A26883:4265
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,
London: printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
P. Must God and man account you such as you are not fit or worthy to be accounted? And will you go on to accuse and contradict Gods Word? Your fancy hath got some harsh conceit of the sense of the word [Worthy] and that cometh still into your mind, as if it meant a worthiness which supposed not that all that we have is of mercy and grace: when the Scripture meaneth no such worthiness, but such as is that of a loving, dutiful, thankful Child, of the inheritance; A moral fitness.
Lib. Well, suppose that our actions and we are worthy of Praise, that is, to be called as they are; yet they are worthy also of dispraise, that is, to be accounted as menstruous rags, defiled with sin, and deserving Hell; and is not this a pitiful praise?
Lib. Well, suppose that our actions and we are worthy of Praise, that is, to be called as they are; yet they are worthy also of dispraise, that is, to be accounted as menstruous rags, defiled with sin, and deserving Hell; and is not this a pittiful praise?
P. Did you ever hear us deny any of this? Why talk you of that which we are all agreed in? But 1. It is not holiness, but the faulty imperfections of it, and the sin that is contrary to it, which deserveth Hell. 2. And the faults of sincere believers deserve not Hell according to the Law of Grace, by which we are to be judged, so as to be liable to it, but only so as to be accounted condemnable, had we not been pardoned.
P. Did you ever hear us deny any of this? Why talk you of that which we are all agreed in? But 1. It is not holiness, but the faulty imperfections of it, and the sin that is contrary to it, which deserveth Hell. 2. And the faults of sincere believers deserve not Hell according to the Law of Grace, by which we are to be judged, so as to be lyable to it, but only so as to be accounted condemnable, had we not been pardoned.