A92140:326
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
Chapter 10: Of indulgence in fundamentall, or non-fundamentall errors.
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.
1. Should not the Magistrate punish no thefts, no robbery, no murder,1 but such as are thefts, robberies, and murders, undeniably and uncontroversally to the conscience of all that are members of that society, whether Anabaptists or others?
1. Should not the Magistrate punish no thefts, no robbery, no murther,1 but such as are thefts, robberies, and murthers, undeniably and uncontroversally to the conscience of all that are members of that society, whether Anabaptists or others?
- 1Queries propounded to Libertines.
2. Should the Magistrate abstain from punishing of that which is false worship, for example sacrificing of a child to God, for fear he domineer over the conscience of a Christian, and so transgress his sphere, and sit down in Gods room (which is really murder, and shedding of innocent blood) though it be not so to the man-slayer, but acceptable service to God, and yet punish the same false worship, as murder and destructive to peace, whereas to the actors conscience, whom he desires to favour, it is not murder and not destructive to peace,1 does he not really and by his office as great violence, and exerciseth no less a domineering power over the mans conscience, then if he should punish this as false worship?
2. Should the Magistrate abstaine from punishing of that which is false worship, for example sacrificing of a childe to God, for feare he domineere over the conscience of a Christian, and so transgresse his sphere, and sit down in Gods roome (which is really murther, and shedding of innocent blood) though it be not so to the man-slayer, but acceptable service to God, and yet punish the same false worship, as murther and destructive to peace, whereas to the actors consience, whom he desires to favour, it is not murther and not destructive to peace,