A supplement to the Serious consideration of the oath of the Kings supremacy; published October 1660. In, first, some consideration of the oath of allegiance. Secondly, vindicating of the consideration of the oaths of the Kings supremacy and allegiance, from the exceptions of Richard Hubberthorn, Samuel Fisher, Samuel Hodgkin, and some others against them, in the points of swearing in some case, and the matters of those oaths. By John Tombes B.D.
         Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.
      
       
         
           1661
        
      
       Approx. 122 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 25 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
       
         Text Creation Partnership,
         Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :
         2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).
         A94740
         Wing T1821
         Thomason E1084_1
         ESTC R207991
         99866999
         99866999
         119289
         
           
            This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of
             Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal
            . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
          
        
      
       
         Early English books online.
      
       
         (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A94740)
         Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 119289)
         Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 161:E1084[1])
      
       
         
           
             A supplement to the Serious consideration of the oath of the Kings supremacy; published October 1660. In, first, some consideration of the oath of allegiance. Secondly, vindicating of the consideration of the oaths of the Kings supremacy and allegiance, from the exceptions of Richard Hubberthorn, Samuel Fisher, Samuel Hodgkin, and some others against them, in the points of swearing in some case, and the matters of those oaths. By John Tombes B.D.
             Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.
          
           [7], 41 p.
           
             printed by Henry Hills, living in Aldersgate-street next door to the sign of the Peacock,
             London :
             [1661]
          
           
             A reply to "Antichristianism reproved, and the doctrine of Christ and his apostles justified against swearing" by Richard Hubberthorn, "Supplementum sublatum" by Richard Hubberthorn and Samuel Fisher, and "A caution to the sons of Sion" by Samuel Hodgkin.
             Imprint date from Wing.
             Annotation on Thomason copy: "march 2d".
             Reproduction of the original in the British Library.
          
        
      
    
     
       
         Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
         Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors.
      
       
         EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
         EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
         The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
         Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
         Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
         Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
         The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
         Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
         
          Keying and markup guidelines are available at the
           Text Creation Partnership web site
          .
        
      
       
         
         
      
    
     
       
         eng
      
       
         
           Hubberthorn, Richard, 1628-1662 -- Antichristianism reproved, and the doctrine of Christ and his apostles justified against swearing.
           Fisher, Samuel, 1605-1665.
           Hodgkin, Samuel. -- Caution to the sons of Sion.
           Oaths -- Early works to 1800.
        
      
    
     
        2007-05 TCP
        Assigned for keying and markup
      
        2007-05 Aptara
        Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images
      
        2007-06 Pip Willcox
        Sampled and proofread
      
        2007-06 Pip Willcox
        Text and markup reviewed and edited
      
        2008-02 pfs
        Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
      
    
  
   
     
       
         
         
           A
           SUPPLEMENT
           TO
           THE
           Serious
           consideration
           of
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           KINGS
           Supremacy
           ;
           Published
           October
           1660.
           
           IN
           ,
           First
           ,
           Some
           consideration
           OF
           THE
           Oath
           of
           Allegiance
           .
           Secondly
           ,
           Vindicating
           of
           the
           consideration
           of
           the
           Oaths
           of
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           and
           Allegiance
           ,
           from
           the
           exceptions
           of
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
             ,
             Samuel
             Fisher
             ,
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
             ,
          
           and
           some
           others
           against
           them
           ,
           in
           the
           points
           of
           swearing
           in
           some
           case
           ,
           and
           the
           matters
           of
           those
           Oaths
           .
        
         
           By
           
             John
             Tombes
          
           B.
           D.
           
        
         
           
             Mat.
             22.
             21.
             
          
           Render
           therefore
           to
           Caesar
           the
           things
           tbat
           are
           Caesars
           ,
           and
           to
           God
           the
           things
           that
           are
           Gods.
           
        
         
           LONDON
           ,
           Printed
           by
           
             Henry
             Hills
          
           ,
           living
           in
           Aldersgate-street
           next
           door
           to
           the
           sign
           of
           the
           Peacock
           .
        
      
       
         
         
         
           To
           the
           Christian
           Readers
           .
        
         
           I
           Need
           not
           tell
           you
           again
           what
           may
           be
           seen
           in
           my
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Readers
           before
           my
           book
           of
           the
           serious
           consideration
           of
           the
           oath
           of
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           ,
           how
           I
           was
           induced
           to
           compose
           and
           publish
           it
           ,
           conceiving
           it
           to
           be
           a
           work
           of
           charity
           ,
           to
           others
           ,
           and
           a
           necessary
           duty
           to
           my self
           ,
           as
           circumstances
           then
           concurred
           .
           I
           have
           found
           not
           a
           little
           fruit
           of
           my
           labor
           therein
           ,
           by
           satisfying
           many
           that
           I
           know
           ,
           and
           more
           (
           as
           I
           am
           told
           )
           whom
           I
           know
           not
           ,
           of
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           taking
           such
           oaths
           ,
           as
           are
           therein
           asserted
           ,
           and
           thereby
           preventing
           the
           ruine
           of
           themselves
           and
           families
           ;
           though
           I
           find
           by
           the
           opposition
           of
           some
           ,
           that
           it
           hath
           proved
           an
           offence
           to
           others
           ,
           insomuch
           that
           I
           was
           told
           ,
           that
           I
           had
           thereby
           given
           occasion
           of
           the
           alienation
           of
           many
           hundreds
           from
           me
           ,
           of
           whose
           peace
           and
           welfare
           I
           was
           ,
           and
           still
           am
           ,
           very
           tender
           .
           Besides
           ,
           what
           exceptions
           have
           been
           made
           in
           private
           conference
           ,
           (
           which
           I
           have
           in
           such
           conferences
           endeavoured
           to
           remove
           )
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
             ,
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           ,
           and
           some
           others
           ,
           have
           in
           print
           opposed
           that
           writing
           .
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           intitles
           his
           writing
           ,
           
             Antichristianism
             reproved
          
           ,
           as
           if
           my
           book
           had
           contained
           Antichristianism
           :
           which
           is
           a
           term
           that
           affrights
           many
           weak
           Christians
           ,
           and
           is
           therefore
           by
           those
           that
           craftily
           endeavour
           to
           uphold
           ,
           and
           further
           divisions
           put
           upon
           those
           actions
           ,
           doctrines
           and
           writings
           ,
           which
           they
           would
           scare
           less
           discerning
           souls
           from
           ,
           and
           so
           separate
           them
           from
           others
           ,
           
           and
           fasten
           them
           to
           their
           party
           ,
           though
           it
           be
           for
           the
           most
           part
           but
           a
           frivolous
           imputation
           ,
           and
           a
           gross
           calumny
           .
           Antichristianism
           according
           to
           the
           Apostle
           John
           ,
           (
           who
           only
           of
           all
           the
           holy
           Writers
           ,
           useth
           the
           term
           Antichrist
           )
           being
           a
           greater
           matter
           then
           some
           errors
           ,
           or
           evil
           in
           some
           points
           of
           practice
           ,
           to
           wit
           ,
           
             a
             denial
             of
             the
             father
             and
             the
             son
             ,
          
           1
           John
           2.
           22
           ,
           23.
           
             not
             confessing
             Jesus
             Christ
             come
             in
             the
             flesh
             ,
          
           1
           John
           4.
           3
           ,
           4.
           2
           
           John
           7.
           of
           which
           sort
           my
           defending
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           some
           swearing
           is
           not
           .
           And
           to
           omit
           his
           nonsense
           ,
           in
           saying
           ,
           
             the
             doctrine
             of
             Christ
             and
             his
             Apostles
             is
             justified
             against
             swearing
             ,
          
           meaning
           my
           doctrine
           of
           swearing
           ,
           where
           he
           saith
           ,
           that
           
             it
             is
             there
             proved
             according
             to
             the
             Scriptures
             ,
             that
             all
             my
             six
             Propositions
             for
             the
             lawfulness
             of
             swearing
             ,
             are
             both
             against
             Christ
             and
             his
             Apostles
             doctrine
          
           ;
           It
           must
           needs
           be
           false
           ,
           sith
           he
           hath
           not
           brought
           any
           Scriptures
           against
           the
           three
           last
           Propositions
           .
           As
           for
           his
           Epistle
           to
           me
           ,
           that
           which
           he
           insinuates
           by
           his
           expostulations
           with
           me
           ,
           
             of
             dividing
             my self
             from
             mine
             own
             people
             ,
             of
             teaching
             people
             to
             swear
             first
             one
             way
             ,
             and
             then
             another
             ;
             of
             my
             being
             long
             a
             hiding
             my self
             under
             so
             many
             false
             covers
             ,
          
           is
           the
           foam
           and
           froth
           of
           his
           railing
           spirit
           ;
           of
           which
           he
           ,
           and
           others
           of
           the
           Quakers
           ,
           seem
           by
           their
           frequent
           venting
           reproaches
           ,
           unjust
           censurings
           and
           revilings
           ,
           to
           have
           gotten
           an
           habit
           ,
           and
           are
           more
           like
           Antichristianism
           ,
           then
           any
           of
           my
           doctrines
           ,
           who
           preach
           not
           up
           that
           which
           Christ
           and
           his
           Apostles
           deny
           ,
           but
           endeavour
           to
           clear
           their
           words
           from
           mistake
           .
           Nor
           was
           my
           writing
           indigested
           ,
           
             as
             if
             God
             did
             not
             brook
             it
             ,
          
           though
           I
           confessed
           ,
           in
           respect
           of
           the
           composure
           of
           it
           ,
           there
           was
           want
           of
           such
           accurate
           digesting
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           framing
           in
           respect
           of
           words
           ,
           method
           and
           matter
           ,
           as
           the
           thing
           required
           ,
           by
           reason
           of
           my
           shortness
           of
           time
           ,
           and
           yet
           there
           was
           no
           cause
           for
           
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           to
           term
           it
           a
           toy
           ,
           as
           he
           doth
           in
           the
           margin
           of
           his
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Reader
           ,
           before
           his
           impetuous
           ,
           though
           impotent
           book
           ,
           intitled
           the
           
             Rusticks
             alarm
             to
             the
             Rabbies
          
           ,
           so
           terming
           Dr.
           Owen
           ,
           Mr.
           Danson
           ,
           Mr.
           
             Richard
             Baxter
          
           ,
           and
           my self
           .
           I
           confess
           I
           had
           an
           intention
           (
           and
           began
           to
           draw
           up
           a
           writing
           to
           that
           purpose
           )
           to
           publish
           a
           fuller
           Treatise
           about
           swearing
           ,
           having
           in
           Catechetical
           Lectures
           ,
           somewhat
           largely
           handled
           the
           general
           nature
           of
           an
           Oath
           ,
           the
           several
           forms
           and
           rites
           of
           swearing
           ,
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           swearing
           ,
           the
           sorts
           of
           Oaths
           ,
           the
           rules
           ,
           obligation
           ,
           urging
           ,
           dispensation
           of
           Oaths
           :
           But
           my
           late
           continual
           molestations
           ,
           imprisonment
           ,
           restraint
           from
           my
           Ministery
           in
           the
           place
           where
           I
           was
           seated
           thirty
           years
           before
           ,
           and
           the
           uncertainty
           of
           my
           dwelling
           ,
           have
           hindred
           me
           from
           
           prosecuting
           thereof
           ,
           and
           other
           works
           ,
           which
           I
           hoped
           to
           accomplish
           for
           publique
           good
           :
           nor
           am
           I
           yet
           secured
           from
           the
           like
           molestation
           and
           uncertainties
           ,
           and
           therefore
           know
           not
           what
           I
           shall
           do
           ,
           or
           resolve
           to
           do
           therein
           .
           Wherefore
           I
           have
           ,
           being
           requested
           thereto
           ,
           published
           this
           little
           Supplement
           ,
           whereby
           my
           aim
           is
           to
           benefit
           others
           ,
           though
           I
           find
           (
           as
           I
           have
           always
           done
           )
           the
           cleering
           of
           truth
           in
           this
           ,
           to
           have
           occasioned
           many
           hard
           censures
           of
           me
           ,
           and
           much
           injury
           to
           me
           ,
           which
           the
           Lord
           forgive
           .
           Yet
           I
           hope
           I
           shall
           truly
           say
           with
           the
           Apostle
           ,
           2
           
             Cor.
             12.
             15.
             
             And
             I
             will
             very
             gladly
             spend
             and
             be
             spent
             for
             you
             ,
             though
             the
             more
             I
             love
             you
             ,
             the
             less
             I
             be
             loved
             .
          
           As
           for
           those
           that
           find
           any
           benefit
           by
           my
           labors
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           ,
           I
           request
           them
           that
           they
           would
           return
           thanks
           to
           God
           for
           it
           ;
           and
           that
           all
           would
           in
           their
           prayers
           to
           God
           for
           me
           ,
           help
           me
           ,
           who
           am
        
         
           
             Their
             brother
             and
             servant
             in
             Christ
             ,
             JOHN
             TOMBES
             .
          
           
             London
             ,
             
               March
               6.
               1660.
               
            
          
        
      
       
         
         
           The
           Oath
           of
           Obedience
           in
           the
           Act
           for
           discovery
           and
           repressing
           Popish
           Recusants
           ,
           30.
           of
           Jac.
           c.
           4.
           commonly
           called
           the
           Oath
           of
           ALLEGIANCE
           .
        
         
           IAB
           .
           doe
           truly
           and
           sincerely
           acknowledge
           ,
           profess
           ,
           testifie
           and
           declare
           in
           my
           Conscience
           before
           God
           and
           the
           world
           ;
           that
           our
           Soveraign
           Lord
           King
           JAMES
           ,
           is
           lawful
           and
           rightful
           King
           of
           this
           Realm
           ,
           and
           of
           all
           other
           his
           Majesties
           Dominions
           and
           Countries
           ;
           and
           that
           the
           Pope
           ,
           neither
           of
           himself
           ,
           nor
           by
           any
           authority
           of
           the
           Church
           or
           See
           of
           Rome
           ,
           or
           by
           any
           other
           means
           with
           any
           other
           ,
           hath
           any
           power
           or
           authority
           ,
           to
           depose
           the
           King
           ,
           or
           to
           dispose
           any
           of
           his
           Majesties
           Kingdomes
           or
           Dominions
           ,
           or
           to
           authorize
           any
           forrein
           Prince
           to
           invade
           or
           annoy
           him
           ,
           or
           his
           Countries
           ,
           or
           to
           discharge
           any
           of
           his
           subjects
           of
           their
           Allegiance
           and
           Obedience
           to
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           or
           to
           give
           licence
           or
           leave
           to
           any
           of
           them
           to
           bear
           Arms
           ,
           raise
           tumults
           ,
           or
           to
           offer
           any
           violence
           or
           hurt
           to
           his
           Majesties
           Royal
           Person
           ,
           State
           or
           Government
           ,
           or
           to
           any
           of
           his
           Majesties
           subjects
           within
           his
           Majesties
           Dominions
           .
           Also
           I
           do
           swear
           from
           my
           heart
           ,
           that
           notwithstanding
           any
           declaration
           or
           sentence
           of
           Excommunication
           or
           deprivation
           made
           or
           granted
           ,
           or
           to
           be
           made
           or
           granted
           by
           the
           Pope
           or
           his
           successors
           ,
           or
           by
           any
           authority
           ,
           derived
           ,
           or
           pretended
           to
           be
           derived
           from
           him
           or
           his
           See
           ,
           against
           the
           said
           King
           ,
           his
           heirs
           or
           successors
           ,
           or
           any
           absolution
           of
           the
           said
           subjects
           from
           their
           obedience
           :
           I
           will
           bear
           Faith
           and
           true
           Allegiance
           to
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           his
           heirs
           and
           successors
           ,
           and
           him
           and
           them
           will
           defend
           to
           the
           uttermost
           of
           my
           power
           ,
           against
           all
           conspiracies
           and
           attempts
           whatsoever
           ,
           which
           shall
           be
           made
           against
           his
           or
           their
           persons
           ,
           their
           Crown
           and
           Dignity
           ,
           by
           reason
           or
           colour
           of
           any
           such
           sentence
           or
           declaration
           ,
           or
           otherwise
           ,
           and
           will
           do
           my
           best
           endeavour
           to
           disclose
           ,
           and
           make
           known
           unto
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           his
           heirs
           and
           successors
           ,
           
           all
           treasons
           and
           traiterous
           conspiracies
           ,
           which
           I
           shall
           know
           or
           hear
           of
           ,
           to
           be
           against
           him
           or
           any
           of
           them
           .
           And
           I
           do
           further
           swear
           ,
           that
           I
           do
           from
           my
           heart
           abhor
           ,
           detest
           and
           abjure
           as
           impious
           and
           heretical
           ,
           this
           damnable
           doctrine
           and
           position
           ,
           That
           Princes
           which
           be
           excommunicated
           or
           deprived
           by
           the
           Pope
           ,
           may
           be
           deposed
           or
           murthered
           by
           their
           subjects
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           whatsoever
           .
           And
           I
           do
           believe
           ,
           and
           in
           conscience
           am
           resolved
           ,
           that
           neither
           the
           Pope
           ,
           nor
           any
           person
           whatsoever
           ,
           hath
           power
           to
           absolve
           me
           of
           this
           Oath
           ,
           or
           any
           part
           thereof
           ,
           which
           I
           acknowledge
           by
           good
           and
           full
           authority
           ,
           to
           be
           lawfully
           ministred
           unto
           me
           ,
           and
           do
           renounce
           all
           pardons
           and
           dispensations
           to
           the
           contrary
           .
           And
           all
           these
           things
           I
           do
           plainly
           and
           sincerely
           acknowledge
           and
           swear
           ,
           according
           to
           these
           express
           words
           by
           me
           spoken
           ,
           and
           according
           to
           the
           plain
           and
           common
           sense
           ,
           and
           understanding
           of
           the
           same
           words
           ,
           without
           any
           equivocation
           ,
           or
           mental
           evasion
           ,
           or
           secret
           reservation
           whatsoever
           .
           And
           I
           do
           make
           this
           recognition
           and
           acknowledgement
           heartily
           ,
           willingly
           and
           truly
           ,
           upon
           the
           true
           faith
           of
           a
           Christian
           .
        
         
           So
           help
           me
           God.
           
        
      
    
     
       
         
         
           The
           words
           of
           King
           JAMES
           in
           his
           Apology
           for
           the
           Oath
           of
           ALLEGIANCE
           ,
           p.
           46
           ,
           &c.
           in
           his
           answer
           to
           Cardinal
           Bellarmine's
           Letter
           .
        
         
           AS
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           was
           devised
           for
           putting
           a
           difference
           between
           Papists
           ,
           and
           them
           of
           our
           profession
           :
           so
           was
           this
           Oath
           [
           of
           Allegiance
           ]
           which
           Bellarmine
           would
           seem
           to
           impugn
           ,
           ordained
           for
           making
           a
           difference
           between
           the
           civilly
           obedient
           Papists
           ,
           and
           the
           perverse
           disciples
           of
           the
           Powder-treason
           .
           In
           King
           Henry
           the
           eighths
           time
           was
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           first
           made
           :
           by
           him
           were
           
             Thomas
             Moor
          
           and
           Roffensis
           put
           to
           death
           ,
           partly
           for
           refusing
           of
           it
           .
           From
           his
           time
           till
           now
           ,
           have
           all
           the
           Princes
           of
           this
           Land
           ,
           professing
           this
           Religion
           ,
           successively
           in
           effect
           maintained
           the
           same
           :
           and
           in
           that
           Oath
           only
           is
           contained
           the
           Kings
           absolute
           power
           to
           be
           judge
           over
           all
           persons
           ,
           as
           well
           Civil
           as
           Ecclesiastical
           ;
           excluding
           all
           forrein
           powers
           and
           Potentates
           to
           be
           Judges
           within
           his
           Dominions
           :
           Whereas
           this
           last
           made
           Oath
           containeth
           no
           such
           matter
           ,
           only
           medling
           with
           the
           civil
           obedience
           of
           subjects
           to
           their
           Soveraign
           in
           meer
           temporal
           causes
           .
           And
           that
           the
           injustice
           as
           well
           as
           the
           errour
           of
           
           Bellarmine's
           gross
           mistaking
           in
           this
           point
           ,
           may
           yet
           be
           more
           clearly
           discovered
           ;
           I
           have
           also
           thought
           good
           to
           insert
           here
           immediately
           after
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           the
           contrary
           conclusions
           to
           all
           the
           Points
           and
           Articles
           ,
           whereof
           this
           other
           late
           Oath
           doth
           consist
           :
           whereby
           it
           may
           appear
           ,
           what
           unreasonable
           and
           rebellious
           points
           he
           would
           drive
           my
           subjects
           unto
           ,
           by
           refusing
           the
           whole
           body
           of
           that
           Oath
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           conceived
           .
           For
           he
           that
           shall
           refuse
           to
           take
           this
           Oath
           ,
           must
           of
           necessity
           hold
           all
           or
           some
           of
           these
           Propositions
           following
           .
        
         
         
           1.
           
           That
           I
           King
           James
           am
           not
           the
           lawful
           King
           of
           this
           Kingdom
           ,
           and
           of
           all
           other
           my
           Dominions
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           by
           his
           own
           authority
           may
           depose
           me
           .
           If
           not
           by
           his
           own
           authority
           ,
           yet
           by
           some
           other
           authority
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           of
           the
           See
           of
           Rome
           .
           If
           not
           by
           some
           other
           authority
           of
           the
           Church
           and
           See
           of
           Rome
           ,
           yet
           by
           other
           means
           with
           others
           help
           he
           may
           depose
           me
           .
        
         
           3.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           may
           dispose
           of
           my
           Kingdoms
           and
           Dominions
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           may
           give
           authority
           to
           some
           forrein
           Prince
           to
           invade
           my
           Dominions
           .
        
         
           5.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           may
           discharge
           my
           subjects
           of
           their
           obedience
           and
           allegiance
           to
           me
           .
        
         
           6.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           may
           give
           licence
           to
           one
           or
           more
           of
           my
           subjects
           to
           bear
           arms
           against
           me
           .
        
         
           7.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           may
           give
           leave
           to
           my
           subjects
           to
           offer
           violence
           to
           my
           person
           ,
           or
           to
           my
           Government
           ,
           or
           to
           some
           of
           my
           subjects
           .
        
         
           8.
           
           That
           if
           the
           Pope
           shall
           by
           sentence
           excommunicate
           or
           depose
           me
           ,
           my
           subjects
           are
           not
           to
           bear
           faith
           and
           allegiance
           to
           me
           .
        
         
           9.
           
           If
           the
           Pope
           shall
           by
           sentence
           excommunicate
           or
           depose
           me
           ,
           my
           subjects
           are
           not
           bound
           to
           defend
           with
           all
           their
           power
           ,
           my
           Person
           and
           Crown
           .
        
         
           10.
           
           If
           the
           Pope
           shall
           give
           out
           any
           sentence
           of
           excommunication
           or
           deprivation
           against
           me
           ,
           my
           subjects
           by
           reason
           of
           that
           sentence
           ,
           are
           not
           bound
           to
           reveal
           all
           conspiracies
           and
           treasons
           against
           me
           ,
           which
           shall
           come
           to
           their
           hearing
           and
           knowledge
           .
        
         
           11.
           
           That
           it
           is
           not
           heretical
           and
           detestable
           to
           hold
           ,
           that
           Princes
           being
           excommunicated
           by
           the
           Pope
           ,
           may
           be
           either
           deposed
           or
           killed
           by
           their
           subjects
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           .
        
         
           12.
           
           That
           the
           Pope
           hath
           power
           to
           absolve
           my
           subjects
           from
           this
           Oath
           ,
           or
           from
           some
           part
           thereof
           .
        
         
           13.
           
           That
           this
           Oath
           is
           not
           administred
           to
           my
           subjects
           ,
           by
           a
           full
           and
           lawful
           authority
           .
        
         
           14.
           
           That
           this
           Oath
           is
           to
           be
           taken
           with
           equivocation
           ,
           mental
           evasion
           ,
           or
           secret
           reservation
           ;
           and
           not
           with
           the
           heart
           and
           good
           will
           sincerely
           ,
           in
           the
           faith
           of
           a
           Christian
           man.
           
        
         
           These
           are
           the
           true
           and
           natural
           branches
           of
           the
           body
           of
           this
           Oath
           .
        
         
           In
           the
           book
           intitled
           [
           
             God
             and
             the
             King
          
           ]
           imprinted
           at
           London
           ,
           
           1615.
           by
           
             King
             James
             his
             special
             priviledge
             and
             command
             ,
             p.
          
           27.
           is
           thus
           said
           .
           The
           matter
           or
           main
           subject
           of
           this
           Oath
           ,
           which
           is
           the
           principal
           thing
           whereof
           I
           conceive
           you
           desire
           to
           have
           a
           more
           distinct
           and
           full
           understanding
           ,
           may
           to
           this
           purpose
           be
           resolved
           into
           these
           ensuing
           assertions
           .
        
         
           1.
           
           Our
           Soveraign
           Lord
           King
           James
           ,
           is
           the
           lawful
           King
           of
           this
           Kingdom
           ,
           and
           of
           all
           other
           his
           Majesties
           Dominions
           and
           Countries
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           The
           Pope
           neither
           by
           his
           own
           authority
           ,
           nor
           by
           any
           other
           authority
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           of
           the
           See
           of
           Rome
           ,
           nor
           by
           any
           other
           means
           ,
           with
           any
           others
           help
           can
           depose
           his
           Majesty
           .
        
         
           3.
           
           The
           Pope
           cannot
           dispose
           of
           any
           of
           his
           Majesties
           Kingdoms
           and
           Dominions
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           The
           Pope
           cannot
           give
           authority
           to
           any
           forraign
           Prince
           to
           invade
           his
           Dominions
           .
        
         
           5.
           
           The
           Pope
           cannot
           discharge
           his
           subjects
           of
           their
           allegiance
           unto
           his
           majesty
           .
        
