John Wesley: Counselor, Spiritual Adviser, and Guide to His Women Friends as Seen in His Letters Arranged by date of Writing Compiled and Edited by Page A. Thomas Retired, Bridwell Library, 1961-2007 December 14 , 2009 The printed letters in this collection, for the most part, have been excerpted from The Letters of John Wesley, edited by John Telford, London, Epworth Press, 1931, as published in the Wesley Center Online Database. The letters of Mary Cooke to John Wesley and the Eliza/Mary Cooke/Adam Clarke/Mr. Perkins/Miss Peacock correspondence, are to be found in their Letterbooks, housed in the Methodist Archives Manuscript Collection, Bridwell Library, Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University. Unfortunately, the Wesley Center Online has not been granted permission to publish online the full text of all of John Wesley‟s letters to and from his female correspondents. Those not printed here may be read in full in Frank Baker‟s Bicentennial Edition of Wesley‟s Letters (The Works of John Wesley, vol. 25, Letters I, 1721-1739, edited by Frank Baker, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1980). We have cataloged these missing letters by the name the of correspondents (to and from with page numbers); the letters mentioned in Wesley‟s diaries that have not survived and the incomplete letters, abstracts, extracts, quotations, references to the contents or purpose are listed within parentheses, as listed in the Index to Wesley‟s Correspondents on pp. 708-763. Letters in Baker’s vol. 2 (The Works of John Wesley, vol. 27, Letters II, 1740-1755, edited by Frank Baker, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1982) are listed in their proper place by date, without the full text of the letters. Letters to Women listed in Frank Baker‟s “List of John Wesley‟s 640 Letters not Appearing in Telford‟s Edition,” compiled in the late 70‟, have been cataloged by the name of correspondents (to and from) listing ownership as Individual or Institution (Contact NNU for this information), and if published, where the letter was published. Letters, 1721-1739: Chapman, Mrs.: to—502-504 Chapone, Mrs. Sarah (Varanese)—to--p. (248); from—p.248 Cox, Lady Mary: to—532-5 [Fallowfield, Mrs.?]—from 523-4 Granville, Ann („Selima‟): to—285-7, 300-1, 305-8, 310-13, 317-20, (323), 475-6; from—252, 279-80, 301-2, 308-9, 316-17, 323-4. Granville, Mrs. Mary: to—259-61; from—302 Harper, Mrs. Robert: see Wesley, Emilia Hawkins, Mrs. Thomas (Beata): from—(470n) Hopkins, Sophia (Mrs. William Williamson): to—490, 498, 512-13, 518 Lambert, Mrs. John: see Wesley, Anne Pendarves, Mrs. Mary („Aspasia‟): to—246-8, 249-50, 250-1, 252-3, 254, 255-7, 261-2, 263, 268, 269, 270-1, 272, (274-6), 274.6, 276-8, 280-1, 287-9, 293-4, 296-9, 303-5, 313-15, 390-1; from—248, 251-2, 253-4, 255, 267-8, 268-9, 271, 273-4, 284, 295-6, 299, 309-10, 389-90 „Selima‟: see Granville, Ann „Varanese‟: see Chapone, Mrs. (Sarah) Wesley, Emilia (Mrs. Robert Harper): to—(161), (729), (430-1); from—161, (214-15). (717), (719), (721), (729), (730), (731), (738), 430-1, 589-90 Wesley, Kezia: to—(717), (289-90, two), (731), (735), 746-7); from—(717), (719), (719-20), 289-90, (731), (734-5) Wesley, Martha („Patty‟, Mrs. Westley Hall): to—(242-3), (272); from—242-3, 272-3, (733) Wesley, Mary („Molly‟), Mrs. John Whitelamb); from—(323) Wesley, Mehetabel („Hetty‟, Mrs. William Wright); to—(177) Wesley, Mrs. Susanna: to—144-5, (149), 149-52, 153-6, (159), 162-4, 167-70, 173-6, (183), (183-4), (184-5), 186-9, (199), 208-9, (211-12), 212-15, (215-16), (217), (218), (227), (228-9), (232), (239), 244- 6, 282-4, (291), (326-7), 327-30, (330-1), (344-5), 347-8, 354-5, (362-4), 371-3, (382-5), 411-13, 418- 19, 450-1, 551-3, 555-6, 556-7; from—(144-5), 148, 149, 152-3, 157, 159-60, 164-7, 172-3, 178-80, 183-5, 189-90, 193-4, 198 (two), 199, 199-200, 200, 209-11, 211-12, 215-16, 217-18, 226-7, 228-9, 232, 233, 239-40, 291-2, 326-7, 330-1, 344-6, (347), (354), 362-4, 377-8, 382-5, (418-19), 445-6, (601, two) Williamson, Mrs. William: see Hopkey, Sophia Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, Sept. 23, 1723. To his Mother [1] This is the first known letter to his mother CH. CH., OXON, September 23, 1723 DEAR MOTHER, --I suppose my brother [Samuel Wesley. See next letter.] told you that Mr. Wigan who is now my tutor, and who, asking me what Mr. Wigan had of me for tutorage, told me he would never take any more of me than he had done, but would rather add something to than take from what little I had. I heard lately from my brother, who then promised me to order Mr. Sherman to let me have the rent of his room, and this quarter's studentship, by which, together with my five 11b from the Charterhouse at Michaelmas Day, I hope to be very near out of debt everywhere. The small-pox and fever are now very common in Oxford; of the latter a very ingenious young gentleman of our College died yesterday, being the fifth day from the beginning of his illness. There is not any other in the