latitude and morality thereof did require or for which it was given His sixth Argument is That either these words Swear not at all must be interpreted as not to forbid any oath though taken upon just occasion or else Paul never knew the meaning of this text or else contrary to his knowledge and that upon good deliberation he acted against it and that in these very writings wherein we all believe that he was infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost for his Oaths saith A. S. are upon record 1 Thes. 2. 5. God is witness see Rom. 1. 9. Now to call God to witness is the very substance of an oath saith A. S. and as Austin tells him and he says he hath not read of any of a contrary opinion except some Phanaticks which if they would yield to as much as Paul saith God is witness of the truth of their assertions it might be wished out of condescention to their weakness that they might be dispensed withal if the Law would give leave as to the external formality of an Oath Ans. What A. S. will call a just â—ccasion I know not it appears to me he would have a large compasse and a larger then the most contenders against Christs Doctrine that we have met with or what he will account a just occasion I know not though otherwise he seem to condemn sometimes needless and vain oaths in ordinary communication though I know some without reflection upon A. S. who uses them too too frequently and are not only members but Pastours so called of the Church of England and though he seems in his Discourse here and there to be against customary and vain oaths yet for all that what he calls a just occasion upon some ground some calls it a needful occasion when they are called before a Magistrate and some when any business is in controversie betwixt man and man calls it a just occasion where sometimes I have seen a Curate administer that which he called an oath upon a Book what ground he had I suspect either from Commandement or example of Primitive Ministers is certain he had none but it may be A. S. will conclude it was upon a just occasion but what compass he will have for his just occasion is doubtful seeing he hath put no termination or end to it but for ought I can perceive would leave liberty for every man to exact an oath upon another when he would and call it a just occasion and account it a point of duty in the other to obey even in ordinary communication And as for St. Paul we deny thy Argument as that he never knew the meaning of this Text of Christs prohibition secondly that in his Writings he acted contrary to his knowledge and upon set deliberation for though God was his witness whom he served with his Spirit in the Gospel of his Son that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my Prayers Also that which A. S. calls an oath 1 Thes. 2. 5. For neither at any time used we flattering words as ye know for a cloak of covetousness God is witness Though we know and infallibly believe with A. S. that he was infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost when he published the Gospel of Christ among the Gentiles and wrote both unto the Jewes and to the Gentiles who believed that his calling God to witness was not any oath neither was there any necessity or just occasion whatever A. S. may call just occasion we cannot for he hath left such a great compass for himself to turn in though here and there he seem to disallow of customary oaths and frequent oaths yet notwithstanding his Discourse rather tends to an allowance of swearing frequently and unnecessarily for we reckon it to be a piece of ordinary communication for a Christian Minister to write a Letter of admonition or exhortation or an Epistle unto the believing hearers and that there is no necessity of Oaths in such a discourse for what ever A. S. sayes this would make the Apostle guilty of frequent and unnecessary and common swearing which we are far from believing for asmuch as they that did believe through the word of life declared by the spirit of God in him neither through his Epistles written being assisted by the Holy Ghost they were not like to believe him for swearing if he had sworn but saith A. S. if his words had really been believed which he spoke and wrote what occasion would there have been for him to have written so to the Romans Rom. 9. 1. I say the truth in Christ I lie not The Apostle knew what occasion he had to speak these words and the occasion was this that the Jewes sought to be justified by the Righteousness of the Law and by the works thereof and would need look upon themselves as the Children of God because they were of the stock of Abraham according to the flesh but the Apostle knew and also gave them to understand that the Children of the promise was counted for the Seed and again for they are not all Israel which are of Israel Rom. 9. 