         
           6.
           
           The
           Pope
           cannot
           give
           licence
           to
           one
           or
           more
           of
           his
           subjects
           to
           bear
           arms
           against
           him
           .
        
         
           7.
           
           The
           Pope
           cannot
           give
           leave
           to
           any
           of
           his
           subjects
           to
           offer
           violence
           unto
           his
           Royal
           person
           ,
           or
           to
           his
           Government
           ,
           or
           to
           any
           of
           his
           Majesties
           subjects
           .
        
         
           8.
           
           Although
           the
           Pope
           shall
           by
           sentence
           excommunicate
           or
           depose
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           or
           absolve
           his
           subjects
           from
           their
           obedience
           ,
           notwithstanding
           they
           are
           to
           bear
           faith
           and
           true
           allegiance
           unto
           his
           Majesty
           .
        
         
           9.
           
           If
           the
           Pope
           shall
           by
           sentence
           excommunicate
           or
           depose
           his
           Majesty
           ;
           nevertheless
           his
           subjects
           are
           bound
           to
           defend
           his
           Person
           and
           Crown
           against
           all
           attempts
           and
           conspiracies
           whatsoever
           .
        
         
           10.
           
           If
           the
           Pope
           shall
           give
           out
           any
           sentence
           of
           excommunication
           or
           deprivation
           against
           his
           Majesty
           ;
           notwithstanding
           his
           subjects
           are
           bound
           to
           reveal
           all
           conspiracies
           and
           treasons
           against
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           which
           shall
           come
           to
           their
           hearing
           and
           knowledge
           .
        
         
           11.
           
           It
           is
           heretical
           and
           detestable
           to
           hold
           ,
           That
           Princes
           being
           excommunicate
           by
           the
           Pope
           ,
           may
           be
           deposed
           or
           murthered
           by
           their
           subjects
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           .
        
         
           12.
           
           The
           Pope
           hath
           not
           power
           to
           absolve
           his
           Majesties
           subjects
           from
           their
           oath
           of
           allegiance
           ,
           or
           any
           part
           thereof
           .
        
         
           When
           Cardinal
           Bellarmine
           disguised
           under
           the
           name
           of
           
             Matthaeus
             Tortus
          
           ,
           as
           his
           Chaplain
           took
           upon
           him
           to
           reply
           to
           King
           
           James
           his
           
             Apology
             for
             the
             Oath
             of
             Allegiance
             ,
          
           and
           would
           have
           it
           believed
           ,
           that
           by
           that
           Oath
           was
           intended
           the
           denying
           the
           Popes
           Ecclesiastical
           power
           ,
           which
           he
           claims
           ,
           and
           is
           with
           Papists
           an
           Article
           of
           their
           Faith
           ;
           
             Lancelot
             Andrews
          
           then
           Bishop
           of
           Chichester
           ,
           after
           of
           Ely
           and
           Winchester
           ,
           then
           very
           eminent
           for
           his
           learning
           and
           repute
           at
           Court
           ,
           answers
           him
           in
           his
           book
           intitled
           
             Tortura
             Torti
          
           ,
           in
           words
           in
           Latin
           ,
           which
           I
           have
           Englished
           thus
           .
        
         
           Art
           thou
           well
           in
           thy
           wits
           who
           babblest
           these
           things
           ?
           That
           thou
           an
           Italian
           ,
           ignorant
           of
           our
           language
           ,
           shouldst
           understand
           the
           Oath
           ,
           that
           the
           Author
           who
           is
           skilled
           in
           the
           language
           ,
           as
           being
           his
           own
           ,
           native
           ,
           proper
           ,
           should
           not
           understand
           it
           ?
           Whence
           art
           thou
           to
           us
           a
           new
           interpreter
           of
           Laws
           ?
           yea
           whence
           art
           thou
           an
           interpreter
           of
           our
           Laws
           ,
           which
           thou
           didst
           not
           make
           ?
           It
           belongs
           verily
           to
           them
           to
           interpret
           to
           whom
           it
           belongs
           to
           make
           Laws
           ;
           yet
           I
           say
           not
           that
           only
           ,
           but
           this
           also
           .
           Is
           there
           for
           this
           reason
           any
           mortal
           man
           that
           understands
           the
           intention
           of
           the
           Law
           ,
           and
           the
           Law-maker
           himself
           ,
           (
           for
           the
           same
           person
           was
           author
           of
           the
           Law
           and
           of
           the
           book
           ,
           nor
           wast
           thou
           ignorant
           of
           this
           )
           the
           Law-maker
           (
           I
           say
           )
           himself
           ,
           should
           not
           understand
           his
           intention
           concerning
           his
           Law
           ?
           Thou
           wilt
           never
           bring
           it
           to
           pass
           ,
           that
           he
           should
           be
           ignorant
           of
           that
           which
           he
           himself
           would
           to
           himself
           ,
           when
           he
           made
           the
           Law
           ,
           when
           he
           made
           the
           Oath
           .
           He
           is
           best
           privy
           to
           his
           own
           intention
           .
           But
           his
           intention
           was
           that
           he
           might
           be
           secure
           of
           the
           fidelity
           and
           constancy
           of
           his
           own
           subjects
           ,
           yea
           this
           was
           his
           only
           intention
           ,
           no
           other
           man
           knows
           this
           ,
           (
           for
           the
           hearts
           of
           men
           he
           knows
           not
           )
           only
           he
           who
           hath
           known
           the
           Law
           ,
           knows
           what
           he
           requires
           in
           his
           Law.
           
        
         
           King
           James
           in
           his
           
             Catalogue
             of
          
           Tortus
           lies
           ,
           at
           the
           end
           of
           his
           
             premonition
             to
             all
             Christian
             Princes
          
           ,
           saith
           ,
           The
           Puritans
           do
           not
           decline
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           but
           do
           daily
           take
           it
           ,
           neither
           ever
           refused
           it
           .
           And
           the
           same
           Supremacy
           is
           defended
           by
           Calvin
           himself
           ,
           
             Instit
             .
             lib.
             4.
             cap.
          
           20.
           
        
         
           Bishop
           Andrews
           in
           the
           book
           forenamed
           ,
           p.
           110.
           
           The
           Puritans
           of
           their
           own
           accord
           take
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           and
           have
           often
           professed
           ,
           and
           that
           in
           books
           published
           by
           themselves
           ,
           that
           this
           is
           a
           meer
           calumny
           ,
           that
           they
           abhor
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           neither
           did
           they
           ever
           decline
           that
           Oath
           .
           But
           if
           there
           were
           at
           any
           time
           any
           scraple
           in
           them
           ,
           it
           was
           about
           the
           term
           ,
           it
           was
           not
           about
           the
           thing
           .
           The
           head
           of
           the
           Church
           sith
           it
           is
           said
           of
           Christ
           ,
           seemed
           to
           them
           a
           higher
           title
           ,
           then
           that
           it
           might
           be
           given
           to
           any
           mortal
           
           man
           :
           so
           for
           a
           while
           they
           stuck
           at
           the
           giving
           that
           title
           ,
           now
           they
           stick
           not
           :
           Concerning
           the
           thing
           it self
           ,
           concerning
           the
           Kingly
           authority
           they
           have
           always
           fully
           professed
           .
        
         
           
             Quakers
             do
             inveigh
             against
             my
             book
             ,
             intitled
          
           A
           serious
           consideration
           of
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           ,
           
             because
             it
             defends
             the
             lawfulness
             of
             some
             swearing
             ,
             yet
          
           Samuel
           Fisher
           
             in
             his
             book
             ,
             intitled
          
           The
           Rusticks
           alarm
           to
           the
           Rabbies
           ,
           Exercit.
           1.
           chap.
           3.
           p.
           48.
           saith
           ,
           I
           should
           (
           God
           knows
           )
           please
           my self
           much
           more
           to
           sit
           down
           in
           silence
           .
           p.
           61.
           
           I
           affirm
           here
           before
           God
           and
           all
           men
           ;
           
             and
             the
             humble
             petition
             of
             some
             called
          
           Anabaptists
           ,
           
             prisoners
             in
          
           Maidstone
           ,
           dated
           January
           25.
           
             saith
             thus
             ;
             Yet
          
           (
           God
           is
           our
           witness
           ,
           who
           is
           the
           searcher
           of
           all
           hearts
           )
           we
           deny
           not
           this
           Oath
           ,
           because
           we
           would
           not
           yield
           due
           subjection
           and
           obedience
           unto
           thee
           and
           thy
           authority
           ;
           for
           this
           we
           say
           ,
           in
           the
           presence
           of
           him
           that
           shall
           judge
           the
           quick
           and
           the
           dead
           ,
           we
           do
           without
           any
           deceit
           ,
           promise
           to
           live
           peaceably
           under
           thy
           Government
           ,
           and
           in
           case
           any
           thing
           should
           be
           by
           thee
           commanded
           in
           spiritual
           matters
           ,
           wherein
           we
           cannot
           obey
           ,
           we
           shall
           not
           then
           take
           up
           any
           carnal
           or
           temporal
           weapon
           against
           thee
           or
           thy
           authority
           ,
           but
           patiently
           suffer
           such
           punishment
           as
           shall
           be
           inflicted
           on
           us
           for
           our
           consciences
           .
           
             But
             the
             using
             of
             these
             speeches
          
           [
           God
           knowes
           ,
           I
           affirm
           before
           God
           ,
           God
           is
           our
           witness
           ,
           this
           we
           say
           in
           the
           presence
           of
           him
           that
           shall
           judge
           the
           quick
           and
           dead
           ]
           
             as
             an
             appeal
             to
             Gods
             contestation
             ,
             is
             plain
             swearing
             .
             So
             that
             while
             these
             men
             ,
             and
             more
             of
             the
             same
             mind
             do
             speak
             against
             all
             swearing
             ,
             they
             indeed
             practice
             some
             swearing
             .
             And
             those
             of
          
           Maidstone
           ,
           who
           offer
           an
           engagement
           taken
           before
           some
           Justice
           of
           the
           Peace
           in
           a
           solemn
           manner
           ,
           with
           calling
           God
           to
           witness
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           
             what
             they
             say
             ,
             do
             offer
             to
             swear
             or
             take
             an
             oath
             .
             The
             lawfulness
             of
             which
             ,
             and
             particularly
             the
             Oaths
             of
             Supremacy
             and
             Allegiance
             ,
             and
             my
             writing
             about
             the
             former
             ,
             I
             shall
             now
             endeavour
             to
             vindicate
             from
             the
             writings
             and
             sayings
             against
             them
             ,
             which
             have
             occurred
             to
             me
             .
          
        
         
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           having
           recited
           my
           first
           Argument
           for
           my
           first
           Proposition
           ,
           thus
           ,
           That
           is
           not
           wholly
           evil
           ,
           about
           the
           use
           of
           which
           some
           directions
           are
           given
           by
           God
           ;
           but
           God
           giveth
           directions
           about
           the
           use
           of
           swearing
           ,
           
             Jer.
             4.
             2.
             
             Ergo
          
           :
           Answers
           ,
           
             By
             the
             same
             argument
             may
             it
             as
             well
             be
             proved
             ,
             that
             the
             Christians
             and
             believers
             in
             Christ
             may
             be
             circumcised
             ,
             offer
             incense
             ,
             burnt
             offerings
             and
             sacrifices
             ,
             because
             for
             the
             use
             of
             it
             God
             gave
             some
             directions
             ,
             and
             therefore
             it
             is
             lawful
             .
             But
             as
             circumcision
             ,
             incense
             ,
             burnt
             offerings
             and
             sacrifices
             of
             the
             law
             ,
             is
             ended
             in
             Christ
             ;
             so
             is
             the
             oath
             which
             was
          
           
           
             among
             the
             Jews
             ,
             in
             him
             ended
             also
             to
             the
             believers
             ,
             and
             by
             him
             forbidden
             :
             for
             as
             it
             was
             said
             in
             old
             time
             thou
             shalt
             swear
             ,
             and
             shalt
             perform
             thy
             oath
             to
             the
             Lord
             ;
             but
             Christ
             in
             the
             5.
             of
          
           Mat.
           
             making
             mention
             of
             the
             Jews
             oath
             which
             God
             gave
             once
             direction
             for
             ,
             yet
             saith
             ,
             Swear
             not
             at
             all
             .
             Here
             Christ
             puts
             an
             end
             ,
             not
             only
             to
             frivolous
             &
             vain
             oaths
             ,
             but
             to
             the
             true
             oaths
             ,
             which
             the
             Jews
             was
             once
             commanded
             of
             God
             to
             swear
             ,
             for
             these
             oaths
             are
             they
             which
             Christs
             words
             hath
             relation
             to
             ,
             for
             he
             came
             to
             end
             the
             Jews
             worships
             and
             oaths
             ,
             who
             is
             the
             oath
             of
             God.
             Christ
             the
             truth
             and
             righteousness
             of
             God
             saith
             ,
             Swear
             not
             at
             all
             ,
             which
             ends
             the
             Jewes
             which
             was
             to
             swear
             in
             truth
             and
             righteousness
             .
          
        
         
           To
           which
           I
           reply
           ,
           Had
           not
           
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           told
           me
           in
           the
           place
           forementioned
           ,
           that
           my
           book
           is
           answered
           by
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           ,
           I
           should
           not
           have
           thought
           it
           worth
           while
           to
           reply
           to
           it
           ,
           there
           being
           in
           it
           so
           much
           defect
           of
           sense
           and
           reason
           ,
           as
           makes
           it
           inconsiderable
           :
           But
           sith
           he
           mentions
           my
           book
           ,
           
             as
             scarce
             worth
             any
             further
             answer
             then
             that
             of
             Hubberthorn
             ,
          
           it
           seems
           he
           esteems
           it
           of
           some
           moment
           .
           And
           therefore
           I
           say
           ,
           that
           1.
           
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           leaves
           out
           of
           the
           proof
           of
           my
           minor
           [
           
             as
             in
             the
             third
             Commandment
             (
             which
             is
             undoubtedly
             moral
          
           )
           ]
           which
           words
           shew
           that
           I
           mean
           my
           major
           proposition
           of
           moral
           actions
           .
           2.
           
           He
           supposeth
           that
           swearing
           allowed
           by
           God
           in
           the
           Old
           Testament
           ,
           which
           Christ
           corrects
           ,
           was
           not
           only
           frivolous
           and
           vain
           oaths
           ,
           but
           the
           true
           oaths
           which
           the
           Jews
           were
           commanded
           ,
           and
           Christ
           was
           to
           end
           ,
           who
           is
           Gods
           oath
           .
           But
           he
           considers
           not
           that
           swearing
           was
           common
           to
           all
           Nations
           ,
           as
           
             Philistines
             ,
             Gen.
          
           21.
           31.
           
           &
           26.
           28.
           
           
             Syrians
             ,
             Gen.
          
           31.
           53
           ,
           &c.
           Nor
           is
           Christ
           any
           where
           termed
           in
           Scripture
           ,
           
             Gods
             oath
          
           ,
           nor
           an
           oath
           made
           worship
           peculiar
           to
           the
           Jews
           ;
           nor
           a
           shadow
           or
           ceremony
           which
           might
           typifie
           Christ
           .
           Now
           my
           major
           proposition
           being
           (
           as
           the
           words
           shew
           I
           understood
           it
           )
           thus
           expressed
           ,
           [
           That
           action
           belonging
           to
           manners
           ,
           common
           to
           all
           Nations
           ,
           and
           not
           proper
           to
           the
           Jews
           ,
           about
           the
           use
           of
           which
           God
           giveth
           some
           directions
           ,
           is
           not
           wholly
           evil
           ]
           is
           firm
           and
           unshaken
           by
           the
           instances
           of
           
             R.
             H.
          
           which
           are
           not
           of
           moral
           ,
           but
           ceremonial
           Rites
           ,
           which
           ended
           in
           Christ
           ,
           but
           not
           so
           the
           moral
           commandment
           ,
           of
           which
           sort
           swearing
           is
           ,
           and
           so
           may
           be
           lawful
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           
             To
             my
             second
             Argument
             ,
             from
          
           Psal
           .
           63.
           11.
           
             his
             answer
             is
          
           ,
           Only
           that
           David
           was
           in
           the
           old
           covenant
           of
           the
           law
           ,
           but
           Christ
           in
           the
           new
           Covenant
           bids
           ;
           Swear
           not
           at
           all
           .
        
         
           Hereto
           I
           reply
           ,
           This
           answer
           presupposeth
           that
           an
           oath
           was
           appropriated
           
           to
           the
           Covenant
           of
           the
           law
           .
           But
           this
           is
           false
           ,
           sith
           it
           was
           ,
           in
           other
           Nations
           besides
           Israelites
           ,
           customary
           to
           swear
           even
           before
           the
           law
           ,
           as
           the
           instances
           in
           Genesis
           and
           elsewhere
           shew
           .
           As
           for
           his
           flings
           at
           
             hireling
             Priests
             and
             hypocrites
          
           ,
           I
           let
           them
           pass
           as
           being
           only
           reviling
           ,
           in
           general
           terms
           ,
           in
           which
           is
           commonly
           guile
           &
           slander
           .
           To
           the
           instances
           which
           I
           bring
           for
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           some
           swearing
           ,
           and
           urging
           to
           swear
           out
           of
           the
           Old
           Testament
           ,
           he
           saith
           ,
           
             all
             these
             were
             under
             the
             first
             Covenant
             ,
             and
             in
             that
             which
             Christ
             called
             the
             old
             time
             ,
          
           Mat.
           5.
           
             and
             proves
             nothing
             that
             Christians
             in
             the
             new
             Covenant
             should
             swear
             .
          
           To
           which
           I
           reply
           ,
           1.
           
           
             Abraham
             ,
             Isaac
             ,
             Jacob
             ,
             Joseph
             ,
          
           were
           before
           the
           law
           ,
           and
           they
           took
           oaths
           of
           Nations
           which
           were
           not
           under
           the
           law
           .
           2.
           
           In
           moral
           things
           the
           commands
           and
           examples
           of
           the
           old
           Testament
           ,
           are
           rules
           to
           us
           still
           ,
           
             Mat.
             7.
             12.
             
             Rom.
             13.
             8
             ,
             9.
             
             Ephes
             .
             6.
             1
             ,
             2.
             
             James
          
           2.
           8
           ,
           10.
           11.
           
        
         
           Nor
           doth
           he
           say
           any
           thing
           to
           the
           Angels
           swearing
           ,
           Rev.
           10.
           6.
           but
           this
           ,
           
             that
             Christ
             saith
             ,
             Swear
             not
             all
             ,
          
           which
           doth
           not
           at
           all
           avoid
           the
           objection
           ,
           that
           the
           Angel
           knew
           Christs
           words
           do
           not
           forbid
           all
           swearing
           ,
           otherwise
           he
           would
           not
           have
           sworn
           at
           all
           .
        
         
           But
           to
           the
           instances
           of
           Pauls
           adjuring
           and
           swearing
           ,
           he
           writes
           somewhat
           more
           .
           To
           the
           allegation
           of
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           where
           the
           word
           signifies
           ,
           I
           
             swear
             you
             by
             the
             Lord
          
           ,
           he
           saith
           ,
           1.
           
           
             This
             is
             the
             long
             and
             thick
             mist
             of
             darkness
             ,
             which
             hath
             been
             long
             kept
             over
             the
             understandings
             of
             people
             ,
             that
             when
             the
             plain
             Scripture
             will
             not
             prove
             their
             ends
             and
             intents
             ,
             then
             they
             tell
             the
             people
             it
             is
             otherwise
             in
             the
             Greek
             or
             Hebrew
             .
          
           I
           reply
           ,
           1.
           
           It
           is
           no
           darkning
           of
           peoples
           understandings
           by
           latter
           translations
           ,
           to
           mend
           or
           to
           adde
           to
           former
           translations
           ,
           sith
           as
           in
           all
           other
           Writings
           and
           Arts
           ,
           
             Dies
             diem
             docet
             ,
             One
             day
             teacheth
             another
          
           ;
           latter
           Commentators
           and
           Interpreters
           without
           arrogancy
           ,
           refine
           former
           .
           Nor
           doth
           this
           darken
           ,
           but
           inlighten
           mens
           understandings
           ,
           nor
           give
           any
           occasion
           to
           doubt
           of
           the
           faithfulness
           of
           former
           Translators
           ,
           but
           only
           shews
           the
           imperfection
           of
           their
           knowledge
           .
           Nor
           is
           there
           any
           just
           cause
           why
           for
           this
           reason
           men
           should
           waver
           in
           their
           faith
           ,
           the
           main
           doctrines
           of
           faith
           and
           manners
           being
           by
           common
           consent
           expressed
           either
           in
           the
           same
           words
           ,
           or
           words
           of
           the
           same
           meaning
           ,
           and
           if
           any
           should
           deprave
           them
           ,
           the
           variety
           of
           Copies
           and
           translations
           would
           remedy
           it
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           Saith
           Hubberthorn
           ,
           Did
           
             not
             the
             Translator
             of
             the
             Bible
             understand
             Greek
             as
             well
             as
          
           John
           Tombes
           ?
        
         
           Answ
           .
           Yes
           ,
           and
           as
           
             John
             Tombes
          
           understood
           it
           ,
           which
           he
           told
           
           his
           Reader
           ,
           that
           the
           Greek
           word
           was
           translated
           ,
           
             I
             charge
             you
             by
             the
             Lord
             ,
             or
             adjure
          
           you
           as
           it
           is
           in
           the
           margin
           .
        
         
           3.
           
           
             Saith
             he
          
           ,
           Or
           are
           we
           not
           to
           believe
           the
           Scripture
           ,
           as
           it
           spoaks
           ,
           till
           again
           it
           be
           translated
           by
           him
           ?
        
         
           Answ
           .
           Yes
           no
           doubt
           ,
           and
           this
           place
           the
           rather
           ,
           because
           it
           is
           translated
           by
           him
           no
           otherwise
           then
           by
           the
           Translators
           ,
           only
           the
           word
           [
           adjure
           ]
           which
           is
           made
           an
           English
           word
           out
           of
           the
           Latin
           ,
           is
           explained
           ,
           by
           ,
           I
           swear
           you
           by
           the
           Lord
           ,
           I
           urge
           ,
           or
           put
           an
           oath
           on
           you
           by
           the
           Lord
           ,
           or
           as
           
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           saith
           ,
           it
           signifies
           ,
           I
           
             bind
             you
             by
             oath
          
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           Saith
           he
           ,
           
             It
             is
             I
             oblige
             or
             charge
             you
             in
             the
             presence
             of
             God
             ,
          
           &c.
           
           I
           reply
           ,
           it
           is
           ,
           I
           charge
           or
           oblige
           you
           by
           oath
           or
           swearing
           ,
           not
           only
           in
           the
           presence
           of
           God
           ,
           but
           also
           by
           the
           Lord.
           
        
         
           5.
           
           
             Saith
             he
          
           ,
           seeing
           
             John
             Tombes
          
           saith
           he
           swore
           them
           ,
           he
           might
           have
           declared
           in
           what
           manner
           they
           were
           sworn
           ,
           seeing
           Paul
           was
           at
           Athens
           when
           he
           wrote
           to
           Thessaloniea
           .
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           He
           might
           understand
           how
           Paul
           at
           Athens
           could
           swear
           them
           at
           Thessalonica
           ,
           if
           he
           understood
           how
           Saul
           charged
           by
           oath
           ,
           or
           adjured
           ,
           or
           bound
           by
           oath
           the
           people
           and
           Jonathan
           his
           son
           ,
           though
           absent
           and
           ignorant
           ,
           1
           Sam.
           14.
           24
           ,
           28
           ,
           42.
           
        
         
           6.
           
           
             Saith
             he
             ,
             John
             Tombes
          
           makes
           the
           like
           charge
           to
           be
           in
           1
           Tim.
           6.
           13.
           which
           according
           to
           the
           Greek
           he
           would
           make
           an
           oath
           ;
           but
           it
           is
           I
           injoin
           or
           command
           thee
           before
           God
           ,
           not
           putting
           an
           oath
           on
           them
           ,
           or
           causing
           them
           to
           swear
           :
           And
           2
           Tim.
           4.
           1.
           not
           that
           he
           took
           him
           sworn
           ,
           or
           put
           an
           oath
           on
           him
           ,
           but
           did
           charge
           him
           .
        
         
           
             I
             reply
             ,
             I
             said
             not
             they
             were
             the
             same
             ,
             but
             like
             charges
             ,
             yet
             differing
             ,
          
           1.
           
           
             In
             that
             the
             word
          
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           
             doth
             expresly
             include
             an
             oath
             ,
             or
             swearing
             ,
             which
             I
             confess
          
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           I
           command
           or
           injoin
           
             doth
             not
             ,
             yet
          
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           I
           witness
           before
           God
           ,
           2
           Tim.
           4.
           1.
           
             doth
             come
             near
             it
             .
             2.
             
             That
          
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           
             in
             the
             accusative
             case
             ,
             cannot
             be
             understood
             any
             otherwise
             then
             thus
             [
             by
             the
             Lord
             ]
             which
             is
             a
             form
             of
             swearing
             more
             plain
             then
             that
             ,
          
           2
           Tim.
           4.
           1.
           
             though
             it
             be
             like
             it
             .
             But
          
           Samuel
           Fisher
           saith
           ,
           nor
           doth
           
             John
             Tombes
          
           insisting
           on
           the
           Greek
           word
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           adde
           a
           jor
           to
           his
           proof
           ;
           for
           howbeit
           it
           is
           ordinarily
           us'd
           to
           signifie
           to
           adjure
           or
           bind
           one
           by
           oath
           ,
           yet
           (
           being
           as
           some
           suppose
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           to
           confine
           ,
           or
           (
           as
           some
           )
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           a
           bound
           or
           limit
           )
           it
           originally
           signifies
           to
           bind
           ,
           limit
           ,
           confine
           ,
           oblige
           any
           way
           by
           word
           or
           promise
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           oath
           .
           And
           
             J.
             T.
          
           confessing
           Pauls
           charge
           in
           that
           place
           ,
           and
           1
           
             Tim.
             6.
             13.
             2
             
             Tim.
          