College sick at present, and it is hoped that the approach of winter will stop the spreading of the distemper. I am very glad to hear that all at home are well; as I am, I thank God, at present, being seldom troubled with anything but bleeding at the nose, which I have frequently. A little while ago, it bled so violently while I was walking in the evening a mile or two from Oxford, that it almost choked me; nor did any method I could use at all abate it, till I stripped myself and leapt into the river, which happened luckily not to be far off. I shall not want the notes of my entrance and a great while yet, but shall take care to write time enough them when I do; they can but be brought by the post at last if nobody comes this way or to London in the time. I should have been very glad to have heard my sister Suky or any other of my sisters; nor am I so poor, but that I can spare postage now and then for a letter or two. I heard yesterday one of the most unaccountable stories which title can only belong to the great God. I shall conclude with begging yours and my father's blessing on Your dutiful Son. Pray remember my love to all my sisters, and my service to Mr. Romley and his wife. For Mrs. Wesley, At Wroot. To be left at the Post-house in Bawtry. Wesley, John. Letter to Samuel Wesley, his Brother. Oxon, June 17, 1724. To his Brother Samuel [1] DEAR BROTHER, -- I believe I need not use many arguments to show I am sorry for your misfortune, though at the same time I am glad you are in a fair way of recovery. If I had heard of it from any one else, I might probably have pleased you with some impertinent consolations; but the way of your relating it is a sufficient proof that they are what you don‟t stand in need of. And indeed, if I understand you rightly, you have more reason to thank God that you did not break both, than to repine because you have broke one leg. You have undoubtedly heard the story of the Dutch seaman who having broke one of his legs by a fall from the main-mast instead of condoling himself, thanked God that he had not broke his neck. [See Spectator, No. 574.] I scarce know whether your first news vexed me, or your last news pleased me, more; but I can assure you that, though I did not cry for grief at the former, I did for joy at the latter part of your letter. The two things that I most wished for of almost anything in the world were to see my mother and Westminster once again; 'and to see them both together was so far above my expectations that I almost looked upon it as next to an impossibility. I have been so very frequently disappointed when I had set my heart on any pleasure, that I will never again depend on any before it comes. However, I shall be obliged to you if you will tell me as near as you can how soon my uncle is expected in England and my mother in London. I hope my sister is pretty well recovered by this time, and that all at Westminster are in as good health as Your loving Brother. PS.--Pray give my service to Mrs. Harris, and as many as ask after me. Since you have a mind to see some of my verses, I have sent you some, which employed me above an hour yesterday in the afternoon. There is one, and I am afraid but one, good thing in them--that is, they are short ... Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, Nov. 1, 1724. DEAR MOTHER,--We are most of us now very healthy at Oxford, as I hope you are, which may be in some measure owing to the frosty weather we have lately had, preceded by a very cool summer. [See letter of Sept. 23, 1723.] All kind of fruit is so very cheap that apples may be had almost for fetching, and other things are both as plentiful and as good as has been known in a long time. We have, indeed, something bad as well as good; for a great many rogues are about the town, insomuch that it is very unsafe to be out late. A gentleman of my acquaintance, only standing at a coffee-house door about seven in the evening, had no sooner turned about but his cap and wig were snatched off, which he could not recover, though he pursued the thief a great way. However, I am pretty safe from such gentlemen; for unless they carried me away, carcass and all, they would have but a poor purchase. The chief piece of news with us is concerning the famous Sheppard's ... escape from Newgate, which is indeed as surprising as most stories I have heard.. It seems he had broke out twice before, besides once out of the condemned hold, which, together with his having got his chains off again when the keeper came in, made them still more apprehensive of him. However, that he might be secure if art could make him so, he was fettered, manacled, and chained down to the ground, by one chain round his waist and another round his neck in the strongest part of the Castle. Notwithstanding which he found means to force open his chains and fetters, break through the ceiling there, and then, sliding to the leads of an adjoining house, to pass six several locked doors, and get clear off without discovery; all which was