Truths Victory Over Error, Chapter 22
CHAP. XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows.
Question I.
IS the name of GOD, that only by which men ought to swear?
Yes. Deut. 6. 13.
Well then, do not the Papists err, who in their swearing, joyn with their calling upon the name of GOD, the calling on Saints departed, and their Reliques?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, swearing is a part of divine worship, which is only due to God; Deut. 6. 13. Deut. 10. 20. Isaiah 65. 16. (2) Because, God only is the judge of hidden and secret truth; and the Avenger to take vengence on them, that do not swear in truth. Therfore he only is to be called on as witness of those things, which are asserted, and promised, which was the practise of the Apostle Paul, Rom. 9. 1. Rom. 1. 9. Phil. 1. 8. (3) Because, God condemns swearing by them, that are no Gods; Ier. 5. 7.
Quest. II.
IS an Oath warranted by the word of GOD, under the New Testament, as well, as under the Old, in matters of weight, and moment?
Yes. Heb. 6. 16. Isaiah 65. 16. Gal. 1. 20. Rom. 1. 9. Rom. 9. 1. 2 Cor. 1. 18. 23. and 2 Cor. 11. 31. with 2 Cor. 12, 19. 1 Thes. 5. 27. Rev. 10. 6.
Well then, do not the Quakers and Anabaptists err, who maintain, that there is no lawful use of an Oath under the New Testament?
Yes.
Do not likewise the Papists err, who make it a degree of perfection, to abstain from all Oaths?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) From Isaiah 65. 16. where it is promised, under the time of the Gospel, that the Nations to be converted to Christ, shall swear by the name of God, as is clear also from Ierem. 4. 2. (2) Because, the calling upon the name of God with due fear and reverence in swearing, is commanded in the third Command, as the profanation of his name is forbidden: but Christ came not to abolish the moral Law. (3) From the approven examples of the Saints, which occurr in the New Testament; Gal. 1. 20. Rom. 1. 9. and 2 Cor. 1. 13, 18. Rev. 10. 6. (4) Because, the end of an Oath, is approven by God, and is in all ages, necessary to all men, being the end of all controversie; Heb. 6. 16. (5) Because, an oath rightly taken, is an Act of Religion, whereby we glorifie God, and adore his attributes. We thereby, first, solemnly acknowledge his Beeing and Existence. Secondly, his Ubiquity that he is present in all places, and at all times, and within our hearing; Psalm 139. 7. His Omniscience, that he is the searcher of the heart. The Apostle calls him Kardiognostes; Acts 15. 8. We acknowledge, fourthly, his Truth and Veracity: he is a witness brought into the Court, that cannot lie, nor be impos'd upon, as saith the Apostle, be not deceived God is not mocked; Gal. 6. 7. Fifthly, his Supremacy over all creatures, for verily men swear by the greater; Heb. 6. 16. We acknowledge, sixthly, his vindictive justice, as he is a Revenger of Perjury. Seventhly, we acknowledge his Providence, and Fatherly care of the concerns of mankind, owning the cause of the Righteous.
(6) Because, there being an express law for swearing (to wit rightly; Deut. 10 20.) it must either belong to the Moral Law, to the Judicial Law, or Ceremonial Law. The Adversaries will not call it, a part of the Judicial Law, which was given to the Iewes, as a Body Politick, which expired together with the state of that People. It is no part of the Ceremonial Law: for what was purely Ceremonial, was purely Typical: but the Law concerning an oath was not a Type of any thing to come. And if it was a Type, where will you find its Antitype in all the Gospel, or the thing represented by it? Therefore, it must be a part of the Moral Law; Deut. 6. 13. Ier. 4. 2, and consequently perpetual, which Christ came not to destroy. It is confirmed hence, that it was of Authentick use, and held sacred among the Patriarchs, before the delivery of the Levitical Law, as it is clear from Abraham the father of the faithful, and Abimelech; Gen. 21. 23, 24, 31. Consider also that other instance in Abraham; Gen. 24. 2, 3, 9. who would not give his servant an oath rashly, nor exercise his authority to impose on his conscience. It is evident also from the example of Isaac, who made a Covenant, and swore to Abimelech; Gen. 26. 28, 31, And from the example of Iacob, who made a Covenant with, and swore to his Uncle Laban, by the fear of his Father Isaac; Gen. 31. 53. That is, by God, who is called our fear, by reason of the filial awe, and fear we ought to stand in before him; Isaiah 8. 13. (7) Because, the reasons and usefulness of Oaths, are perpetual, and the same to us under the Gospel, as they were to them under the Law. There is as much need of oaths for ending of strife in this litigious age, as there could be in former times. (8) Because, oaths were once lawful, therefore they are lawful still; unless the Adversaries prove them repealled; which they must do, not by stealing out of the Scripture single words by themselves, making one part contradict another. (9) Because, we need not fear to imitate any thing, which is done in Heaven. Our Lord has taught us to pray, thy will be done in Earth, as it is done in Heaven. But the Angel (says Iohn; Rev. 10. 5, 6.) which I saw stand upon the Sea, and upon the Earth, lifted up his hand to Heaven, and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever. That Angel, calls himself our fellow-servant, and of our brethren the Prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this Book; Rev. 22. 9. And therefore the Angels being of the same fraternity with us, do not act under different dispensations from us.