6 7 8. And thus he spake truth unto them as it was revealed by Christ whom the Father had revealed in him and why might he not say I speak the truth in Christ seeing that Christ was in him and he in him I lie not my Conscience also bears me witness in the Holy Ghost he might also as well say that Paul swore by his Conscience seeing that he took it for a witness away away with such perverting and straining of the Scripture beyond and beside the mind of the Holy Ghost for God is witness and I say the truth in Christ they are no more then ardent and zealous or fervent expressions as the spirit of God at several times did stir up in his heart both to speak and write for the end that they unto whom he spoke or wrote might believe and therefore we conclude not as A. S. would needs have it that the Apostle spoke these fervent words unnecessarily for we know and see his end and purpose was good and therefore he spoke with fervency and with boldness the spirit of the Lord bearing witness in his conscience that he spoke the truth which we are far from believing is either juration or abjuration and for ought can be perceived by A. S. disdainful spirit all that doth dissent from him in his opinion he calls Phanaticks and Paul shall hardly go free nor divers of the ancient Fathers as Orgen Chrysostome Jerome Theophilact and others who denyed not only swearing in private conversation but to swear at all but now these must be called Phanaticks who dissent from all Men but themselves by A. S. and such as he who sails with wind and tide and exalteth and applaudeth that which hath praise amongst men and hath not the praise of God and so the last of all he makes this conclusion that so help me God is the most
out that command Swear not at all The reasons the very strength of them I have laid down as A. S. hath published them without varying from his own words the Answer thou may peruse and read without prejudice and weigh with the measure of Gods Spirit in thy self for unto that I appeal which is a more certain thing then Councils or Nations or Consent of multiâ—udes who hath the name of Christian and walks not in his Doctrine neither lives his life nor doth the things he saith I am shut up in a corner and have not that advantage that some opposers have of others labours as to bring Authors of divers Ages that denied to Swear though not only some there were but many but alas they are condemned already by A. S. and others for Phanaticks and Heteradox and so their sayings will seem of less force but however I have not much striven neither shall to fetch things from far in the Apostacy but rest in that which makes all things evident even the spirit of God in thy own heart and the Scriptures of Truth which was spoken by the Spirit which are so clear unto many that there needs not multitude of words to demonstrate this truth of the prohibition of all Oaths among true Christians but I shall not detain thee from the matter it self and the Lord give thee an understanding F H. Oathes no Gospel Ordinance but prohibited by Christ. THere being a Book lately published by A. Smalwood D. D. as I understand Doctor of Divinity first preached in a Sermon at Carlile I suppose before the Judges at the Assizes then holden the 17 th day of August 1664. since which I perceive many Additions by reasons and paraphrases are added thereunto and printed at York In which Discourse he hath vindicated the lawfulness of Swearing under the Gospel and hath gone about to prove it by many reasons and Authors how that Christ upon that subject Mat. 5. 34. Swear not at all did not intend an absolute universal prohibition of all manner of swearing under the Gospel which Book of his I have perused with an upright heart and an impartial eye seriously to the end I might own that which is good in it not as one being glued to an opinion or judgment but what as carries demonstration of truth with it upon my conscience and in my heart it being a principle well known and believed amongst us to have our consciences void of offence towards God and towards Man and seeing my self and many more are great sufferers at this day upon this very account which I look upon being truly and conscientiously grounded upon the Doctrine of Christ and consonant to the Primitive Christians and seeing so large things have been written by other hands in asserting the truth of what we have believed which yet stands as a witness unto the Doctrine of Christ notwithstanding all opposition and gain-saying that it hath had by many hands I could have been wholly silent and have refered all that have been said to the judgment of the Lord and to that of God in every Mans conscience but that I perceive A. Smalwood hath rendred that People which I own in judgment and practise to be in error and hath greatly gain-sayed and villified all such as ever did or do deny Swearing upon never so conscientious account as erroneous and as only sprung from the Pelagian Heresie and Manacheus and I know not who and have rendred all with reproach and disdain as Phanaticks who discent from him with disdainful and reproachful names to represent us as odious as may be to the Magistrate and at such a time as this when tender and conscientious people who fear the Lord in their hearts and desires to live and be at peace and seeks it with all Men are sufferers and great sufferers too upon this very account whereby many are stired up to more persecution and wrath against us and besides this Discourse it seemes is cryed up as the most exquisite that ever was or can be and as unanswerable and that we who deny to swear would abolish all judicable proceedings and make them nothing this Discourse is printed as A. S. in his 12. page sayes to induce us to forsake so irrational an opinion and to convince us of our error and it seemes he himself besides many other exspects it must effect some great matter Reply I say all these things being considered was a strong inducement to me to write something in reply thereunto though in very deed I love not contention neither strife about words but seeing it is the Doctrine of Christ and that which hath been and is stedfastly believed by divers faithful Professors and sufferers both formerly and now however by A. Smalwood accounted and reproached by that disdainful name of Phanaticks a word lately invented in the Pit of Darkness where many of those and the like reproaches come from I was engaged in my heart to hear my testimony against this said Book and for the truth of Christs Doctrine not out of obstinacy and wilfulness but in duty as by conscience to God and his truth which is dearer to me then my outward liberty or all I have to loose for it which I and many more at this day choose rather to suffer then to be found violating the commands of Christ or deny that which I have stedfastly believed being perswaded thereunto by the spirit of the Lord and evidence of the Scripture of truth The subject A. Smalwood hath taken to treat upon and in the end to gain-say and pervert are no less then Christs own Doctrine Mat. 5. 