done between six and eleven at night. I suppose you have heard that Brigadier Mackintosh [William Mackintosh (1662-1743). of Borlum, Inverness-shire was Brigadier in the Old Pretender's service took a prominent part in the Jacobite Rising 1714, escaped to France 1716, returned to Scotland probably in 1719, and was imprisoned for life in Edinburgh Castle. See Dic. Nat. Biog.] was once more taken, but made his escape from a messenger and six dragoons after an obstinate fight. Three gentlemen of our College were in September last walking in the fields near Oxford about half an hour after six, of whom the foremost was named Barnesley, [Two .Barnesleys (or Barnsleys) were at Christ Church. John Barnesley, son of John of St. Luke's, Dublin, matriculated on Oct. 21, 1724, age 16. William Barnesley of London matriculated May 17, I723, age 19. It was probably the latter to whom Wesley refers. See Foster's Alumni Oxonienses.] who, going to cross the path, of a sudden started back and turned as white as ashes, but being asked by the others what ailed him, answered, Nothing. The second man coming up to the same place seemed presently more frighted than he, and bawled that he saw one in white shoot across the path as swift as an arrow. Mr. Barnesley, hearing that, told him he had seen it just before; and both of them describe it to have been like a man or woman in light gray, but of so thin a substance that they could plainly see through it. They had likewise another accident the same evening, though not quite so remarkable, both which made Barnesley so curious as to write down the day of the month, which was the 26th of September. We thought no more of it afterwards till last week, when Barnesley was informed by a letter from his father in Ireland that his mother died the 26th of September between six and seven in the evening. I suppose you have seen the famous Dr. Cheyne's Book of Health and Long Life, which is, as he says he expected, very much cried down by the physicians, though he says they need not be afraid of his weak endeavors while the world, the flesh, and the devil are on the other side of the question. He refers almost everything to temperance and exercise, and supports most things he says with physical reasons. He entirely condemns eating anything salt or high-seasoned, as also pork, fish, and stall-fed cattle; and recommends for drink two pints of water and one of wine in twenty-four hours, with eight ounces of animal and twelve of vegetable food in the same time. I shall trouble you no more about him here, since you may have probably seen the book itself, which is chiefly directed to studious and sedentary persons. I should have writ before now had I not had an unlucky cut across my thumb, which almost jointed it, but is now pretty well cured. I hope you will excuse my writing so ill, which I can't easily help, as being obliged to get done as soon as I can; and that you will remember my love to my sisters and brother, and my services to as many as ask after me. I should be exceeding glad to keep a correspondence with my sister Emly, [Emilia. She was eleven years older than John. She thanks him on April 7, 1725, for 'dispatching so speedily the business I desired you to do' (Stevenson's Memorials of the Wesley Family, p.262).] if she were willing, for I believe I have not heard from her since I was at Oxford. I have writ once or twice to my sister Suky too, but have not had an answer, either from her or my sister Hetty, from whom I have more than once desired the Poem of the Dog. I should be glad to hear how things go at Wroot, which I now reflect on with more pleasure than Epworth; so true it is, at least in me, that the persons not the place make home so pleasant. You said something of it in your last letter, which I wish could come to pass; but I am afraid I flattered myself too soon. It is well my paper will hold no more, or I don't know when I should have. done, but the scantiness of that obliges me to conclude with begging yours and my father's blessing on Your dutiful Son. Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, Dec . 18, 1724. DEAR MOTHER--I am very glad to hear you are all well at home, as we are here, the small- pox, which raged so much a little while ago, being now almost quite over. [See letter of Sept. 23, 1723.] Only one gentleman of our College had it, who is now recovered, so that the others who feared it are freed at last from their apprehensions. I have not lately heard from Westminster; but Mr. Sherman, who did, assured me that my brothers and sister there were very well. He has given me one or two books lately, of which one is Godfrey of Bulloigne. [A translation (probably by Edward Fairfax) of Tasso's Jerusalem Delivered, of which an octavo edition was published in 1687.] We have still very warm weather at Oxford; and a gentleman, now in the room with me, says that several of the flowers in his father's garden, who lives in town, are blown as if it were spring ... Pray remember my love to all my sisters: