A92140:725
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.
From this place it is clear, when a Kingdom, or two Kingdoms are united together, and confederate by the Oath of God in one Religious Covenant, they become an Ecclesiastic body, so as the whole may challenge any part that maketh defection, and labour to gain them, and if they contumaciously resist, they are with the sword to decide the matter, lest wrath from the Lord break out on the whole confederate body; as for the sin of one […], wrath came upon all Israel: Nor can I well see what can be answered on the contrary, except that that war for the new Altar, was undertaken upon judicial and temporary warrants, which do not bind us under the New Testament.
From this place it is cleere, when a Kingdome, or two Kingdomes are united together, and confederate by the Oath of God in one Religious Covenant, they become an Ecclesiastick body, so as the whole may challenge any part that maketh defection, and labour to gaine them, and if they contumaciously resist, they are with the sword to decide the matter, lest wrath from the Lord breake out on the whole confederate body; as for the sinne of one 〈…〉, wrath came upon all Israel: Nor can I well see what can be answered on the contrary, except that that warre for the new Altar, was undertaken upon judiciall and temporary warrants, which do not binde us under the New Testament.
But this is said, not proved, that new Altar was not a heap of stones; but if it had been made upon Religio•s grounds, and for the service of God, it had been no less than an Apostasy from that true Religion once delivered by God. Then if the third part of Scotland and England should turn Apostates from the Religion once sworn, after they had bound themselves in Covenant: the question remaineth, what should the State and Parliament do in that case? should they be indifferent beholders, and not use the sword against such Apostates?1 Swarez and others, not without reason, thinks that Infidels that are not Subjects, and not Apostates, cannot be compelled to embrace the true faith, even though it be sufficiently proposed to them, his reasons are, there is no lawful power given to the Church by Jesus Christ to compel such. 2. It is no tradition of the Church. 3. Those that are without cannot be judged; but the truth is, the sword is not given to the