34. But I say unto you swear not at all who would have believed or thought that one who accounts himself a Doctor a Divine and a Minister of Christ should choose Christs own words to plead against Christ and them that do abide in his Doctrine or that ever any should go about to prove swearing lawful from these words in Gospel times or that swearing is not forbiden but what would not this Man encounter with or what would not he oppose if he have but the power of this World on his side it is a small thing to gain-say what we say and pervert our words and make them seem erroneous and to make our intentions one thing and our words another when he is so bold as to make Christs Doctrine his express words Swear not at all and his intentions contrary to his words what do we judg of a Man that speaks one thing and intends another it's fearful to think what conclusions some will make to carry on their intended designes but me thinks A. S. might have been more considerate then to have taken Christs own Doctrine and words to oppose Christs intention or to be so bold as to assert the intention of Christ was otherwise then his words import but rather have chosen some other subject but what matter makes many of subjects for with a consequence or two and a little
Logick they will seem to turn things any way and go about to prove darkness is light and light is darkness and what as in them lyes make it so to appear if they take a matter in hand and therefore the Apostle exhorted to beware of Phylosophy and vain deceit for by this Men have been cuning and crafty and lie in wait to deceive the Innocent and harmless and to lead them out of the way In the fourth page he saith he will clear his intention and that there are two sorts of Men that do violence to this Text the one winds it up too too high a note as though Christ had forbidden all Swearing whatsoever And in the tenth page he saith this error is masked under a fair colour of a more then ordinary piety but tends to overthrow all Judicatures and takes away the decision of all emergent suites and controversies and were it granted saith A. Smallwood we should be necessitated if not to disown the Magistrates authority yet to disobey their loyal command as having a countermand from Christ Swear not at all and the other sort of men are such who in despight of this text do commonly rashly prophanely and falsely swear Answ. Who doth the greater violence to this Scripture whether A. S. who in his Doctrine he hath raised from these words to be the foundation of his Discourse who makes Christs plain and express words one thing and his intentions another I leave to all unbyassed spirits to judge off or they that say Christ intended what he spoke and spoke what he intended I say let all see and consider where the violence lies and in whom and whether he doth not wind it up by that not or contrary to it to use his own words otherwise then Christ intends it as after will be made more evidently to appear and we say it s not error but truth to believe Christs words who are truth more then A. S. his conjectural supposition neither do we believe it to be error masked but truth revealed and Christ spoke and declared it that we might beleive it and obey it And we believe that A. S. and many more hath put a mask and a vail upon Christs words and would hoodwink all and lead them blindfold after their imaginations and crooked pathes winding and turning this way and that way that leads into darkness and trouble and confusion from the path of life And what doth Christs command viz. Swear not at all doth it overthrow all Justice and Judicatories It is not the seat of Judgment established in Righteousness and truth and they that sit in Judgment ought they not to give sentence and Judgment in Righteousness and truth and as the causes are represented unto them and brought before them and may not every truth be confirmed out of the mouth of two or three Witnesses and all emergent suits and controversies ended according to the best evidence after diligent inquisition and judgment given accordingly and that without the needless and cumbersome formality of an Oath which is sometime this and sometime that and changable when as every true confession and testimony is equivâ—lent thereunto in the presence of the God of all truth and who ever denyed this And there is no necessity so to judge that he that fears to swear and take an Oath yet refuseth not to gâ—ve true testimony about any matter whether it do concern the Lord or his Neighbour that therefore he denies the Magistrates authority or yet disobeyes their legal commands so that though all Swearing should be denyed yet that which answers the cause in hand is not denyed true testimony and therefore the Magistrates authority and their lawful commands may well stand and be obeyed and right done unto every man and command stand also these are but the secret smitings and suggestions of A. Smallwood to render them odious to the Magistrates and all people who dissent from him in judgment And indeed such like Discourses and instigations from such like mouths and pens as his is who is accounted learned and eminent hath not a little added afflictions unto our bonds and they have made wide the wound and hath made the breach seem greater then it is and the matter more grievous then there hath been any cause for I desire they may consider of it and repent And in 13. page from this Text Mat. 5. 