I would have writ to one or two of them if I had either room or time; but I am just going to church; for which reason you will excuse me for breaking off so abruptly and writing so bad. I shall therefore conclude with begging yours and my father's blessing on Your dutiful Son Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, May 28, 1725. To his Mother [1] DEAR MOTHER, -- My brother Charles, I remember, about a month or two since, was bemoaning himself, because my brother and I were to go into the country, and he was to be left behind. But now I hope he has no reason 'to complain, since he had the good fortune to go down in my stead. It was indeed very reasonable that he should, since he had never been at Wroot before, and I have; besides that, my father might probably think it would be an hindrance to my taking Orders, which he designed I should do on Trinity Sunday. But I believe that would have been no impediment to my journey, since I might have taken Bugden [Buckden] in Huntingdonshire, where Bishop Reynolds. ordained, in my way; and by that means I might have saved the two guineas which I am told will be the charge of Letters Dimissory. I was lately advised to read Thomas Kempis over, which I had frequently seen, but never much looked into before. I think he must have been a person of great piety and devotion, but it is my misfortune to differ from him in some of his main points. I can't think that when God sent us into the world He had irreversibly decreed that we should be perpetually miserable in it. If it be so, the very endeavor after happiness in this life is a sin; as it is acting in direct contradiction to the very design of our creation. What are become of all the innocent comforts and pleasures of life; if it is the intent of our Creator that we should never taste them? If our taking up the cross implies our bidding adieu to all joy and satisfaction, how is it reconcilable with what Solomon so expressly affirms of religion--that her ways are ways of pleasantness and all her paths peace? A fair patrimony, indeed, which Adam has left his sons, if they are destined to be continually wretched! And though heaven is undoubtedly a sufficient recompense for all the afflictions we may or can suffer here, yet I am afraid that argument would make few converts to Christianity, if the yoke were not easy even in this life, and such an one as gives rest, at least as much as trouble. Another of his tenets, which is indeed a natural consequence of this, is that all mirth is vain and useless, if not sinful. But why, then, does the Psalmist so often exhort us to rejoice in the Lord and tell us that it becomes the just to be joyful? I think one could hardly desire a more express text than that in the 68th Psalm, ' Let the righteous rejoice and be glad in the Lord. Let them also be merry and joyful.' And he seems to carry the matter as much too far on the other side afterwards, where he asserts that nothing is an affliction to a good man, and that he ought to thank God even for sending him misery. This, in my opinion, is contrary to God's design in afflicting us; for though He chasteneth those whom He loveth, yet it is in order to humble them: and surely the method Job took in his adversity was very different from this, and yet in all that he sinned not. I hope when you are at leisure you will give me your thoughts on that subject, and set me right if I am mistaken [See next letter.] Pray give my service to any that ask after me, and my love to my sisters, especially my sister Emly. I suppose my brothers are gone.--I am Your dutiful Son. Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, June 18, 1725. To his Mother [2] DEAR MOTHER--I am very much surprised at my sister's behavior towards my brother Charles, [Mrs. Samuel Wesley, jun., had evidently been vexed with Charles at Wroot. She had been a kind friend to John when he was at Charterhouse, and she was a young wife at Westminster. Charles told his brother in 1727 that he had cautioned Hetty “never to contraict my sister, whom she knows,‟ and who. had been very kind to her (Stevenson's Wesley Family, p. 304).] and wish it is not in some measure of his own procuring. She was always, as far as I could perceive, apt to resent an affront, and I am afraid some reflection or other upon her, of which I have formerly heard him make several, has by accident come to her knowledge. If so, I don't at all wonder at anything which might follow; for though I believe she does not want piety, I am not of opinion she abounds in charity; having observed her sometimes to retaliate with great bitterness, on imagined contempt or slighting expression. She has always been particularly civil to me, ever since I was fifteen or sixteen years old; nor do I ever remember to have received an ill word from her, even to the time of her last being at Oxford. We had then a pretty deal of talk together, frequently by ourselves, and sometimes about my brother Charles, and I don't know that she once intimated anything