Adam and Eve when they were first created because in that state they saw no strangers in their Family These words were especially related to the ancient Israelites who had lived in Aegypt like strangers to the end they might learn when they should possess the Land of Promise to deal with all the World otherwise than the Aegyptians had dealt with them And therefore the aforementioned cannot be understood ex Jure naturali as belonging to the Moral Law it being alike and the same among all Nations Fourth Answer The next words For in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth the Sea and allthat in them is and rested the seventh day do not infer in themselves an indispensable necessity for no body doubts but that God could create this great World with all its perfections in a less time yea in a moment if he had pleased and consequently that he could appoint another day than the seventh to be kept holy as for Example the third if on that day he had finished the Creation of the World But being finish'd in six days the Question is whether the seventh be of an indispensable necessity Wherefore I Answer Fifthly That the day assigned by God for his Worship was Symbolical Mystical and Ceremonial and consequently ought to be abolished and so was not of an indispensable Necessity and therefore did not belong to the Moral Law That the institution of the Sabbath day was such may be seen clearly because Adam the first of all men was able by the strength of his natural Reason in the state of Innocency to comprehend what belonged to the Natural and Moral Law but by the strength of his Reason he could never understand why the seventh day ought to be kept holy rather than another Therefore the Reason of it was the good Will of God which Adam could never understand of himself wanting a special Revelation or positive Commandment wherein the Reason of it might be manifested unto him And it signifies nothing to say that it is written we are bound to keep holy the seventh day for ever because by the word for ever is meant only a long space of time assigned by God as it appears in these Texts Exod. 21. 6. Exod. 32. 13. Levit. 24. 8 9. Numb 18. 19. Numb 25. 13. Wherein though the word for ever be used yet we say it belongs to the Ceremonial Law and consequently ought to be abolished under the Gospel where the body of these things whereof they were but a shadow is made manifest And that the Institution of the seventh day reduplicativé ut sic could be abolished appears by the words of the Prophet Ezekiel I gave them my Sabbaths to be a sign between me and them that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctifie them An by the other words of St. Paul to the Colossians Let no man judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an holy day or of the new Moon or of the Sabbath days which are shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ. Now seeing the Plural Number contains all Singulars Sabbaths being taken in the Plural Number it followeth that that contained in the Decalogue and which is here in Dispute is also included therein Otherwise St. Paul would not have failed to make an exception The Sabbath saith Christ was made for man and not man for the Sabbath therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath Now he that is the Lord of any thing can dispose of it as it seems good unto him therefore the Son of man being Lord also of the Sabbath he may dispose of it as he pleaseth and therefore might abolish it and consequently it doth not belong to the Natural or Moral Law which cannot be changed even by God himself And it signifies nothing to say that Jesus Christ himself and his Apostles have kept and sanctified the seventh day for they did keep it as they did some other Commandments of the Ceremonial Law which were all abolished in their convenient time to the end that they might not offend the Jews among whom they were born and to whom especially they were to preach the holy Gospel but might convert them to Christian Religion and call them that were predestinated and might by all means save some and so propagate the more the Kingdom of God Which doth not consist in meat and drink or in distinction of sabbaths but in righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost From whence it follows that the Sanctification of the seventh day reduplicativé ut sic did not belong to the Moral Law and consequently might be abolished I say the Sanctification of the seventh day ut sic for in reference of that which is Moral I mean the true Piety and Worship due unto God it could not be abolished and no man in the World in whatsoever dignity yea nor God himself can dispense with Now the Worship due unto God may be considered in two respects inwardly or out wardly Considered in the first sence it respects our Confidence in God our Obedience to his Commandments our Invocation Praises and Thanksgivings Considered in the latter it respects places where are publick Meetings wherein the Word of God is preached and his Sacraments are administred In reference to the outward Worship due unto God it is necessary to avoid Confusion from whence proceed great evils to establish some Order and to appoint certain days and hours to meet together that we might praise and worship our Lord call upon his holy Name and give thanks for all his unmeasurable mercies Now the Church to which Christ gave his Authority and Power and whose Ordinances he will have us to keep as it appears by these words If he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a