A TREATISE OF OATHS Containing Several Weighty Reasons why the People call'd QVAKERS refuse to SWEAR And those Confirmed by Numerous Testimonies out of Gentiles Jews and CHRISTIANS both Fathers Doctors and Martyrs Presented to the King and Great Council of England Assembled in PARLIAMENT Mat. 5.34 But I say unto you Swear not at all Jam. 5.22 Above all things my Brethren Swear not Jer. 32.10 Because of Oaths the Land Mourneth Theognis He ought to Swear neither this thing nor any thing Maimonides It is a great Good for a Man not to Swear at all Chrysostom It is not lawful to Swear neither in a just nor unjust Cause Printed Anno 1675. TO THE King and Great Council OF ENGLAND Assembled in PARLIAMENT The Case of the People call'd QUAKERS relating to OATHS further Represented and Recommended to their Consideration in order to a Speedy and Effectual REDRESS THe common Benefit of the Free People of England being undoubtedly both the first and greatest Reason for the Ancient Just Necessary Constitution of Parliaments and being also inform'd that it is your Resolution to employ this Session to the Redress of Publick Grievances And since We cannot but repute our selves a Member of this Great Body you represent by Birth and English Descent and are not only involved in the Common Calamities of the Kingdom but in Particular very cruelly Treated in our Persons and Estates because we cannot for pure Conscience take any Oath at all though we have again and again tender'd our solemn Yea or Nay and are most willing to sustain the same Penalty in Case of Lying that is usually inflicted for Perjury To the End we may not be interpreted to decline the Custom out of meer Humour or Evasion though our frequent heavy Sufferings by Fines and tedious Imprisonments sometimes to Death it self should sufficiently Vindicate us against any such Incharitable Censure WE do with all due Respect present you with our Reasons for that Tenderness and many Testimonies and Prâ—sidents in their Defence and we entreat you to express that Care of a Member of your own Civil Body which Nature and Christianity excite to We mean That it would please you to consider how deeply we have already suffered in Person and Estate the Inconveniencies we have daily to encounter and those Injurious not only to our selves but others we commerce with in that both they and we because of our Tenderness in this Matter are constantly at the Mercy of such as will Swear any thing to advantage themselves where they are sure that a Contrary Evidence shall be by Law esteem'd however True Invalid under which Difficulty several of us at this Hour fruitlesly labour That being sensible of our Calamity you may please to endeavour as for others so for this Grievance both a Speedy and Effectual Redress otherwise besides ordinary Cases wherein many of us extraordinarily suffer we may perhaps prove in this of Oaths the Greatest if not the Only Sufferers of the Kingdom a Cruelty we hope you do not design against us God Almighty we beseech him with all Sincerity of Heart incline you to Justice Mercy and Truth Amen London the 25th of the 3d Moneth 1675. Subscribed on the behalf of the rest of our Friends by Alexander Parker George Whitehead Stephen Crisp William Mead Gerrard Roberts William Welsh Samuel Newton Thomas Heart John Osgood James Claypool Thomas Rudyard Richard Richardson William Penn. A Catalogue of the Authors Testimonies and Presidents cited in Favour of this Treatise AESchylus p. 31. Albertus Magnus p. 10 115. Albingenses p. 100 121. W.C. Albrid p. 12. Alexander de Ales p. 115. Alexander ab Alexandro p. 18. Alexid p. 34. Alphonsus de Avendano p. 134. Ambrosius p. 10 68 135. Ambrosius Ansbertus p. 112. Anabaptists p. 100 101. Antiochus Palest p. 109. Anthelmus Cantuar p. 120. Tho. Aquinas p. 115 132. Aristophanes p. 102. Aristoteles p. 18. Athanasius p. 50 54. Augustinus p. 10 95 132 133. M. Aurelius Antoninus p. 36. Ausonius p. 36. B Bagool pag. 100. Baptista Folengius p. 115. Baroâ—ius p. 100 121. Basil Magnus p. 10 60 100. Basilides p. 41. J. Bechet p. 124. Beda p. 110 141. Counc Berghamsted p. 111. Bernard p. 100 113 115 137 144. Beza p. 102 141. Bible folio printed 1578. p. 144. Bible 4 to printed 1559. 143. Biblioth vet patr p. 116. Blandina p. 41 45. Blastaris p. 62 111. Brugensis p. 10 115. Otho Brunfelfius p. 114. Beat Bruno p. 46. Wal. Brute p. 123. J. Burrel p. 126. C Cajetan p. 133 135. Caesarius p. 67. Joac Camerar p. 143. Gui. Carmelite p. 100. Cassiodorus p. 46 108. Castro p. 100 141. Caten 65. Graec. Patr. p. 108. Cathari p. 100. Hug. Cardinal p. 115. Pet. Charron p. 144 Geff. Chaucer p. 122. Cheril p. 33. Chromatius 10 104. Chrysostom p. 10 11 17 50.70 100 112 120 141. Cicero p. 18 33. Clemens Alexandr p. 15 43 47. Clemens Roman p. 58 101 142. J. Clements p. 124. Clineas p. 31 62. Qu. Curtius p. 29. Cyprian p. 51. Cyril p. 107. D J. Damascen pag. 107. Diodorus Siculus p. 28. Diogenes Laert. p. 33. Druthmarus p. 114 141. E Archiep. Ebur Egbert p. 111. J. Edward p. 124. Epictetus p. 34. Epiphanius p. 50 67. Erasmus p. 128. Esseni p. 37. Eusebius p. 40 41 99. Evagrius Scholast p. 104 107. F Jacob Faber p. 138. Festus ad Lapidem p. 18. J. Fox Martyrol pag. 121 122 123.124 125 128. G Bp. Gauden p. 10 14 30 154. Gentian Hervet p. 48. Gennadius p. 99 Gloss Ordin p. 107 115. Hug. Grotius p. 31 34 37 150. H J.M. Hadingtonian p. 143. Haimo p. 112. Hercules p. 29. Hesiod p. 29. R. Herbert p. 124. Hierocles p. 31. Hilary p. 50 57 Hilary Syracus p. 100. Huetius p. 50. Humiliati p. 100. J. Huss p. 126. I James on the Fathers pag. 78. Jansenius p. 100 114. Jerom p. 11 92 127 136 141 143. Jews Antiquities p. 154. Josephus p. 37 136. Justin Martyr p. 41. Irenaeus p. 97. Isidorus Pelusiot p. 104. Isodor Hispalens p. 109. Isocrates p. 32. K Hist ref Kirk Scotland p. 127. L Lactantius p. 43. Laertius Hermip p. 30. Libanius p. 36. Lindenbrogius p. 18. Lodovicus Pius p. 148. Lollards pag. 127. Lotharius p. 148. Ludulphus p. 10 115 Luitprandus p. 158. N. Lyra p. 106 115. Lysander p. 32. M Maimonides pag. 37. Menander p. 33. Maldonat p. 101. 144. Manichees p. 100. Marlorat p. 144. Fra. de Mendoca p. 136. Archiep. Mentz p. 111. S. Morland p. 128. N Grave of Nassou p. 160 161. G. Nazianzen pag. 42. 64 Nicodemus's Gospel p. 59 Nilus p. 107. G. Nyssenâ—s p. 63.141 O Oecumenius pag. 119. Olympiodorus p. 108. Prince of Orange p. 162. Origen p. 30 49 100 101. Orthodoxographa p. 59. P Paschatius Ratbertus p. 113. Patrini pag. 100. Pelagians p. 100 101 Persians p. 28. Philo Judaeus p. 36 38 138 146. Plato p. 32. Plinius p. 18. Plowman's Complaint p. 121. Plutarch p. 29 32 35. Polybius