to his disadvantage, so that either she must be a very skilful dissembler or the misunderstanding between them has took its rise very lately. About a fortnight before Easter, upon my visiting Mr. Leyborn, [Robert Leyborne (or Leyborn] ... he informed me that my brother [Samuel Wesley and his wife seem to have been in Oxford about March before their visit to Wroot.] had writ to him to provide a lodging. Mr. Leyborn immediately made him proffer of Dr. Shippen's,[ Robert Shippen, Principal of Brasenose College 1710-45.] then out of town. But a second letter of my brother's in which he accepted the proffer being answered in three days (Mr. Leyborn says because did not receive it), a third comes from my brother, which indeed was a very strange one, if he had met with no other provocation. It began with words to this purpose: „That he well hoped Mr. Leyborn had been wiser than to express his: anger against his humble servant though but by silence, since he knew it would be to no purpose; and that now he need not fear his troubling him, for lodgings would be taken for his wife and him elsewhere.‟ How the matter was made up I don't know; but he was with them the day after they came to town, and almost every one of the succeeding. We were several times entertained by him, and I thought very handsomely, nor was there the least show of dislike on either side. But what I heard my sister say once, on our parting with Mr. Leyborn, made the former proceedings a little clearer, „Thus should we have been troubled with that girl's attendance everywhere, if we had gone to lodge at Dr. Shippen's.‟ You have so well satisfied me as to the tenets of Thomas of Kempis, that I have ventured to trouble you once more on a more dubious occasion. I have heard one I take to be a person of good judgment say that she would advise no one very young to read Dr. Taylor Of Living and Dying[See next letter.]: she added that he almost put her out of her senses when she was fifteen or sixteen year old; because he seemed to exclude all from being in a way of salvation who did not come up to his rules, some of which are altogether impracticable. A fear of being tedious will make me confine myself to one or two instances, in which I am doubtful, though several others might be produced of almost equal consequence ... IWE ARE of all men most miserable! God deliver us from such a fearful expectation as this! Humility is undoubtedly necessary to salvation; and if all these things are essential to humility, who can be humble, who can be saved? Your blessing and advice will much oblige and I hope improve Your dutiful Son. Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, July 29, 1725. DEAR MOTHER, -- I must in the first place beg you to excuse my writing so small, since I shall not otherwise have time to make an end before the post goes out; as I am not sure I shall, whether I make haste or no. The King of Poland has promised what satisfaction shall be thought requisite in the affair of Thorn [In 1724 a riot occurred at Thorn in Poland between Jesuit students and Protestants who were accused of sacrilege. The aged President of the City Council and several leading citizens were executed in December. The Protestant Powers of Europe were indignant, and the Poles especially annoyed by the speech of the English minister at Ratisbon. See Morfill's Poland, p. 2o3; and letter of Nov.]; so that all Europe seemed now disposed for peace as well as England, though the Spaniards daily plunder our merchantmen as fast as they can catch them in the West Indies. [Spain was hoping to regain her lost possessions across the Atlantic, and sought to monopolize the commerce of the most important part of the New World, and the rigid exercise of the right of search on the high seas gave rise to many acts of violence and barbarity (Lecky's England. in the Eighteenth Century, i. 449). In 1727 she besieged Gibraltar.] You have much obliged me by your thoughts on Dr. Taylor, [See letter of Feb. 28, 1730.] especially with respect to humility, which is a point he does not seem to me sufficiently to dear. As to absolute humility (if I may venture to make a distinction, which I don't remember to have seen in any author), consisting in a mean opinion of ourselves, considered simply, or with respect to God alone, I can readily join with his opinion. But I am more uncertain as to comparative, if I may so term it; and think some, plausible reasons may be alleged to show it is not in our power, and consequently not a virtue, to think ourselves the worst in every company. We have so invincible an attachment to truth already perceived, that it is impossible for us to disbelieve it. A distinct perception commands our assent, and the will is under a moral necessity of yielding to it. It is not, therefore, in every case a matter of choice whether we will believe ourselves worse than our neighbor or no; since we may distinctly perceive the truth of this proposition, He is worse than me; and then the judgment is not free. One, for