A26912:462
A defence of the principles of love, which are necessary to the unity and…
A defence of the principles of love, which are necessary to the unity and concord of Christians and are delivered in a book called The cure of church-divisions ... / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed for Nevil Simmons, 1671
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.
And though Church-tyranny be a grand ⟨p. 95⟩Divider, that this was not the only Cause, two instances prove to the great disgrace of this assertion of his. First, the instance of the said sects of Christians, for the first 300 or 400 years, when there were no such Impositions. Secondly, our late twenty years (or near) contentions and divisions, and numerous parties, when there were little or no impositions. Was it impositions or tyranny that bred sects in the Armies, and in England and Ireland in the days of liberty?
And though Church-tyranny be a grand ⟨p. 95⟩Divider, that this was not the only Cause, two instances prove to the great disgrace of this assertion of his. First, the instance of the said sects of Christians, for the first 300 or 400 years, when there were no such Impositions. Secondly, our late twenty years (or neer) contentions and divisions, and numerous parties, when there were little or no impositions. Was it impositions or tyranny that bred sects in the Armies, and in England and Ireland in the daies of liberty?
5. And is it not sufficient proof to England, that there are weak, ignorant, injudicious Christians, when the ruins of twenty years experience overwhelmeth us, and when so many years unreconcilable differences prove i? And when we have so many sects and differences to this day: What all these differences, these wars, these disputings, these censurings, divisions and confusions, and yet no Ignorant Injudicious Christians? O what will pass for proof with them that will not take such experience for proof?
5. And is it not sufficient proof to England, that there are weak, ignorant, injudicious Christians, when the ruines of twenty years experience overwhelmeth us, and when so many years unreconcilable differences prove i? And when we have so many sects and differences to this day: What all these differences, these wars, these disputings, these censurings, divisions and confusions, and yet no Ignorant Injudioious Christians? O what will pass for proof with them that will not take such experience for proof?