To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
THis is now ceased at the end of twenty years; what need you mention this?
1. I thought you had desired to know why we conformed not for the twenty years past. 2. I suppose that the like is still imposed on others, in the Corporation Act, the Vestry Act, the
Militia Act, and the Marrow of it still imposed on us in the Ox∣ford Oath.
And what have you against it?
First I'll tell you what we have not against it, because we are commonly here falsly accused.
1. It is none of our Controversie whether this Oath or Cove∣nant was unlawfully made and imposed both on the people and the King; we deny none of this.
2. It is none of our Controversie, whether there be not some part of the Matter of it that is unlawful: We deny not that.
3. It is none of our Controversie, whether it was not unlaw∣fully taken: We justifie not that as to our selves, tho' we are not judges of the sin of King and Lords, and others whom we have no Calling to condemn.
4. It is none of our Controversie, whether this, or any other Covenant or Vow do bind us to Rebellion, Sedition, or any un∣lawful Act; we renounce all such Obligation.
5. Yea, we hold that neither this, nor any other Vows of our own, can prevent any Obligation that the King hath Authority to impose upon us, in things great or small; else men might dis∣able Magistrates to rule them, and exempt themselves from Obe∣dience by Vowing before hand not to obey.
6. I add for my self, that I hold my self bound by this Cove∣nant to nothing, which I had not been bound to if I had never taken it. For I never thought that by Vows we may make new Religions or Laws to our selves, but only bind our selves to that which God doth make our Duty.
Where then is the danger or sin that you fear?
I. As to the Obligation of the Vow on my self.
II. As to the Obligation of it on all others.
III. As to the Matter of altering Church Government.
1. I am neither so blind, wicked or singular, as to deny the common Doctrine of Casuists, Protestants and Papists; that tho' a Vow be both sinfully imposed, and sinfully taken, yet it bindeth in materia necessaria & licita: Yea, that if part of the matter be unlawful, yet it bindeth to that part which is lawful. Else a Knave might exempt himself from the performance of all his Vows, by foisting in some unlawful matter, or by making them in an unlawful manner.
Therefore if there be any thing that is necessary or lawful in that Vow, I believe that I am thereto bound.
So Rebels that think it lawful to rebel, will say that the Cove∣nant binds them to it.
So he that thinks Gods Law doth bind him to Murder or Rebellion, will plead Gods Law for it: But doth it follow that Gods Law bindeth him to that or to nothing?
It is not mens false sayings that make or prove such Obligation? He that will say that Gods Laws, or the Kings, or the Cove∣nant, binds him to sin, must be punished for his Sin and Lie, and yet all just Obligations stand.
But you are bound before by other Obligations to all that is good in it, and not by the Covenant?
That's an inference contrary to Reason and Christianity; Can a Man of any Reason once dream that a Man may not have many Obligations to one and the same Duty? or that the second Oath binds not to it because the first did? you vowed your self to Christ in Baptism, and you renew the same in the Lords Supper: Are all the latter null, because the first is valid? What if you many times Swear Allegiance to the King? Do none of these bind you but the first?
II. But do you think that endeavours to alter Church Govern∣ment is any of your lawful or necessary Matter?
You know that there is a Law that maketh it a praemunire penalty, to say that the Covenant bindeth one to endeavour any alteration of Church Government: And why then will you put such a question to me? All that I will say is this, that as I say not that any one is bound to it by this Covenant; so I am not so good a Casuist as to be able to justifie and acquit all other men from all such Obligations. Let them look to themselves, for my part I will be no voucher or surety for their indemnity.
III. This brings up to the other part of your Reasons; and why may you not say that none is so bound?
1. Because God never made me a Casuist to determine the case for all men in three Kingdoms.
2. Because it is a new and monstrous thing for one private man (yea many thousand private men) to be forced to such an Office and Undertaking: Every man must answer for himself before God and Man: Noxa caput sequitur. If I were commanded to be surety for everyman in England, Scotland and Ireland, but for
the Peace or good Behaviour, I should think it a piece of as pal∣pable injustice as most ever the World knew. But if I must un∣dertake to answer for all their Souls, in a case where thousands of Learned men have been of the contrary mind, I'll first think how to answer for my own.
Yet as to that part which I am certain of my self, I do not scru∣ple it. I dare subscribe that the Covenant bindeth no man to be False or Rebellious against the King, or to endeavour to alter our Monarchy, or to deprive the King of any of his Rights; nor to endeavour to change any part of Church Government which Christ hath instituted for continuance in his Church. And is not this enough?
But whether our Diocesan frame, as distinct from that which Arch-bishop Vsher called the Primitive Government, be change∣able; or whether none of their Courts, and Lay-mens power of the Keys be changeable, or ought to be changed? And whether no man may endeavour it in his place and calling? I think a man may be saved without knowing. And I think, if you ask a man, if King and Parliament should change the Office of an Official, a Commissary, a Chancellor, &c. or should set up a Bishop in every Market Town, is it a sin against God? or is it unlawful to obey them? or if it be lawful to do it, and any of them Swear to endeavour it in his place, is he bound to perform that Oath? If to all this a man say, I cannot tell, I am not Learned enough in Law and Divinity to resolve such cases; but I am resolved my self to live in Loyalty and Peace. I would ask any man that hath not put off humanity, whether that man be fit to determine the case for all other men in three Kingdoms, and to be a voucher for all their Souls in a case that he understandeth not himself.
L▪ How doth this make you a Voucher for their Souls?
1. The case is of exceeding weight: If I should publickly declare that no man is thus bound by a Vow, and I should prove mistaken. 1. Then I become guilty of all these mens sin by justi∣fying it as no sin. 2. And I am guilty of cruelty to their Souls in open telling them that they need not perform their Vows, nor repent of non-performance. 3. And Perjury is one of the hei∣nousest sins on Earth. 4. And the Perjury of Millions or Nati∣ons is yet one of the grievousest degrees of guilt. 5. And I do my worst to make God destroy or forsake such a Land. And what yet can I do worse? I say, if in justifying them I should be
mistaken, what a guilt should I incur? And doth Nature or Scrip∣ture bind me to run so great a hazard for so many thousand o∣thers.
Besides, he that will be a Casuist must know all the case: there are hundreds and thousands put upon these decisions, that being then Children, knew not who made the Covenant; nor how it was imposed or taken, and many that know not what it is, and never saw it.
And there are thousands, if not millions, that took it, whose Faces I never saw, and know not what moved them, nor in what sence they took it; and Casuists say, that if a man mistake the Imposers sence, he is bound to keep it in the sence that he understood it when he took it, if a lawful one; especially if the Imposers had no Authority, or their sence was doubtful.
And it is not uncharitable for me to think ••hat none of the Kings Compounding Lords or Clergy that after took it, did take it in a sence which they thought found? And must I tell them all that none of them is bound to keep it in that sound sence?
I will not run the danger of having thousands in judgment to suffer for Perjury, and saying, This man declared that it was no sin. If they are all Innocent, what need they my justification, when they stand or fall by the judgment of God. If they prove guilty, my declaring it no sin, will not acquit them, but condemn my own Soul by tempting them to impenitence. I do not say that they are obliged by this Vow herein, nor I will not say they are not. There are many matters first to be known, if we agree in point of Doctrine; and I know that it's an easie thing for confi∣dent men to multiply words to prove all lawful in this Oath, and to Swear that it is rebellious Hearts that cause our doubtings: (and so say the Papists of the Protestants) But whatever they say or threat, I will not by their confidence and talk be drawn, to cast my Soul into so great a hazard. All men are not so bold in such things as some.