§. VII.

Apparel in its Vanity and Superfluity disallowed.The Third Thing to be treated of, is the Vanity and Superfluity of Apparel. In which, First, Two Things are to be considered, the Condition of the Person, and the Country he lives in. We shall not say that all Persons are to be clothed alike, because it will perhaps neither suit their Bodies nor their Estates. And if a Man be clothed soberly, and without Superfluity, though they may be finer than that which his Servant is clothed with, we shall not blame him for it: The abstaining from Superfluities, which his Condition and Education have accustomed him to, may be in him a greater Act of Mortification than the abstaining from finer Clothes in the Servant, who never was accustomed to them. As to the Country, what it naturally produces may be no Vanity to the Inhabitants to use, or what is commonly imparted to them by Way of Exchange, seeing it is without Doubt that the Creation is for the Use of Man. So where Silk abounds, it may be worn as well as Wool; and were we in those Countries, or near unto them, where Gold or Silver were as common as Iron or Brass, the one might be used as well as the other. The Iniquity lies then here, First, When from a Lust of Vanity, and a Desire to adorn themselves, Men and Women, not content with what their Condition can bear, or their Country easily affords, do stretch to have Things, that from their Rarity, and the Price that is put upon them, seem to be precious, and so feed their Lust the more; and this all sober Men of all Sorts will readily grant to be Evil.

Secondly, When Men are not content to make a true Use of the Creation, whether the Things be fine or coarse, and do not satisfy themselves with what Need and Conveniency call for, but add thereunto Things merely superfluous, such as is the Use of Ribbands and Lace, and much more of that Kind of Stuff, as painting the Face, and plaiting the Hair, which are the Fruits of the fallen, lustful, and corrupt Nature, and not of the New Creation, as all will acknowledge. And though sober Men among all Sorts will say, That it were better these Things were not, yet will they not reckon them unlawful, and therefore do admit the Use of them among their Church-members: But we do account them altogether unlawful, and unsuitable to Christians, and that for these Reasons:

The proper Use of Clothes.First, The Use of Clothes came originally from the Fall. If Man had not fallen, it appears he would not have needed them; but this miserable State made them necessary in two Respects: 1. To cover his Nakedness; 2. To keep him from the Cold; which are both the proper and principal Use of them. Now for Man to delight himself in that which is the Fruit of his Iniquity, and the Consequence of his Sin, can be no Ways lawful for him: So to extend Things beyond their real Use, or to superadd Things wholly superfluous, is a manifest Abuse of the Creation, and therefore not lawful to Christians.

Secondly, Those that will needs so adorn themselves in the Use of their Clothes, as to beset them with Things having no real Use or Necessity, but merely for Ornament Sake, do openly declare, Not to please their Lusts.That the End of it is either to please their Lust (for which End these Things are chiefly invented and contrived) or otherwise to gratify a vain, proud, and ostentatious Mind; and it is obvious these are their general Ends in so doing. Yea, we see how easily Men are puffed up with their Garments, and how proud and vain they are, when adorned to their Mind. Now how far these Things are below a true Christian, and how unsuitable, needs very little Proof. Hereby those who love to be gaudy and superfluous in their Clothes, shew they concern themselves little with Mortification and Self-denial, and that they study to beautify their Bodies more than their Souls; which proves they think little upon Mortality, and so certainly are more nominal than real Christians.

Contrary to Scripture.Thirdly, The Scripture severely reproves such Practices, both commending and commanding the contrary; as Isa. iii. how severely doth the Prophet reprove the Daughters of Israel for their tinkling Ornaments, their Cauls, and their round Tires, their Chains and Bracelets, &c. and yet is it not strange to see Christians allow themselves in these Things, from whom a more strict and exemplary Conversation is required? Christ desires us not to be anxious about our Clothing, Matt. vi. 25. and to shew the Vanity of such as glory in the Splendor of their Clothing, tells them, That even Solomon, in all his Glory, was not to be compared to the Lily of the Field, which To-day is, and To-morrow is cast into the Oven. But surely they make small Reckoning of Christ’s Words and Doctrine that are so curious in their Clothing, and so industrious to deck themselves, and so earnest to justify it, and so enraged when they are reproved for it. The Apostle Paul is very positive in this Respect, 1 Tim. ii. 9, 10. I will therefore in like Manner also that Women adorn themselves in modest Apparel, with Shamefacedness and Sobriety, and not with broidered Hair, or Gold, or Pearls, or costly Array, but (which becometh Women professing Godliness) with good Works. To the same Purpose saith Peter, 1 Pet. iii. 3, 4. Whose Adorning let it not be that outward Adorning of plaiting the Hair, and wearing of Gold, or of putting on of Apparel; but let it be the hidden Man of the Heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the Ornament of a meek and quiet Spirit, &c. Here both the Apostles do very positively and expresly assert two Things. First, That the Adorning of Christian Women (of whom it is particularly spoken, I judge, because this Sex is most naturally inclined to that Vanity, and that it seems that Christian Men in those Days deserved not in this Respect so much to be reproved) ought not to be outward, nor consist in the Apparel. Plaiting the Hair, &c.Secondly, That they ought not to use the Plaiting of the Hair, or Ornaments, &c. which was at that Time the Custom of the Nations. But is it not strange, That such as make the Scripture their Rule, and pretend they are guided by it, should not only be so generally in the Use of these Things, which the Scripture so plainly condemns, but also should attempt to justify themselves in so doing? For the Apostles not only commend the Forbearance of these Things, as an Attainment commendable in Christians, but condemn the Use of them as unlawful; and yet may it not seem more strange, That in Contradiction to the Apostle’s Doctrine, as if they had resolved to slight their Testimony, they should condemn those that out of Conscience apply themselves seriously to follow it, as if in so doing they were singular, proud, or superstitious? This certainly betokens a sad Apostasy in those that will be accounted Christians, that they are so offended with those who love to follow Christ and his Apostles, in denying of, and departing from, the lying Vanities of this perishing World; and so doth much evidence their Affinity with those who hate to be reproved, and neither will enter themselves, nor suffer those that would.

