Thy pris'ners release, vouchsafe us thy peace: Our present Redeemer and Comforter thou! Vol. II. p. 124. Let the yoke now be broke; Partner of thy perfect nature, A new sinless creature. p. 156. Bring thy heavenly kingdom in ; Fill us with thy glorious power, Rooting out the seeds of sin. p. 163. Come, thou dear Lamb, for sinners slain, Thine efficacious blood. O let it sink into our soul, Deep as the inbred sin; Make every wounded spirit whole, Pris'ners of hope, arise; Lo! on the wings of love he flies, p. 171. "Come unto me, the pard'ning God: Jesus, to thee we look, 'Till sav'd from sin's remains, Reject the inbred tyrant's yoke, By faith we apprehend the power JESU, our Life, in us appear, Who daily die thy death: In every waiting beart. p. 183. P. 194. In Him we have peace, In Him we have power: p. 323. A second edition of these hymns was published in the year 1755: and that without any other alteration than that of a few literal mistakes. I have been the more large in these extracts, because hence it appears, beyond all possibility of exception, that to this day, both my brother and I maintained, 1, That Christian Perfection is that love of God and our neighbour, which implies deliverance from all sin : 2, That this is received merely by faith: 3, That it is given instantaneously, in one moment: 4, That we are to expect it not at death, but every moment: that now is the accepted time, now is the day of this salvation. 19. At the Conference in the year 1759, perceiving some danger, that a diversity of sentiments should insensibly steal in among us, we again largely considered this doctrine. And soon after, I published Thoughts on Christian Perfection, prefaced with the following advertisement: "The following Tract is by no means designed to gratify the curiosity of any man. It is not intended to prove the doctrine at large, in opposition to those, who explode and ridicule it: no, nor to answer the numerous objections against it, which may be raised even by serious men. All I intend here is, simply to declare, what are my sentiments on this head; what Christian Perfection does, according to my apprehension, include, and what it does not; and to add a few practical observations and directions, relative to the subject. "As these thoughts were at first thrown together by way of question and answer, I let them continue in the same form. They are just the same that I have entertained for above twenty years." Q. What is Christian Perfection? A. The loving God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength. This implies, that no wrong temper, none contrary to love, remains in the soul; and that all the thoughts, words, and actions, are governed by pure love. Q. Do you affirm, that this perfection excludes all infirmities, ignorance, and mistake? A. I continually affirm quite the contrary, and always have done so. Q. But how can every thought, word, and work, be governed by pure love, and the man be subject at the same time to ignorance and mistake? A. I see no contradiction here. "A man may be filled with pure love, and still be liable to mistake." Indeed I do not expect to be freed from actual mistakes, till this mortal put on immortality. I believe this to be a natural consequence of the soul's dwelling in flesh and blood. For we cannot now think at all, but by the mediation of those bodily organs, which have suffered equally with the rest of our frame. And hence we cannot avoid sometimes thinking wrong, till this corruptible shall have put on incorruption. But we may carry this thought farther yet. A mistake in judgment may possibly occasion a mistake in practice. For instance: Mr. De Renty's mistake touching the nature of mortification, arising from prejudice of education, occasioned that practical mistake, his wearing an iron girdle. And a thousand such instances there may be, even in those who are in the highest state of grace. Yet, where every word and action springs from love, such a mistake is not properly a sin. However, it cannot bear the rigour of God's justice, but needs the atoning blood. Q. What was the judgment of all our brethren, who met at Bristol in August, 1758, on this head? A. It was expressed in these words: 1. Every one may mistake as long as he lives. 2. A mistake in opinion may occasion a mistake in practice. 3. Every such mistake is a transgression of the perfect law. Therefore, 4. Every such mistake, were it not for the blood of atonement, would expose to eternal damnation. 5. It follows, that the most perfect have continual need of the merits of Christ, even for their actual transgressions, and may say for themselves, as well as for their brethren, "Forgive us our trespasses." This easily accounts for what might otherwise seem to be utterly unaccountable: namely, that those who are not offended, when we speak of the highest degree of love, yet will not hear of living without sin. The reason is, they know all men are liable to mistake, and that in practice as well as in judgment. But they do not know, or do not observe, that this is not sin, if love is the sole principle of action. Q. But still, if they live without sin, does not this exclude the necessity of a Mediator? At least, is it not plain, that they stand no longer in need of Christ in his priestly office? A. Far from it. None feel their need of Christ like these; none so entirely depend upon him. For Christ does not give life to the soul separate from, but in and with himself. Hence his words are equally true of all men, in whatsoever state of grace they are: "As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me: without (or separate from) me, ye can do nothing." In every state we need Christ in the following respects: 1. Whatever grace we receive, it is a free gift from him. 2. We receive it as his purchase, merely in consideration of the price he paid. 3. We have this grace not merely from Christ, but in him. For our perfection is not like that of a tree, which flourishes by the sap, derived from its own root, but, as was said before, like that of a branch, which, united to the vine, bears fruit, but severed from it, is dried up and withered. 