I 56' The inclifpenjible Duty of their cnen1-ies, as it could in the revenge c( the injury: their wicke(~ hun1ours are not ftarv·ed, but only ch~nge their diet. ·of tl:is nature was the anfwer of the philofophcr, to fome who incited and provok.. ed hin1 to revenge, If an qfs kick me, jhafl I kick him ·a,gain? This is but a lame 3nd n1ifuapen charity; it hath n1ore of pride than goodnefs. We ihould learn of the· holy Jejits, \vho was not only meek, but lowly. We fu6uld contemn the injury, and pity the weaknefs, but fhould not difdain or defpife the perfonsofour enen1ies. Cha– rity .vaunteth not herfelj, is not puffed up, doth not behave herje!j unfeemb'· Having thus difcovered thofe things which arc in.confifl:ent with charity, and . r excluded by the love of enernies, it ren1ains that we fhew what it does import and re- . _quire. / Firfi, then it imports an inward kindnefs and affection; which if it does not amount to that paffionate tendernefs whichwe have for our near relations and intin1ate friends, yet it implies a good-will towards - them, and friendly concernn1ent in their interefi. If we love an enemy, we fhall wiih his welfare, and rejoice il) it, and be unfeignedly fol'ry for any difafier that befals him·; fo far
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=