“1771. August 14.—When I received your ladyship’s letter of the 2nd inst., I immediately saw that it required an answer, only I waited till the hurry of Conference was over, that I might do nothing rashly. I know your ladyship would not servilely ‘deny the truth;’ neither would I; especially that great truth, justification by faith, for which I have given up all my worldly hopes, my friends, my reputation; yea, for which I have so often hazarded my life, and by the grace of God will do again. The principles established in the ‘Minutes’ I apprehend to be no way contrary to this; or to that faith which was once delivered to the saints. I believe whoever calmly considers Mr. Fletcher’s letters will be convinced of this. I fear, therefore, ‘zeal against those principles’ is no less than zeal against the truth, and against the honour of our Lord. The preservation of His honour appears so sacred to me, and has done for above these forty years, that I have counted, and do count, all things loss in comparison of it. But till Mr. Fletcher’s printed letters are answered, I must think everything spoken against those ‘Minutes’ is totally destructive of His honour, and a palpable affront to Him both as our Prophet and Priest, but more especially as our King. Those letters, therefore, which could not be suppressed without betraying the honour of our Lord, largely prove that the ‘Minutes’ lay no other foundation than that which is laid in Scripture, and which I have been laying, and teaching others to lay, for between thirty and forty years. Indeed, it would be amazing that God should at this day prosper my labours, as much if not more than ever, by convincing as well as converting sinners, if I was ‘establishing another foundation, repugnant to the whole plan of man’s salvation under the covenant of grace, as well as the clear meaning of our Established Church and all other Protestant Churches.’ This is a charge indeed! But I plead, not guilty; and till it is proved upon me, I must subscribe myself, my dear lady, your ladyship’s affectionate but much injured servant,

“John Wesley.”[[234]]

Thus, by Wesley’s firmness, Fletcher’s manuscript, without any delay, was printed and published. Its title was, “A Vindication of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s Last Minutes: Occasioned by a circular printed Letter, inviting principal Persons, both Clergy and Laity, as well of the Dissenters as of the Established Church, who disapprove of those Minutes, to oppose them in a Body, as a dreadful Heresy: And designed to remove Prejudice, check Rashness, promote Forbearance, defend the Character of an eminent Minister of Christ, and prevent some important Scriptural Truths from being hastily branded as heretical. In Five Letters, to the Hon.[Hon.] and Rev. Author of the Circular Letter. By a Lover of Quietness and Liberty of Conscience. Bristol: Printed by W. Pine, in Wine Street, 1771.” 12 mo., 98 pp.

The publication roused again the Hon. and Rev. Walter Shirley, who immediately prepared and published “A Narrative of the principal Circumstances relative to the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s late Conference, held in Bristol, August the 6th, 1771, at which the Rev. Mr. Shirley, and others, his Friends, were present. With a Declaration then agreed to by Mr. Wesley, and Fifty-three of the Preachers in Connection with him. In a Letter to a Friend. By the Rev. Mr. Shirley. Bath: 1771.” 12mo., 24 pp.

Upon the whole, Mr. Shirley’s “Narrative” was truthful, fair, and respectful.[[235]] It is dated “Bath, September 12, 1771.” He apprised Fletcher of its contents, and of his intention to publish it; and Fletcher, in reply, wrote the following letter, which completes the history of the commencement of the great Calvinistical controversy:—

“Madeley, September 11, 1771.

“Rev. and Dear Sir,—It is extremely proper, nay, it is highly necessary, that the public should be informed how much like a minister of the Prince of Peace, and a meek, humble, loving brother in the Gospel of Christ, you behaved at the Conference. Had I been there, I would gladly have taken upon me to proclaim these tidings of joy to the lovers of Zion’s peace. Your conduct at that time of love is certainly the best excuse for the hasty step you had taken; as my desire of stopping my ‘Vindication,’ upon hearing of it, is the best apology I can make for my severity to you.

“I am not averse at all, Sir, to your publishing the passages you mention out of my letters to Mr. Ireland. They show my peculiar love and respect for you, which I shall at all times think an honour; and, at this juncture, shall feel a peculiar pleasure to see proclaimed to the world. They apologize for my calling myself ‘a lover of quietness,’ when I unfortunately prove a son of contention; and they demonstrate that I am not altogether void of the fear that becomes an awkward, inexperienced surgeon, when he ventures to open a vein in the arm of a person for whom he has the highest regard. How natural is it for him to tremble, lest by missing the intended vein, and pricking an unseen artery, he should have done irreparable mischief instead of an useful operation!

“But while you do me the kindness of publishing those passages, permit me, Sir, to do Mr. Wesley the justice of informing him, I had also written to Mr. Ireland, that, ‘whether my Letters were suppressed or not, the ‘Minutes’ must be vindicated,—that Mr. Wesley owed it to the Church, to the real Protestants, to all his Societies, and to his own aspersed character,—and that, after all, the controversy did not seem to me to be so much whether the ‘Minutes’ should stand, as whether the Antinomian Gospel of Dr. Crisp[[236]] should prevail over the practical Gospel of Jesus Christ.

“I must also, Sir, beg leave to let my vindicated friend know, that, in the very letter where I so earnestly entreated Mr. Ireland to stop the publication of my Letters to you, and offered to take the whole expense of the impression upon myself, though I should be obliged to sell my last shirt to defray it, I added that, ‘If they were published, I must look upon it as a necessary evil, or misfortune.’ Which of the two words I used I do not justly recollect: a misfortune for you and me, who must appear inconsistent to the world;—you, Sir, with your Sermons,[[237]] and I with my Title-page; and nevertheless necessary to vindicate misrepresented truth, defend an eminent minister of Christ, and stem the torrent of Antinomianism.