the workings of his own mind. He will tell you, that every day strengthens this conviction; yea, that hourly he sees fresh reason to deplore his want of simplicity in intention, his infirmity of purpose, his low views, his selfish unworthy desires, his backwardness to set about his duty, his languor and coldness in performing it: that he finds himself obliged continually to confess, that he feels within him two opposite principles, and that he cannot do the things that he would. He cries out in the language of the excellent Hooker, "The little fruit which we have in holiness, it is, God knoweth, corrupt and unsound: we put no confidence at all in it, we challenge nothing in the world for it, we dare not call God to reckoning, as if we had him in our debt books; our continual suit to him is, and must be, to bear with our infirmities, and pardon our offences!" Wilberforce's Practical View, p.

28-37.

Such is the view, which a pious and impressive writer has given, of what, all who reflect must acknowledge, to be the true condition of man. Another writer, not less pious and impressive, (Mrs. Hannah More,) has, with her usual powers of eloquence, presented the same picture of the moral and religious history of the world, in her admirable Strictures on the modern System of Female Education. To observations similar to those of Mr. Wil'berforce, on the doctrine of human depravity, she adds this remark. "Perhaps one reason why the

faults of the most eminent saints are recorded in Scripture, is, to add fresh confirmation to this doctrine. If Abraham, Moses, Noah, Elijah, David, and Peter sinned, who, shall we presume to say, has escaped the universal taint? (H. More's works, vol. iv. pp. 330, 331.)

How easily is this question answered by the fol

lower of Priestley :-or I may add, (strange as the combination may appear,) of Wesley! The former produces his philosopher, the latter his saint, in refutation of such unworthy and disparaging notions of human nature. They differ indeed in one material point. The one contends, that by his own virtuous resolutions he can extricate himself from vicious propensities and habits; whilst the other is proud to admit, that the divine favour has been peculiarly exerted in his behalf, to rescue him from his sins. The one denies, that he was ever subject to an innate depravity: the other confesses that he was, boasts even of its inveteracy, but glories that he has been perfectly purified from its stains. But both are found to agree most exactly, in that vain self-complacency, which exults in the reflexion that they "are not as *other men

* The contemptuous language, which the overweening Methodist is too apt to employ, with respect to all who are not within his sanctified pale, but more especially with respect to the Clergy of the establishment, affords but too strong a justification of this charge as it applies to him. The clergy are uniformly with religionists of this description; "dumb dogs," "watchmen who sleep upon their posts." "priests of Baal," "wolves in sheep's clothing," &c. &c. Indeed Mr. Whitefield informs us in his works. (vol. iv. p. 67.) that " Mr. Wesley thought meanly of Abraham, and, he believes, of David also:" whilst, of Mr. Wesley himself we are told, that "wherever he went, he was received as an Apostle ;" and that "in the honour due to .. Moses he also had a share, being placed at the head of a great people by him who called them," &c. (Hampson's Life of Wesley, vol. iii. p. 35. Coke's Life of Wesley, p. 520.)—Mr. Wesley has taken care to let mankind know, that Methodism "is the only religion worthy of God:" (Hamps. vol. iii. p. 30.) and the miracles, which repeatedly attested his divine mission for the propagation of this religion, he has most copiously recorded throughout his Journals.-Whoever wishes to form a just idea of the pernicious extravagances of this enthusiastic teacher, and of his followers, will find ample satisfaction in Bishop Lavington's Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists compared, (a book VOL. I.

18

are;" and in the arrogant presumption, that they are lifted above that corruption of nature from which the more humble and more deserving Christian feels himself not to be exempt. In the philosophising Unitarian all this is natural and consistent. But in the Methodist, (I speak of the Arminian Methodist, or follower of Wesley,) it is altogether at variance with the doctrines which he professes to maintain. Accuracy of reasoning, however, is not among the distinctive marks of this latter description of religionists. But what is wanting in reason is made up in fancy. And as the great mass of mankind is moved more by the passions than by the understanding, it is not surprizing, that a scheme of religion, which addresses itself almost exclusively to the former, should have been extensively embraced: and that fanaticism and ignorance have, in consequence, combined with alarming effect, in spreading far and wide through these countries the mischievous extravagancies of this sect.

