Chapter XXIV: Part III: The Present testimony stated and vindicated in its principal heads (13)

3. Of all these cases, only two are applicable to our imposed transactions with our wicked rulers, viz. in the matter of friendly contracts, or in the matter of judicial appearances before them, and swearing and banding before, and to them. In both which, there must be a sort of confederation, with them. In contracts with them it will not be doubted; and in judicial submitting to their authoritative impositions of such securities, it is evident, there must be also a confederation with them, not only in acknowledging their authority, but in coming under mutual exacted stipulations; wherein, by taking these oaths and bands, we give them security of orderly subjection, as members of the community whereof they are judges, and get their security of acquittance, and that we shall not be molested nor prosecuted among the recusants. Now concerning this confederation, I shall concede in two cases, it may be owned, and consequentially oaths and bonds may be given to men of their stamp, 1. A confederation which is more discretive, or discriminative may be allowed to them; that is, such bargains wherein they and we are kept still divided as two parties, and not under one incorporation, as in contracts of co-habitation, living under them as tenants, buying and selling, and the like. But we cannot enter into a confederation unitive with them, which may make us one body or party. 2. A confederation which is necessary and unavoidable; when either an unavoidable strife or contention doth arise between them and us, whereupon we are compelled to answer in law, and can no otherwise be decided but by our oath of confirmation, which is an end of all strife; or when we are falsely accused of some odious and heinous crime, as of murder or adultery: it is then lawful and necessary to vindicate ourselves, by giving all these legal confirmations that we are free of these things; for otherwise to ly under the imputation of such enormities, were shamefully scandalous to religion. But we cannot allow any transactions of this sort, which are elective and voluntary, to make or pursue either peace or pleas with them, when our own interest or benefit draweth us thereunto; but ere we go to law, or give oaths and bonds to, and before the unjust and perfidious, and such also as we cannot own as magistrates, we would rather take wrong, and suffer ourselves to be defrauded as the apostle adviseth, 1 Cor. vi. 1, 7. It was not unlawful, as expositors shew from that place, for the Corinthians to answer in law for their own vindication, being pursued by a heathen; but it was utterly a fault to go voluntarily one with another. And if to pursue a brother was a fault, then much more to go to law with an apostate, with whom there should be less meddling. And if to go before the unjust magistrates, as these heathen judges were at Corinth, who yet were magistrates, was utterly a fault, then much more to go before such as have neither rightful nor righteous authority at all: which yet must be acknowledged, if we take oaths and bands before them: for none can exact these but acknowledged magistrates. Hence it is apparent, it would be an elective confederation with these wicked usurping judges, when brought before them to take their tendered oaths and bonds, not as parties pursued before them, but as transacting with them, with whom, as well as before whom, we must give these confirming securities: and so not only must we acknowledge them to be gods, among whom the Lord sitteth, whose holy name is interposed in such solemn transactions; but also we must swear and enter in bonds to them as they require. This indeed is necessary when called before them against our will, and accused of horrid crimes, as was always in the imposition of the oath of abjuration audaciously imputed to the refusers, that they asserted murdering principles, and owned it lawful to kill all that served the king; in such a case, to declare with the most solemn asseverations, for vindication of truth, that we disown not only all such assertions, but all such thoughts as that it is lawful to kill all that serve the king, or any that serve him because they serve him, or because they have injured us any manner of way, and to declare our abhorrence of all murder and assassinations. But to swear such things to them, when we are altogether innocent, would be a granting that we were legally suspected, by offering a legal purgation. And so all the subjects of Scotland should take upon them to purge themselves from a suspicion of murder, which were odious. And to abjure a declaration, as asserting such things, when it asserts no such thing, is a swearing to a lie.

