John Fletcher
1729–1785
Wesley's designated successor and the chief theological defender of Methodism in the Calvinist controversy.
In his own words
Again: if God justify sinners merely as "ungodly," and people that "work not," why should he not justify all sinners; for they are all ungodly, and there is "none of them that does good, no, not one?" Why did not the Pharisee, for example, go to his house justified as well as the publican? You will probably answer, that "he was not convinced of sin." Why, sir, this is just what Mr. Wesley maintains. Express yourself in St. Peter's words, "He did not fear God;" or in those of John the Baptist, "He did not bring forth fruits meet for repentance." Should some ask, "What works meet for repentance did the woman caught in adultery do, before our Lord justified her?" I would ask, in my turn, how do they know that the Lord justified her? Do they conclude it from those words, "Neither do I condemn thee?" Does not the context show, that as the Pharisees had not condemned her to be stoned, according to the Mosaic law, neither would our Lord take upon himself to pass sentence upon her, according to his declaration on another occasion, "I am not sent to condemn te world, but that the world through me might be saved?" This by no means implies, that the world is justified in St. Paul's sense, Rom. v, 1. But supposing she was justified, how do you know that our Lord's words, writing, looks, and grace, had not brought her to godly shame and sorrow, that is, to "the fear of God," and "the working of internal righteousness," before he gave her the peace that passes all understanding?
Quoted verbatim from the library, as an answer would quote it.
What we hold of him
Checks to Antinomianism
Classic
Ask what John Fletcher says
Amos Standard answers theological questions from a curated library and cites the work behind every claim. It is in a closed beta; leave your address and we will write when there is room.