A92140:599
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 21: Of the Samaritans, and of no compelling of Heathens. How the Covenant bindeth us.
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.
3 But we are (saith he) to endeavour by all lawful means and ways, the nearest uniformity among the Churches, and the only lawful way, as he thinks is not by force, but by rebuking, instructing, exhorting, and by no weapons, but only by the word of God. But since this Author and all the Nation of Libertines go upon this principle, Religion is not to be compelled by force, for we are not infallible, and those whom we force as heretics may be no heretics, for ought we know, but as sound in the faith as our selves. Then we have no faith, nor any well-grounded persuasion of the word of God, to refute them by the word; and we refute them not of faith, but sinfully ⟨p. 255⟩and erroneously,1 for they may be as sound in the faith, as we our selves, for ought we know, and this is a strong argument against moral ways of gaining heretics by the power of the word, for if they may be sound in the faith, and we the heretics, though we refute them by the word, we may be perverting the right ways of God, and •ight against Christ, as Elim•s: for Eli••s only by moral ways, not by force or violence laboured to pervert the faith of Sergius Paulus, and it is not apparent that Elimas was persuaded in his conscience, that the Gospel Paul preached was the truth of God, and so by no means, lawful or unlawful, by force, or by the word of God, are we to endeavour uniformity, for our endeavouring is not of faith, nor from the real grounds of the word, but from mere opinions and conjectures, for it may be (say Libertines) that all those whom we refute as heretics, be sound in the faith, and we, not they the heretics, and those whom we refute, are as much obliged in faith to refute us, as we to refute them. So I see not how Libertines can use so much as moral compelling of Heretics. For 1. They cannot compel them with the sword to forsake their heresies, because the sword bearer being fallible knoweth them not to be heresies, they may be necessary truths for him. Ergo, because the Pastor is no more infallible then the Magistrate, the Pastor with certainty of faith cannot say, thus saith the Lord.
3 But wee are (saith he) to indeavour by all lawfull meanes and wayes, the nearest uniformity among the Churches, and the onely lawfull way, as he thinks is not by force, but by rebuking, instructing, exhorting, and by no weapons, but onely by the word of God. But since this Authour and all the Nation of Libertines goe upon this principle, Religion is not to be compelled by force, for we are not infallible, and those whom we force as hereticks may be no hereticks, for ought we know, but as sound in the faith as our selves. Then we have no faith, nor any well-grounded perswasion of the word of God, to refute them by the word; and we refute them not of faith, but sinfully