p. 10 18. Polycarpus p. 40 45. Ponticus p. 41 45. Potamicna p. 42. Jer. of Prague p. 126. Prateolus p. 100. Le Pricur p. 45. Protestants of Piedmont p. 128. Publicani p. 100. J. Purrey p. 124. Pythagoras p. 30 31. Q Quintilian p. 34 R Rabanus p. 107 115. Raimundus pag. 37. Reiner p. 120. Remigius p. 115. Rhadamanthus p. 32. Rigaltius p. 46. Ruffinus p. 115. Rupertus p. 115. S Mich. Sadler pag. 127. Ger. Sagarel p. 128. Grae. Sages p. 30. Rob. Sanderson p. 20 101 104. W. Sawtree p. 126. Scapula p. 102. Scultetus p. 43 46. Scythians p. 29. Simocat p. 34. Smaragdus p. 115 Sociad p. 30. Socrat. Schol. pag. 51 60 63 71. Solon p. 30. Lod. Soto Major p. 144. H. Spelman p. 111. Spotswood p. 127. Stobaeus p. 30 34. Swarez p. 47 58 100 140. W. Swinderby p. 122. Jer. Taylor pag. 155. Tertullian p. 42 52 100. Gr. Thaumaturgus p. 51. Theodoret p. 11. 106. Theognis p. 30. Theophylact p. 100 113 141. W. Thorp p. 124 126. Titelmannus p. 10. Treatise of Peace p. 163. Archiep. Triers p. 111. V Valerius Max. p. 30 33. Villerius p. 143. Vossius p. 100. J. Usher p. 100 121 128 152. W Walden p. 100. Waldenses p. 100 120. Bp. Walton p. 102. W. White p. 126. J. Wickliff p. 121. Wickliffists p. 101. Widsord p. 100 Em. Willy p. 124. X Xenocrates p. 33 15. Xenophon p. 102. Y Eliz. Young p. 125. Z Euthymius Zagabonus p. 126. Some Inducements Offer'd TO Answer this REQVEST From a Consideration of the Cause and End of an Oath And those REASONS AND TESTIMONIES Given by us against the USE and IMPOSITION of it The GROUND or Reason of Swearing THis we think all will agree to have been the Degeneration of Man from primitive Integrity at what time Yea and Nay were enough for when men grew corrupt they distrusted each other and had recourse to extraordinary Wayes to awe one another into Truth's-speaking as a Remedy against Falseness else what need had there been of an Oath or any Extraordinary Way of Evidence when every Syllable was freighted with Truth and Integrity It had been a meer taking of God's Holy Name in vain Truth then flowed naturally and wanted no such Expedient to Extort its Evidence Thus Polybius though an Heathen in his Story of the Romans saith Among the Ancients Oaths were seldom used in Judicatures themselves but when Perfidiousness increased Oaths increased or then the Use of them first came in Basilius Magnus saith Oaths are an Effect of Sin Gregorius Nazianzonus in his Dialogue against Swearing saith An Oath is nothing else but a certain consumation of Mischiefs Ambrosius saith Swearing is only in Condescension to a Defect Chrysostom saith An Oath came in when Evils increased when men appeared unfaithful when all things became Topsy Turvy Again To swear is of the Devil seeing Christ saith What is more then Yea c. is of Evil. Swearing took its Beginning for want of Truth or Punctuality Augustin saith An Oath is not among good but Evil Things and used for the Infirmity of others which is Evil from which we pray that we may be daily delivered Chromatius saith What need we swear seeing it is unlawful to Lye Which shows that Lying was the Occasion of Oaths and by leaving off Lying Oaths vanquish as unprofitable Titelmannus saith that an Oath belongs not to Virtue Albertus Magnus saith Swearing is by Indulgence Ludulphus saith An Oath was permitted of Infirmity Burgensis cites Jerome saying Our Saviour teacheth that an Oath sprung from the Vices of Men. Bp. Gauden also tells us That the Evils of mens Hearts and Manners the Jealousies and Distrusts the Dissimulations and Frauds of many Christians their Vncharitableness and Insecurities are such as by their Diseases do make solemn Oaths and judicial Swearing necessary not ABSOLUTELY MORALLY or PRECEPTIVELY but as a Remedy or Expedient Jerom with many of the Fathers Chrysostom Theodoret and others here omitted because largly cited hereafter make this the Reason why God indulged the Jews in the Use of Swearing That they were but in the State of Infancy and that they might be kept from Swearing by false Gods which the Scripture is plain in For thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and swear by HIS Name Ye shall not go after other Gods for God is a Jealous God c. Which shews that he dispensed with Swearing by his Name that he might take them off from Swearing by False God's because they would thereby acknowledge them and not the True God so that Swearing is only better then Idolatry It will remain that we give our REASONS why we cannot take this Liberty and Swear as well as other Men have done and yet do I. THe first is drawn from the Cause and Ground of Oaths viz. Perfidiousness Distrust and Falshood God's Injunctions to avoid those hateful Crimes The Ability he hath given man to answer his Commands and Man's Duty to make that use of God's Gift For if Swearing came in by Perfidiousness Distrust Dissimulation and Falshood it is a most just Consequence that it ought to go out with them or that as the Rise and Increasing of those Evils were the Rise and Increasing of Oaths so the Decreasing and Extirpation of those Evils should be the Decreasing and Abolishing of Oaths otherwise there would be no Truth in the Rule of Contraries nor Reason in that ancient Maxim Cessante ratione Legis cessat lex That the Ceasing of the Reason of the Law is the Cessation of the Law Expedients are no longer useful then to obtain what they are designed to Means are swallowed up of their Ends Diseased Men only want Remedies and Lame Men Crutches Honesty needs neither Whip nor Spur She is Security for her self and Men of Virtue will speak Truth without Extortings for Oaths are a sort of Racks to the Mind altogether useless where Integrity swayes This we presume no man of Reason will deny viz. That Swearing came in and ought to go out with Perfidiousness and we hope it will be as easie to grant at least it will be very easie to prove That God hath frequently both by Prophets and Apostles reproved men for such Impieties and strictly required Truth and Righteousness as Isa 59 3 4. Jer. 9.3 5. Rom. 12.19 Gal. 5.19 20 21. Col. 3 8 9 10. Josh 24.14 1 Sam. 12.24 1 King 2.4 Eph. 4.25 and by abundance of other Places in Holy Scripture And that God should enjoyn man any thing that he hath not impowered him to perform is unworthy of any man acknowledging a God so much as to conceive It is true that the unprofitable Servant in the Parable is represented to entertain so blasphemous a Thought of his Maker that he was so hard a Master as to reap where he did not sow but the same Parable also acquaints us of the dreadful Consequence of that Presumption The Prophet Micha preached
Jerusalem for it is the City of the great King neither shalt thou swear by thy Head because thou caâ—st not make one Hair white or black but let your Word be YEA YEA NAY NAY for whatsoever is MORE then THESE cometh OF EVIL He here prohibits even the lesser Oaths as They thought them that reverenced Swearing by the Name of the Lord which in old time he suffer'd by reason of the Falseness of their Hearts and great Pronness to Idols even as Moses permitted them to put away their Wives which in the precedent Verse also is disallowed by Christ though with the Exception of Fornication but Swearing without any Exception He doth not say Swear not except before a Magistrate though he says Put not away thy Wife except for the Cause of Fornication but SWEAR NOT AT ALL why because it is OF EVIL which reason reaches the Oaths taken before Magistrates as well as other Oaths for Distrust Unfaithfulness are the Cause of one as well as the other And there is equal Reason in that respect that a Master should swear in private to his Servant at his Entrance that he will pay him his Wages as that the Servant should swear in publick to a Magistrate that at his Departure his Master would not pay him his Wages both which Oaths the Certainty of their Words their Yea being Yea and their Nay being Nay makes vain and superfluous Obj. We are not unsensible of the common Objection that is made against this Allegation of our Master's Command That he only prohibited Vain Oaths in Communication But if the words of the Text and Context be consider'd every Oath will be proved Vain and Vnlawful for Christ's Prohibition was not a meer Repetition of what was forbidden under the Law but