Christian Concord, Postscript
Postscript.
I Am urged to adde to what is written, a few words of Advice to the People of those Congregations whose Ministers refuse to Associate. Either such Ministers are Insufficient or Scandalous, or they are (or seem) Able and Faithfull. If the former, I advise all conscionable people to endeavour speedily to cast them out, and not think of joyning them with us who cannot receive them. I know some will plead compassion to them; but it's cruel compassion, which for fear of bringing a mans family to poverty, will both connive at his proceeding in such hainous guilt, and at the starving, and everlasting damnation of mens souls. The devil loves such mercy as this is. If indeed you pity such, help them, if you can, to a sight of their sin, in undertaking so high a Calling, and so great a Charge, which they are so unfit for: that they may break off their sin by Repentance, and betake themselves to a work that they are fitter for. Obj. But may not Ministers, as well as others, be forborn upon their Repentance? Ans. 1. Repentance will not cure their Insufficiency. 2. It must be a very notable Repentance that must at all (much less suddenly) readmit a scandalous person into the Ministry. In the Primitive Churches, after hainous sinning, they would admit him to the Ministry no more, were he never so penitent, though they would admit him to Communion. However, let him be cast out of the Ministry, and Repent then; and if he manifest such Repentance as may satisfie the Church, let them then take him in again, there or elsewhere: But shall he therefore be trusted in his forfeited Office, where he may wrong mens souls, because when he is questioned, he pretendeth Repentance? Obj. But how can any other conscionably receive his sequestred maintenance, when by Law it is his? Ans. Is it not given him only as Pastor, for the Work of Christ, and the service of the Church? If there be 200l per annum allowed to each City for a publick Physician, and some ignorant Empericks get into the place, who kill more then they cure, were not he cruelly mercifull that would have these men continue to the murdering of poor people whom they pretend to cure? and were not he wickedly and hypocritically just, that would say, No man else may take the stipend, it belongs to these? If an ignorant man that is wholly unacquainted with Seafaring, should get to be the Pilot of a Ship of Warre, or of richest lading, would any be so madly mercifull or just, as to let him alone to the drowning of himself and all that are with him, for fear of putting him out of his place, or giving his maintenance to another? I will give such titular Pastors better advice: and that is, That they would lament day and night, as long as they live, the heavy guilt of the blood or damnation of souls which they have incurred, and that so far as they are able, they would make the Church restitution of the Tithes which for so many years they have so unjustly received; it being, before God, but plain Robbery; and one of the most hatefull kindes of Robbery that can be imagined; to starve and destroy mens souls, and then to take hire for it. But enough of them.
2. But if the Ministers that refuse to Associate cannot be proved Insufficient, or of wicked lives, then I would advise all their Peaceable Godly people, to joyn together, and desire their Pastor to Associate with his Brethren for a Unanimous carrying on the Work of God. If he yet refuse, he will no doubt, give some reason of it: Which if he do, his people may do well to desire him, to meet once, at least, with the Associated Ministers, and give in his Reasons to them. This they should desire, both 1. Because the people may there hear both sides speak together, and so be the better able to judge, whether his Reasons for Dissent be sufficient or not: and 2. Because Christianity and common charity bindes that Dissenting Brother to manifest to the rest what he judgeth to be their Errour, and so great an Errour that he dare not Associate with them. And it is not a sudden appearance, and slight casting in some superficial Reasons, that must satisfie his Conscience, or satisfie his people: but it must be a fair and full Debate of the whole business; such as may be apt or sufficient for a manifestation of the Truth. If after this the dissenting Pastor will not yet Associate; the People (having been present and heard the Debate) may be the better able to judge, whether the grounds of his Dissent be tollerable or intollerable; and accordingly they may know how to carry themselves to him. Where note, that I can give no people a particular direction before hand, that will fully reach all such cases; seeing they are so diversified by circumstances. And therefore I would have all such people as have a Minister that declineth Union and Association with his Brethren, to desire the Advice of that Association of faithfull Ministers who are next him; who will be best able to advise them when the case is known: In the mean time, common Reason requires that People should hear and obey such a Pastor with more jealousie then if he were in Union with his Brethren. 1. Because the judgement of one man is not to be valued before the Judgement of many as Godly; unless it be fully manifest that he is of more painfull studies, and a stronger Judgement then all those are. 2. Christ doth so plainly and pressingly require Unanimity, Accord, and Association of Brethren, that he that will refuse this so plain and great a duty, may well be suspected the more in the rest of his Doctrine. 3. It is more probable that that man means to play the Pope and tyrannize over the Flock, and make himself Lord of Gods heritage, who will do all alone, singularly or on his own head; then he that doth all in Unity, and is ready to give an account of all his doings to the rest of his Brethren, and to hear what they can say against him.