           4.
           1.
           to
           be
           alike
           ,
           therein
           
           confutes
           himself
           however
           .
           For
           the
           words
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           and
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           there
           used
           ,
           are
           no
           more
           then
           to
           engage
           before
           some
           witness
           (
           God
           or
           man
           )
           or
           solemnly
           to
           command
           or
           charge
           ,
           and
           not
           to
           swear
           one
           ,
           and
           cannot
           be
           taken
           so
           strictly
           as
           to
           adjure
           ,
           though
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           may
           be
           taken
           in
           the
           moderate
           sense
           ,
           
             i.
             e.
          
           any
           way
           to
           oblige
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           in
           that
           rigid
           way
           of
           swearing
           .
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           That
           the
           rule
           of
           expounding
           or
           interpreting
           words
           ,
           is
           not
           the
           derivation
           of
           the
           word
           ,
           which
           often
           is
           very
           uncertain
           ,
           but
           the
           use
           (
           which
           is
           
             Vis
             &
             norma
             loquendi
             ,
             the
             force
             and
             rule
             of
             speaking
          
           )
           and
           there
           being
           no
           instance
           given
           by
           him
           of
           any
           place
           ,
           where
           it
           is
           used
           in
           any
           author
           of
           obliging
           ,
           in
           his
           moderate
           sense
           ,
           without
           an
           oath
           ,
           and
           he
           confessing
           that
           ,
           it
           is
           ordinarily
           used
           to
           signifie
           to
           adjure
           or
           
             bind
             by
             oath
          
           ,
           and
           it
           being
           I
           
             charge
             or
             adjure
             by
             the
             Lord
             ,
          
           it
           can
           be
           taken
           in
           no
           other
           sence
           then
           swearing
           or
           binding
           by
           oath
           ;
           nor
           doth
           my
           alledging
           1
           
             Tim.
             6.
             13.
             2
             
             Tim.
          
           4.
           1.
           as
           like
           charges
           ,
           abate
           any
           whit
           the
           force
           of
           my
           proof
           ,
           sith
           I
           do
           not
           call
           them
           the
           same
           ,
           or
           the
           one
           as
           express
           for
           charging
           by
           oath
           ,
           as
           the
           other
           .
        
         
           
             In
             my
             fourth
             Argument
             I
             alledged
             ,
          
           2
           Cor.
           1.
           18
           ,
           23.
           and
           11.
           31.
           and
           12.
           19.
           1
           
           Cor.
           15.
           31.
           
             to
             prove
             the
             use
             of
             swearing
             by
          
           Paul
           
             in
             Gospel-times
             .
             To
             the
             first
             only
          
           Richard
           Hubberthorn
           
             saith
             thus
          
           ,
           Now
           those
           that
           minds
           this
           Scripture
           ,
           may
           see
           that
           Paul
           doth
           only
           justifie
           Christs
           words
           in
           keeping
           to
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           saying
           ,
           that
           with
           him
           it
           was
           not
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           for
           saith
           he
           ,
           ver
           .
           18.
           but
           as
           God
           is
           true
           ,
           our
           word
           towards
           you
           was
           not
           yea
           and
           nay
           .
           
             And
             ver
          
           .
           19.
           for
           the
           son
           of
           God
           ,
           Jesus
           Christ
           ,
           who
           was
           preached
           among
           you
           by
           us
           ,
           even
           by
           me
           and
           Silvanus
           ,
           and
           Timotheus
           ,
           was
           not
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           for
           all
           the
           promises
           of
           God
           in
           him
           are
           yea
           ,
           and
           in
           him
           Amen
           .
           So
           that
           this
           Scripture
           is
           so
           far
           from
           bringing
           people
           to
           oaths
           and
           swearing
           ,
           that
           he
           labours
           to
           bring
           them
           all
           to
           yea
           and
           nay
           in
           all
           things
           ,
           and
           so
           to
           Christ
           the
           substance
           ,
           in
           whom
           all
           the
           promises
           of
           God
           are
           yea
           ;
           so
           that
           the
           Apostle
           might
           well
           use
           these
           words
           ,
           that
           as
           God
           was
           true
           ,
           &c.
           so
           also
           were
           they
           true
           to
           their
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           the
           end
           of
           all
           oaths
           .
        
         
           I
           reply
           .
           1.
           
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           in
           all
           this
           his
           pretended
           answer
           doth
           not
           deny
           ,
           the
           expressions
           2
           
             Cor.
             1.
             18.
             
             As
             God
             is
             true
             ,
             2
             Cor.
             1.
             23.
             
             I
             call
             God
             for
             a
             record
             upon
             (
             or
             against
             )
             my
             soul
             ,
             2
             Cor.
             11.
             31.
             
             The
             God
             and
             Father
             of
             our
             Lord
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             which
             is
             blessed
             for
             evermore
             ,
             knoweth
             that
             I
             lie
             not
             ,
             2
             Cor.
             12.
             19.
             we
             speak
             before
             God
             in
             Christ
             ,
          
           to
           be
           forms
           of
           swearing
           .
           Surely
           the
           
           expression
           ,
           2
           
             Cor.
             1.
             23.
             
             I
             call
             God
             for
             record
             ,
          
           is
           so
           plain
           an
           appealing
           to
           Gods
           testimony
           ,
           which
           is
           the
           definition
           of
           an
           oath
           by
           attestation
           or
           contestation
           of
           God
           as
           true
           ,
           and
           upon
           or
           
             against
             my
             soul
          
           ,
           by
           pawning
           or
           wishing
           a
           curse
           to
           himself
           ,
           if
           he
           spake
           not
           true
           ,
           and
           so
           appealing
           to
           God
           ,
           not
           only
           as
           Tostis
           or
           Witness
           ,
           but
           also
           as
           
             Vindex
             ,
             the
             Avenger
          
           or
           Judge
           ,
           if
           he
           spake
           not
           true
           ,
           that
           I
           find
           few
           or
           no
           expressions
           of
           swearing
           ,
           more
           full
           then
           this
           ,
           and
           therefore
           do
           thence
           infer
           irrefragably
           ,
           that
           Paul
           did
           swear
           ,
           and
           consequently
           ,
           that
           he
           did
           not
           conceive
           Christ
           forbade
           all
           swearing
           ,
           and
           therefore
           it
           is
           but
           his
           conceit
           ,
           that
           the
           prescribing
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           Mat.
           5.
           37.
           was
           to
           put
           an
           end
           of
           all
           oaths
           .
           2.
           
           Whereas
           he
           saith
           ,
           
             That
             this
             Scripture
             labours
             to
             bring
             them
             to
             yea
             and
             nay
             in
             all
             things
             ,
          
           and
           that
           
             Paul
             doth
             only
             justifie
             Christs
             words
             in
             keeping
             to
             yea
             and
             nay
             ,
          
           it
           is
           so
           far
           from
           being
           true
           ,
           that
           if
           the
           expressions
           of
           [
           
             yea
             and
             nay
          
           ]
           were
           meant
           of
           using
           those
           words
           without
           swearing
           ,
           as
           
             R.
             H.
          
           doth
           vainly
           imagin
           ,
           the
           Apostle
           would
           be
           so
           far
           from
           
             bringing
             them
             to
             yea
             and
             nay
             in
             all
             things
             ,
             and
             justifying
             Christs
             words
             in
             keeping
             to
             yea
             and
             nay
             ,
          
           that
           he
           should
           indeed
           do
           the
           contrary
           ,
           forasmuch
           as
           he
           saith
           ,
           
             Our
             word
             toward
             you
             was
             not
             yea
             and
             nay
             ,
          
           and
           ,
           
             the
             son
             of
             God
             ,
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             who
             was
             preached
             among
             you
             by
             us
             ,
             was
             not
             yea
             and
             nay
             .
          
           I
           know
           the
           meaning
           of
           the
           speech
           ,
           
             Our
             word
             towards
             you
             was
             not
             yea
             and
             nay
             ,
          
           is
           not
           about
           the
           using
           of
           these
           terms
           ,
           
             yea
             and
             nay
          
           ,
           but
           of
           the
           constancy
           of
           his
           speech
           and
           actions
           ,
           as
           I
           express
           it
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             ,
             p.
          
           16.
           
           But
           I
           only
           shew
           me
           silliness
           of
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorns
          
           talk
           ,
           sith
           what
           he
           alledgeth
           ,
           if
           understood
           as
           he
           seems
           to
           understand
           it
           ,
           would
           make
           against
           him
           .
        
         
           But
           Samuel
           Fisher
           
             against
             my
             allegation
             of
          
           1
           Cor.
           15.
           31.
           
             saith
             thus
          
           ,
           And
           as
           for
           his
           saying
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           is
           a
           particle
           of
           swearing
           ,
           I
           say
           it
           is
           not
           necessarily
           so
           ,
           but
           oft
           of
           affirming
           only
           as
           quidem
           ,
           profecto
           ,
           truly
           ,
           verily
           ,
           &c.
           
           And
           however
           where
           Paul
           uses
           it
           ,
           1
           Cor.
           15.
           31.
           he
           does
           not
           swear
           (
           as
           
             J.
             T.
          
           divines
           he
           did
           )
           for
           sith
           he
           ,
           and
           all
           confess
           ,
           none
           are
           to
           swear
           by
           any
           but
           God
           alone
           ;
           Pauls
           swearing
           there
           (
           had
           it
           been
           an
           oath
           )
           had
           been
           unlawful
           ,
           it
           being
           not
           by
           God
           ,
           but
           by
           his
           and
           the
           Corinthians
           rejoycing
           .
        
         
           To
           which
           I
           reply
           ,
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           Grammarians
           make
           a
           particle
           of
           sweaning
           ;
           nor
           hath
           
             S.
             F.
          
           shewed
           any
           instance
           ,
           where
           having
           an
           Accusative
           Case
           after
           it
           ,
           as
           here
           ,
           it
           is
           a
           particle
           of
           affirming
           without
           swearing
           ,
           and
           until
           he
           do
           so
           ,
           it
           is
           necessarily
           here
           a
           particle
           of
           swearing
           .
           Nor
           is
           it
           against
           the
           Confession
           ,
           
             That
             none
             are
             to
             swear
             
             by
             any
             but
             God
             only
             .
          
           For
           in
           this
           oath
           he
           swears
           by
           God
           ,
           when
           he
           swears
           by
           his
           and
           the
           Corinthians
           rejoycing
           ,
           it
           being
           an
           oath
           by
           oppignoration
           ,
           pawning
           ,
           or
           execration
           ,
           in
           which
           God
           is
           appealed
           to
           as
           Judge
           ,
           or
           avenger
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           witness
           ,
           by
           pawning
           to
           him
           ,
           and
           wishing
           the
           forfeiture
           of
           his
           rejoycing
           ,
           or
           glorying
           in
           Christ
           Jesus
           ,
           if
           what
           he
           saith
           were
           not
           true
           ;
           as
           when
           we
           say
           ,
           On
           my
           salvation
           it
           is
           so
           ,
           as
           God
           help
           me
           ,
           &c.
           which
           I
           hope
           to
           clear
           more
           fully
           ,
           if
           ever
           I
           finish
           and
           publish
           my
           fuller
           Treatise
           about
           swearing
           ,
           forementioned
           .
           Hitherto
           Samuel
           Fisher's
           opposition
           hath
           confirmed
           my
           Arguments
           against
           himself
           .
           I
           return
           to
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           .
        
         
           
             To
             my
             alledging
             to
             prove
          
           Paul
           '
           
             s
             swearing
          
           ,
           Rom.
           1.
           9.
           
           &
           9.
           1.
           
           Gal.
           1.
           20.
           
           Phil.
           1.
           8.
           
           Richard
           Hubberthorn
           
             thus
             saith
          
           ,
           Is
           this
           a
           proof
           for
           men
           to
           swear
           and
           take
           oaths
           for
           men
           ,
           or
           against
           men
           ?
           hath
           not
           the
           man
           here
           lost
           the
           understanding
           of
           a
           man
           ?
           thus
           to
           compare
           and
           call
           this
           the
           Apostles
           oath
           ,
           when
           he
           takes
           God
           to
           witness
           ,
           that
           he
           prayes
           for
           the
           Saints
           continually
           ;
           is
           this
           an
           oath
           to
           testifie
           the
           truth
           of
           his
           writing
           against
           lies
           ?
           Indeed
           this
           we
           desire
           ,
           that
           
             John
             Tombs
          
           ,
           and
           the
           rest
           of
           the
           Priests
           in
           this
           Nation
           ,
           would
           write
           nothing
           but
           what
           God
           would
           witness
           unto
           the
           truth
           of
           ;
           and
           that
           they
           would
           speak
           truth
           ,
           and
           not
           lie
           ,
           then
           they
           would
           not
           thus
           abuse
           the
           Apostles
           words
           ,
           when
           as
           the
           Apostles
           intend
           no
           such
           thing
           in
           their
           words
           here
           asserted
           .
           And
           whereas
           it
           is
           again
           said
           ,
           that
           the
           Apostle
           took
           an
           oath
           ,
           Phil.
           1.
           8.
           
           Now
           let
           all
           honest
           and
           sober
           hearted
           men
           consider
           ,
           whether
           the
           truth
           of
           God
           and
           the
           Apostles
           that
           speak
           it
           forth
           ,
           be
           not
           abused
           ,
           that
           from
           a
           Novice
           that
           is
           lifted
           up
           in
           pride
           ,
           and
           would
           do
           or
           say
           any
           thing
           for
           his
           hire
           ,
           should
           bring
           those
           Scriptures
           to
           plead
           for
           swearing
           ,
           and
           that
           lawfulness
           of
           oaths
           ;
           in
           all
           which
           the
           Apostle
           took
           God
           to
           witness
           his
           love
           to
           the
           Saints
           ,
           and
           labour
           in
           the
           work
           of
           his
           Ministry
           ,
           signifying
           that
           all
           understand
           how
           that
           he
           spoke
           the
           truth
           ,
           and
           did
           not
           lie
           ,
           and
           kept
           to
           his
           yea
           and
           nay
           ,
           according
           to
           Christs
           doctrine
           (
           and
           did
           not
           swear
           at
           all
           .
           )
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           1.
           
           Those
           Texts
           were
           not
           brought
           by
           me
           as
           a
           proof
           for
           men
           to
           swear
           and
           take
           oaths
           for
           men
           or
           against
           men
           ,
           but
           to
           prove
           that
           some
           swearing
           in
           Gospel-times
           may
           be
           lawful
           ,
           sith
           the
           Apostle
           Paul
           ,
           a
           man
           moved
           by
           the
           holy
           spirit
           ,
           even
           in
           his
           holy
           writings
           and
           speeches
           did
           swear
           :
           which
           is
           enough
           against
           
             R.
             H.
          
           and
           his
           complices
           ,
           who
           deny
           any
           swearing
           lawful
           in
           any
           case
           .
           2.
           
           I
           say
           ,
           that
           these
           speeches
           [
           
             God
             is
             my
             witness
             ,
             I
             speak
             the
             truth
             in
             Christ
             ,
          
           I
           
             lie
             not
             ,
             my
             conscience
             also
             bearing
             me
             witness
             in
             the
             Holy
             Ghost
             ,
             
             behold
             ,
             before
             God
          
           I
           
             lie
             not
             ,
             God
             is
             my
             record
          
           ]
           are
           forms
           of
           swearing
           ,
           it
           being
           the
           definition
           of
           an
           oath
           ,
           which
           all
           Writers
           that
           I
           know
           of
           agree
           in
           ,
           that
           an
           oath
           is
           an
           appeal
           to
           ,
           or
           invocation
           of
           God
           ,
           as
           joint
           witness
           with
           us
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           our
           speeches
           ,
           and
           therefore
           in
           this
           I
           write
           nothing
           ,
           but
           what
           God
           will
           witness
           the
           truth
           of
           ,
           I
           speak
           truth
           before
           God
           ,
           without
           abusing
           the
           Apostles
           words
           in
           pleading
           for
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           some
           swearing
           ;
           and
           in
           this
           I
           dare
           stand
           to
           the
           arbitrement
           of
           sober
           ,
           honest-hearted
           ,
           intelligent
           men
           ,
           not
           fearing
           the
           censure
           of
           
             R.
             H.
          
           as
           if
           I
           were
           a
           Novice
           ,
           who
           have
           been
           a
           professor
           of
           Christianity
           above
           forty
           years
           ,
           and
           a
           Preacher
           of
           the
           Gospel
           above
           thirty
           ,
           and
           wish
           
             R.
             H.
          
           do
           not
           accuse
           me
           as
           lifted
           up
           with
           pride
           ,
           with
           the
           like
           spirit
           as
           it
           is
           said
           ,
           that
           Diogenes
           trampled
           on
           
           Plato's
           pride
           with
           greater
           pride
           ,
           there
           being
           not
           many
           branches
           of
           pride
           greater
           then
           this
           ,
           to
           take
           on
           him
           to
           judge
           the
           secrets
           of
           anothers
           heart
           ,
           and
           to
           foretel
           what
           he
           will
           do
           ,
           it
           being
           to
           behave
           himself
           as
           if
           he
           were
           God.
           Sure
           they
           that
           know
           me
           ,
           and
           judge
           of
           me
           with
           a
           charitable
           mind
           ,
           they
           that
           have
           had
           experience
           of
           my
           adventures
           and
           losses
           for
           asserting
           truth
           ,
           will
           not
           believe
           
             R.
             H.
          
           in
           what
           he
           here
           suggests
           ,
           that
           I
           would
           do
           or
           say
           any
           thing
           for
           hire
           ,
           Who
           would
           thank
           
             R.
             H.
          
           if
           he
           would
           shew
           what
           hire
           I
           have
           taken
           ,
           which
           the
           words
           of
           Christ
           and
           his
           Apostle
           allow
           not
           ,
           
             Luke
             10.
             7.
             1
             
             Cor.
             9.
             7
             ,
             10
             ,
             11
             ,
             13
             ,
             14.
             1
             
             Tim.
          
           5.
           17
           ,
           18.
           
           Gal.
           6.
           6.
           
           But
           if
           he
           think
           his
           tongue
           is
           his
           own
           ,
           that
           he
           may
           accuse
           and
           reproach
           at
           his
           pleasure
           ,
           I
           think
           it
           my
           duty
           to
           tell
           him
           ,
           that
           his
           practice
           is
           rayling
           and
           false
           accusing
           ;
           and
           that
           his
           tongue
           is
           set
           on
           fire
           of
           hell
           ,
           and
           that
           without
           repentance
           he
           shall
           not
           inherit
           the
           kingdom
           of
           God
           ,
           1
           Cor.
           6.
           9
           ,
           10.
           
           He
           proceeds
           in
           the
           same
           vein
           of
           reviling
           ,
           censuring
           and
           false
           accusing
           in
           his
           speech
           of
           my
           fifth
           Argument
           ,
           to
           which
           he
           makes
           no
           answer
           but
           this
           ,
           That
           
             to
             break
             Christs
             command
             is
             of
             no
             necessary
             use
             ;
             that
          
           I
           
             might
             as
             well
             have
             stated
             my
             Argument
             ,
             That
             to
             break
             Christs
             command
             is
             of
             benefit
             to
             humane
             society
             ,
             therefore
             to
             break
             Christs
             command
             is
             lawful
             ,
          
           &c.
           
             and
             might
             thus
             have
             proved
             it
             ,
             that
             except
             we
             break
             Christs
             command
             ,
             we
             cannot
             preach
             for
             hire
             ,
             nor
             sue
             men
             at
             law
             for
             tithes
             ,
             nor
             live
             in
             pride
             ,
             ease
             and
             vanity
             ,
             nor
             keep
             our
             places
             of
             profit
             and
             benefits
             ,
             which
             is
             necessary
             for
             our
             society
             of
             Priests
             ,
          
           Ergo.
           
             But
             we
             whose
             eyes
             God
             hath
             opened
             ,
             do
             see
             that
             all
             his
             book
             tends
             to
             perswading
             of
             people
             to
             swear
             when
             Christ
             hath
             said
             ,
             Swear
             not
             at
             all
             ,
             and
             that
             which
             he
             would
             now
             swear
             for
             again
             ,
             would
             swear
             against
             for
             the
             same
             advantage
             and
             profits
             which
             he
             hath
             in
             his
             eye
             ,
             yea
             ,
             or
             he
          
           
           would
           perswade
           all
           men
           not
           to
           swear
           ,
           and
           bring
           scripture
           to
           prove
           it
           upon
           the
           same
           account
           ,
           so
           that
           what
           he
           doth
           in
           this
           kind
           ,
           is
           because
           of
           advantage
           :
           for
           two
           years
           since
           he
           did
           not
           preach
           this
           doctrine
           ,
           nor
           write
           those
           arguments
           .
        
         
           To
           which
           I
           reply
           ,
           The
           Lord
           rebuke
           thee
           :
           there
           's
           none
           of
           thy
           accusations
           of
           divinations
           here
           ,
           after
           thy
           rayling
           fashion
           ,
           brought
           by
           thee
           ,
           which
           thou
           canst
           prove
           by
           me
           ,
           and
           those
           that
           know
           me
           ,
           know
           it
           to
           be
           false
           which
           thou
           suggests
           concerning
           my
           seeking
           gain
           ,
           and
           suiting
           my
           actions
           thereto
           ,
           and
           changing
           my
           doctrin
           .
           There
           is
           no
           doctrin
           in
           that
           book
           thou
           here
           opposest
           ,
           or
           the
           other
           of
           the
           insufficiency
           of
           light
           in
           each
           man
           ,
           which
           hath
           not
           been
           my
           constant
           doctrine
           .
           What
           thou
           wouldst
           have
           imagined
           as
           if
           no
           swearing
           were
           of
           necessary
           use
           to
           humane
           society
           ,
           is
           contrary
           to
           all
           experience
           of
           governors
           of
           Kingdoms
           and
           Commonwealths
           ,
           and
           the
           Apostles
           words
           alledged
           by
           me
           ,
           
             Heb.
             6.
             16.
             
             An
             oath
             for
             confirmation
             is
             to
             men
             an
             end
             of
             all
             strife
             .
          
           That
           which
           
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           saith
           ,
           
             That
             what
             swearing
             was
             then
             allowed
             of
             ,
             (
             as
             before
             a
             ruler
             it
             then
             was
             to
             end
             a
             strife
             among
             men
             ,
             who
             are
             yet
             in
             strife
             )
             is
             now
             unlawful
             among
             his
             Saints
             ,
             who
             are
             redeemed
             out
             of
             strife
             ,
             and
             the
             rest
             of
             those
             fleshly
             works
             ,
             which
             it
             is
             one
             of
             ,
          
           Gal.
           5.
           is
           a
           silly
           shift
           .
           For
           ,
           1.
           
           The
           Saints
           are
           men
           .
           2.
           
           Those
           of
           the
           old
           Testament
           were
           Saints
           ,
           and
           yet
           were
           to
           swear
           .
           3.
           
           If
           men
           ,
           not
           Saints
           ,
           may
           swear
           to
           end
           strife
           ,
           then
           it
           is
           not
           prohibited
           by
           Christ
           to
           them
           to
           swear
           in
           some
           cases
           ,
           and
           ,
           sith
           the
           precept
           of
           not
           swearing
           is
           not
           limited
           to
           Saints
           ,
           if
           others
           may
           swear
           in
           some
           cases
           ,
           notwithstanding
           that
           precept
           ,
           Saints
           may
           swear
           also
           .
           4.
           
           Saints
           are
           redeemed
           from
           other
           works
           of
           the
           flesh
           ,
           yet
           are
           not
           so
           redeemed
           ,
           but
           that
           they
           may
           have
           envyings
           ,
           wrath
           ,
           emulations
           .
           However
           Quakers
           imagine
           themselves
           perfect
           ,
           yet
           the
           Scripture
           doth
           not
           say
           ,
           that
           the
           most
           eminent
           Saint
           is
           so
           redeemed
           out
           of
           strife
           ,
           but
           that
           he
           may
           be
           tempted
           to
           ,
           and
           guilty
           of
           some
           unlawfull
           strife
           ,
           while
           he
           is
           in
           the
           body
           .
           5.
           
           There
           was
           strife
           between
           Paul
           and
           
             Barnabas
             ,
             Acts
             15.
             39.
             
             Paul
          
           and
           
             Peter
             ,
             Gal.
          
           2.
           11.
           the
           
             Corinthians
             ,
             1
             Cor.
          
           1.
           11.
           
           Who
           were
           termed
           
             Saints
             ,
             ver
          
           .
           2.
           6.
           
           Quakers
           are
           guilty
           of
           strifes
           in
           opposing
           Preachers
           and
           reviling
           dissenters
           from
           them
           ,
           and
           therefore
           if
           it
           be
           necessary
           to
           end
           strifes
           of
           men
           ,
           that
           there
           be
           oaths
           ,
           it
           is
           also
           necessary
           to
           swear
           to
           end
           strifes
           with
           them
           .
           Do
           not
           they
           seek
           to
           recover
           stollen
           goods
           ,
           due
           debts
           ?
           and
           if
           so
           ,
           oaths
           are
           necessary
           for
           them
           .
           7.
           
           Oftimes
           Saints
           are
           found
           so
           guilty
           of
           contentions
           among
           themselves
           ,
           that
           ,
           were
           not
           Magistrates
           impowred
           
           to
           compose
           them
           ,
           they
           would
           be
           endless
           and
           remediless
           .
           The
           story
           of
           the
           libels
           brought
           to
           Constantine
           the
           great
           at
           the
           Nicene
           Council
           ,
           of
           one
           Bishop
           and
           Confessour
           against
           another
           ,
           and
           burnt
           by
           him
           ,
           shewes
           ,
           how
           ill
           it
           would
           fare
           with
           the
           best
           Saints
           ,
           if
           Magistracy
           did
           not
           quiet
           them
           .
           Our
           own
           times
           have
           had
           too
           much
           experience
           of
           this
           .
           8.
           
