this a good Means to put them upon ſtriving; and that ſtriving a good Means to make their Calling, and thereby their Election ſure?—This is one Reaſon among many others, why I admire the Doctrine of Election.—It has a natural Tendency to rouſe the Soul out of its carnal Security:—And therefore ſo many carnal Men cry out againſt it. Univerſal Redemption has a natural Tendency to keep the Soul in its carnal Security; and therefore ſo many natural Men admire and applaud it.

Your three following Paragraphs, 13, 14, 15, come▪ next to be conſidered. The Witneſs of the Spirit, (you ſay, Paragraph 14, Page 14.) Experience ſhews to be much obſtructed by this Doctrine. But, dear Sir, whoſe Experience? Not your own: For in your laſt Journal, you ſeem to acknowlege you have it not; and therefore you are no proper Judge in this Matter. You muſt mean the Experience of others; for you ſay, in the ſame Paragraph, Even in thoſe that have taſted of that good Gift, who yet have ſoon loſt it again (I ſuppoſe you mean loſt the Senſe of it again) and fallen back into Doubts, and Fears, and Darkneſs, even horrible Darkneſs that might be felt, &c.—And was not this the Caſe of JESUS CHRIST himſelf, after that he had received the HOLY GHOST? Was he not led by the Spirit into the Wilderneſs to be tempted of the Devil? Was not his Soul exceeding Sorrowful, even unto Death, in the Garden? And was he not ſurrounded with an horrible Darkneſs, even "a Darkneſs that might be felt,"—when on the Croſs, he cryed out, My GOD! my GOD! why haſt thou forſaken me? And that his Followers muſt expect the ſame, is it not evident from Scripture? For, ſays the Apoſtle, he was tempted in all Things like unto his Brethren, that he might be able to ſuccour thoſe that are tempted.—And why then ſhould Perſons falling into Darkneſs, after they have receiv'd the Witneſs of the Spirit, be any Argument, againſt the Doctrine of Election? Yes, you ſay, many very many of thoſe that hold it not in all Parts of the Earth, have enjoyed the uninterrupted Witneſs of the Spirit, the continual Light of GOD's Countenance, from the Moment wherein they firſt believed, for many Months and Years to this very Day.—But how does dear Mr. Weſley know this? Has he conſulted the Experience of many, very many in all Parts of the Earth? Or, ſuppoſing he had, does it follow that their being kept in this Light, is owing to their not believing the Doctrine of Election? No, this, according to the Sentiments of our Church, greatly confirms and eſtabliſhes a true Chriſtian's Faith of eternal Salvation through CHRIST, and is an Anchor of Hope both ſure and ſtedfaſt when he walks in Darkneſs and ſees no Light; as a true Chriſtian certainly may do, after he has received the Witneſs of the Spirit, whatever you or others may unadviſedly aſſert to the contrary. Then to have Reſpect to GOD's everlaſting Covenant, and to throw himſelf upon the free diſtinguiſhing Love of that GOD who changeth not; This, I ſay, makes him to lift up the Hands that hang down, and ſtrengthens his feeble Knees. Without believing the Doctrine of Election I cannot ſee how we can arrive at a full Aſſurance of Faith: An Aſſurance that all my paſt Sins are forgiven, and that I am now a Child of GOD; but may hereafter, for all that I know, become a Child of the Devil, and be caſt into Hell at laſt; is no Aſſurance at all, at leaſt not a full Aſſurance. No, a full Aſſurance of Faith makes the Soul give Men and Devils the Challenge, not only for the preſent, but for the future. Who ſhall lay any Thing to the Charge of GOD's Elect? It is CHRIST that juſtifies me, who is he that condemns me? It is CHRIST that died; yea rather that is riſen again, who is even at the right-Hand of GOD, who alſo maketh Interceſſion for me. Who ſhall ſeperate me from the Love of CHRIST? Shall Tribulation, or Diſtreſs, or Perſecution, or Famine, or Nakedneſs, or Peril, or Sword: Nay, in all theſe Things I am more than Conqueror through him that loved me. For I am perſuaded that neither Death, nor Life, nor Angels, nor Principalities, nor Powers, nor Things preſent, nor Things to come, nor Heigth, nor Depth, nor any other Creature, ſhall be able to ſeperate me from the Love of GOD which is in CHRIST JESUS my LORD.