instance, who is in company with a free-thinker, or other person signally debauched in faith and practice, can't avoid knowing himself to be the better of the two; these' propositions extorting our assent, --An Atheist is worse than a Believer; A man who endeavors to please God is better than he who defies Him. If a true knowledge of God be necessary to absolute humility, a true knowledge of our neighbor should be necessary to comparative. But to judge oneself the worst of all men implies a want of such knowledge. No knowledge can be, where there is not certain evidence; which we have not, whether we compare ourselves with acquaintance or strangers. In the one case we have only imperfect evidence, unless we can see through the heart and reins; in the other we have none at all. So that the best can be said of us in this particular, allowing the truth of the premises, is that we have been in a pious error, if at least we may yield so great a point to free-thinkers as to own any part of piety to be grounded on a mistake. Again, this kind of humility can never be well-pleasing to God, since it does not flow from faith, without which it impossible to please Him. Faith is a species of belief, and belief is defined 'an assent to a proposition upon rational grounds.' Without rational grounds there is therefore no belief, and consequently no faith. That we can never be so certain of the pardon of our sins as to be assured they will never rise up against us, I firmly believe. We know that they will infallibly do so if ever we apostatize, and I am not satisfied what evidence there can be, of our final perseverance till we have finished our course. But I am persuaded we may know if we are now in a state of salvation, since that is expressly promised in the Holy Scriptures to our sincere endeavors, and we are surely able to judge of our own sincerity. As I understand faith to be an assent to any truth upon rational grounds, I don't think it possible without perjury to swear I believe anything, unless I have rational grounds for my persuasion. Now, that which contradicts reason can‟t be said to stand on rational grounds; and such undoubtedly is every proposition which is incompatible with the Divine Justice or Mercy. I can therefore never say I believe such a proposition, since 'tis impossible to assent upon reasonable evidence where it is not in being. What, then, shall I say of Predestination? An everlasting purpose of God to deliver some from damnation does, I suppose, exclude all from that deliverance who are not chosen. And if it was inevitably decreed from eternity that such a determinate part of mankind should be saved, and none beside them, a vast majority of the world were only born to eternal death, without so much as a possibility of avoiding it. How is this consistent with either the Divine Justice or Mercy? Is it merciful to ordain a creature to everlasting misery? Is it just to punish man for crimes which he could not but commit? How is man, if necessarily determined to one way of acting, a free agent? To lie under either a physical or a moral necessity is entirely repugnant to human liberty. But that God should be the author of sin and injustice (which must, I think, be the consequence of maintaining this opinion) is a contradiction to the clearest ideas we have of the divine nature and perfections. I call faith an assent upon rational grounds, because I hold divine testimony to be the most reasonable of all evidence whatever. Faith must necessarily at length be resolved into reason. God is true; therefore what He says is true. He hath said this; therefore this is true. When any one can bring me more reasonable propositions than these, I am ready to assent to them: till then, it will be highly unreasonable to change my opinion. I used to think that the difficulty of Predestination might be solved by supposing that it was indeed decreed from eternity that a remnant should be elected, but that it was in every man's power to be of that remnant. But the words of our Article will not bear that sense. I see no other way but to allow that some may be saved who were not always of the number of the elected. Your sentiments on this point, especially where I am in an error, will much oblige and I hope improve Your dutiful Son. Wesley, John. Letter to Mother. Oxon, July 29, 1725. DEAR MOTHER, -- I must in the first place beg you to excuse my writing so small, since I shall not otherwise have time to make an end before the post goes out; as I am not sure I shall, whether I make haste or no. The King of Poland has promised what satisfaction shall be thought requisite in the affair of Thorn [In 1724 a riot occurred at Thorn in Poland between Jesuit students and Protestants who were accused of sacrilege. The aged President of the City Council and several leading citizens were executed in December. The Protestant Powers of Europe were indignant, and the Poles especially annoyed by the speech of the English minister at Ratisbon. See Morfill's Poland, p. 