           Saints
           live
           among
           men
           unholy
           ,
           to
           whom
           they
           owe
           duties
           of
           love
           and
           righteousness
           ,
           which
           cannot
           be
           done
           without
           testifying
           the
           truth
           in
           many
           cases
           ,
           wherein
           they
           differ
           ,
           to
           end
           their
           strife
           ;
           and
           therefore
           Saints
           are
           bound
           ,
           when
           the
           laws
           require
           oaths
           ,
           and
           they
           are
           the
           only
           witnesses
           to
           give
           in
           evidence
           ,
           out
           of
           charity
           and
           justice
           to
           swear
           for
           ending
           of
           strife
           .
        
         
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           addes
           something
           against
           what
           I
           argue
           in
           proof
           of
           the
           fourth
           Proposition
           ,
           omitting
           any
           shew
           of
           answer
           to
           my
           sixth
           Argument
           for
           my
           first
           Proposition
           ,
           and
           passing
           over
           the
           second
           and
           third
           .
           I
           alledged
           to
           prove
           this
           Proposition
           ,
           [
           
             That
             the
             King
             is
             the
             only
             supreme
             Governor
             in
             all
             his
             Dominions
          
           ]
           the
           example
           and
           rule
           of
           Christ
           ,
           
             Mat.
             22.
             21.
             1
             
             Tim.
             6.
             13.
             
             Luke
          
           2.
           51.
           which
           he
           saith
           ,
           I
           
             bring
             to
             prove
             an
             oath
             of
             Supremacy
             to
             King
          
           Caesar
           ;
           which
           is
           not
           true
           ,
           it
           being
           brought
           to
           prove
           a
           supremacy
           over
           all
           persons
           ,
           not
           an
           oath
           of
           supremacy
           ,
           and
           so
           all
           his
           answer
           is
           impertinent
           .
           The
           Argument
           stands
           good
           .
           Christ
           himself
           did
           acknowledge
           subjection
           to
           Caesar
           ,
           and
           his
           parents
           ,
           therefore
           no
           Prelate
           is
           exempt
           from
           the
           Kings
           government
           .
        
         
           Richard
           Hubberthorn
           addes
           ,
           John
           Tombes
           
             saith
             ,
             That
          
           Paul
           
             a
             Saint
             was
             subject
             to
             the
             judgement
             of
          
           Caesar
           ,
           
             and
             appealed
             to
             him
             ,
             then
             he
             acknowledged
             him
             supreme
             ,
          
           &c.
           Ergo.
           Ans
           .
           Paul
           
             was
             a
             prisoner
             for
             the
             word
             of
             God
             ,
             and
             testimony
             of
             Jesus
             ,
             and
             appealed
             to
          
           Caesar
           
             for
             justice
             ,
             because
             he
             was
             unjustly
             accused
             ,
             and
             had
             not
             done
             any
             thing
             worthy
             of
             bonds
             or
             of
             death
             ;
             therefore
             according
             to
             their
             law
             he
             ought
             to
             be
             set
             free
             ;
             but
          
           Paul
           
             did
             not
             call
          
           Caesar
           
             the
             Supreme
             Head
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
             and
             chief
             Ruler
             in
             Ecclesiastical
             things
             ,
             for
             if
          
           Caesar
           
             had
             been
             the
             supreme
             Head
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
             of
             which
          
           Paul
           
             was
             a
             member
             ,
             he
             would
             but
             have
             needed
             little
             appealing
             unto
             for
             setting
             him
             at
             liberty
             ;
             but
             in
             such
             Arguments
             as
          
           Tombes
           
             hath
             used
             ,
             is
             manifest
             the
             ignorance
             of
             foolish
             men
             ,
             wherein
             their
             folly
             appeareth
             to
             all
             men
             ,
             as
             the
             Scripture
             saith
             ,
          
           2
           Tim.
           3.
           9.
           
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           'T
           is
           true
           ,
           I
           alledged
           Pauls
           example
           ,
           Acts
           25.
           8
           ,
           10.
           to
           prove
           the
           King
           Supreme
           Governor
           over
           all
           persons
           in
           his
           Dominions
           ,
           and
           Acts
           23.
           29.
           and
           24.
           5
           ,
           6
           ,
           8
           ,
           10.
           and
           25.
           8
           ,
           11
           ,
           19
           ,
           21.
           and
           26.
           2
           ,
           3.
           to
           prove
           him
           Governor
           in
           all
           Causes
           ,
           or
           
           Chief
           Ruler
           in
           Ecclesiastical
           things
           ,
           not
           to
           prove
           
             Caesar
             Supreme
             Head
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
          
           as
           
             R.
             H.
          
           misrepresents
           me
           .
           Now
           he
           shews
           not
           any
           defect
           in
           my
           proof
           taken
           from
           matter
           of
           fact
           related
           in
           the
           Text
           ,
           but
           tels
           us
           ,
           If
           Caesar
           
             had
             been
             Supreme
             Head
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
             of
             which
          
           Paul
           
             was
             a
             member
             ,
             he
             would
             have
             needed
             little
             appealing
             ,
          
           which
           is
           to
           alter
           the
           conclusion
           ,
           and
           to
           say
           nothing
           to
           that
           point
           which
           was
           in
           question
           ,
           nor
           to
           answer
           the
           proof
           at
           all
           ,
           which
           all
           that
           know
           the
           rules
           of
           arguing
           know
           to
           be
           ridiculous
           ,
           and
           indeed
           very
           foolish
           .
        
         
           Speeding
           no
           better
           in
           answering
           my
           Arguments
           ,
           
             R.
             H.
          
           proceeds
           to
           his
           wonted
           course
           of
           invectives
           against
           my
           person
           ,
           which
           I
           am
           necessitated
           to
           take
           notice
           of
           ,
           because
           they
           are
           impediments
           to
           many
           ,
           of
           receiving
           the
           truth
           I
           teach
           ,
           and
           do
           so
           fill
           people
           with
           prejudice
           ,
           that
           their
           ears
           are
           stopped
           from
           hearkning
           to
           the
           clearest
           demonstrations
           ,
           and
           they
           are
           carried
           away
           with
           the
           vain
           conceits
           of
           Quakers
           ,
           and
           other
           blind
           guides
           .
           He
           tels
           me
           ,
           
             That
             my
             Ministry
             if
             received
             would
             beget
             men
             from
             their
             holy
             and
             harmless
             state
             into
             transgression
             of
             Christs
             command
             ,
             and
             from
             the
             tenderness
             of
             conscience
             into
             hardness
             of
             heart
             ,
          
           and
           saith
           ,
           When
           I
           say
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           was
           imposed
           for
           excluding
           of
           the
           Popes
           jurisdiction
           ,
           &c.
           
             if
             so
             ,
             why
             dost
             thou
             preach
             it
             up
             to
             be
             imposed
             upon
             the
             holy
             ,
             harmless
             ,
             godly
             Christians
             ,
             who
             are
             redeemed
             from
             the
             Popes
             power
             and
             jurisdiction
             ,
             that
          
           I
           
             am
             a
             miserable
             comforter
             to
             tender
             consciences
             ,
             that
             my
             end
             is
             seen
             ,
             and
             therefore
             cannot
             deceive
             many
             ,
             that
             those
             holy
             persons
             who
             are
             tender
             of
             an
             oath
             ,
             ought
             to
             be
             my
             teachers
             ,
             who
             am
             far
             from
             righteousness
             or
             tenderness
             of
             conscience
             ,
             that
             it
             is
             a
             shame
             for
             me
             to
             be
             an
             imposer
             of
             oaths
             upon
             tender
             consciences
             ,
             who
             profess
             my self
             a
             Minister
             of
             Christ
             ,
             that
             it
             is
             manifest
             my
             Ministry
             is
             to
             bring
             people
             into
             condemnation
             ,
          
           in
           which
           he
           falsly
           accuseth
           me
           ,
           that
           I
           
             am
             an
             imposer
             of
             oaths
             upon
             tender
             consciences
             ,
          
           that
           I
           
             preath
             it
             up
             to
             be
             imposed
             upon
             the
             holy
             ,
             harmless
             ,
             godly
             Christians
             ,
          
           because
           to
           free
           them
           from
           the
           snare
           ,
           which
           the
           Law
           of
           the
           Land
           brings
           them
           into
           by
           reason
           of
           their
           denying
           to
           take
           the
           Oaths
           of
           Supremacy
           and
           Allegiance
           ,
           I
           have
           endeavoured
           out
           of
           compassion
           to
           their
           souls
           ,
           to
           prove
           to
           them
           ,
           that
           such
           swearing
           may
           be
           lawful
           :
           It
           is
           not
           I
           that
           
             impose
             the
             Oaths
             on
             them
          
           ,
           but
           the
           Law
           and
           the
           Officers
           that
           are
           to
           execute
           it
           ;
           nor
           did
           I
           
             preach
             it
             up
             to
             be
             imposed
             on
             tender
             consciences
             ,
          
           but
           after
           it
           was
           imposed
           on
           them
           by
           others
           ,
           and
           my
           Petition
           with
           others
           to
           his
           Majesty
           for
           the
           release
           thereof
           without
           the
           desired
           effect
           ,
           I
           did
           upon
           advise
           and
           importunity
           ,
           publish
           the
           writing
           
           about
           it
           ,
           to
           free
           them
           from
           mistakes
           ,
           who
           scrupled
           the
           thing
           ,
           there
           being
           then
           in
           appearance
           ,
           no
           other
           way
           for
           the
           liberty
           and
           help
           of
           many
           then
           imprisoned
           ,
           and
           more
           liable
           to
           imprisonment
           for
           their
           refusal
           to
           swear
           ,
           then
           by
           shewing
           them
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           that
           ,
           for
           denying
           of
           which
           they
           suffered
           ,
           and
           therefore
           they
           might
           without
           danger
           to
           their
           souls
           ,
           and
           much
           benefit
           to
           themselves
           in
           their
           outward
           estate
           ,
           take
           an
           expedite
           course
           for
           their
           peace
           .
           Which
           charity
           (
           that
           
             thinketh
             no
             evil
          
           ,
           that
           
             hopeth
             all
             things
             ,
             believeth
             all
             things
             ,
             1
             Cor.
          
           13.
           5.
           7.
           
           )
           if
           there
           had
           been
           any
           in
           
             R.
             H.
          
           would
           not
           have
           construed
           to
           have
           been
           done
           to
           any
           evil
           end
           ,
           but
           out
           of
           love
           and
           mercy
           to
           men
           for
           their
           good
           ,
           and
           for
           the
           great
           advantage
           of
           them
           that
           are
           of
           the
           same
           judgement
           with
           me
           in
           point
           of
           baptism
           ,
           that
           it
           may
           not
           be
           imputed
           to
           them
           as
           their
           common
           tenent
           ,
           that
           they
           allow
           no
           Oaths
           ,
           no
           not
           in
           judicial
           proceedings
           ,
           which
           is
           interpreted
           as
           tending
           to
           the
           overthrow
           of
           all
           civil
           Government
           ,
           and
           so
           the
           persons
           counted
           intolerable
           ,
           which
           hath
           caused
           ,
           and
           is
           yet
           likely
           to
           cause
           great
           persecution
           to
           those
           that
           hold
           the
           truth
           about
           baptism
           .
           In
           which
           thing
           I
           bless
           God
           I
           have
           not
           been
           so
           
             miserable
             a
             comforter
          
           ,
           but
           that
           I
           know
           my self
           of
           many
           ,
           and
           am
           told
           of
           more
           hundreds
           ,
           yea
           thousands
           ,
           who
           have
           had
           their
           liberty
           and
           their
           families
           ,
           saved
           from
           ruine
           ,
           by
           reason
           of
           the
           clearing
           of
           the
           point
           to
           them
           in
           that
           book
           ;
           and
           ,
           if
           some
           after
           their
           swearing
           have
           been
           disquieted
           in
           spirit
           because
           of
           their
           Oath
           ,
           it
           is
           not
           to
           be
           imputed
           to
           that
           book
           ,
           but
           their
           own
           weakness
           ,
           or
           such
           affrightments
           as
           
             R.
             H.
          
           and
           others
           ,
           do
           put
           upon
           them
           .
           I
           refuse
           not
           to
           be
           taught
           by
           
             R.
             H.
          
           or
           any
           other
           ,
           but
           ,
           sure
           I
           am
           ,
           in
           this
           thing
           
             R.
             H.
          
           yields
           me
           no
           light
           to
           rectifie
           me
           ,
           but
           by
           his
           false
           accusations
           of
           me
           ,
           as
           
             far
             from
             righteousness
             ,
             as
             bringing
             men
             into
             condemnation
             by
             my
             Ministry
             ,
          
           &c.
           gives
           me
           occasion
           to
           fear
           that
           he
           is
           led
           by
           an
           evil
           spirit
           ,
           so
           venomous
           a
           tongue
           discovering
           a
           malicious
           poisoned
           heart
           .
        
         
           My
           answer
           to
           the
           grand
           objection
           from
           Mat.
           5.
           34
           ,
           35
           ,
           36
           ,
           37.
           
           James
           5.
           12.
           was
           ,
           that
           there
           must
           of
           necessity
           be
           some
           limitation
           of
           Christs
           speech
           ,
           as
           of
           the
           next
           speech
           ,
           ver
           .
           38
           ,
           39
           ,
           40
           ,
           41
           ,
           42.
           and
           many
           more
           places
           ,
           which
           I
           then
           did
           not
           recite
           ,
           but
           shall
           now
           refer
           the
           Reader
           to
           some
           of
           them
           ,
           
             Mat.
             5.
             29
             ,
             30.
             
             Mat.
             6.
             17
             ,
             19.
             25.
             34.
             
             Mat.
             7.
             1.
             
             Mat.
             10.
             28.
             
             Mat.
             23.
             3
             ,
             8
             ,
             9.
             
             Luke
             6.
             30.
             
             John
          
           6.
           27.
           which
           with
           many
           more
           if
           they
           were
           understood
           without
           limitation
           ,
           would
           cross
           other
           Texts
           of
           holy
           Scripture
           ,
           and
           such
           truths
           as
           are
           undeniable
           ,
           and
           introduce
           such
           evils
           
           as
           are
           intolerable
           .
           And
           that
           Mat.
           5.
           34
           ,
           35
           ,
           36
           ,
           37.
           is
           to
           be
           limited
           ,
           I
           proved
           it
           from
           the
           Angels
           and
           Pauls
           swearing
           and
           adjuring
           after
           that
           precept
           ,
           which
           shews
           they
           understood
           it
           with
           limitation
           ,
           and
           so
           are
           we
           to
           understand
           it
           ,
           and
           that
           it
           is
           to
           be
           limited
           as
           I
           there
           set
           down
           ,
           I
           proved
           from
           the
           words
           of
           the
           Text
           ,
           there
           and
           elsewhere
           .
           Hereto
           
             R.
             H.
          
           speaketh
           thus
           .
        
         
           
             Indeed
             it
             doth
             plainly
             appear
             ,
             that
             thou
             must
             of
             necessity
             either
             disprove
             Christs
             words
             ,
             or
             else
             deny
             thy
             own
             ,
             seeing
             they
             are
             contrary
             the
             one
             to
             the
             other
             :
             so
             therefore
             thou
             saist
             ,
             that
             it
             was
             those
             oaths
             above
             mentioned
             ,
             that
             was
             forbidden
             by
             Christ
             and
             the
             Apostles
             ,
             and
             I
             shall
             shew
             it
             plainly
             ,
             that
             thou
             hast
             no
             necessity
             to
             limit
             Christs
             words
             to
             vain
             and
             prophane
             swearing
             ;
             (
             but
             only
             that
             thou
             wouldst
             have
             thy
             words
             true
             ,
             and
             his
             false
             )
             for
             Christs
             words
             in
          
           Mat.
           5.
           
             do
             not
             intend
             such
             oaths
             ,
             for
             he
             speaks
             of
             the
             true
             oaths
             which
             was
             used
             among
             the
             Jews
             ,
             and
             such
             oaths
             as
             Christ
             told
             them
             they
             were
             to
             perform
             ;
             for
             it
             was
             not
             said
             in
             old
             time
             ,
             that
             they
             should
             perform
             vain
             ,
             light
             ,
             prophane
             ,
             unnecessary
             ,
             customary
             ,
             and
             passionate
             oaths
             ,
             but
             such
             as
             they
             were
             to
             perform
             betwixt
             the
             Lord
             and
             them
             ,
             and
             the
             solemn
             Vows
             and
             Covenants
             which
             they
             made
             in
             old
             time
             to
             their
             Kings
             ,
             and
             one
             to
             another
             ,
             the
             Christians
             now
             by
             the
             command
             of
             Christ
             was
             not
             ,
             to
             swear
             these
             oaths
             ,
             neither
             any
             oath
             true
             nor
             false
             .
          
        
         
           To
           which
           I
           reply
           ,
           'T
           is
           true
           ,
           Christ
           spake
           of
           true
           oaths
           to
           be
           performed
           to
           the
           Lord
           ,
           as
           the
           occasion
           of
           his
           precept
           did
           lead
           him
           to
           speak
           :
           But
           it
           is
           true
           also
           ,
           that
           our
           Lord
           Christ
           forbids
           not
           such
           oaths
           universally
           ,
           nor
           as
           they
           were
           used
           in
           old
           time
           among
           the
           Jews
           ,
           and
           to
           their
           kings
           ,
           and
           one
           unto
           another
           ;
           but
           as
           the
           Pharisees
           and
           other
           teachers
           interpreted
           what
           was
           said
           to
           them
           of
           old
           time
           ,
           that
           what
           was
           said
           to
           them
           ,
           did
           bind
           no
           further
           then
           not
           to
           break
           their
           oaths
           ,
           but
           to
           perform
           them
           to
           the
           Lord
           ,
           otherwise
           they
           might
           swear
           as
           oft
           as
           they
           would
           ,
           and
           in
           what
           manner
           they
           pleased
           :
           But
           this
           Christ
           denied
           ,
           and
           determines
           they
           might
           not
           swear
           frequently
           ,
           unnecessarily
           ,
           with
           such
           oaths
           as
           they
           used
           ,
           and
           conceits
           of
           the
           obligation
           of
           some
           ,
           and
           not
           others
           ,
           as
           the
           Text
           leads
           us
           to
           conceive
           ;
           and
           the
           reasons
           by
           me
           given
           ,
           prove
           the
           words
           are
           to
           be
           limited
           ,
           to
           which
           
             R.
             H.
          
           hath
           given
           no
           answer
           ,
           and
           therefore
           my
           answer
           and
           whole
           dispute
           stands
           good
           ,
           notwithstanding
           the
           opposition
           of
           
             R.
             H.
          
           and
           
             S.
             F.
          
           And
           for
           the
           insinuations
           of
           
             R.
             H.
          
           that
           this
           is
           
             preaching
             of
             the
             lawfulness
             of
             swearing
             (
             or
             sinning
             )
             against
             Christs
             command
             ,
          
           and
           that
           
             such
             teachers
             are
             given
             to
             change
             with
             every
             government
             ,
             and
             that
             they
             preach
             as
             the
             false
             
             prophets
             did
             for
             handfuls
             of
             barley
             and
             pieces
             of
             bread
             ,
          
           they
           are
           but
           a
           further
           continuation
           of
           his
           revilings
           ,
           it
           being
           no
           teaching
           against
           ,
           but
           expounding
           of
           Christs
           command
           ;
           nor
           have
           we
           changed
           our
           doctrine
           or
           principles
           with
           change
           of
           government
           ,
           but
           shewed
           subjection
           to
           the
           powers
           that
           be
           ,
           as
           Paul
           injoins
           ,
           Rom.
           13.
           1
           ,
           2.
           
           Nor
           do
           we
           look
           at
           wages
           any
           otherwise
           ,
           then
           we
           are
           allowe
           nor
           conceive
           we
           are
           bound
           by
           any
           law
           of
           Christ
           or
           his
           Apostles
           ,
           to
           refuse
           or
           neglect
           more
           liberal
           maintenance
           ,
           be
           it
           by
           tithes
           or
           other
           pay
           assigned
           by
           law
           ,
           then
           that
           which
           is
           by
           meer
           alms
           or
           voluntary
           contribution
           ,
           which
           in
           most
           places
           is
           so
           scant
           ,
           that
           persons
           of
           worth
           are
           necessitated
           to
           live
           in
           a
           sordid
           manner
           ,
           or
           people
           are
           necessitated
           to
           take
           persons
           of
           little
           worth
           ,
           and
           thereby
           the
           Ministry
           is
           debased
           ,
           the
           people
           untaught
           or
           ill
           taught
           ,
           such
           ignorant
           and
           corrupt
           men
           ,
           as
           
             R.
             H.
          
           seems
           to
           be
           by
           his
           writing
           ,
           creep
           in
           among
           men
           ,
           and
           pervert
           them
           .
        
         
           That
           which
           
             R.
             H.
          
           saith
           ,
           the
           
             Jews
             sware
             by
             the
             living
             God
             ,
             but
             the
             Apostates
             by
             the
             book
             ,
          
           insinuates
           ,
           as
           if
           such
           were
           apostates
           as
           swear
           thus
           ,
           and
           that
           they
           swear
           by
           the
           book
           ,
           and
           not
           by
           the
           living
           God.
           But
           neither
           doth
           he
           prove
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           teach
           the
           lawfulness
           of
           some
           swearing
           ,
           are
           apostates
           from
           Christianity
           ,
           any
           more
           then
           holy
           Paul
           ,
           who
           hath
           left
           upon
           record
           in
           holy
           Scripture
           ,
           his
           oaths
           ,
           after
           he
           was
           an
           Apostle
           ;
           nor
           is
           this
           form
           of
           swearing
           ,
           
             So
             help
             me
             God
             ,
             and
             by
             the
             Contents
             of
             this
             book
             ,
          
           any
           other
           then
           swearing
           by
           the
           living
           God
           ,
           made
           known
           in
           that
           book
           ,
           and
           pawning
           our
           interest
           in
           his
           help
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           doctrine
           and
           promises
           in
           that
           book
           ,
           expressed
           by
           laying
           the
           hand
           on
           the
           book
           ,
           as
           formerly
           by
           
             coming
             before
             the
             altar
             ,
             1
             Kings
             8.
             31.
             2
             
             Chron.
          
           6.
           22.
           as
           a
           sign
           of
           our
           abandoning
           our
           interest
           in
           Gods
           help
           ,
           made
           known
           in
           that
           book
           ,
           if
           we
           speak
           not
           truth
           .
        
         
           I
           find
           in
           an
           
             humble
             petition
             of
             some
             prisoners
             in
             Maidston
             ,
          
           dated
           
             January
             25.
          
           that
           
             they
             cannot
             acknowledge
             any
             authority
             that
             God
             hath
             given
             the
             King
             in
             spiritual
             things
             or
             causes
          
           ;
           and
           they
           thus
           argue
           :
           
             If
             thou
             hast
             any
             power
             to
             be
             a
             Lord
             over
             our
             faith
             ,
             or
             by
             outward
             force
             to
             impose
             any
             thing
             in
             the
             worship
             of
             God
             on
             our
             consciences
             ,
             it
             is
             given
             unto
             thee
             as
             thou
             art
             a
             Magistrate
             ,
             or
             as
             thou
             art
             a
             Christian
             ;
             but
             thou
             hast
             no
             such
             power
             given
             unto
             thee
             of
             God
             as
             thou
             art
             a
             Magistrate
             ,
             appears
             ,
             1.
             
             Because
             if
             Magistrates
             as
             such
             ,
             have
             such
             an
             authority
             ,
             then
             all
             Magistrates
             in
             all
             Nations
             have
             the
             same
             power
             :
             In
          
           Turky
           
             I
             must
             be
             a
             Mahometan
             ,
             in
          
           Spain
           
             a
             Papist
             ;
             and
             for
             ever
             as
             the
             authority
             changes
             Religion
             ,
             I
             must
             do
          
           
           
             the
             same
             .
             2.
             
             Because
             the
             Apostles
             refused
             to
             be
             obedient
             to
             their
             rulers
             ,
             when
             they
             were
             commanded
             to
             forbear
             that
             which
             they
             judged
             part
             of
             the
             worship
             of
             God
             ,
          
           Acts
           4.
           19.
           
           Acts
           5.
           29.
           3.
           
           
             All
             the
             Scriptures
             of
             the
             new
             Testament
             that
             injoyns
             obedience
             unto
             Magistrutes
             ,
             were
             written
             when
             the
             Romans
             had
             the
             Empire
             of
             the
             world
             ,
             whose
             Emperours
             were
             for
             the
             most
             part
             (
             if
             not
             all
             )
             heathenish
             idolaters
             for
             the
             first
             300
             years
             ,
             until
          
           Constantine
           
             's
             time
             ;
             it
             therefore
             cannot
             be
             supposed
             ,
             that
             any
             of
             these
             Texts
             of
             Scripture
             that
             calls
             for
             obedience
             to
             Magistrates
             ,
             intends
             an
             obedience
             in
             matters
             of
             faith
             or
             worship
             ,
             for
             then
             the
             Christians
             that
             lived
             under
             those
             Emperours
             ,
             must
             needs
             have
             denied
             Christ
             ,
             and
             worshipped
             the
             Roman
             gods
             ,
             as
             some
             of
             the
             Emperours
             commanded
             .
          
        
         
           Answ
           .
           Though
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             of
             the
             Oath
             of
             the
             Kings
             Supremacy
             ,
          
           there
           is
           that
           said
           which
           might
           have
           prevented
           this
           objection
           ,
           yet
           being
           willing
           to
           clear
           the
           truth
           more
           fully
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           1.
           
           That
           it
           is
           not
           rightly
           supposed
           ,
           That
           
             by
             outward
             force
             any
             thing
             in
             the
             worship
             of
             God
             ,
             may
             be
             imposed
             on
             mens
             consciences
             .
          
