A SOBER ENQUIRY About the New Oath Enjoined on NON-CONFORMISTS' According to Act of Parliament.  
WHither Passion, Prejudice, Partiality, etc. must not be laid aside in this Business?  
Wither living under a Lawful Government, and expecting Protection from it, I do not owe Allegiance to it, and must Submit, and not endeavour to alter the Government, especially when this is made the Condition of my living under its Protection?  
Wither Considering the State of the times, and the intention of our Governors, to secure the Peace at home against bosom Enemies, of which sort there are too many, is it not rational to expect security from us, and that by a lawful Oath or some other way?  
Wither the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, mainly intended and understood against the Papists, will give you sufficient security, considering the Principles and Practices of the late times; (too too sadly yet remaining with many) the which are signified in the Act for safety both of King and Kingdom; and should not the new Oath respect such pernicious Principles and practices, as at present are like (if not most warily prevented) to endanger both Church and State, both King and Kingdom?  
Wither they could not easily have ordered it, in another form, directly and in terms reversing the Covenant; and was it not through Providence and Prudence, ordered as it is; that sober and peaceable may be distinguished from those that will not rest till all return to their old Confusions?  
Wither the Oath, though in Expressions somewhat ambiguous, may not be well enough understood by  persons, that will not stretch their Charity, to suppose what their fancies will imagine of their Governors, and their intentions in it; since, the words of the Preamble, and the Act for Safety, (to whom this must be referred) and other known Laws, and Customs of the Land, will give them sufficient information; and since, the sense of Governors in their Laws, if not plain in words, is to be by private men (till a public Authentic interpretation) understood by common usage, and comparing with other Laws, or parts of the Law to which it belongs and may be referred 
* See Preamble, Act for Safety, Lord Chancellors and the Speakers Speeches. And for the Legislative Power, see Act for Safety. For the Militia, the Acts about it. For Church Government, see such Laws as Settle or declare all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in the King, and the Exercise of it only as in Commission from his Majesty, about Bishops and their Powers, see Laws referred to them, and sometimes granting more, and sometimes less. Read 1. Eliz. 1.2. and 5. Eliz. 1. 32. H. 8. c. 6. 1. Ed. 6. c. 2. 25. H. 8. c. 19 & c. 21. and an Act of this present Parliament repealing, 17. Car. 1. See Cooks Institutes, part. 4. and his Reports about Ecclesiastical Matters, and Part. Cawdryes' Case, etc. , and not by our private suppositions of their Intentions not expressed in their Laws?  
Wither this Oath can be rationally supposed to Bind us up from more, then endeavouring to overturn the foundation of the Government of Church or State, as to the King in both, and (if you will too) Bishops in the Government of the Church; Any thing more than these being accounted by the Laws of the Land, and by the Practices of our Kings, Parliaments, Synods, as alterable, and hath been, and may be daily (if duly) altered? Or, if this Oath may be supposed to bind us up from more, as to particulars and superstructures in Constitutions and Administrations, whither then can it rationally be supsed to intent more, to bind us up from a turbulent and irregular endeavour of altering, or (as expressed in the Preamble and Act for safety) in a way of Schism, Sedition and Rebellion, and whither can this Oath be justly understood to bind us up from Peaceable and Regular endeavours of reforming what may be found amiss in Church or State; since that the Government itself to which in the Oath I swore with, the Fundamental and Positive Laws of the Land allow me, as a Man, an Englishman, a Christian, a Subject; my Just, though bounded liberty in that particular? and must not this be understood though not expressed in the Oath? 
* See Magn. Charta. c. vet. King Coronat. Oath. Act about Petitioning, etc.   
Wither other parallel Oaths, binding to Government and Laws, be not thus by general Reason, Consent and Custom, understood? as the King's Coronation Oath, with Non Mutabimus leges & Consuetud. the Oaths that Members of Parliament, and of Convocation take; the Oaths for Judges, and other Lawyers; the Oaths in Courts, Corporations, Universities, etc. Compared with their known and allowed practices, in their places, changing and altering as to particulars both in Church and State. 
* About the Kings reserving the Foundations of Church-Government, and the Bishops under him, because of his Oath; yet allowing great alterations in the Government, as to the Exercise and Administration for Peace; see his Majesty's Instructions to his Commissioners, with their Paper in Sir Rich. Bakers Chron. pag. 461. See also our present Sovereign's Decleration about Ecclesiastical affairs; and for the nature of such like Oaths, see the sense of the long Parliament, and of the Assembly in the Exhortation to the Covenant, p. 5. and 6.   
Whither are not many Scriptures themselves thus understood, with limitations of the general Expressions, according to the nature and condition of the Subject; and particularly, Scriptures requiring obedience to Kings, Masters, Husbands, Parents, etc. see Rom. 13.5. with Beza's note, 1 Pet. 2.13, etc. with Bishop Ushers power of Princes, Ephes. 6.24, etc. 
* In all things. In every thing, etc.   
Wither this Oath in effect (though added, and in terms it differ for reasons before expressed) require more from us than we have already sworn unto, in the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy. 
* 
Alleg. No violence or hurt to Kings, Person, State, or Government, etc.  
Suprem. In all Causes, and over all Persons Ecclesiastical, etc. I will assist and defend— all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions, Preeminencies, etc. This not to alter. See Stat. 1. Eliz. 1. and 5 Eliz. 1.    
Whither whatever the Covenant were in itself, and its imposing, can any sworn to it, now rationally suppose himself as bound by it to act against the Government, or towards the alteration of Government in Church or State; since such endeavours would be against the Laws of the Land, to which we own obedience; against the terms of the Covenant itself, and the Exhortation to it, is lawfully, and in place and calling, etc. but especially against the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy, with their antecedent obligation in force before, and consequently being renewed since the King's return? Eccles. 8.2.  
Whither not to Endeavour, be more than not to Act against the Government of Church or State; or that not to act, be more then to be subject or submit; and whither such subjection or submission, be not my bounden duty to my Superiors in such like cases from the Word of God? see Rom. 13.1, etc. 5. etc. and 1 Pet. 2. Eccles. 8.2. etc. Eccles. 10.8, 9, and 20. Prov. 30.31. and vers. 24, 21, 22.  
Whither Apostles and primitive Christians, made not great Conscience of submitting in such like matters, as appears by Epistles and Church History, (see Bishop Ushers Power of Princes, and duty of Subjects) and whither Christianity and Laws of Christ, do not bind us to the peace and good behaviour in all such matters as are not our Rights, but our Superiors, both in War and Peace, in Church or State.  
Whither, if consequences may be considered, as the taking the Oath may offend many, and possibly (though quaere how with our duty to our Superiors it may be supposed) it may not secure us, etc. so whither the not taking it, will not offend our Governors? and besides, bring such a scandal upon our whole Profession, as can never be washed away, though with our blood, which God prevent, and teach us our duty, leaving Events to him.  
Over and above; Wither may not an honest Christian take a supposedly captious and ensnareing Oath, when the words are fair for an equal and an honest sense, betvveen the imposer and the taker, and wherein by honest men on every hand it would and should be understood, especially in an Oath betvveen a Ruler and a Subject (where no such captious supposition can be made without sin) when the end of Government, and of the Oath itself declared, is nothing but the peace and welfare both of Church and State. 
* This Quere borrowed from, and to be referred to the Papers of another.   
FINIS.   

Oxford Printed for R. Davis, Anno Dom. 1665.