But perhaps you will ask, What if we cannot get our Pastor so much as to come to the Associated Ministers to give in his Reasons of Dissent? I answer, Then try whether he will entertain a Debate with some one or two that they shall send to him. If he will not do that neither, it is too probable, that he is so Proud or Ignorant, as that a People should be jealous how they trust him with the guidance of their souls. But yet I would not have such rashly to reject him, but first advise with the next Associated Ministers.
Quest. But how shall we judge, if he do come in, whether his Reasons be of weight or not? Ans. Partly by what you hear replied to them (and therefore do not content your selves to hear them from himself alone) and partly by the evidence that they carry. He that will prove it his duty not to Associate, must prove that there is some sin which that Association would engage him to. If there be any such sin, it is either something unlawfull to be subscribed in our Agreement; or something to be necessarily done in practice. Hear him therefore manifesting and proving either of these. I can foresee the vain cavils that some are like to use, by the experience I have long had of the Separatists arguings. First, Perhaps they will tell you we have such and such bad Ministers among us in our Association; and here they will aggravate all the faults of such as they except against, as if they were notoriously graceless. To this I would desire the Hearers to return these Answers. 1. That we have agreed to reject from our Society all that are of known Insufficiency, or Ungodliness, or Unfaithfulness in the main work. And if any one get in among us, that is guilty of any scandall, which we were never sufficiently acquainted with, we judge it no more our fault, then it is the fault of a Church that an Hypocrite is in it, or a sinner that none accuseth. 2. We had rather of the two erre in judging too favourably, and permitting some in our society that are less fit, then in judging unrighteously, and rejecting the faithfull servants of Christ. No Society hath all the members of equal integrity, and beyond exception. 3. Desire those Brethren that Object this but to search their hearts and waies, and remember what may be said against themselves, and cast the beam first out of their own eye; at least to censure, as humble men, that are sensible of their own miscarriages and imperfections; and how much allowance the best must have, that they may pass for currant. 4. Tell them this, which I think, may give them full satisfaction: If they have any charge against any member of our Association, let them bring it in, and they shall be fully heard, and we will reject all whom they shall prove fit to be rejected. Can they desire more? Will men of any Conscience or face of common honesty, let fly at men behinde their backs, and not bring in their charge to their faces, and hear them speak for themselves: Yea and withdraw from a Society meerly because of the presence of such, whom they never accused to that Society? Would they be thus dealt by themselves? If we have bad members, might not their presence who are better, do more then their absence to remove them, or hinder them from doing any hurt? 5. Take heed lest out of your own mouthes you be condemned; while you acknowledge that even bad men are forwarder to Reformation and Unity then you.
They will perhaps further tell you, that we do but make a shew of Reformation, and we leave all or many ungodly ones still in our Churches; they are even common Parish-Churches, composed of the common multitude, as they were before.
Ans. This I have answered sufficiently already: Further I say, 1. No mans mis-practice is any reasonable cause of excepting against our Agreement: The Propositions which we subscribe doe exclude as many as I can finde any Scripture warrant for excluding. If the Objectors deny this, let them give their reasons against the Propositions, and not against any mans practising contrary to them. Would any wise man say, I will not subscribe Propositions for Reformation, because such a man will not reform exactly that doth subscribe them? As if he should say, I will not consent to the Law against swearing, because such a Justice doth not punish Swearers. 2. Before they withdraw for any mans personall fault (in permitting unfit members in his Congregation) they must admonish that person and convince him of his fault, yea, and convince that association of their fault in not casting him off, or else why should they divide from an Assembly for one mans male-administration? Or if all be guilty, they must be dealt with as in case of other sins, before they be rejected. If I know some of the Congregationall way that admit unfit persons into their Churches, shall I for that refuse communion with them and others of that way. 3. We are not to reject any member from our Church-communion that desires it, without sufficient cause produced against them. Let these Objectors therefore name the particular persons who have been proved unfit, and yet been retained; and not for shame, speak of our retaining Parishes, multitudes, the ignorant, the ungodly, &c. in generall, when they name no particulars. As if we must therefore condemn and punish men as ungodly, without any accusation, meerly because they are many, or because such men clamour out generall reproaches: The multitude of members is one part of the honour of Christs Churches, as the purity is another.
