To the Printer of the 'Dublin Chronicle' Date: LONDONDERRY, June 2, 1789. SIR, 1. As soon as I was gone from Dublin, the Observer came forth, only with his face covered. Afterwards he came out under another name, and made a silly defense for me, that he might have the honor of answering it. His words are smoother than oil, and flow (who can doubt it) from mere love both to me and the people. 2. But what does this smooth, candid writer endeavor to prove, with all the softness and good humor imaginable Only this point (to express it in plain English), that I am a double-tongued knave, an old crafty hypocrite, who have used religion merely for a cloak, and have worn a mask for these fifty years, saying one thing and meaning another. A bold charge this; only it happens that matter of fact contradicts it from the beginning to the end. 3. In my youth I was not only a member of the Church of England, but a bigot to it, believing none but the members of it to be in a state of salvation. I began to abate of this violence in 1729. But still I was as zealous as ever, observing every point of Church discipline, and teaching all my pupils so to do. When I was abroad, I observed every rule of the Church, even at the peril of my life. I knew not what might be the consequence of repelling the first magistrate's niece See letters of July 5, 1737, to Thomas Causton and Mrs. Williamson (Sophia Hopkey). from the sacrament, considering, on the one hand the power lodged in his hands, on the other the violence of his temper, shown by his declaration, 'I have drawn the sword, and I will never sheathe it till I have satisfaction.'

4. I was exactly of the same sentiment when I returned from America. I attended St. Paul's Church, and advised all our Society either to attend there every Sunday or at their several parish churches. In the year 1743 I published the Rules of the Society; one of which was that all the members thereof should constantly attend the church and sacrament. We had then a large Society at Newcastle-upon-Tyne; but one of the members totally left it after a few months,' because,' said he, 'they are mere Church-of-England men.' 5. About the year 1744 a clergyman offered me a chapel in West Street, Seven Dials (formerly a French church), and I began to officiate there on Sunday mornings and evenings. We did the same (my brother and I alternately) soon after at the French church in Spitalfields as soon as it came into our hands. This we continued from that time; and no one in England ever thought or called it leaving the Church. It was never esteemed so by Archbishop Potter, with whom I had the happiness of conversing freely; nor by Archbishop Secker, who was throughly acquainted with every step we took; as was likewise Dr. Gibson, then Bishop of London; and that great man Bishop Lowth. Nor did any of these four venerable men ever blame me for it in all the conversations I had with them. Only Archbishop Potter once said, 'Those gentlemen are irregular; but they have done good, and I pray God to bless them.' 6. It may be observed that all this time, if my brother or I were ill, I desired one of our other preachers, though not ordained, to preach in either of the chapels after reading part of the Church Prayers. This both my brother and I judged would endear the Church Prayers to them; whereas, if they were used wholly to extemporary prayer, they would naturally. contract a kind of contempt if not aversion to forms of prayer: so careful were we from the beginning to prevent their leaving the Church. 7. It is true Bishop Gibson once said (but it was before I had ever seen him), 'Why do not these gentlemen leave the Church' The answer was very ready: 'Because they dare not; they do not leave the Church because they believe it is their duty to continue therein.'

8. When the Rev. Mr. Edward Smyth came to live in Dublin, he earnestly advised me to leave the Church; meaning thereby (as all sensible men do) to renounce all connection with it, to attend the service of it no more, and to advise all our Societies to take the same steps. I judged this to be a matter of great importance, and would therefore do nothing hastily, but referred it to the body of preachers, then met in Conference. We had several meetings, in which he proposed all his reasons for it at large. They were severally considered and answered, and we all determined not to leave the Church. 9. A year ago Dr. Coke began officiating at our chapel in Dublin.- This was no more than had been done in London for between forty and fifty years. Some persons immediately began to cry out, 'This is leaving the Church, which Mr. Wesley has continually declared he would never do.' And I declare so still. But I appeal to all the world, I appeal to common sense, I appeal to the Observer himself, could I mean hereby ' I will not have service in church hours 'when I was doing it all the time I Could I even then deny that I had service in church hours No; but I denied, and do deny still, that this is leaving the Church, either in the sense of Bishop Gibson, or of Mr. Smyth at the Dublin Conference ! Yet by this outcry many well-meaning people were frighted wellnigh out of their senses. 10. But see the consequences of having Sunday service here. See the confusion this occasioned I Some time since, while a popular preacher was preaching at Leeds, one cried out, 'Fire! fire!' The people took fright; some leaped over the gallery, and several legs and arms were broken. But upon whom were these consequences to be charged Not on the preacher, but on him that made the outcry. Apply this to the present case. I have kindled no more fire in Dublin than I did in London. It is the Observer and a few other mischiefmakers who fright the people out of their senses; and they must answer to God for the consequence.

11. This is my answer to them that trouble me and will not let my gray hairs go down to the grave in peace. I am not a man of duplicity: I am not an old hypocrite, a double-tongued knave. More than forty years I have frequented Ireland. I have wished to do some good there. I now tell a plain tale that 'the good which is in me may not be evil spoken of.' I have no temporal end to serve. I seek not the honor that cometh of men. It is not for pleasure that at this time of life I travel three or four thousand miles a year. It is not for gain. No foot of land do I possess, No cottage in this wilderness; A poor wayfaring man, I lodge awhile in tents below, Or gladly wander to and fro, Till I my Canaan gain. PS. At the desire of a friend I add a few words in answer to one or two other objections. First. When I said, 'I believe I am a scriptural bishop,' I spoke on Lord King's supposition that bishops and presbyters are essentially one order. Secondly. I did desire Mr. Myles to assist me in delivering the cup. Now, be this right or wrong, how does it prove the point now in question that I leave the Church I ask (2) What law of the Church forbids this and (3) What law of the Primitive Church Did not the priest in the Primitive Church send both the bread and wine to the sick by whom he pleased, though not ordained at all Thirdly. The Observer affirms, 'To say you will not leave the Church, meaning thereby all the true believers in England, is trifling.' Certainly; but I do not mean so when I say, 'I will not leave the Church.' I mean, unless I see more reason for it than I ever yet saw, I will not leave the Church of England as by law established while the breath of God is in my nostrils.