A92140:334
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.
But I answer, if it be grateful worship to God, it is no more cruelty then to burn a beast to God, and you are to suppose that a godly Anabaptist, hath warrant from God for that worship, as well for burning of beasts, and offering yearly thousands of bullocks and sheep to God, in memory of Christ once already sacrificed for sinners, and that there is in it neither cruelty to beasts, nor hurt to the Commonwealth, that the Magistrate can restrain, for though there be no reason at all for the worship, ex natura rei, if we consider the worship it self, yet there is such reason to tolerate the worship, so as if the Magistrate restrain, he tyranni•eth over the conscience, and a bloody conscience is a conscience as uncapable of violence, and as immediately in the New Testament, subject to God only, not to the sword, as a good conscience, then if the sword can strain no conscience as conscience; how can it squeeze a conscience wading in bloody son-butchery more then any other conscience?1
But I answer, if it be gratefull worship to God, it is no more cruelty then to burne a beast to God, and you are to suppose that a godly Anabaptist, hath warrant from God for that worship, as well for burning of beasts, and offering yearely thousands of bullocks and sheep to God, in memory of Christ once already sacrificed for sinners, and that there is in it neither cruelty to beasts, nor hurt to the Commonwealth, that the Magistrate can restraine, for though there be no reason at all for the worship, ex natura rei, if we consider the worship it selfe, yet there is such reason to tolerate the worship, so as if the Magistrate restraine, he tyranni•eth over the conscience, and a bloody conscience is a conscience as uncapable of violence, and as immediately in the New Testament, subject to God onely, not to the sword, as a good conscience, then if the sword can straine no conscience as conscience; how can it squeeze a conscience wading in bloody son-butchery more then any other conscience?1
- 1To compel men to do against their conscience, that is to sin neither in Old or New Test-lawful.To compell men to do against their conscience, that is to sin neither in Old or New Test-lawfull.