what the Law allowed as Bp. Sanderson well observeth It was not needful that Christ should forbid what was forbidden in it self or was alwayes Vnlawful which vain Swearing was and is by the third Commandment Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain therefore Christ exceded the Prohibition of the Law And the whole Chapter is a Demonstration of a more excellent Righteousness then that which either needed or used Oaths for Christ brings Adultery from the Act to the Thought in lieu of Revenge he commands Suffering and extends Charity not only to Friends but Enemies so in the Place controverted in the room of such Oaths Vows as ought to be perform'd unto the Lord he introduces Yea and Nay with a most absolute SWEAR NOT AT ALL. This was the Advance he made in his excellent Sermon upon the Mount he wound up things to an higher pitch of Sanctity then under the Law or the childish State of the Jews could receive Again saith he Ye have heard of old time thou shalt not Forswear thy self but shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oaths but I say unto you SWEAR NOT AT ALL as plain general and emphatical a Prohibition as can be found in Holy Scripture However those Persons that usually advocate for the Continuance of Oaths under the Gospel tell us it is not a general Prohibition but is limited to Swearing by Creatures either by Heaven Earth Jerusalem or Head c. VVhich is wholy inconsistent with the Scope of the Place as we shall make appear from these Four Considerations 1 st The Prohibition reaches as well to serious as vain Oaths such as men made if they swore at all and ought to make to God only for to him alone should they perform them and are they accountable for them These very allowed Oaths of Old Time are the first prohibited by Jesus Christ It was said of Old thou shalt not Forswear thy self but I say SWEAR NOT AT ALL. 'T is true it is not particularized what Oaths they were to keep of old but in general Terms that they were not to Forswear themselves and it is clear that God enjoyned them that would Swear that they should only Swear by his Name Now what can be hence inferred more evidently then that men ought not to swear those Oaths under the Gospel which they might swear and ought not to forswear but to perform unto the Lord in the Law 2 dly Christ himself gives the Explanation of his own Words Chap. 23.16 17 18 19 20 21 22. where he teacheth us That he that swears by the Temple swears by it and by him that dwells therein and he that shall swear by Heaven swears by the Throne of God and by him that sits thereon So that he that swears by the Head swears by him that made it and he that swears by the Earth swears by him that created it which leaves no room for the Objection for it is as if Christ should have said I not only command you not to Forswear but perform as it was said to them of old time but I charge you NOT TO SWEAR AT ALL I mean not only that you should not swear by God and those Oaths that the Pharisees account binding but also that you should not so much as swear by those lesser Oaths as they esteem them and which they are wont to swear by for they are not less nor more allowable in that they that swear by them swear by him that is the Author and Maker of them wherefore being of the same Nature with the other I forbid you to swear by them as well as by those Oaths that were of old time made and ought not to be broak but perform'd unto the Lord for this is one of my great Commandments which they must keep that will be my Disciples that is to say SWEAR NOT AT ALL. Our 3 d Inducement to believe this to have been the Intention of our Lord Jesus Christ is the concurrent Testimony of the Apostle James which is not only a Repetition of his Master's Doctrine but an Addition and Illustration we hope sufficient to determin the present Question with every unprejudic'd Reader But above all things my Brethren saith he swear not which runs parallel with Swear not at all The Negative is as general forcible He proceeds neither by Heaven neither by the Earth Words of equal Import with the latter part of Christ's Prohibition and as if he had foreseen the Cavils of our Swearing Adversaries he adds neither by any other Oath which though as clear as the Sun if yet for their last shift they should tell us that he only meant any other Oath of that kind not that he prohibited Swearing by the Name of the Lord it will not do their Business for that Christ hath already assured us Whosoever swears by Heaven swears by him that sits thereon and the very next words show that it was not his Design only to prohibit vain but plainly to exclude all Swearing But let your Yea be Yea and your Nay Nay lest ye fall into Condemnation else why had he not said but you may swear by the Name of God before a Magistrate Why must
Praises of a Christian Emperor He is sayes he so far from being blackt with Perjury that he is even afraid to swear the Truth It seems then they swore not in his time and that Libanius an Enemy to Christians preferr'd and admired Swear not at all Auson Epist 2. XXV We shall conclude with Ausonius whose Saying seems to be all contracted or those other Testimonies digested into one Axiom that is To swear or speak falsly is one and the same thing These are the Reflections upon Oaths we receive from Heathens who by the Light they had both discerned the Scope of the Evangelical Doctrine Swear not at all preceptively laid down by Christ our Lord Mat. 5.34 and prest it earnestly And which is more to their Honour but to the Christians Shame several of them lived it sincerely II. Testimonies from the Jews in Dislike of all Swearing H. Grot. Com. on Mat. 5.34 XXVI Maimonides out of the most ancient of the Jewish Rabbies extracts this memorable Axiom IT IS BEST FOR A MAN NOT TO SWEAR AT ALL. Raimund p. 135. XXVII Raimundus quotes him thus Maimonides in tract de juramentis IT IS A GREAT GOOD FOR A MAN NOT TO SWEAR AT ALL The ancient and lawful Doctrine of the Synagogue Jofeph de bello Judaico l. 2. c. 7. XXVIII The Esseni or Essaeans saith Josephus keep their Promise and account every Word they speak of more force then if they had bound it with an Oath and they shun Oaths worse then Perjury for they esteem him condemned for a Lyar who is not believed without calling God to witness These Essaeans were the most Religious of the Jewish Pepole though the Pharisees made the greatest Noise amongst the Rabble Philo de decalogo p. 583. XXIX Philo that excellent Jew relates thus much concerning the same Essaeans That what soever they said was firmer then an Oath And that to Swear was counted amongst them a thing superfluous Philo Judeus on Com. 3d. XXX The same Philo himself thus taught in his Treatise on the Ten Commandments Commandment 3 d. Thou shalt not take the Name of God in vain Many Wayes saith he do men sin against this Commandment so THAT IT IS BETTER NOT TO SWEAR AT ALL but so well accustom thy self to speak Truth alwaies that thy Bare Word shall have the Force and Virtue of an Oath It is become a Proverb That to swear well and holily is a second Voyage for he that sweareth is suspected of Lying and Perjury It is saith he most profitable and agreeable to the reasonable Nature to abstain ALTOGETHER from Swearing Whatsoever a godly Man speaks let it go for an Oath The Wisdom and Moderation of this worthy Personage reflects just Blame upon those that Pillage their Neighbours because they Conscientiously