34. But I say unto you Swear not at all he layes down this Proposition or Doctrine viz. Our Saviour did not intend by these words Swear not at all an absolute universal and limited prohibition of all manner of swearing and goes on to prove it by divers Reasons The first he gives is That the Father and the Son are one in nature power wisdom immutability and eternity and one in will and wisdom therefore they cannot give forth contrary commands but God the Father hath commanded Swearing in these words Thou shalt fear the Lord and swear by his Name and serve him Deut. 6. 13. And therefore it is not possible that God the Son should forbid it Answ. Though the Father and the Son be one in nature power and wisdom and immutability and will as in themselves and alters not but keeps Covenant from age to age and from generation to generation there is no contrarity in them yet there are diversities of gifts but the same spirit and there are differences of administrations but the same Lord. It is granted that after sin entred into the World and death by sin and diffidence and unbelief variance and strife and many transgressions for which the Law was added and because of which the Law was added and the command given forth unto the Jewes to swear by the Name of God as Jerome saith upon the 5. of Mat. 3. 37. It was permitted the Jewes under the Law as being tender and infants and to keep them from Idolatry which the rest of the Nations did run into they might swear by the Name of God not that it was rightful so to do but that it was better to swear by the Lord then by false Gods or devils but the great Evangelical sincerity and truth admits not of an Oath Secondly For the ending of strife and variance being in the unbelief which was the occasion of the adding of the Law and the cause of the command given forth Deut. 6. 13. with divers more words specified by Moses and the Prophets And though Christ came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it and to destroy that which the Law was against and which it took hold upon and to finish sin and transgression and bring in everlasting Righteousness and to restore to the beginning and we say according as we have believed and received of the Lord and have a cloud of Witnesses both them that are gone before and of them that yet remain alive As Christ said of Divorcement It was not so from the beginning so we say Oaths was not from the beginning but
of it though I perceive he hath read the Arguments that have been used as Answers to these things though he will not seem to take notice nor to reply to confute the Arguments but rather minds his own and to assert what may seem to make for his purpose as to the matter he hath taken in hand but as for good Mens swearing and the Angels swearing if their example would justifie the lawfulness of swearing yet they could not be any president to us who are under the Gospel of the Son that is greater then the Angels by the dispensation of whom the Law for Oathes Tithes Offrings Oblations and other legal Rites and Rudiments was given which Son also all the Angels of God are bid to worship for the Apostle saith Hebr. 2. 5. For unto the Angels hath he not put into subjection the World to come but that is committed unto the Son under whose ministration and subjection we are who said Let your yea be yea and your nay nay and speak the truth and do the truth and bear witness to the truth who said Learn of me and these things we have learned of him unto whom all power is committed for he is counted Hebr. 3. 3. more worthy of glory then Moses though Moses was faithful in his House as a Servant but Christ as a Son which is that great Prophet that Moses prophesied of which all is to hearken unto with whom the Father is well pleased being made so much better then the Angels Hebr. 1. 4. as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name then they vers 5. for unto which of the Angels said he at any time thou art my Son this day I have begotten thee vers 6. Again when he bringeth the first begotten into the World he saith let all the Angels of God worship him of the Angels he saith he makes them ministring spirits and a flame of fire but unto the Son he saith thy Throne oh God is for ever and ever the Scepter of righteousness is the Scepter of thy Kingdome for if the words spoken by Angels was stedfast and every transgression received a just recompence of reward how shall they escape Hebr. 2. 3. who do not only neglect the command of Christ but labours to pervert through their strength of their own reason the ministration of the Son who is the summe and substance of all shadowy and typical ministrations and therefore A. S. and all concerned look to it who would introduce Judaism and the Mosaical observations upon the neck of Christs Disciples and as Lawes in his Kingdom and whether would not this prefer the servant before the Son yea or nay and his ministration before the ministration of the Sons though the one is not against the other but the one pointing at the other and in the latter the first is fulfilled the truth declared the truth spoken the truth lived in and the truth confessed in every matter wherein any Christian is concerned which is the summe and the matter which all oaths in their highest and greatest ordination could or can effect In the 4â— th page of his Book he saith our Saviour saith Amen Amen 24. time in John's Gospel which he saith St. Ambrose will needs have to amount unto an Oath and he cites Apoc. 3. These things saith the Amen compares it with Isa. 65. 