Publican had good and sufficient Reasons to change the seventh into the first day of the week First Because being Typical and Mystical and not belonging to the Moral Law as I have made it appear it might be abolished as all the other Precepts of the Ceremonial Law were For Christ blotting out the hand-writing of Ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and took it out of the way nailing it to his Cross Secondly The Sanctification of the seventh day being ordained unto us to the end we might remember the day and benefit of our Creation as it appears by the words of the 11th verse For in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth c. The Church which we ought to obey in all things not contrary to the holy Scripture finding that the day of our Redemption was very considerable yea much more excellent than that of our Creation as it appears by the words of Jesus Christ concerning Judas Good were it for that man if he had never been born And finding that in the first day of the week Jesus Christ
adjured upon Oath St. Paul oftentimes called God to witness for the Confirmation of what he saith seeing David and several others have used it in the Old Testament and God himself who cannot give us a bad Example used it for the Confirmation of his Promises it is a clear and evident sign that it is lawful and that we are to explain these words of St. Matthew I say unto you swear not at all as also these others of St. James above all things my Brethren swear not they ought to be interpreted not generally but in a limited sence as only forbidding swearing in common Conversation and in our ordinary Commerce and Affairs as it appears by the words immediately following viz. Let your Communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil From whence it follows though Swearing or Oaths ought to be avoided in our Conversations because they are then so many sins yet there is a time and there are occasions as when the matter is doubtful and of concern and no Evidence can be had to clear and decide it when they are not only lawful but also very necessary And therefore when at certain times and upon certain occasions the Church of England commands to sware or take an Oath and believes it lawful she doth neitherbelieve nor practise any thing forbidden in the holy Scripture Object It is written in the 20th Chapter of Exod. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God in it thou shalt not do any work thou nor thy Son nor thy Daughter thy man-Servant nor thy maid-Servant nor thy Cattel nor thy Stranger that is within thy Gates for in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth the Sea and all that in them is and rested the seventh day wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it The Church of England doth not keep this divine Commandment but observes the first day of the week instead of the seventh therefore she is not the holy Catholick Church Before I give an Answer to this Objection I will give leave to my Adversary to say all that he can to establish his Opinion When I read saith he these words in the 20th Chapter of Exodus or when I see them written in great Letters in our Churches or hear them pronounced aloud at the Communion Table the first day of the week which we call Sunday I think that the words of Isaiah Hear ye indeed but understand not and see ye indeed but perceive not may be well here adapted And may not this be justly attributed unto us since the Jews excepted with a small number of Christians scattered in the North we neither practise what we read nor what we hear And that this may appear clearly it is necessary to consider without any prejudice that the aforesaid words contain a day determined by God which we are bound to keep holy and whereon we ought to rest But it is the seventh day which God kept holy and whereon he rested therefore it is that and no other which we ought to keep holy and whereon we are bound to rest That it is the day upon which God rested which we are bound to keep holy appears evidently by these words In it thou shalt not do any work For what mean these words but thou shalt not do any work in the day whereon God rested This is the most natural Explication that a man can give to them But God foreseeing he should be forgot by his Creatures gives us warning saying Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day And that that day is the seventh which we call Saturday appears again evidently First by these words But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God Secondly by the next In six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth the Sea and all that in them is and rested the seventh day Thirdly because we read in Genesis God rested on the seventh day from all his works which he had made and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it Therefore it is that day which is to be kept holy for it is an Axiome received in Divinity viz. that men neither can nor ought to change what was established and determined by God as for Example Water in Baptism and Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper cannot be changed by men because they have been established and determined by Jesus Christ who is received as God among Christians Is it not written Cursed is he that addeth any thing to the Law or diminisheth from it doth not St. Paul forbid not to think of men above that which is written and doth not Christ himself say in St. Matthew In vain they do worship me teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men