Refuse an Oath But that men who pretend to be the Disciples of Jesus Christ should commit these Cruelties aggravates their Evils and doubt less their Guilt How can they ever hope to look their Lord with Comfort in the Face who so severely Treat their Fellow-Servants Certainly Jews and Heathens will one Day rise up in Judgment against such Christians for their Unnatural Carriage towards their Brethren This is not to Love Enemies but injure Friends Jews and Heathens are become Names of Reproach yet to the Rebuke of Christians as they call themselves they not only discern'd the Rise and Ground of Oaths but the Evil of using them even while they were tolerated and both avoided them and exhorted others to that Integrity which had no need of them These Testimonies though they are of Weight with us and we hope they will have a due Impress upon the Minds of many of our Readers yet because nothing produced out of Jews and Gentiles may advance our Cause with some or render it ever the more acceptable We shall next betake our selves to the more Christian Ages of the World for Approbation of our Judgment who we are sure will kindly entertain us their Liberality being Extraordinary to our Cause and from whom we shall never want Votes for SWEAR NOT AT ALL while their Works are in the World May our Superiors joyn theirs with them and we have Reason to believe that our Deliverance from the Yoak of Oaths will be the happy Issue of this necessary Address III. Testimonies from Christians both Fathers Doctors and Martyrs in Dislike of All Swearing Polycarpus XXXI The first Testimony recorded against Swearing after the Apostles Times was that of Polycarpus who had lived with the Apostles and was said to have been Disciple to John not the least of the Apostles for at his Death when the Governour bid him Swear Defie Christ c. he said Fourscore and Six Years have I served him yet hath he never offended me in any thing The Proconsul still urged and said Swear by the Fortune of Caesar to whom Polycarpus answered If thou requirest this Vain-glory that I Protest the Fortune of Caesar as thou sayest feigning thou knowest not who I am hear freely I AM A CHRISTIAN This Good man began his Fourscore and Six Years which was about Twenty Years after James wrote Above all things my Brethren Swear Not and several years before John the Apostle deceased for he is called his Disciple See his History and Commendation in Eusebius We know it is objected by some That he refused to Swear only because he could not swear by that Oath which is a Guess and no Confutation of what we alledge But if that had been Polycarpus's Reason why did he not rather say The Law of God forbids Swearing by Idols 'T is certain the first Christians would not Swear but thought Polycarpus's Answer Security enough to them that demanded their Oath He refused all Oaths as a Christian therefore saying he was a Christian was Reason sufficient why he would not take that Oath Justin Martyr Apol. 2. pro Christianis ad Anton. Pium oper p. 63. XXXII It was some time before his Suffering that Justin Martyr who is the first we find writing of it publisht an Apology for the Christians in the year 150. as himself saith and a second after that wherein he tells us after the Doctrine of his Master That we should NOT SWEAR AT ALL but alwayes speak the Truth He that is Christ hath thus commanded SWEAR NOT AT ALL but let your YEA be YEA and your NAY NAY and what is more then these is of Evil. See his Praise and Martyrdom in Eusebius soon after Polycarpus Euseb Eccl. Hist lib. 5. c. 1. XXXIII Under the same Emperor says Eusebius suffered also Ponticus of Fifteen Years of Age and Blandina a Virgin with all kind of Bitter Torments the Tormentors now and then urging them to Swear which they constantly Refused Euseb ibid. lib. 6. cap. 4. XXXIV And in the next Emperor's Reign Basilides a Souldier of Authority amongst the Hoast being appointed to lead Potamiena to Execution and by her convinced of the Truth in Christ was
since there may be some Truth and Sincerity we cannot but acknowledge and embrace And we hope the Reasons and Authorities of others they bring and the Concessions and Confessions they make may and indeed ought to be of Weight in that Point at least to shew that it is no new strange or unreasonable Thing for us to refuse Oaths And though some might with a Mixture of Supâ—rstition and Wâ—ll-worship undertake and maintain that Strictness and Preciseness which some of the holy Ancients by the Spirit of Truth were led to practise the ancient Histâ—ries of whom from Eye-Witnesses as the Word signifies of some of them we in a great Part believe And some later more Enlightened and Zealous Men taking Offence thereat but especially at the Hypocrisie and Abomination palliated by such fair Pretences have streined much in Opposition to that Evangelical Doctrine yet is the Doctrine nevertheless a Truth in it self Nor can we believe that all that were accounted Hereticks were out of the Catholick or Universal Church for the Word Catholick signifies Vniversal containing all that are in the Church that is in God the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ in all Times and those were not all of the same Mind in all Things as may be read in the Holy Scriptures and also in Eusebius and other Ecclesiastical Histories where Men are commended for Holiness and Virtue yet at much Difference in some Things Synesius though he believed not the Resurrection was chosen to minister and afterward was made a Bishop the Charity of Christians was so great in that Age. And some accounted Hereticks suffered Martyrdom that are commended or excused by Eusebius one in particular that dyed with Polycarpus and another called Asclepius called Marcionites See also the beginning of his eighth Book concerning the Divisions among them that afterward suffered for the Testimony of the Universal or Catholick Truth nor can we receive their Judgment that branded those with the Name of Hereticks Pelagians c. who denyed Swearing in those declining Ages and suppressed their Works under that Name and Aspersion only not allowing them to speak for themselves to us of latter Times We see how unjustly we our selves are aspersed in almost every Doctrine we hold and that under Pretence of serving God particularly with seeking to work our Salvation by our own Power and when they have made us this Belief they bestow Pelagianism upon it for Fathers have Right to name their own Children whereas of all other People we especially disclaim our own Ability and wait to be renewed and guided by the Spirit of Christ and to be found in his Righteousness and therefore on the other hand reputed Phanaticks Enthusiasts c. and mocked for being moved by the Spirit following the Light c. But let their Example or Authority be as it will or however they were in other Respects the Doctrine of the ancient primitive Fathers and Practice of that Church as also the Doctrine of famous Men among themselves neither of which Sort dare they condemn for Hereticks do sufficiently defend them from the Aspersion of Heresie in that Particular And so we shall come to our remaining Testimonies it being our Business not to maintain every one of their Principles we cite but this Doctrine of Swear not at all to have had the Voice of several Ages to confirm it The ancient Waldenses reputed to have continued Vncorrupted with the Grosness of the Apostacy ever since the Apostles Times