THE CASE OF SWEARING AT ALL DISCUSSED WITH Several Objections answered the Primitive Practises therein asserted out of several Ancient Authors together with several Presidenâ—s out of the Book of Martyrs The inconveniences that follows the present practice of swearing which might easily be prevented by a Law to punish false Witnesse-bearing and lying as well as other evils ALSO A Word to all People that are zealous for the Commands of CHRIST recorded in the Scripture By a friend of Truth and Righteousness John Crook Because of Oaths the Land mourns And for want of truth and righteousness in the Land the innocent and uppright are made a prey LONDON Printed for Robert Wilson at the sign of the Black-Spread-Eagle and Windmill in Martins near Aldersgate 1660. The Case of swearing discussed MAn was planted a Noble Vine wholly a right seed but he is turned into the degenerated plant of a strange Vine more degenerate than the Oxe or the Ass he is fallen from the uprightness sincerity and simplicity into the invention subtilty and fleshly wisdome where he lies grovelling upon the earth thinking by the multitude of his inventions to recover himself and to come to life again but he is fenced out with a flaming Sword so that to life he cannot come but through death which he seeks to avoid by following the counsel of the Evil-One who sayes in this as he did formerly to the woman Thou shalt not surely dye though God had said as it is written Of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye And also that which the Apostle feared might come upon some of the Corinthians is come upon all the world viz. The Serpent that beguiled Eve hath beguiled men and women in this age through his subtilty by corrupting their mindes from the simplicity that is in Christ and as the Deceiver then denyed what God had spoken and not onely so but also put his own meaning and exposition upon Gods Command that so he might accomplish his end for said the Perverter then God doth know that in the day thou eatest thereof your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as Gods knowing good and evil And hath not the same Serpent beguiled the people of this age from the naked simplicity to hearken to the disguized subtilty and fleshly wisdome not onely to deny that Christ hath given out an absolute Command that his followers should not swear at all by any Oath but also as he did then so he hath done since and doth do now in this age put his exposition and meaning to Christs commands in saying in some men that it is not all swearing that is forbidden but swearing in mens ordinary communication This exposition the subtilty in some men puts upon Christs Command whereupon theâ— conclude that notwithstanding Christs command not to swear at all yet when any man is called before a Magistrate if the Magistrate require it he ought to swear c. To which it is said Christs own words at the 33 Verse of the fifth of Matthew answers this objection in these words Again it hath been said in old time Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform to the Lord thy Oaths but I say unto you Swear not at all c. Mark Thou shalt not forswear thy self c. The Law in old time did not allow of swearing in their ordinary communication and dealing for that was taking Gods Name in vain Exodus 20.7 which was forbidden from the begâ—nning but in that case wherein they were allowed to swear they were not to forswear themselves But Christ Jesus the Son by whom the Father speaks in these last times who is the end of the Law for righteousness to all that believe in him who is the truth and substance of all sayes Sweaâ— not at all Mark the truth sayes swear not at all for whatever is more then yea and nay comes of evil Now if Christ the Truth had spoken no more in these words Swear not at all c. then to forbid prophane swearing as they call it or not sweaâ—iâ—g in mens ordinary communication what doth he forbid â—ore then was forbidden in old time seeing as before is proved that all prophane swearing which is a taking of Gods Name in vain or swearing in ordinary communication or dealing was forbidden from the beginning And again how doth this hold parallel with the rest of Christs sayings and comparisons viz. What was said in the old time by the Law and is now said by himself who is the sum and end of the Law for righteousness c. and whether they who thus reason do not by their Traditions make Christs Command of none effect And do not all those that plead that the Saints ought and may swear when they are called to it by a Magistrate not onelâ— break Christs Commands themselves but teaches others so to do whose portion may be read in Matthew 5 19. and by their thus â—â—asoning in their dark mindes make Christ to speak nothing further nor fuller then was spoken in old time though in old time it was said Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform unto the Lord thy Oaths c. But saith Christ I say unto you swear not at all Now let all judge who are not blinded through gain or tradition whether those that say the Saints ought to swear when called to it as aforesaid do not wholly make void these words viz. Whatsoever is more then these commeth of evil and