These Objections I therefore here answer, that people may know, they are not sufficient to warrant any Minister to withdraw from Unity. And again I do advise all godly people to consider, that it concerneth them to know the reasons of their Ministers dissent, and to be well satisfied in them: For else 1. They may be guilty of encouraging and following him in a Division. 2. It is the Churches as well as the Pastors that must be linked together by these Associations, and therefore seeing it is by the Pastors that they must (principally) preserve that Union and correspondence, the withdrawing of the Pastors, tendeth to the dividing of the Churches themselves. 3. They cannot safely trust their souls under a dividing Pastor. And let them but observe when all pretences are taken off, whether with many these prove not the true causes of withdrawing? 1. Some men are conscious of so much ignorance, that they will not joyn with Ministers, where there is like to be any trial of their parts, for fear of being shamed upon the disclosing of their weakness: In a Pulpit they may possibly seem some body; but they will not endure a closer trial. These men would do well to learn, that Christian honour is not got as other honour is, by contesting or subtill contriving for it: but by an open and humble confessing of weaknesses: He that will needs be greatest, shall be least: and he shall be greatest that will be the lowest and servant of all. He that will save his honour shall lose it: Pride is the greatest shame among Christians. For my part I value the youngest learner that is humble and diligent, above a hundred of these close hypocriticall Rabbies, that have nothing but big looks and contempt of others, to cover their ignorance.
2. Others you shall find, that will withdraw and divide in meer pride of their own supposed godliness, and censoriousness of others, as unworthy of their fellowship: These are the worst of all: So contrary is it to the true nature of Christianity to be proud and censorious, and to say to our Brother, Stand by; I am more holy then thou! What sin hath our Master more rebuked and shamed then pride and censoriousness? There is no obscurity in those plain commands: Judge not, that ye be not judged: Who art thou that judgest another mans servant? to his own Master he standeth or falleth: Why dost thou judge thy Brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy Brother? We shall all stand before the judgement seat of Christ. Let us not therefore judge one another any more, &c. Rom. 14. 4, 10, 13. see Gal. 6. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
If these men be godly indeed, they will be so humbly conscious of their own unworthiness and great imperfections, that they will be readier to draw back on that account, and say, I am not worthy to be Associated with Christs Ministers: rather then to say, Such a one is not worthy to joyn with me: (except he will come and prove him indeed one fit to be rejected.) And truly in my experience, they prove none of the best men themselves, nor furthest from exception, who are so ready to condemn their Brethren as ungodly. How oft have I heard one man accusing his Brethren as men void of grace, or thus and thus faulty: and within a few daies, heard others as deeply accusing him, for pride or coveteousness, or ignorant, careless Preaching, and negligent, disorderly, rash, empty performance of Gods work; as a man that doth but disgrace the work of Preaching, and make men loath Gods Word, through his ill managing of it. Thus frequently do I hear men accused on both parts: Alas, that men conscious of their own weaknesses, should not forbear such vilifying of their Brethren! Perhaps one may excell in judgement or solidity, and another may excell in zeal and diligence: Must each therefore despise or reject the other? He is a rare man that is generally excellent.
3. Others you will finde will divide, meerly to fit themselves to parties, or to serve a thriving side, against the unity of the Church: These Pastors, if known, are unfit to be owned.
4. Others will hold off, for fear of displeasing their ungodly Parishoners, by this exercise of Discipline that we have agreed on: especially if their maintenance lie in the peoples hands: These servants of Mammon are unfit for Christs service. I confess it is a great temptation to men that have a Family to maintain, to cast themselves on a way that may lose their Maintenance: But is he fit to teach others the doctrine of Christianity, Self-denial, taking up the Cross, parting with things present for the hopes of future, &c. who will openly contradict it all himself?
Quest. But put case that the people are satisfied of the Ministers Reasons for withdrawing?
Ans. Both he and they must faithfully propound those Reasons to the Associated Brethren: 1. Else how can we that erre be rectified? 2. If they hear not both sides speak, they may easily be deluded, and satisfied in their sin.
