An Apology for the True Christian Divinity / Being an explanation and vindication of the principles and doctrines of the people called Quakers

by Robert Barclay

§. XI.

Secondly, All rash and vain Oaths in familiar Discourses; because he saith, Let your Communication be yea, yea, and nay, nay.

Answ. 1.To which I answer, First, That the Law did forbid all Oaths made by the Creatures, as also all vain and rash Oaths in our common Discourses, commanding, That Men should only swear by the Name of God, and that neither falsely nor rashly; for that is to take his Name in vain.

Answ. 2.Secondly, It is most evident that Christ forbids somewhat that was permitted under the Law, To swear by God himself forbidden by Christ.to wit, to swear by the Name of God, because it was not lawful for any Man to swear but by God himself. And because he saith, Neither by Heaven, because it is the Throne of God; therefore he excludes all other Oaths, even those which are made by God; for he saith, Chap. xxiii. 22. He that shall swear by Heaven, sweareth by the Throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon: Which is also to be understood of the rest.

Answ. 3.Lastly, That he might put the Matter beyond all Controversy, he adds, Neither by any other Oath: Therefore seeing to swear before the Magistrate by God is an Oath, it is here without Doubt forbidden.

Object.Secondly, They object, That by these Words Oaths by God’s Name cannot be forbidden, because the Heavenly Father hath commanded them; for the Father and the Son are one, which could not be, if the Son had forbid that which the Father commanded.

Answ.I answer, They are indeed one, and cannot contradict one another: Oaths under the Old Covenant.Nevertheless the Father gave many Things to the Jews for a Time, because of their Infirmity under the Old Covenant, which had only a Shadow of good Things to come, not the very Substance of Things, until Christ should come, who was the Substance, and by whose Coming all these Things vanished, to wit, Sabbaths, Circumcision, the Paschal Lamb: Men used then Sacrifices, who lived in Controversies with God, and one with another, which all are abrogated in the Coming of the Son, who is the Substance, Eternal Word, and Essential Oath and Amen, in whom the Promises of God are Yea and Amen: Who came that Men might be redeemed out of Strife, and might make an End of Controversy.

Object.Thirdly, They object, But all Oaths are not Ceremonies, nor any Part of the Ceremonial Law.

Answ.I answer, Except it be shewn to be an eternal, immutable, and moral Precept, it withstands not; neither are they of so old an Origin as Tithes, Tithes, &c. unlawful now.and the Offering of the First Fruits of the Ground, which by Abel and Cain were offered long before the Ceremonial Law, or the Use of Oaths; which, whatever may be alleged against it, were no Doubt Ceremonies, and therefore no Doubt unlawful now to be practised.

Object.Fourthly, They object, That to swear by the Name of God is a moral Precept of continual Duration, because it is marked with his essential and moral Worship, Deut. vi. 13. and x. 20. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him alone: Thou shalt cleave to him, and swear by his Name.

Answ.I answer, This proves not that it is a moral and eternal Precept; for Moses adds that to all the Precepts and Ceremonies in several Places; as Deut. x. 12, 13. saying, And now, Israel, what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all his Ways, and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul; to keep the Commandments in the Lord, and his Statutes, which I command thee this Day? And Chap. xiv. 23. the Fear of the Lord is mentioned together with the Tithes. And so also Levit. xix. 2, 3. 6. the Sabbaths and Regard to Parents are mentioned with Swearing.

Object.Fifthly, They object, That solemn Oaths, which God commanded, cannot be here forbidden by Christ; for he saith, That they come from Evil: But these did not come from Evil; for God never commanded any Thing that was Evil, or came from Evil.

Answ.I answer, There are Things which are Good because commanded, and Evil because forbidden; other Things are commanded because Good, and forbidden because Evil. Oaths are Evil, because forbidden.As Circumcision and Oaths, which were Good, when and because they were commanded, and in no other Respect; and again, when and because prohibited under the Gospel, they are Evil.

And in all these Jewish Constitutions, however ceremonial, there was something of Good, to wit, in their Season, as prefiguring some Good: As by Circumcision, the Purifications, and other Things, the Holiness of God was typified, and that the Israelites ought to be holy, as their God was holy. In the like Manner Oaths, under the Shadows and Ceremonies, signified the Verity of God, his Faithfulness and Certainty; and therefore that we ought in all Things to speak and witness the Truth. Truth was before all Oaths.But the Witness of Truth was before all Oaths, and remains when all Oaths are abolished; and this is the Morality of all Oaths; and so long as Men abide therein, there is no Necessity nor Place for Oaths, as Polybius witnessed, who said, “The Use of Oaths in Judgment was rare among the Ancients; but by the growing of Perfidiousness, so grew also the Use of Oaths.” Oaths supply presupposed Defects of Men’s Inconstancy.To which agreeth Grotius, saying, “An Oath is only to be used as a Medicine, in Case of Necessity: A solemn Oath is not used but to supply Defect. The Lightness of Men, and their Inconstancy, begot Diffidence; for which Swearing was sought out as a Remedy.” Basil the Great saith, “That Swearing is the Effect of Sin.” And Ambrose, “That Oaths are only a Condescendency for Defect.” Chrysostom saith, “That an Oath entered when Evil grew, when Men exercised their Frauds, when all Foundations were overturned: That Oaths took their Beginning from the Want of Truth.” These and the Like are witnessed by many others with the fore-mentioned Authors. But what Need of Testimonies, where the Evidence of Things speaks itself? For who will force another to swear, of whom he is certainly persuaded that he abhors to lie in his Words? And again, as Chrysostom and others say, “For what End wilt thou force him to swear, whom thou believest not that he will speak the Truth?”