so they being in the evil are blinded and hate the light that would let them see and speak evil of it because it would reprove them and beâ—ng in darkness they know not whither they go but as saith the Prophet â—say 5 20. call â—arkness light and light darkness and good evil aâ—d evil good And it is further manifest to all that have an eâ—e to see that Christ the substance and the truth in ended as he spake when he said Swear not at all which was to forbid all â—anner of swearing without exception because when Christ intenâ—ed an exception at the 32 Verse he exâ—ressed it in these words But I say unto you Whosoever shall put awaâ— his â—ife saving for the cause of Adultery Mark saving for the cause of Adultery Where Christ plainly expresâ—eth the exception But for proud men to make exceptions where Christ hath made none is to set Self on the Throne And again at the 28 Verse the exception is expressed viz. Whosoever shall look upon a woman and lust after her Mark to lust after her and is not lest to vain man to put his meaning to it It is further objected by some that by those of old time is meant the Expositors of the Law who said If men swear truth that was noâ— evil but onely they were not to swear to that which was false c. To which it is answered that this being an
who gives this the preheminence in a peculiar manner above all other things that those whom he wrote to should be carefull to keep and observe saying Above all things my Brethren swear not neither by Heaven nor Earth nor any other oath which is an absolute negative exclusion of all swearing in all cases And Eusebius an Antient Writer of no mean esteem among the learned writes in his sixth book Chapter 4 page 98. about the year 200. that Basilides a Souldier unto whâ—m the Virgin Potamioena was committed as one appointed for Martyâ—dome But not long after the same Basilides being required by his fellow-souldiers to swear upon some occasion that fell out affirmed plainly it was not lawful for him to swear for he said he was a Christian and that he would in very deed protest the same who afterward was beheaded as a Martyr And of the Waldenses of whom the first Book of Martyrs makes much mention and are said by some immediately to succeed the Apostles and were dispersed into most parts of the world and to be the most antient and true Protestants as may be seen by what Fox records of them in the Book of Martyrs and this they maintained among other things that all manner of swearing was unlawfull as may appear by Parsons Sanders â—occius and others and by Bishop Uâ—her a late Writer and a man reputed for learning who hath by way of Apology for the Waldenses in this case of swearing seemed to justifie them therein as in his book De Succes Cap. 6. And the said Usher further sayes in his eighth Chap. quoting some antient Authors that the Waldenses as well as Anabaptists of late did professe it to be no way lawfull for a Christian to swear upon any occasion And Theophilâ—te upon Matthew 5.37 Sayes that though in the time of the Old Law it was not evâ—l to swear but since the coming of Christ it is evil as is Circumcision and in sum whatever is judaical for it may become a Child to suck but not a man And further in the Book of Martyrs 1 Voll page 701. it is charged against William Thorp in his Sermon that he preached at Shrewsbury that it is not lawfull to swear in any case To which he answered he denied to swear by a book as being made up of creatures and quoats Chrysostome in these words who blamed them greatly who brought forth books to swear whether they think a man to swear true or false c. The Arch-bishop and his Clarks scorned this saying of Thorp and the Bishop manaced him with great punishment except he left this opinion of swearing to which Thorp answered it was not his Opinion but the opinion of Christ and of Saint James and of Chrysostome and of other divers Saints and Doctors The Arch-bishop caused to be read this Homily of Chrysostome which the Clark did accordingly until he came to a Clause where Chrysostome sayes That it is sin to swear well c. And again in Fox Voll 1. pa. 527. in the Ploughmans prayer in these words Thou gavest us a Commandment in truth in bidding us say yea yea nay nay and swear for nothing Thou gavest us also a Commandment of meekness and another of poorness but Lord he that cleepeth himself thy Vickar on earth hath both broken these Commandments for he makes a Law to compel men to swear and by his Law he teacheth that a man to save his life may forswear and lye and so Lord through comfort of him and his Law the people ne dreadeth not to swear and to liven ought time to forswear them Lord here is little truth c. Again William Swinderby an Article charged against him that no man owns to swear for any thing but simply without an Oath to affirm or deny and if he swears he sins And those that are conversant in our Law what was the practice in antient time where they testifie that Oaths antiently were not called imprecations but attestations And by the Statute-Law an Act of Parliament made 28 Hen. 8.7 in these words it is said No man of what estaâ—e degree or condition soever he be hath power to dispence with Gods Law as all