§. VIII.

Sports, &c. inconsistent with the Gospel.Fourthly, Let us consider the Use of Games, Sports, Comedies, and other such Things, commonly and indifferently used by all the several Sorts of Christians, under the Notion of Divertisement and Recreation, and see whether these Things can consist with the Seriousness, Gravity, and Godly Fear, which the Gospel calls for. Let us but view and look over the Notions of them that call themselves Christians, whether Papists or Protestants, and see if generally there be any Difference, save in mere Name and Profession, from the Heathen? Doth not the same Folly, the same Vanity, the same Abuse of precious and irrevocable Time abound? The same Gaming, Sporting, Playing, and from thence Quarrelling, Fighting, Swearing, Ranting, Revelling? Now how can these Things be remedied, so long as the Preachers and Professors, and those who are the Leaders of the People, do allow these Things, and account them not inconsistent with the Profession of Christianity? And it is strange to see that these Things are tolerated every where; the Inquisition lays no Hold on them, neither at Rome, nor in Spain, where in their Masquerades all Manner of Obscenity, Folly, yea, and Atheism is generally practised in the Face of the World, to the great Scandal of the Christian Name: But if any Man reprove them in these Things, and forsake their Superstitions, and come seriously to serve God, and worship him in the Spirit, he becomes their Prey, and is immediately exposed to cruel Sufferings. Doth this bear any Relation to Christianity? Do these Things look any Thing like the Churches of the Primitive Christians? Surely not at all. I shall first cite some few Scripture Testimonies, being very positive Precepts to Christians, and then see whether such as obey them can admit of these forementioned Things. The Apostle commands us, That whether we eat or drink, or whatever we do, we do it all to the Glory of God. By Sports and Games God is not glorified.But I judge none will be so impudent as to affirm, That in the Use of these Sports and Games God is glorified: If any should so say, They would declare they neither knew God nor his Glory. And Experience abundantly proves, That in the Practice of these Things Men mind nothing less than the Glory of God, and nothing more than the Satisfaction of their own carnal Lusts, Wills, and Appetites. The Apostle desires us, 1 Cor. vii. 29. 31. Because the Time is short, that they that buy should be as though they possessed not; and they that use this World, as not abusing it, &c. But how can they be found in the Obedience of this Precept that plead for the Use of these Games and Sports, who, it seems, think the Time so long, that they cannot find Occasion enough to employ it, neither in taking Care for their Souls, nor yet in the necessary Care for their Bodies; but invent these Games and Sports to pass it away, as if they wanted other Work to serve God in, or be useful to the Creation? The Apostle Peter desires us, To pass the Time of our Sojourning here in Fear, 1 Pet. i. 17. But will any say, That such as use Dancing and Comedies, Carding and Dicing, do so much as mind this Precept in the Use of these Things? Where there is nothing to be seen but Lightness and Vanity, Wantonness and Obscenity, contrived to draw Men from the Fear of God, and therefore no Doubt calculated for the Service of the Devil. There is no Duty more frequently commanded, nor more incumbent upon Christians, than the Fear of the Lord, to stand in Awe before him, to walk as in his Presence; but if such as use these Games and Sports will speak from their Consciences, they can, I doubt not, experimentally declare, That this Fear is forgotten in their Gaming: And if God by his Light secretly touch them, or mind them of the Vanity of their Way, they strive to shut it out, and use their Gaming as an Engine to put away from them that troublesome Guest; and thus make merry over the Just One, whom they have slain and crucified in themselves. But further, if Christ’s Reasoning be to be heeded, who saith, Matt. xii. 35, 36. That the good Man, out of the good Treasure of the Heart, bringeth forth good Things; and an evil Man, out of the evil Treasure, bringeth forth evil Things, and that of every idle Word we shall give an Account in the Day of Judgment, it may be easily gathered from what Treasure these Inventions come; and it may be easily proved, that it is from the Evil, and not the Good. Comedies a studied Complex of idle lying Words.How many idle Words do they necessarily produce? Yea, what are Comedies but a studied Complex of idle and lying Words? Let Men that believe their Souls are immortal, and that there will be a Day of Judgment, in which these Words of Christ will be accomplished, answer me, how all these will make Account in that great and terrible Day, of all these idle Words that are necessarily made use of about Dancing, Gaming, Carding, and Comedies acting? And yet how is it that by Christians not condemning these Things, but allowing of them, many that are accounted Christians take up their whole Time in them, yea, make it their Trade and Employment? Such as the Dancing-masters and Comedians, &c. whose Hellish Conversations do sufficiently declare what Master they serve, and to what End these Things contribute. And it cannot be denied, as being obviously manifest by Experience, That such as are Masters of these Occupations, and are most delighted in them, if they be not open Atheists and Profligates, are such at best as make Religion or the Care of their Souls their least Business. Now if these Things were discountenanced by Christians, as inconsistent with their Profession, it would remove these Things; for these Wretches would be necessitated then to betake themselves to some honest Livelihood, if they were not fed and upholden by these. And as hereby a great Scandal and Stumbling-block would be removed from off the Christian Name, so also would that in Part be taken out of the Way which provokes the Lord to with-hold his Blessing, and by Occasion of which Things the Minds of many remain chained in Darkness, and drowned in Lust, Sensuality, and worldly Pleasures, without any Sense of God’s Fear, or their own Soul’s Salvation. Many of those called Fathers of the Church, and other serious Persons, have signified their Regret for these Things, and their Desires they might be remedied; of whom many Citations might be alleged, which for Brevity’s Sake I have omitted.