This, dear Sir, is the triumphant Language of every Soul that has attained a full Aſſurance of Faith.—And this Aſſurance can only ariſe from a Belief of GOD's electing everlaſting Love. That many have an Aſſurance that they are in CHRIST to Day, but take no Thought for, or are not aſſured that they ſhall be in him to-morrow, nay, to all Eternity, is rather their Imperfection and Unhappineſs, than their Privilege.—I pray GOD bring all ſuch to a Senſe of his eternal Love, that they may no longer build upon their own Faithfulneſs, but on the Unchangeableneſs of that GOD whoſe Gifts and Calling are without Repentance;—For thoſe whom GOD has once juſtified he alſo will glorify.

I obſerved before, dear Sir, it is not always a ſafe 〈…〉 judge of the Truth of Principles from People 〈…〉 .—And therefore, ſuppoſe all that held 〈…〉 •• demption, in your Way of explaining it, after they receiv'd Faith, enjoy the continual uninterrupted Light of GOD's Countenance, it does not follow that this is a Fruit of their Principle:—For that I am ſure has a natural Tendency to keep the Soul in Darkneſs forever—becauſe the Creature is thereby taught, that his being kept in a State of Salvation, is owing to his own Free-Will: And what a ſandy Foundation is that for a poor Creature to build his Hopes of Perſeverance upon? Every Relapſe into Sin, every Surprize by Temptation, muſt throw him into Doubts and Fears, into horrible Darkneſs, even Darkneſs that might be felt. Hence it is that the Letters which have been lately ſent me by thoſe who hold Univerſal Redemption, are dead, lifeleſs, dry and inconſiſtant, in compariſon of thoſe I receive from Perſons on the contrary Side.—Thoſe on the one Side, tho' they might begin in the Spirit (whatever they may ſay to the contrary) are ending in the Fleſh, and building up a Righteouſneſs founded on their own Free-Will. Whilſt the others triumph in Hopes of the Glory of GOD; and built upon GOD's never-fading Promiſe, and unchangeable Love, even when his ſenſible Preſence is withdrawn from them.—But I would not judge of the Truth of Election by the Experience of any particular Perſons: If I did (Oh bear with me in this Fooliſhneſs of Boaſting) I think I my ſelf might Glory in Election. For theſe five or ſix Years I have received the Witneſs of GOD's Spirit; and ſince that I have not doubted a Quarter of an Hour, of my having a ſaving Intereſt in JESUS CHRIST. But I have fallen into Sin ſince that; and tho' I lay the Blame wholly on my own wicked Heart, yet, perhaps, it was permitted that I might confute thoſe who hold a Man cannot commit Sin after he is born again. I have been alſo in Heavineſs through manifold Temptations, and expect to be often ſo again before I die. Thus was St. Paul himſelf.—Thus was Luther, that Man of GOD, who did not hold Election; and the great John Arndt, was in the utmoſt Perplexity a Quarter of an Hour before he died, and yet he was no Preſteſtinarian; and if I muſt ſpeak freely I believe your writing ſo ſtrenuouſly againſt the Doctrine of Election, and pleading up a ſinleſs Perfection, is one great Cauſe why you are kept out of the Liberties of the Goſpel, and that full Aſſurance of Faith which thoſe enjoy who have experimently taſted, and daily feed upon GOD's electing everlaſting Love.