the Clergy of this Realm in the said Convocation and most part of all the Universiteis of Christendome and we also do affirm and think c. which makes void all Lawes and practises and customes that are contrary to Christs Law and the Apostles Doctâ—ine which sayes Swear not at all and above all things my Brethren swear not neither by heaven nor earth nor any other Oath c. And to conclude this head a lively Embleme we have this day practised in England where it is practised that those who are called Noble-men of England are not put to their oaths as it is said in any case but onely their testimony is taken upon their words affirming or denying upon their Honours And is there nothing left among Christians in these our dayes or the people of the Lord that is as dear unto them as an earthly great mans repute and honour in the world is unto him Blush for shame and let it not be told in Gath nor published in Askelon that Christianity is grown out of repute or that a true Christian may not be believed when he speaks in the presence and fear of the Lord although at the same time and in the same case he shall be believed that testifies onely upon his earthly honour And to this Courts Martial may not be an unfit president who proceeds both to the tryal and condemnation of persons without an Oath taken by those that sit as Judges and that upon this ground also because a Souldier is supposed to be so tender of his honour that he will not impeach it by injuring another or advantaging himself So let all these things be put together and what can be more clear then that Oaths or swearing men since the comming of Christ before either they can be capable of office or serving their Countrey or their testimony be received in cases of difference before Courts of Judicature is a Popish Institution and hath no foundation or footing in the Scripture of truth nor in the practise of the Primitive Christians nor hath not been without a testimony against it by some in all ages even down to this day Now follows the severall inconveniences that necessarily follow the imposition of Oaths which might be prevented if swearing were not compelled BEsides all that hath been said do not these inconveniences and mischiefs necessaâ—ily follow the imposition of Oaths or determining things by swearing c. Is not that which is called an Oath in many cases once taken untraversable As for instance one man having sworn against another positively is not he that is sworn against left without remedy and do not those before whom the oath is taken in some cases take themselves concluded and bound up by that oath without any further examining witnesses on the other
invention of the Objector and no where so said in the Scripture of tâ—uâ—h it needs no other answer then a denyal but the word in the Greek reads it thus It was said to them of old time thereby implying those to whom and by whom God spake c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an t quis But it is stâ—ongly obâ—ected That the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews allows of swearing before a Magistrate as in Hebrews 6.16 in these words For men verily swears by the greater and an Oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife c. To which is replyed there the Apostle by a similitude makes it out to the Hebrews how that God sware by himself because he could not swear by a greater to confirm the Promise That by two immutable things by which it was not possible for God to lye that they might have strong consolation who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before them and God being more abundantly willing to shew to the Heirs of the promise the immutability of his Counsel confirmed it by an Oath which thing was used among men that lived in strife to put an end to strife they used an Oath and they sware by the greater an Oath for confirmation was to them an end of all strife and because God could not swear by a greater he sware by himself and by the Oath of God is the promise confirmed to the righteous seed that they might have strong consolation no more to suffer strife and fears and doubts to enter upon them but that they all might witness in themselves an end put to all strife and contention c. as truly and really in the inward man by Christ Jesus Gods Oath and Covenant as an outward Oath used among men that live in strife was to them for confirmation the end of all strife And in this case under the Law was an Oath required Exodus 22.10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an Oxe or an Asse or a sheep or any beast to keep and it die or be hurt or driven away no man seeing it then shall an Oath of the Lord be between them both that he hath not put his hand to his neighbours goods and the Owner of it shall accept thereof and he shall not make it good Mark the Owner of the goods was to accept thereof and he shall not make it good so an Oath for confirmation was an end to the controversie and in this old time under the Law they were not to forswear themselves but Christ sayes Swear not at all who is the end of the Law for Righteousness c. Now the Apostle never intended by that which was used in old time and among men that lived in