That the seventh day is our Saturday is again manifested First because since Moses the Jews who did always and do still keep the seventh day do keep our Saturday for their Sabbath Secondly Because as Sabbath among the Hebrews is the seventh day Sabbato among the Italians Sabbado among the Spaniards Samedy among the French so is Saturday among the English men Thirdly Because the Evangelists saying in our Translation that Jesus Christ was risen the first day of the week which according to the Language of the Scriptures is the next day after the Sabbath it follows evidently our Saturday preceding the first day of the week and the Sabbath being the seventh day that the seventh day is our Sabbath But it is in vain to bring such Proofs unto them who acknowledg to have changed the Saturday or seventh to the first day of the week Therefore since our Saturday is the seventh day of the week and God rested on it blessed sanctified it and commanded us to keep it holy is it not just in Obedience to God to keep it so Some will answer saith my Adversary that that change was made First That we might have no Communication with the Jews Secondly Because Jesus Christ arose upon the first day of the week Thirdly Because we read that the Apostles met on that day To the first Objection my Adversary replyeth that we ought to have Communication with the Jews in all things which are good Otherwise the Jews believing in one God we should not believe so and they believing in the Old Testament it should not be the Object of our Faith To the Second he saith that a Question may be made whether he rose on the first day of the week none of the Evangelists in the Original saying in express words the first day of the week but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But though this be true is it a sufficient Reason to change the day which God himself hath prescribed unto us blessed sanctified and commanded We may remember the day of his Resurrection and keep it holy but we ought not because he rose
upon the first day of the week to abolish the true Sabbath to transpose it to another day without an express Commandment either of Christ or of his Apostles And if that Reason were good might we not say because he dyed on such a day we ought also to transfer the Sabbath unto it And to the third Objection it is true saith he we read in our Translation that the Apostles met on the first day of the week but mark ye that it was Concerning the Collection for the Saints as ye may read in the 16th Chapter of the first to the Corinthians And though it were also to Preach and break Bread as it appears in the Acts yet saith he if this Reason were sufficient for the changing of the Sabbath into the first day of the week this should be sufficient also for the continuing of it in the seventh since we read that the Apostles met oftentimes together on the Sabbath to pray preach and baptize And Christ himself and his Apostles were strict Sabbath-keepers they even after his death And Christ seems to favour this Opinion when in the 24th Chapter of St. Matthew speaking not only concerning the Destruction of Hierusalem but also concerning the last day of Judgment he saith Pray ye that your flight be not in the Winter neither on the Sabbath day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From which words this Argument is deduced In Christ's time the Sabbath was on the seventh day therefore when he commanded us to pray that at the day of Judgment our flight should not be on the Sabbath day he commanded us to pray that it should not come on the seventh day and since this Commandment of Christ is still the same at that time in reference to the last day of Judgment the same day ought to continue still otherwise his Commandments and Threatnings are vain And it signifieth nothing to say that in the words of the fourth Commandment there is something moral as the Sanctification of days without any determination which cannot be abolished and something Ceremonial as the determination of a day which may be changed For if the determination of the seventh day be meerly Ceremonial and consequently may be changed likewise the Determination of the first day of the week is meerly Ceremonial and therefore may be changed also Wherefore the Reason why this is kept rather than another is meer Policy and to avoid Confusion which we could not prevent if there were not a day determined But if that Reason be valid is it not better to take the day assigned by God whereon he rested which he sanctified and blessed above all others upon which he declares he will bless them that keep it holy as he will curse and punish the Transgressors of it which was kept by Jesus Christ and his Apostles which God commanded usin express words and which Christ doth now command for as I have made it appear this Ordinance Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter neither on the Sabbath stands at this very day Is it not better I say to take that day than that whereof we find no Commandment in the holy Scripture Again It signifieth nothing to say it is written in the 2d Chapter to the Colossians Let no man judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an holy day or of the new Moon or of the Sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ for in this place the word Sabbaths instead of shewing that the seventh day could be changed into the first of the week serves only to make it appear we ought to have no determined day Therefore since it is certain and granted