we serve You say When men pray they bid us pray in extempore prayer both are required to what is good True And I may joyn with the good in an extempore prayer without owning any evil in it Indeed you say p. 28. The Mass is not more twisted in all the parts of it by Law than the Lyturgy nor left less to our power to pick and choose If this Union do render the far greater pollutions the Idolatry and Heresy of the Mass infectious to the whole Worship who can prove that the pollutions of other Worship when we are likewise commanded not to distinguish or divide doth not in their kind and degree diffuse the taint alike Ans. God is the Master of his Worship I do what he bids me tho man contradict it If God bid me hear and believe the Scripture and man say hear also and believe the Apocrypha I will openly profess I obey God and you no further than you contradict not God Rather than not hear the Scripture I will hear also the Apocrypha but not believe it to be Gods Word But if they bid me also hear the Alcoran I will withdraw 2. It is not the Conjunction but the kind of the thing joyned that maketh it unlawful An honest weak man an Antinomian an Anabaptist a Presbyterian or whoever you dissent from in tolerable cases may mix his Opinion and faulty expressions and methods with his Prayer and Sermon as intimately as evil is mixt in the Mass and yet you will not refuse Communion with him It is lawful to drink beer that hath bad water mixt rather than none but not to drink that which hath poyson equally mixt To p. 29. I think if a Turk pray against Idolatry Murder c. that Prayer is materially good But as to Goodness from a Holy Principle no Hypocrites is good The insufficiency of my answer you no way manifest till you prove that I must joyn with all that is in publick Worship or with none 6. Pag. 32. You say Doth he say a word of owning Parish Churches and Worship Ans. If you or he say nothing against these we shall leave the Diocesan case to others But if you be the man that I have lately privately written to I doubt not but I have proved to you that Parish Churches that have good Ministers are true particular Churches and those Ministers true Pastors and that any Bishops holding the contrary doth not disprove it 7. When you recite my words describing the Cause I plead viz. I have written over and over that I persuade no man either to or from a publick Church till I know his Circumstances And that I doubt not but it is one mans duty and another mans sin You add I believe dear Sir that though this concession may displease those who may best bear it it may reconcile you to most of those that are called Dissenters If so those Dissenters it seems by you do not much differ from me But I think ten to one of the people accounted commonly Dissenters through England are of my mind and are for Parish-Worship rather than either none or worse But by Dissenters I suppose you mean those of the Doctors mind or your own And if so I thank you for your own Charity and Reconciliation But if you did not know them better than I I should doubt that your said Friends are not altogether so reconcileable Sir You add p. 39. And if as you allow the practical determination depends on the circumstances of the Persons you reduce the Controversy to a far narrower room than was by most supposed And every one being best capable of understanding his own circumstances it will not bear great heat or importunity from another But whence came those wrong Suppositions of the most If after 20 years Communion in the Parish Churches I venture on the Censorious so far as to give my Reasons for my own Practice and defend those Reasons and that Practice against contrary Writings and such wise Men as you are so reconcilable and see how narrow the Controversy is whence comes it that most think it to be what it is not against such frequent plain expressions You and I may conjecture at the Cause Your Conclusion is a pious Profession of that Love and the main Principles of that Concord for which I write 10. You wisely leave the Vindication of the Doctors words when it cometh to the case which I oppose him in As That neither God nor good men will allow of judging our Profession and Practice by any reserves of our own when I have proved that our reserves against owning mixtures of evil are necessary in all Communion 11. You vindicate not his words that He that joyns in the Worship of the Common-Prayer doth by his Practice make Profession that it is wholly agreeable to Gods mind and will And that to do it with other reserves is Hypocrisy and worse than the thing itself without them 12. You vindicate not his grand Argument Religious Worship not Divinely Instituted and Appointed is false Worship without excepting any secondary sort of Worship 13. You defend not his saying That there is nothing accidental in the Worship of God and that every thing that belongs to it is part of it or of its subsistence 13. You defend not that Because outward Rites and Modes of Worship Divinely Instituted and determined do become necessary parts of Divine Worship therefore such as are Humanly Instituted and Determined are thereby made parts of false Worship What work would this Argument make If all outward Modes are false Worship when determined by Men if Divine Determination would make them necessary 14. You do not vindicate that All Prayers and Praise