4. All solemn securities of oaths or bonds, that are sacred promises, are by strictness of law, of most strict and indispensible obligation, as Mr. Durham on the third command, shews in many cases: No man's loss, or private prejudice, can make it void, (though we swear to our own hurt, we must not change, Psal. xv. 4) nor indifferency in the matter, if once engaged in, for then our souls are bound, Numb. xxx. 2. nor deceit of others, if the deceit be circumstantial only, as in the Gibeonites case; nor the extortion of it by fear or violence, if the matter be lawful; nor rashness and sin in the manner, if lawful in the matter, as with the Gibeonites; nor another meaning afterwards devised, not according to the imposer's mind, nor our own at first who took it, (that is but a swearing deceitfully, Psal. xxiv. 4.) nor any good meaning or design in reversing the oath (Saul was punished for breaking his oath with the Gibeonites, out of zeal, 2 Sam. xxi. 2.) nor though the oath be conceived by creatures, (as by the altar or temple, &c. Mat. xxxiii. 20,--22.) nor when the thing becomes impossible, if that possibility could have been foreseen or prevented; nor any other sacred meaning, by equivocation or mental reservation, which are abominable; nor any dispensation from pope or king; nor any other posterior oath. None of these things can make an oath void; but if we have bound ourselves, God will require it: "For whoso despises an oath, by breaking the covenant, when lo he hath given his hand, he shall not escape, God shall recompense it," Ezek. xvii. 18, 19. They are null indeed and of no force, when they become bonds of iniquity, tying to things unlawful or impossible; or when the thing sworn is not in our own power, Numb. xxx. 5. Or when there is deceit in it, not in circumstantials only, but in essentials; or when it hinders a greater good, when the case materially altereth; or when the party sworn to relaxeth us. All these do condemn the horrid breach of the sacred and solemn league and covenant, and confutes the perverting and wresting the words of it in the third article, as if it did oblige to allegiance of tyrants; for, in that case, the obligation is unlawful, and there is a case in essentials, and the case materially altereth, (for in the covenant we are bound to the king, not to a tyrant) and the party sworn to have relaxed us long ago, by annulling the covenant; yet all these things prove, that the covenant is still in force, and that all the oaths and bonds contradictory to it, are sinful: and yet though it be sinful to take them, and sinful to keep them, it is nevertheless perjury to break them, especially to them whose erroneous conscience is bound by them, under a notion of their lawfulness.

And in a special manner it is here conspicuous, how deceitful a juggle that sinful shift of many hath been, that they could subscribe an unlawful bond under a penalty: as for example, to answer to their courts, or to go to church, or separate from the persecuted meetings of the Lord's people, under such a penalty, which they thought to pay the penalty would clear them off, as if it were only an alternative bond. The iniquity of this juggle will appear, if we consider, such bonds cannot be alternative: for alternatives are always disjunctive, binding equally either to this or that; and the one alternative is no more determinately enjoined by the imposer, than the other. And so, if these bonds were alternative, it should be in the binder's choice, whether to answer the court, go to church, to separate meetings, or pay so much money. But it is not so, for the stipulation and promise is determinate to the obligation, for which the bond is required, and the penalty is annexed, as a punishment of the breach of that obligation. And that fancy of eluding the bond by paying the penalty, would quite enervate all security among men, in their mutual compacts of that nature; and under that pretence, they might give a satisfactory compliance to the most wicked imposed obligation imaginable, to subscribe the Turk's Alcoran, with a reserved attention only to pay the imposed penalty. Which reservation is so far from being suitable to that christian simplicity the gospel requires, that it does not answer that moral honesty that our concern, in the good of human society, calls for. It is incumbent on all that expect to dwell on God's holy hill, to have this requisite qualification for one, though they swear to their own hurt they will not change it, and they must be far from swearing deceitfully; and consequently, if they bind themselves by a promise, which a Christian should be no less tender of than his oath, they must keep it. And besides, to condescend that that penalty or fine should be paid, by ourselves, or friends in our behalf, were to condescend that these enemies should be enriched by our own or the spoil of our friends, upon the account of the forfeiture of our promise; which seems such a dishonest and dishonourable thing, that an honest heart would disdain it. And though this should be flouted as foolish preciseness, to chuse rather to ly still and suffer in such a case; yet it may be considered that Christ's cross, even with reproaches, is always a better choice than the world's ease, purchased at any price which is a hire for Christ's enemies.