by all men that though we are to sanctifie all the days of our life that is to say to live holily yet we ought particularly to set aside one day of the week whereon we ought to rest and keep holy to God Almighty These words then of St. Paul to the Colossians are not to be understood concerning the Sabbath assigned in the 20th Chapter of Exodus but concerning other Sabbaths which besides this the Jews did keep It is then evident if we lay down all prejudices that the said Objections are not strong enough to contradict what is before asserted viz. that men neither can nor ought to change what is established and determined by God as it is the consent of all Divines and holy Scriptures and notwithstanding all that I have just now alledged the Church of England changing the seventh unto the first day of the week to keep it holy it is manifest she breaks the fourth Commandment of the Decalogue and consequently is not the holy Catholick Church Answ All the words contained in the fourth Commandment do not bind equally some containing a Commandment as Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day and some including a Permission as Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work as likewise these of St. Paul to the Corinthians Whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat asking no Question for Conscience sake In these sorts of Expressions God doth not command but gives only permission and leave to eat of whatsoever is sold in the Shambles As well as to eat of the Fruit of the Trees of the Garden excepting the Tree of Life which was forbidden our first Parents It is then clear that these words Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work include but a Permission for I think no body will say that it is not lawful to a man on any other day of the week to abstain from gross and slavish works to the end he might meditate God's Works and Perfections and apply himself unto Exercises of Charity and Piety Second Answer All that are contained in the Decalogue are not ex Jure naturali nor belong to the Moral Law and consequently are not Immutable for the Preface Hear Israel I am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt out of the House of bondage sheweth evidently that God speaks unto Israel according to the Flesh as they were a Type of Israel according to the Spirit and puts them in mind of his renowned favours towards them in delivering them out of the bondage of Aegypt as a Type of our spiritual Redemption and slavery under the Devil Sin and Death Now if either we consider the Type or the thing signified thereby neither of them are ex Jure naturali or belong to the Moral Law which is the same and Immutable at all times and among all Nations but are grounded upon the good pleasure of God who by his special goodness towards that People was pleased so to deal with them Third Answer These words of the fourth Commandment In it thou shalt not do any work thou nor thy Son nor thy Daughter thy man-Servant nor thy maid-Servant nor thy Cattel nor the Stranger which is within thy Gates could not have relation to
therefore she is not the holy Catholick for as you said before to give the denomination of holy Catholick to any Church it is requisite she should believe the whole Christian Faith as it was once delivered to the Saints without any addition to or diminution from the holy Scriptures Answ Though that word Trinity be not found in the holy Scriptures yet the thing signified thereby is found therein as it appears by the words of Matthew Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father ther and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And more evidently by those of the first of St. John There are three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one That Consequence therefore is not good which saith that the Church of England is not the holy Catholick because it believes in the Trinity that word not being express'd in the holy Scripture for provided the thing signified be found there in equivalent terms or may be deduced from thence by clear and necessary Consequences 't is sufficient and matters not if the word it self be not expressed But as I have just now made it appear by the Texts of Saints Matthew and John the Trinity is there very clearly expressed therefore c. But you may further urge that by the word Trinity we mean three eternal and infinite Persons really distinct one from another subsisting in one Nature numerically but this is contrary to Reason and is not found in the holy Scripture nor can be deduc'd from it by clear and necessary Consequences therefore it may be rightly inferr'd that the Church of England is not the holy Catholick Church it believing a point of Faith which is neither found distinctly nor in equivalent terms in the holy Scripture Probatur minor First That the Trinity is contrary to humane Reason which is proved thus For as it is contrary to humane Reason that Peter Paul and John who are three distinct Persons have but one Nature Numerically seeing that every Person hath its Nature different from th' other if not in Specie at least Numericè and it cannot be otherwise so it is centrary to Reason that the Father Son and Holy Ghost should be three really distinct Persons and notwithstanding have but one nature Numericè which can't be since from three Persons do naturally follow three substances or natures which is proved thus Person in God is either a being or nothing we can't say that it is nothing because the three divine Persons should