QUERIES OF SOME TENDER Conscienced CHRISTIANS.  
About the late Protestation, commended to them by the House of Commons, now Assembled in the High and Honourable Court of Parliament,  
Wherein they desire to be resolved, Concerning 

1. The Authority imposing it.  
2. The necessity of it.  
3. The danger of it.  
4. Whether it can be taken in Faith.    
As also Certain Queries concerning the Ambiguity thereof, appearing in most, if not in all the several Branches thereof.  
Together with a Form of such an interpretation of it, as may safely be taken, and doth not go against the literal Sense.  
Written by a Learned Divine.  
Printed 1642.   

The Queries of certain tender-Conscienced Christians, concerning the late Protestation, commended to them by the House of Commons, now Assembled in the High and Honourable Court of Parliament wherein they humbly crave a clear satisfaction from their abler brethren, that they may take it with a well grounded and cheerful Conscience.  
FIrst, as concerning the Authority of it, whether it comes sufficiently authorised to be imposed upon any, unless by the joint consent of his sacred Majesty, and both Houses of that High and Honourable Court both Head and Members; We do not hereby intent to charge any with the guilt of combination against Authority, but in the tenderness of our consciences, humbly to signify our just scruples about the authority imposing it, and the contents of it; if it be said, it is not to be imposed on any, than we hope none can justly blame us; for using our lawful liberty, and refusal of that, which is not imposed on us.  
Secondly, concerning the Necessity of it; what need is there of urging or taking a Protestation at this time; since Oaths, sacred Bonds, are not to be taken without urgent necessity, unless we will take the Name of God in Vain: and though the prudence of the contrivers may see a necessity to commend it, yet it is no wonder if such silly ones as we, see not the necessity of taking it, until they shall be pleased to impart their reasons. The conscientious will hold themselves bound to maintain the Doctrine established, power of Parliaments, and liberty of Subjects without it, all others will slight it: we think in all humility love a stronger bond than compulsion, and other means more effectual for holding out of Popery, namely diligent Preaching, Prayer, Humiliation, and Reformation, whereby we may increase in the knowledge of the Truth, and the ability to defend us against the enemies of it. But for Ministers it seems less needful, who have already subscribed and sworn, and subscribed to the Doctrine of the Church of England against Popery, against whom sufficient Prouisoes are made in case they revolt.  
3. Thirdly what danger by multiplying Oaths? where divers for fear may be forced to take them, Reluctante conscientia. Most do make too little conscience of them, and may endanger the land by drawing on it a Judgement for their slighting such a sacred bond, or violation of it, For Oaths the Land mourns, jer. 25.10. Whereupon Saint Austin in his second Sermon, De verbis Apostoli, Falsa juraetio exitiosa, vera iuratio periculosa, nulla iuratio secura est, Above all things my Brethren, swear not, Isaiah 5.12.  
4. Fourthly, whether can this Oath be taken in Faith? without which, whatsoever we do is sin, Rom. 14.23. Now this Oath comprehends so many things of several kinds, and divers of them unknown to most of us, that though we be ready to believe & receive some of them single, yet our Faith cannot fathom them altogether, and so we cannot swear without doubting, and surely doubtful swearing is as dangerous as doubtful eating, every Oath should be taken in Truth, Righteousness and Judgement. jer. 4.2. How can we take an Oath in Judgement, not having a full persuasion in the meaning of it, or how can others with good Conscience press it on us, till they give us full satisfaction herein?  
If it be answered that the Creed, etc. are ambiguous, subject to doubtful Interpretations, as appears in divers Articles, yet upon this reason, may not be refused to be sworn: to this, the learned Divines of Aberdine have given sufficient answer. pag. 50. of their Duplice, these are of Divine Authority, or next Divine, agreeable to the Word, approved by the uniform consent of all places in all ages. Whereupon we are undoubtedly persuaded that the contrivers of them did neither intent, nor yet set down any untruth, and therefore we do submit to the unfallible authority of them, though some things be controverted in them, whereas we cannot suppose the same in any Oath contrived by men, subject to errors, wanting that general approbation.  

The Ambiguity of the OATH appears to us in most, if not in all the several Branches of it.  
