46.
According to that Gospel which hath hitherto been the pillar of the Christian world, we are taught that whosoever endeavours to the best of his ability to reform his manners, and amend his life, will have pardon and acceptance.
As interpreted by whom?
By the Socini, or the Barrister ?--Or by Origen, Chrysostom, Jerome, the Gregories, Eusebius, Athanasius ?--By Thomas Aquinas, Bernard, Thomas-a-Kempis ?--By Luther, Melancthon, Zuinglius, Calvin ?--By the Reformers and martyrs of the English Church ?--By Cartwright and the learned Puritans ?--By Knox ?--By George Fox ?--With regard to this point, that mere external evidence is inadequate to the production of a saving faith, and in the majority of other opinions, all these agree with Wesley.

So they all understood the Gospel.

But it is not so! 'Ergo', the Barrister is infallible.
Ib.p.

47.
'When the wicked man turneth away from the wickedness which he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive'.

This gracious declaration the old moral divines of our Church have placed in the front of its Liturgy.
In the name of patience, over and over again, who has ever denied this?
The question is, by what power, his own, or by the free grace of God through Christ, the wicked man is enabled to turn from his wickedness.
And again and again I ask:--Were not these "old moral divines" the authors and compilers of the Homilies?
If the Barrister does not know this, he is an ignorant man; if knowing it, he has yet never examined the Homilies, he is an unjust man; but if he have, he is a slanderer and a sycophant.
Is it not intolerable to take up three bulky pamphlets against a recent Sect, denounced as most dangerous, and which we all know to be most powerful and of rapid increase, and to find little more than a weak declamatory abuse of certain metaphysical dogmas concerning free will, or free will forfeited, 'de libero vel servo arbitrio'-- of grace, predestination, and the like;--dogmas on which, according to Milton, God and the Logos conversed, as soon as man was in existence, they in heaven, and Adam in paradise, and the devils in hell;--dogmas common to all religions, and to all ages and sects of the Christian religion;--concerning which Brahmin disputes with Brahmin, Mahometan with Mahometan, and Priestley with Price;--and all this to be laid on the shoulders of the Methodists collectively: though it is a notorious fact, that a radical difference on this abstruse subject is the ground of the schism between the Whitfieldite and Wesleyan Methodists; and that the latter coincide in opinion with Erasmus and Arminius, by which latter name they distinguish themselves; and the former with Luther, Calvin, and their great guide, St.Augustine?
This I say is intolerable,--yea, a crime against sense, candour, and white paper.
Ib.p.