Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ecclesiastical_a	king_n	supremacy_n	2,485	5	10.5338	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62874	A serious consideration of the oath of the Kings supremacy wherein these six propositions are asserted. 1. That some swearing is lawful. 2. That some promissory oaths are lawful. 3. That a promissory oath of allegiance and due obedience to a king is lawful. 4. That the King in his realm, is the onely supreme governour over all persons. 5. That the king is the governour of the realm, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things, or causes, as temporal. 6. That the jurisdictions, priviledges, preeminences, and authorities in that oath, may be assisted and defended. By John Tombes B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1660 (1660)	Wing T1818; ESTC R220153	19,748	28

A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THE OATH OF THE Kings Supremacy Wherein these six Propositions are asserted 1. That some Swearing is Lawful 2. That some promissory Oaths are Lawful 3. That a promissory Oath of Allegiance and due obedience to a King is Lawful 4. That the King is His Realm is the onely Supreme Governour over all persons 5. That the King is the Governour of the Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal 6. That the Jurisdictions Priviledges Preeminences and Authorities in that Oath may be assisted and defended By John Tombes B. D. Prov. 23. 21. My son fear thou the LORD and the King and meddle not with them that are given to change LONDON Printed by Henry Hills living in Aldersgate-street next door to the sign of the Peacock To the Christian Readers BEing by special Providence brought hither upon some occasions of mine own and finding many persons of different perswasions scrupling the taking of the oath of Supremacy now beginning to be urged by reason of their unacquaintance with it through the long disuse of it by various conferences I convinced sundry of them that the end and matter of the oath was not such as they imagined Whereupon some persons tender of the publique peace and the liberties of those doubting persons who still remained unsatisfied earnestly pressed me to draw up something in writing tending to the elucidation of this doubt which I was unwilling to do being absent from mine own Books and Collections and hoping to have staid here less time then I am now necessitated to do yet the instant pressure hath drawn from me this writing though short and indigested it being conceived useful in this juncture of time wherein if I be offered on the sacrifice and service of your faith I joy and rejoyce with you all as being studious not how to have dominion over your faith but to be a helper of your joy For which and I crave your prayers who am London Oct. 13. 1660. Your brother and servant in Christ John Tombes The OATH of SUPREMACY as it is in the Statute 1. Eliz. Cap. 1. I A. B. do utterly testifie and declare in my conscience that the Queens Highness is the only supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other her Highness Dominions and Countreys as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal and that no forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm and therefore I do utterly renounce and forsake all foreign Iurisdictions Powers Superiorities and Authorities and do promise that from henceforth I shall bear Faith and true Allegiance to the Queens Highness her Heirs and lawful Successors and to my power shall assist and defend all Iurisdictions Priviledges Preheminencies and Authorities granted or belonging to the Queens Highness her Heirs and Successors or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm So help me God and by the Contents of this Book The Proviso in the Statute of 5. Eliz. Cap. 1. PRovided also That the Oath expressed in the said Act made in the said first year shall be taken and expounded in such form as is set forth in an Admonition annexed to the Queens Majesties Injunctions published in the first year of her Majesties Reign That is to say to confess and acknowledge in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors none other Authority than that was challenged and lately used by the noble King Henry the eighth and King Edward the sixth as in the said Admonition more plainly may appear The Admonition annexed to the Queens Injunctions THe Queens Majesty being informed that in certain places of this Realm sundry of her native Subjects being called to Ecclesiastical ministery in the Church be by sinister perswasion and perverse construction induced to finde some scruple in the form of an othe which by an Act of the last Parliament is prescribed to be required of divers persons for the recognition of their Allegiance to her Majesty which certainly neither was ever ment ne by any equity of words or good sence can be thereof gathered Would that all her lovyng Subjects should understand that nothing was is or shall be ment or intended by the same othe to have any other duty allegiance or bonde required by the same othe then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble kynges of famous memory kyng Henry the viii Her Majesties father or kyng Edward the sixth Her Majesties brother And further Her Majesty forbyddeth all manner Her subjects to give ear or credit to suche perverse and maliciouse persons which most sinifferly and maliciously labour to notify to her loving subjects how by the words of the sayde othe it may be collected the kings or Queens of this Realm possessours of the Crowne may challenge aucthority and power of ministrie of divine offices in the Churche wherein Her said subjectes be much abused by such evyl disposed persons For certainly