Xvii. Xviii.

XVII.

FOR THE DOCTRINE OF MERIT. V.

AGAINST THE DOCTRINE OF MERIT.

65. “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, or, ‘as our works deserve?’ Can you split this hair? I doubt I cannot.” — I say so still. Let Mr. H., if he can. (“And yet I still maintain, there is no merit, taking the word strictly, but in the blood of Christ; that salvation is not by the merit of works; and that there is nothing we are, or have, or do, which can, strictly speaking, deserve the least thing at God’s hand.”)

And all this is no more than to say, Take the word merit in a strict sense, and I utterly renounce it; take it in a looser sense, and though I never use it, yet I do not condemn it. Therefore, with regard to the word merit, I do not contradict myself at all.

XVIII.

FOR A SINGLE LIFE. VS. AGAINST A SINGLE LIFE.

66. “Mr. W. says, his thoughts on a single life are just the same they have been these thirty years.” (“Why, then, did Mr. W. marry?” For reasons best known to himself. (Page 136.)

67. “He advises that we should pray against marriage.” (“I advise single persons to pray, that they may prize the advantages they enjoy.” Be this right or wrong, still here is no contradiction.

XIX.

FOR GAY APPAREL. VS. AGAINST GAY APPAREL.

68. “To make it a point of conscience to differ from others (as the Quakers do) in the shape or color of their apparel, is mere superstition.” So I advise; but I do not “make it a point of conscience.” So here is no contradiction still. (“Let a single intention to please God prescribe both what clothing you should buy, and the manner wherein it shall be made.” (Ibid.) This I stand to. “Wear nothing of a glaring color, or made in the very height of fashion.”)

XX.

AGAINST TEA. VS. FOR TEA.

69. “Mr. W. published a tract against drinking tea, and told the tea-drinkers, he would set them an example in that piece of self-denial.” (I did set them an example for twelve years. Then, at the close of a consumption, by Dr. Fothergill’s direction, I used it again.) But must not a man be sadly in want of argument who stoops so low as this?

XXI.

FOR BAPTISM BY SPRINKLING. VS.

AGAINST BAPTISM BY SPRINKLING.

70. “As there is no clear proof of dipping in Scripture, so there is very probable proof to the contrary.” (“When Mr. W. baptized Mrs. L. S., he held her so long under water, that her friends screamed out, thinking she had been drowned.” When? Where? I never heard of it before.)

71. “Christ nowhere, as far as I can find, requires dipping, but only baptizing; which word signifies to pour on, or sprinkle, as well as to dip.” (“Why then did you at Savannah baptize all children by immersion, unless