PA &I. II. Reverend Mr. Richard Baxter. 425 § ;95, Incident to this Controverfie are other Claufes of the Declaration,as that the Covenant was in it self an unlawful Oath , and impofed againft the known Laws, c. which though they contradia not, yet many that were Children then, and know neither Matter of Law or Facto, no not, fo much as the Fundamental Laws and Contlitution of the Kingdom, do think themfelves very uncapable of determining. § 39. And for the Traytereas Position of taking Amyl by bit Authority againft bis Per.(onor ágainf thafe that areCommiJonatedby him: We feenopotition here recited; and thereforemuff annex this Claufè to the former ( as before ), fuppofing that the meaning is that it is a Trayterous Pofisien to fay, That it is lawful by the King's Au- thority, to takeup Arms on any pretence whatfoever, against, &c. J And we all confeti that it is a Contradi&ory and Trayterous Polition for anyman to fay,thathe may take up,Armsby the King's Authority against his Authority, or Dignity, or Honour, or Perfon : But all the Doubt is as aforefaid, Whether the King's Laws have not his Authority ? and whether his Laws and his Commiflîon may not be contrary ? or one Commilfion contrary to another ? And in that cafe, whether,it be Trayterous tofay.that one fidebath his Authority againft the other? As if his Law allowMea to defend their Lives and Purses against Affaults, and an Affail- ant produce a Commillìon, whether the King's Authority in his Laws and Courts enablenot a Man by Arms to fave his Purfe or Life againft filch a pretended Com miflioner : (And how )hall any Subje&, at the time of the Affault, be fare whether the Commiffion be true or fpurious ?) If as joab and Abner Lent the young Men to play ( mad play) before them, and theRomans caufed their. Gladiators to fight to make them fporr, fo if the King to try the Valour of fome Subje&s, would Corn- million a few on both fides to fight againft eachother, doth it follow that both fides were Traytors, becaufe they both fought by his Authority against filch as were Commillionatedby him ? If it be raid, That this is not the meaning of the A&: we anfwer, That whereForms are fuppofed to bedeliberately worded by a,; Parliament, if we mull not undérffand Univerfalsuniverfally, but may put in Lid mitationsor Exceptions at our Pleafure, then their words are not the signifiers of their Minds, and we know not whether to go to understand them, nor what be the Exceptions and Limitations allowed, but every Man may except according to hisFancy, and thus all will be but Equivocation and Deceit. And Dr. Sanderson refolveth it, That when Oaths ( and confequently fubfcribedForms) are ambigu- ously.worded, and the Impofers will not explain them, it is not fit at all to take them. Some Lawyers tell me, that if it camebefore the Judges they would judge an Unlawful Commif ion to be noCommiflion ; and that the Judges are the Exposi- tors of theLaw. I anfwer, I. We have no affurance that the Judges would fo judge ; much left unanimoully : nor that they have fo done. 2. Lately Mr. `7a- f hob Read offered at the King's-Bench-Bar to take the Oxford Oath as expounded in that fence by the Vote of the Lords about the Tell ; and he wa4 reproved for his Offer, and told that he muff take it as the Law impofed it, and was fent back to jail. ;. TheLaw- makers only can expound a Law as antecedently Obligatory to . all the Subje&s: The Judges can only expound it confequently for the decifion of a particular Cafe, in order to Execution ; and ad hoc., which warrantéth noMan to take that for the true meaning of the Statute. § 397. IV. TheFourth Controverfie is about the Oath of Canonical Obedience e And the Reafons why this is fcrupled by the Non -Conformists are thefe: Becaufe they take the Power it felf to which they are to fwear, to be fpecifically Evil, and agatnft the Wordof God: of which their Proofs are givenbefore: And therefore they dare notbe guilty of fwearing Obedience to them, left they r. Take the Namd of God in vain ; an Oatb being a thing which is not to be ventured on, but with the greatest reverence, deliberation and fincerity. 2. And left they foandaloufly approve of Ufurpation, in Chriff's Kingdom, to the wrong of his Crown and Dig- nity, and contra& the guilt of Treafon or Dilloyalty againft him. 3. Left they encourageUfurpers in thefe infolent Novelties and Corruptions, which the ancient Churches never knew, and camenot into theChurch till the Roman Papacy grew to fome degree of Impudency in their Ufurpations. § 398. Yet thefe two things the Non-conformifts are contented readily to do: r. To obey the Bishops Chancellors, &e by meer Submiion, without an Oath, in all things lawful. To appear at their Courts, and anfwer them with due reverence. For they think that Sob)eilionand Submiion towards Ufurpers greatly differ: and Iii that
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=