5. All divines and casuists do grant, that an oath must be taken in his sense and meaning who tenders it, and in whose favours it is conceived: because oaths and bonds are for security, and therefore whosoever would deal honestly and christianly in taking an oath, must take it in the sense that it is understood by such as impose it; otherwise the holy name of God should be taken in vain, and the swearers and promisers shall deal deceitfully, in frustrating the end of the oath or bond, and the design of the tenderers thereof. And therefore, as reason and religion requires, that all oaths or bonds be so conceived and enunciated, that all concerned may understand them, and if there be any doubt how far they bind, the imposers should explain the same, as Abraham did to his servant: So conscience requires, that they be always taken in the imposer's sense, and as they discover their sense and sentiments of them, and not according to the meaning that we may think the words capable of; nor yet according to the wheedling explications, that they may give or allow, which are as deceitful and ensnaring as the things themselves. Nor is it to be looked upon as a favour to get a liberty to put a sense upon them, contrary to their known meaning; for that is but a liberty to mock God, to mock others, and ourselves too, and nothing but a snare to the conscience. And to put a gloss upon printed oaths or bonds, which in strict construction they will not bear, and then to subscribe them in the terms as offered, is not only an intangling ourselves into the bond of sinful oaths and bands, but to stumble the godly, and harden the wicked in the present, and to mock posterity in future ages; who shall see the oaths in the terms subscribed, but not the sense they were taken in. See Apolog. Relat. Sect. 14. It is known by manifold experiences that it is dangerous to hearken to their overtures who study to ensnare us, but far more hurtful and hateful to propound overtures to them. For they interpret it a ceding and giving ground, and when they see a man beginning to yield, then they will seem to be very condescending, even to accept of little at first, that they may draw him on to more: like cunning anglers sometimes recoiling and drawing back the well baited and busked hook, to invite the poor unwary fish to pursue, and sometimes letting it run away with the hook when it bites kindly: So when they find a man offering and ready to accept of accommodations, they will be very yielding and easy, but with a design to hook him. But conscience can find no safety at present, nor satisfaction afterwards in accommodations with them. For it is plain to all that are not blinded with ignorance, or partiality, or a judicial stroke, that our imposers are such sons of Belial as cannot be taken with hands, or by the hand; and if we reflect upon the matters upon which these accommodations are to be offered or accepted, they are not things upon which we may come and go, upon our discretion, as we do with our own particulars, or with problems to be disputed, or ambiguous propositions capable of different senses; but matters so and so circumstantiate, as do require the positive determinate judgment of the conscience, concerns of truth and falsehood, duty and sin, which cannot admit of accommodation, or dispensation, or reservation, or any other sense than the imposers and they that state their inquisition about such things do own, and are observedly known to have and maintain about them. Otherwise, all other forged accommodations are but tampering tricks, juggling with jugglers, deceiving the deceivers, in such a way as does not well consist with the simplicity of the gospel, or the doves innocency; for what is that but a swearing or promising deceitfully! Psal. xxiv. 4. "a conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood," Isa. lix. 13. "a false oath," Zech. viii. 17. "which are hateful to God who will be a swift witness against false swearers," Mal. iii. 5. Neither will they be so easily deceived, for they will readily yield to accommodations, or any tolerable sense that we can put upon their snares; for they reckon that a yielding in part, and are glad to find us so far justifying their acts and impositions, as by our offer practically to declare they bear a good sense, and they will come many ways to our hand to get us hooked so.

Secondly, These things being premitted, I shall offer reasons why it was necessary, in point of conscience, to refuse all the oaths hitherto tendered; and consequently conscientious sufferers upon this account will be vindicated. And first, some general reasons against all of them together, and then a word to each sort of them.

1. There is one general argument, that will condemn coming in any terms of oaths or bonds with that party, that have broken the covenant, overturned the reformation, and destroyed the people of the Lord: because such transactions with them (as hinted above) are a sort of confederacy with the known enemies of truth and godliness, importing a voluntary subjection to them, compliance and incorporation with them, as members of the same community, whereof they are acknowledged to be the head. Now all such sort of confederacy with such malignant enemies of God and of the church, is unlawful, as Mr. Gillespie demonstrates in his useful case of conscience, concerning associations and confederacies with idolaters, or any known enemies of truth and godliness. Though civil compacts for common commerce may be allowed, as Abraham was confederate with Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, Gen. xiv. 13. Jacob covenanted with Laban by way of lawborrows, Gen xxxi. 14. But sacred confederations of this sort are unlawful from these arguments, 1. The law of God condemns them, Exod. xxiii. 32. "Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods, they shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me,"----Where not only religious covenants are discharged in a toleration of the idolatry, but familiar conversation also, they shall not dwell in thy land. If then we must not suffer them, if in capacity, sure we must far less be imposed upon by them; if we are not to be familiar with heathens, far less with apostates, that call themselves Christians; for the apostle lays much more restraint from communion with them, than with Pagans, 1 Cor. v. 10, 11. The reason of the law, lest they make thee sin: as long therefore as there is that hazard of sinning, the law obliges to that caution. So Exod. xxxiv. 