see their History in P. Perin S. Moreland and Bp Vsher de Succes we have good Cause to say denyed the taking of any Oath in what Sense the Primitive Christians and Fathers refused and that was altogether Sure their Enemies charg'd them with it for above three hundred Years and we cannot find they then denyed the Charge We suppose none will attempt to prove they did Though one of our Adversaries joyns with theirs traducing them for Perjurers and with them abuses that worthy and learned Man Bp. Vsher who defends them from that improbable and contradictory Aspersion of Lying and Forswearing and yet of Denying to Sweaâ— who sayes that they were as far from Lying and Forswearing as their Enemies were from Modâ—sty and Truth which did appear in that they were charg'd by them Not to swear at all Peruse that part of his Book de Successione where he treats of them and where also you may read of their Succession how that the Syrians Armenians came out of the East into Thracia thence in process of Time into Bulgaria and Sclavonia thence into Italy and Lumbardy and were called by several Names of several People or at several Times as Manichees Waldenses Albingenses Cathari or Puritans Patrins Publicans Humiliati c. who were charged with denying Swearing And how that several of the better sort of the Clergy and of the nobler Laity who refused the present Use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper were burnt under the Name of Manichees Suarez also reckons-up the Catharists Alba. Bagnald and others which Prateolus and Castro relate the Waldenses the Anabaptists c. And which Jansenius also out of Augustine Epist 89. the Pelagians out of Hilary Syracusanus Epist 88. Bernard homil 69. on Cant. The Fathers sayes he seem to favour this Opinion especially Basil hom in Psal 14. Chrysostom hom 19.78 ad popul and 17. on Mat And Theophylact on Mat. 5. Origen Tract 35. Mat. Tertullian de Idololat Clem. Rom. l. 6. Constitut Apost Maldonat on Mat. 5.34 saith the Anabaptists the Wickliffists some Syracusans a kind of Pelagians denyed Swearing and that Origen was not far off that Opinion Here the Hereticks as accounted and the Fathers are reckoned up together as holding the same Opinions Sure in this they were not Hereticks for then the Fathers should be condemned with them and called Hereticks too as well as they or else these Men are partial and contradictory On Jam. 5. of the words of the Apostle thus Ser. 30. Perhaps it is meet for the Lord alone to swear who cannot forswear And so he goes on to shew how hard it is for men to avoid Perjury In Serm. 3. ad competentes Let them not only abstain from Perjury but from Swearing because he doth not Lye who saith A man Swearing much shall not depart from Iniquity and the Plague shall not depart from his House Eccles 23. But if it were an August Act of the Worship of God he would on the contrary have exhorted at least if not commanded them to swear which we never read any Command for but in Opposition to Idols even in the time of the Old-Testament-Writings as the Testimonies before alledged declare and in the time of the New no Command at all but on the contrary a Prohibition by the Lord himself and another by his Apostle nor any Example for that of Paul's was but an Asseveration as by the Testimonies already produced and to be alledged appears For besides
those of the Fathers and other Doctors of late Bp. Ro. Sanderson in his Oxford Lectures shows that is sometimes used in the Form of an Oath which is no Oath and so he defendeth Joseph from breaking God's Command that is not to have sworn so and therefore not to have sinned but to have used an Asseveration as if he had said as sure as Pharaoh liveth ye are Spyes So may Paul be defended against the breaking Christ's Command as if he had said as sure as ye or as some Greek Copies have it We Rejoyce in Christ Jesus For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they translate I protest by hath sometimes the same signification that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea hath as may be seen in Scapula For he sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated I protest by is a Particle sometimes of granting and affirming sometimes it is put for verily indeed and he interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the same word which is translated yea which Scapula saith is also sometimes used in Swearing and cites Aristophanes and Xenophon for it And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used also in Composition for affirming as in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profusus lavishing which cannot signifie Swearing And how easily might the Transcriber through that common Use alter a Letter being of the same signification seeing in that very Verse in some Copies there is not only in another word an Alteration of a Letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our and your but in another word five Letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 referring it to the Verse before yea a whole Word of Seven Letters added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And of about Thirty Greek Copies there are not Two of them that agree but they interfer some in one place some in another insomuch that there are Thousands of various Readings which many of the ancient Fathers diversly follow some one some another See the various Lections Variae Lectiones Graec. Nov. Test in Bp. Walton's Polyglot vol. 6. also the Preface and Beza's Epistle therein And consider how hard a thing it is to construe limit and lay the Interpretation of the Sayings of Christ and his Apostles and the Weight of a Doctrine and that as men would avoid Penalties too upon a Letter which yet alters not the Signification upon Credit of the Transcribers especially in Paul's Epistles wherein Peter sayes many things are hard to be understood and wrested by the Vnlearned which he must needs intend in such Learning as he himself had and that was not of Worldly Academics but from the Holy Spirit And these words which are joyned with that Particle are not such words as men use in Swearing but for a Ground of his Fidelity and a Remedy against their Incredulity and questioning of the Weight of his Assertions amongst whom other Teachers were preferred and who compelled him to speak as a Fool he says even to commend himself So that it is not strange if to them and not to other Churches he used such forcible Asseverations from the Testimony that they had of him of the Truth and Work of Christ in â—im and the Record thereof upon his Soul and his Joy therein that he spoak the Truth to them and did not lye so that he brings his Perfections against their Imperfections to gain Belief which can amount to no more then a Voluntary Condescension for the time being and cannot prove or countenance a Compulsory Promissory Formal Ceremonial Oath to be exacted or taken up for the future But Mark that the word Oath or Swear used both by Christ and the Apostle James in their Prohibition is never used by Paul in his Asseverations neither doth he ever apply it to Brethren bâ—t speaking to them of the Oath that was in old time and of men indefinitely that use to swear he saith Men swear and to them an Oath is for Confirmation that is as among the Jews and Heathen he doth not say to Vs or to You or We or Ye swear who are not in Strife which if had that been true it might have stood the present Oath-Advocates in