4. All our blessings, temporal, spiritual, and eternal, depend on his intercession for us, which is one branch of his priestly office, whereof, therefore, we have always equal need. 5. The best of men still need Christ in his priestly office to atone for their omissions, their short-comings, (as some not improperly speak,) their mistakes in judgment and practice, and their defects of various kinds. For these are all deviations from the perfect law, and consequently need an atonement. Yet that they are not properly sins, we appre hend may appear from the words of St. Paul, "He that loveth hath fulfilled the law, for love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom. xiii. 10, 12. Now, mistakes, and whatever infirmities naturally flow from the corruptible state of the body, are no way contrary to love, nor therefore in the Scripture sense, sin. To explain myself a little farther on this head. 1. Not only sin, properly so called, that is, voluntary transgression of a known law, but sin improperly, so called, that is, an involuntary transgression of a divine law, known or unknown, needs the atoning blood. 2. I believe there is no such perfection in this life, as excludes these involuntary transgressions, which, I apprehend, to be naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from mortality. 3. Therefore sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself. 4. I believe a person filled with the love of God, is still liable to these involuntary transgressions. 5. Such transgressions you may call sins, if you please: I do not, for the reasons above mentioned. Q. What advice would you give to those that do, and to those that do not, call thêm so? A. Let those who do not call them sins, never think that themselves, or any other persons, are in such a state, as that they can stand before infinite Justice without a Mediator. This must argue either the deepest ignorance, or the highest arrogance and presump tion. Let those who do call them so, beware how they confound these defects with sins, properly so called. But how will they avoid it? How will these be distinguished from those, if they are all promiscuously called sins? I am much afraid, if we should allow any sins to be consistent with perfection, few would confine the idea to those defects, concerning which only the assertion could be true. Q. But how can a liableness to mistake consist with perfect love? Is not a person, who is perfected in love, every moment under its influence? And can any mistake flow from pure love? A. I answer, 1. Many mistakes may consist with pure love. 2. Some may accidentally flow from it. I mean, love itself may incline us to mistake. The pure love of our neighbour, springing from the love of God, thinketh no evil, believeth and hopeth all things. Now this very temper, unsuspicious, ready to believe and hope the best of all men, may occasion our thinking some men better than they really are. Here then is a manifest mistake, accidentally flowing from pure love. Q. How shall we avoid setting perfection too high or too low? A. By keeping to the Bible, and setting it just as high as the Scripture does. It is nothing higher and nothing lower than this: the pure love of God and man; the loving God with all our heart and soul, and our neighbour as ourselves. It is love governing the heart and life, running through all our tempers, words, and actions. VOL. 8.-D Q. Suppose one had attained to this, would you advise him to speak of it? A. At first perhaps he would scarcely be able to refrain, the fire would be so hot within him; his desire to declare the loving kindness of the Lord, carrying him away like a torrent. But afterward he might; and then it would be advisable, not to speak of it to them that know not God. It is most likely, it would only provoke them to contradict and blaspheme: nor to others without some particular reason, without some good in view. And then he should have especial care to avoid all appearance of boasting, to speak with the deepest humility and reverence, giving all the glory to God. Q. But would it not be better to be entirely silent; not to speak of it at all? A. By silence he might avoid many crosses, which will naturally and necessarily ensue, if he simply declare, even among believers, what God has wrought in his soul. If therefore such an one were to confer with flesh and blood, he would be entirely silent. But this could not be done with a clear conscience; for undoubtedly he ought to speak. Men do not light a candle to put it under a bushel; much less does the all-wise God. He does not raise such a monument of his power and love, to hide it from all mankind. Rather he intends it as a general blessing, to those who are simple of heart. He designs thereby not barely the happiness of that individual person, but the animating and encouraging others, to follow after the same blessing. His will is, "That many shall see it, and rejoice, and put their trust in the Lord." Nor does any thing under heaven more quicken the desires of those who are justified, than to converse with those whom they believe to have experienced a still higher salvation. This places that salvation full in their view, and increases their hunger and thirst after it: an advantage which must have been entirely lost, had the person so saved buried himself in silence. Q. But is there no way to prevent those crosses, which usually fall on those who speak of being thus saved? A. It seems they cannot be prevented altogether, while so much of nature remains even in believers. But something might be done, if the Preacher in every place would, 1. Talk freely with all who speak thus and, 2. Labour to prevent the unjust or unkind treatment of those, in favour of whom there is reasonable proof. Q. What is reasonable proof? How may we certainly know one that is saved from all sin? A. We cannot infallibly know one that is thus saved, (no, nor even one that is justified,) unless it should please God to endow us with the miraculous discernment of spirits. But we apprehend these would be sufficient proofs to any reasonable man, and such as would leave little room to doubt, either the truth or the depth of the work : 1. If we had clear evidence of his exemplary behaviour, for some time before this supposed change. This would give us reason to believe he would not lie for God; but speak neither more nor less than he felt: 2. If he gave a distinct account of the time and manner |