in Church-Assemblies meerly as such are prohibited by the Lyturgy unless you do it by denying Parish-Churches 15. You do not defend That the Lyturgick Worship was in its first Contrivance and is in its continuance an Invention or Engine to defeat or render useless the promise of Christ to his Church of sending the Spirit in all Ages to enable it to the due discharge and performance of all Divine Worship in its Assemblies and therefore unlawful to be complyed with That the very being and continuance of the Church without which it is but a dead Machine lyeth on this Doth this speak only of the English Lyturgy which is not 200 years old think you When next he tells us that It 's the way of Worship by a prescribed Lyturgy and that it was insensibly brought in when in several Ages the Church had lived without it and that to render the promise of Christ and the work of the Holy Ghost in the Administration of gifts useless 16. You defend not that Hence followed a total neglect of all the Spirits Gifts in the said Administration Nor that This produced all the Enmity of the said work of the Spirit which the world is now filled withal that it ariseth from hence alone Nor that the Worship Treated
Catholick Communion Doubly Defended By Dr. OWENS VINDICATOR AND RICHARD BAXTER And the State of that Communion opened and the Questions discussed whether there be any Displeasure at Sin or Repentance for it in Heaven With a Parallel of the case of using a faulty Translation of Scripture and a faulty Lyturgy Gal. 2. 11 12 13. When Peter was come to Antioch I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed For before that certain came from James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew and separated himself fearing them which were of the Circumcision And the other Iews dissembled likewise with him insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation Acts 11. 2 3. They which were of the Circumcision contended with him saying Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised and didst eat with them Jud. 10. These speak evil of those things which they know not LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Three Bibles and Crown at the lower end of Cheap-side near Mercers-Chappel 1684. THat the Primitive Churches had some Responsal Forms which our Psalms in Meeter and Tune do now supply without offence or disorder and that it is the declining of Zeal and the badness of men that is become their disgrace and not the forms for the use of men of both extreams passing by Cyprians Sursum Corda I shall recite an evidence out of Chrysostom on 1 Cor. 14. pag. 652. When we begin to say the People answer with thy Spirit shewing that they so spake of old not moved by their own Wisdoms but by the Spirit But I speak not now of my self But the Church is now like a Woman which is fallen from her ancient prosperity and in many places retaineth only the Symbols or tokens of that ancient felicity and sheweth only the Cases or Boxes and Cabinets or Tills of her Iewels or Ornaments but is deprived of her Riches The Church is now like such a Woman And I speak not this only as to her loss of gifts for if this were all the matter were the less but also as to Life and Virtue When in the fourth Century the old Custom is thus reported it must be very ancient And this sheweth that Zeal then caused the peoples Responses And were they now used by good men with the like holy Zeal they would be less scrupled THE CONTENTS SECT 1. THE Vindicators healing Concessions and Silence SECT 2. What Catholick Communion is which I plead for in 40 Positions SECT 3. Our Doctrinal Differences I. What knowledge Souls in Heaven have II. Whether those in Heaven yea God be not displeased with sin Aff. III. Whether there be no repentance in Heaven Aff. IV. Whether it be true that doing what a Law requireth so far as the intention is moved by the Law is a justifying of it and that submitting to any Law on consideration of its Penalties is so far to justify the Preceptive part and not so great an Evil as the Penal Neg. SECT 4. Short strictures on his words for the use of the Vindicator SECT 5. A Parallel or Comparison of the Case of using a faulty Translation of Gods Word as Christ and the Apostles did the Septuagint with that of using a faulty Lyturgy SECT 6. An Expository Advertisement about naming Men. The Consent of Dr. Owens Vindicator to the Catholick Communion defended by Richard Baxter SECT 1. SIR Your Book called A Vindication of Dr. Owen I find containeth four distinct Parts or Subjects I. A Vindication of Dr. Owens Personal Worth which you and I agreeing in I have nothing in that to say against you II. Your Consent to the main of the Cause which I defend and your dissent from the Persons whose words I Confute Of this I shall thankfully take notice III. Your blaming of me for my naming the Dr. and for my manner of defence against his Arguments IV. Your dissent from me in certain Doctrinals Having dismist the first as to the second I thank you 1. That you profess your self a hearty friend to all good men and to the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace 2. I thank you that you say p. 3. I do not pretend in what follows to maintain against you that it is unlawful to use a form of Prayer or comply with an imposed Lyturgy or under some circumstances to joyn in the use of ours in