Fletcher’s description of the antinomianism of the period is a frightful picture; and though not so applicable to the followers of Wesley as to those of the Countess of Huntingdon’s connexion, yet the former were not so free from the antinomian poison as they should have been. Hence the publication of Wesley’s theological theses; substantially the same as he had enunciated in 1744; but not so guardedly expressed. As they led to the longest and bitterest controversy in Wesley’s history, we subjoin them in their entirety. “We said, in 1744, ‘We have leaned too much toward Calvinism.’ Wherein? “1. With regard to _man’s faithfulness_. Our Lord himself taught us to use the expression; and we ought never to be ashamed of it. We ought steadily to assert, on His authority, that, if a man is not ‘faithful in the unrighteous mammon,’ God will not give _him the true riches_. “2. With regard to _working for life_. This also our Lord has expressly commanded us: ‘Labour,’ εργαζεσθε, literally ‘Work’ ‘for the meat that endureth to everlasting life.’ And, in fact, every believer, till he comes to glory, works for as well as _from_ life. “3. We have received it as a maxim, that ‘a man is to do nothing in order to justification,’ Nothing can be more false. Whoever desires to find favour with God should ‘cease from evil, and learn to do well,’ Whoever repents should do ‘works meet for repentance,’ And if this is not _in order_ to find favour, what does he do them for? “Review the whole affair: 1. Who of us is _now_ accepted of God? He that now believes in Christ with a loving and obedient heart. “2. But who among those that never heard of Christ? He that feareth God and worketh righteousness, according to the light he has. “3. Is this the same with ‘he that is sincere’? Nearly, if not quite. “4. Is not this ‘salvation by works’? Not by the _merit_ of works, but by works as a _condition_. “5. What have we been disputing about for these thirty years? I am afraid, _about words_. “6. As to _merit_ itself, of which we have been so dreadfully afraid; we are rewarded ‘according to our works,’ yea, ‘because of our works.’ How does this differ from, _for the sake of our works_? And how differs this from _secundum merita operum_? as our works _deserve_? Can you split this hair? I doubt I cannot. “7. The grand objection to one of the preceding propositions is drawn from matter of fact. God does in fact justify those, who, by their own confession, neither feared God nor wrought righteousness. Is this an exception to the general rule? It is a doubt, God makes any exception at all. But how are we sure, that the person in question never did fear God and work righteousness? His own saying so is not proof; for we know, how all that are convinced of sin undervalue themselves in every respect.