But perhaps you may ſay, That Luther, & Arndt, were no Chriſtians. I know you think meanly of Abraham and David; and have wrote me Word, That no Baptiſt or Preſbyterian Writer whom you have read, knew any Thing of the Liberties of CHRIST. See, dear Sir, what Narrow-ſpiritedneſs and want of Charity ariſes from your Principles; and then do not cry out againſt Election any more on Account of its being "deſtructive of Meekneſs and Love.

To proceed. Again, ſays the dear Mr. Weſley, Page 15, Paragraph the 16th, How uncomfortable a Thought is this, That Thouſands and Millions of Men, without any preceeding Offence or Fault of theirs, were unchangeably doomed to everlaſting Burnings?

But whoever aſſerted, That Thouſands and Millions of Men, without any preceeding Offence or Fault of theirs, were unchangeably doom'd to everlaſting Burnings? Do not thoſe who plead up for GOD's dooming Men to everlaſting Burnings, ſuppoſe GOD looks upon them as Men fallen in Adam? How then are they doomed without any preceeding Fault? Surely Mr. Weſley will own GOD's Juſtice in imputing Adam's Sin to his Poſterity: And alſo that after Adam fell, and his Poſterity in him, GOD might juſtly have paſſed them all by without ſending any one of them a Saviour. Unleſs you own both theſe Things, you do not believe Original Sin aright. If you do own them, you muſt acknowledge the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation to be reaſonable. For if GOD might juſtly have imputed Adam's Sin to all, and afterwards have paſſed by all, he might juſtly paſs by ſome. Turn either on the right Hand or on the left, you are reduced to an inextricable Dilemma.

Your 17th Paragraph, Page 16, I paſs over. What has been ſaid on Paragraph the 9th and 10th, with little Alteration, will anſwer it. I ſhall only ſay, 'tis the Doctrine of Election that moſtly preſſes me to abound in good Works: I am made willing to ſuffer all Things for the Elects Sake. This makes me preach with Comfort becauſe I know Salvation does not depend on Mens Free-Will, but the Lord makes a willing People in the Day of his Power, and may make uſe of me to bring ſome of his Elect Home.

But Fifthly, You ſay, Paragraph the 18. Page 17. This Doctrine has a direct and manifeſt Tendency to overthrow the whole Chriſtian Religion.— For, ſay you, ſuppoſing that eternal unchangeable Decree, one part of Mankind muſt be ſaved, though the Chriſtian Revelation were not in Being.

But, dear Sir, how does that follow, ſince it is only by the Chriſtian Revelation, that we are acquainted with GOD's Deſign in Reſpect to Mankind? And how then has the Doctrine of Election a direct Tendency to overthrow the whole Chriſtian Revelation? For, has not GOD intended this Revelation as a Means to bring his Elect home? And how then in holding this Doctrine, do we join with modern Unbelievers, in making the Chriſtian Revelation unneceſſary? No, dear Sir; you miſtake—Infidels of all Kinds are on your Side the Queſtion. Deiſts, Arians, Socinians, arraign GOD's Sovereignty and ſtand up for Univerſal Redemption.—I pray GOD dear Mr. Weſley's Sermon, as it has grieved the Hearts of many of GOD's dear Children, it may not 〈◊〉 ſtrengthen the Hands of many of GOD's profeſs'd Enemies! Here I could almoſt ſit down and weep. O tell it not in Gath! Publiſh it not in the Streets of Aſkalon; leſt the Daughters of the uncircumciſed rejoice, leſt the Sons of Unbelief triumph!

Further, you ſay, Page 18, Paragraph 19, This Doctrine makes Revelation contradict itſelf. For Inſtance; ſay you, the Aſſerters of this Doctrine interpret that Text of Scripture, "Jacob have I loved, but Eſau have I hated," as implying that GOD "in a litteral Senſe, hated Eſau and all the Reprobate from Eternity." And when conſidered as fallen in Adam, were they not Objects of his Hatred? And might not GOD, of his own good Pleaſure, love or ſhew Mercy to Jacob, and the Elect, and yet, at the ſame Time, do the Reprobate no Wrong? But you ſay, "GOD is Love." And cannot GOD be Love, unleſs he ſhews the ſame Mercy to all?

