| Note 0 |
There is a little Pamphles extent, called, Supplementum sublatum, in answer to Mr. Tombes, by Richard Hubberthorne, in a Samuel Fisher, who deny that these expressions, I affirme before God. God is witness, &c. are Oaths, because were these Oaths, then the Apostle did Swear frequently and unnecessarily, in respect his credit was so good amongst the Saints to whom he did wri•e, that his words would have been taken at any time without an Oath. I answer, That though he swore several times, yet never unnecessarily. For had he not judged those Oaths necessary, he would not have used them. And he knew better in what credit he was with his Countrymen, than either Mr. Hubber thorne or Mr. Fisher I am sure St. Austin was not of •ha• jud•ement, For he sayes (•erm. 28. de verbis Apost.) Videbat ibi, (that is amongst the Galations to whom he had used this expression behold before God I lye not, Gal. 1. 20) eos qui•e edebant, videbat & alios qui non credebant. Thus St. Aust•n with an unde•iable, evidence of Reason. For if all had so readily beleeved his word, how came it to p•ss that some, even of the beleevers, disputed against his Doctrine? Acts 15 Or what occ•si•n bad there been for him to have written (as he does Rom. 9. 1.) I say the truth in Christ, (or, by Christ) I lye not? Which translation (by Christ) Mr. Fisher in his Antidote carps at, because it is in Greek NONLATINALPHABET. And yet it is the same word, (as he knows, I doubt not) that is h•re translated by Heaven, by Earth, &c. Mat. 5. 34. 35. 36. But not to digress, it is not probable to be as they imagine: For were their A•gument good, as there had been no need of such Oaths, so neither of such vehement Asseverations, as they themselves take these to be. And then i• would follow, that the Apostle writ what he needed not, which to assert savours of blasphemy, if we grant that be writ by inspiration from the holy Ghost. But if these be Oaths, how is it (say they) that the Judges and Justices in Sessions will not own them as so —? And then they triumph saying, Surely the Magistrate in England doe not believe the Priests Doctrine. I answer, (1.) I have heard a great Magistrate say, That such Oaths should be accepted by him. (2) I suppose that they are accepted by such as be in Authority so to do, when they are persuaded of the fidelity of the Swearer. For I have it under the hand of Mr. Isaac Pennington (one of the most considerable of that Fraternity) that he once gave satisfaction, which he heard found acceptance with the Court to which he gave it, and also to the King, &c. (3.) The same I. P. gives a Reason why that savour is not indulged to all. His own expressions are these, (Many words have been spoken by severall eminent Persons (as hath been often related to me) of their belief and satisfaction in relation to our words, and a good inclination in them several times to accept thereof in stead of an Oath, if they knew but how to exclude others from the like indulgence, whom they were more jealous of. (4ly.) Inferiour Magistrates (such as they speak of) are sworn to act according to Law: And the Law prescribes (as I understand) in what manner, and with what formality Oaths are to be taken, which it is not in their power to dispense with, or vary from pro arbitrio. And therefore though they firmely believe that calling God to witness is an Oath; yet they are not at liberty to accept thereof, because they are tied up to Rules of Law. And of this me thinks Mr. H. and Mr. F. should not be ignorant, and if they were not, then this Quaere were needless. Lastly, they argue thus, If to say God knows, or God is witness, as in appeal to Gods contestation be Swearing by God; then to say such a man knows, or such a man is witness to the truth of what I say as an appeal to that mans contestation is Swearing by that man. And then they cry out upon such an absurdity. 'Tis strange that men of Parts, and Reason should be so deluded. They migh• •t well have argued, That if a Man may lawfully marry a Woman, then a Man may lawfully marry a Beast. I say as well. For as the Essence of lawfull Matrimony consists in the mutuall agreement betwixt a Man and a Woman; and not betwixt a Man and a Beast: so the Essence of a lawfull Oath consists in calling God to wi•ness, not in calling Man to witness. I beseech God to open their eyes, that they may discern into what absurdities they fall, whilst they v•••ly dream of putting absurdities upon others. |