1. I Promise, Vow, and Protest, to maintain with my life, goods, and Power, the true Protestant Religion, expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England. Quaere, What is the Doctrine of the Church of England? Whether that in the 39 Articles? Why is it not specified that we may know to what we swear? Whether may it not be extended to that which hereafter shall be established; since in the Oath it is not (now expressed, or already established) but, Expressed, in the Doctrine of the Church of England; which we suppose will bind us, if expressed hereafter; if so, None will set his seal to a blank bond, so as the Obligee may make his dept as large as he listeth: and we conceive we should be more cautelous in engaging ourselves by Oath, than our Estate by Bond, since the tye is more vigorous, and the breach more dangerous. Ley. pag. 55.  
2 I swear to maintain this Doctrine against all Popery and popish Innovations. Quaere, in what extent is Popery here abjured? Whether only in doctrinals, and such only as are fundamental or come nigh the foundation? or to remoter superstructions undetermined? Wherein it hath always been held lawful for Scholars to vary, and abundare sensu suo. Whether to Discipline also? and hath not episcopacy been branded for a Popish Hierarchy, and the Ministers ordained by them and standing under them. Notwithstanding it hath been allowed by our Doctrine, and established by our law? Hath not our Liturgy (though established by Act of Parliament) been rejected as Popish? and all innocent Ceremonies (though ancienter fare than Popery) if abused by them? Nay one of late, against Popish Ceremonies tells us, that an oath must be extended to the largest sense; Disput. against Engl. Ceremonies, p. 93.97.  
3. I swear to maintain the power and privilege of Parliaments, & the lawful liberty and rights of Subjects. Quaer. What are those privileges of Parliaments and rights of Subjects? Are these evident by the light of nature? that upon notifying them, every one that swears is able to give his assent, acknowledging them undoubted privileges and rights? or do they vary in divers Countries, according to the different constitutions of Statutes and charters depending on positive laws? Why are we not directed to those laws? where we may be clearly informed, what are those undoubted privileges and rights?  
4. I will maintain every person that maketh this Protestation, in what he shall do in the lawful pursuance of the same. Quaer. Whether am I hereby bound to embroil myself in every private quarrel betwixt particular persons? Suppose one that hath taken this Protestation be oppressed by some great one and pursue his right. Whether am I hereby bound to engage myself? If it be with reference to the public State. Whether am I alone bound to maintain him in his rights, or only jointly with others? And how shall I be assured that it is his right, and that his pursuance is lawful, that I may join with him?  
5. I will oppose and bring to condign punishment, all such as shall do any thing to the contrary. Quer. Whether is his sacred Majesty and his lawful Successors here excepted, in case they should attempt some innovation in Religion, or to infringe the liberty of Parliaments; or the rights of Subjects, or to oppose any that hath taken this Protestation? Now to take up arms against our Sovereign, either offensive or defensive, we have not as yet learned. We neither in the Scriptures, nor the writings, nor practice of primitive times find any other remedy for Subjects unjustly prosecuted by Hereditary Monarches, but flight from their wrath, or patiented suffering, or humble supplication with tears and prayers. Nor dare we subscribe till we see those arguments answered in the learned Duplice of the Divines of Aberdine, pag. 160. If his Majesty be excepted, why is it not expressed? Nor can the expression of such an exception be thought needless, though elsewhere we swear to maintain the King.  
Nor can it seem a greater tenderness of his Majesty's Honour, to omit the exception in this clause, supposing his Majesty's constancy in Religion, and equitable disposition in the administration of Justice. Surely the modest request of such an exception cannot in the judgement of any reasonableman, import the slenderest suspicion of his Majesty's inconstancy in Religion, or disposition to injustice. None are more fully settled in their good opinion of him then we. But we provide for our own peace, in case of dispute about the boundaries of Religion, privilege of Parliaments, and rights of Subjects. Nor do we cast the least aspersion of imprudence or disloyalty upon the contrivers of this Protestation, which we doubt not but their wisdoms can easily clear, and we much crave may be cleared to us.  
6. In case of dispute, what is the Religion established? power and privilege of Parliaments? rights of Subjects? and the lawful means of the pursuance of the same? or concerning the boundaries of those? who shall be Judge? The dictate of every private man's conscience? That were to expose the Kingdom to perpetual contention; the Parliament? what if a dispute arise when no Parliament sits? The King and Counsel? or some deputed by his Majesty and the Parliament? or the stronger part?  