Again, ſays dear Mr. Weſley, "They infer from that Text, I will have Mercy on whom I will have Mercy, that GOD is Love only to ſome Men, viz. the Elect; and that he hath Mercy for thoſe only: Flatly contrary to which is the whole Tenour of the Scripture, as is that expreſs Declaration in particular; The Lord is loving to every Man, and his Mercies are over all his Works."—And ſo they are; but not his ſaving Mercy. GOD is loving to every Man; he ſends his Rain upon the Evil, and upon the Good.—But you ſay, "GOD is no Reſpecter of Perſons." No. For every one, whether Jew or Gentile, that believeth on JESUS, and worketh Righteouſneſs, is accepted of him. Notwithſtanding theſe Texts in the ſtricteſt Senſe, GOD will have Mercy on whom he will have Mercy; nay, I will add, and whom he will he hardneth.

You go on, Page 20.—"Again, from that Text, The Children being not yet born, neither having done Good or Evil, that the Purpoſe of GOD, according to Election might ſtand, not of Works, but of him that calleth, it was ſaid unto her (unto Rebecca) the Elder ſhall ſerve the Younger; they, (i. e. the Predeſtinarians) infer that our Predeſtination, or Election, no Way depends on the Fore-knowledge of GOD". But who infers this, dear Sir? For, if by Fore-knowledge, you mean Fore-knowledge as it ſignifies Approbation, (as it does in ſeveral Parts of Scripture,) then we confeſs that Predeſtination and Election do depend on GOD's Fore-knowledge. But if by GOD's Fore-knowledge, you underſtand GOD's foreſeeing ſome good Works done by his Creatures, and therefore electing them, then we ſay, that in this Senſe, Predeſtination does not any Way depend on GOD's Fore-knowledge.—But I referred you at the Beginning of this Letter to Dr. EDWARDS. Read his Veritas Redux, which I recommended to you in a late Letter, with ELISHA COLE on GOD's Sovereignty. Be pleaſed to read thoſe; and alſo Mr. COOPER's Sermons of Boſton, which I likewiſe ſent you, & I doubt not but you will ſee all your Objections anſwered. Though I would obſerve that after all our Reading on both Sides the Queſtion, we ſhall never in this Life be able to ſearch out GOD's Decrees to Perfection: No; we muſt humbly adore, what we cannot comprehend; and with the great Apoſtle, at the End of our Inquiries, cry out, O the Depth! &c. Or with our LORD, when he was admiring GOD's Sovereignty, Even ſo Father, for ſo it ſeemeth Good in thy Sight.

However it may not be amiſs to take Notice that if thoſe Texts GOD willeth that none ſhould periſh. I have no Pleaſure in him that dieth, and ſuch like, be taken in the ſtricteſt Senſe, then no one will be damned. For GOD may prevent every ones Damnation if he pleaſes, and cannot but in one Senſe be ſaid to will it, becauſe he might have prevented it if he would.

But here's the Diſtinction,—GOD taketh no Pleaſure in the Death of Sinners, ſo as to delight ſimply in their Death; tho' he delights to magnify his Juſtice in their Death. As a Judge may take no Pleaſure in condemning a Criminal, and yet juſtly permit him to be executed (though in his Power to procure him a Reprieve) in Order that he may ſatisfy the Juſtice of the Law.