12,--16. "Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land--lest it be a snare--but ye shall destroy their altars--lest thou make a covenant with them--and they go a whoring after their gods, and thou take of their daughters unto thy sons"--Here again all sacred transactions are discharged, upon a moral and perpetually binding ground, and all toleration is prohibited, and conjugal affinity. Such compliance brought on the first desolating judgment, the flood on the old world (Gen. vi. 1, 2, 3.) when the godly conformed and incorporated themselves, and joined in affinity with that ungodly crew, from whom they should have separated themselves. Likewise Deut. vii. 2, 3, 4, 5.--"Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them, neither shalt thou make marriages with them--for they will turn away thy son from following me--so shall the anger of the Lord be kindled against you--but thus shall ye deal with them, ye shall destroy their altars." Where all transactions with a people devoted to destruction are discharged, even that of toleration of malignant enemies, according to which precept, "David resolved to destroy early all the wicked of the land, and cut off all wicked doers, from the city of the Lord," Psal. ci. 8. Mark this, all, of what degree or quality soever, without respect of persons. And lest it should be thought this is meant only of these seven nations there enumerate, the law is interpreted by the spirit of God or many other nations; where Solomon is condemned for joining in affinity with other wicked people, besides these, 1 Kings, xi. 1, 2. So that it is to be understood generally, against confederacies with all, to whom the moral ground is applicable, and the danger of insnaring the people of God. It is clear likewise, we must have nothing to do with the wicked, but to treat them and with them as enemies, Psal. cxxxix. 21, 22. with whom, as such, there can be no confederation; for that supposes always the enmity is laid aside, but that can never be between the professors of religion and the professed enemies thereof: but that must always be the language of their practice, "Depart from me ye workers of iniquity, for the Lord hath heard me," Psal. vi. 8. The command is peremptory and perpetual, "Forsake the foolish," Prov ix. 6. "Make no friendship with them," Prov. xxii. 24. "Say not a confederacy to them." Isa. viii. 12. where it is clear from the opposition in that text, betwixt confederating with the wicked and the fear of God, that the one is not consistent with the other. There is an express discharge to yoke or have any fellowship with them, 2 Cor. vi. 14. to the end--"for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness?--what concord hath Christ with Belial?--wherefore come out from among them, and be separate."--2. Many sad and sharp reproofs for such transactions and confederations do conclude the same thing, Judg. ii. 1, 2, 3--"I said,--ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land, you shall throw down their altars: but you have not obeyed my voice, Why have you done this? Wherefore--I will not drive them out from before you--." It cannot be expected, the Lord will drive out these enemies, if we swear subjection and allegiance, and come under confederations with them; for thereby we contribute actively to their settlement and establishment, and bring ourselves not only under the misery, but the guilt of strengthening the hands of evil doers. So Jer. ii. the people of God are reproved, for making themselves home-born slaves. How? by outlandish confederacies, verse 18. "Now what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria?--The Chaldee paraphrase hath it, What have you to do to associate with Pharaoh king of Egypt? and what have you to do to make a covenant with the Assyrian?" So may we say, what have we to do to take their oaths and bonds, that are as great enemies as they were? Ephraim is reproved for mixing himself among the people, Hos. vii. 8. by making confederacies with them. What follows? He is a cake not turned, hot in the nether side, zealous for earthly things, but cold and raw in the upper side, remiss in the things of Christ. And this we have seen in our experience to be the fruit of such bargains, or bonds, or oaths, that they that were engaged in them, have always in some measure fallen from their former fervour for Christ. Nay we shall find, that such transactions are seldom or never recorded in the book of God without a reproof, or some greater marks of God's displeasure put upon them? which doubtless is set purposely as beacons, that we may beware of them. And therefore, 3. We may take notice of many disallowed and condemned examples, on which the Lord set marks of wrath, as Ahab's covenant with Benhadad, 1 Kings xx. 32. to the end. Asa's covenant with Benhadad, which the prophet calls a foolish deed, 2 Chron. xvi. from beginning to verse 10. proceeding from an evil heart of unbelief, as all such transactions are overawed compliances. Jehoshaphat's with Ahab hath the same censure, though he kept himself free of Ahab's idolatry, and Ahab seemed to have been penitent before he joined with him, and his relation to him was very near, the enemy of both was an infidel, the cause was good, to recover a city of refuge, the manner of his proceeding was pious, consulting the prophets, and his end good; yet all this did not justify that wickedness, related 2 Chron. xviii. and reproved 2 Chron. xix. 2. Jehu the prophet is sent to him, "Shouldst thou love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord." After this, when he joined himself with Ahaziah, who did very wickedly, the Lord brake his works, 2 Chron. xx. 35. to the end: which made him afterwards mend his fault, for he would not again join with him, when he sought the like association, 1 Kings xxii. 49. So Amaziah's bargain with the Israelites, when the Lord was not with them, is condemned by the prophet, admonishing him to disjoin himself from them, 2 Chron. xxv. 7,--20. and Ahaz's bargain with Tilgath Pilneser the Assyrian, 2 Chron. xviii. 16 &c. is plainly disallowed. 4. The complaints, confessions, and lamentations of the Lord's people, mourning over this sin, demonstrate the evil of it, Ezra ix. 14. "Should we again break thy commandments, and join in affinity with the people of these abominations? Wouldst not thou be angry with us, till thou hadst consumed us, so that there shouldst be no remnant nor escaping?" Psal. cvi. 35. "They were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works."

