Selected quad for the lemma: end_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
end_n	lord_n	receive_v	supper_n	1,604	5	9.1492	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35138	The catechist catechiz'd: or, Loyalty asserted in vindication of the oath of allegiance, against a new catechism set forth by a father of the Society of Jesus To which is annexed a decree, made by the fathers of the same Society, against the said oath: with animadversions upon it. By Adolphus Brontius, a Roman-Catholick.	Cary, Edward, d. 1711.; England. Parliament.	1681 (1681)	Wing C722; ESTC R222415	68,490	195

to be true in order to be believ'd M. What is a Promisory S. It is to swear a Promise in order to bind our selves to another M. In which of these two Oaths does an Oath of Allegiance consist S. In a promisory as is clear for by a promise alone I bind my Allegiance M. Is the English Oath of Allegiance wholly Promisory S. No the greatest part is meerly speculative and Assertory and therefore no Oath of Allegiance so that the Title ill becomes the whole and seems only put to draw in People M. Set me down the Conditions required for the Lawfulness of an Oath S. They are three Truth Lawfulness of the thing to be sworn and Necessity of swearing M. What do you mean by Truth S. I mean that I must understand the words I swear by and that I must have a moral certainty that the thing is so as I swear it to be which certainty admits no doubt of the thing 's being otherwise M. Is not the probability of a thing 's being so enough for one to swear it S. No for probability leaving a rational doubt whether the thing be so or no I cannot bring God's veracity to witness what I doubt of M. May not I upon a probability of a thing 's being so swear I think it is so S. I may because the Oath is then grounded upon the certainty I have of my Thought tho' never so weak and not upon the probability of the thing M. Pray come to the 2. Requisit what do you mean by the Lawfulness of a thing S. I mean that the thing be neither unlawful in it self as the telling of a lye nor by prohibition as eating Flesh upon Friday M. What do you understand in the third Requisite by Necessity S. I mean that one must not swear lightly but by reason of some Obligation grounded in a vertue as Charity Justice or Obedience M. Of which of these requisites does the Oath of Allegiance fail S. It fails of all It fails of Truth which is the first because many Illiterate Persons do not understand the force of the words and those who understand them have no moral certainty of the truth of the things signifi'd by them It fails of the 2. Requisit that is the Lawfulness of the thing I swear First by reason this Oath obliges me to unlawful Discoveries Secondly by reason it is prohibited by a lawful power and Thirdly by being made a mark of Religion M. What say you to the 3. Requisit which is Necessity S. It appears from the want of the two first requisits For it is so far from the requisit of Necessity as that it is necessary not to take it M. You seem then to hold this Oath cannot be taken without a grievous sin and without Perjury S. It is but what two Popes have declared with several Breves M. What is Perjury S. It is a calling God to witness a falsity M. In what consists it's Malice S. In making God who is Truth it self Witness of an untruth and as it were Perjured he being his own Oath in what he witnesses M. Is Perjury a great sin S. Yes a hainous one and so against Nature as the very Gentiles the Scythians and Aegyptians put the Perjured to Death the Indians cut off their Hands and Feet CHAP. III. Of the Title of the Act. M. WHat is the Title of the Act which orders the tendring the Oath S. It is An Act for the discovering and suppressing Popish Recusants M. What do you infer from this Title S. I infer what is naturally Inferr'd from a Title the intent of the Act which is to discover and suppress Popish Recusants by means of the Oath M. Do you then think the Oath to be intended as a distinctive sign of Popery S. Yes for what ever is ordered to Discover and Suppress Popish Recusants must be intended to distinguish them from others M. Why so Are there not other things enjoin'd by the Act to distingush Recusants as the going to Church to Communion c. which may verify the Title of the Act S. There are but those things discover Dissenters in General who refuse the Protestant Communion and Church no less than Catholicks The Oath of Allegiance is only proper to try Catholiks and therefore chiefly pointed at by the Title M. Have you considered the Preamble in the Act prefixed to the Oath it may perchance alter your Opinion S. I believe not I pray deliver it me M. It runs thus And for the better tryal how his Majestyes Subjects stand Affected in point of Loyalty and due Obedience be it also Enacted c. By which words you see the intent is to distingush Loyal from disloyal Subjects and not what you pretend from the Title of the Act. S. Be it said with your good leave this preamble Confirms the Oath to be not only a distinctive sign to discover a Papist but adds to the Discovery a Penalty the greatest imaginable of making a Papist to be reputed and persecuted as Disloyal and consequently to be suppressed as is designed in the Title M. Is then the Title of the Act fitly and fully apply'd to the Oath since other things are contain'd in the Act S. Yes for a Papist is Discover'd by his Refusal and his refusal of the Oath brings him in Disloyal and exposes him as such to the Laws to be Suppress'd which is the full intention of the Act for so are compleated the two parts of the Title to Discover and Suppress From this you must necessarily infer that this Law which settles Protestant Religion by the words Loyalty and Obedience understands and aims at nothing but a complyance with that Religion M. Can you make this out by another instance contained in the Act and prove that this Oath is intended for a distinction of Religion and not only a distinction of Loyalty S. Yes I can if you allow Communion and going to Church to be a distinctive mark of Religion M. I allow them for such S. If so be pleased to reflect how the same Act does declare that Communion is proposed for a distinctive sign of Loyalty and Obedience and not for a sign of Religion for the Preamble to the ordaining the taking of the Communion is this For the better discovery therefore of such Persons and their evil Affection to the Kings Majesty and the state of the Realm to the end that evil purposes may be better prevented be it Enacted that once in every Year following he receive the Lords Supper M. This is somthing for if the Receiving the Communion be a distinctive sign of Religion although the Preamble might be produced to perswade the contrary and that it is only a distinctive sign of Loyalty so the taking the Oath is clearly a distinctive sign to discover a Papist as the Title does declare though the Preamble alledged seem to bear another intent Nor can I invent a Reason when I compare the two Preambles why this latter Preamble