Quest. III.
IS an Oath to be taken, in the plain and common sense of the words, without Equivocation, or Mental reservation?
Yes. Psalm. 24. 4. Exod. 20. 7. Lev. 19. 12. Ier. 4. 2.
Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that it is lawful in swearing, to use words of Equivocation?
Yes.
Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain Mental reservation, to be lawful in swearing?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, the Scripture requires from all men in their common dealing one with another, in their discourse, and conferences, Verity, and Simplicity; Matth. 5. 37. Eph. 4. 25. Much more are these things required in Swearing, wherein God is called to be witness of the truth of those things, which are asserted. (2) Because, the Lord threatneth such as use guile, and deceit in their words; Psalm 15. 4. Psalm 24. 4. Gal. 2. 11, 12, 13. (3) Because, the Lord requires in every Oath, truth, righteousness, and judgement; Ier. 4. 2. (4) Because, Equivocations, and Mental Reservations, are against the very end of an approven Oath; which is to put an end to all debate, and controversie. (5) Because, if Equivocations, and Mental Reservations were lawful, in vain should the Lord have made laws against lying: for a lie may be excused by Mental Reservation. (6) If Equivocations, and Mental Reservations were allowed, they would take away all commerce among men, and would make Bonds, Contracts, and Charter-parties of none effect.
Quest. IV.
IS a Religious Vow to be made to GOD alone, and not to any creature?
Yes. To GOD alone; Ier. 44. 25, 26. Psalm 76. 11.
Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, Vows may be made to Saints departed, and to Cenobiarchs, that is, to Priors of Monasteries, or Abbeys?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, Vows are a part of our gratitude, and thankfulness due to God only, for his favours and mercies conferred upon us; Psalm 50. 14. Psalm 66. 13, 14. (2) Because, we are commanded in the Word to make our vowes to God, and perform them. But no where are we appointed to make our vows to Saints departed; Psalm 58. 14, (3) Because, God only is the trier, and searcher of the heart: and it is he only that knoweth the sincerity of the mans mind, that voweth, and is able to punish such as violate, and break their vows; Deut. 23. 21. (4) Because, the Lord threatneth those severely, that had vowed to any other Gods, but to himself alone, and accuses them of a very great sin; Ierem. 44. 25, 26.
Quest. V.
ARE Popish Monastical Vows of a perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious, and sinful snares, in which no Christian, may intangle himself?
Yes. Matth. 19. 11, 12. 1 Cor. 7. 2, 9. Eph. 4. 28. 1 Peter 4. 2.
Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain Monastical Vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and Regular Obedience, to be degrees of higher perfection?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, a Vow of a perpetual single life, is unlawful. For no man ought to Vow the performance of that, for which he hath not a promise of strength to perform. But no man hath a promise of perpetual Continency which is necessarly required to a perpetual single life. Nay Christ says expresly, that the gift of Continency, is not given to all men; Mat. 19. 11. (2) Because, marriage is honourable among all men, and the bed undefiled; Heb. 13. 4. (3) Because, the Apostle bids every man take his own wife, for shuning of Fornication; 1 Cor. 7. 1, 2, 9. (4) Because, the forbidding of Marriage, is a Doctrine of Devils; 1 Tim. 4. 1, 3.
Next, the Vow of professed Poverty is unlawful.
(1) Because, the Lord did not allow Beggars to be among his people of old; Deut. 15. 7. (2) Because, Agur wished, that the Lord might not give him poverty, least he should steal, and take the name of God in vain; Prov. 30. 8, 9. (3) Because, the Lord will have every man to eat his bread, in the sweat of his face; Gen. 3. 19. (4) Because, the Apostle commands the Thessalonians to work with their own hands; 1 Thes. 4. 11. (5) Because, professed poverty, hindereth a greater good, to wit, our charity, and benevolence towards the poor, and indigent members of Christ, which is contrary to the Apostles Rule; Eph. 4. 28.
The Vow of Regular Obedience is likewise unlawful.
1) Because, it makes us the servants of men, which is contrary to the Apostle. Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of Men, viz. to do any thing for the service, or obedience of men (Superiours) which should be repugnant, to the Commands of the service of God. Or suffer not your selves, in spiritual things, to be brought in bondage by any men, that you should not freely use that which the Lord hath made free to us; 1 Cor. 7. 23.