It is much to be lamented, that any of the friends of true religion have given countenance to such a perversion of its soundest principles: and it is matter equally of wonder and concern, that a system, which no longer covertly, but openly and avowedly, works in continued hostility to the established religion, has not met with more effectual resistance from those who may be supposed to take an interest in the well-being of the establishment. On the contrary, examples are not wanting of cases, in which the clergy have been set aside in the work

which B. Warburton, in one of his private letters to his friend Hurd, very unfairly describes, as "a bad copy of Stillingfleet's famous book of the Fanaticism of the Church of Rome,") and in the later publication of Nott's Religious Enthusiasm considered.

of religious instruction; whilst men, who uphold the Wesleian chimera of perfection, who openly reject the *Liturgy and Articles, and oppose the

* The treatment which the Liturgy and the Articles have experienced from Mr. Wesley, is, I apprehend, very little understood by the generality of those, who are disposed to look with complacency upon the sect of which he has been the founder. Professing to adopt the Liturgy of the Church of England, he has framed one for his followers, differing from it in many and essential particulars. He confesses, indeed, that he has made some slight alterations; which he enumerates in such a way, as would naturally induce the supposition, that the difference is altogether unimportant: whilst, in truth, he has not only newly modified the common prayer, and nearly abolished the whole of the baptismal office; but, besides mutilating above sixty of the Psalms, has discarded thirty-four others, and newly rendered many of the remainder. Of the Psalms, which he has discarded, six at least are admitted to be eminently prophetic of our Saviour, of his incarnation, his sufferings, and his ascension; whilst the reason assigned for the expurgation is, their being "improper for the mouth of a Christian congregation!!" But this is not all, the Rubrick and the appointed lessons are in most places altered; and the Catechism, and the two Creeds (the Nicene and Athanasian) totally discarded. Of these last mentioned alterations, it is also particularly to be observed, that Mr. Wesley gave to his followers no notice whatever; whilst the former were represented by him as of a nature altogether unimportant: so that the ignorant amongst his adherents were led to imagine, that they were not materially departing from the forms of the establishment, when in truth they were altogether drawn away from the offices of the Church. To complete the whole, Mr. Wesley provided his Communion with a new set of Articles, reducing the number from thirtynine to twenty-five; and making such changes, in those which he retained, as he found most convenient.-It may be satisfactory to the reader to know exactly, what are the Articles and Psalms that have been rejected by Mr. Wesley-The Articles rejected are, the third, eighth, the greater part of the ninth, thirteenth, fifteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, twentieth, twenty-first, twenty-third, twenty-sixth, much of the twenty-seventh, twentyninth, thirty-third, and three others of the less important ones at the end. Those marked in Italics are more particularly to be noticed. The Psalms rejected are, the 14th, 21st, 52d, 53d, 54th, 58th, 60th, 64th, 72d, 74th, 78th, 83d, 87th, 88th, 94th,

doctrines of the Established Church, have been deemed fit objects of preference to the recognized religious teachers of the land.

Against abuses such as these, and particularly against the open outrages upon decency and upon the rights of the establishment, of which many of this visionary sect have been guilty, I am happy to say, that some respectable members of the national church have lifted their voices in both countries. Amongst these I allude with particular pleasure to my respected friend and brother academic, Dr. Hales: and I allude to him the more willingly, not only because he has with much ability and good temper combated and confuted the extravagant dogmas, of sinless perfection, and miraculous impulses, which are the distinguishing tenets of this sect; but because he has, in opposition to their wild rhapsodies, exhibited such a portrait of the true Christian, and of the nature of that perfection which it is permitted him in this life to

101st, 105th, 106th, 108th, 110th, 120th, 122d, 129th, 132d, 134th, 186th, 137th, 140th, 149th. The general character of the rejected Articles and Psalms will pretty clearly establish what has been alleged as to the nature of the opinions, which Mr. Wesley and his followers maintain, or at least of the doctrines which they reject. But not to enter further into particulars, it may be sufficient in this place to notice two instances of omitted Articles, from which the spirit that governed the whole may easily be divined. The eighteenth Article, which pronounces, that "Eternal salvation is to be obtained only by the name of Christ ;" and the fifteenth, which asserts, "that Christ alone was without sin," are two of those, which the founder of Methodism has declared to be unfit objects of a Christian's belief. Thus it appears, that the Socinian is not the only sectary that would degrade the dignity of Christ.Such are the people from whom certain weak members of the establishment apprehend no mischief.-On the points which have been here noticed, see particularly Nott's Relig. Enth. p.

150-167.