All these commands, reproofs, examples and complaints, are written for our learning; and being seriously laid to heart, will sufficiently sear all the fearers of God to join, but stand aloof from all compliances, conjurations, or confederacies with the enemies of God, directly or indirectly, formally or interpretatively, for fear of partaking of their sins, and receiving of their plagues. I insist the more largely on this argument, both because it will conclude that for which those proofs are adduced, to condemn all bonding or bargaining with malignant enemies; and because it will vindicate the aversion of this poor persecuted remnant, from associating in expeditions of war, with promiscuous subverters and perverters of the cause, on which it were not proper to my purpose to dilate any discourse in a distinct head, while I must confine myself only to the heads of sufferings; only because it may be objected, and it will be profitable to consider it, that these scriptures disprove only voluntary and elective confederations with the wicked, but cannot condemn necessitated subscriptions of lawful obligations, when the matter is not sinful; nor come they home to the case of prisoners, who are constrained to transact and treat, and have do with the men in power, otherwise, if all bonds were unlawful, then prisoners might not procure liberty for longer or shorter time, upon bond and bail, to answer again when called; which yet is generally approven, and practised without scruple, and see us not want a precedent in scripture, in that Jason gave such security, Acts xvii. 9. I shall therefore subjoin here some considerations, by way of answer to this. 1. These scriptures disprove all covenants, Exod. xxiii. 32. All confederacies, Isa. viii. 12. All concord or agreement with the men of Belial, 1 Cor. vi. 15. and, without distinction of voluntary or overawed transactions, all unitive agreements of whatsoever sort are discharged, and can no more be restricted to the particulars there specified, as if any other covenant, confederacy, or concord might be lawful, that there was not a joining in marriage, an associating in war, or communion in communion in worship with them, than the moral grounds of these prohibitions can be so restricted: for the hazard of sins and snares, the hurt of faithless fears from whence they flow, and the hatefulness of such unequal conjunctions, which are the grounds and reasons of these laws, as may be seen in these forecited places, cannot be restricted to the particulars specified. But now all the tendered oaths and bonds of our adversaries, when subscribed as they require; yea, even those transactions of prisoners for procuring their liberty, on terms of engaging to re-enter themselves according to agreement with their persecutors, are unitive covenants, or conditional agreements, giving solemn securities for their respective obligations, upon terms wherein both parties accord; for these bonds are given to them, and not only before them, as was said. They are confederacies of the subjected, seeking the peace and favours of their superiors, which when overawed are sinful to be made with wicked enemies of religion, as well as when unconstrained, for Ahaz's transaction with the Assyrian, was forced out of fear, and yet it is called a sinful confederacy, not to be homologated by any of the fearers of the Lord, Isa. viii. 12. They are concords and agreements with the unrighteous sons of Belial, and not about common matters, but matters wherein religion and righteousness are nearly concerned: can any think that these commands are given with exception of prisoners? and that if any Israelite was prisoner to these nations, he might make a covenant with them for his liberty, upon an engagement to render himself prisoner to them again? Then he might give bond to God's devoted enemies, to bind up his hands from prosecuting the war with them, which all Israel was obliged to do: for if they might covenant subjection to them, then it would have been their sin to rebel, as it was Zedekiah's sin to rebel against Nebuchadnezzar, because it was breach of covenant: and so there might be a case, wherein the Israelites, notwithstanding of all these prohibitions, would be obliged not to destroy, nor break down their altars, to wit, if they made such a bargain with them for their liberty, to surrender themselves as their subjects. Now we read, many times they were brought under subjection, and that as a punishment of their leaguing with them: and yet they broke the yoke, when they cried unto the Lord, and never submitted any longer than they were able to deliver themselves. Whence it is plain, that they never bound themselves to such subjection by oath, bond, or promise, for that would have been no mercy which was purchased by treachery. 2. It is a voluntary compact with the men in power to procure liberty upon bond to answer again, and cannot be called necessitated; or if it be, it is but a necessitated sin. It must be voluntary, because it is an act of the will, and the will cannot be forced; it is the consent of the will, and the consent cannot but be voluntary, in so far as it is a consent; and by this, whereas, before their so procured liberty, they were prisoners by constraint, now when they must return to prison, they are prisoners by consent: It is the prisoner's choice, whether he will come out upon these terms, or not; and every choice, in so far as it is a choice, is elective and voluntary: it is put to the man's choice, whether he will continue under the cross, and continue his testimony for the cause, or surcease from it for a time, the latter in the case is chosen. It is the prisoner's desire and petition, to transact with them in these terms for liberty, without which no benefit of any such bond can be procured, and every desire is voluntary. Yea, it is a formal compact and capitulation with them, binding and obliging these bonders by their own word and writ, at least to be at their call and command, not by compulsion and force now, but by the moral obligation of their own compact: now, every such compact is voluntary. And therefore, if all voluntary covenants, confederacies, and agreements, be discharged in scripture, then this bond of compearance also must be discharged. The judgment of the famous Mr. Rutherford, or a draught of a petition to have been presented to the committee of estates, by those ministers who were prisoners in the castle of Edinburgh, will confirm what is said: we find it in the third part of his letters, Numb. 93. where are these words, 'I am straitned as another suffering man, but dare not petition this committee, 1. Because it draws us to capitulate with such as have the advantage of the mount, the Lord so disposing for the present, and to bring the matters of Christ to yea and no (you being prisoners, and they the powers) is a hazard.' 