her Majesty neither doth ne ever wyll challenge any other aucthority than that was challenged and lately used by the sayde noble kinges of famous memorye king Henry the eight and kynge Edward the sixt which is and was of ancient time due to the Imperial Crowne of this Realm That is under God to have the soverainty and rule over all maner persons born within these Her Realms Dominions and Countries of what estate either ecclesiastical or temporal soever they be so as no other forrain power shall or ought to have any superioritie over them And if anye person that hath conceived anye other sence of the fourm of the sayde othe shall accept the same othe with this interpretation sence or meaning Her Majestie is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient subjects and shall acquit them of all maner penalties conteyned in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily or obstinately refuse to take the same othe The 37. Article professed in the Church of England The Kings Majesty hath the chief power in his Realm of England and other his Dominions unto whom the chief government of all Estates of this Realm whether they he Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appetain and is not nor ought to be subject to any forrain jurisdiction where we attribute to the Kings Majesty the chief government by which titles we understand the mindes of some standerous folks to be offended we give not to our Prince the ministring either of Gods Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also sometime set forth by Elizabeth our late Queen do most plainly testifie but that onely Prerogative which we see to have been given to all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the civil sword

the stubborn and evil doers The OATH of SUPREMACY briefly considered and the lawfulness of taking it asserted IT is questioned whether the Oath of the Kings being acknowledged Supreme Governour in all causes according to the Statute 1. Eliz. may be lawfully taken To which I answer affirmatively and thus argue If it may not be lawfully taken it is either because no Oath may be taken or no promissory Oath or no promissory Oath to a King or the matter of this Oath is not to be acknowledged or promised But none of these make it unlawful Ergo The consequence is proved because there is a sufficient enumeration made of things that seem to prohibit the taking of it if not let what else may make it unlawful be named The minor is proved by parts in confirming these six propositions I. That some swearing is lawful II. That promissory Oaths may be lawful III. That to swear to a King or Governour may be lawful IV. That the King is Supreme Governour over all persons in his Dominions V. That he is Governour in Ecclesiastical causes VI That the Iurisdictions Preeminences and Priviledges meant in that Oath may be lawfully acknowledge and defended The first is proved thus I. That which is not de toto genere in it's whole kind evil may be lawful But swearing is not de toto genere or in its whole kind evil Therefore some swearing may be lawful The major is manifest of it self The minor is thus proved That is not wholly evil about the use of which some directions are given by God God doth not give directions about the use of Blasphemy witchcraft idolatry c. which are in their whole kind evil But God giveth directions about the use of swearing as in the third commandment which is undoubtedly moral Jer. 4. 2. where he saith And thou shalt swear The Lord liveth in truth in judgement and in righteousness Ergo 2. That which is approved by God is lawful But some swearing is approved by God Psal. 63. 11. Every one that sweareth by God shall glory Ergo The major is of it self manifest the minor the text evidenceth sith the swearing by God is made part of glorying in God or of the swearers glory 3. If it were unlawful to use any Oath then it were unlawful to put any Oath on any But this is not to be said Ergo The consequence is manifest sith we cannot lawfully urge any to that which is of it self sinful Now that it is lawful to put an Oath on some persons at some times is manifest by Gods own appointment Levit. 5. 1. 4. his ratifying Solomons petition concerning this thing 1 King 8. 31. 2 Chr. 6. 22. and the practise of Abraham in the old Testament Gen. 24. 2 3. putting an Oath on his servant and Pauls in the New putting an Oath on the Thessalonians 1 Thes. 5. 27. for so the Greek word translated I charge you by the Lord or adjre you as it is in the margin by the Lord is I put the Lords Oath on you or swear you that this Epistle be read to all the holy brethren Alike charges are 1 Tim. 6. 13. 2 Tim. 4. 1. 4. That which hath been the practise of the godly before under the law and in the times of the Gospel without reproof is lawful for in all these times and by such men moved as they were by Gods spirit even in their holy speeches and writings it would not have been done had it been sinful But some swearing hath been the practise of the godly before under the law and in the times of the Gospel as is proved by instances as of Abraham that lift up his hand to the most high God Gen. 14. 22. of Isaac Gen. 26. 31. of Jacob Gen. 31. 53. under the law of the people of Israel Josh. 9. 19 20. of David and Jonathan 1 Sam. 20. 3. 42. David to Saul 1 Sam 24 22. of Urijah 2 Sam. 11. 11. of Ittai 2. Sam. 15. 21. of David 1 Kings 1. 29 30 2. 8. of Solomon Vers. 23. of Elijah 1 Kings 17. 1. of Michajah 1 Kings 22. 14. of Elisha 2 King 2. 4 6. and 3. 14. and 5. 16. and the woman of Shunem 2 King 4. 30. in the times of the Gospel of Paul 2. Cor. 1. 18. using this Oath As God is true verse 23. I call God to record upon my soul and 11. 31. and 12. 19. 1 Cor. 15. 