strife all which he brings in as a comparison and a fimilitude to confirm the promise c. and not to incourage men to break Christs Commands who sayes Swear not at all nor to give any sort of men incouragement to walk contrary to the Apostles Doctrine who said Above all things my Brethren swear not c. Neither that they should take incouragement from his comparison to live in strife because men that used swearing at all did so neither did the Apostle any more intend to lay a foundation for swearing or for men to impose Oaths upon others by his similitude of what was used among strifeful men then he intended that the Ministers of Christ should bring a Heathen Poet to prove their Doctrine because he sayes Acts 17.28 As certain also of your own Poets have said c. And may it not be as justly concluded that Parents should take incouragement to correct their children after their own pleasure because he sayes Heb. 12.9.10 We have had Fathers of our flesh who for a few dayes chastised us after their own pleasures c. And as honestly as it may or ought to be concluded that the Apostle intended that men should either swear themselves at all or compel others so to do from these words viz. For verily menswears by the greater and an Oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife And further is there any more ground given by the Apostle foâ— the Saints to swear at all by any Oath from the words before-mentioned then there is ground from Christs words to the Saints to exercise Lordâ—hip one over another because he sayes Mark 10.42 the Gentiles do so Besides did not those that used swearing use it onely in those cases where an Oath would put an end to all strifes But is not Oaths imposed at this day where no strife is Nay are they not imposed for the beginning of strife Let the righteous judge how far those that would be accouned Saints are fallen that they are short in their practises of those men that lived in strife in ages past Again to impose Oaths upon others from the Apostles words is to make the Apostle a Transgressor for he sayes Galathians 2.18 If I build again the things that I destroyed am I not a Transgressor Now he condemned some among the Corinthians for walking as men 1 Cor. 3.3 For ye are yet carnal whereas there is envying among you division and strife are you not carnal and walk as men Mark there was strife and division among them and from thence he proves them carnal and therefore they walk as men which the Apostle condemns whereas they should walk as became Saints who are redemed from among men Revel 14.14 out of envy strife and division and are called unto love righteousness and peace which all who walk as becomes Saints witness Object That an oath cannot be bad because even God himself did often use swearing in Scripture c. Answ That it may become God alone to swear because he alone is true and cannot lye but all men aâ—e lyars as sayes the Apostle And the Lord hath sworn and will not repent Psa 110.4 Let him then swear that cannot repent of his Oath and he is not to be imitated in swearing by that man who cannot imitate him in fulfilling It is again objecâ—â—â— by some that all proceedings at Law depends upon swearing therefore they conclude that all men must swear c. Answ That the foundation of the Law of England and the present practise and proceedings thereupon do not agree as may appeaâ— by theâ—e instances following viz. One main and principal foundation of the Law of England is the Law of God so sayes the law-Law-book Docter and Student Chapter 2. page 4. in these words There is a Law written in the heart of man which is man created in the Image of God and this Law is alwayes good and righteous stirring up the man to do the gooâ— and abhor the evil and therefore against this Law sayes the book Prescription Statute Custome may not prevail and if any be brought in against it they be void and against Justice Now consider according to your Law how few proceedings are according to
of one Witness he shall not be put to Death In this case of Life and Death no Oath was used that we read of Deuter. 17.6 And if any false Witn ss did arise he and the party he witnessed against was to stand befo e the Lord and before the Priest and Judges which should be in those dayes and the Judges were to make diligent inquisition And if the Witness be a false Witness and have testified falsly against his Brother then shall ye â—o unto him as he had thought to have done unto his Brother so shall you put away the evil from among you Deut. 1916 17 18. But no swearing is mentioned and if any matter did arise too hard for them in judgement between blood and blood between plea and plea and stroak and stroak being matters of controversie within their gate they were not to swear men to finde it out neither were they to act presumptiously their own passion and wills and then cover it with saying they were Judges of the Law and they judged it so and many things being left to discretion and therefore sayes wilful men in the stoutness of thei hearts If we do what we cannot answer take your course against us And thus presumptiously do they act their own wills upon the innocent but Israel was not to do so but in cases too hard