1: Qr Whether it be lawfull to take an oath with &c, where ther may bee a doubt of how much is thereby signified?

2: Whether to affirme in an oath that such a thing ought by right so to stand doth not suppose it to be divine right?

3: Whether it be lawfull to sweare the perpetuall maintaining of any ordinance meerely Ecclesiasticall?

4: Whether the superiority of Archbishops aboue Bishops, and the substitution of Deanes, and Arch Deacons &c be not meerly Eccl Ecclesiasticall?

5: Whether Divine Authority onely ordaining Bishops to be Church Governours, perticularly in point of Excommunication it be lawfull to con- sent any more to any other Governours Eccleciasticall to exercise the same authority of Excommunication?

6: Whether since the Church of England rejects the lay Elders of other Churches it doeth not thereby condemne giving any power to chancellours Comissarys, and officialls who are meerly lay men to medle in Excommunication even jointly with ministers much lesse as chife the Surrogates being but their deputies and assistants.

7 Whether any scripture doth authorize such power given to a very lay man

8: Whether having sworne to the Kings supreamacy in all causes Eccle- siaticall it be not a violation of the oath, or at least a hazzard of it in time to come to sweare not to giue consent to such an alteration in goverment as may at least possibly be thought fitt and even commanded with all authority by the Kinge, or any successor of his heereafter

9 Whether experience shewing that the goverment of Chancellours &c hath not advantaged the Kingdome of Christ, nor religion and piety nor suppressed vice, but rather the contrary? whether it be law- full to consent actually to thir continuance, and much lesse to sweare their perpetuall continuance?