then be nothing at all therefore it must be a Being If Being either it is real or mental we can't call it mental because sublato Intellectu the Persons should be no more therefore it remains that it is a real Being if real either it is a Substance or an Accident there being no Medium between Substance and Accident We can't say that it is an Accident because we do not admit any in the Godhead for the great Absurdities which follow from thence therefore it must be a Substance and if a Substance since there are three really distinct Persons it follows that there are also three really distinct Substances which is contrary to Reason Secondly That the Trinity is neither found distinctly nor in equivalent Terms in the holy Scripture is easily proved The former is without any contradiction for if ye read over the holy Scripture ye shall no where find the word Trinity And the latter is proved thus If the Trinity be there in equivalent terms it is either in this Text Go ye and teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost or else in this There are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one For though in the one and th' other mention be made of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and consequently of three Persons because the Father is a Person the Son a Person and the holy Ghost a Person yet we cannot infer that these three Persons have but one nature or substance Numericè for although some infer it from that word in the Name which is in the singular number yet that is not convincing since I may say such a thing is commanded in the Name of the King and his Chancelor and yet though that word be in the singular Number we can't infer that the King and his Chancelor have but one nature Numericè Neither can the Trinity be inferred from these words of St. John and these three are one because by that Unity we may very well understand a Unity of Will Agreement and Spirit and not of Nature or Substance so that when 't is said there are three that bear Record the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one It is the same thing as to say these three are one in Will do agree one with another what one Will 's the other willeth also And this is confirmed by the words of St. John wherein Jesus Christ prayeth his Father that we may be one as he is one with his Father that is that we may do what he will have us to do as he doth what his Father will have him to do Every body may see clearly that we are not nor can be one in nature Numericè with Jesus Christ it being contrary to Reason therefore we cannot infer by a clear and necessary Consequence that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost have but one nature or substance Numerice therefore the Trinity is neither found in the holy Scriptures distinctly nor can be deduced from them by evident and necessary Consequences First I answer thus I must confess with all learned men that the Mystery of the Trinity is above humane Reason that it can't be comprehended in this World by any Creature whatsoever We may sooner reckon the Sands of the Sea the Leaves of Trees than understand that glorious Mystery for how can we apprehend one and the same thing to be one and yet many How can we apprehend that one and the same Essence may be begotten and yet unbegotten that one and the same thing was from all Eternity and yet was truly and properly begotten This is above humane Reason Therefore the Angel in a form of a little Boy that brought a Spoonful of Water from the Sea and poured it in a little hole did answer Austin who was meditating upon the Mystery of the Trinity he asking him what was his intention that his design was to put all the Water of the Sea in that little hole But Austin replying that that was impossible the Sea being so vast and the hole so little the Child answered that he should do that sooner than he could comprehend the Mystery of the most holy Trinity Deum esse Trinitatem credimus potius quà m videmus That is we rather believe than see that God
if the Son be Consubstantial with the Father it follows that he is really and properly true God but he cannot be properly and really true God ergo he is not Consubstantial with his Father The Minor is proved out of the holy Scriptures There is none other God but one The Lord of Israel is that true God for there is none else besides him The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is that only true God This is Life eternal that they might know thee O Father the only true God For though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Lords many and Gods many but to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him For There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus But if according to what St. Paul saith though there be many that are called Gods and Lords nevertheless there is but one true God and one true Lord and if according to what Jesus Christ saith his Father be that only true God it follows that Christ or the Son of God is not really and properly true God and consequently that he is not Consubstantial with his Father Probatur 2o. If Jesus Christ were really and properly true God his Resurrection should be ascribed unto him as the true and principal Author but it is not ascribed to him as the true and principal Author but to his Father as we read in several places of the holy Scriptures God the Father who raised him from the dead God having raised up his Son Jesus c. Therefore he is not really and properly true God Probatur 3o. If the Son were really