{Second Part 37}
CHP. VII.
Touching Swearing.
Those unto whom the Lord hath given a divine understanding, have declared, that under the Dispensation of the Gospel of Christ, ‘tis not agreeable to the truth to Swear in any Case whatsoever.
This position is justifiable according to the Scriptures of Truth, and is not disagreeable to the light within.
Matth. 5. 33, 34, 35, 36, 37. ‘Tis thus said by Christ, Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear they self, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oaths, But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by Heaven, for it is God’s Throne; nor by the Earth, for it is his Footstool; neither by Jerusalem, for it is the City of the great King; Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one Hair white or black; But let your Communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these, cometh of evil.
These words of Christ are in themselves a positive prohibition, not only of vain Oaths, but of all other whatsoever, which were accounted lawful; and though some have objected, that vain Oaths were only forbidden by Christ, because the Author to the Hebrews thus written, For men verily Swear by the Greater, and an Oath for Confirmation is to them an End of all Strife.1; thence inferring, that under the Gospel-Dispensation, Oaths by way of testimony for ending of Controversie were lawful; yet these words will not bear any such inference; {Second Part 38} for the words in themselves do only signifie what was practiced by men, but nothing is said in justification of that Practice, and if we peruse the 13th and 17th verses of the same Chapter, ‘twill thence appear, that the Occasion whereon these words are written, was by way of Illustration or Comparison, in relation to the promise which god made unto Abraham, and confirmed by an Oath. Moreover, 'tis evident that Christ intended the Prohibition of something, which was lawful; which could not be, if nothing be prohibited save Vain Oaths, because such the Law allowed not.
Obj. On this Subject some may readily thus object. Do you believe that the Light Within would have directed you to have denyed the taking of an Oath, before a Magistrate on any Occasion whatsoever, had the Scriptures been silent in this case?
Ans. The matter of Swearing (especially the Form thereof) as it relates to the practice of the People of England, is but an Humane, Political Institution, not justifiable by any Testimony given in the Scriptures of Truth, either under the first or second Covenant, and introduced on this score, as supposing a greater Dread might lie on the Consciences of Mankind, to speak the Truth and Perform a Covenant, when sworn so to do, than when not: But those who are guided by the Light of Christ Jesus, do know, that by this Light (which speaks Condemnation and Judgement unto all False Witnesses, and Covenant Breakers, when in truth they have covenanted) their Consciences are bound to speak the Truth, and to keep their Covenant, beyond what is possible by Thousands of Oaths; and therefore from the Light of Christ within, they have a Testimony against such Formal Proceedings, whereby the Credit of their Yea and Nay, seems to be called in {Second Part 39} question; having this sense, that Oaths were originally introduced, not to be a bond on the Children of Light (who being restored out of the fall, do keep their Place and Habitation in the Unchangeable Truth and Light of Righteousness) but rather for those, who being defiled, have or may make Shipwreck of Faith and of a good Conscience; which seems clearly agreeing with the Testimony of Chrisostome “Juranmentum intravit, cum Malik accresceret, cum nominee fraudes fuas eercerent, cum omnia fundmenta aversa assent; Juramentum originem suam accepit exdefectu Veritatis. An Oath entred when Evil increased, when men uttered their deceits, when all foundation were overturned; An Oath took its beginnings from the Failing of Truth.”
And though tis clearly manifested, that a Denial to swear in any case, is agreeable unto the Manifestation of Christ’s Light within, as other Truths held forth are; yet I cannot but testifie, that those whose Understandings have been so enlightened, have always had a regard unto every Instrument, through which the Conscience hath been awakened, to close with that Appearance in themselves.
And doubtless, the Scriptures of Truth have been in this case so instrumental unto many, as that a diligent enquiry at God’s Witness, or Light within, hath (through waiting upon the Lord) been made in this matter; and so the answer from Christ’s Light in the Conscience, hath been agreeable to the express Doctrine of Christ, which is so strictly laid down, as that no room is left for the least Objection as is evident in these very words, Swear not at all; which doctrine by the Apostle James is thus testified unto, But above all things, my Brethren, Swear not, neither by Heaven, neither by the Earth, neither by any other Oath; but let your Yea, be Yea and your Nay, Nay; lest ye fall into Condemnation2.
No comments:
Post a Comment