Worship Neither shall I undertake to justify altogether the 12 Arguments you have printed as Dr. Owens in order to refuting them 3. I am pleased that you expound the Doctors words p. 24. as signifying only It is not lawful for us to go and joyn in publick Worship by the Common-Prayer He doth not say it is not lawful for any and for ought you know this Us whom he concerned in it might be a very few to whom this Manuscript was imparted and they might be under such circumstances as your own resolutions oft in Print would discharge from that Worship as a duty Were I never so well able to prove from this and the Doctors many printed Writings that he meant more I would not now do it I only here desire the Men and Women that have been with me and profest that they thought the Doctors 12 Arguments to be unanswerable against the Lawfulness of joyning in the use of the Lyturgy to take notice of what his worthy Vindicator saith 4. You grant p. 25. that you Conceive that the Author doth not mean by these words Because that Worship itself is not lawful that it is simply unlawful which must render it so at all times and to all Persons under what circumstances soever But that taken with all its modes as well as matter and the manner severity and universality of its imposing it is so Besides it is not said that according to the rule of the Gospel it is Unlawful but according to the rule of the Gospel it is not lawful which may fairly be construed thus The rule of the Gospel doth not authenticate or warrant it and I think it ought to be so construed It being the defect of the rule not its Opposition which he lays the great stress of his Cause upon Remember Reader that I was mistaken that thought not-lawful and unlawful had been all one and that the Doctor said not that the joyning in the Lyturgy as aforesaid was unlawful but only not lawful not as in opposition to the rule but without it and so are the 20 circumstances which I named 5. When he saith It is not in our power to make use of any part of it as we shall think fit And I maintain that though man hath not put that in our power God hath put it in our power to joyn in the good part of tolerable Publick Worship without owning the faults or else we must joyn with none you deny not this p. 27. but say that he meant it of mans giving us power which I never denyed But it is God that
it is not his If you can and will but tell me that you believe it not to be his that I may have but so much to say I will thank you and make it publickly known Either the Cause and Arguments are true or false If true defend them If false are they not dangerous in so great a Cause and at such a time when they tend to drive hundred thousands from all Church Worship and Communion and to persuade Men into scandalous suffering for ill doing I think it laudable in you to honour the Doctor and if you be the Man I conjecture you are I think it 's specially incumbent on you As to your hints of suspicion of my sense of old differences if I know my heart I forgave and fully put up all Personal Quarrel long ago But the National Concerns made so deep a wound in my heart as never will be fully healed in this world But this leads me to the second part of your reproof II. I do but tell you my reasons for naming the Doctor but I undertake not to justify either that or the manner of my writing from mistake imprudence or other such faultiness I suppose you to be a Man whom I take from my heart to be far wiser and better than my self And therefore as I thank you for your gentle friendly reprehension so I profess that my very esteem and reverence of your judgment maketh me suspect that I have done amiss when I see it not in the Cause itself That I could have defended the Cause of Love and Communion against those Arguments without taking notice of the Author and without wronging the Non-conformists who will be charged by his name I did and do wish but I thought it could not well be done If in this I mistook I ask pardon of God and Man for so I must do for my sins known and unknown And as to the manner of my writing again I say I am convinced that all that I do is faulty and cannot but have some favour of the ignorance and imprudence and forgetfulness and other faults of the Author I read over your Animadversions and 1. I see at present some words of my own that I much more blame my self for writing than you for blaming 2. What I yet see not to be faulty your Authority shall make me yet suspect and further consider 3. I see very many passages where I am confident the mistake is yours sometimes mistaking the matter and sometime my words What good will it do the Reader or you or me to give the world an account of all these and to drown the Cause in abundance of self-defending words Indeed I have neither time nor mind to write a Book now for my self-defence The greatest Affliction I have by this Controversy as Personal is this diverting of my thoughts so near my last hours from things more agreeable to my Case And far be it from me to be confident in justifying my faulty writings when I am going to the Judge that will take that for an aggravation of my sin But I durst never forsake publick Communion nor my own work because I cannot have one and do the other without fault I am suspicious there may be more faults in me and my writings than either I discern or you or any such have told