16. where he concludes that Amen seems either to be a name or an epethite of God and this he says is the opinion of our Church in the Homily against swearing that our Saviour did swear divers times and further says it cannot be denyed that God himself swore Psalm 110. 4. The Lord hath sworn and will not repent and so concludes that Christ forbid not all swearing Unto this Bp. Gauden though he straines and scrues very hard as A. S. doth to make all things to bend to their inclination will needs have â—men or verily verily to be an Oath Doctor Gauden in his citation of Capellos out of Rabby Johnas says In veritate forma jurandi apud Judeos but he concludes doubtfully and says it is only the next degree unto an oath but A. S. thinks he hath put it out of doubt with his reason and his Authors that verily verily is an oath which if it were true this would only prove swearing lawful in Sermons and not in Controversies which is the great good end he so much pleads for and if this were true would serve his turn The Magistrates exacting Oathes he seems to prove out of the Mosaical Law and the Priests swearing lawfully out of Pauls Epistles and Christs Sermons but this his covering is too short and is but trifling in the weighty things of God not distinguishing betwixt the first Covenant and the second and the Ordinances thereof for the first he hath no adversary viz. that they did swear though never exacted under penalties the second we conclude to be no oath viz. Amen Amen or verily verily which is no more then truly truly I say unto ye and if this be an oath why hath it not and why is it not accepted as such for we have said more then this and can do in truth which we look upon to be far from amounting to an oath and yet it would never be received as such which argues plainly that what S. F. and R. H. hath said though A. S. quarel with it that surely the Magistrates in England doth not believe the Priests Doctrine for if they did why are so many sentenced to perpetual imprisonment with confiscation of all Lands and Goods to the ruinating of many poor Wives and Children which A. S. knows little of and for ought I know such a discourse as this may add affliction to their bonds and misery to their sufferings and yet these have never been received as if we say verily verily or truly truly or God is our witness or we speak the truth in Gods presence yet notwithstanding this would never give satisfaction to any Magistrate in any Judicature that ever we knew or heard of in England and though he tell us of I. Pennington how that he gave satisfaction and that it found acceptance with the Court and also to the King We are not ignorant of what I. P. hath written which is wholsome just and good and sound and condescendingly as a Christian man could do as about the premisses to pacifie and satisfie all whom it concerned that they might not proceed in such a rigorous manner against the truly conscientious and so in letting them know what we could do and what we could not do yet notwithstanding what ever any might seem to own as sufficient in private we never found it in publick or in any case of concernment but rather they knew before hand what would ensnare us have set the snare and run us into it but notwithstanding all this that A. S. will have to be oaths as God is witness and I speak the truth in Christ and verily verily it
Oaths no Gospel Ordinance But prohibited by CHRIST Being in ANSWER TO A. SMALLWOOD D. D. TO HIS Book lately published being a Sermon Preached at Carlile 1664. wherein he hath laboured to prove Swearing lawful among Christians his Reasons and Arguments are weighed and answered and the Doctrine of Christ Vindicated against the Conceptions and Interpretations of Men who would make it void By a Sufferer for Christ and his Doctrine F. H. Because of Oaths the Land mourneth Jer. 33. 10 11 12 c. By Swearing and lying and killing and stealing and committing Adultry they break out and blood toucheth blood therefore shall the Land mourn and every one that dwelleth therein shall languish Hosea 4. 2 3. Printed in the Year 1666. To the Reader READER TRuth never had that advantage nor countenance from the men of this world though wise in their generation since sin entered into it to have the approbation of the World neither of the powers and Potentates thereof for it alwaies hated the truth because it bore witness against the World and the deeds and works thereof which are evil for Wisdom is only justified of her Children and Truth is justified of her Children neither indeed doth it need any other Patron to shelter it self under but the God of all Truth from whence it proceeds neither shall I seek a shelter neither run to any mountain or hill for safety or protection nor to the mighty of the Earth as many of latter dayes have done to Patronize their Labours and to make them the more acceptable and to be the sooner and more readily received But seeing the Apostle saith Not many wise not many rich not many noble are chosen but he hath chosen the weak and poor and despised of the world who are rich in Faith and good works who are heirs of the promise and of the world to come I chuse only to be approved to the witness of Christs light in every mans Conscience and to the measure of his holy Spirit which he hath placed in every