Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A65844
|
The case of the Quakers concerning oaths defended as evangelical in answer to a book, entituled, The case of the Quakers relating to oaths stated by J.S.
|
Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.
|
1674
(1674)
|
Wing W1899; ESTC R19753
|
38,726
|
52
|
suffered under Verus the Emperor Ann. 170. Eus. l. 4. c. 14 15. Eâ—e Chro. 567. To our saying that he was demanded to swear by the Emperor 's Good Fortune or Caesar 's Prosperity he absolutely denyed and said He was a Christian J. S. answers They interpret GOOD FORTUNE by Prosperity or as if this Martyr could not swear by the Emperor 's Good Fortune but by his Prosperity But for that he hath left us to seek for a Proof He adds Eusebius in the place quoted hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Translation renders Jurare per Caesaris genium Swear by the Genius the good Daemon or good Fortune of Caesar which Form of Oath Polycarpus and the whole Army of Martyrs refused to take because that which the Gentiles stilâ—d Genij the Christians know to be Devils A Daughty Argument Polycarpus would not swear by an Heathenish Goddess or their Gods who were Devils therefore Christians must not Swear by the True God Reply This he calls a Daughty Argument is none of ours but his own Consequence unjustly deduced against us for ours is That Polycarpus refused to swear as the Heathen required because he was a Christian for Conrcience sake but J. S. thinks this not enough to prove that he refused to swear by the True God And as he hath not proved this so we do not think that he hath proved or can prove that Polycarpus either could swear or profered to swear by the true God for that was not required of him Therefore it was enough for him to refuse all the swearing that they required and not to tell them he could not swear by the True God for that was not the Matter he was called upon It is true that Polycarpus and those Christian-Martyrs refused to Swear by the Good Fortune of Caesar which is as we cited before 2. But why makes this man such a Difference between the Good Fortune of Caesar or Caesar's Prosperity He tells us p. 20. That Tertullian assureth us That the primitive Christians who suffered under the Pagan Persecutions who would not swear by the Genij of the Emperors have sworn by the Health of the Emperors Tertull. Apolog. c. 32. Whatever Tertullian saith of those Christians it doth not invalidate our particular Instance of Polycarpus who was a more eminent Martyr and clear in his Testimony then many others For what is more plain in Ecclesiastical History then that some Christian-Martyrs exceeded many of the more weak Christians both in their Courage Valour Patience Nobility and Clearness in bearing their Testimony And we did not say that all the former Christians Martyrs and Fathers since the Apostles dayes refused to swear as we do but many did and therefore said we have of many more given some Instances and Testimonies of such Primitive Christian-Martyrs and Fathers c. the Case p. 9. And also it s confessed that the Christians prayed for the Emperor's Health and wished Caesar's Prosperity which to them was instead of a great Oath Tertull. ibid. And though J. S. would insinuate That Polycarpus did not refuse to Swear upon the Account of Christ's Inhibition but the Impiety of the Form of the Oath saying That the true Criterion was this That the Gentiles would have had the Martyrs swear by the Idols but the Martyrs would not swear but by the God of Truth pag. 38. See the Man's Contradiction to himself and to what he saith Tertullian assures us viz. That without the least scruple of Conscience they have sworn by the Health of the Emperor Oh strange and yet would not swear but by the God of Truth Was there no Difference between the Health of a Wicked Persecuting Emperor and the God of Truth If Polycarpus had then profered according to J. S. his Account of those Martyrs viz. By the Eternal God I wish or pray for the Health of the Emperor or else if this would not have pleased his Persecutors when they urged him to swear by the Fortune of Caesar he had then answered Well I will swear by the Prosperity or Health of the Emperor probably he might have come off at a more easie rate then he did as many Temporizers have evaded Suffering in our dayes But to proceed with Polycarpus The Proconsul urged him divers times to swear by the Fortune of Caesar To whom Polycarpus answered If thou requirest this Vain-Glory that I protest the Fortune of Caesar as thou sayest seigning thou knowest me not who I am hear freely I am a Christian and if thou desirest to know the Doctrine of Christianity appoint the day and thou shalt hear it The Proconsul commanded the Beadle thrice in the midst of the Theatre Polycarpus confesseth himself a Christian The Multitude both of Jews and Gentiles inhabiting Smyrna cryed with one Voice That Polycarpus must be Burnt quick upon which the Multitude forth-with carried Logs and Wood and Sticks out of their Shops and Bootks but especially the Iews served promptly after their wonted manner for that purpose c. See the Account at large Euseb. l. 4. chap. 15. So it appears that both the out-ragious Gentiles who were for swearing by their Heathen Gods and those hypocritical Iews who were commanded to swear only by the True God both joyned together to murder this Eminent and Valiant Christian-Martyr who would have taught the Proconsul the Christian Doctrine which contains an express Prohibition of Swearing and whose Refusing to Swear by the Good Fortune of Caesar appears to be as he was a Christian from Christ's Prohibition with respect to him as well as upon the Account of the Impiety of the Form of the Oath it self though those furious Heathens and envious Iews were not fit to hear all his Reason on that Account Consider that Irenaeus reporteth Lib. 3. against Heres That Polycarpus was not only instructed by the Apostles and conversant with many who saw Christ but also of the Apostles ordained Bishop of Smyrna who lived long and was very old and at length finished this Life with most Glorious and most renowned Martyrdom when he had continually taught that which he learned of the Apostles And that he converted many of the Hereticks unto the Church of God preaching the one and only Truth received of the Apostles To which we add It is not then probable that he should teach the Iews Doctrine for swearing by the Lord either to God or men much less that he taught men to swear by the Health of Caesar But rather that he taught them as Christ and his Servant Iames did Not to swear at all by Heaven Earth or any other Oath seeing he continually taught that which he had learnt of the Apostles 2. It is not probable he should so plainly contradict the Apostle Iames his Doctrine My Brethren Swear not neither by Heaven nor by Earth nor by any other Oath as to say My Brethren Ye may either Swear by God that you wish Caesar's Prosperity or otherwise You may Swear by the Health of