and properly true God he should have the knowledg of all things but he hath not the knowledg of all things since he doth not know the day of Judgment therefore c. The Minor is proved thus But of that day and hour saith Christ knows no man no not the Angels of Heaven but my Father only Mark that that word only is exclusive for if the Father only knows the day and hour of Judgment it follows that the Son doth not know it therefore having not the knowledg of all things he is not really and properly true God since to the true God nothing can be unknown Probatur 4o. Either the Son is of himself or by an other he is not of himself because he hath a Father therefore he is by another if by another he cannot be really and properly true God for he that is by an other is not independent but the true God is independent Probatur 5o. Christ or the Son is Mediator between God and men but if the Son was really and properly true God and Consubstantial with his Father he should be Mediator between men and himself which is absurd because no body is Mediator between himself and another Probatur 6o. The Son is begotten even according to divine Nature But that which is begotten was not always that which was not always is not eternal that which is not eternal is not really and properly true God therefore the Son is not really and properly true God and consequently he is not Consubstantial with his Father To the first Objection which contains these words of John This is Life eternal c. I answer that by the onl◠true God is mean◠God a se and in that sence the Father is the only true God because he only is God à se he only is the Origine of the Godhead But the Son is God of God and the Image of the invisible Father And to the words of St. Paul Though there be that are called Gods c. I say that as nothing can hinder the Father to be Lord though it be said There is but one Lord Jesus Christ so nothing can hinder Jesus Christ to be true God though it be written There is but one God the Father To the Second I answer that as a non esse ad non posse the Consequence is not good so because the Son did not raise up himself from the dead it doth not follow that he could not and the contrary appears by his own words I lay down my Life that I might take it again no man taketh it from me but I lay it down of my self I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again To the Third I say that the Son of God according to his humane Nature knew not the day and hour of Judgment as he knew not Lazarus's Sepulchre when he asked his Sisters where they had laid him And as he knew not what the two Disciples were talking of by the way when he said unto them What manner of Communications are these that ye have one to another as ye walk and are sad And as he knew not whether Peter loved him more than the rest of his Disciples when he said unto him the third time Lovest thou me But as he was God he knew all things for In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge and as saith Isaiah The spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him the spirit of wisdom and understanding the spirit of counsel and might the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord. And as it appears by these words of Peter Lord thou knowest all things Secondly I say because Christ emptied himself and took upon him the form of a Servant therefore for a little time he laid down his knowledge that he might be less than the Angels and that in all things he might be like unto us sin only excepted and that he were born like other Children who got their knowledge by degrees as it is written in Luke Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favour with God and men Or according to Austin he is said ignorant of the day of Judgment because he doth not make them know it that is he knew it not so that he would manifest it to his Disciples But he was to declare it in a convenient time of which time to come speaking as if it were past he said Henceforth I call you not Servants for the Servant knoweth not what his Lord doth but I have called you friends for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made them known into you Which things he had not yet declared but because he was to manifest them certainly he spake as if he had done it already for he tells them I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now amongst which is understood the day of Judgment and therefore he hid it from them and according to that kind of expression a man is said to be ignorant of that which he keeps from another To the Fourth I say though the Son be of the
Children were circumcised now since Baptism is in the place of Circumcision weare to baptize young Children since they were circumcised and seeing Circumcision which was a Ceremony and divine Institution did neither require Doctrine nor Repentance in young Children though it were necessary in adult Persons as it appears in Abraham and in all others who turned Jews even so Baptism which is a Ceremony and a divine Institution doth neither require Faith nor Repentance in young Children although it doth in adult Persons Which is confirmed by the words of St. Matthew where it is said that They brought unto Jesus Christ little Children that he should put his hands on them and pray and that the Disciples rebuking them Jesus said suffer little Children and forbid them not to come unto me for of such is the Kingdom of God From whence I argue thus To whom do belong the things signified unto them belong the Signs also as the Crown which is the Sign and Mark of Royalty belongs to him to whom the Kingdom belongs but unto little Children belongs the Kingdom of God as it is written in St. Matthew 19. 