But a greater difficulty occurres then any of these. What if a Congregation have the choice of their Pastor, and they cannot agree in choosing, but one party will have one man, and another party will have another? How will your Union be carried on, when the people cannot agree about their Teachers? Ans. I confess I foresee a sad calamity like to befall the generality of the Churches in this point, if God do not wonderfully prevent it. For I finde it such a difficulty to have many men of one minde (even of the best) that I can hardly expect that ever the people should long agree in the choice of their Ministers: especially if they have divers propounded that may seem fit. For the Ancient experienced, or meeker sort of Christians will be for a man of Solidity, Judgement and Peace: The younger and the more rash, unexperienced Professors, will rather incline to a man of Zeal, who is inclined to Divide, and under pretence of further Reformation, to fall into unwarrantable separating waies. And usually, such unexperienced people are untractable, and will have their way, be it never so wrong: For passion quite perverts their judgement: and that passion is often indulged rather then suspected, because it goes under the name of Zeal. You will have also carnall superstitious persons, setting in for a man of their own stamp, to humour them; and so how many parties may there be? Especially if publique Maintenance be taken down, and people allowed to maintain whom they please; then most great Congregations will be (in all likelihood) divided into two or three parties. Or if men grossly erroneous, and intollerable, should by Rulers be put in the publique Place, and so the best people forced to separate (which I strongly fear) in all these cases our Union will be difficult. Yea, if people grow into a dislike of their Pastors; and one part would cast him off, and the other would continue him: Or if there should be two Ministers together, and part of the people should cleave to one, and part to the other. What now should be done in all these cases? I answer, It is not hard to tell what should be done: but it's hard to bring even godly men to do it. I will premise this Prognostick, That I have little hope when I have said all, to prevail with either the wilfull, self-conceited superstitious party, or the rash youth, whose Zeal doth carry them beyond all sober, considerate, judicious proceedings. But for the sake of the rest I will tell them what must be done.
First it must be Resolved on, That the Church must not be divided. And therefore in all debates, keep that Resolution firm. And that Minister or party that is for Dividing, do but discover a strong ground of suspition, that their Cause is the worst. All true Pastors and Christians will be so tender of the Churches Unity, that they will try every preventing course, and wait and suffer much before they will yield to the Division of a Church. Obj. But if we must either consent to an unfit Pastor, or Divide, it is not long of us, but of the rest. Answ. There are several degrees of fitness and unfitness: If he be one that is utterly incompetent and intollerable, then you must use all right means to keep him out: and if you cannot prevail, you must further do, as I shall anon acquaint you more fully. But if he be one that is competently fit, though with many imperfections, you must do your best to have a better, but rather accept of him then Divide. The Reason is plain: God hath flatly commanded Unity, and forbidden Division: but he hath no where forbidden the Accepting of a weaker competent Pastor, to prevent such division. God hath not yet provided enough for every Church of the Abler sort, (alas, how few are they in comparison of the rest that yet are honest and tollerable!) If therefore all the weaker must be cast off, then the farre greatest part of the Churches must be unchurched, or be without any Pastors.
This therefore being first Resolved on, That the Church must not divide, you must secondly take this as certain, that God hath not put it in the power of the people alone, to determine who shall be their Pastors, except in case of Necessity, where his ordinary way of Determination doth fail.
This is so fully proved by many others in Writing already, and it is so contrary to my intended brevity to insist on such points, that I shall say but little.
Observe carefully the difference between Election, Determination and Consent: Choosing or Electing sometime signifieth only The first Nomination of one person of divers that be offered, though yet there may be no Power finally to determine, whether that Person shall stand. Sometime it signifieth the said Nomination with Determination also. To Determine is Authoritatively and finally to decide the case, and set down, who the man shall be. To Consent, is but to be Willing to have that man who is Elected or Determined of.
Now I affirm 1. Gods Word hath left it undecided, whether the people shall be the Electors, so as first to nominate the man that shall be their Minister, or not. The Apostles chose two for Judas room, and left God to take one by Lot. The Apostles required the Church at Jerusalem to choose seven men for Deacons, as supposing them acquainted with their lives, and as being loth to put any upon them, in that Office especially, which medled with money matters. But for Elders (for all the shew from Act. 14. 23.) there is no command or any thing equivalent, that the people have the Nomination.
