Wesley's Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, ShropshireTyerman, L. (Luke)
Religion
Wesley's Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire
Tyerman, L. (Luke)
Fletcher, John, 1729-1785
Probably, by this time, the reader is tired of Creeds. He has had
Fletcher’s Creed for an Antinomian; Mr. Richard Hill’s Creed for
Arminians and Perfectionists; and now he has, in “The Fictitious and the
Genuine Creed,” Fletcher’s Creed for Methodists. The last may be dry
reading, but it contains truths of the utmost importance,—truths which
Fletcher spent the greatest part of his literary life in endeavouring to
explain and to defend; and, speaking generally, truths which Wesley
himself endorsed, embraced, and taught. Fletcher concludes his pamphlet
with the following scrap of autobiography:—
“I shall close this answer to the Creed, which Mr. Hill has composed
_for Arminians_, by an observation which is not foreign to our
controversy. In one of the ‘Three Letters’ which introduce the
Fictitious Creed, Mr. Hill says, ‘_Controversy, I am persuaded, has
not done me any good_;’ and he exhorts me to examine myself closely
whether I cannot make the same confession. I own that it would have
done me harm, if I had blindly contended for my opinions. Nay, if I
had shut my eyes against the light of truth;—if I had set the plainest
Scriptures aside, as if they were not worth my notice;—if I had
overlooked the strongest arguments of my opponents;—if I had advanced
groundless charges against them;—if I had refused to do justice to
their good meaning or piety;—and, above all, if I had taken my leave
of them by injuring their moral character, by publishing over and over
again arguments, which they have properly answered, without taking the
least notice of their answers;—if I had made a solemn promise not to
read one of their books, though they should publish a thousand
volumes;—if, continuing to write against them, I had fixed upon them
(as ‘_unavoidable_’ consequences) absurd tenets, which have no more
necessary connexion with their principles than the doctrine of general
redemption has with Calvinian reprobation. If I had done this, I say,
controversy would have wounded my conscience or my reason; and,
without adding anything to my light, it would have immovably fixed me
in my prejudices, and perhaps branded me before the world for an
_Arminian bigot_. But, as matters are, I hope I may make the following
acknowledgments without betraying the impertinence of proud boasting.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account