Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	bishop_n	call_v	king_n	1,627	5	3.8453	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35118	The case of swearing, at all, discussed with several objections answered, the primitive practices therein asserted out of several ancient authors : together with several presidents out of the book of martyrs : the inconveniences that follows the present practice of swearing, which might easily be prevented by a law to punish false witnesse-bearing, and lying as well as other evils : also, a word to all people that are zealous for the commands of Christ, recorded in the Scripture / by a friend of truth and righteousness, John Crook.	Crook, John, 1617-1699.	1660 (1660)	Wing C7197; ESTC R5532	23,258	32

Justice and instead of being made void as being against Justice they are incouraged and hath been Again it is the Law of England 9. Hen. 3.29 That Right and justice should neither be sold deferred nor denie● to any man c. But let those that have to do at Courts speak and bear witness whether both denying and delaying both of Law and Right be not that which they meet withall and for selling and buying of it let the great and excessive Fees which some Lawyers take for pleading speak who are in repute and as the people say if you can but retain such a man you need not fear your Cause c. Again it is the Law of England that none should be put into Office upon suit or for favour or affection but upon desert 12 Rich. 2.2 5. Edw. 6.16 The first part of Cooks Institutes page 2.34 A Law sayes Cook worthy to be written in letters of Gold But how contrary to these Statutes the present practises are let the righteous judge Further both by the Common-law and Statute law the Judges were not to hear the Plantiffs Cause if he first put not in security to answer his Adversaries damages if he complained of him wrongfully Mirror page 64. 37 Edw. 3. 18. 38 Edw. 3. 9. And he that chargeth a man with any accusation ought to put in Security to make good his accusation and the Law hath previded a punishment for him that makes not his accusation good But how contrary the present practises and proceedings of Courts are at this day let the Causes that comes into them speak Do not they issue out their Writs grounded upon divers plain and notorious lyes As that they have sent to the Sheriff of Middlesex which they have not done and that he hath returned that the Party is not within his Liberty which he hath not done but lies lurking in another County which is most commonly false the man going up and down as at other times and the Sheriff of Middlesex knowing nothing of it Again They say they have taken Pledges to prosecute viz John Doe and Richard Roe which is also a Deceipt and a Lye those being common feigned names put into all Writs and these Writs made up of so many lyes being framed by any Clerk and given forth in the chief Magistrates name is borne witness to be the Chief Justice of England is the ground and foundation of all proceedings at Law whereby the known Law of England in Cases of Debt men ought to be first summoned to appear to answer the Plantiff before they be arrested but how contrary the present proceedings are let all sober men judge Again the Law saves Mirror page 2. 49. It is an abuse of the Common-Law to appear or answer by an Attorney But the present practise is quite contrary for they have and do deny to accept of a mans Appearance in person although the words of their own Writs are so In these words So that we may have his body before us at our Court at Westminster such a day c. And it is further evidenced that the Appearing by an Attorney was first in favour and in ease of the Subject that so they might depute one for their ease as in the book De Atturnati Faciendo but now so is Justice and Judgement turned backward that that which was for the ease of the people is now made use of to maintain a trade of deceipt It is written in Cooks Reports in Richard Go frey's Case that Excessus in re qualibet jure reprobatur communi as excessive distresses excessive aids excessive ame●ciaments are against the Common-Law And how contrary the present practises is let the proceedings against the innocent people called Quakers bear witness in d vers Counties in England who have been fined more then they have been worth some it may be for not swearing and others for not respecting of mens persons but Presidents enough may be seen of their cruel Oppressions in this kinde in a book in Print called The Record of the sufferings for Tythes and in most Prisons in England examples of excessive cruelty may be found exercised upon poor innocent people because they cannot submit to pay these excessive Fines imposed on them contrary to any known Law and the practises of Ages past but such men flye to Custome when no known Law can be found and abuse the word Custome as many Justices do and have done the word Discretion neither of them warranting the practises of proud self-willed men there being Customes that are evill which ought to be abolished as sayes the Law and Cook in his Reports in Gatewards Cause sayes Custome ought to be reasonable Et excerta Causa rationab●li usitata as Littleton sayes and if every Custome should be a Law because Judges calls them so surely it may be said that King and Bishops would have been still standing in England and the word Discretion is as much abused by corrupt men they making it a Cloak to cover their deceitful Actings when they have no Law to warrant their practises But Discretion as Cook sayes is a knowledge or understanding to discern betwixt truth and falshood and between right and wrong between shadowes and substance and between equity and colourable glosses and pretences and not to do according to our wills and private affections For sayes he Talis discretio discessionem confundit and hath been adjudged in the ●a●e of Commission of Suers Discretion is to be bounded with Reason Law and Justice and so the word Custome is abus●● 〈◊〉 urged by corrupt men in opposition to the express Command of Christ Who sayes Swear not at all By these Exam●les the honest-hearted may see how contrary the p●e●en● practises of the Law is to the foundation of the Law and to that which is good being used lawfully is beco●e a dead thing execution being the Life of the Law and hereby the ●●ghteous that it is not made for is most hurt by it and the Flatterer and Evil-doer incouraged therefore their reasoning is not good who say all men ought to swear because of long time they have used to do so and continue still to do so therefore the question is not what men do practise but what men ought to practise according to a true Rule and Line For we read not that I remember among all Israels Laws that any of their Officers were made by an Oath as Judges Rulers Kings or Priests or Prophets or required to swear before they took the work or Office upon them But we read Deuter. 19.15 At the mouth of two or at the mouth of three Witnesses shall the matter be established Mark the matter was to be established without swearing For if they should have been first sworn it would have been so written it being a Command to Israel and in the case of Life and Death At the mouth of two or three Witnesses shall he that is worthy of Death be put to Death but at the mouth