2. The Power of Authoritative determining who the man shall be, is clearly in Scripture denied to the people. For it is appropriated to the Church-Rulers, under the name of Ordaining. For foreign, used, Tit. 1. 5. Act. 6. 3, &c. signifieth an Authoritative appointment, which is not a meer useless Ceremony (as some make Ordination to be, that necessitate the Ordainer to lay hands on him whom the people Elect) but comprehendeth the Determination that this must be the man. For my part I believe that it is the Church-Guides or Ordainers that have the sole Authoritative Determination, and the people have the full and free judgement of Discretion, to judge whether the Ordainer have rightly determined, or not. But if that should be otherwise, yet still it is evident that ordinarily the Ordainers have a Negative voice; and that the Church cannot take to themselves a Minister without them: Or else it would follow, either the Church-Rulers must Ordain whomsoever the people nominate (which is not to be imagined) Or that the people may take them Ministers unordained (where Ordainers may be had) which is as vain a conceit.
Note also, that it is not only to the Office of the Ministry in General that Ordination is Necessary; but also to the fixing of Ministers to particular Charges. The Apostles Ordained the seven Deacons, as appropriate to the Church of Jerusalem: and Ordained them Elders in every Church, Act. 14. 23. and commanded Titus to Ordain Elders in every City, Tit. 1. 5.
Observe also, that though there be some controversies whether this power belong to a fixed Bishop, or General Minister, as the Apostles, or to a Presbytery, or to a single Minister of that same Church (if there be any left;) yet all are agreed that it belongs not to the People. Conclude of this therefore that the People (alone at least) cannot justly determine who shall be their Pastor.
3. Yet the Determiners or Ordainers must have the peoples Consent, ordinarily. Because the Ministeriall power compels not to obedience by outward violence: And therefore Consent is of naturall Necessity to the peoples actuall obedience. If a man set a Steward over his Family, the rest of the servants are bound to obey him, whether they chose him or no: but yet because they cannot be made to obey him against their Wils, a wise Master will chuse such a one (if fit) whom the servants will soonest consent to: So if a man be to send his sons to the University, he will not tell them that it is in their own power to choose themselves a Tutor; but himself will do that; and command them to obey him. But yet because they can never learn against their wils, therefore he will not (ordinarily) force them to a Tutor whom they will not consent to, if others may be had: (Though perhaps he may urge them to consent by some sharp words or dealings.) So that the Ordainers should please the people as far as may stand with their welfare, and no further.
These things being thus laid down, let me for Application, tell you, Thirdly, That when a Church is at variance about the choice of a Pastor, or determining who shall be the man, they are bound to seek the advice and determination of Church-Guides: For seeing it belongs to them to Determine, whether there be difference or no, (by Ordaining) they must especially be sought to when there is a difference.
4. If the Ordainers or Ministers determine of a fit man, you must stand to the Determination, though perhaps another might be more fit. If the man by them determined of, be utterly incompetent, you must first prove it to them, and (if that serve not) appeal to some more General Assembly, or seek further to men more unquestionably Judicious and faithfull then they are.
5. If the people will not thus be satisfied, the refused Minister must remember his duty, and not offer, without order and authority, to make himself the head of a dividing company.
6. If he will not obey, he is to be admonished by the Pastors of that Association, and to be Avoided and Rejected, if he be obstinate.
7. If any passionate part of the Church will stick to that man, the rest that fear God must admonish them, and if they be obstinate, avoid them, according to Rom. 16. 17. Now I beseech you, Brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences, contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them: For they that are such, serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own bellies: and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. I have seen this verified in the issue, of some that I durst not so have thought of in the beginning. Poor inconsiderate, unexperienced Christians little know what they do, when they take part with dividers, and encourage them in division. They do but strengthen their own snares. Such men fish most for themselves, even when they think themselves they are more zealous for Christ then others.
8. Were there no other remedy, rather then the Church should divide, they should (after solemn seeking God) let God himself determine it by a Lot, as Matthias was chosen.
If you once fall a dividing, you will give the worser part such an example, that they will presently choose themselves Teachers that will please them, and leave but few to hear or maintain a pious Ministry.
8. If the Church-Guides be so corrupted, that they all conspire to force on the people unsound, insufficient or ungodly men, then the people may reject them (as Cyprian adviseth them) of their own accord; as being left destitute of Christs orderly Remedy.