3. This agreement with the enemies for liberty upon these terms, is sinful. For it is not only an acknowledgement of a wicked power, in owning and transacting with them as judges, who can free them and bind them as prisoners by law, which is disproved above; but it is a binding themselves over to a packed, perverse, and law-perverting judicatory, not as prisoners by forcible constraint, but a willing consent, acknowledging the legality of their imprisonment, and obliging themselves to observe it when demanded: yea, it is a covenanted and bonded obedience to a wicked law; for it is a wicked law, to exact from a sufferer for truth his re-entry to prison, for no crime but his duty. As also it is a justifying of a wicked sentence; for it is a wicked sentence, that an innocent man shall return to prison when they please; which is justified when they bind themselves to obey it. This is no ways like a man's going to the gibbet on his own feet; for the man does not bind himself to do that, neither is it exacted of him as an obedience to a law, nor is it given forth as a part of his sentence, only he chooseth it for his own ease: but if all these did concur, it were unlawful for a martyr for righteousness to obey such a law, or voluntarily to submit to such a wicked sentence. Neither is it of any pertinency to urge, that it is lawful for a man to submit so far to a robber, as to bind himself to return to him against such a day with another purse to him: for this is a necessitated bargain, to give what a man hath, and promise more to save his life, and is like a man's casting his goods out at sea to save the ship; the other is not so, but elective: this is only a choice of the least of two evils of suffering, but the other is a choice of one of two evils, which is sin, which cannot come under a Christian's election at all; this is a compact with the robber, which is still discretive, and no ways unitive of the robber and him, in any bargain of concord, or confederacy, or acknowledged subjection, only a passive surrender to his greater force as an enemy; but the other is unitive, as between rulers and ruled: this is not any obedience to a law, nor is the man's purse required to be given, or promised under that notion, as the other is. I shall here also subjoin some more of that foresaid letter of Mr. Rutherford's, in the second place, says he, 'A speaking to them in writ, and passing in silence the sworn covenant, and the cause of God, which is the very present controversy, is contrary to the practice of Christ and the apostles, who being accused, or not accused, avouched Christ to be the Son of God, and the Messias, and that the dead must rise again, even when the adversary initiated the question.' Now plain it is, that neither in the bonds nor petitions, is there any word of the cause or testimony suffered for. 4. As it is sinful, so it is very scandalous in several respects; in that at least it hath the appearance of evil, which Christians should abstain from, 1 Thes. v. 22. and seems to be a voluntary subjecting themselves to their impositions (at least of that to return to prison again) a willing acknowledgment of their unjust usurpations; a spontaneous consenting to their mischiefs framed into a law, and exacted under the notion of a law; a gratifying of the enemies of religion, and pleasing them more than any thing a prisoner can do, except he should wholly deny the cause: and therefore chiefly always this overture is most acceptable from those that durst give any testimony, because they look upon it as some indication of their fainting or falling from it, or of their wearying of the cross of Christ, of which they are very glad; and an offending and making sad the hearts, and condemning the practice, of some truly tender and zealous confessors of Christ, who have had strong tentations to make such transactions, and durst not yield so far for a world; yea it is certainly an argument of faithless fear, and impatient wearying of the cross, because of the fury of the oppressor, which the Lord taxeth, when the captive hastneth that he may be loosed, and that he should not die in the pit, nor that his bread should fail; which is a dishonour to him who hath promised to bear their charges, and hath given them many encouragements to trust, that he will open a door in his own time and way. See Isa. li. 13, 14. Of this Rutherford addeth in that forecited letter: 'Silence of the cause of God which adversaries persecute, seems a tacit deserting of the cause, when the state of the question is known to beholders, and I know the brethren intend not to leave the cause. And a little after, says he, the draught of that petition which you sent me, speaks not one word of the covenant of God, for the adhering to which you now suffer, and which is the object of men's hatred, and the destruction whereof is the great work of the times; and your silence, in this nick of time, appears to be a not confessing of Christ before men, and you want nothing to beget an uncleanly deliverance, but the profession of silence:' which is professed by all that petition for such a bond, when their address and transaction speaks no more in favours of the cause, than if they denied it. It is plainly a coming out of prison without a testimony, which cannot consist with faithful and zealous suffering for Christ, and is far from the choice of Christ's witnesses, who overcame by the blood of the Lamb, and the word of their testimony, recorded, Heb. xi. 35.