           For
           though
           by
           outward
           force
           ,
           things
           may
           be
           imposed
           on
           the
           outward
           man
           ,
           and
           the
           actions
           of
           some
           of
           the
           members
           ,
           yet
           by
           outward
           force
           a
           thing
           cannot
           be
           imposed
           on
           the
           conscience
           .
           For
           then
           only
           is
           a
           thing
           imposed
           on
           the
           conscience
           ,
           when
           the
           conscience
           is
           convinced
           ,
           that
           he
           ought
           to
           do
           ,
           or
           not
           to
           do
           it
           ,
           which
           must
           be
           done
           by
           doctrine
           ,
           or
           some
           other
           way
           insinuating
           into
           the
           conscience
           the
           necessity
           or
           lawfulness
           of
           doing
           or
           not
           doing
           a
           thing
           ,
           which
           outward
           force
           cannot
           perform
           .
           2.
           
           That
           it
           is
           a
           greater
           mistake
           ,
           
             That
             the
             King
             in
             the
             Oath
             of
             Supremacy
             ,
             is
             acknowledged
             to
             have
             power
             to
             be
             a
             Lord
             over
             faith
             ,
             or
             by
             outward
             force
             to
             impose
             any
             thing
             in
             the
             worship
             of
             God
             ,
             on
             mens
             consciences
             .
          
           This
           mistake
           might
           have
           been
           rectified
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           heeded
           the
           Oath
           ,
           Proviso
           ,
           Admonition
           ,
           37th
           .
           Article
           prefixed
           before
           my
           book
           ,
           and
           the
           explication
           of
           the
           5th
           .
           and
           6th
           .
           Propositions
           ,
           which
           I
           gave
           conformably
           to
           the
           speeches
           of
           learned
           approved
           men
           ,
           by
           the
           Princes
           that
           have
           been
           and
           are
           ,
           which
           I
           find
           not
           yet
           any
           persons
           in
           authority
           have
           disallowed
           ;
           and
           yet
           I
           conceive
           by
           their
           words
           in
           the
           end
           of
           their
           petition
           ,
           they
           were
           not
           ignorant
           thereof
           ,
           sith
           they
           cite
           the
           proviso
           of
           the
           Statute
           5.
           
           Eliz.
           and
           the
           admonition
           ,
           which
           I
           presume
           they
           found
           printed
           in
           my
           book
           .
           By
           which
           they
           might
           have
           understood
           ,
           that
           Kings
           are
           acknowledged
           Governors
           in
           spiritual
           things
           ,
           as
           well
           ,
           and
           no
           otherwise
           as
           in
           temporal
           things
           .
           Now
           in
           temporal
           things
           they
           have
           not
           power
           to
           impose
           any
           thing
           on
           
           mens
           consciences
           by
           outward
           force
           ,
           not
           is
           the
           King
           a
           Lord
           over
           our
           faith
           in
           temporal
           things
           ;
           so
           as
           that
           if
           he
           should
           tell
           us
           we
           may
           marry
           our
           brothers
           wife
           ,
           or
           command
           us
           to
           fight
           a
           duel
           for
           our
           honour
           ,
           we
           may
           think
           we
           are
           bound
           in
           conscience
           to
           do
           it
           ,
           or
           that
           we
           may
           lawfully
           do
           it
           ,
           much
           less
           that
           he
           is
           Lord
           over
           our
           faith
           in
           the
           things
           of
           God
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           impose
           on
           our
           consciences
           what
           we
           shall
           believe
           concerning
           God
           ,
           Christ
           ,
           the
           Covenant
           of
           grace
           ,
           the
           doctrine
           of
           salvation
           ,
           &c.
           or
           to
           form
           the
           worship
           of
           God
           by
           addition
           or
           diminution
           ,
           otherwise
           then
           is
           appointed
           by
           Gods
           word
           ,
           but
           as
           Dr.
           
           Rainold's
           Confer
           .
           with
           
             Hart
             ,
             chap.
          
           10.
           cites
           the
           words
           of
           Augustine
           ,
           which
           I
           find
           in
           the
           seventh
           Tome
           of
           his
           works
           ,
           in
           the
           third
           book
           against
           Cresconius
           the
           Grammarian
           ,
           chap.
           51.
           more
           fully
           then
           in
           the
           fiftieth
           
             Epistle
             ,
             For
             in
             this
             kings
             ,
             as
             it
             is
             commanded
             them
             by
             God
             ,
             served
             God
             as
             they
             are
             Kings
             ,
             if
             in
             their
             Kingdom
             they
             command
             good
             things
             ,
             and
             forbid
             evil
             things
             ,
             not
             only
             which
             pertain
             to
             humane
             society
             ,
             but
             also
             which
             pertain
             to
             the
             Religion
             of
             God.
          
           And
           as
           they
           are
           not
           to
           govern
           in
           temporal
           things
           ,
           but
           according
           to
           just
           Laws
           of
           the
           Commonwealth
           ,
           so
           neither
           in
           the
           things
           of
           God
           ,
           but
           according
           to
           the
           holy
           Laws
           of
           God
           ;
           and
           although
           they
           have
           more
           authority
           in
           making
           and
           executing
           Laws
           in
           Civil
           things
           ,
           then
           in
           Religious
           ,
           yet
           in
           neither
           to
           make
           or
           execute
           Laws
           contrary
           to
           Gods
           Laws
           ,
           nor
           to
           usurp
           that
           prerogative
           which
           belongs
           to
           God
           to
           dispense
           with
           his
           Laws
           ,
           or
           to
           hinder
           the
           doing
           of
           a
           duty
           imposed
           in
           the
           first
           or
           second
           table
           of
           the
           Law
           ,
           or
           to
           mould
           or
           urge
           doctrines
           of
           faith
           or
           worship
           ,
           otherwise
           then
           God
           in
           Scripture
           declares
           or
           appoints
           ;
           nor
           do
           we
           acknowledge
           by
           taking
           that
           Oath
           ,
           that
           we
           owe
           them
           active
           obedience
           ,
           if
           they
           urge
           us
           by
           Laws
           and
           Edicts
           thereto
           ,
           in
           things
           reserved
           to
           Gods
           prerogative
           ,
           or
           such
           as
           are
           contrary
           to
           his
           Laws
           in
           force
           ,
           only
           we
           are
           to
           yield
           passive
           obedience
           by
           suffering
           ,
           and
           not
           resisting
           the
           power
           and
           authority
           thus
           abused
           .
           Nor
           is
           there
           any
           thing
           in
           the
           words
           of
           Q.
           
             Elizabeths
             Admonition
             annexed
             to
             her
             injunctions
             ,
          
           contrary
           to
           this
           explication
           .
           For
           the
           Queen
           doth
           not
           say
           ,
           that
           
             She
             challenged
             by
             that
             Oath
             ,
             such
             a
             power
             as
             was
             challenged
             by
             her
             Father
             ,
             King
          
           Henry
           
             the
             eighth
             ,
             which
             was
             ,
             to
             burn
             his
             subjects
             at
             the
             stake
             for
             their
             dissenting
             from
             him
             in
             religious
             matters
             :
          
           But
           She
           saith
           ,
           
             That
             nothing
             was
             ,
             is
             ,
             or
             shall
             be
             meant
             or
             intended
             by
             the
             same
             Oath
             ,
             to
             have
             any
             other
             duty
             ,
             allegiance
             ,
             or
             bond
             required
             by
             the
             same
             Oath
             ,
             then
             was
             acknowledged
             to
             be
             due
             to
             the
             most
             Noble
             Kings
             of
             famous
             memory
             ,
             King
          
           Henry
           
             the
             eighth
             Her
             Majesties
             Father
             ,
             
             or
             King
          
           Edward
           
             the
             sixth
             ,
             Her
             Majesties
             Brother
             .
          
           And
           again
           :
           
             For
             certainly
             her
             Majesty
             neither
             doth
             ,
             ne
             ever
             will
             challenge
             any
             other
             authority
             ,
             then
             that
             was
             challenged
             ,
             and
             lately
             used
             by
             the
             said
             Noble
             Kings
             of
             famous
             memory
             ,
             King
          
           Henry
           
             the
             eighth
             ,
             and
             King
          
           Edward
           
             the
             sixth
             ,
             which
             is
             ,
             and
             was
             of
             ancient
             time
             due
             to
             the
             Imperial
             Crown
             of
             this
             Realm
             ;
             that
             is
             ,
             under
             God
             to
             have
             the
             soverainty
             and
             Rule
             over
             all
             manner
             of
             persons
             ,
             born
             within
             these
             Her
             Realms
             ,
             Dominions
             and
             Countries
             ,
             of
             what
             estate
             ,
             either
             Ecclesiastical
             or
             temporal
             ,
             soever
             they
             be
             ,
             so
             as
             no
             other
             forrein
             power
             shall
             ,
             or
             ought
             to
             have
             any
             superiority
             over
             them
             .
          
           Now
           if
           She
           had
           challenged
           power
           to
           burn
           at
           a
           stake
           her
           subjects
           ,
           for
           their
           dissenting
           from
           King
           Henry
           the
           eighth
           in
           religious
           matters
           ,
           then
           she
           must
           challenge
           power
           to
           burn
           all
           his
           Protestant
           subjects
           at
           a
           stake
           ,
           and
           therefore
           she
           must
           be
           conceived
           to
           challenge
           only
           authority
           over
           all
           persons
           to
           govern
           them
           according
           to
           just
           Laws
           ,
           excluding
           forrein
           power
           .
           Whereto
           agree
           both
           the
           words
           of
           the
           37th
           .
           Article
           ,
           set
           down
           in
           my
           former
           book
           ,
           and
           the
           word
           of
           King
           James
           in
           this
           ,
           That
           in
           
             that
             Oath
             only
             is
             contained
             the
             Kings
             absolute
             power
             to
             be
             Judge
             over
             all
             persons
             ,
             as
             well
             Civil
             as
             Ecclesiastical
             ,
             excluding
             all
             forrein
             powers
             and
             Potentates
             ,
             to
             be
             Judges
             within
             his
             Dominions
             .
          
           Nor
           is
           it
           true
           ,
           That
           by
           King
           Henries
           
             practice
             appears
             ,
             that
             Q.
          
           Elizabeth
           
             challenged
             power
             to
             burn
             dissenters
             from
             King
          
           Henry
           
             in
             matters
             of
             Religion
          
           .
           For
           she
           did
           not
           challenge
           all
           the
           power
           ,
           which
           King
           Henry
           practised
           ,
           for
           then
           she
           should
           have
           challenged
           a
           power
           to
           behead
           her
           mother
           ,
           which
           he
           practised
           ,
           and
           if
           the
           
             Queen
             her self
             exercised
             the
             same
             authority
          
           (
           though
           it
           be
           not
           to
           be
           called
           authority
           or
           power
           truly
           ,
           but
           an
           usurpation
           or
           abuse
           of
           power
           )
           
             in
             putting
             some
             to
             death
             for
             their
             conscience
             in
             Religion
             ,
          
           yet
           doubtless
           she
           challenged
           no
           other
           power
           then
           what
           before
           
             had
             been
             or
             might
             be
             lawfully
             exercised
             or
             used
             ,
          
           as
           the
           words
           are
           in
           the
           Statute
           1.
           
           
             Eliz.
             c.
          
           1.
           a
           little
           before
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           nor
           doth
           the
           Oath
           acknowledge
           the
           King
           Governor
           ,
           or
           to
           have
           any
           other
           power
           or
           authority
           to
           be
           assisted
           ,
           defended
           or
           actively
           obeyed
           ,
           then
           as
           it
           is
           lawful
           ,
           and
           used
           or
           exercised
           lawfully
           ,
           and
           therefore
           in
           answer
           to
           the
           three
           Arguments
           of
           the
           Petitioners
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           1.
           
           That
           by
           the
           acknowledgement
           of
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           in
           spirituals
           ,
           as
           a
           Magistrate
           neither
           is
           a
           man
           bound
           to
           change
           his
           Religion
           as
           the
           King
           doth
           ,
           nor
           to
           forbear
           Gods
           worship
           which
           he
           forbids
           ,
           nor
           to
           deny
           Christ
           ,
           or
           worship
           other
           Gods
           because
           he
           commands
           it
           .
        
         
           
             It
             followes
             in
             the
          
           Maidston
           
             prisoners
             Petition
          
           .
           And
           now
           ,
           O
           
           King
           ,
           that
           no
           man
           as
           he
           is
           a
           Christian
           ,
           hath
           power
           to
           be
           a
           Lord
           over
           anothers
           faith
           ,
           or
           by
           outward
           force
           to
           impose
           any
           thing
           in
           the
           worship
           of
           God
           ,
           is
           as
           clear
           ,
           1.
           
           Because
           the
           Lord
           Jesus
           himself
           ,
           nor
           his
           disciples
           ,
           would
           never
           by
           any
           outward
           force
           compel
           men
           to
           receive
           them
           or
           their
           doctrine
           ;
           for
           when
           the
           disciples
           of
           Christ
           (
           supposing
           they
           might
           use
           violence
           as
           under
           the
           law
           )
           would
           have
           commanded
           fire
           to
           come
           from
           heaven
           (
           as
           Elias
           did
           )
           to
           consume
           them
           that
           would
           not
           receive
           them
           ;
           Christ
           turned
           and
           rebuked
           ,
           saying
           ,
           ye
           know
           not
           what
           spirit
           ye
           are
           of
           ,
           for
           the
           Son
           of
           man
           is
           not
           come
           to
           destroy
           mens
           lives
           ,
           but
           to
           save
           them
           .
        
         
           Answ
           .
           To
           be
           Governor
           in
           things
           and
           causes
           spiritual
           and
           Ecclesiastical
           ,
           is
           ascribed
           to
           the
           King
           as
           King
           ,
           and
           not
           as
           a
           Christian
           ,
           for
           a
           Christian
           as
           a
           Christian
           hath
           not
           the
           Government
           of
           any
           others
           besides
           himself
           in
           any
           causes
           ,
           and
           he
           is
           Governor
           in
           Ecclesiastical
           causes
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           temporal
           :
           But
           he
           is
           not
           governor
           in
           temporal
           things
           as
           a
           Christian
           ,
           but
           as
           a
           King
           ;
           although
           it
           is
           true
           ,
           that
           a
           Christian
           is
           better
           fitted
           to
           govern
           in
           both
           causes
           ,
           in
           that
           he
           is
           a
           Christian
           ,
           his
           Christianity
           by
           framing
           his
           spirit
           to
           wisedom
           ,
           justice
           ,
           clemency
           ,
           &c.
           producing
           more
           aptitude
           to
           govern
           ,
           though
           not
           more
           authority
           ,
           and
           therefore
           were
           there
           not
           in
           this
           part
           of
           the
           Petition
           sundry
           mistakes
           ,
           by
           which
           those
           Petitioners
           incommodate
           ,
           and
           harm
           themselves
           and
           others
           ;
           and
           there
           seems
           to
           be
           some
           reflection
           on
           my
           book
           of
           the
           Serious
           consideration
           of
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           ,
           I
           should
           let
           this
           pass
           :
           But
           for
           these
           reasons
           I
           shall
           a
           little
           examine
           what
           is
           said
           .
        
         
           1.
           
           The
           mistake
           is
           continued
           ,
           as
           if
           by
           acknowledging
           the
           King
           supreme
           Governor
           in
           spiritual
           things
           ,
           he
           had
           a
           power
           given
           him
           to
           be
           Lord
           over
           anothers
           faith
           ,
           which
           were
           indeed
           to
           ascribe
           that
           to
           the
           King
           ,
           which
           the
           Pope
           takes
           on
           him
           ,
           to
           determine
           what
           a
           Christian
           is
           to
           believe
           ,
           which
           Hart
           the
           Jesuite
           imagined
           was
           given
           to
           the
           King
           by
           that
           Oath
           ,
           but
           was
           rectified
           therein
           by
           Dr.
           
             John
             Rainold
             confer
             .
             with
             Hart
             ,
             chap.
          
           10.
           
        
         
           2.
           
           If
           [
           
             by
             imposing
             by
             outward
             force
             ,
             any
             thing
             in
             the
             worship
             of
             God
          
           ]
           be
           meant
           of
           imposing
           on
           the
           conscience
           ,
           the
           same
           mistake
           is
           continued
           ,
           which
           I
           have
           before
           discovered
           :
           But
           if
           [
           
             by
             outward
             force
             imposing
             any
             thing
             in
             the
             worship
             of
             God
          
           ]
           be
           meant
           of
           [
           imposing
           by
           civil
           penalties
           on
           the
           outward
           man
           ,
           something
           in
           Gods
           worship
           ]
           there
           is
           need
           of
           much
           caution
           to
           determine
           of
           their
           power
           .
           Civil
           penalties
           are
           greater
           ,
           as
           death
           ,
           banishment
           ,
           mutilation
           ,
           imprisonment
           ,
           spoiling
           of
           estate
           ,
           liberty
           of
           trade
           ,
           &c.
           
           Or
           less
           ,
           as
           some
           small
           diminution
           of
           priviledges
           ,
           office
           ,
           &c.
           
           The
           things
           imposed
           on
           men
           may
           be
           either
           the
           commands
           ,
           or
           plain
           institutions
           of
           Christ
           ,
           or
           some
           things
           devised
           by
           men
           ,
           as
           Councils
           ,
           Fathers
           ,
           Prelates
           ,
           &c.
           
           And
           these
           impositions
           may
           be
           either
           in
           circumstances
           of
           time
           ,
           place
           ,
           order
           ,
           which
           are
           undetermined
           by
           Christ
           ,
           or
           in
           such
           points
           of
           doctrine
           or
           worship
           ,
           as
           are
           of
           greater
           moment
           ,
           and
           determined
           by
           Christ
           .
           The
           impositions
           may
           be
           such
           ,
           as
           are
           termed
           by
           the
           Apostle
           ,
           
             hay
             and
             stubble
          
           ,
           or
           such
           as
           overthrow
           the
           foundation
           which
           is
           laid
           ,
           
             which
             is
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             1
             Cor.
          
           3.
           11
           ,
           12.
           such
           as
           are
           impositions
           tending
           to
           Idolatry
           ,
           Superstition
           ,
           Profaneness
           ,
           heresies
           of
           perdition
           ,
           blasphemy
           .
           The
           imposition
           may
           be
           on
           Teachers
           or
           Learners
           ,
           stronger
           or
           weaker
           Christians
           ,
           to
           be
           subscribed
           to
           ,
           or
           taught
           ,
           or
           to
           be
           conformed
           to
           ,
           or
           professed
           ,
           and
           this
           to
           be
           done
           either
           by
           bare
           presence
           ,
           which
           infers
           no
           consent
           ,
           or
           by
           some
           act
           which
           shews
           consent
           .
           It
           cannot
           be
           denied
           ,
           but
           that
           Kings
           by
           reason
           of
           their
           errour
           and
           rigour
           ,
           have
           very
           sadly
           miscarried
           in
           their
           impositions
           on
           Christian
           brethren
           in
           matters
           of
           faith
           and
           worship
           ,
           there
           having
           been
           many
           mistakes
           in
           the
           best
           Councils
           ,
           Fathers
           ,
           Prelates
           and
           learned
           men
           ,
           since
           the
           Apostles
           days
           ,
           who
           have
           seldome
           been
           so
           equal
           ,
           as
           to
           permit
           those
           they
           have
           been
           prejudiced
           against
           ,
           to
           debate
           freely
           and
           fully
           what
           they
           hold
           ;
           nor
           are
           they
           heard
           with
           that
           equanimity
           ,
           which
           were
           requisite
           .
           And
           therefore
           Princes
           ,
           Parliaments
           ,
           Republiques
           ,
           have
           made
           many
           hard
           Laws
           ,
           and
           done
           innumerable
           unrighteous
           executions
           ,
           to
           shedding
           of
           much
           innocent
           blood
           ,
           and
           most
           heavy
           oppressions
           of
           men
           ,
           either
           guiltless
           ,
           or
           not
           deserving
           such
           severe
           penalties
           as
           they
           have
           indured
           .
           I
           think
           Kings
           and
           Parliaments
           who
           see
           not
           much
           with
           their
           own
           eyes
           ,
           but
           are
           fain
           to
           use
           the
           judgements
           of
           Learned
           men
           and
           Prelates
           ,
           who
           are
           often
           partial
           through
           prejudice
           or
           interest
           ,
           or
           not
           studied
           in
           the
           points
           about
           which
           they
           advice
           ,
           do
           often
           stand
           in
           a
           very
           slippery
           place
           ;
           and
           that
           Law-makers
           and
           Officers
           of
           justice
           have
           need
           of
           very
           much
           circumspection
           and
           tenderness
           ,
           ere
           they
           make
           penal
           Laws
           in
           matter
           ;
           of
           Religion
           ,
           that
           they
           should
           not
           make
           heresie
           by
           the
           determinations
           of
           any
           Councils
           since
           the
           Apostles
           days
           ,
           nor
           urge
           subscriptions
           and
           conformity
           under
           civil
           penalties
           ,
           but
           in
           things
           plainly
           set
           down
           in
           holy
           Scripture
           ,
           that
           so
           much
           liberty
           to
           dissents
           and
           different
           usages
           should
           be
           given
           ,
           as
           may
           stand
           with
           peace
           .
           Yet
           that
           Kings
           should
           use
           no
           civil
           penalties
           on
           men
           for
           any
           disorders
           or
           errours
           in
           any
           matters
           of
           saith
           or
           worship
           of
           God
           ,
           I
           am
           
           not
           yet
           convinced
           by
           any
           thing
           I
           have
           read
           ,
           much
           less
           by
           the
           Arguments
           of
           these
           Petitioners
           .
        
         
           Not
           by
           the
           first
           .
           For
           a
           King
           may
           do
           that
           which
           our
           Lord
           Christ
           in
           his
           state
           of
           humiliation
           would
           not
           do
           .
           
             He
             would
             not
             divide
             an
             inheritance
             among
             brethren
             ,
             Luke
          
           12.
           13
           ,
           14.
           and
           yet
           a
           king
           may
           do
           it
           .
           For
           though
           Christ
           was
           King
           in
           right
           ,
           yet
           he
           refused
           at
           that
           time
           to
           take
           upon
           him
           ,
           or
           to
           execute
           the
           office
           of
           a
           King
           ,
           but
           
             took
             upon
             him
             the
             form
             of
             a
             servant
             ,
             Phil.
          
           2.
           7.
           
           And
           therefore
           a
           King
           on
           his
           throne
           is
           not
           debarred
           from
           doing
           that
           which
           Christ
           would
           not
           do
           in
           his
           debasement
           .
           And
           yet
           even
           then
           the
           Lord
           Christ
           
             did
             whip
             the
             buyers
             and
             sellers
             out
             of
             the
             Temple
             ,
             and
             overthrew
             the
             tables
             of
             the
             money-changers
             ,
          
           John
           2.
           15
           ,
           16.
           
           Mat.
           21.
           12.
           
           I
           will
           not
           now
           dispute
           ,
           whether
           Christ
           did
           this
           
             jure
             zelotarum
          
           ,
           by
           the
           right
           that
           Zelots
           of
           the
           Law
           among
           the
           Jews
           ,
           claimed
           to
           themselves
           ;
           or
           
             jure
             Regio
          
           ,
           by
           the
           right
           of
           a
           King
           ,
           under
           which
           notion
           acclamation
           was
           made
           to
           him
           when
           he
           rode
           on
           an
           Ass
           into
           
             Jerusalem
             ,
             Luke
          
           19.
           38.
           after
           which
           he
           did
           expel
           the
           buyers
           and
           sellers
           out
           of
           the
           Temple
           ,
           ver
           .
           45.
           nor
           whether
           this
           be
           a
           good
           proof
           for
           Magistrates
           ,
           to
           intermeddle
           in
           matters
           of
           Religion
           ,
           as
           it
           hath
           been
           argued
           by
           Mr.
           Cobbet
           of
           
             New
             England
          
           .
           It
           is
           sufficient
           for
           my
           present
           purpose
           ,
           that
           the
           alledging
           of
           Christs
           example
           by
           these
           Petitioners
           ,
           is
           so
           far
           from
           making
           against
           the
           Kings
           power
           in
           Ecclesiastical
           causes
           ,
           that
           it
           rather
           makes
           for
           it
           .
           Nor
           is
           it
           against
           the
           Kings
           power
           in
           causes
           Ecclesiastical
           that
           the
           
             Lord
             Jesus
             himself
             ,
             nor
             his
             disciples
             ,
             never
             would
             by
             any
             outward
             force
             compel
             men
             to
             receive
             them
             or
             their
             doctrine
             .
          
           For
           ,
           besides
           what
           is
           already
           said
           of
           Christs
           example
           ,
           there
           is
           a
           great
           difference
           to
           be
           made
           between
           professed
           infidels
           ,
           and
           disorderly
           Christians
           ;
           between
           planting
           of
           the
           Gospel
           at
           first
           ,
           and
           resorming
           Christians
           who
           have
           in
           shew
           received
           it
           ,
           there
           may
           be
           reason
           to
           do
           the
           latter
           by
           civil
           penalties
           ,
           though
           not
           the
           former
           ,
           though
           men
           are
           not
           to
           be
           made
           Christians
           by
           civil
           penalties
           ,
           sith
           Religion
           is
           not
           to
           be
           inforced
           ,
           but
           perswaded
           ,
           yet
           being
           Christians
           they
           may
           be
           corrected
           by
           civil
           penalties
           .
           As
           the
           Apostle
           Paul
           ,
           though
           he
           said
           ,
           
             what
             have
             I
             to
             do
             to
             judge
             them
             that
             are
             without
             ?
             1
             Cor.
          