31. this is a form of swearing By your rejoycing which I have in Christ Jesus it being in the Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which is a particle of swearing not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which are prepositions noting the means or instrument of the effect of the Angel Revel. 10. 6. who sware by him that liveth for ever The like are Rom. 1. 9. 9. 1. Gal. 1. 20. Philip 1. 8. Ergo 5 That which hath a necessary use for the benefit of humane society is not unlawful But some swearing hath a necessary use for the benefit of humane society Ergo The major is plain it agreeing with the law of nature and nations which is of necessary use for the benefit of humane society which laws God the author of nature hath imprinted in all and indeed hath made all his laws for men one towards another subservient thereto The minor is plain from the words of the Author to the Hebrews Chap. 6. 16. An Oath to men is an end of strife which is a necessary use for humane benefit 6. That which hath been counted by all nations as a Sacred thing a principal part of the acknowledgement and worship of God is not unlawful of it self But so hath some swearing been counted Ergo The minor is proved by Gods own words Deut. 10. 20. Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God him shalt thou serve and to him shalt thou cleave and swear by his name The second That promissory Oaths may be lawful is thus proved 1. That is not altogether of it self evil or unlawful which God makes a bond of the soul to be kept and performed to the Lord But some promissory Oaths God makes a bond of the soul to be kept and performed to the Lord Ergo Some promissory Othes may be lawful The major is proved because that which is altogether unlawful cannot bind the soul to God nor is to be kept and performed to the Lord The minor is proved from Numb. 30. 2. If a man vow a vow unto the Lord or swear an Oath to bind his soul with a bond he shall not break or profane his word he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth Matth. 5. 33. Again ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oathes where a promissory Oath is made a bond to bind the soul with to be kept and performed to the Lord 2.

it will be said The Kings of Israel were types of Christ and therefore their Power and Authority did cease in things Spiritual and Ecclesiastical when Christ was come 1. But to the contrary this is said without proof and so is rejected as easily as it is alledged 2. It is true Christ is often termed David and it is said he shall sit on Davids throne Luk. 1. 32 33. But this power of reforming Religion was not appropriate to David or the race of the Kings of Judah but belonged also to the Kings of Israel who were not types of Christ who are charged with the permission or promoting of Idolatry as their sin as on Jeroboam Ahab c. and Jehu is in some measure rewarded for the partial Reformation he made 2 King 10. 28 29 30. and therefore it belonged not to the Kings of Israel to reform Religion onely as types of Christ but even as Kings 2. This is proved and the Proposition it self That is to be ascribed to the King which was with approbation ascribed to Kings out of the Church But the Government in things and Causes spiritual or belonging to Religion is ascribed with approbation to Kings out of the Church Ergo The major is proved because what of this kind is with approbation ascribed to Kings out of the Church is to be taken as belonging to Kings as Kings and not as typical Kings or Rulers The minor is proved by instances The first of Cyrus King of Persia of whom we read that the Lord stirred up his spirit to make a Proclamation for building of Gods house 2. Chron. 36. 22 23. Ezra 1. 1 2. in doing this he is called Gods shepherd Isa 44. 28. and anointed by God Isa. 45. 1. and the same was continued by Decrees of Darius Ezra 6. 7 8 9 10 11 12. and Artaxerxes Ezra 7. 13 21 23 26. now these things belonging to the building of Gods house furthering his service were spiritual things and therefore Government in spiritual things belonging to Religion is ascribed to Kings out of the Church To these may be added the Decree of Nebuchadnezzar against them that should speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach Meshach and Abednego Dan. 3. 29. and of Darius Dan. 6. 26. That in every Dominion of his Kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel which are undoubtedly about spiritual Causes or Matters of Religion and the King of Nineveh his Proclamation by the Decree of the King and his nobles that all should fast covered with sackcloth and cry mightily to God Jonah 3. 7 8. which is approved by God in that he defer'd his judgement thereupon in all which Government in matters of Religion was exercised and approved 3. That which agrees to other Rulers besides Kings agrees much more to Kings But to Govern in Causes spiritual or things of Religion belongs to Governours below Kings therefore much more to Kings 4. The major is proved from the title given to the King 1 Pet. 2. 13. where he is called the Supreme or Excelling and of those that are in Authority or Excelling 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. the King is reckoned as chief therefore if inferiour Governours are to Govern in matters of Religion much more Kings Now that they are to do so appears by the practice of Nehemiah who being not King nor Priest but Governour under the King of Persia reformed the Priests excluding aliens from the Priests chambers giving the Levites their portion and chiefly by restraining the profanation of the Sabbath Nehem. 13. 