, 1881-11-13

doctrine OF Lne lnLet11eu!Asss ot*lIS% % Stu ~
tile vast mass OF Christend"n', and IS found
III the prayers of the ages. Has Dr. lllo1!as
violated any nne of the twenGy@,tlve @ ! attic!es
Of the Methodist religion? Whlc,s Not
one. Has lie violated tfe only creed VI tl1s
f'Guast Wici. ast,cs S'fn OF So1 one for it defines
nothing as to the future state 0f the wicked.
but relegates this subject to the domain ot
opinions. What were the reqtsltlons o1
John Wesley for recognizing preachers u
his societies and as called of God to preach
4 godly experience. q lust colccptioE ot the
doctrines Of justification BY faith. and the
practical fruits nf the ministry in the cnnyci-
sion of souls. Can any ule feau JonA Mes-
ley's prayer book and not see there the very
idea suggested by Dr. Thomas:
but there is i stronger defense for Dr.
Thomas Tie Methodist articles are.takeli
from the English Church, and Jol!n Wesley
held the views Of the Episcopal Church o1
which l!e was minister and in whose COM
munion lie died. Now, If we can ascertain
what the position of the British Church WAS
as to the future punishment we shall Shnw '
what the position OF john Wesley anu tile
Methodist Church was rs 10 lu.HlS p,ta;tl ~ vatl,
or a mere opinion. If II mere opinion.
great wrong has been done Dr. Thomas rs i
Methodist and Il minister, and the Methodist
Church itself, by his condemnation,
punishment was aeitalcd III the early English
Church. Edward VI, the first King OF
England, after tile usurpation Of the Church
of Rome had been entirely checked, anu
the Church of England had secured her
primitive independence, published, by: royal
authority. forty-two articles Of religion;
agreed upon by the Bishops and other good
men in the convention heltt ut London III Tile
wear 1:l13. to root out the discurds OF opinion
and establish the agreement Of the true rc-
These articles were repealed ~ Qneen
Mary, the I'apal successor Of EdWaki l.
But Queen Elizabeth, her succ"ssors gave
royal assent to ''t!aiTty'-lllne articles agreed
boil, provinces. and the Whole clergy i'll tile
eonyucatiCn holden ut London in the year
1862 for avoiding tiivcl stiles vi opinion anu
for the establishing vi consent touching lhe
true religion"
BY Edward VI. contained these Wor'ts:
s.'rftey are worthy OF condemnation IIatI'1,
lan,llatione,} who eltleayor at this time to
restore the dangerous opinion tllat all men.
be they never sh nngodly, SNAIL al lelSln "
sins certain time appointed by Ghu's JUS
tice.'' The conyoca;ioli Of lGt'e- i'll their rt-
vision of the 1'rayer-Iook, struck out the
tnrty-second article, which has never been
recnarte This question y I,olt one OF optn": ,",
sistency, ali opinion OH this subject ut rarl-
ancs, with the curre1tt religious sentiment
without compromising his Subscription to the
Apostles Creed or tile Methodist Articles Ut
Religion.
But this question has been made tile snb-
iect Of legal adjudication i'll the highest
ecclesiastical court Of the Protestant world,
the Arches Court OF Canterbury: 10 tlils
formal decision every Methodist, Episcopal-
primitive faith should submit as authoritative
aud conclusive; that the. whole subject Of
hell aud its notifications belongs not TO the
faith, the essence OF belief, but to opinions,