There is a little Pamphles extent, called, Supplement Sublatum, in answer to Mr. Tombs, by Richard Hubberthorne, in a Samuel Fisher, who deny that these expressions, I affirm before God. God is witness, etc. Are Oaths, Because were these Oaths, then the Apostle did Swear frequently and unnecessarily, in respect his credit was so good among the Saints to whom he did wri•e, that his words would have been taken At any time without an Oath. I answer, That though he swore several times, yet never unnecessarily. For had he not judged those Oaths necessary, he would not have used them. And he knew better in what credit he was with his Countrymen, than either Mr. Hubber thorn or Mr. Fisher I am sure Saint Austin was not of •ha• jud•ement, For he Says (•erm. 28. de verbis Apost.) Videbat There, (that is among the Galatians to whom he had used this expression behold before God I lie not, Gal. 1. 20) eos qui•e Edged, videbat & Alioth qui non Credebant. Thus Saint Aust•n with an unde•iable, evidence of Reason. For if all had so readily believed his word, how Come it to p•ss that Some, even of the believers, disputed against his Doctrine? Acts 15 Or what occ•si•n bade there been for him to have written (as he does Rom. 9. 1.) I say the truth in christ, (or, by christ) I lie not? Which Translation (by christ) Mr. Fisher in his Antidote carps At, Because it is in Greek. And yet it is the same word, (as he knows, I doubt not) that is h•re translated by Heaven, by Earth, etc. Mathew 5. 34. 35. 36. But not to digress, it is not probable to be as they imagine: For were their A•gument good, as there had been no need of such Oaths, so neither of such vehement Asseverations, as they themselves take these to be. And then i• would follow, that the Apostle writ what he needed not, which to assert savours of blasphemy, if we grant that be writ by inspiration from the holy Ghost. But if these be Oaths, how is it (say they) that the Judges and Justices in Sessions will not own them as so —? And then they triumph saying, Surely the Magistrate in England do not believe the Priests Doctrine. I answer, (1.) I have herd a great Magistrate say, That such Oaths should be accepted by him. (2) I suppose that they Are accepted by such as be in authority so to do, when they Are persuaded of the Fidis of the Swearer. For I have it under the hand of Mr. Isaac Pennington (one of the most considerable of that Fraternity) that he once gave satisfaction, which he herd found acceptance with the Court to which he gave it, and also to the King, etc. (3.) The same I. P. gives a Reason why that savour is not indulged to all. His own expressions Are these, (Many words have been spoken by several eminent Persons (as hath been often related to me) of their belief and satisfaction in Relation to our words, and a good inclination in them several times to accept thereof in stead of an Oath, if they knew but how to exclude Others from the like indulgence, whom they were more jealous of. (4ly.) Inferior Magistrates (such as they speak of) Are sworn to act according to Law: And the Law prescribes (as I understand) in what manner, and with what formality Oaths Are to be taken, which it is not in their power to dispense with, or vary from Pro arbitrio. And Therefore though they firmly believe that calling God to witness is an Oath; yet they Are not At liberty to accept thereof, Because they Are tied up to Rules of Law. And of this me thinks Mr. H. and Mr. F. should not be ignorant, and if they were not, then this Quaere were needless. Lastly, they argue thus, If to say God knows, or God is witness, as in appeal to God's contestation be Swearing by God; then to say such a man knows, or such a man is witness to the truth of what I say as an appeal to that men contestation is Swearing by that man. And then they cry out upon such an absurdity. It's strange that men of Parts, and Reason should be so deluded. They migh• •t well have argued, That if a Man may lawfully marry a Woman, then a Man may lawfully marry a Beast. I say as well. For as the Essence of lawful Matrimony consists in the mutual agreement betwixt a Man and a Woman; and not betwixt a Man and a Beast: so the Essence of a lawful Oath consists in calling God to wi•ness, not in calling Man to witness. I beseech God to open their eyes, that they may discern into what absurdities they fallen, while they v•••ly dream of putting absurdities upon Others. |