9. What hath been here said of the first case, may suffice to determine the other cases. If a people have two Ministers, and some would adhere to one and reject the other, and the rest adhere to him and refuse obedience to the former; in this case they should all take the advice of the neighbour Associated Pastors: For, though it be disputed, whether such Associated Ministers have any Regent Authority over a neighbour Church, yet all agree that they should be consulted and heard in order to Unity; and that's enough to the business in hand. If they can prove their Ministers fit to be ejected, let them there prove it. All Christians are bound to be accountable to their Brethren, in such offensive actions, as have a face of division or disobedience. If both the Pastors in question be approved of, then the Associated Ministers should advice the people to lay aside their carnal sinfull contentions (which the Church of Corinth was so plainly chid for) and to close with both, 1. Because two Ministers are far fitter to Guide a Church (specially if great) then any one alone: Yea should one of them be but weak, and the other more able: a weak hand will afford some help. 2. It is the Scripture way to have more Elders then one, and if they reject their Pastors, and supply the room with private men, they will, likely, have weaker then they reject. 3. It is not in the peoples power to reject one that is already their Teacher: except when he is utterly intollerable, and all orderly means for his ejection do fail. Prove from Scripture that any people may else reject or depose their Minister. 4. Much less may a lesser part of a Church do it, when the greater dissenteth: no nor a greater, because it tendeth to division.
If the people are unruly and will not agree; the neighbour Ministers must admonish both the said Pastors, and charge them in Christs Name that they avoid Divisions, and that themselves do heartily and lovingly close and entertain no motion to division from the people: and that will break the peoples dividing purposes, if the Pastors be but resolvedly against it, and do not secretly foment it (as commonly they do.) If either of the Pastors be resolved for Division, and reject this admonition; the godly people are bound to suspect that man, and to admonish him, and not side with him; seeing it is usually the true mother that would not have the childe divided: and an ill sign when men draw Parties and Disciples after them. And the neighbour Ministers are to admonish such a man, and proceed with him as he receiveth or rejecteth the admonition. Many differences in Judgement and Practice must be tollerated among Brethren to prevent dividing: but dividing it self is not to be tollerated: (except where the cause is just; which must be a great necessity.) What should be done with those particular persons, that will own but one of the Pastors, and yet will joyn with the whole body of the Church, which acknowledgeth both, I will not now attempt to advise; because it will be fittest to do it according to the quality of the persons, their reasons, their carriage in the business, &c. all which may much vary the case.
If it appear, that the people reject or disown a Minister for private grudges, or for crossing them in their opinions or old customs in things unnecessary, or worse, those people must be the more sharply dealt with. Much more, if it be for crossing them in their sin, or telling them the truth. But in case a Minister have by weakness or passionate speeches, or neglect of his duty, given just offence to his people, yet the fault be not such as to cast him out: then the neighbour Ministers must advise him, humbly to acknowledge to the people his weakness or miscarriage, and to promise his faithfull endeavours to reform: and if any persons remain passionately unreconcilable to him, they must be the more born with (so they drive not to a division) because he gave them so much occasion of offence. No humble man can violently prosecute another, for being too violent against his faults: but will rather submit to it, as Gods afflicting, humbling, reforming rod. And it's two to one, but after some experience of his more holy, harmless, diligent behaviour, those very people will own him, that did disclaim him.
Lastly, If all remedies fail, let one of the Pastors depart, and say, Let him take the living childe undivided: And the better man will likely be the readiest to do it; according to that I before cited out of Clem. Roman. ad Corinth.
Let none wonder that I speak so much on this subject: For if the Scripture were conscionably observed, men would take Church-division for a greater sinne then Adultery or Theft. Mutinies and Divisions do more infallibly destroy an Army, then almost any other fault, or weakness: and therefore all Generals punish Mutineers with death, as well as flat Traytors. I confess ten or twelve years ago, I wondered oft to finde both Scripture, and almost all the voluminous Writings of the Fathers in every age, to be so filled with exclamations and argumentations against Church-dividers and Hereticks: But now I know a little better the reason of it; and how prone, even Godly, Zealous men (especially young unexperienced Christians) are to it, and of what desperate consequence it is. Our Union is our strength and beauty: Commonly they that Divide for the bringing in of any inferiour Truth or Practice, do but destroy that Truth and Piety that was there before. I like not him that will cure the Headach by cutting the Throat. No Master, no Law, no Profession was ever more mercifull, gentle, meek, more for Unity, Love and Concord, then the Master, Law and Profession of Christians. O that the Lord would speedily arise, and stirre up in all his people in the world, so mighty a Zeal for Unity and Sanctity, that those blessed Twins might conjunctly flourish, which thrive so ill when they are divided: and that the true Saints of Christ may once taste that sweetnesse which such a blessed State of the Church would afford! However, the friends of Peace and Holinesse shall taste of it, Reade James 1. 13. to the end. 1 Cor. 1. & 3. Heb. 12. 14.
FINIS.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, Christian Concord (1653)