for them in judgement they were to arise and go up to the place which the Lo d God should choose and they were to come to the Priest and Levite and unto the Judges which should be in those dayes and enquire and they were to shew the Sentence of Judgement and they were to do according to the Sentence which they of the place which the Lord should choose should shew therein And thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall inform thee c. And the man that will do presumptiously and will not hearken to the Priests that stands up there to minister before the Lord thy God or unto the Judges even that man shall die and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel Deut. 17.8 9 10 11 12. This was Gods Law to Israel that the Presumptious that would not wait upon the Lord to receive a Law where there was none should be put to death Was it an offence of old to act presumptiously And is it not now a crime worthy to be taken notice of by the chief in power in these dayes Or are there none that have done presumptiously in casting innocent people into prison when they have done no offence nor broken no known Law except it is become an offence to wait upon the Lord and to pray unto him for which cause and none other the innocent have been cast into prison by the presumptious and self-willed men who when they had no Law have acted in their wills contrary to â—â—w let suâ—h remember that by Gods Law they that would not wait upon the Lord for a Law but would act presumptiously without a Law were to be put to death Objection That by not swearing at all we are to understand by any creature and not by God the Creator for they were commanded to swear by God Thou shalt swear by the Lord as in Deut. 10. c. Answer That according to Christs own words Swear not at all without any exception as before hath been proved and is expounded in the large Bible in Quarto in the Margent on Matthew 5.37 in these words VVhatsoever you vouch vouch it barely and whatsoever you deny deny it barely without any more words for whatsoever is more then these comes of the Devil And also in the saâ—e book it is said on James 5.12 That what you have to say or affirm speak or affirm it simply and without any Oath and that that you will deny deny simply and flatly And again this Objection is more fully answered in Matthew 23.21 22. VVhosoever swears by the Temple swears by it and by him that dwells therein and whosoever swears by heaven swea s by the Throne of God and him that sits thereon So that he that swears by the creature shall not be exempted by the Creator from prophaning his name for now it is said Swear not at all Again it is objected by the former Objectors who sayes all proceedings at Law depends upon swearing that if we should take every mans word when they are called to give their testimony in all cases it might be of dangerous consequence both to mens lives liberties and estates c. To which it is answered That if the same Law or a stricter were made against lying and bearing false witness in all cases as against mens swearing false swearing or for-swearing themselves and that Law tâ—ul and constantly executed without respect of persons it would then be of no more danger to believe a mans yea or nay to the questions that are asked him by the Magistrate whatever they be then if they had kissed the book or used any other posture with the hand or spoken never so many words his affirming or denying to the case in question being his testimony I say the truth of these mens testimonies may as easily plainly and fully be discerned and punished according to the Law in that case provided if it be false as if the had used never so many words or postures as aforesaid a d therefore mens lives liberties and estates may every way be as well secured by a Law provided to punish lying and bea ing false witness as by any Law that is made or can be made to punish swearing or false-swearing so called Again as to the present state of things because there is no Law in being as some say to punish lying therefore we must swear c. What Law is there to force men to swear or to punish those that swear falsly or against their knowledge to their Answers to Bills in Chancery and Chequor And is it not common and ordinary for men so to do If there be a Law why is it not put in execution or doth Custome make swearing falsly and against a mans knowledge no offence and a mans speaking truly without swearing an offence punishable with imprisonment Who hath given this authority to Custome Let Equity answer But of this more may be spoken afterward in its place Objection That an Oath is a solemn thing and that when people are called before a Magistrate to swear there is an awe upon them and therefore those that are wicked and Lyars c. are afraid to forswear themselves when called before a Magistrate This Objection is for what answered in the preceding Objection But further it is answered That the fear upon People when they come to swear is either the fear of God which is good or some other fear which is evill as the fear of man only and his punishment this last fear is not to be feared by those that fear the Lord Fear ye not their fear but fear him that can destroy