also presumes to tell us Here is nothing forbidden but what was forbidden in the Law when Swearing by the Lord was not only lawful but expresly commanded Deut. 6. 13. 10. 20. All which is answered by Christ himself where he recites what was said in old time in this Case of Swearing as namely It hath been said by them of old time Thou shalt not Forswear thy self but shalt perform to the Lord thy Oathes But I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. But let your Communication be Yea Yea Nay Nay c. Which makes it very plain that here was more forbidden by Christ then what was by the Law his words in this holding parallel with his very next words Ye have heard that it hath been saith An Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth but I say unto you That ye resist not Evil but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right Cheek turn to him the other also vers 38 39. Did not Christ himself hereby forbid his Disciples that kind of severe Retaliation which was allowed under the Law as he allowed divers and other things in Condescension to the People's Weakness Deut. 24. 1. Matth. 5. 31 32. Luke 16. 18. And in this Case of God's allowing the Jews to swear under the Law where he said Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him and shalt Swear by his Name Deut. 6. 13. This appears plainly to be a Condescension to their Weakness and an Obligation to prevent them from going after other Gods as is evident by the very next words Ye shall not go after other Gods of the Gods of the people that are round about you vers 14. This State was much below the Evangelical State of the true Christians who in the Love they bear to the Lord are engaged to speak the Truth in Yea and Nay without an Oath as Christ his Apostles have taught So the Difference lies here the Jews when bound by an Oath they feared the Oath or the Curse contained or implyed in it they Swearing by the Great God as chiefly to be feared them with regard to his Power to judge and avenge c. and this was for a time some tye upon them to prevent them from going after other Gods The True Christians are bound in their Consciences by the Royal and Evangelical Law of Love which was before Swearing was and takes away the Occasion of Oaths to serve God and speak the Truth every man to his Neighbour without Swearing So that the Disparity between the State under the Law and that under the Gospel lies here Under the Law Thou shalt fear the Lord and Swear by his Name Under the Gospel Thou shalt so Love the Lord as to speak the Truth and confirm it in Yea and Nay without being bound by an Oath Now judge serious Reader which of these do express more Love Respect and Honour to God whether he that 's bound by an Oath not to go after other Gods and to speak the Truth as fearing an Oath and the Curse which was the better use of Oaths which now few that use them regard or he that is bound in Conscience to speak and do Truth without an Oath whose word Yea and Nay is more binding to him and of more Value and Credit then men's Swearing Imprecations and Curses And likewise between man and man and Neighbours which do express most Love one to another and Confidence in each other they that will not believe one another without Oathes and Curses or they that will like Christians speak the Truth and believe one another's plain and simple Yea Yea and Nay Nay as Christ and his Apostle has commanded Such are the true Christians and People of God as are come to the fulfilling of the Evangelical Prophesie Surely they are my People Children that will not Lye and so was he their Saviour Isa. 63. 8. And the Remnant of Israel shall not speak Lyes neither shall a Deceitful Tongue be found in their Mouth But to return to Christ and his Apostles express Prohibition But I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. nor by ANY OTHER Oath Hereby Christians are so plainly forbidden Swearing in any Case as Christ forbids an Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth or hating thine Enemy see Mat. 5. 39 44. Or else what Coherence is there in his Words and what Difference is there between the Dispensation of the Law and that of the Gospel if as this man sayes Christ here forbids nothing but what was forbid in the Law By which he renders Christ as thus speaking It hath been said by them of old time Thou shalt not Forswear thy self but shalt perform to the Lord thine Oaths And I say the same Instead of But I say unto you Swear not at all And likewsie ye have heard that it hath been said An Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth And I say the same to you instead of But I say unto you Resist not Evil c. And so this would make Christ still leave his Followers in the Fighting Revengful Nature as this man's limiting his words for Swearing as the Jews did renders Christ as leaving his Followers but still in the same common Humane Infirmity as his words are and weak Distrusting and unsteady Condition as the Jews under the Works of the Law were in who were allowed to Swear by the Lord as a Prevention from running after other Gods and to remove Jealousie or Hard Thoughts out of the Minds one of another as about the Case mentioned Exod. 22. 10 11. Upon the words Neither by any other Oath J. S. adds Swear not at all by Heaven Earth or any other of those Forms of Swearing by the Creature that Christ forbad the use of p. 17. whereas the words of the Apostle who well knew the Mind of Christ extend farther as not only a forbidding a Swearing by Heaven or Earth but also by ANY OTHER OATH But mark how presently after this Oath-Vindicator hath opposed Swearing by Heaven Earth or the Creature he contradicts himself in the same page where he saith He that swears by Heaven swears by him whose Throne it is He that swears by Earth swears by him whose Foot-Stool it is because though God's Name be not expresly mentioned in such Forms of Oaths yet it is implyed and therefore we are not to use such Forms in our common Speech any more then the Name of God himself but in Reverence and in extreme Necessity p. 17. So that by this he allows of such a Form as Swearing by Heaven or Earth that thereby they may Swear by God that dwells therein when before they are not at all to Swear by Heaven Earth or any other of thâ—se Forms See what an eminent Antagonist this is that undertakes to confute the Quakers and yet contradicts himself in one and the same page As much as to say We may not