both soul a●d bo●y and this fear is pure and keeps the heart clean whereby ●od is seen and deceit and guile is kept out a ditruth is spoken in all cases and he that abides in the fear of the Lord stands in awe and sins nor and is kept not only from wearing but lying also but he that onely fears man and his punishment when he comes to know and understand that there is as great or greater punishment to be inflicted upon him for his lying as for his false swearing or forswearing himself or bearing false witness then he also will stand in as much fear of a Lye as of an Oath or th●t which is called so besides it is commonly seen by experience that those who care not what they speak matters not much what they swear if so be they can but keep from the punishment of the Law but it is not so with the Righteous for the fear of the Lord makes them sober and solid and their words to be few and savoury seasoned with truth but those that fear man and his displeasure and punishment only when they know the same Law to be in force again lying as against swearing or swearing falsly they will then be as solemn and as afraid to lye as now to forswear themselves It is objected by others who say the Scripture is their rule that the holy men in old time did swear as we may read under the Law as Abraham sware and David and Solomon to all which it is said Christ is the end of the Law and he who is the Oath of God by whom God speaks in these last dayes sayes Swear not at all and he that is greater then Solomon whose day Abraham saw but he himself is now come and sayes Swear not at all and he who is Davids Lord sayes Swear not at all who is the end of the Prophets the everlasting High-Priest and Covenant of God the summe and substance of all the things the Law was but a shadow of Who is the Truth the Life and the Way to the Father and teaches all his followers to speak truth to their neighbour and to walk in the truth which makes free from swearing at all notwithstanding the traditions of their Fathers in the flesh or the practises of strifeful men for by Christ the Truth they are taught to speak truth and not to fear them that can but kill the body but to fear him that can cast both soul and body into hell which fear he hath placed in their hearts that they might not depart from him but abide in his Doctrine which sayes Swear not all It is further objected by some that the Angel sware in the Revelations and that Paul sware as may be read in his Epistles in saying I protest before God and in often saying I call the Lord God to Witness which is said to be an Oath c. To the first that the Angel sware it is said Let all the Angels worship him Who hath said Swear not at all And to that that Paul protested before God it is the intrusion of the Translator it being neither in the Greek Copies nor Latine nor some English Copies To the second That he calls God to Witness that is no Oath but onely an earnest attestation an Oath being that whereby by something is sworn by as Israel was to swear by the Name of the Lord and calling God to witness or saying God is my Witness is no more then to say I speak in Gods presence or before him who knowes the hearts and thoughts of all men and is no formal Oath as it is called or commonly used in opposition to a plain and earnest expression of a mans mind Again it is objected that not to swear at all is only Evangelical counsel and not an absolute prohibition of all swearing in all cases though it be said Swear not at all so it is said Thou shalt not kill and yet in some cases it is lawfull to kill Answer That forbidding to swear at all is no where in Scripture called Evangelical Counsel but such an Absolute and Positive Command and backed with the Apostles Doct●ine that I know not any Command fuller in the Scripture of truth And whereas it is said That to kill is a prohibition and yet in some cases allowable yet it is no where so said of swearing in the New Testament or since the time of its prohibition that it is lawful in any case to swear neither was it practised in the first ages of the true Church as may a●pear hereafter in its proper place under the head of Presidents of them who denyed swearing and though it be lawful in some cases to kill though it be said Thou shalt not kill yet ●t is no where said it is lawful to swear in any case as aforesaid but on the contrary Wo be unto them that brings a Christian to such a necessity that he must swear as woe attends them that necessitates a Christian to kill Now follows several Presidents or Examples both out of Holy W●it and Antient Authors of the best repute among them that are called learned FIrst in the Scripture of truth in the Old Testament where in the several cases wherein swearing was used is recorded as Gen. 24.3 Exod. 22.11 Numb 5.21 Levit. 19.12 Deuter. 6.13 and 10.20 Jeremy 12.16 Amos 8.14 Zepha 1.5 these being the particular cases and occasions wherein swea●ing is mentioned where the Reader may observe at his leasure the cases in which swearing is used and the ground and cause and end of it but neither was the Judges nor Rulers nor Prophets nor Priests nor Kings nor any other Officer that we read of constituted or made by an oath as necessary to let him into his work or office or place or imployment or that without which he could not so officiate or be imployed but on the contrary an oath was not so much as tendered to them or required at their hands neither in the greatest accidents or cases that fell out in Israel was it to be determined by those which were sworn or took an oath except before excepted in the case of goods committed to his Neighbour to keep c. Exodus 22.11 and the woman in case of Adultery Numb 5.21 who was to purge her self by an oath and so was determined by a signal and eminent judgment upon her but in all other cases as in particular between stroak and stroak and plea and plea and in cases of greatest moment as of life and death they were all to be determined without an oath and the false witness on either side was to be punished according to the appointment of the Law And in the New Testament by Christ the great Prophet and High-Priest of our profession it is so fully and absolutely forbidden and bound up with this word Not at all that nothing is plainer either in the Old or New Testament and this continued in and preached by his Apostles particularly by James