13. Therefore unto them belongs Baptism which is the Sign of the entring into that Kingdom For except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Therefore young Children born with original sin as it appears in several places of the holy Scripture but especially by these words of St. Paul to the Romans By the Offencof one Ju dgment came upon all men to Condemnation are not to be deprived of Baptism lest they should not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is the Reason that St. Cyprian and Austin have so often declared the Baptism of little Children to be necessary Moreover if they brought unto Jesus Christ young Children and he put his hands on them and prayed for them why shall they not bring unto him little Children in the Church Why shall not the Minister pray for them And why shall he not confer unto them the Ceremony or the Institution of Baptism as Jesus Christ gave unto little Children the Ceremony or Institution of Imposition of hands I ask this Question whether the Ceremony of Imposition of hands was in vain or whether they received by it some particular Grace from Christ Ye will not say that it was in vain because then Jesus Christ in whom were hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledg would not have used it if they received by it some special Grace notwithstanding their want of Repentance and Faith which they were not then capable of why shall not young Children now receive the Ceremony of Baptism and thereby all Graces annexed unto it though they be not capable of Faith and Repentance When a Father or Mother were baptized all those of the Houshold were baptized also as it appears in the Acts where it is said that Lydia a seller of Purple of the City of Thyatira was baptized and her Houshold and that the Keeper of the Prison was baptized he and all his And in the first Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians St. Paul saith that he hath baptized the Houshold of Stephanus but it is probable though not convincing that in so many Families there were Children And since our Fathers and their Children were baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea and they being the Figures of our Baptism as is evident by St. Paul that that which is by them figured may be accomplished the Children now ought to be baptized in the Baptism of Jesus Christ Object It is forbidden in several places of the holy Scriptures to Swear or to take an Oath Ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time thou shalt not forswear thy self but I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. But let your Communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh o evil and in the Epistle of St. James Above all things my Brethren swear not lest ye fall into Condemnation But the Church of England is not against swearing or taking an Oath yea she uses and maintains it lawful therefore she believes and practises an Article forbidden in the holy Scripture therefore she is not the holy Catholick Church Before I give an Answer it is necessary to know that an Oath is an Invocation to God or an Appeal to him as a Witness of the Truth of what we say so that in case that that we swear be not true we if not expresly at least virtually invoke God as a Judge and Avenger There are two sorts of Oaths one Assertory and the other Promissory an assertory Oath is when we promise by Oath something that is Future and if our promise be made directly and immediately to God 't is called a Vow if to men an Oath That being supposed I Answer That an Oath is not only lawful but also is sometimes necessary as when mens Estates are concern'd and no Evidence can be had to decide and clear the matter but what is assured by Oath Then it is necessary to make an end of and decide the Controversie as it appears by these words of St. Paul An Oath for Confirmations is to them an end of strife And its lawfulness appears by several Texts of the holy Scripture wherein God who is truth it self and cannot lie and consequently might be believed of men upon his bare word and without necessity of making an Oath yet to confirm his promises is willing to take it For when God made the Promise to Abraham because he could not swear by a greater he sware by himself And verse 17. God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his Counsel confirmed it by an Oath Therefore if God himself swears and takes an Oath why shall it not be lawful to men to take an Oath in dubious matters and of great Concern and when no Evidence can be had to decide and clear them Was not Mephibosheth spared because of the Lord's Oath that was between them between David and Jonathan the Son of Saul Did not the Law of Moses in many cases require them Doth not St. Paul use them oftentimes as when he saith God is my witness I call God for a Record upon my Soul Before God I lie not Which Oaths St. Paul who was to teach the Precepts of Christ to others should not have used if they had been unlawful and forbidden in the holy Scriptures And Christ himself as ye may read Mat. 26. 63 64. did not refuse it when the High-Priest asked him to answer upon his Oath whether he was the Son of God I adjure thee saith the High-Priest by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God and Jesus said unto him thou hast said Therefore seeing Jesus Christ himself doth answer when he is