stead So that such as will have it that Paul swore must being the word swear or Oath to prove it But if they could his Example then were not enough to invalidate to us now the Command of Christ for the Abolishing of Swearing no more then his shaving his Head at Cenchrea because he had a Vow or his purifying himself in the Temple and offering with the four Jews that had a Vow or his circumcising of Timothy because of the Jews can warrant us to the Observation of those legal Rites and Ceremonies which so long since are not only dead but deadly as the Fathers and Bp. Sanderson distinguish about them And those that would therefore bring in Swearing and Vows might under the same Colour bring in sacrificing and circumcising too LIV. ISIDORUS PELUSIOTA who as Euagrius Schol. writes lived at the same time with Cyrill and that the Fame of his Sayings and Doings was spead far and near and rise in every man's Mouth that He led on Earth the Life of an Angel and wrote many notable Works amongst which are his Epistles in one whereof he writeth against Swearing thus If thou art of our Flock and art ordered under a good Shepherd deny the Nature of Wild Beasts and obey his Voice that Forbiddeth to Swear AT ALL. Moreover not to Swear is not to require an Oath of another Now if thou wilt not swear neither require thou an Oath of another for two Causes either because he who is asked loves Truth or on the contrary to Lye If the man speaks Truth usually he will alwayes speak Truth without an Oath but if he is a Lyar he will Lye though he Swear Therefore for both these Causes one ought not to require an Oath LV. CHROMATIUS Bishop of Aquileia about or not long after that time upon these words But I say unto you Swear not at all paraphraseth thus The Law saith he given by Moses received a Growth Proficiency or Perfection by the Grace of the Doctrine of the Gospel In the Law it was commanded not to Forswear but in the Gospel NOT TO SWEAR Which very thing heretofore the Holy Ghost did premeditate that Solomon should command or teach saying Let not thy Mouth use to Swear And again As a Servant beaten continually is not lessened from the Paleness of his Stripes so every one that sweareth shall not be purg'd from Sin Wherefore it is not meet for us to Swear AT ALL For what need is there for any of us to Swear seeing that it is not at all LAWFUL FOR US TO LYE whose Words ought always to be so True so very Faithful that they may be accounted for Oaths And therefore the Lord not only forbids us to Forswear BUT EVEN TO SWEAR that we may not seem to speak Truth ONLY
saith Because he desires entirely to draw out the deadly Poison of the Tongue in his Hearers he forbad to detract or slander any man or to judge his Neighbour who forbad to grieve in Adversities which are open Sins he adds this also seeming light to some that he may take away the Custom of Swearing For that this also is not to be esteem'd a light matter plainly appears to them that carefully consider that Sentence of the Lord where he faith Of every idle Word that men shall speak they shall give Account in the Day of Judgment That ye fall not into Condemnation Therefore saith he I restrain you from the Fault of Swearing lest by Swearing frequently true things ye fall sometimes also into Forswearing but stand so far from the Vice of Forswearing that you will not Swear neither but by the greatest Necessity But he also falls under the Judgment of Guilt who although he never Forswear yet sweareth true oftener then there is need namely he offends in the very Idleness of superfluous Speech and he offendeth the Judge which forbad both every unprofitable Word and OATH From this chief man among the English of that time it is manifest that this was the Doctrine they then held as further appears from H. Spelman that learn'd English Knight in his Book of Brittish Councils Canons c. in the Exceptions or select Collections of Egbert Arch Bishop of York Artic. 19. That no Priest whaâ—soever may swear an Oath but let him speak all things simply in Purity ond Truth And in the same Author and Council Art 18. the chief of Monasteries Priests Deacons should say without Swearing when they were to purge and clear themselves only thus I speak the Truth in Christ I lye not And in pag. 259. In England at the Council of Berghamstâ—d about the Year 750. Artic. 17. That a Bishop or a King's Word or Affirmation without an Oath is irrefragable This agrees with Blastaris Canons above mention'd And at this Day in some Countries as the Electoral Arch-Bishops in Germany of Colen Mentz and Triers and many Noble Men in their Station speak without an Oath upon their Honour c. Certainly then it is much below the Nobility of true Christians in their Spiritual Station to Swear as Chrysostom and the Ancients have well observ'd LXV HAIMO lived about 840. who on the Revelations saith That it 's lawful only for Men and Angels to swear but to Men it is forbidden LXVI AMBROSIUS ANSBERTUS Gallus Presbyter Seeing the Lord cohibits the Faithful from every Oath saying Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. but let your Yea be Yea and your Nay Nay what abounds more then them is from the Evil Who stretcheth out his Hand to Heaven and sweareth by him that liveth forever Are not his Sayings and Actings set for Examples for Believers to imitate But only in that men are often deceived by an Oath but he who is the Truth never is deceived for he would not have prohibited men from an Oath if he had not known Sin to be in it For what do we understand to be figured by the Hand of the Angel unless as before noted a Dispensation of Redemption of Mankind For his Hand is the Operation of our Salvation although also if it may be so said the same Son be his Right-Hand as when the Word of the Father speaketh he sheweth that he is the Word of the Father LXVIII THEOPHYLACT Arch-Bishop of the Bulgarians whom some place in the Ninth Century others after to be sure very Famous being as it were their Apostle in his Comment on Mat. 5. saith To swear or adjure more to Yea or Nay is of the Devil Moreover sayes he if thou shouldst say That the Law also given to Moses was evil because it commandeth to swear Learn that then it was not Evil to swear but after Christ it is Evil as also to be circumcised and in brief whatsoever is Jewish For it is convenient for a Child to suck but not at all for a Man LXIX Barnard The Truth needs not an Oath De modo bene vivendi Ser. 32. De perjurio A Faithful Word holds the Place of an Oath as he cannot Lye who doth not Speak so he cannot Forswear who doth not undertake to Swear grounded on Matthew 5. LXX PASCHALIUS RATBERTUS on Mat. 5. Ye have heard c. In this place as also every where in those things the Perfection in Righteousness is renew'd for by what every one swears he either worships loveth or fears it Therefore by the Law for the carnal People it was lawful to swear by God and this was allow'd as to little Ones that as they offer'd Sacrifices to God lest they should offer them to Idols so also it was permitted to them to swear by God Not that they did this well but because it was better to give it to God then to Devils LXXI OTHO BRUNFELSIUS on Mat. 5. But let your Word be Yea c. That is the Duty of a Christian man to be so sure in his Words that being Unsworn he surpass any Jew or Heathen swearing by all his holy Things namely in these bare Words only Yea Yea Nay Nay Such Faithfulness Constancy is commended in good men by prophane Authors Read Seneca Cicero Valerius Maximus But thou wilt say I shall not be trusted unless I swear Even so it is permitted by the Popes to swear good Words in a good Cause But such Distrust ought not to reign in the Faithful But if we trust not Words what should an Oath do It is a Proverb None is less trusted then he which shall often swear Moreover Who gave Power to Popes to break the Command of God LXXII DRUTHMARUS on Math. 5. Lest the Jews should Swear by Idols Names the Lord suffered them to swear by his own Name The Lord taught us Perfection that such Trust is to be among Christians that there should be no need to interpose the Name of God for Witness LXXIII JANSENIUS on Matth. 