man to that only I desire to be either approved or by it reproved for wholly unto the judgment of that in every Conscience I appeal and do commend this ensuing Discourse in the sight of God and the Answer unto Smalwood's Book who hath sought to make void Christs command for to obey the command of men as is manifest in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Gentlemen of Cumberland For it seems by his Epistle they put him on work to Preach and Print this Sermon whether upon this subject or not I shall not determine but however he sayes he hath obeyed their commands though he hath laboured as much as in him lies to make the command of Christ void and the Apostles Doctrine by his Arguments which he hath raised to prove Christs Doctrine one thing and his intention another and so would blind the minds of people only to establish the Doctrines of men and the Traditions of men in the Apostacy and hath put divers Constructions upon the plain words of the Scripture and interpretation to prove his false Assertion that he laid down at the first that Christ did not forbid all swearing I say I could have willingly have been silent rather then to be found over and over again contending with every new opposer of those old truths that have been believ'd and received long before the Apostacy entered in which hath been answer'd by that People I own in judgment and conversation long ago to let pass those disadvantages we have adventered upon our low persecuted imprisoned and in a manner condemned condition so that we may exspect our words how true soever yet they are not like to gain much credit against such an eminent man as Doctor Smallwood Again considering how we expose our selves to the lash and severity of a sharp law which some men in their blind zeal are far more ridged and severe in their Prosecution of it then I am apt to believe the supream enactors of it were in their intentions when they did inact it all which notwithstanding are no discouragement unto me for as much as the internal and eternal truth of our God which we have known received and believed is very precious in our eyes yea far more then either life or liberty and estate which some have forfeited and lost upon Truths account or any external treasure or outward enjoyment whatsoever so that considering how the truth lies at stake we cannot be silent least thereby we should appear to some mens apprehensions as to be satisfied with what the Doctor hath said and own his Arguments Reasons that he hath laid down for possitive truth I could do no less then to show our dislike of his Doctrine and to manifest the weakness of his Arguments about this particular of Swearing at all under the Gospel though he hath strained very hard to prove his Assertion that Oaths may lawfully he taken by Christians in some cases notwithstanding Christs prohibition and command to the contrary but of how little effect or force his Reasons are thou wilt see in the ensuing Discourse although his Book be looked upon by some to be sufficient force to convince all gain-sayers and although he say he hath had divers Papers and Books of Dissenters who are of a contrary judgment where he found any Reason offered against what he hath laid down for Doctrine he hath answered though indeed he hath over-riden the most weighty matters in them and hath said little but that hath been said before by other opposers of Christs Doctrine though its very like the Doctor will count this but a loose Discourse as he hath done others of very great weight yea indeed of more weight and reason in them then any thing he hath exhibited yet to the contrary and so count it not worth taking notice of but though he do not it is not of much moment for that end only I have writ to bear my testimony for Christs Doctrine against all the false and feigned interpretations of men being that which I have stedfastly believed and is of that force and weight upon many Consciences and so evident by the Spirit of Christ that they can receive nothing of mans faln reason and conceptions which are variable and changable to answer or weigh down the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and Primitive Christians who walked in the order of the Gospel and obeyed the Commands of Christ before the Apostacy entered in and the power was lost and the life and Spirit of Christ erred from and mingled the Ordinances of the first and second Covenant together and the injunctions of men among them for Doctrine and then compelled all to receive it all this long time of Antichrists reign and the false Church visibility wherein she hath sitten as a Queen upon the Waters which are the Nations Kindreds Tongues and People which A. S. brings as a great argument to prove Swearing in use among Christians since Christ gave
Reformed Chuâ—ches and were the most ancient and true Protestants if any Reformation be looked at beyond Luther they professed it no way lawful for a Christian to swear and the said Bishop Vsher de Succes Chap. 6. doth esteem that place of the 5th of Mat. Swear not at all and that of 5th James to be a sufficient plea for them against the Papists and he pleads their cause and this made Renerius and Jansenius so much envy the Waldenses two Romanists who said amongst all the Sects which are or have been there is not any more pernicious to the Church meaning the Church of Rome then the Waldenses and that for three Reasons first their Antiquity secondly because of their Universality thirdly in that they did maintain and hold it no way lawful for a Christian to swear on any occasion But it may be that A. S. will tell us that these and other were