A97353:771
The second part of The nonconformists plea for peace being an account of their…
The second part of The nonconformists plea for peace being an account of their principles about civil and ecclesiastical authority and obedience ... : mostly written many years past, and now published to save our lives and the kingdoms peace, from the false and bloody plotters ... / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for John Hancock, 1680
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.
84. To have no Church concord, will bring as many evils as they themselves foretell when they write against Toleration. The more to be blamed is that man whoever he be that will cut out mens tongues, and then write for the great necessity of speech, or that will put Coloquintida into the pottage, and then write of the danger of purging and looseness! If offence, and division must needs ⟨p. 179⟩come; yet woe to the Church because of offences, and woe to the Pastors by whom they come.
84. To have no Church concord, will bring as many evils as they themselves foretel when they write against Toleration. The more to be blamed is that man whoever he be that will cut out mens tongues, and then write for the great necessity of speech, or that will put Colloquintida into the pottage, and then write of the danger of purging and loosness! If offence, and division must needs ⟨p. 179⟩come; yet wo to the Church because of offences, and wo to the Pastors by whom they come.
85. The greatest plague of our continued Divisions, will be (and is) the destruction of Christian Love, which is the essential mark of Christs disciples, and of absolute necessity to Salvation. If it were possible for such fiery and bloody books to be written against brethren as by some now are, or such scornful books as Martin Marprelate and Martin Marpriest wrote, without any abatement of Love in themselves, can they believe that they will do nothing to destroy it in others: can all of their own side read words that are written to make men odious, and not hate them: Or all of the other side, hear themselves reviled without the least temptation to uncharitableness? Is it more natural to water to quench fire, than for such books, and other effects of discord, to quench brotherly love? (Allowing the difference between a natural agent and a Voluntary). Nay the authors themselves do plainly profess that they do it to draw men to hate those that they write and speak against: and will scarce call them Brethren themselves, unless in a fit of special humility.