2o3; and letter of Nov.]; so that all Europe seemed now disposed for peace as well as England, though the Spaniards daily plunder our merchantmen as fast as they can catch them in the West Indies. [Spain was hoping to regain her lost possessions across the Atlantic, and sought to monopolize the commerce of the most important part of the New World, and the rigid exercise of the right of search on the high seas gave rise to many acts of violence and barbarity (Lecky's England. in the Eighteenth Century, i. 449). In 1727 she besieged Gibraltar.] You have much obliged me by your thoughts on Dr. Taylor, [See letter of Feb. 28, 1730.] especially with respect to humility, which is a point he does not seem to me sufficiently to dear. As to absolute humility (if I may venture to make a distinction, which I don't remember to have seen in any author), consisting in a mean opinion of ourselves, considered simply, or with respect to God alone, I can readily join with his opinion. But I am more uncertain as to comparative, if I may so term it; and think some, plausible reasons may be alleged to show it is not in our power, and consequently not a virtue, to think ourselves the worst in every company. We have so invincible an attachment to truth already perceived, that it is impossible for us to disbelieve it. A distinct perception commands our assent, and the will is under a moral necessity of yielding to it. It is not, therefore, in every case a matter of choice whether we will believe ourselves worse than our neighbor or no; since we may distinctly perceive the truth of this proposition, He is worse than me; and then the judgment is not free. One, for instance, who is in company with a free-thinker, or other person signally debauched in faith and practice, can't avoid knowing himself to be the better of the two; these' propositions extorting our assent, --An Atheist is worse than a Believer; A man who endeavors to please God is better than he who defies Him. If a true knowledge of God be necessary to absolute humility, a true knowledge of our neighbor should be necessary to comparative. But to judge oneself the worst of all men implies a want of such knowledge. No knowledge can be, where there is not certain evidence; which we have not, whether we compare ourselves with acquaintance or strangers. In the one case we have only imperfect evidence, unless we can see through the heart and reins; in the other we have none at all. So that the best can be said of us in this particular, allowing the truth of the premises, is that we have been in a pious error, if at least we may yield so great a point to free-thinkers as to own any part of piety to be grounded on a mistake. Again, this kind of humility can never be well-pleasing to God, since it does not flow from faith, without which it impossible to please Him. Faith is a species of belief, and belief is defined 'an assent to a proposition upon rational grounds.' Without rational grounds there is therefore no belief, and consequently no faith. That we can never be so certain of the pardon of our sins as to be assured they will never rise up against us, I firmly believe. We know that they will infallibly do so if ever we apostatize, and I am not satisfied what evidence there can be, of our final perseverance till we have finished our course. But I am persuaded we may know if we are now in a state of salvation, since that is expressly promised in the Holy Scriptures to our sincere endeavors, and we are surely able to judge of our own sincerity. As I understand faith to be an assent to any truth upon rational grounds, I don't think it possible without perjury to swear I believe anything, unless I have rational grounds for my persuasion. Now, that which contradicts reason can‟t be said to stand on rational grounds; and such undoubtedly is every proposition which is incompatible with the Divine Justice or Mercy. I can therefore never say I believe such a proposition, since 'tis impossible to assent upon reasonable evidence where it is not in being. What, then, shall I say of Predestination? An everlasting purpose of God to deliver some from damnation does, I suppose, exclude all from that deliverance who are not chosen. And if it was inevitably decreed from eternity that such a determinate part of mankind should be saved, and none beside them, a vast majority of the world were only born to eternal death, without so much as a possibility of avoiding it. How is this consistent with either the Divine Justice or Mercy? Is it merciful to ordain a creature to everlasting misery? Is it just to punish man for crimes which he could not but commit? How is man, if necessarily determined to one way of acting, a free agent? To lie under either a physical or a moral necessity is entirely repugnant to human liberty. But that God should be the author of sin and injustice (which must, I think, be the consequence of maintaining this opinion) is a contradiction to the clearest ideas we have of the divine nature and perfections.