THE CASE OF THE QUAKERS RELATING TO OATHS STATED Wherein they are Discover'd To oppose Prophetical To pervert Evangelical To falsifie Ecclesiastical and To contradict their own Doctrine LONDON Printed for Charles Brome at the Sign of the Gun at the West-End of St. Pauls 1696. SECTION I. Christians of the highest rank and greatest Prosiciency way lawfully in some cases confirm the Truth with an Oath Arg. 1. SAint Paul both knew the minde of Christ 2 Cor. 1.23 And served God in the spirit in the Gospel of his Son Rom. 1.9 yet he was so far from pleading that of the Essenns mentioned by Josephus Bell. Jud. lib. 2. c. 7. who profess'd that quicquid dixerint validius esse omni juramento supervacuum esse ipsis jurare their word was stronger then the oath of other men and therefore it was superfluous for them to swear Or that of the Scythians who told Alexander as Quintus Curtius reports that their love of veracity was so eminent as their affirming a thing was in stead of an Oath Or the custome of the Heroick Age wherein as Homer relates the shaking of their Sceptre or shaking by the hand did more oblige men to speak the truth and perform promises then the most sacred Oaths could oblige succeeding degenerate Ages So far I say was S. Paul from pleading such examples or his own exemption from his performance of this office of charity to common humane infirmity which in many cases requires the inter position of an oath in order to the procuring an indubitable perswasion of the truth as he frequently confirms what he asserts in such like forms of sacred oaths as these God is my witnesse Rom. 1.9 I say the truth in Christ I lie not my conscience also bearing me witnesse in the holy Ghost Rom. 9.1 I call God for a record upon my soul that c. 2 Cor. 1.23 The God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ knows that I ly not 2 Cor. 11.37 As God is true our word towards you was not yea and nay 2. Cor. 1.18 Before God I ly not Gal. 1.20 God is my record Phil. 1.8 Ye are witnesses and God also 1 Thes 2.10 upon which St. Austin Jura … autem ipse Apostolus in Epistolis suis sio ostendit quomodo accipiendum quod dictum est Non Jurate omnino Augustine de mend cap. 15. for the Apostle himself did swear in his Epistles and thereby demonstrate how that is to be understood where it is said swear not at all That these forms of speech are sacred oaths is manifest from Genesis 31.50.53 where Laban and Jacob are said to swear in these forms of words So God is witnesse betwixt me and thee and the God of Abram the God of Nahor the God of their fathers judge betwixt us and Jacob sware by the fear of his father Isaack that is by God whom his father worshipt And to spare the labour of making more quotations from the definition of an oath which in Philo's phrase de legibus particularibus and in the common notion of mankinde is nothing else but a calling of God to witnâ—sse to the truth of what we say From which if eminency of Holinesse would excuse any man it would have excused S. Paul who before the writing of those Epistles had given greater testimony of his sincerity veracity and love to truth then any man living can either in truth or with Christian modesty lay claim to Who can have the face to say That he hath delivered the truth with greater demonstration of the spirit and of power in words which the Holy Ghost teacheth 1 Cor. 2.4.13 That he hath by manifestation of the truth commended himself to every mans conscience in the sight of God 2 Cor. 4.2 more then this chosen vessel did which of them that tell us we may take their word and spare their oath dares vie with him in the perills pains hardships labours losses which he sustain'd for the truths sake If then S. Paul notwithstanding Christs prohibition and that he could pleade more for mens taking his bare yea and nay then any man now living can pleade did yet frequently confirm his sayings with an oath what more then Essaan then Scythiâ—â— then Luciferian pride possesseth those monsters of men who have the impudence to pleade their own eminency in grace as that which exempts them from calling God for a record against their soul when the considerableness of the thing requires it From exhibiting to the divine Majesty that part of incommunicable honour due to his sacred and dreadfull name Away with that smoakie pride out of Gods house let it not be so much as named amongst Saints whosâ— character is humility Arg. 2. Without the interposition of an oath 't is impossible iâ— many câ—sâ—â— that Justice can be administred according to the rule of the Gospell To instance in one for all Exod. 22.10 11. If a man deliver unto his neighbour an oxe or ass or sheep 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 It is the righteous Gods will that Justice be administred in this and the like cases now under the Gospell as well as formerly under the law but in such like cases it cannot be determined