9 10 15 22. reckoning it among the works for which he would have God remember him Jacob reforms his houshold by requiring them to put away the strange gods that were among them and bury them Gen. 35. 2 4. Parents are required to bring up their children in the nurture in Greek discipline or government and admonition of the Lord Ephes. 5. 4. Servants are to be obedient to their masters as to Christ Vers. 5. As the servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart Vers. 6. With good will doing service as to the Lord and not to men therefore Parents and Masters have Government in matters of Religion much more the Father and Master of the Common-wealth having a more ample Authority 4. This is further confirmed in that the Apostle where he speaks of the Powers he saith without limitation that Rulers are not a terrour to good works but to evil wilt thou not be afraid of the power do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same he is the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil Rom. 13. 3. 4. Kings and Governours sent by them are for the punishment of evil doers and for the praise of them that do well without limitation and distinction of Civil and Spiritual things 1 Pet. 2. 14. Now where the Law doth not distinguish neither are we and therefore are to understand the Governing in the text to be in Religious things as well as Civil 5. Which is further confirmed from the Titles given to them they are termed gods Psal. 82. 1 6. John 10. 34 35. Ministers of God Rom. 13. 4. That judge not for man but for the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 9. therefore they are to be ministers in a Political way and to judge in things of the Lord 6. Paul did not refuse to apologize for himself about the accusations of the Jews against him for his profession and preaching of Christian Religion but did justifie himself before Felix Festus and king Agrippa and appealed to Caesar Act. 23. 29. and 24. 5 6 8 10. and 25. 8 11 19 21 and 26. 2 3. therefore he denied not but acknowledged the Kings Government even in the things and Causes that concern Christian Religion and consequently we may in like manner acknowledge it 7. Paul exhorts us to pray and give thanks for Kings and all that are in authority or excellency that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. therefore he supposeth that Kings have some Government in matters of godliness as well as honesty and therefore are Governours In Causes Spiritual or of Religion 8. From the absurdities which follow if this be not granted 1. If the King be not Governour in Ecclesiastical things and Causes then his Kingly power is of no use in matters of Religion for if he have no Government in them he is to be a looker on and in effect a meer cipher in respect of such things But this is not to be said sith matters of Religion do as much concern him to Govern in as any causes all experience shewing that no Government can be well ordered without some regard had to Religion 2. All the actions which Kings have been commended for by godly persons were unjustifiable the pulling down of Idols restraining the importation and vending of Popes pardons and consecrated ware the causing the holy

upright therein so it may be in Ecclesiastical Causes if he choose and use the help of them that are skilful and faithful in Religion But in this thing there is need of the greatest circumspection vigilancy and wariness on the one side by reason of the cunning and diligence of seducers and the violence of spirit in profane persons against the most holy and harmless Christians and on the other side by reason of the weakness in the faith of many upright souls whose consciences are very tender and their wounds hardly cured of whom our Lord Christ was very tender Matth. 12. 20. and gentle toward them as the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting covenant Heb. 13. 20. as was foretold Isai. 40. 11. and the Apostle Paul requires much indulgence to be given them Rom. 14. 1 4. Object 8. The acknowledgement of this Supremacy of the King hath been opposed by sundry godly Protestants who have in their writings excepted against it as Calvin and the Century writers of Magdeburg Answ. T is true they excepted against the Title of head of the Church given to King Henry the eighth as Stephen Gardiner and such like persons misreported it as if it gave to the King an uncontrollable authentique power to determine of faith and worship of God but when those learned Protestants better understood what was meant by it they withdrew their exceptions as Doctor Rainold shews in his Conference with Hart in the Tower chap. 10. Object 9. Many godly persons are offended with the taking and defending the Lawfulness of the taking of this Oath as fearing it many tend to the taking away those Liberties of their consciences in Religion which are dearer to them then their lives and being jealous of those who take it least they betray those Liberties Ans. It is to be considered by those conscientious persons who make this objection that the takers and defenders of the taking of this Oath do apprehend that the imposing this Oath was for the excluding the Popes jurisdiction and other Forreign power as the admonition of Queen Elizabeth here prefixed shews and therefore there is nothing done by such takers or defenders in prejudice of their brethrens Liberties or imposition on the consciences of others But they that have taken it or conceive they may take it if imposed do it as being satisfied in their consciences by the foregoing arguments or such like that they do but what they may do lawfully without offence and hope that it will fall out as it did in the business of the Altar of Ed Josh. 22. that a right intelligence of their fact will prevent any breach between them and others and