           5.
           12.
           yet
           did
           not
           exclude
           Ecclesiastical
           penalties
           on
           them
           that
           are
           within
           ;
           no
           more
           are
           they
           that
           are
           within
           ,
           freed
           from
           civil
           penalties
           in
           some
           things
           Ecclesiastical
           ,
           because
           they
           are
           within
           ,
           though
           perhaps
           they
           that
           are
           without
           ,
           are
           not
           to
           be
           compelled
           to
           come
           in
           .
           And
           yet
           it
           is
           not
           proved
           ,
           that
           a
           King
           may
           not
           use
           some
           civil
           penalties
           ,
           
           especially
           denying
           of
           favours
           and
           priviledges
           to
           them
           that
           embrace
           not
           the
           faith
           ,
           or
           rather
           ,
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           he
           ought
           so
           to
           put
           a
           difference
           between
           Christians
           and
           infidels
           ,
           godly
           Christians
           and
           profane
           loose
           ones
           ,
           that
           the
           former
           may
           have
           that
           encouragement
           and
           benefit
           ,
           which
           others
           have
           not
           ,
           according
           to
           Davids
           example
           ,
           Psal
           .
           101.
           which
           a
           King
           ought
           to
           follow
           .
        
         
           As
           for
           the
           speech
           of
           Christ
           ,
           Luke
           9.
           54
           ,
           55
           ,
           56.
           it
           serves
           much
           less
           for
           the
           Petitioners
           purpose
           .
        
         
           For
           1.
           
           The
           reason
           of
           the
           disciples
           desire
           of
           calling
           fire
           from
           heaven
           ,
           was
           not
           their
           not
           receiving
           them
           or
           their
           doctrine
           as
           Christian
           ,
           but
           as
           Jews
           .
           For
           the
           
             Samaritans
             did
             not
             receive
             Christ
             ,
             because
             his
             face
             was
             as
             though
             he
             would
             go
             to
             Jerusalem
             ,
          
           ver
           .
           53.
           which
           shews
           ,
           that
           their
           not
           receiving
           him
           ,
           was
           out
           of
           the
           hatred
           they
           bare
           to
           him
           as
           a
           Jew
           ,
           and
           to
           the
           worship
           which
           was
           at
           Jerusalem
           ,
           according
           to
           what
           we
           read
           of
           the
           
             Samaritans
             ,
             Joh.
          
           4.
           9
           ,
           20.
           
           &
           8.
           48.
           
           And
           therefore
           this
           is
           not
           to
           the
           present
           purpose
           of
           Christs
           denying
           power
           to
           the
           Civil
           Magistrate
           ,
           to
           inflict
           civil
           penalties
           on
           the
           non-receivers
           of
           his
           doctrine
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           The
           fact
           of
           the
           Samaritans
           was
           far
           different
           from
           the
           fact
           of
           the
           Captains
           that
           came
           to
           take
           
             Elijah
             ,
             2
             Kings
             1.
             chap.
          
           For
           they
           came
           to
           take
           Elijah
           to
           destroy
           him
           ,
           these
           only
           did
           not
           receive
           Christ
           ,
           those
           doubtless
           were
           worshippers
           of
           Baal
           ,
           and
           joyned
           with
           the
           King
           of
           Israel
           to
           uphold
           idolatry
           ,
           and
           to
           persecute
           the
           Prophets
           and
           Worshippers
           of
           the
           true
           God
           ,
           which
           made
           them
           more
           justly
           objects
           of
           wrath
           and
           Divine
           vengeance
           then
           the
           Samaritans
           were
           .
        
         
           3.
           
           That
           which
           the
           disciples
           would
           have
           had
           fall
           on
           the
           Samaritans
           ,
           was
           
             fire
             from
             heaven
             to
             destroy
             them
             ,
          
           which
           was
           too
           great
           a
           punishment
           for
           that
           neglect
           :
           But
           this
           doth
           not
           prove
           that
           a
           lesser
           and
           proportionable
           penalty
           ,
           may
           not
           be
           inflicted
           on
           some
           disorderly
           Christians
           by
           a
           Civil
           Magistrate
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           The
           disciples
           were
           but
           private
           persons
           ,
           and
           were
           carried
           with
           a
           private
           and
           selfish
           spirit
           ,
           even
           the
           desire
           of
           private
           revenge
           ,
           and
           therefore
           Christ
           rebukes
           them
           ,
           as
           not
           minding
           with
           what
           spirit
           they
           were
           moved
           ;
           which
           hinders
           not
           but
           that
           a
           publique
           Magistrate
           ,
           
             ex
             zelo
             justitiae
          
           ,
           with
           a
           publique
           spirit
           out
           of
           zeal
           of
           justice
           ,
           may
           inflict
           some
           proportionable
           civil
           penalties
           on
           Christians
           ,
           who
           are
           his
           subjects
           for
           some
           offences
           in
           spiritual
           or
           Ecclesiastical
           things
           or
           causes
           .
        
         
           But
           ,
           say
           the
           Petitioners
           ,
           
             2.
             
             If
             any
             men
             under
             heaven
             have
             had
          
           
           
             any
             such
             power
             in
             the
             dayes
             of
             the
             Gospel
             ,
             the
             Apostles
             and
             Elders
             in
             the
             Primitive
             times
             must
             needs
             have
             had
             it
             ,
             but
             this
             they
             disowned
             .
             The
             Apostle
          
           Paul
           in
           2
           Cor.
           1.
           24.
           
             saith
             thus
             ,
             Not
             for
             that
             we
             have
             dominion
             over
             your
             faith
             ,
             but
             are
             helpers
             of
             your
             joy
             ,
             for
             by
             faith
             you
             stand
             ;
             yea
             the
             Lord
             Jesus
             when
             they
             strove
             for
             Domination
             ,
             forbids
             it
             ,
             saying
             ,
             ye
             know
             that
             the
             Princes
             of
             the
             Gentiles
             exercise
             dominion
             over
             them
             ,
             and
             they
             that
             are
             great
             do
             exercise
             authority
             upon
             them
             ,
             but
             it
             shall
             not
             be
             so
             amongst
             you
             ,
          
           Mat.
           20.
           25
           ,
           26.
           
             even
             so
             saith
          
           Peter
           ,
           
             speaking
             to
             the
             Elders
             ,
             Feed
             the
             flock
             of
             God
             which
             is
             amongst
             you
             ,
             taking
             the
             oversight
             thereof
             ,
             not
             by
             constraint
             ,
             but
             willingly
             ;
             not
             for
             filthy
             lucre
             ,
             but
             of
             a
             ready
             mind
             ,
             neither
             as
             being
             Lords
             over
             Gods
             heritage
             ,
             but
             being
             examples
             to
             the
             flock
             ,
          
           1
           Pet.
           5.
           2
           ,
           3.
           
           
             And
             in
             truth
             the
             Apostles
             and
             disciples
             were
             not
             to
             use
             any
             external
             force
             to
             carry
             on
             their
             masters
             work
             ,
             but
             only
             by
             shewing
             the
             terrours
             of
             the
             Lord
             were
             to
             perswade
             men
             ;
             and
             in
             case
             of
             resistance
             to
             shake
             the
             dust
             from
             their
             feet
             ,
             as
             a
             witness
             against
             their
             opposers
             .
          
        
         
           Answ
           .
           1.
           
           To
           have
           dominion
           over
           our
           faith
           ,
           that
           is
           to
           appoint
           authoritatively
           what
           we
           shall
           believe
           ,
           what
           not
           ,
           so
           as
           that
           if
           we
           believe
           not
           ,
           we
           sin
           against
           God
           ,
           and
           are
           liable
           to
           his
           wrath
           ,
           is
           peculiar
           to
           Christ
           the
           great
           Prophet
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           Acts
           3.
           22
           ,
           23.
           
           To
           the
           Apostles
           themselves
           ,
           Christ
           said
           ,
           
             Mat.
             23.
             10.
             
             Neither
             be
             ye
             called
             Masters
             ,
             for
             one
             is
             your
             Master
             ,
             even
             Christ
             .
          
           Neither
           the
           Pope
           ,
           nor
           any
           Council
           of
           Bishops
           or
           Elders
           ,
           much
           less
           Kings
           and
           Parliaments
           (
           who
           take
           not
           upon
           them
           to
           be
           teachers
           in
           the
           Church
           )
           can
           prescribe
           to
           us
           our
           Creed
           ,
           or
           form
           of
           Worship
           of
           God
           ,
           any
           otherwise
           then
           Christ
           and
           his
           Apostles
           from
           him
           ,
           have
           delivered
           them
           to
           us
           .
           Nor
           doth
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ascribe
           to
           them
           such
           power
           and
           authority
           ,
           but
           it
           hath
           been
           disclaimed
           ,
           as
           is
           before
           shewed
           .
           Nevertheless
           Princes
           may
           require
           those
           under
           their
           Dominions
           ,
           to
           worship
           God
           in
           Christ
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           plain
           direction
           of
           the
           Scriptures
           of
           the
           new
           Testament
           ;
           and
           if
           they
           set
           up
           idols
           ;
           blaspheme
           the
           God
           of
           heaven
           ,
           &c.
           may
           inflict
           civil
           punishment
           ,
           they
           may
           forbid
           and
           punish
           the
           teaching
           of
           some
           doctrines
           ,
           tending
           to
           the
           reproach
           of
           Religion
           ,
           destructive
           of
           Christianity
           ,
           of
           Civil
           Government
           ,
           provided
           they
           be
           very
           wary
           ,
           that
           they
           do
           not
           judge
           by
           any
           other
           then
           the
           plain
           declarations
           of
           the
           holy
           Scripture
           ,
           and
           not
           by
           the
           authority
           of
           any
           Councils
           or
           Fathers
           ,
           sith
           as
           it
           is
           in
           the
           21.
           
           Article
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           
             England
             ,
             General
             Councils
             have
             erred
             and
             may
             erre
             ,
             in
             things
             pertaining
             to
             God
             ,
          
           and
           the
           punishment
           be
           so
           proportioned
           and
           qualified
           ,
           
           as
           may
           agree
           with
           justice
           ,
           equity
           ,
           prudence
           ,
           clemency
           ,
           and
           other
           vertues
           requisite
           in
           them
           that
           rule
           over
           others
           .
           Nor
           〈◊〉
           that
           which
           is
           here
           alledged
           ,
           of
           validity
           to
           disprove
           it
           .
           For
           1.
           
           
             It
             is
             not
             rightly
             supposed
             ,
             that
             Princes
             have
             not
             in
             the
             days
             of
             the
             Gospel
             ,
             a
             power
             in
             matters
             of
             Religion
             ,
             which
             the
             Apostles
             and
             Elders
             in
             the
             Primitive
             times
             ,
             had
             not
             .
          
           The
           contrary
           is
           proved
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             of
             the
             Oath
             of
             Supremacy
             ,
          
           in
           the
           confirmation
           of
           the
           4th
           .
           and
           5th
           .
           Propositions
           .
           The
           Apostles
           and
           Elders
           ,
           as
           messengers
           of
           Christ
           ,
           and
           Pastors
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           had
           their
           peculiar
           authority
           ,
           which
           Princes
           are
           not
           to
           usurp
           ;
           and
           Princes
           have
           their
           peculiar
           power
           and
           authority
           ,
           to
           which
           
             every
             soul
             is
             to
             be
             subject
             :
          
           neither
           have
           dominion
           over
           our
           faith
           ;
           and
           ,
           however
           Popes
           claim
           it
           ,
           our
           Princes
           disclaim
           it
           .
           2.
           
           The
           Text
           Mat.
           20.
           25
           ,
           26.
           is
           rightly
           urged
           by
           Protestants
           against
           the
           Popes
           usurpation
           ,
           as
           I
           shew
           in
           my
           
             Romanism
             discussed
             ,
             Art.
             7.
             
             Sect.
          
           8.
           but
           not
           rightly
           urged
           against
           Christians
           ,
           being
           civil
           Magistrates
           ,
           nor
           against
           Princes
           being
           governors
           over
           all
           persons
           in
           their
           dominions
           ,
           in
           spiritual
           things
           .
           That
           which
           is
           there
           forbidden
           ,
           is
           rule
           in
           the
           Apostles
           over
           one
           another
           ,
           after
           the
           manner
           of
           the
           Kings
           of
           the
           Nations
           .
           3.
           
           The
           Text
           ,
           1
           Pet.
           5.
           2
           ,
           3.
           is
           much
           less
           to
           the
           purpose
           ,
           it
           being
           only
           a
           precept
           to
           Teachers
           and
           Elders
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           concerning
           the
           exercise
           of
           their
           Ecclesiastical
           function
           ,
           nothing
           to
           the
           restraint
           of
           Princes
           from
           the
           exercise
           of
           their
           office
           ,
           in
           things
           and
           causes
           spiritual
           .
           4.
           
           The
           Apostles
           only
           perswading
           ,
           shewing
           the
           terrours
           of
           the
           Lord
           ,
           shaking
           off
           the
           dust
           of
           their
           feet
           ,
           are
           ill
           alledged
           to
           exclude
           Princes
           from
           their
           power
           of
           governing
           all
           persons
           in
           all
           causes
           .
           The
           Apostles
           and
           Elders
           did
           not
           bear
           the
           sword
           as
           Princes
           do
           .
           It
           would
           be
           of
           very
           bad
           consequence
           ,
           if
           in
           case
           of
           resistance
           they
           might
           do
           no
           more
           then
           the
           Apostles
           were
           to
           do
           in
           case
           their
           doctrine
           were
           received
           or
           opposed
           .
        
         
           
             It
             is
             added
             by
             the
             Petitioners
             ,
             thus
             .
          
           3.
           
           It
           is
           very
           plain
           ,
           that
           the
           Lord
           Jesus
           himself
           in
           his
           parable
           of
           the
           tares
           and
           wheat
           ,
           forbids
           any
           force
           to
           be
           exercised
           upon
           false
           worshippers
           ,
           as
           such
           ;
           for
           by
           the
           tares
           which
           he
           forbids
           the
           pulling
           up
           ,
           Mat.
           13.
           29.
           cannot
           be
           intended
           the
           transgressors
           of
           the
           second
           Table
           ,
           such
           as
           thieves
           ,
           murderers
           ,
           &c.
           because
           all
           confess
           with
           one
           consent
           ,
           that
           the
           Magistrates
           authority
           reaches
           such
           ,
           but
           those
           that
           Christ
           Jesus
           would
           have
           remain
           amongst
           his
           wheat
           ,
           in
           the
           field
           of
           the
           world
           ,
           are
           the
           children
           of
           the
           wicked
           one
           through
           Idolatry
           and
           will-worship
           ;
           this
           will
           further
           appear
           ,
           if
           the
           28
           ,
           29
           ,
           30.
           ver
           .
           be
           compared
           with
           the
           38
           ,
           39.
           of
           the
           
           same
           Chapter
           ;
           and
           the
           reason
           the
           Lord
           Jesus
           gives
           ,
           why
           both
           tares
           and
           wheat
           must
           grow
           together
           ,
           (
           O
           King
           ,
           that
           it
           were
           engraven
           with
           the
           point
           of
           a
           diamond
           ,
           and
           often
           laid
           before
           thee
           )
           is
           ,
           least
           in
           gathering
           up
           the
           tares
           ,
           the
           wheat
           also
           be
           rooted
           up
           with
           them
           .
        
         
           Answ
           .
           Parables
           are
           a
           way
           of
           teaching
           ,
           much
           used
           of
           old
           in
           the
           Eastern
           Countries
           ,
           as
           appears
           by
           
           Jotham's
           parable
           ,
           
             Judg.
             9.
             
             Nathans
          
           parable
           ,
           2
           Sam.
           12.
           and
           they
           are
           narrations
           of
           things
           perhaps
           never
           done
           ,
           yet
           related
           as
           if
           they
           had
           been
           so
           acted
           as
           they
           are
           told
           ,
           that
           by
           the
           resemblance
           ,
           the
           thing
           intended
           may
           more
           easily
           insinuate
           it self
           into
           the
           minds
           of
           the
           persons
           to
           be
           instructed
           by
           the
           parable
           .
           Now
           there
           are
           in
           such
           parables
           ,
           two
           parts
           ,
           the
           one
           the
           devised
           story
           ,
           the
           other
           the
           intended
           doctrine
           to
           be
           learnt
           by
           it
           ,
           which
           is
           sometimes
           opened
           ,
           as
           Mat.
           13.
           which
           we
           term
           the
           application
           or
           explication
           ,
           and
           sometimes
           left
           to
           be
           gathered
           by
           the
           auditors
           ,
           as
           Luke
           14.
           16
           ,
           &c.
           
           Luke
           15.
           11
           ,
           &c.
           and
           even
           Mat.
           13.
           31
           ,
           32
           ,
           33
           ,
           44
           ,
           45
           ,
           46.
           
           In
           the
           devised
           story
           are
           many
           things
           inserted
           ,
           as
           lace
           in
           a
           garment
           ,
           or
           carvings
           in
           a
           building
           ,
           or
           pictures
           in
           a
           Map
           ,
           which
           are
           only
           for
           comeliness
           in
           the
           speech
           ,
           more
           handsome
           dress
           of
           the
           speech
           ,
           or
           filling
           it
           up
           ,
           and
           yet
           are
           not
           doctrinal
           ,
           nor
           argumentative
           ,
           as
           from
           the
           parable
           ,
           Luke
           16.
           23
           ,
           24
           ,
           25.
           it
           would
           be
           vain
           to
           teach
           men
           ,
           that
           those
           in
           hell
           may
           see
           those
           in
           Abrahams
           bosome
           ,
           and
           speak
           one
           to
           another
           .
           And
           therefore
           it
           is
           a
           rule
           in
           Divinity
           ,
           that
           such
           symbolical
           expressions
           are
           not
           argumentative
           any
           further
           then
           their
           application
           ,
           explication
           or
           scope
           ,
           appears
           to
           be
           .
           Now
           the
           parable
           ,
           Mat.
           13.
           24
           ,
           25
           ,
           26
           ,
           27
           ,
           28
           ,
           29
           ,
           30.
           being
           distinctly
           opened
           by
           Christ
           ,
           from
           ver
           .
           36.
           to
           44.
           it
           is
           unsafe
           to
           conclude
           any
           more
           from
           it
           ,
           then
           Christ
           hath
           done
           in
           his
           explication
           .
           I
           know
           this
           passage
           ,
           Mat.
           13.
           29
           ,
           30.
           hath
           been
           much
           urged
           for
           the
           toleration
           of
           men
           ,
           corrupt
           in
           matters
           of
           faith
           and
           worship
           by
           the
           civil
           Magistrate
           ,
           without
           civil
           penalties
           ,
           specially
           such
           as
           are
           destructive
           of
           mens
           being
           .
           But
           ,
           what
           ever
           be
           said
           of
           the
           conclusion
           ,
           this
           Text
           serves
           not
           to
           the
           purpose
           .
           For
           1.
           
           It
           is
           no
           part
           of
           the
           application
           or
           explication
           ,
           ver
           .
           36.
           to
           ver
           .
           44.
           and
           therefore
           is
           to
           be
           counted
           only
           a
           filling
           up
           of
           the
           devised
           story
           ,
           and
           therefore
           not
           doctrinal
           or
           argumentative
           .
           2.
           
           There
           is
           no
           proof
           ,
           That
           by
           
             the
             children
             of
             the
             wicked
             one
             ,
          
           ver
           .
           38.
           are
           meant
           only
           Idolaters
           and
           wil-worshippers
           :
           Yea
           these
           reasons
           seem
           to
           prove
           that
           others
           are
           meant
           ,
           to
           wit
           ,
           wicked
           men
           ,
           who
           are
           transgressors
           of
           the
           second
           Table
           of
           the
           Law
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           first
           .
           1.
           
           That
           the
           children
           
           of
           the
           wicked
           one
           ,
           are
           ver
           .
           41.
           termed
           all
           scandals
           ,
           or
           
             things
             that
             do
             offend
             ,
             and
             them
             that
             do
             iniquity
             ,
             or
             that
             which
             is
             not
             agreeable
             to
             Gods
             Law.
          
           2.
           
           John
           8.
           44.
           1
           
           John
           3.
           10
           ,
           12.
           
             haters
             of
             their
             brethren
             ,
             and
             murderers
             and
             liars
             ,
          
           are
           termed
           
             children
             of
             the
             Devil
             ,
             or
             wicked
             One
             ,
          
           as
           well
           as
           Idolaters
           or
           will-worshippers
           .
           3.
           
           
             The
             children
             of
             the
             wicked
             One
          
           seem
           to
           be
           all
           sorts
           of
           men
           ,
           who
           are
           of
           Satans
           sowing
           .
           4.
           
           All
           those
           who
           are
           not
           
             children
             of
             the
             Kingdome
          
           ,
           but
           are
           
             to
             be
             cast
             into
             a
             furnace
             of
             fire
             .
          
           Ver.
           38.
           42.
           are
           termed
           tares
           ,
           and
           these
           are
           not
           only
           Idolaters
           ,
           will-worshippers
           ,
           heretiques
           ,
           but
           all
           other
           sorts
           of
           sinners
           ,
           such
           as
           are
           mentioned
           ,
           1
           Cor.
           6.
           9
           ,
           10.
           and
           elsewhere
           .
           Nor
           are
           the
           reasons
           valid
           ,
           here
           produced
           to
           the
           contrary
           .
           For
           1.
           
           It
           followes
           not
           thieves
           and
           murderers
           ,
           and
           others
           ,
           whom
           confessedly
           the
           authority
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           here
           reacheth
           ,
           are
           not
           here
           meant
           ,
           therefore
           not
           other
           transgressors
           of
           the
           second
           Table
           ,
           but
           Idolaters
           ,
           will-worshippers
           ,
           heretiques
           .
           2.
           
           Nor
           doth
           it
           follow
           ,
           Christ
           would
           not
           have
           thieves
           ,
           murderers
           ,
           and
           other
           transgressors
           of
           the
           second
           Table
           ,
           remain
           among
           the
           wheat
           ,
           but
           to
           be
           plucked
           up
           ;
           therefore
           they
           are
           not
           here
           meant
           by
           the
           tares
           ,
           but
           Idolaters
           and
           will-worshippers
           ,
           as
           if
           Christ
           would
           have
           all
           transgressors
           of
           the
           second
           Table
           plucked
           up
           ,
           none
           of
           the
           transgressors
           of
           the
           first
           ,
           which
           is
           all
           one
           ,
           as
           to
           say
           Christ
           would
           have
           all
           liars
           ,
           covetous
           ,
           unrighteous
           persons
           ,
           in
           any
           kind
           destroyed
           ,
           not
           any
           Witch
           ,
           Atheistical
           scoffer
           ,
           Blasphemer
           ,
           Idolater
           ,
           profane
           person
           .
           3.
           
           It
           is
           not
           proved
           ,
           that
           by
           the
           
             servants
             of
             the
             housholder
          
           ,
           are
           meant
           the
           civil
           Magistrate
           ,
           why
           not
           the
           Angels
           termed
           
             reapers
             ?
             ver
          
           .
           39.
           
           These
           Petitioners
           after
           make
           them
           the
           Apostles
           :
           will
           they
           have
           them
           to
           tolerate
           Idolaters
           in
           the
           Church
           ?
           4.
           
           Were
           it
           granted
           ,
           that
           here
           were
           meant
           only
           Idolaters
           ,
           will-worshippers
           ,
           heretiques
           ,
           how
           is
           it
           proved
           that
           this
           is
           a
           precept
           to
           civil
           Magistrates
           .
           There
           is
           no
           such
           precept
           in
           the
           application
           or
           explication
           of
           the
           parable
           ,
           and
           therefore
           it
           seems
           to
           me
           not
           to
           note
           the
           duty
           of
           the
           civil
           Magistrate
           ,
           but
           the
           event
           of
           Gods
           providence
           ,
           that
           God
           would
           permit
           the
           cohabitation
           of
           the
           wicked
           in
           the
           world
           ,
           with
           the
           just
           ,
           as
           is
           also
           taught
           in
           the
           parable
           of
           
             the
             net
             ,
             ver
          
           .
           47
           ,
           48
           ,
           49
           ,
           50.
           
           Not
           that
           Magistrates
           or
           Ministers
           should
           permit
           them
           ,
           and
           not
           by
           civil
           punishment
           or
           Ecclesiastical
           ,
           remove
           them
           out
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           the
           world
           .
           Lastly
           it
           follows
           not
           ,
           Magistrates
           may
           not
           destroy
           Idolaters
           ,
           will-worshippers
           ,
           therefore
           they
           may
           not
           inflict
           any
           civil
           punishment
           ,
           
             from
             the
          
           species
           
             to
             the
          
           genus
           ,
           
             negatively
             ,
             an
             argument
             concludes
             not
             .
          
        
         
         
           
             These
             Petitioners
             further
             tell
             us
          
           ,
           How
           sad
           it
           is
           to
           remember
           how
           in
           all
           ages
           since
           Christ
           ,
           very
           strange
           mistakes
           have
           been
           on
           this
           account
           ;
           the
           Lord
           of
           life
           himself
           was
           put
           to
           death
           for
           supposed
           blasphemie
           and
           wickedness
           ,
           and
           accused
           for
           being
           an
           enemy
           to
           
             Caesar
             ,
             Mat.
             26.
             65.
             
             John
          
           19.
           12.
           and
           this
           done
           unto
           him
           by
           a
           people
           that
           had
           the
           Law
           of
           God
           amongst
           them
           ,
           and
           were
           famous
           in
           the
           world
           for
           their
           earthly
           wisdom
           and
           knowledge
           .
           Stephen
           was
           stoned
           ,
           and
           James
           the
           Apostle
           killed
           with
           the
           sword
           ,
           supposed
           to
           be
           tares
           ,
           or
           the
           children
           of
           the
           wicked
           One
           ,
           when
           they
           were
           the
           pretious
           wheat
           of
           God
           ,
           
             Acts
             6.
             13
             ,
             14.
             and
          
           12.
           2.
           