----Who were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection. 5. As it is a scandalous, so it is very inconvenient and unsuitable for the confessors of Christ. In that not only they may be ignorant, and much troubled to know what underhand dealings their friends may use sometimes to procure that liberty, without acquainting them, and how odiously their act of deliverance may be worded and registred to the prejudice of the cause, which they dare not testify against afterwards when they do know it, for fear of many inconveniences. But also it cannot be vindicated from being a dishonourable shifting, and putting off, or casting off the call of a testimony; and confessing either an inconstancy, or impatience, or unreadiness, or want of resolution, to confess or profess the testimony for Christ, without some respite to gather new defences for it: whereas Christ's witnesses should be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh them a reason of the hope that is in them, 1 Pet. iii. 15. And besides, they involve themselves into the incumbrances of a doubtful suspence about the event, whereas if they keep their first resolution and condition with cheerfulness, aloof from such bargains, they know the utmost they have to fear or hope from men. But now, as it is hard for them to come off without some sinful engagement, and to continue any measure of faithfulness when they are out, for fear of being soon called again; so they bring themselves into many sad difficulties how to behave, and cast themselves into many tentations unavoidably. However, except of late, a precedent of this practice can hardly be instanced among the sufferers of Christ in former times, but, on the contrary, many have refused such offers. I shall only name one; in the persecution of queen Mary of England, Dr. Sands, prisoner at London, had the offer of liberty, upon the term of such a bond, finding bail to appear when he should be called, but refused it absolutely; and when a gentleman, without his knowledge, having procured it by giving 1000 l. bond for him, brought him forth and required his consent and observance of the obligation, he would not consent to give any security, and denied his resolution to observe it in the least; whereupon the gentleman very courteously told him, he would stand to his hazard. This was far more like the innocency of the dove, but this new prudence resembles more wisdom of the serpent. Finally, as for Jason's business, which is so much harped upon by these bonders. (1.) These were rulers that he had to deal withal, and not raging tyrants. (2.) They were indifferent arbiters between Jason and the lewd fellows that troubled him, and not both judge and party; he gave no security to his persecutors, as these bonders do, but to the true judges of the cause, who impartially took cognizance of it, from whom Jason might and did expect right. (3.) This was before he was prisoner, being as free as his accusers, and having the law as free for him as it was for them; whereby he could vindicate himself and abide the law, and be absolved by it: which does not answer the case of prisoners actually engaged in and called to a testimony for Christ, when there is no law but what is established in opposition to Christ. (4.) In the original it is, when they got satisfaction from him; that is, when he so cleared himself, that they could not fasten any transgression upon him, then they absolved him.

2. All these oaths and solemn securities that have been imposed in these times, are dreadful and heinous breaches of the third command, by taking his name in vain in the worst sort, whereby the takers cannot be holden guiltless. For it is impossible such oaths and bonds, however they be constructed, can ever be taken with these requisite qualifications necessary to be observed in all oaths (and consequently in all solemn promises or bonds) that are mentioned once for all, Jer. iv. 2. where one that sweareth, must do it in truth, in judgment, and in righteousness. 1. They cannot be taken in truth, which is a necessary qualification in all oaths, according to the definition of a true oath, which is a solemn invocation of God, for confirmation of some true, lawful, grave, and weighty, useful and worthy business, wherein he is attested and appealed unto, that he, as the only searcher of hearts, may give his testimony to the truth of the thing, and punish the swearers, if he swear not in truth. And this swearing in truth does import and require both sincerity of the heart, filled with reverence and the awful apprehension of a present God; and simplicity of the mind, well informed of the genuine meaning of the oath, that we have clear uptaking of it, and take it not implicitly, but with our own understanding; and also singleness and honesty of the intention, that it be not to deceive, by putting any other sense than the imposer hath, or will allow when he understands it: so the meaning must be clear, and such as may be obviously gathered from the words, and according as they are supposed to be understood by others, especially them that exact the oath; for if they mean one thing and we another, God's name is profaned, and the end of the oath frustrated, and so all equivocations and mental reservations are condemned; as all divines treating on oaths teach, and worthy Mr. Durham particularly on the third command, who asserts, 'that though we could devise some other meaning, that might seem to make for us; yet if that was not meant at first tendering, but otherwise understood by him that did take it, it will not absolve from the guilt of perjury; for an oath of strict law, and will not admit, on any respect or account, of interpretations prejudicial to the native truth of it, lest it should be found to be' (according to Psal. xxiv. 4.) 