me of And if I could prove that your mistakes are the ground of your Accusation I see by your noting my numbring the mistakes in matter of Fact in the private Letter to me how you would take it Therefore instead of writing for my self I will give the Reader this concession and advice Readers I think it is little of thy concern to know whether I be wise or unwise good or bad or whether I did well or ill in naming Dr. O. or whether the manner of my writing be much or little to be blamed On condition you will agree with me in the cause of Love and Concord that I defend Lonly then intreat you that what imprudence unskil fulness rashness or other faults you find in me or my writings you will the more carefully your selves avoid them and do better And if you judge me to do ill when I do my duty and think very hardly of me for being against your way I unfeignedly forgive you and if you forgive not me I can bear that I was aware that I should be ill spoken of by many whom I love And I am not Ambitious to be ill spoken of If Folly make me exercise self-denyal it is for somewhat that I thought had been better then all the Love and Praises which I deny I flatter no Party and I look to gain by none I have gathered no Church to depend on for kindness nor is the fear of displeasing them a by as to my judgment And if it be otherwise with any I think were they like to have need of men in this world as short a time as I they would make as little of mens good or ill thoughts and words as I do except for the sake of other men Therefore Reader think of all the rest what you see cause so you will but agree in the Cause that I am defending That is I. That GOD IS LOVE and he that dwelleth in LOVE dwelleth in GOD and GOD in him 1 Joh. 4. II. It is the Prayer of Christ that all who shall believe may be one that the world may thereby be brought to believe that the Father sent him Jo. 17. 21 22 23. And that they must love one another even as he hath loved them by which it is that all must know that they are his Disciples Jo. 13. 34 35. III. This Love must extend to all that are of one Body one Spirit one Hope one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all And this Unity of the Spirit must be kept in the bond of Peace Eph. 4. 3. And if it be possible as much as in us lyeth we must live peaceably with all men Rom. 12. 18. IV. Christians must love one another with a pure heart fervently 1 Pet. 1. 22. with a Love which suffereth long and is kind envieth not is not easily provoked thinketh no evil beareth all things believeth hopeth endureth all things Rom. 13. V. Yet must they not be so tender of each others Honour as of Gods nor justify the sin of any nor make mens names a snare to draw the weak to sin nor think that Love and Peace can be justly vindicated without gain-saying the Errours which oppose them nor that Christ broke the Law of Love by his sharp rebuke of Peter that tempted him to forbear the work of Love nor by rebuking the hurtful zeal of James and John nor by being angry with those that forbad little Children to come to him nor Paul by withstanding Peter in his Separation VI. Christian Love must extend to those that differ from us though faultily in Cases of tolerable infirmity so as not to judge or
praecipientis the Commanders Act The instances before mentioned tell you that this may be obeyed for the Penalty sake when yet the evil of the Command or Law is sinful and so worse than the Penalty or Obedience which are not sin Forgive me for telling you that you should have distinguished the preceptive part of the Law from the matter Commanded by it and the evil of the Law and Law-maker from the evil of the Obeyer and then only have concluded that he that obeyeth a Precept only to avoid the Penalty professeth the Penalty to be worse then his Act of Obedience But he doth not make it worse then the Law or the Law-makers sin If a Law did Command me to appear before a Lay-Civilian who useth the Keys of the Church and this on pain of Death or Imprisonment I may be moved both by Precept and Penalty to appear as being better then either refusal or penalty and yet not think that the Law or Precept is a less evil in itself or its ends to the Law-maker or the publick Whether this thought be right or wrong is nothing to our question so if I were by Law commanded to joyn in the Lyturgy on pain of Death or Imprisonment or being deprived of all other Church Worship I may think this Law worse than my sufferings and yet think my Obedience to it my Duty Yea if a Law bid me play with Childrens Bubbles or any such trisling on pain of Death the Case would be the same And if any should take occasion by your confident judgment to refuse to obey wherever he may not justify the preceptive part of the Law the effect would be worse then of my naming Dr. O. SECT 4. I Told you I have no leisure to write Books for my self now Thus far I have written for Truth and Love and Unity As to all your Charges against my self I say again I will not justify my self My naming Dr. Owen which is so heinously taken I have told you the occasion of To which I truly add 1. I did it as a distinctive note that the Readers might know what it was that I answered 2. And I that use to put my Name to my Writing never dreamt that it would have been taken any worse to name him than to confute a Writing that by common uncontrolled