WHither Passion, Prejudice, Partiali­ty, &c. must not be lay'd aside in this Business?

Whither 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?

Whither Considering the State of the times, and the intention of our Governours, to secure [Page 2]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?

Whither the Oaths of Allegiance and Supre­macy, mainly intended and understood against the Papists, will give you sufficient security, consi­dering the Principles and Practises of the late times; (too too sadly yet remaining with many) the which are signifyed in the Act for safety both of King and Kingdome; 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 Kingdome?

Whither 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?

Whither the Oath, though in Expressions somewhat ambiguous, may not be well enough understood by unbyassed persons, that will not stretch their Charity, to suppose what their fan­cies will imagine of their Governours, and their [Page 3]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 sence of Governours in their Laws, if not plain in words, is to be by private men (till a publick Authentique inter­pretation) understood by common usage, and comparing with other Laws, or parts of the Law to which it belongs and may be refer'dSee Preamble, Act for Safety, Lord Chancellours 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, &c., and not by our private suppositions of their Inten­tions not expressed in their Laws?

Whither this Oath can be rationally suppo­sed to Bind us up from more, then endeavou­ring to overturn the foundation of the Gover­ment of Church or State, as to the King in both, and (if you will too) Bishops in the Gover­ment [Page 4]of the Church; Any thing more then 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 dayly (if duely) 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 intend 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 Schisme, 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 it self to which in the Oath I sware with, the Funda­mental and Positive Laws of the Land allow me, as a Man, an Englishman, a Christian, a Subject; my Just, though bounded libertie 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, &c.

Whither other parallel Oaths, binding to Government and Laws, be not thus by general [Page 5]Reason, Consent and Custome, understood? as the Kings 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, &c. Com­pared with their known and allowed practises, 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 Majesties Instructions to his Commissioners, with their Pa­per in Sir Rich. Bakers Chron. pag. 461. See also our present Soveraigns Decleration about Ecclesiastical affairs; and for the nature of such like Oaths, see the sence 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, &c. see Rom. 13.5. with Beza's note, 1 Pet. 2.13, &c. with Bishop Ushers power of Princes, Ephes. 6.24, &c. In all things. In every thing, &c.

Whither this Oath in effect (though added, and in terms it differ for reasons before expressed) re­quire more from us then we have already sworn unto, in the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy.Alleg. No violence or hurt to Kings, Person, State, or Government, &c. Suprem. In all Causes, and over all Persons Ecclesiasti­cal, &c. I will assist and defend — all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions, Preheminencies, &c. This not to alter. See Stat. 1. Eliz. 1. and 5 Eliz. 1.

Whither whatever the Covenant were in it self, 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 owe obedience; against the terms of the Covenant it self, and the Exhorta­tion to it, is lawfully, and in place and calling, &c. but especially against the Oath of Allegi­ance and Supremacy, with their antecedent ob­ligation in force before, and consequently being re­newed since the Kings return? Eccles. 8.2.

Whither not to Endeavour, be more then 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 Superi­ours [Page 7]in such like cases from the Word of God? see Rom. 13.1, &c. 5. &c. and 1 Pet. 2. Eccles. 8.2. &c. 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 Superiours, 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 suppos'd) it may not secure us, &c. so whither the not taking it, will not offend our Governours? and besides, bring such a scan­dal upon our whole Profession, as can never be wash'd avvay, though vvith our blood, which God prevent, and teach us our duty, leaving Events to him.

Over and above; VVhither may not an honest Christian take a supposedly captious and ensnare­ing Oath, vvhen the vvords are fair for an equal and an honest sence, betvveen the imposer and the [Page 8]taker, and vvherein by honest men on every hand it would and should be understood, especially in an Oath betvveen a Ruler and a Subject (vvhere no such captious supposition can be made vvithout sin) vvhen the end of Government, and of the Oath it self declared, is nothing but the peace and welfare both of Church and State.This Quere borowed from, and to be referred to the Papers of another.