according to the Evangelical rule who shall bear the losse without the interposition of an oath For if the mans bare word be taken for the proof of his innocency the controversy will be decided by one onely witnesse directly against Christs precept Mat. 18.16 That in tho much of two or three witnesses every word may be establisht And therefore the guiltlesse party in such cases as this where no man but himself is privy to his innocency must in vindication thereof take iâ— God to witness with him that so the matter may be decided by two witnesses at least to wit by him that makes oath and by God whom he calls to witnesse with him Breifly we must either make Christ by this prohibition swear not to patronize such injustice under the Gospell as God would not patronize under the law or proceed to the determination of controversies contrary to Christs rule or else put an end to such like strife by the interposure of an oath And therefore swearing in such cases is so far from being a sin as it is a necessary duty not to be neglected without manifest injustice to the preventing whereof and the doing of right betwixt man and man nothing is more contributary then Evangelicall grace so far is sanctity from exempting its possessors from the discharge of those offices of charity which they owe to themselves and their neighbour in such cases Arg. 3. That which the spirit of Christ in the old Testament-Prophets 1 Peter 1.11 did commend as that which should be
them that drop from their lipps 3. Sincerely with a purpose to lay as great an Obligation upon thyself to keep thy promise and swear truly as thy making oath imports to thy neighbour when thy minde and words are both of a colour and the impressions of thy soul correspond with the expressions of thy mouth when thy conscience can tell thee that thou speakest before God in thy heart what thou utterest to thy neighbour a words All these conditions concur'd in our Saviours and S. Pauls asseverations and therefore though they were more then these yet they proceeded not of evill but from a good and honest heart and were all wanting in those Pharisaicall oaths which our Saviour condemns wherein they had neither reverentiall thoughts of God for they conceited they did by those forms swear by God nor weighed the matter and ponderated circumstances but upon every slieght upon no occasion bolted out fruitless oaths nor did they intend to binde themselves to a performance of their word for they accounted themselves as sree after such oaths as if thoy had never made them Such kinde of additions to our yea and day are of themselves evil and therefore forbidden But the ground and reason of Christs prohibition does not reach the other sort of additions 9. That I may make the two Testaments kisse one another at partting and bring the ends of my discourse together Let it be considered from the prophesies before-quoted That to interpret those Evangelical texts as prohibitions to Christians to swear in any case draws after it these blasphemous consequences 1. That Christ who came to accomplish and seal prophesies to fullfill what was spoken by the mouth of the prophets which have been since the world began did contradict by his precepts and prohibit the accomplishment of those prophesies that foretold that under the Gospel when Gods name should be great in all the earth his elect and chosen servants should swear by the God of truth as an evidence of their conversion to him from idols 2. That S. James was by the Holy Ghost which Christ promised should leade his Apostles into all truth to forbid that viz. to learn to swear after the way of Gods people the Lord liveth under pain of falling into condemnation or at least into hypocrisy which the Spirit of Christ in the holy Prophets perswades Christians to do under pain of utter destruction in case of neglect and by the promise of being built up in the midsts of Gods people in case they would dilligently learn to swear by his name which the same spirit commends to Christians as a signe of their sincere and cordiall acceptance of the true God for their God 3. That if the Christian Church does not perform homage to the God of truth by swearing as well as blessing in his name If their tongue does not as well swear as their knees bow to him then the Christian people are not the people of the Messias the Messias is not yet come but still to be expected then the blessed Jesus is not that Christ of whom the prophets speak but as the Jews at his arraignment and their posterity blasphemously stile him a deceiver and a counterfeit For by the prophets it was foretold that at his exhibition and vocation of the gentiles to the knowledge of the true God the gentiles called by his name should swear by the God of truth throughout the carth c. Yield but this much to a Jew or Pagan that the Christian law forbids worshipping of God by swearing by his name forbids any other