supposition bore his Name Had I thought it would have been taken so ill while the Super-Conformists bear far more it 's two to one but I had forborn it And now it 's done I am yet but little wiser when I think of the publick Cause fore-described I am ready to think it should weigh down all your contrary reasons When I feel in my self an inward averseness to strive with any by ungrateful words and hear from you how ill it 's taken then I dislike it And my own selfish lothness to be the object of the hard thoughts and talk of so many of you is some byass to my judgment I wholly follow the Rule you mention to choose that which doth most good and least hurt And truly the reverence of your own and some others judgment telling me that it doth more hurt than good doth turn the Scales and make me repent that I named the Doctor And I leave your Charges against me to their best advantage to the Reader though my inclination is much to open the mistakes I may give a brief touch to your self for your information which I expect not should affect the Reader suppose your Book to lie open before you Pag. 1. 1. If you thought them not good enough to be his nor intended for publick view why did you wrong him so much and the people much more as to divnlge them with his Name Pag. 2. Do good men take it for a priviledge to hurt the Church uncontradicted 2. The more are displeased with Truth the greater is the disease that needeth it 3. To be zealous for Love against Hatred and its Causes is not so bad as to need to be quenched It is zeal for a Sect against Unity which corrupt nature is for 4. I doubted not but guilt would be impatient 5. It was your Party that wronged his Name by divulging that which you now take for his disgrace Pag. 3. It 's wisely done not to own the Cause I oppose and yet not let men know whether it be for fear of the Law or because you are against it O that I could have fore-known that I might have confuted his Arguments without his Name and displeased no body I thought you had taken them for his Honour and not his Disgrace when so many value them Pag. 4. 1. If they are true they are his Honour If false why should I suffer them to do mischief 2. I named not Mr. Ralphson till all said he openly owned his Books in Prison Had you rather all that Worship God in Parish Churches were persuaded that it is Idolatry than Mr. Ralphson should be confuted by name I hope you have better reasons for concealing your own Name to do mischief un-named is not worth pleading for Pag. 5. If the work be faulty why do you not joyn with me to save men from it And why did your private Letter own it his conjunct with Fame And not one Man yet that I hear of denyeth it 2. I offered you to stop it 3. Is it disingenuity in me to tell you of twenty untruths in your private Letter and many notorious and ingenuity in you to be offended for being told of them rather than for writing them This is to comply with the World that taketh the detecter only for the sinner 4. Is a defensive confutation of Errour dealing severely 5. Agreeing Copies confute you To confute Errour is not worse then to own or defend it Pag. 6. If it be so heinous to confute it why did you divulge it Pag. 7. My Reasons for Love and Concord were long before considered 2. I had heard of them long in many hands though till then I never saw them And you say you saw it a year before 2. It 's strange so knowing a man should think that bad Arguments with a valued Name are not dangerous Yes even against common sense as those for Transubstantiation To confute your self you add that on all sides peoples Opinions are mostly and most strongly mastered by affections and it 's beyond all our power to cure the disorder And yet is there no danger from Names Pag. 8. Must all appearance of Enmity and bitterness be laid aside and Love used c. And yet must we let Men Excommunicate one another and call all to mutual avoidance without contradiction Let Churches and Christians be taught to damn each others Persons and Worship causelesly and take each other for Idolaters for fear of breaking Love and Peace 2. Do you believe that Dr. Owens Name was not known with them before 3. Mr. Warners came out since which I compared with Mr. Ralphsons 4. Can you tell why I was to
name Dr. O. in my Cure of Church Divisions or his Books I told you great reasons against it what now you call a brave advantage would have been otherwise called by yours I was not inclined to note a little evil among much good If you cannot see the Doctors Arguments there answered by me I cannot help that Must. I transcribe them to convince you Pag. 177. Dâ—r 32. Obj. Where hath God given any men power to prescribe impost Forms for others or commandea others to obey them Read the answer pag. 178 179 180. At least not on Ministers p. 181. Christ hath given gifts to all his Ministers and commanded them to use them They use them not when they use imposed Forms So pag. 190. p. 196. of approving of sin and signifying Consent by joyning More fully p. 201. And in my Christ. Direct If you never found these Arguments there answered in Dr. O. Book I cannot help that others have Pag. 11. I thought you had known how usual it is to speak to the second person in answering Books many hundred years old If not you have free leave to take it for my folly I 'le not contend with Quakers whether we should say You