           The
           Christians
           that
           suffered
           in
           the
           ten
           persecutions
           ,
           were
           they
           not
           accused
           of
           being
           pestilent
           fellows
           ,
           movers
           of
           sedition
           ,
           turners
           of
           the
           world
           upside
           down
           ,
           enemies
           to
           
             Caesar
             ,
             Acts
             24.
             5
             ,
             12.
             and
          
           17.
           6
           ,
           7.
           when
           the
           contrary
           was
           most
           true
           ,
           and
           they
           will
           be
           found
           to
           be
           the
           faithful
           martyrs
           of
           Jesus
           ?
           So
           in
           latter
           times
           many
           of
           those
           that
           have
           been
           put
           to
           death
           for
           heresie
           and
           blasphemy
           ,
           are
           by
           this
           age
           acknowledged
           to
           be
           the
           Saints
           of
           God.
           O
           King
           ,
           that
           our
           words
           might
           be
           acceptable
           to
           thee
           ,
           consider
           ,
           that
           neither
           thy Self
           nor
           Counsellors
           ,
           have
           the
           spirit
           of
           infallibility
           ;
           if
           the
           Apostles
           that
           had
           an
           extraordinary
           spirit
           of
           discerning
           ,
           must
           not
           pluck
           up
           the
           tares
           ,
           lest
           they
           root
           up
           the
           wheat
           also
           :
           how
           can
           any
           Prince
           on
           earth
           undertake
           a
           work
           so
           dangerous
           ?
           It
           is
           possible
           ,
           many
           of
           those
           that
           are
           counted
           false
           worshippers
           and
           hereticks
           ,
           in
           this
           day
           ,
           may
           (
           at
           the
           time
           when
           God
           shall
           judge
           the
           world
           in
           righteousness
           )
           be
           servants
           of
           the
           most
           high
           God.
           Remember
           ,
           we
           pray
           thee
           ,
           that
           those
           that
           lived
           in
           the
           days
           of
           the
           Lord
           Jesus
           ,
           accused
           their
           fathers
           for
           being
           guilty
           of
           the
           blood
           of
           the
           Prophets
           ,
           saying
           ,
           If
           we
           had
           been
           in
           the
           days
           of
           our
           Fathers
           ,
           we
           would
           not
           have
           been
           partakers
           with
           them
           in
           the
           blood
           of
           the
           Prophets
           ,
           Mat.
           23.
           29
           ,
           30.
           yet
           themselves
           killed
           the
           Lord
           of
           life
           .
           The
           Romish
           Church
           also
           saith
           ,
           if
           we
           had
           lived
           in
           the
           days
           of
           the
           heathen
           Emperors
           ,
           we
           would
           not
           have
           been
           partakers
           with
           them
           in
           the
           blood
           of
           the
           Christians
           ,
           yet
           puts
           to
           death
           many
           as
           righteous
           as
           they
           were
           :
           and
           now
           many
           of
           thy
           subjects
           in
           this
           Nation
           ,
           are
           ready
           to
           say
           ,
           If
           we
           had
           lived
           in
           the
           days
           of
           Queen
           Mary
           ,
           we
           would
           not
           have
           been
           guilty
           with
           our
           Fathers
           in
           the
           blood
           of
           those
           good
           men
           that
           then
           suffered
           ;
           yet
           such
           a
           spirit
           of
           persecution
           is
           now
           risen
           up
           ,
           as
           (
           if
           not
           restrained
           )
           will
           terminate
           in
           the
           blood
           of
           many
           good
           men
           ,
           and
           so
           bring
           down
           the
           wrath
           of
           God
           upon
           this
           generation
           ,
           and
           there
           will
           be
           no
           remedy
           .
        
         
           Answ
           I
           could
           eccho
           out
           all
           this
           after
           them
           ,
           were
           not
           this
           alledged
           as
           a
           ground
           of
           their
           denial
           of
           the
           taking
           the
           Oath
           of
           the
           
           Kings
           Supremacy
           .
           It
           is
           a
           good
           wish
           that
           the
           King
           would
           deeply
           consider
           and
           remember
           all
           this
           ;
           some
           acts
           of
           his
           give
           cause
           to
           think
           he
           doth
           ,
           and
           to
           hope
           he
           will
           remember
           it
           .
           I
           said
           somewhat
           to
           the
           same
           effect
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             of
             the
             Oath
             of
             the
             Kings
             Supremacy
             ,
          
           and
           such
           things
           as
           have
           lately
           hapned
           ,
           give
           still
           cause
           to
           inculcate
           this
           ,
           that
           his
           Majesty
           ,
           his
           Counsel
           ,
           and
           Ministers
           of
           justice
           ,
           have
           need
           of
           very
           much
           circumspection
           how
           they
           imprison
           ,
           and
           other
           ways
           punish
           men
           for
           their
           dissent
           from
           that
           which
           is
           established
           in
           matters
           of
           faith
           and
           worship
           ,
           sith
           this
           power
           of
           punishing
           for
           supposed
           heresies
           ,
           errours
           and
           schisms
           ,
           hath
           been
           so
           unhappily
           and
           unrighteously
           managed
           ,
           as
           gives
           cause
           to
           fear
           ,
           that
           it
           neither
           was
           ,
           nor
           will
           ,
           nor
           can
           be
           well
           used
           without
           destruction
           of
           many
           innocent
           persons
           .
           God
           forbid
           I
           should
           justifie
           any
           abuse
           ,
           or
           neglect
           according
           to
           my
           power
           and
           place
           ,
           the
           seeking
           of
           reformation
           .
           Nevertheless
           all
           this
           amounts
           not
           to
           a
           sufficient
           ground
           or
           reason
           ,
           to
           deny
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           in
           spirituals
           ,
           sith
           the
           like
           abuses
           happen
           in
           temporal
           things
           ,
           and
           yet
           these
           Petitioners
           deny
           not
           the
           promise
           ,
           yea
           and
           that
           indeed
           in
           words
           of
           swearing
           of
           obedience
           in
           temporal
           causes
           .
           We
           might
           make
           a
           Catalogue
           of
           
             Sauls
             ,
             Davids
             ,
             Solomons
          
           ,
           and
           others
           oppressions
           in
           temporal
           things
           ,
           shall
           we
           therefore
           deny
           their
           regal
           power
           in
           them
           ?
           no
           ,
           but
           acknowledge
           the
           power
           ,
           and
           oppose
           the
           abuse
           ;
           yet
           not
           by
           arms
           ,
           or
           other
           unpeaceable
           ways
           ,
           but
           by
           Petitions
           to
           the
           Rulers
           ,
           prayers
           to
           God
           ,
           patient
           suffering
           ,
           which
           are
           the
           weapons
           whereby
           Christians
           conquer
           .
           For
           which
           reason
           ,
           I
           except
           not
           against
           that
           which
           the
           Petitioners
           adde
           .
        
         
           
             4.
             
             To
             inflict
             temporal
             punishmemts
             upon
             any
             of
             us
             thy
             subjects
             ,
             for
             not
             conforming
             to
             thy
             decrees
             ,
             that
             restrain
             us
             from
             the
             worship
             that
             we
             know
             to
             be
             of
             God
             ;
             Is
             it
             not
             a
             breach
             of
             that
             royal
             law
             ,
             that
             commands
             thee
             ,
             that
             whatsoever
             ye
             would
             that
             men
             should
             do
             to
             you
             ,
             do
             you
             even
             so
             to
             them
             ,
             for
             this
             is
             the
             law
             and
             the
             Prophets
             ?
          
           Mat.
           7.
           12.
           
           
             And
             we
             would
             in
             all
             humility
             offer
             to
             thy
             consideration
             ,
             if
             thy
             soul
             were
             in
             our
             souls
             stead
             ,
             wouldest
             thou
             be
             satisfied
             with
             the
             same
             measure
             ,
             as
             is
             now
             dealt
             unto
             us
             ,
             when
             neither
             the
             God
             of
             heaven
             ,
             nor
             our
             own
             consciences
             condemn
             us
             of
             any
             evil
             intended
             against
             thy
             person
             or
             authority
             ?
             Nor
             can
             the
             greatest
             of
             our
             enemies
             make
             any
             due
             proof
             of
             any
             combination
             or
             plotting
             with
             any
             upon
             the
             face
             of
             the
             earth
             ,
             for
             the
             disturbance
             of
             the
             publique
             peace
             :
             And
             this
             we
             can
             with
             boldness
             say
             ,
             because
             we
             know
             our
             own
             innocency
             .
          
           Yet
           cannot
           this
           be
           a
           sufficient
           ground
           of
           denying
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           in
           spirituals
           ;
           
           nor
           is
           the
           proof
           of
           that
           Supremacy
           enervated
           by
           what
           follows
           .
        
         
           
             But
             whereas
             it
             is
             objected
             ,
             that
             the
             Kings
             of
          
           Israel
           and
           Judah
           ,
           
             under
             the
             old
             Testament
             ,
             had
             power
             in
             spiritual
             causes
             ,
             and
             did
             punish
             blasphemy
             and
             Idolatry
             ,
             which
             are
             crimes
             of
             the
             highest
             nature
             against
             God
             ,
             we
             confess
             they
             had
             such
             power
             ,
             which
             was
             given
             to
             them
             in
             plain
             precepts
             ,
             written
             in
             the
             law
             of
          
           Moses
           ;
           
             but
             the
             Gospel
             that
             we
             live
             under
             ,
             is
             another
             dispensation
             ,
             in
             which
             the
             Lord
             Jesus
             is
             the
             only
             Law-giver
             ,
             who
             doth
             not
             (
             as
          
           Moses
           
             )
             proceed
             against
             the
             transgressors
             of
             his
             precepts
             ,
             by
             external
             force
             and
             power
             ,
             to
             the
             destroying
             them
             in
             their
             bodies
             and
             estates
             in
             this
             life
             ,
             but
             in
             long
             suffering
             waits
             on
             men
             ,
             not
             willing
             they
             should
             perish
             ,
             but
             rather
             that
             they
             should
             repent
             and
             be
             saved
             ,
             2
             Thes
             .
             1.
             9.
             2
             
             Pet.
             3.
             9.
             
             Acts
             17.
             31.
             and
             when
             any
             continues
             in
             disobedience
             to
             the
             Gospel
             ,
             his
             punishment
             is
             eternal
             in
             the
             world
             to
             come
             .
             The
             Apostle
          
           Paul
           
             testifies
             of
             himself
             ,
             that
             he
             was
             a
             blasphemer
             and
             perescuter
             ,
             1
             Tim.
             1.
             20.
             
             And
             if
             the
             mind
             of
             God
             had
             been
             ,
             that
             he
             should
             have
             suffered
             death
             in
             that
             condition
             ,
             how
             should
             he
             have
             had
             repentance
             given
             him
             ,
             and
             been
             such
             a
             glorious
             instrument
             in
             the
             Church
             as
             he
             was
             ?
             Furthermore
             it
             is
             too
             well
             known
             ,
             that
             the
             Jews
             are
             the
             greatest
             blasphemers
             against
             our
             Lord
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             as
             are
             on
             the
             earth
             ;
             yet
             it
             is
             not
             the
             mind
             of
             the
             Lord
             they
             should
             be
             destroyed
             from
             the
             face
             of
             the
             earth
             ,
             for
             how
             then
             should
             the
             Scripture
             be
             fulfilled
             ,
             wherein
             God
             hath
             promised
             to
             call
             them
             ,
             and
             to
             make
             them
             the
             most
             glorious
             Nation
             of
             the
             world
             ?
             Oh
             how
             can
             they
             be
             converted
             ,
             if
             they
             be
             not
             permitted
             where
             the
             Gospel
             is
             preached
             ?
             We
             speak
             not
             this
             in
             favour
             of
             any
             blasphemy
             ,
             for
             our
             souls
             abhor
             it
             ;
             but
             because
             we
             would
             have
             the
             lives
             of
             men
             as
             precious
             in
             thy
             eyes
             ,
             O
             King
             ,
             as
             they
             are
             in
             the
             eyes
             of
             the
             righteous
             and
             most
             holy
             God.
             
          
        
         
           Answ
           .
           It
           is
           true
           ,
           that
           I
           alledged
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             of
             the
             Oath
             of
             the
             Kings
             Supremacy
             ,
          
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Kings
           of
           Israel
           in
           spirituals
           ,
           to
           prove
           the
           King
           to
           be
           Governor
           in
           spiritual
           causes
           ;
           I
           did
           not
           ,
           nor
           was
           it
           necessary
           I
           should
           assert
           the
           same
           power
           every
           way
           ,
           or
           the
           justice
           of
           proceeding
           now
           by
           the
           same
           Laws
           ,
           which
           were
           in
           many
           things
           appropriate
           to
           the
           policy
           of
           that
           Nation
           ,
           nor
           am
           I
           of
           opinion
           ,
           that
           the
           judicial
           laws
           of
           Moses
           ,
           bind
           us
           any
           farther
           then
           their
           common
           equity
           ,
           nor
           do
           I
           think
           it
           necessary
           we
           should
           fetch
           our
           Laws
           from
           them
           ,
           they
           being
           in
           many
           things
           fitted
           to
           the
           policy
           of
           that
           people
           ,
           which
           is
           different
           from
           ours
           .
           Nor
           do
           I
           deny
           ,
           that
           there
           is
           not
           the
           same
           reason
           of
           punishing
           some
           idolatry
           and
           blasphemy
           of
           professed
           Christians
           ,
           as
           
           was
           of
           punishing
           the
           idolatry
           and
           blasphemy
           of
           the
           Israelites
           ,
           in
           the
           worshipping
           of
           the
           golden
           Calf
           ,
           
             Baal
             ,
             Ashtaroth
             ,
             Molech
          
           ,
           there
           being
           such
           special
           warnings
           given
           them
           before
           ,
           such
           great
           things
           done
           by
           God
           for
           them
           ,
           as
           made
           their
           engagement
           greater
           ,
           and
           their
           revolt
           to
           other
           gods
           ,
           worse
           ,
           and
           more
           detestable
           then
           in
           other
           people
           ;
           and
           if
           it
           be
           true
           which
           Dr.
           
             John
             Burges
          
           in
           his
           
             rejoinder
             to
             the
             reply
             to
             Bishop
          
           Mortons
           
             defence
             of
             the
             three
             Ceremonies
             ,
             that
             the
             Popish
             idolatry
             is
             not
             so
             bad
             as
             the
             Israelites
             ,
          
           then
           there
           may
           be
           cause
           why
           that
           idolatry
           which
           the
           Papists
           use
           ,
           should
           not
           be
           punished
           with
           death
           ,
           though
           the
           worship
           of
           the
           golden
           Calf
           ,
           
             Baal
             ,
             Molech
          
           ,
           and
           such
           Idols
           were
           .
           And
           for
           some
           blasphemies
           against
           Christ
           ,
           as
           the
           Messiah
           or
           Son
           of
           God
           ,
           and
           some
           errours
           or
           heresies
           ,
           which
           under
           the
           name
           of
           blasphemies
           have
           been
           punished
           with
           death
           ,
           and
           perhaps
           by
           Laws
           in
           force
           are
           liable
           to
           the
           same
           punishments
           ,
           I
           dare
           not
           say
           that
           they
           are
           equally
           evil
           ,
           or
           to
           be
           punished
           as
           the
           blasphemy
           of
           the
           mungrel
           was
           ,
           Lev.
           24.
           14
           ,
           15
           ,
           16.
           
           Nor
           do
           I
           take
           upon
           me
           to
           justifie
           those
           Laws
           by
           which
           death
           is
           awarded
           to
           heretiques
           ,
           nor
           to
           avow
           the
           sentences
           that
           have
           been
           past
           against
           persons
           ,
           as
           heretiques
           ,
           because
           condemned
           by
           Canons
           of
           Councils
           .
           He
           that
           should
           now
           enact
           a
           law
           to
           put
           men
           to
           death
           for
           breaking
           the
           Sabbath
           ,
           because
           God
           did
           so
           appoint
           it
           ,
           Numb
           .
           15.
           35.
           in
           the
           case
           of
           him
           that
           gathered
           the
           sticks
           on
           the
           Sabbath
           day
           ;
           or
           should
           make
           a
           law
           ,
           that
           the
           father
           and
           mother
           of
           a
           stubborn
           son
           ,
           should
           bring
           him
           to
           the
           Elders
           of
           the
           City
           to
           be
           stoned
           to
           death
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           Deut.
           21.
           18
           ,
           19
           ,
           20
           ,
           21.
           should
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           said
           of
           Draco
           the
           
             Athenian
             ,
             write
             his
             laws
             in
             blood
             .
          
           I
           deny
           not
           but
           that
           in
           the
           New
           Testament
           ,
           punishments
           are
           put
           off
           to
           the
           last
           judgement
           ,
           that
           Christ
           hath
           told
           us
           ,
           Mark
           3.
           28.
           that
           
             all
             sins
             shall
             be
             forgiven
             to
             the
             sons
             of
             men
             ,
             and
             blasphemies
             wherewithsoever
             they
             shall
             blaspheme
             ,
             excepting
             that
             against
             the
             holy
             Ghost
             ,
          
           that
           John
           8.
           7
           ,
           8
           ,
           9
           ,
           10.
           
           Christ
           (
           if
           that
           story
           be
           genuine
           )
           would
           not
           condemn
           the
           woman
           taken
           in
           adultery
           ,
           but
           rather
           furthered
           her
           escape
           from
           stoning
           ,
           that
           
             the
             Gospel
             we
             live
             under
             is
             another
             dispensation
             ,
          
           as
           the
           Petitioners
           speak
           ,
           meaning
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           not
           so
           severe
           and
           rigid
           a
           Covenant
           ,
           as
           the
           Law
           was
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Law
             was
             given
             by
          
           Moses
           ,
           
             but
             grace
             and
             truth
             came
             by
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
          
           John
           1.
           17.
           
           And
           therefore
           I
           count
           them
           too
           severe
           beyond
           Christian
           moderation
           ,
           that
           inflict
           death
           ,
           imprisonment
           ,
           banishment
           for
           some
           errours
           termed
           heresies
           ,
           for
           
           non-conformity
           to
           some
           forms
           of
           worship
           ,
           for
           some
           conceived
           blasphemies
           :
           Some
           eminent
           Protestants
           
           have
           been
           censured
           as
           too
           cruel
           ,
           even
           by
           men
           of
           great
           understanding
           for
           their
           severity
           in
           these
           things
           .
           According
           to
           this
           determination
           ,
           a
           prevention
           may
           be
           made
           of
           destroying
           such
           a
           blasphemer
           as
           Paul
           or
           the
           Jews
           ,
           and
           yet
           the
           Kings
           Supremacy
           proved
           from
           the
           example
           of
           the
           Kings
           of
           Israel
           ,
           even
           in
           spirituals
           ,
           which
           may
           be
           exercised
           for
           publique
           peace
           ,
           and
           common
           good
           ,
           if
           good
           caution
           be
           used
           ,
           without
           such
           direful
           and
           cruel
           persecutions
           as
           have
           been
           .
           A
           fathers
           power
           may
           be
           proved
           from
           the
           Law
           ,
           Deut.
           21.
           18
           ,
           19
           ,
           20
           ,
           21.
           though
           that
           law
           stand
           not
           in
           force
           ,
           and
           so
           may
           the
           Kings
           power
           in
           causes
           Ecclesiastical
           be
           proved
           ,
           from
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Kings
           of
           Israel
           ,
           though
           it
           be
           denied
           ,
           that
           he
           is
           to
           punish
           Idolatry
           ,
           blasphemy
           ,
           heresie
           ,
           as
           they
           did
           ,
           or
           some
           would
           now
           have
           it
           once
           more
           say
           the
           Petitioners
           ;
        
         
           5.
           
           As
           it
           is
           no
           wayes
           lawful
           from
           the
           word
           of
           God
           ,
           for
           Christian
           Magistrates
           to
           destroy
           and
           root
           out
           the
           contrary
           minded
           in
           religious
           matters
           ,
           (
           although
           Idolaters
           )
           so
           such
           proceedings
           may
           many
           times
           prove
           inconsistent
           with
           the
           very
           being
           of
           nations
           ;
           for
           suppose
           any
           Nation
           were
           wholly
           heathenish
           idolaters
           ,
           and
           the
           word
           of
           God
           coming
           in
           amongst
           them
           ,
           should
           convert
           the
           chief
           Magistrates
           ,
           and
           twentieth
           part
           of
           the
           Nation
           more
           ;
           must
           he
           with
           that
           twentieth
           part
           destroy
           all
           the
           other
           nineteen
           ,
           if
           they
           will
           not
           be
           converted
           ,
           but
           continue
           in
           their
           heathenish
           Idolatry
           ?
           it
           cannot
           possibly
           be
           supposed
           warrantable
           .
        
         
           Answ
           .
           All
           this
           may
           be
           granted
           .
           The
           Spaniards
           practice
           in
           destroying
           the
           Americans
           ,
           is
           condemned
           by
           
             Bartholomew
             de
             Casa
          
           ,
           a
           Spanish
           Bishop
           ,
           their
           practises
           in
           their
           bloody
           Inquisition
           are
           abhorred
           by
           all
           sober
           people
           ,
           that
           are
           not
           made
           drunk
           with
           the
           wine
           of
           the
           whore
           of
           Babylons
           fornications
           ;
           few
           men
           of
           good
           temper
           and
           wisdome
           ,
           do
           allow
           making
           war
           to
           propagate
           Religion
           :
           the
           zeal
           of
           Princes
           and
           Bishops
           ,
           in
           persecuting
           Christians
           ,
           adjudged
           heretiques
           by
           them
           ,
           is
           censured
           as
           madness
           by
           well
           composed
           men
           .
           
             In
             the
             multitude
             of
             people
             is
             the
             Kings
             honour
             :
             but
             in
             the
             want
             of
             people
             is
             the
             destruction
             of
             the
             Prince
             ,
          
           Prov.
           14.
           28.
           
           
             Thou
             shalt
             not
             be
             joyned
             in
             burial
             ,
             because
             thou
             hast
             destroyed
             thy
             land
             ,
             and
             slain
             thy
             people
             ,
          
           Isa
           .
           14.
           20.
           
           Doubtless
           a
           Prince
           ought
           to
           be
           tender
           of
           his
           subjects
           ,
           as
           of
           his
           children
           ,
           and
           yet
           he
           may
           correct
           them
           ,
           and
           though
           he
           be
           not
           to
           destroy
           those
           that
           remain
           infidel-idolaters
           ,
           nor
           to
           force
           them
           to
           be
           Christians
           ,
           yet
           he
           may
           have
           a
           power
           to
           govern
           in
           things
           spiritual
           .
           And
           this
           if
           wisely
           and
           uprightly
           managed
           ,
           may
           be
           of
           great
           advantage
           to
           the
           Church
           of
           God
           ,
           and
           is
           not
           to
           be
           
           denied
           because
           he
           doth
           ,
           much
           less
           because
           he
           may
           ,
           or
           we
           are
           jealous
           he
           will
           abuse
           it
           .
           Thus
           much
           be
           said
           in
           answer
           to
           those
           Petitioners
           .
        
         
           
             Afore
             the
             first
             sheet
             of
             this
          
           Supplement
           
             was
             printed
             off
             ,
             I
             met
             with
             a
             little
             piece
             ,
             intituled
             ,
          
           A
           caution
           to
           the
           sons
           of
           Zion
           ,
           by
           Samuel
           Hodgkin
           ,
           
             in
             which
             he
             grants
             assertory
             oaths
             in
             judicial
             proceedings
             not
             to
             be
             forbidden
             by
             Christ
             ,
          
           Mat.
           5.
           34.
           
             because
             commanded
             in
             the
             law
             of
          
           Moses
           ,
           
             and
             overthrows
             the
             Quakers
             plea
             ,
             that
             no
             swearing
             is
             lawful
             ,
             yet
             denies
             any
             promissory
             oath
             lawful
             ,
             and
             therefore
             in
             that
             respect
             opposeth
             the
             oaths
             of
             Allegiance
             and
             Supremacy
             ,
             and
             saith
             he
             is
             imprisoned
             for
             that
             reason
             .
             In
             that
             book
             ,
             he
             first
             excepts
             against
             the
             definition
          
           Jeremiah
           Ives
           
             gave
             of
             a
          
           sacred
           oath
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           a
           bond
           by
           which
           a
           man
           binds
           his
           soul
           to
           the
           speaking
           of
           that
           which
           is
           in
           it self
           true
           ,
           or
           the
           doing
           of
           that
           which
           is
           in
           it self
           lawful
           ,
           unto
           which
           the
           living
           and
           true
           God
           is
           called
           to
           witness
           ,
           
             Numb
             .
             30.
             2.
             
             To
             which
          
           Samuel
           Hodgkin
           faith
           ,
           To
           this
           I
           answer
           ,
           That
           every
           sacred
           Oath
           by
           which
           God
           is
           called
           to
           witness
           to
           the
           truth
           of
           a
           thing
           ,
           or
           to
           the
           performance
           of
           a
           lawful
           thing
           ,
           is
           a
           bond
           whereby
           the
           soul
           is
           bound
           ,
           but
           every
           calling
           God
           to
           witness
           in
           lawful
           things
           ,
           is
           not
           an
           Oath
           .
           As
           appears
           thus
           ,
           if
           a
           bare
           calling
           God
           to
           witness
           ,
           be
           swearing
           by
           God
           ,
           then
           calling
           the
           heaven
           and
           earth
           to
           witness
           ,
           is
           swearing
           by
           heaven
           and
           earth
           ,
           for
           then
           Moses
           had
           sworn
           by
           creatures
           ,
           Deut.
           4.
           26.
           
           I
           call
           heaven
           and
           earth
           to
           witness
           against
           you
           this
           day
           ;
           And
           so
           likewise
           God
           himself
           ,
           in
           Deut.
           30.
           19.
           
           I
           call
           heaven
           and
           earth
           to
           record
           against
           you
           ,
           chap.
           31.
           28.
           