confirmation of what we affirm but yea yea nay nay and you do not only deprive the Christian Cause and Church of one of her strongest bulwarks of one of those demonstrations of the spirit the spirit of prophesy in the holy men of old whereby the Champions of the Christian faith have inrefragably proved against all assailants that Jesus is the prophets Christ viz. because since his calling of us gentiles by his gospell we have worshipt the true God by swearing by his name but also administer to Infidells an unanswerable argument for them to prove that that Jesus whom we Christians worship for the Christ is not indeed the very Christ viz. because he hath forbid that worship to be exhibited which the prophets foretold men should learn to tender the God of truth at the coming of that Christ whom they speak of It is not possible to imagine any thing more unlike or opposite to one another then that Christ and his disciples which the prophets describe are to what this glosse of the Quakers presents Jesus Christ and his disciples to be In the reign of the Prophets Christ Gods chosen ones of the Gentiles are to do him homage to acknowledge their subjection to him dependance on him awe of him and his dreadfull attributes by swearing by his name But in the reign of the Quakers Christ the world indeed may take its own course but they whom God hath called and chosen out of the world are not to swear at all The people of the Prophets Christ at what time he should publish his royall law and men should be taught of God were to learn to swear the Lord â—â—veth and to be made to ply this lesson with a promise to be built up of they learn'd it diligently with a threat to be plucked up if they did not But the people of the Quakers Christ are taught of God that they must not learn this lesson and are terrified from their book with demouns against it as evill as leading to destruction c. For the opposition is so palpable as I need not illustrate it with more Instances It can now therefore be a matter of no great difficulty to determine whether exposition and practise grounded upon these expostions is more justifiable That of the Christian Church in all ages which so expounds Christs words as not prohibiting her to give to God the honour that 's due to him by a reverentiall invocating of his great name in sacred and solemn oaths to the end that the sayings of the prophets may be fulfill'd our Jesus demonstrated to be the Christ or that of the Quakers whose glosse defrauds God of his due homage robs the King of Saints of one of the prime Jewells of his crown presents the ever-blessed Jesus in the form of an Impostor and false Christ leads directly to the gulf of grossest infidelity and denial of Christ and sets the Old and New-Testaments the Prophets and Evangelists at greater odds then the Manichaeans did making the Gospel to contradict those holy Prophets to whose testimony our Saviour constantly appe al'd for the decision of that great question whether he was that Christ that was to come putting it to this issue that he would forego the claim and give them leave to call him deceiver if he did not exactly answer that model which the Prophets had drawn of him that was to come if they could discern
sometimes swear but so far as I am able to judge not but when I am compell'd with the greatest necessity when I see that I cannot be believed except I swear and that it stands not with my neighbours good that he does not believe me Id ibid. An oath is the greatest bond of fidelity amongst men and therfore we should have recourse to it as our sacred anchor when nothing else will establish men in the truth of what we say That faith which we make by oath is the most perfect that can be given saith Halicarnassensis The most firm and therefore should be the last pawn of our veracity saith Procopius Persicorum l. 2. But does it follow that because we must not swear at all not by any kinde of oath first of all or before all other wayes of procuring credit to our words that therefore we may at the last extremity have recourse to a solemn Oath 8. The argument that our Saviour urgeth to perswade us that we swear not at all but let our communication be yea yea nay nay evinceth Christ to intend in this prohibition common but not solemn swearing For whatsoever is more then these cometh of evill or the evill one that is of the devil For except we understand Christ to speak here of such voluntary asseverations as men make in their ordinary discourse and not of such as either the weight of the case or the necessity of justice call for we must be constrain'd impiously to assert that in all those passages prae-alledged in S. Paul where he called God to witnesse came from an evill spirit that our blessed Saviour so often as he said amen amen which is more then yea yea had those words put into his mouth by the evill one that the elect Angell which Christ sent from heaven