'a swearing deceitfully.' And he afterwards says, 'much less will it exempt a man from guilt, that in swearing he had a meaning of the words, contrary to what in common sense they bear, and in the construction of all indifferent persons, without oath, or beyond it; but it should be plain, single, and clear.' And Paraeus saith, in Catech. Urs. part 2. quest. 102. An oath hath the divine sanction, that it might be a bond of verity among men, and a testimony that God is the author and defender of truth. Now, none of these oaths and bonds can be taken in truth; for if they may be safely taken in any sense, it must be such as the oath in the design of the imposers cannot bear, and which the imposers never intended, nor would they ever have allowed, if they had understood it; which industriously the takers have a care they should not understand, and so they must take it in that sense with a mind to deceive, which cannot be in truth, but most derogatory both to the truth and simplicity of the gospel. And they are all unclear and ambiguous which cannot be taken in truth, because they have no truth in them, as Dr. Sanderson saith, de jure. promiss. oblig. prael. 6. Sect. 10. 'A proposition of an ambiguous and indefinite sense, before the matter be distinguished, is not a true proposition; yea, nor a proposition at all: for a proposition, as its definition cleareth, should signify either a truth or a falsehood, without any ambiguity; and therefore, says he; such oaths should be suspected that there is some deceit lurking, and every pious and prudent man should refuse them offered under such terms,' cited by apol. relat. sect. 10. pag. 118. and sect. 15. pag. 267. In fine, none of them can be taken in truth, since they are all a denying the truth, as will be evident by the induction of all of them: which, how it can consist with the fear of God, or sincerity of the heart, cannot be imagined; and if conscience be called into judgment, it will condemn the taking them. 2. They cannot be taken in judgment, is that, with knowledge and deliberation, minding and understanding what it is we swear or subscribe, as Mr. Durham explains it in the place above cited. For, first, they cannot be taken in judgment, because they are all ambiguous, the terms of them being capable of divers senses, not explained by the imposers. And if they were explained in their sense, then they could not be taken in righteousness; and so at best they are uncertain: and that is dreadful to invoke the majesty of God to be a witness to uncertainties; for that is to swear with an evil conscience and contempt of God to dare to call him in as a witness of that which is in suspense, whether it be truth or a lie; and such a swearer must make it a matter indifferent, whether he make God a witness of a truth or of a lie in the case. Vide Paraeum. loc. sup. cit. pag. 754. sect. 4. Dr. Sanderson as before, gives these reasons further against all ambiguous oaths. 'Because of him who tendereth the oath. For the proper end of an oath is, that he in whose favours it is taken should have some certainty of that whereof he doubted before; but there can be no certainty out of the words which have no certain sense. Next, because of him who sweareth, who, if he take such an oath in these terms, either stumbleth his neighbour, or spreadeth a net for his own feet; for to what else should such collusion tend, but either that by our example others may be induced to take it, whereby they are stumbled; or, that afterwards, by virtue of that oath, something may be required of us, which is either unlawful or hurtful, and this is to lay a snare for ourselves! Therefore let every prudent man beware of suffering himself to be deceived by these wiles, and of thinking so much either of the favour of the ill will of any other, as to swallow the bait under which he is sure there is a hook: it is expedient, that, in the matter of oaths, all things be done aright, and that the sense be clear to all, and that is, to swear with a clear conscience,' apol. relat. pag. 267. But next, they cannot be taken in judgment; because they are all imposed and extorted under a severe penalty, and some of them of death, and so must be taken out of fear. Such oaths are by many famous divines judged unlawful, especially public oaths imposed by authority, and under colour of law; these are worse than a man's private oath given to a robber, for fear of death, if the matter be unlawful: for, without the matter be lawful or unlawful, such oaths coacted, exacted, and imposed by law, cannot be taken in judgment; for if they be taken out of respect to the law; then it is the person's suffrage to the equity of that law, and an approbation of the imposition; which, in the present case, cannot be done, by any man of conscience; for, whether the oaths be lawful or not, the authority imposing them is nought, and the law wicked, and can never be approven; and if they be extorted out of fear, then they cannot be taken with deliberation, or voluntary and unviolented choice, unconstrained light or liberty, which are all the ingredients of judgment. 3. They cannot be taken in righteousness, that is, according to the law of equity as well as piety, neither wronging God nor others by our oaths. Lawful oaths should be in themselves ties of equity, as well as truth. And Paraeus faith, in the place before cited, lawful oaths are only these which are engaged into about things true, certainly known, lawful, possible, weighty, necessary, useful and worthy. And if that be true, then are all the oaths and bonds taken these many years but fetterings into bonds of iniquity; which, when the consciences of the takers will reflect on them, will become galls of bitterness, and found to have none of these qualifications; but on the contrary, to be about matters false, uncertain, unlawful, impossible, frivolous, fruitless, useless, and unworthy, to the worst degree of baseness; and, which is worst of all, dreadfully sinful, and horrid to be thought on to interpose the name of God upon, making him the approver of what his soul hates, and a witness of that which he will be an avenger of, as will appear by the particular consideration of all of them.