LETTER I.

FROM THE REV. MR. RILAND, TO THE REV. MR. BLICK.

SIR,

As

S there were, in your Sermon of yesterday, various particulars, which, with many perfons, I find, but especially with myself, want an explanation, I call upon you for that explanation, that we may know what your meaning was, both as to things and perfons. And, in the mean time, that I may not mistake your words in the Sermon, I ask for a perufal of it. Please to fend it by the Bearer

Those words that are in Italics were fcored under in the ori

ginal Letter.

B

THE

THE REV. MR. BLICK's ANSWER.

Feb. 1, 1791.

I

REV. SIR,

Own myself much furprized at the letter I have

received from you last night, and forry to find that any particulars in my Sermon on Sunday fhould need an explanation, or be fuppofed to contain any fecret meaning, as both the language and doctrines I endeavoured to render as plain as poffible. To you, Sir, however, I am ready to give any explanation that may be required, but to no other perfon, except I am firft acquainted with them by name. With refpect to my meaning as to perfons, I am perfectly unconscious of any, as I pofitively aver I neither made nor meant any perfonal reference whatever; and as to things or doctrine, I am aftonished they should need any further explanation, for the fentiments were fuch, as about seven years ago I delivered in the fame church, and to the fame audience, and for a great part in the fame words, and fuch, as I have been told, have had a happy effect, been much approved of by the congregation at large, and fuch as I have been actually thanked for. The purport of the doctrine as contained in one fentence, which you must have heard me repeat towards the clofe of my difcourfe, was, that without

without holiness, without purity of manners, and the practice of the moral duties, no one could be entitled to that reward, which the merits and atonement of Chrift had purchased for him; and this I hope and believe, is ftrictly conformable to the doctrine of the facred fcriptures, and the church of England. Your defire, that I will send you my Sermon, I must beg leave to refuse. If, Sir, there are any paffages you can refer to, that you wish to see, or fhould request any further explanation of any particular points, thofe fhall be instantly complied with, but indeed to fend it verbatim, if it was not contrary to my inclination and constant resolution, is probably in this cafe out of my power. It was, Sir, my fervent prayer at the delivery, that the dif course might by the grace of God, conduce to the edification and amendment of life of my hearers, and I still pray that it may be so, and that our joint labours may always tend to inftruct the flock in the true light of the gofpel, and may help them forward in the right way that leadeth unto falvation.

I am, Sir, with respect,

Your Friend and fellow Servant in Christ,

A

THE REV. MR. RILAND's SECOND LETTER.

Feb. 5, 1791.

SI cannot procure from you a perusal of your Sermon, I must speak to it, in the best manner my memory will enable me; and if I mistake your meaning, as expreffed in your words, the Sermon must then itself point out the particulars, wherein I do mistake it. I am fure I remember the matter, though not fure that I remember the man

ner.

1. I first observe, That, in this faid Sermon on John vii. 17. You repeatedly, expressly, and very plainly (and fo that your meaning could not poffibly be mistaken, if common words exprefs common fenfe) spake so in favour of the light of nature, of reajon, of man's capability to teach him his duty, and of his power to do it, as that, of consequence, the particular teaching of God's fpirit, the particular direction of God's word, and the particular influence of God's grace, in an experimental manner, inwardly in the foul, were unavoidably, by your argument, rendered needlefs. This we all well remember, and have no doubt of. Here, then, I ask you, Whether this be the doctrine of your Bible? See the contrary in Mat. xi. 27, and xvi. 17. 1 Cor. ii. 9—

16.