condemned in some general or Provincial Council for Heresie and if he do it is no great matter since most of these have erred especially since all Nations have drunk of the VVhores cup of Fornication and have erred from the faith and have lost the power and then contend for a forme and bind all to receive it upon some comination or malediction or other or else they were Hereticks And why who said so the Church hath so decreed and if these Canons and such like must be binding A. S. will hardly escape their censure if he continue in the profession of the faith he is in though he and they seem to agree in this particular about swearing But I come to his fifth Argument Fifth Argument Christ never forbad any thing but what was intrinsecally evil as may be proved by induction he forbids anger abusive language he forbids lust and divorce and swearing by Creatures and therefore what ever he forbad was evil and that in it self and not meerly as forbidden but swearing in general is not for that hath not only been the practice of holy Men but of Angels Dan. 12. 7. Revel 10. 6. Reply Was it evil in it self under the Law if a man smote out anothers eye or tooth or cut off his hand or his foot or give one a would in any part of the body Deut. 21. 24. Levit. 1. 24. 20. Deut. 19. 11. was it evil in it self for the Judges in those days to give sentence that he that had struck out his Neighbours eye or struck out his tooth or cut off his hand to pronounce and give the same judgment unto the offender that he should be so done withal was this eternally evil or intrinsecally evil for the party so wronged to seek remedy or was it not an act of justice equal and good not only because enjoyned and commanded but in it self just and was it or is it an act in it self intrinsecally evil if a man sued a man wrongfully at the Law and takes a mans coat or garment away to seek to defend himself and preserve his coat or cloak if not A. S. his argument is of no moment for even in the same Chapter where envy and murther and divorce saving for fornication and abusive language and all swearing is forbidden so is that forbidden which is not intrinsecally evil by Christ Mat. 5. 39 40. But I say unto you that you resist not evil and whosoever shall smite the one cheek turn him the other also and if a man sue thee at the Law and take away thy coat let him have thy cloak also and whosoever shall compell thee to go a mile go with him twayn And it is in the new Testament I hope written Avenge not your selves And was it evil in it self or morally evil to keep the seventh day of the week as a Sabbath or only good because commanded or was it lawful to fight with Amalecks Edomites Aegiptians and Canaanites because Israel was only commanded or because they were real enemies to God in their hearts or as Samuel Fisher said well in answer to Doctor Gauden which A. S. quarels with that Circumcision Sacrifices and Offerings Passeover and New Moons Fasts and Swearing was not evil in themselves but because forbidden and though A. S. give such a great Challenge to S. F. to produce one instance that any thing was prohibited by Christ but what was intrinsecally evil or else his argument is in vain I say the aforementioned thing prove it that something was forbidden that was not evil eternally and intrinsecally but because prohibited and again in the same Chapter ver 44. But I say unto you love your enemies bless them that curse you though under the Law they did fight and might fight with the aforesaid enemies the Canaanites and Gentiles but now I say put up forgive love your enemies Peter put up thy Sword he that takes hold on it shall perish by it avenge not go not to Law one with another 1 Cor. 6. 7. Suffer forbear forgive if thy brother sin against thee seventy times 7. times And though A. S. say that nothing was forbidden by Christ or in all the new Testament but what was in it self evil or in some respect conducing thereunto methinks he hath given too bold a Challenge what will he say to all the former things mentioned and what evil had Circumcision in it or the Passeover or Sacrificing or New Moons and the Sabbath days or what tendency had they to evil but rather were good for the end they were ordained to be signes and types and figures of holy things to come like as swearing was among the rest what ever A. S. say or argue and yet when the substance of the good things was come to them that had believed and received him who was the summe of all the Apostle said Gal. 5. 2 3. If you be Circumcised Christ profits you nothing after he was offered up And Gal. 4. 9 10 1. You observe new Moons and holy days and Sabbaths And these things that were once as really good as ever swearing was considering the end wherefore they were enjoyned and these things was never evil in themselves yet the Apostle reckoned them beggarly Rudiments and told them they had begun in the Spirit and now sought to be made perfect through the flesh and so stood in doubt of them that his labour had been in vain and therefore if A. S. or any other will needs uphold swearing because commanded to the Jewes before the seed Christ was revealed I say he is Gal. 5. 34. a debter to the whole Law and is as much bound to keep it in all other points as this or else he is a transgressour and is one of those that would be laying yoaks upon the Disciples necks unto whom they were never intended for if the Ceremonies and Rites and outward observations which properly did belong to the Jewish Church and state to observe till the fulness of time when the partition wall should be broken down and the Jewes and Gentiles should be one and