7. I swear never to relinquish this Protestation, etc. Quaere, doth this clause bind me for ever in no case to alter? What if the King and State should find it expedient hereafter to revoke this Protestation, or something in it? Why is not there a reservation of liberty to change with the State? Master Ley in his book of the late Canons, pag. 86. thinks it unfit to make Median & Persian Protestations, that cannot be ●●tered, when as such changes may fall in a State, as the wisest law may be thought necessary to be altered, and therefore to receive no farther establishment, then may agree with all humane laws to be left alterable.  
Nor let us be thought herein to wrong ourselves, in forging exceptions and laying impediments in our own way. We walk in sincerity according to our light, not forging to ourselves impediments or laying stumbling blocks in our own way, but showing such as seem to be laid in our way, by the incommodious expression of the Protestation. If any think our doubts are too many, perchance he thinks too little of the peace of conscience of private Christians, and price of Ministry.  
If any enforcement should be used, our suspense, till satisfaction be given, may be charitably ascribed rather to conscience then contumacy. And therefore the case so standing, we hope we shall neither be pressed to the taking, nor our modest refusal oppressed with any penalty.  
What pity were it? which some men's fears begin to suggest, that after our painful studies in the Universities, the expense of our patrimonies in out costly education (which might have maintained us plentifully in another course.) After our painful employments in our Pastoral charge, to the tiring out of our strength. After our families increased above our abilities to support them (without the means we receive from the Church) to be thrust out of all, who cannot dig, and are ashamed to beg. After our hopes of removal of all burdens, now to be oppressed. With the same tongue that hath blest God for the heroic zeal of that High and Honourable Court in removal of one Oath, now to complain of the pressure of our consciences by another? that when such care is taken for the establishment of the rights of Subjects (should this Oath come hereafter to be pressed) it might strip us of all which we conceive derogatory to our rights, who are not the worst Subjects. That those, who have complained of subscriptions & oaths these eighty years (though of such things only as were established by Parliament) should now be so forward to promote this, and press it upon others. When divers things established by law were inconstrued, the Church and State thought it expedient to interpreat them, as appears, by divers Canons, Rubrics, and Injunctions, and the preface to the Common Prayers. When the Oath of Supremacy was inconstrued, King james of blessed Memory, vouchsafed to clear it by public writings, and after to clear this explication from all objections of Fall and others, by Bishop Andrew's and others. When the Reverend Primate of Armagh had cleared the same Oath in Ireland, the King gave him thanks for his pains taken therein, by a Letter now Printed. And this present Parliament to remove the fear of some Londoners (as we hear) vouchsafed to set forth an interpretation of one clause of this Protestation.  
Whether would it not highly commend their prudence, and eternize their goodness, to vouchsafe a further interpretation of all the several branches of it, or authorise by special Commission, some grave, wise men, in every Diocese, to admit of such interpretations as did not go against the literal sense, and clear it from all ambiguity.   

Whether this interpretation, or such like might be accepted.  
1. I Swear to maintain the Doctrine expressed in the Church of England, etc. I understand the Doctrine already established in ●he 39 Articles.  
2. This Doctrine I will maintain against all Popery, and Popish innovations etc. I understand all Popery Doctrinal, and innovations practical, contrary to the Doctrine already established.  
3. I Swear to maintain the power and privilege of Parliaments, the lawful liberty and rights of Subjects, etc. I understand this so far as they shall be evidenced to me, by the standing laws of this Kingdom, not repugnant to the laws of God, to be undoubted privileges and rights, and further the maintenance of these rights of Subjects, I understand not with reference to one another, to be hereby bound to imbroy I myself in every private man's quarrel, though I conceive right, but with reference to the public State.  
4. I will maintain every person that maketh this Protestation, in whatsoever he shall do in the lawful pursuance of the same, etc. This maintenance I understand not to bind me to maintain them by myself alone, but together with others consenting and lawfully authorised, the same I understand of opposing in the next clause.  
5. I will oppose and bring to condign punishment, etc. In all the several clauses, I expressly except his sacred Majesty, and his lawful successors, according to my Oath of Allegiance, not daring to think a disloyal thought, much less to lift up my hand against the Lords Anointed.  
6. I will never relinqush this Protestation, etc. Unless the State shall think it expedient to alter or revoke it, in which case I reserve my freedom.   
FINIS.