           But
           it
           was
           ever
           unlawful
           to
           swear
           by
           creatures
           ,
           therefore
           I
           conclude
           ,
           that
           a
           bare
           calling
           to
           witness
           ;
           is
           not
           swearing
           .
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           The
           conclusion
           is
           granted
           ,
           and
           yet
           the
           definition
           of
           
             Jeremiah
             Ives
          
           stands
           good
           ,
           who
           did
           not
           say
           ,
           that
           
             a
             bare
             calling
             to
             witness
             ,
             is
             swearing
             ,
          
           but
           
             calling
             God
             to
             witness
             to
             the
             speaking
             of
             that
             which
             is
             true
             .
          
           And
           this
           to
           be
           an
           oath
           is
           granted
           by
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           himself
           ,
           p.
           16.
           when
           he
           saith
           ,
           
             That
             calling
             God
             to
             witness
             is
             not
             swearing
             ;
             but
             when
             we
             read
             of
             the
             servants
             of
             the
             Lord
             swearing
             in
             Scripture
             ,
             we
             find
             that
             it
             was
             not
             only
             a
             bare
             calling
             God
             to
             witness
             ,
             but
             they
             swear
             by
             God
             ,
             that
             they
             did
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
             or
             that
             they
             would
             do
             such
             a
             thing
             .
          
           Now
           swearing
           by
           God
           at
           least
           in
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           can
           be
           no
           other
           then
           calling
           God
           to
           witness
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           that
           we
           speak
           ,
           and
           in
           promissory
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           our
           intention
           to
           perform
           what
           we
           say
           we
           will
           do
           .
           That
           which
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           saith
           ,
           
             Now
             to
             swear
             by
             the
             Lord
             ,
             is
             to
             say
             that
             they
             do
             
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
             or
             will
             do
             such
             a
             thing
             by
             the
             Lord
             ,
             as
             much
             as
             if
             they
             should
             say
             ,
             that
             the
             Lord
             do
             help
             them
             in
             what
             they
             do
             ,
             or
             that
             they
             do
             it
             by
             his
             assistance
             :
             And
             hence
             it
             comes
             to
             pass
             ,
             that
             it
             was
             unlawful
             for
             a
             man
             to
             swear
             by
             any
             creature
             ,
             because
             no
             creature
             can
             help
             him
             to
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
             or
             perform
             what
             he
             promised
             ;
             and
             hence
             it
             is
             that
             God
             took
             it
             ill
             when
             they
             did
             not
             speak
             truth
             ,
             because
             they
             did
             as
             much
             as
             say
             ,
             that
             God
             did
             help
             them
             to
             speak
             a
             lie
             ,
             and
             so
             they
             blasphemed
             the
             name
             of
             God
             in
             the
             highest
             nature
             ;
             and
             doubtless
             ,
             those
             that
             made
             the
             oath
             we
             have
             in
             our
             common
             Law
             ,
             did
             understand
             no
             less
             ,
             and
             therefore
             they
             charge
             the
             witness
             ,
             By
             the
             help
             of
             God
             to
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
          
           is
           a
           manifest
           mistake
           of
           the
           meaning
           of
           the
           phrase
           [
           
             to
             swear
             by
             the
             Lord
          
           ]
           which
           it
           seems
           he
           understands
           to
           signifie
           ,
           not
           only
           that
           he
           that
           swears
           calls
           God
           to
           be
           a
           witness
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           what
           he
           saith
           in
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           and
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           his
           intentions
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           saith
           in
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           but
           also
           ,
           that
           he
           calls
           God
           to
           witness
           ,
           that
           he
           speaks
           truth
           by
           his
           help
           ,
           or
           God
           helping
           him
           to
           speak
           truth
           in
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           and
           that
           his
           intention
           is
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           promiseth
           ,
           by
           Gods
           help
           or
           assistance
           .
           So
           that
           according
           to
           this
           mans
           conceits
           ,
           it
           is
           no
           swearing
           ,
           unless
           the
           person
           swearing
           do
           call
           God
           to
           be
           witness
           ,
           not
           only
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           his
           words
           and
           intentions
           ,
           but
           also
           of
           his
           acknowledging
           of
           Gods
           help
           in
           speaking
           truth
           in
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           and
           his
           expectation
           of
           Gods
           help
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           saith
           he
           will
           do
           in
           promissory
           ;
           which
           is
           a
           new
           and
           wild
           conceit
           .
           New
           ,
           for
           none
           ,
           as
           far
           as
           I
           know
           ,
           ever
           vented
           it
           before
           ;
           but
           all
           Writers
           that
           I
           have
           met
           with
           ,
           have
           made
           the
           calling
           of
           God
           to
           witness
           the
           truth
           of
           our
           speech
           in
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           and
           of
           our
           intentions
           to
           perform
           ,
           what
           we
           say
           in
           promissory
           ,
           without
           this
           addition
           of
           acknowledging
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           by
           Gods
           help
           we
           speak
           truth
           ,
           or
           of
           expectation
           of
           help
           from
           God
           to
           do
           ,
           what
           we
           promise
           ,
           to
           be
           swearing
           .
           And
           it
           is
           a
           wild
           conceit
           .
           For
           1.
           
           It
           is
           frivolous
           to
           call
           God
           to
           witness
           ,
           that
           he
           speaks
           truth
           by
           his
           help
           ,
           or
           that
           he
           expects
           his
           help
           to
           do
           what
           he
           promiseth
           ,
           it
           being
           impertinent
           to
           the
           occasion
           and
           end
           of
           swearing
           ;
           the
           occasion
           of
           swearing
           being
           some
           uncertainty
           of
           the
           truth
           of
           his
           words
           and
           intentions
           ,
           and
           the
           end
           to
           take
           away
           that
           ,
           there
           is
           no
           question
           or
           controversie
           to
           be
           decided
           by
           whose
           help
           he
           speaks
           truth
           ,
           nor
           by
           whose
           help
           he
           expects
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           promiseth
           .
           Every
           man
           knowes
           ,
           that
           what
           is
           spoken
           or
           done
           ,
           is
           by
           Gods
           help
           ,
           else
           it
           could
           not
           be
           ;
           but
           whether
           it
           be
           certainly
           
           true
           which
           he
           affirms
           ,
           and
           his
           intentions
           true
           and
           real
           to
           perform
           ,
           the
           consideration
           by
           whose
           help
           he
           speaks
           ,
           or
           expects
           to
           do
           what
           he
           promiseth
           ,
           is
           not
           at
           all
           required
           or
           minded
           by
           the
           exactor
           of
           the
           oath
           ,
           as
           belonging
           to
           the
           oath
           ,
           but
           the
           acknowledging
           that
           he
           speaks
           truth
           by
           Gods
           help
           ,
           is
           only
           a
           duty
           of
           thankfulness
           ,
           which
           is
           fittest
           to
           be
           done
           by
           the
           person
           swearing
           after
           the
           oath
           is
           taken
           ,
           and
           the
           expectation
           of
           help
           from
           God
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           promises
           ,
           is
           a
           duty
           of
           trust
           in
           God
           ,
           or
           dependance
           on
           him
           to
           be
           done
           after
           the
           swearing
           .
           2.
           
           If
           this
           were
           necessary
           to
           an
           oath
           ,
           then
           he
           were
           forsworn
           or
           unsworn
           ,
           that
           did
           not
           acknowledge
           ,
           that
           he
           spake
           truth
           by
           Gods
           help
           ,
           or
           did
           not
           depend
           on
           Gods
           help
           for
           performance
           of
           what
           he
           promised
           ,
           and
           all
           infidels
           ,
           hypocrites
           ,
           Saints
           that
           neglect
           their
           duty
           herein
           ,
           let
           their
           words
           or
           intentions
           be
           never
           so
           true
           ,
           and
           their
           performance
           never
           so
           punctual
           and
           exact
           ,
           should
           be
           perjured
           or
           unsworn
           .
           That
           which
           he
           alledgeth
           for
           this
           conceit
           ,
           is
           frivolous
           .
           For
           the
           
             unlawfulness
             of
             swearing
             by
             any
             creature
             ,
             is
             not
             ,
             because
             no
             creature
             can
             help
             him
             that
             swears
             to
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
             or
             perform
             what
             he
             promised
          
           ;
           he
           that
           informs
           him
           of
           the
           truth
           ,
           may
           help
           the
           swearer
           to
           speak
           truth
           ,
           though
           he
           be
           a
           creature
           ,
           and
           he
           that
           will
           aid
           him
           with
           money
           ,
           &c.
           may
           help
           him
           to
           perform
           what
           he
           promised
           ;
           but
           because
           God
           only
           is
           a
           witness
           of
           secret
           truths
           ,
           and
           sincerity
           of
           intentions
           ,
           and
           can
           only
           be
           his
           judge
           and
           avenger
           if
           he
           speak
           not
           truth
           ,
           and
           therefore
           more
           fully
           oaths
           are
           expressed
           in
           such
           forms
           as
           these
           ,
           God
           be
           my
           judge
           ,
           witness
           ,
           helper
           ,
           &c.
           
           Nor
           is
           the
           reason
           ,
           why
           
             God
             takes
             it
             ill
             that
             men
             swear
             falsly
             by
             his
             name
             ,
             because
             it
             is
             as
             much
             as
             to
             say
             ,
             that
             God
             did
             help
             them
             to
             speak
             a
             lie
             ,
          
           for
           then
           in
           promissory
           oaths
           when
           they
           swearby
           God
           ,
           he
           should
           take
           it
           ill
           if
           they
           do
           not
           perform
           their
           promise
           ,
           because
           it
           is
           as
           much
           as
           to
           say
           ,
           that
           God
           helps
           them
           to
           neglect
           their
           promise
           ;
           which
           is
           a
           sense
           no
           swearer
           imagins
           his
           words
           bear
           ,
           nor
           any
           reprover
           of
           perjury
           ,
           did
           ever
           give
           as
           the
           reason
           of
           the
           iniquity
           of
           the
           breaker
           of
           his
           oath
           :
           but
           because
           he
           by
           false
           swearing
           shews
           he
           either
           believes
           not
           ,
           or
           fears
           not
           Gods
           discovery
           ,
           or
           avenging
           of
           his
           deceit
           .
           In
           the
           form
           of
           swearing
           in
           our
           common
           Law
           ,
           
             So
             help
             me
             God
          
           ,
           the
           words
           are
           not
           in
           the
           Indicative
           Mood
           ,
           as
           if
           it
           were
           God
           doth
           help
           me
           ,
           or
           will
           help
           me
           ,
           but
           
             ita
             me
             Deus
             adiuvet
          
           in
           the
           Imperative
           or
           Potential
           ,
           let
           God
           help
           me
           ,
           may
           God
           help
           me
           ,
           I
           pray
           or
           wish
           God
           may
           help
           me
           ,
           or
           not
           according
           as
           I
           speak
           ,
           truly
           or
           otherwise
           ,
           nor
           is
           the
           charge
           given
           
           by
           the
           giver
           of
           the
           oath
           to
           the
           witness
           ,
           by
           the
           help
           of
           God
           to
           speak
           truth
           ,
           but
           he
           requires
           him
           to
           speak
           truth
           ,
           as
           he
           expects
           help
           from
           God
           in
           other
           things
           ,
           as
           his
           salvation
           ,
           &c.
           
           When
           the
           swearer
           speaketh
           the
           words
           ,
           it
           is
           his
           pawning
           his
           help
           he
           expects
           from
           God
           ,
           as
           a
           voucher
           that
           he
           speaks
           truth
           ;
           not
           an
           acknowledging
           he
           speaks
           truth
           by
           Gods
           helping
           him
           only
           in
           that
           act
           of
           speaking
           .
        
         
           As
           for
           what
           he
           alledgeth
           out
           of
           Deut.
           4.
           26.
           and
           30.
           13.
           and
           31.
           28.
           to
           prove
           that
           
             all
             calling
             to
             witness
             is
             not
             swearing
             ,
          
           it
           is
           granted
           him
           .
           I
           easily
           yield
           ,
           that
           men
           and
           inanimate
           things
           may
           be
           taken
           to
           witness
           without
           swearing
           ,
           as
           
             Gen.
             31.
             48.
             
             Josh
          
           .
           22.
           34.
           
           But
           nevertheless
           calling
           God
           to
           witness
           that
           we
           speak
           truth
           ,
           or
           intend
           as
           we
           speak
           is
           swearing
           :
           Even
           as
           though
           such
           rhetorical
           speeches
           as
           are
           used
           ,
           
             Isa
             .
             1.
             2.
             
             Jer.
          
           22.
           29
           ,
           &c.
           are
           not
           prayers
           ;
           or
           invitations
           to
           hear
           ,
           yet
           the
           words
           of
           
             Solomon
             ,
             1
             Kin.
          
           8.
           28
           ,
           30.
           are
           prayer
           ,
           so
           though
           it
           be
           not
           swearing
           which
           is
           used
           ,
           Deut.
           30.
           19.
           yet
           it
           is
           swearing
           which
           is
           used
           ,
           2
           Cor
           ,
           1.
           23.
           
        
         
           
             Another
             thing
             which
          
           Samuel
           Hodgkin
           
             affirms
             ,
             is
          
           ,
           That
           all
           promissory
           oaths
           are
           forbidden
           by
           Christ
           ,
           Mat.
           5.
           34.
           
           Jam.
           5.
           12.
           he
           grants
           assertory
           oaths
           not
           forbidden
           ,
           because
           they
           were
           commanded
           in
           the
           old
           Testament
           ,
           Exod.
           22.
           11.
           but
           denies
           promissory
           oaths
           to
           be
           lawful
           ,
           because
           they
           are
           voluntary
           ,
           and
           the
           occasion
           of
           the
           precept
           was
           about
           voluntary
           oaths
           ,
           ver
           .
           33.
           and
           therefore
           they
           are
           wholly
           forbidden
           ,
           but
           not
           assertory
           .
           Whence
           he
           infers
           ,
           that
           the
           Oaths
           of
           Allegiance
           and
           Supremacy
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           they
           are
           promissory
           are
           forbidden
           .
        
         
           Concerning
           this
           opinion
           ,
           I
           deny
           not
           ,
           but
           that
           there
           are
           learned
           men
           that
           conceive
           ,
           that
           promissory
           oaths
           of
           secular
           matters
           ,
           especially
           of
           small
           moment
           ,
           are
           forbidden
           ,
           because
           of
           the
           occasion
           ,
           ver
           .
           33.
           of
           the
           prohibition
           ,
           Mat.
           5.
           34.
           
           But
           if
           promissory
           oaths
           be
           forbidden
           universally
           ,
           then
           the
           promissory
           oaths
           to
           the
           Lord
           are
           forbidden
           ,
           and
           not
           only
           oaths
           of
           secular
           matters
           between
           man
           and
           man.
           And
           if
           all
           promissory
           oaths
           be
           forbidden
           ,
           the
           swearing
           according
           to
           our
           common
           Law
           ,
           not
           excepted
           against
           by
           
             S.
             H.
          
           should
           be
           unlawful
           .
           For
           thus
           usually
           is
           the
           witness
           sworn
           ,
           
             You
             shall
             make
             true
             answer
             to
             such
             questions
             as
             shall
             be
             demanded
             of
             you
             :
             You
             shall
             speak
             the
             truth
             ,
             the
             whole
             truth
             ,
             nothing
             but
             the
             truth
             .
          
           The
           Jury
           thus
           ,
           
             You
             shall
             well
             and
             truly
             trie
             ,
             and
             true
             deliverance
             make
          
           ;
           All
           which
           are
           requiring
           of
           a
           promise
           ;
           and
           so
           exacting
           a
           promissory
           oath
           .
           But
           that
           promissory
           oaths
           are
           not
           universally
           forbidden
           ,
           I
           
           prove
           ,
           1.
           
           From
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           where
           the
           Apostle
           urgeth
           the
           Thessalonians
           thus
           ,
           I
           
             adjure
             you
             by
             the
             Lord
             ,
             that
             this
             Epistle
             be
             read
             to
             all
             the
             holy
             brethren
             .
          
           That
           this
           passage
           contains
           urging
           by
           oath
           ,
           hath
           been
           proved
           before
           in
           my
           
             Serious
             Consideration
             of
             the
             Oath
             of
             the
             Kings
             Supremacy
             ,
          
           and
           in
           this
           Supplement
           in
           my
           Reply
           to
           
             Richard
             Hubberthorn
          
           and
           
             Samuel
             Fisher
          
           .
           But
           this
           oath
           which
           he
           urgeth
           on
           them
           ,
           was
           promissory
           ,
           it
           being
           of
           a
           thing
           to
           be
           done
           by
           them
           ,
           to
           wit
           ,
           
             the
             reading
             of
             that
             Epistle
             to
             all
             the
             holy
             brethren
             .
          
           Whence
           I
           argue
           ,
           That
           sort
           of
           oath
           by
           which
           Paul
           adjured
           ,
           bound
           ,
           or
           urged
           the
           Thessalonians
           ,
           was
           lawful
           ,
           else
           the
           Apostle
           would
           not
           have
           urged
           it
           ,
           or
           them
           by
           it
           .
           But
           Paul
           adjured
           ,
           bound
           by
           ,
           or
           urged
           the
           Thessalonians
           by
           a
           promissory
           oath
           ,
           therefore
           a
           promissory
           oath
           is
           lawful
           in
           the
           new
           Testament
           .
        
         
           That
           which
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           saith
           ,
           That
           
             the
             Text
             speaks
             not
             a
             word
             of
             swearing
             ,
          
           is
           not
           true
           ,
           the
           word
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           signifies
           I
           adjure
           ,
           or
           
             urge
             you
             by
             oath
          
           ,
           it
           is
           the
           same
           word
           that
           is
           used
           ,
           Mat.
           26.
           63.
           which
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           himself
           ,
           p.
           5.
           denies
           not
           to
           have
           been
           
             a
             charging
             Christ
             to
             swear
             by
             the
             living
             God
             ,
          
           saving
           that
           Mat.
           26.
           63.
           it
           is
           the
           compound
           Verb
           ,
           but
           1
           Thes
           .
           5.
           27.
           the
           simple
           .
        
         
           
             But
             saith
          
           Samuel
           Hodgkin
           ,
           were
           it
           not
           more
           reasonable
           to
           think
           ,
           that
           if
           the
           Thessalonians
           did
           value
           Pauls
           charge
           ,
           they
           would
           as
           soon
           have
           read
           this
           Epistle
           without
           swearing
           ,
           as
           to
           be
           sworn
           to
           read
           it
           ?
           for
           doubtless
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           not
           valued
           his
           charging
           them
           to
           read
           it
           ,
           they
           would
           not
           have
           valued
           his
           charging
           them
           to
           swear
           to
           read
           it
           .
        
         
           I
           reply
           ,
           Whether
           the
           Thessalonians
           did
           value
           Pauls
           charge
           or
           no
           ,
           cannot
           be
           determined
           by
           us
           ,
           but
           this
           we
           know
           ,
           that
           adjuring
           or
           urging
           by
           oath
           ,
           being
           a
           stricter
           bond
           ,
           then
           urging
           to
           promise
           ,
           or
           requiring
           without
           an
           oath
           ,
           it
           may
           well
           be
           conceived
           ,
           that
           the
           Apostle
           had
           reason
           to
           charge
           them
           by
           oath
           ,
           and
           not
           barely
           to
           charge
           them
           without
           it
           .
        
         
           2.
           
           I
           urge
           that
           passage
           ,
           
             Heb.
             6.
             16.
             
             An
             oath
             for
             confirmation
             ,
             is
             to
             men
             an
             end
             of
             all
             strife
             ,
          
           of
           which
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
             ,
             p.
          
           8.
           grants
           ,
           
             that
             it
             contains
             the
             end
             of
             oaths
             commanded
             ,
          
           and
           so
           cannot
           in
           reason
           deny
           ,
           that
           those
           oaths
           which
           are
           there
           meant
           ,
           having
           the
           end
           of
           swearing
           are
           lawful
           .
           But
           that
           passage
           speaks
           of
           the
           end
           of
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           (
           for
           such
           was
           Gods
           oath
           ,
           of
           which
           the
           Apostle
           there
           speaks
           ,
           ver
           .
           14.
           15
           ,
           17.
           )
           and
           therefore
           they
           have
           the
           end
           of
           swearing
           to
           take
           away
           strife
           or
           contradiction
           ,
           or
           doubt
           concerning
           mens
           intentions
           and
           purposes
           one
           to
           another
           ,
           and
           so
           are
           for
           a
           necessary
           use
           ,
           and
           consequently
           ,
           lawful
           .
        
         
         
           3.
           
           The
           Angels
           swearing
           ,
           
             Rev.
             10.
             6.
             that
             there
             should
             be
             time
             no
             longer
             ,
          
           was
           of
           a
           thing
           future
           ,
           and
           therefore
           to
           be
           reduced
           to
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           if
           the
           division
           of
           oaths
           into
           assertory
           and
           promissory
           be
           full
           ,
           it
           cannot
           be
           reduced
           to
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           therefore
           it
           must
           be
           reduced
           to
           promissory
           ,
           and
           therefore
           promissory
           oaths
           are
           not
           wholly
           forbidden
           .
        
         
           4.
           
           That
           which
           the
           Psalmist
           makes
           a
           property
           of
           one
           that
           was
           to
           dwell
           in
           Gods
           holy
           hill
           ,
           Psal
           .
           15.
           was
           moral
           ,
           and
           so
           not
           unlawful
           ,
           as
           abrogated
           in
           the
           new
           Testament
           ,
           but
           when
           he
           saith
           ,
           a
           person
           making
           a
           promissory
           oath
           is
           not
           to
           change
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           not
           to
           neglect
           to
           keep
           it
           ,
           
             though
             it
             be
             to
             his
             own
             hurt
             ,
          
           he
           allows
           a
           promissory
           oath
           ,
           as
           in
           some
           cases
           lawful
           .
        
         
           5.
           
           Add
           hereto
           ,
           that
           a
           promissory
           oath
           if
           unlawful
           ,
           is
           so
           ,
           either
           because
           it
           is
           swearing
           ,
           and
           then
           all
           swearing
           should
           be
           unlawful
           ,
           contrary
           to
           the
           grant
           concerning
           assertory
           oaths
           ,
           by
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           ,
           if
           as
           promissory
           ,
           then
           all
           promises
           should
           be
           unlawful
           ,
           and
           so
           all
           civil
           contracts
           unlawful
           ,
           marriage
           ,
           covenants
           ,
           &c.
           
        
         
           6.
           
           If
           no
           promissory
           oaths
           be
           lawful
           to
           a
           Christian
           ,
           then
           a
           Christian
           Prince
           may
           not
           confirm
           a
           league
           with
           another
           Prince
           or
           State
           ,
           nor
           any
           Magistrates
           ,
           Officers
           of
           Justice
           ,
           take
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           no
           Souldiers
           ,
           no
           Trustees
           ,
           Secretaries
           ,
           &c.
           are
           to
           make
           promissory
           oaths
           of
           faithfulness
           ,
           which
           would
           expose
           all
           affairs
           of
           government
           and
           trust
           ,
           to
           such
           hazard
           and
           uncertainty
           ,
           as
           would
           take
           away
           ,
           as
           things
           and
           men
           are
           ,
           much
           of
           that
           security
           men
           have
           in
           their
           affairs
           ,
           and
           hasten
           the
           ruine
           of
           States
           .
        
         
           That
           which
           
             Samuel
             Hodgkin
          
           saith
           ,
           that
           
             there
             is
             no
             command
             for
             promissory
             oaths
             ,
          
           is
           said
           without
           proof
           .
           For
           the
           precepts
           ,
           Deut.
           6.
           13.
           
           
             Deut.
             10.
             20.
             
             Jer.
          
           4.
           2.
           do
           include
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           assertory
           .
           As
           there
           is
           no
           difference
           made
           in
           the
           Text
           ,
           so
           there
           is
           as
           much
           if
           not
           more
           likelihood
           ,
           that
           promissory
           oaths
           should
           be
           chiefly
           meant
           ,
           because
           the
           oaths
           of
           which
           we
           have
           examples
           in
           the
           old
           Testament
           ,
           are
           most
           of
           them
           promissory
           .
        
         
           'T
           is
           true
           ,
           Mat.
           5.
           33.
           speaks
           of
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           but
           that
           the
           prohibition
           ,
           ver
           .
           34.
           is
           limited
           to
           promissory
           ,
           as
           forbidding
           them
           only
           ,
           and
           not
           assertory
           ,
           or
           forbidding
           promissory
           oaths
           universally
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           allow
           none
           of
           that
           sort
           ,
           is
           said
           without
           proof
           ,
           and
           there
           is
           this
           in
           the
           text
           to
           shew
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           meant
           not
           of
           those
           promissory
           oaths
           ,
           which
           are
           meant
           ,
           ver
           .
           33.
           to
           wit
           ,
           special
           vows
           to
           God
           ;
           but
           of
           other
           oaths
           ,
           whether
           promissory
           or
           assertory
           ,
           which
           
           are
           in
           our
           ordinary
           speech
           ,
           1.
           
           That
           the
           forms
           of
           oaths
           ,
           
             by
             the
             heaven
             ,
             by
             the
             earth
             ,
             by
             Jerusalem
             ,
             by
             the
             head
             ,
          
           there
           expressed
           ,
           are
           not
           used
           in
           special
           vowes
           ,
           but
           in
           common
           speech
           of
           one
           man
           with
           another
           ,
           and
           most
           likely
           in
           customary
           ,
           light
           ,
           needless
           ,
           passionate
           swearing
           .
           2.
           
           The
           expression
           [
           
             let
             your
             communication
             or
             speech
          
           ]
           notes
           their
           conference
           one
           with
           another
           .
           3.
           
           And
           so
           do
           the
           terms
           ,
           
             yea
             and
             nay
          
           ,
           which
           are
           used
           most
           fitly
           in
           colloquies
           or
           speeches
           ,
           wherein
           one
           answers
           another
           .
        
         
           FINIS
           .