pc-acp vbz dt j n2 n1, vvn, fw-la fw-la, p-acp n1 p-acp n1 n2, p-acp np1 np1, p-acp dt np1 n1, r-crq vvb cst d n2, pns11 vvb p-acp np1. np1 vbz n1, av vbr n2, c-acp vbdr d n2, cs dt n1 vdd vvb av-j cc av-j, p-acp n1 po31 n1 vbds av j p-acp dt n2 p-acp ro-crq pns31 vdd vvi, cst po31 n2 vmd vhi vbn vvn p-acp d n1 p-acp dt n1. pns11 vvb, cst cs pns31 vvd j n2, av av-x av-j. c-acp vhd pns31 xx vvn d n2 j, pns31 vmd xx vhi vvn pno32. cc pns31 vvd av-jc p-acp r-crq n1 pns31 vbds p-acp po31 n2, cs d n1 vvb n1 cc n1 n1 pns11 vbm j n1 np1 vbds xx pp-f n1 n1, c-acp pns31 vvz (n1. crd fw-la fw-la n1.) fw-la fw-la, (cst vbz p-acp dt n2 p-acp ro-crq pns31 vhd vvn d n1 vvb p-acp np1 pns11 vvb xx, np1 crd crd) fw-la fw-la fw-la, fw-la cc n2 fw-fr fw-fr fw-la. av n1 n1 p-acp dt j, n1 pp-f n1. p-acp cs d vhd av av-j vvd po31 n1, q-crq vvd pn31 p-acp n1 cst d, av pp-f dt n2, vvn p-acp po31 n1? vvz crd cc r-crq n1 vvd a-acp vbn p-acp pno31 pc-acp vhi vvn (c-acp pns31 vdz np1 crd crd) pns11 vvb dt n1 p-acp np1, (cc, p-acp np1) pns11 vvb xx? r-crq n1 (p-acp np1) n1 np1 p-acp po31 n1 n2 p-acp, c-acp pn31 vbz p-acp jp. cc av pn31 vbz dt d n1, (c-acp pns31 vvz, pns11 vvb xx) cst vbz av vvn p-acp n1, p-acp n1, av np1 crd crd crd crd cc-acp xx pc-acp vvi, pn31 vbz xx j pc-acp vbi c-acp pns32 vvb: c-acp vbdr po32 n1 j, c-acp a-acp vhd vbn dx n1 pp-f d n2, av dx pp-f d j n2, c-acp pns32 px32 vvb d pc-acp vbi. cc av n1 vmd vvi, cst dt n1 vvn r-crq pns31 vvd xx, r-crq p-acp vvb n2 pp-f n1, cs pns12 vvb cst vbb vvn p-acp n1 p-acp dt j n1. p-acp cs d vbb n2, q-crq vbz pn31 (vvb pns32) d dt n2 cc n2 p-acp n2 vmb xx vvi pno32 a-acp av —? cc av pns32 vvb vvg, av-j dt n1 p-acp np1 vdb xx vvi dt ng1 n1. pns11 vvb, (crd) pns11 vhb vvn dt j n1 vvb, cst d n2 vmd vbi vvn p-acp pno31. (crd) pns11 vvb cst pns32 vbr vvn p-acp d c-acp vbb p-acp n1 av pc-acp vdi, c-crq pns32 vbr vvn pp-f dt n1 pp-f dt n1. p-acp pns11 vhb pn31 p-acp dt n1 pp-f n1 np1 np1 (pi pp-f dt av-ds j pp-f d n1) cst pns31 a-acp vvd n1, r-crq pns31 vvd vvn n1 p-acp dt n1 p-acp r-crq pns31 vvd pn31, cc av p-acp dt n1, av (crd) dt d pns11. np1 vvz dt n1 c-crq d n1 vbz xx vvn p-acp d. po31 d n2 vbr d, (d n2 vhb vbn vvn p-acp j j n2 (c-acp vhz vbn av vvn p-acp pno11) pp-f po32 n1 cc n1 p-acp n1 p-acp po12 n2, cc dt j n1 p-acp pno32 j n2 pc-acp vvi av p-acp n1 pp-f dt n1, cs pns32 vvd cc-acp c-crq pc-acp vvi n2-jn p-acp dt j n1, ro-crq pns32 vbdr av-dc j pp-f. (n1.) j-jn n2 (d c-acp pns32 vvb pp-f) vbr vvn pc-acp vvi vvg p-acp n1: cc dt n1 vvz (c-acp pns11 vvb) p-acp r-crq n1, cc p-acp r-crq n1 n2 vbr pc-acp vbi vvn, r-crq pn31 vbz xx p-acp po32 n1 pc-acp vvi p-acp, cc vvi p-acp fw-la fw-la. cc av cs pns32 av-j vvb d n1 np1 pc-acp vvi vbz dt n1; av pns32 vbr xx p-acp n1 pc-acp vvi av, c-acp pns32 vbr vvn a-acp p-acp n2 pp-f n1. cc pp-f d pno11 vvz n1 np1 cc n1 np1 vmd xx vbi j, cc cs pns32 vbdr xx, cs d fw-la vbdr j. ord, pns32 vvb av, cs pc-acp vvi np1 vvz, cc np1 vbz n1, c-acp p-acp n1 p-acp ng1 n1 vbb vvg p-acp np1; av pc-acp vvi d dt n1 vvz, cc d dt n1 vbz n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f r-crq pns11 vvb p-acp dt n1 p-acp d ng1 n1 vbz vvg p-acp d n1. cc av pns32 vvb av p-acp d dt n1. pn31|vbz j cst n2 pp-f n2, cc n1 vmd vbi av vvn. pns32 n1 av av vhi vvn, cst cs dt n1 vmb av-j vvi dt n1, cs dt n1 vmb av-j vvi dt n1. pns11 vvb c-acp av. p-acp p-acp dt n1 pp-f j n1 vvz p-acp dt j n1 p-acp dt n1 cc dt n1; cc xx p-acp dt n1 cc dt n1: av dt n1 pp-f dt j n1 vvz p-acp vvg np1 p-acp n1, xx p-acp vvg n1 pc-acp vvi. pns11 vvb np1 pc-acp vvi po32 n2, cst pns32 vmb vvi p-acp r-crq n2 pns32 vvb, cs pns32 av-j vvb pp-f vvg n2 p-acp n2-jn. |
