A92140:915
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 28: Divers other Arguments for pretended Toleration, answered.
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.
Answ. 1This strongly concludes that the understanding and will cannot be forced by the sword, but must move a connatural way, by the indictment of reason, and nothing follows but that the internal and elicit acts of the understanding and will, cannot be produced by external violence which we yield, ye say that it involves a contradiction that the elicit acts of the understanding and will, can be produced by external force, but if masters of Logic infer, Ergo the Magistrate cannot punish a Seducer, a false Prophet for teaching, what his erroneous conscience dictates to him: then we say this argument is against the Holy Ghost, not against us; and blaspheming Celsius, Lucianus do &c. object, the like against Moses Laws as unjust and bloody, and Scripture:2
Answ. 1This strongly concludes that the understanding and wil cannot bee forced by the sword, but must move a connatural way, by the indictment of reason, and nothing followes but that the internal and elicite acts of the understanding and will, cannot be produced by external violence which we yeeld, ye say that it involves a contradiction that the elicite acts of the understanding and will, can be produced by external force, but if masters of Logicke infer, Ergo the Magistrate cannot punish a Seducer, a false Prophet for teaching, what his erroneous conscience dictates to him: then we say this argument is against the Holy Ghost, not against us; and blaspheming Celsius, Lucianus doe &c. object, the like against Moses Lawes as unjust and bloody, and Scripture:2
- 1The objection of a carnal way by swords as no fit means to suppress heresy answered.The objection of a carnall way by swords as no fit means to suppresse heresie answered.
- 2The objection from carnal weapons, and forcing of conscience, and contradictions involved, enforcing the elicit & •n•ernall acts of will and understanding &c. as strong against laws in the old Testament as in the New.