5. If all Christians were such as they ought to be it would certainly be needless both to require and take an Oath I think this more Christian and not to Swear at all nor Compel to Swear more Spiritual Yea and Amen are the same 2 Cor. 1. not Swearing but Affirming So Christ swore not See Bernard Hom. 69. in Cant. De more bene vivendi Serm. 32. LXXIV ALBERTUS MAGNUS on Mat. 5. Swearing is by Indulgence Thomas Aquinas cites Rabanus on Mat. 5. LXXV Alex. de Ales citeth HUG CARDINAL saying The Lord Forbad Swearing lest any should desire to swear as a Good Thing also that none might fall into Perjury LXXVI REMIGIUS on Rom. 1. Who never Swears never Forswears LXXVII RUFFINUS on Psal 14. Not to Swear at all is of Perfect Men. See also Smaragdus on Mat. 5. Titelmannus on Psal 14. Brugensis on Mat. 5. Ludolphus Carthusianus vita Christi part 2. cap. 12. Rupertus de
operibus spiritus sancti fol. 453. Baptista Folengius on Psal 15. Nic. Lyra and Ordinary Gloss on Mat 5. LXXVIII EUTHYMIUS ZAGABONUS on Matth. 5. p. 43. saith thus Again ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time Thou shalt not Forswear c. but I say unto you Swear not at all c. Now the old Law saith Thou shalt not Forswear but shalt offer to the Lord thine Oaths which he added that he might put Fear into the Swearer that he should not Forswear knowing that God which knows all things undertakes the Oath But I say unto you Swear not at all For he that easily sweareth sometimes perchance may Forswear by the Custom of Swearing but he that Swears by no means will never Forswear Besides thou that swearest so be thou do not Forswear thou observest the Worship of God but Swearing by no means thou dost promote it And the other is the part of mean and imperfect Philosophy but this of that which is the highest and perfect The other Thou shalt not Forswear is written in the Book of Exodus but this Thou shalt restore to the Lord thine Oaths in the Book of Deuteronomy but in other words Now he commanded this lest they should swear by Gods of a false Name Again Not to Swear and not to require an Oath comes to the same thing For how canst thou induce thy Brother unto that which thou avoidest thy self if so be that thou art a Lover of thy Brother and not rather of Money Nor by Heaven for it is the Throne of God c. Lest they should think that he forbad to swear by God only in saying By God he adds also other kind of Oaths by which then the Jews did swear for he that sweareth by these things sweareth again by God who fills these things and rules them for they have these things in Honour for him and not for themselves for he saith by the Prophet Heaven is my Throne and the Earth is my Foot-stool the Prophet manifesting by this that God filleth all things Do not I fill Heaven and Earth David also saith The City of the Great King Neither by thy Head Therefore thou shouldst not swear the meanest Oath I say even by thy own Head lest thou proceed to greater or by any other manner for the Creature is also the Possession of God And again the Oath is made by God who hath it the Creature in his Power for although it the Head be made thine yet it is not thy Work which is manifest from this That thou canst not make one Hair white or black But let your Words be Yea Yea Nay Nay c. Let your Speech be when ye affirm Yea and when ye deny Nay and use only these for or instead of Oaths to Confirmation and no other then Yea and Nay what is adjoyned besides these he calleth an Oath Quest But if an Oath be of the Devil how did the old Law permit 〈◊〉 Answ Because the Sacrifices of Living Creatures were also of Evil and by the Deceit of Idols yet the Law permitted them because of the Infirmity of the Hebrews For whereas they were Gluttons and Smell-Feasts they lov'd the Sacrifices of Idols and whereas also they were Unbelieving they also loved an Oath And that they should not afterwards either sacrifice to Idols or swear by Idols the Law permitted them to sacrifice and to swear and if there were any thing else of that kind they transferred all unto God Now it was to come to pass that in process of time he would cut off these things also by a more sublime Law to be brought in because it is good for Infants to be suckled but for men it is very unfit There we allow this to them that live after the manner of Infants but we with-draw or prohibit them that are manly from it Quest What then is to be done if any require an Oath yea compel to Swear Answ Let the Fear of God be more forcible then this Compulsion or Necessity and chuse rather to suffer all things then to transgress the Command sith in every Precept Force and Violent Danger will often meet with thee And unless thou esteemest the Command of God every where more forcible all things will depart from thee Void and Unperformed In the following Passages the Lord saith The Kingdom of Heaven suffered Violence and the Violent take it by Force LXXIX OECUMENIUS a Famous Greek Writer about Ann. 1070. writes on Jam. 5.12 thus But some will say If any be forced to swear what is to be done We say that the Fear of God shall be stronger then the Force of him that compels But some may doubt How it comes to pass that Grace doth not command this as did the Old Law affording Praise to him that did swear by the Name of the Lord We say The old Law leading the Jews not to swear by Devils appointed to swear by God as it commanded them to sacrifice drawing them from the Sacrifice of Idols or Devils But when it had sufficiently taught them to have a Religious Respect to God then it rejected Sacrifices as unprofitable seeking not a Sacrifice by Beasts but a Broaken Spirit that is a sweet whole Burnt-Sacrifice enflamed by the Fire of Love That ye fall not into Hypocrisie so some Copies have it for the words in Greek are something alike Hypocrisie he saith or Condemnation which follows them that Swear without sparing and through the Custom of Oaths are carryed out to Forswear The Word Hypocrisie signifies thus much that which being one thing appears another How then falleth he into Hypocrisie that sweareth Answ When he that is believed for the Oath 's sake to be true and yet Transgression following is declared to be a Lyar instead of a true Man not producing Yea in Certainty He forbids to swear by God because of Perjury but by Heaven and other Oaths that men should not bring these things into the Honour of God for all that swear do swear by the Greater LXXX ANSHELMUS Bishop of Canterbury about Ann. 1090. on that place of Mat. 5. thus pag. 38. Thou shalt not Forswear c. Moses seeing that he could not take away Swearing takes away Perjury And again Because men have in great Reverence those things by which they swear lest they should make the Creatures Gods to themselves he commands them to render their Oaths to God and not to swear by Creatures But the Lord removes them more perfectly from Perjury when he forbids them to Swear at all LXXXI The Ancient WALDENSES we have good Cause to say Deny'd the taking of any Oath in what Sense the Primitive Christians and Fathers refused and that was altogether To be sure their Enemies charged them with it for above Three Hundred Years and we cannot find that they then deny'd the Charge We suppose none will attempt to prove they did for they were well known in the World as to this