unite them more closely Object 10. This acknowledgement of the Kings Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastical hath been but of late not before King Henry the eighth and Edward the sixth Answer The Title of head of the Church of England now altered into Supreme Governour over all persons though it were not assumed by the Kings of England before Henry the eighth yet the power of Supreme Government in Causes Ecclesiastical as saith Bishop Bramhal in his answer to Militiere pag. 111. The ancient Kings of England ever exercised not onely before the Reformation but before the Norman Conquest as appeared by the Acts of their great Councils by their Statutes and Articles of the Clergy by so many Laws of provision against the Bishop of Romes conferring Ecclesiastical dignities and benefices upon Foreigners by so many sharp oppositions against the exactions and usurpations of the Court of Rome by so many Laws concerning the Patronage of Bishopricks and investitures of Bishops by so many examples of Churchmen punished by the Civil Magistrate This power though not this name the Christian Emperors of old assumed to themselves to Convocate Synods to preside in Synods to confirm Synods to establish Ecclesiastical Laws to receive appeals to nominate Bishops to eject Bishops to suppress Heresies to Compose Ecclesiastical differences in Councils out of Councils by themselves by their Delegates All which is as clear in the History of the Church as if it were written with a beam of the Sun The sixth Proposition is The Jurisdictions Preeminences Priviledges and Authorities in that Oath may be assisted and defended The jurisdictions c. meant I conceive to be expressed a little before the form of the Oath in the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Of which the Queens admonition saith No other Authority is challenged than that was challenged and lately used by King Henry the eighth and Edward the sixth that is under God to have the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of persons born within her Realms Dominions and Countreys of what estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them What was used in the days of Henry the eighth and Edward the sixth appears by the book of Acts and Monumens and Statutes in their days to wit the rejecting the Popes jurisdiction appointing visitors judging and deposing some Bishops commands to take down Images causing Divine service to be in the English tongue the Bible in the English tongue to be in Churches with many other things of the like kinde the promise to defend them is to Our power whether by opposing the bringers in of a Forreign power especially the Popes or by aiding the King in the right use of this Authority neither is the power granted which may not be lawfully used or exercised nor is the abuse of it required to be defended With this explication the Proposition is thus proved That we may lawfully swear to assist and defend which may lawfully be exercised and may be of necessary use This Proposition needs not any further proof being of it self manifest But all the Jurisdictions Priviledges Preeminences and Authorities meant in the Oath according to the Queens explication in her Admonition ratified in the proviso of the Statute 5. Eliz. may be lawfully exercised and may be of necessary use as appears by the recital of them and their use before specified therefore we may lawfully swear to assist and defend them The Objection that is made against this is that these Jurisdictions Preeminences Priviledges and Authorities were the same that were taken from the Pope and given to the King and thereby Papal power was conferred on him To which I answer The power saith Hart Conference with Rainold chap. 1. division 2. which we mean to the Pope by this title of the Supreme Head is that the Government of the whole Church throughout the world doth depend of him in him doth lie the power of judging and determining all causes of faith of ruling Councils as President and ratifying their Decrees of ordering and confirming Bishops and Pastours of deciding Causes brought him by Appeals from all the Coasts of the earth of reconciling any that are excommunicate of excommunicating suspending or inflicting other censures and penalties on any that offend yea on Princes and Nations finally of all things of the like sort for Governing of the Church even whatsoever toucheth either preaching of Doctrine or practising of Discipline in the Church of Christ Now this immense power as too heavy for the shoulders of a mortal man and as not belonging to the Kingly Office at all in many parts of it is disclaimed by the Kings of England as is before shewed and not meant to be acknowledged in the Oath Therefore saith Dr. John Rainold Confer. with Hart chap. 10. that which we take from the Pope we give not to any mortal creature and having by the reading of Dr. Nowels reproof of Dormans proof of certain Articles convinced Hart the Jesuite that no more is meant by it then what August saith Epist. 50. that Kings do serve Gods as Kings if in their own Realm they command good things and forbid evil not onely concerning the civil state of men but the Religion of God also thus much he did subscribe to Out of all which I infer that it was very presumptuously and unjustly made by Mounsier de la Militiere the crime of the Kings of England which God chastised by the late Tragedy that the Authority which God gave the King in Temporal matters was used by him for Governing Spiritual in his tempting Epistle to his Majesty that now is whom the Lord preserve and direct in the mannaging of this power of so great concernment to so many millions of precious souls as are within his Dominions Amen FINIS