A92140:175
A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved
A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved by Mr. John Goodwin, John Baptist, Dr. Jer. Taylor, the Belgic Arminians, Socinians, and other authors contending for lawless liberty, or licentious toleration of sects and heresies. / By Samuel Rutherfurd professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews.A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved by Mr. John Goodwin, John Baptist, Dr. Jer. Taylor, the Belgick Arminians, Socinians, and other authors contending for lawlesse liberty, or licentious toleration of sects and heresies. / By Samuel Rutherfurd professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews.
London: printed by R.I. for Andrew Crook, 1649
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.
For the first, we lay hold on all the arguments that prove the word preached to be the only means of converting the soul, begetting of faith and that carnal weapons are not able, yea nor were they ever appointed of God, to doing down strong holds,1 nor can they make a willing people: and Lactantius said well, What is left to us, if another's lust […] that by force, which we must do willingly? And that of Tertullian. It is of the law or right of man and of his natural power what every man worships, what he thinks he should worship, nor doth the Religion of one either do good or do evil to another man, nor is it religion to compel religion, which ought ⟨p. 51⟩to be received by w•ll not by force: since sacrifices (of worship) are required of a willing mind. In which I observe. 1. Tertullian speaks not of the true Christian Religion which is now in question:2 but of Religion in general as it is comprehensive of both true and false Religion. Because he speaks of that Religion which by the Law of nature a man chooseth, and is humani juris & naturalis potestatis: but it is not of the law of man or natural power, nor in flesh and bloods power to choose the true Christian Religion, that election is Supernatural saith Tertullian there and else where often, as also the Scripture Joh. 6. 44. Math. 16. 17. Math. 11. 25, 26, 27 2. Religion is taken two ways 1. for the inward and outward acts of Religion as seen both to God and man as Lactantius, Tertullian and others say, so it is most true. Christians ought not with force of sword, compel Jews, nor Jews or Pagans compel Christians to be of their Religion, because Religion is not begotten many, by persuasion of the mind, nor by forcing of the man.3 Again Religion is taken for the external profession and acting and performances of true Religion within the Church or by such as profess the truth, that are obvious to the eyes of Magistrates and Pastors, and thus the sword is no means of God to force men positively to external worship or performances. But the sword is a means negatively to punish acts of false worship in those that are under the Christian Magistrate and profess Christian Religion, in so far as these acts come out to the eyes of men and are destructive to the souls of these in a Christian society; Tis even so (& not otherwise punishable by the Magistrate;)