which is the only Due of Perjury and if you condescend to yield us the Kindness of the one we offer our Persons to answer the just Severity of the other We will add here out of Hoofâ—'s History of the Netherlands a President not impertinent to our Purpose fol. 464 465. translated out of Latin as follows CXX In this Assembly of the States saith Hooft there was something attempted towards the Oppression of the Menists as appears by a certain Letter written from Dort the last of March by the Ld. St. Aldegonde to the Minister Caspanus Heidanus which was thus worded The Cause of the Menists hath since receipt of your and Taffin's Letters yesterday been treated of with the most illustrious Prince And verely I find it more difficult then I had hoped for ever may and will such Cursed Hopes meet with such Wise Repulses from prudent Rulers For he had at Middelburgh given me great Hopes that we should seclude from the Freedom of Burgesses or at leaft not so solemnly receive those that refused an Oath Now he alledgeth that such a thing cannot be concluded without a new Convulsion in the Churches because the States will never suffer that such a Law be made as they judge no wayes conducing to the Common Good of the Republick Yea he avers That this was the only Cause formerly which brought their Consistories so far into the Displeasure of the States that it differed very little but they had been all at once voted down and laid aside by the Council That they the Clergy were now again about the same thing and that in such a season that no doubt many would pour in cold Water out of the Popish Hodg-podge That his settled Judgment was that this would turn to great Disadvantage and breaking down of their Churches And when I saith Aldegonde fervently urged That we could easily reject those that broak the Band of all Humane Society upon Pretence of Civil and Political Order and when I added saith he how much Danger and Peril Church and State were threatned with by such a Conclusion of the Council in it self Ungodly He answered me sharply enough That those men's YEA must pass for an Oath and that we must not urge this thing any further or we must confess that the Papists had Reason to Force us to a Religion that was against our Consciences and that the North-Hollanders would not at all allow of it In short saith he I scarce see any thing we can get done in this Point which verely ye may believe him upon his Protestation Is the greater Smart to me the more I observe that the Minds of many Honest Men by the pretending of I know not what unseasonable Stumbling Blocks will be thereby imbitter'd yea I could almost say wounded to see them less affected â—o those that to their uttermost seek to advance the Cause of the Church The PRINCE saith he partly in the Name of the State and partly of himself chid me as if we were about to set up in our Clergy a Dominion over the Conscience and as if they endeavour by their Laws and Constitutions to subject all others to them And he praised the Saying of a Monk that was lately here who answered to the Objection of the Persecuting Spirit of the Romish Church That our Pot had not gone so long to the Fire as theirs whom we did so much revile upon that Account And that he clearly saw That before two Ages passed the Church-Dominion would upon both sides stand on even Ground To which Hooft adds By this we may observe of what Consequence the Prince and States then held Liberty of Conscience to be And that what we have hitherto said may not be thought a thing impracticable we shall present you with the Judgment and Edicts of Forreign Governments Here follow Two Letters of the Grave of Nassou and Prince of Orange to the Magistrates of the City of Middelburgh in Behalf of the Menists there CXXI A Copy of the First Letter FOrasmuch as a Supplication hath been presented unto his Excellency in behalf of certain Inhabitans of this City of Middelburg complaining thereby That the Magistrates of the said City had lately caused their Shops to be shut and consequently prohibited their Trade which yet the only means which they have to maintain their Families the sâ—id Prohibition proceeding from their not having yet taken the Usual OATH as others The said Inhabitants further remonstrating how that they now for a certain long Term of Years have without taking the said Oath freely born all Civil Burdens Contributions and Taxes equally with other Burgesses and Inhabitants of this said City without ever having been in any Default and therefore ought at present still to remain unmolested seeing they do therein not desire any thing else then to live in the Liberty of their Consciences upon which Account this present War against the King of Spain hath been by his Subjects taken up and all Ceremonies contrary thereunto resisted in which such Advance is through the Help of God made that the afore-said Liberty of Conscience is preserved and therefore it would be an Unequal Thing to Deprive the Supplicants thereof who have helped to acquire the same by bearing Taxes Contributions and other Burdens not without great Peril of their Bodies and Lives consonant to which they having presented a Request to the aforesaid Magistrates but got for Answer That they must regulate themselves according to the Policy and Order of the aforesaid City Whereby saith the Petition the aforesaid Magistrates seem to endeavour by the Oath not only totally to ruin and expel out of these Lands the Petitioners with their Wives Children residing in Middelburgh but consequently innumerable others in Holland and Zeeland who have according to his Excellency's Proclamations placed themselves under his Excellency's Protection by which no man can be any wayes benefited but all these Lands received great and considerable Dammage because thereby the Traffique thereof would be every where greatly diminished Intreating therefore and humbly begging his Excellency that looking upon their Case with Compassion he would take due Course about it especially seeing that the aforesaid Petitioners do proffer that their YEA passing for an Oath the Transgressors hereof should be punished as Oath-Breakers Therefore his Excellency having considered the Premises and having maturely deliberated upon the same hath with the previous Advice of the Governour and Council of Zeeland ordered and appointed ordereth and appointeth hereby That the aforesaid Petitioners YEA shall be received by the Magistrates of the aforesaid City instead of an OATH provided that the Transgressors thereof shall be punished as Oath-Breakers and Perjured Persons His Excellency charging and commanding the Magistraâ—es of Middelburgh and all others whom this may concern No further to oppress the Petitioners contrary to their Consciences concerning the Oath but suffer them to Open their Shops and Enjoy their Trades as they formerly have done all by Provision and