or Thou nor with you whether it be better to say Him or You. You say It displeaseth him not Pag. 15. If numbring mens Errours used to do hurt be worse than committing or defending them I mistook Pag. 16. I consent that you do so by me so you speak nothing but truth 2. Repentance is a hard work and the impenitent impatient therefore we all suffer what we do Pag. 17. My Pleas for Peace have been all ill taken by the other side And which of you therefore were so offended at them 2. I am sorry that you seign the healing Parliament to have disowned our Repentance I preacht to the Parliament but once and it was for Repentance I have oft publickly accused my self and I hope I break not the Act of Oblivion by it They forbad reproaching and troubling one another but not remembring our sin nor seeling when we suffer nor asking what caused it to stop the like again if not for a cuâ—e But dear Brother do you not know that it was your divulged Writing that rubb'd upon the sort and broke the Act of Oblivion if this be breaking it Did it not tell what work the imposing the Lyturgy had made against Reformation for Ignorance Rtviling and Reproaching the Spirit sit up ungifted Ministers made great disolations in the Church silencing painful Ministers ruining Families destroying Souls c. Do you think this broke the Act of Oblivion or is condemned by the healing Parliament or doth nothing break it but on one side Look on both sides and tell me how such Arguments misused should be answered but by shewing that there was danger and ill effects also on the contrary extream Did the Parliament forbid one side only this Commemoration I pray you if but one side may be called to Repent let it be us that we may be forgiven Pag. 18. If you know not that the Principles of Separation were the great cause in Armies and elsewhere of the subversions and confusions which brought us to what we have felt I do And you would not at once live under the fruit of it as we now do and I yet make so light of it as to take it for a noli me tangere if it had cost you as many painful days and nights as many ungrateful disputes as many groans and tears and as much blood as it hath done me And how little is my part to that which England cotland and Ireland hath suffered even by that cause conjunct with Pride and Ambition these sourty years If I may not have leave to say as Bradford Repent O England you should give me leave to Repent my self that ever I preacht one Sermon with any byass of overmuch desire to please Persons of the accusing separating humour Pag. 19. I said of our late overturnings in England that all this is publickly known Many late Volumes on both sides record it were it but Whitlocks Memorials it were enough The Nations ring of it and I have ost lamented it heretofore and you mistaking all this seign me to say that the passages debated in Dr. Owens Papers and his words were all known before and so bestow many reproofs upon a fiction of your own Pag. 20. You would put such terms upon me in dispute a Veron devised to put on the Protestants I must oppose his Doctrine only as in the Syllables written Accidentals in Worship signify you think at least an Integral Part. Doth in turn Accidents into parts Are Accidents parts because Inherent Are not your Quality Quantities Immanent Acts Passions c. inherent Is not Kneeting putting off the Hat Methods Translations Meeter Tunes c. in the Worship of God And is it unlawful because in it If it be therefore a part of Worship you must conclude that either all these are unlawful or that it 's lawful for men to make parts of Gods Worship 2. Are all things duly belonging to it parts of it I believe you own none of this your self Pag. 21. The Doctors 7th Argument was that this practice condemneth the suffering Saints of the present age rendring them false Witnesses of God I answered Let us not stand to any dividing Principle or Cause lest the Saints be blamed that have fathered it in God I used the word Saints but as repeating his own phrase And this you make to have better become the Observator Is not this partiality May the Argument use a term which the answerer may not repeat And dear Brother is it not a sad case if among the many ill causes fathered on God any or all of them should say We must not repent â—or amend lest we be blamed as false Witnesses of God Pag. 22. Sir if telling me of any sin that ensnareth Souls be using me more scornfully then the most virulent adversaries spare me not but use me so wo to me if Repentance become odious and intolerable But I must stop lest I cross my purpose of not writing for my self but you The conclusion of all is dear Brethren the longer I study the Gospel and the longer I live in the world the more fully I am Convinced that Love is the great work of the Spirit and the Men that Love most are the best Men and those the worst that have least love And I would write in golden Letters as my Motto GOD IS LOVE and he that dwelleth in Love dwelleth in God and God in him And if Christians loved no more than others they would be no better than they And that Love desireth union and familiarity and that censoriousness contempt and flying from each other both signify and breed hatred Could we but so live as to make all our Enemies believe that we heartily love them it would conquer their enmity and tie their Hands and Tongues by reconciling