I could hint farther, that you unjuſtly charge the Doctrine of Reprobation with Blaſphemy.—But the Doctrine of Univerſal Redemption, in your Senſe, is really blaſphemous.—For judge, whether it be not Blaſphemy to ſay, as you do, Page 20. Chriſt not only died for thoſe that are ſaved, but alſo for thoſe that periſh. The Text you have miſapplied, to gloſs over this, ſee it explained by RIDGLEY, EDWARDS and HENRY. I purpoſely omit anſwering this and ſome other Texts my ſelf, that you may be brought to read ſuch Treatiſes, which under GOD, would ſhow you your Error. You cannot, indeed Sir, you cannot make good this Aſſertion, "That CHRIST died for them that periſh," without holding (as One of the Moravian Brethren. Peter Bochler, in order to make out Univerſal Redemption, lately frankly confeſſed in a Letter) that all the damned Souls would hereafter be brought out of Hell. I cannot think Mr. Weſley thus minded. And yet without this can be proved, Univerſal Redemption, taken in a literal Senſe, falls intirely to the Ground. For how can all be univerſally redeemed, if all are not finally ſaved?

Dear Sir! For JESUS CHRIST's Sake, conſider how you diſhonour GOD. By denying Election you plainly make Man's Salvation depend not on GOD's FREE GRACE, but Man's FREE WILL. And if ſo, JESUS CHRIST died at a Venture, and perhaps would not have had one Soul as the Purchaſe of his Blood. Our Preaching would then be vain, and our Invitations to People to believe would be in vain alſo.

But, bleſſed be GOD!—Our LORD knew for whom he died.—There was an eternal Compact between the Father, and the Son.—A certain Number was then given him, as the Purchaſe of his Obedience and Death. For theſe he prayed, John xvii.—and not for the World.—For theſe, and theſe only, he is now interceeding; and with their Salvation, he will be fully ſatisfied.

I purpoſely omit making any farther Remarks on the ſeveral laſt Pages of your Sermon. Indeed, had not your Name, dear Sir, been prefixed to the Sermon, I could not have been ſo uncharitable as to think you were the Author of ſuch Sophiſtry. You beg the Queſtion, in ſaying, "That GOD has declared (notwithſtanding you own, I ſuppoſe, ſome will be damned) that he will ſave all, i. e. every individual Perſon." You take it for granted, (for ſolid proof you have none) That he is unjuſt if he paſſes by any; and then you exclaim againſt the horrible Decre • .—

Dear, dear Sir! O be not offended! for CHRIST's Sake be not raſh! Give yourſelf to Reading;—ſtudy the Covenant of Grace; down with your carnal Reaſoning, be a little Child! And then inſtead of pawning your Salvation, as you have down in a late Hymn-Book, if the Doctrine of Univerſal Redemption be not true; inſtead of talking of ſinleſs Perfection as you have done in the Preface of that Book, and making Man's Salvation depend on his own Free-Will, as you have in this Sermon; you will compoſe a Hymn in Praiſe of ſovereign diſtinguiſhing Love.—You will caution Believers againſt working a Perfection out of their own Hearts, and print another Sermon, the reverſe of this, and entitle it, Free Grace indeed. Free, not becauſe free to all; but free, becauſe GOD may with-hold or give it to whom and when he pleaſes.

Till you do this, I muſt doubt whether you know yourſelf. In the mean while I cannot but blame you for cenſuring the Clergy of our Church for not keeping to their Articles, when you yourſelf by your Principles, poſitively deny the IXth, Xth, & XVIIth. Dear Sir! theſe Things ought not ſo to be. GOD knows my Heart! As I told you before, ſo I declare again, nothing but a ſingle Regard to the Honour of CHRIST has forced this Letter from me. I love and honour you for his Sake; and when I come to Judgment, I may thank you before Men and Angels, for what you have, under GOD, done for my Soul.

There, I am perſuaded, I ſhall ſee dear Mr. Weſley convinced of Election and everlaſting Love. And it often fills me with Pleaſure, to think how I ſhall behold you caſting your Crown down at the Feet of the Lamb, and as it were filled with a holy Bluſhing, for oppoſing the divine Sovereignty in the Manner you have done.

But I hope the LORD will ſhew you this before you go hence: O how do I long for that Day! If the Lord ſhould be pleaſed to make Uſe of this Letter for that Purpoſe, it would abundantly rejoice the Heart of,