to communicate the knowledge of future things to S. John was inspired by the devill when we swear by him that liveth for ever Is it a hard matter now to choose whether we should think that the chosen vessel the elect Angel yea the Archangell of the Covenant were led by an evill spirit to say more then yea yea nay nay Or that those men are led by a spirit of errour and under Judiciall blindenesse that cannot see that the words of Christ must necessarily be referred to voluntary rash oaths in our common discourse upon slieght occasion without reverence of the divine Majestie or intention to ratifie some trâ—th or promise of weight But that which will give a clearer light to this text and be a more full demonstration of the truth that I am contending for is this observation That Christ affirms whatsoever is more then these in the case wherein he prohibits the use of more to be intrinsecally and of its 〈◊〉 nature of an evill originall For he does not ground this position whatsoever is more is of evill upon either his prohibition or command As if his meaning were that 't is therefore evill because he hath now forbid the use of more but on the contrary he grounds both his prohibition Swear not and his injunction let your communication c. upon this argument because whatsoever is more then these is of evill and presseth the intrinsecal evil that is naturally in that which he prohibits antecedently to his forbidding of it as the reason of his prohibition He does not say I have now forbid you to swear or to use any more then yea and nay and therefore the use of more is evill But the use of more in the case that I speak of is evil and therefore I probibit it whence it unavoidably follows that in all cases wherein Christ here forbids swearing it was ever a sin to swear a sin in the Patriarchs and Old-Testament Saints before this prohibition as well as it is in us Christians since that is rashly prophanely irreverently in our ordinary communication and that Christ hath not made that kinde of reverent swearing a sin to Christians that was the duty and commendation of his antient people 1. It is manifest that all rash swearing whether in Jew or Christian proceeds from the evill heart of him that inures himself to it from that pride athiesm and hypocrisy that lodgeth in the breast doth the mouth utter all vain fruitlesse and precipitate oaths and asseverations and therefore he that fears God will abstain from all customary oaths not only for fear of the event ne jurando ad fâ—cilitatem jurandi veniatur ex facilitate ad consuetudinem ex consuetudine in perjurium decidatur S. Austin de mend c. 15. lest by swearing we contract a facility to swear and fall from a facility to a custom and from custome into perjury but in regard to that evill fountain the prophanenesse of the swearers hearts whence all such slink calves of the lips are cast In a word the Russian disgorgeth oaths from the same Principle that the Fanatick powreth out extempore prayers neither of them consider that they are before God while they invoke his name and therefore they are so ready to offer the sacrifice of fools As there are certain forms of words at the using whereof evill spirits by vertue of diabolicall institution present themselves so all forms of invoking God either by Oath or prayer exhibit the divine presence to us of which presence if they had regard the one would not think it nothing to swear nor the other to pray unadvisedly neither of them would be so hasty with theâ—r mouths so hasty to utter quicquid in buccam if they did consider they were before God My ranking them together will displease them both but let them wreak their spleen upon Solomon who hath coupled them as brethren in iniquity as alike guilty of Athiestical prophanesse and hath prescribed the same method of cure for them both if they have wit or grace to apply themselves to ire observation of his rules Eccles 5.1 2. And it is as manifest from the In tances of Christ and Saint Paul that more then these sometimes and in some cases proceeds from good from a divine principle from an honest and gracious heart to wit when strong asseverations even by oath are used 1. Reverentially as a solemn invocation of Gods name as the celebration of the highest and most august act of divine worship and adoration that can possiblie be tendred to the divine majesty 2. Deliberately with due consideration and preponderation of the weight of the thing the importance of our Neighbours bekeving it the probability that he will be prevail'd to beleeve us upon the interposition and assurance of the oath c. Et ideo non insetitur jurasse nisi scribens ubi consideratio cautior non habet linguam pacipitem We do not finde saith S. Austin de mend c. 15. that S. Paul did swear but when he was writing because the pen is not so great a blabb as the tongue men are more circumspect of the words that fall from their quill then of