§. IX.

Object.But they object, That Men’s Spirits could not subsist, if they were always intent upon serious and spiritual Matters, and that therefore there is Need of some Divertisement to recreate the Mind a little, whereby it being refreshed, is able with great Vigour to apply itself to these Things.

Answ.I answer; Though all this were granted, it would no Ways militate against us, neither plead the Use of these Things, which we would have wholly laid aside. For that Men should be always in the same Intentiveness of Mind, we do not plead, knowing how impossible it is, so long as we are clothed with this Tabernacle of Clay. But this will not allow us at any Time so to recede from the Remembrance of God, and of our Souls chief Concern, as not still to retain a certain Sense of his Fear; The Fear of God the best Recreation in the World.which cannot be so much as rationally supposed to be in the Use of these Things which we condemn. Now the necessary Occasions in which all are involved, in order to the Care and Sustentation of the outward Man, are a Relaxation of the Mind from the more serious Duties; and those are performed in the Blessing, as the Mind is so leavened with the Love of God, and the Sense of his Presence, that even in doing these Things the Soul carrieth with it that Divine Influence and Spiritual Habit, whereby though these Acts, as of eating, drinking, sleeping, working, be upon the Matter one with what the Wicked do, yet they are done in another Spirit; and in doing of them we please the Lord, serve him, and answer our End in the Creation, and so feel and are sensible of his Blessing: Whereas the Wicked and Profane, being not come to this Place, are in whatsoever they do cursed, and their Ploughing as well as Praying is Sin. Now if any will plead, that for Relaxation of Mind, there may be a Liberty allowed beyond these Things, which are of absolute Need to the Sustenance of the outward Man, I shall not much contend against it; provided these Things be not such as are wholly superfluous, or in their proper Nature and Tendency lead the Mind into Lust, Vanity, and Wantonness, as being chiefly contrived and framed for that End, or generally experienced to produce these Effects, or being the common Engines of such as are so minded to feed one another therein, and to propagate their Wickedness, to the imprisoning of others; seeing there are other innocent Divertisements which may sufficiently serve for Relaxation of the Mind, Lawful Divertisements.such as for Friends to visit one another; to hear or read History; to speak soberly of the present or past Transactions; to follow after Gardening; to use Geometrical and Mathematical Experiments, and such other Things of this Nature. In all which Things we are not to forget God, in whom we both live, and are moved, Acts xvii. 28. as not to have always some secret Reserve to him, and Sense of his Fear and Presence; which also frequently exerts itself in the Midst of these Things by some short Aspiration and Breathings. And that this may neither seem strange nor troublesome, I shall clear it by one manifest Instance, answerable to the Experience of all Men. It will not be denied but that Men ought to be more in the Love of God than of any other Thing; for we ought to love God above all Things. Now it is plain, that Men that are taken with Love, whether it be of Women, or of any other Thing, if it hath taken a deep Place in the Heart, and possess the Mind, it will be hard for the Man so in Love to drive out of his Mind the Person or Thing so loved; yea, in his eating, drinking, and sleeping, his Mind will always have a Tendency that Way; and in Business or Recreations, however intent he be in it, there will but a very short Time be permitted to pass, but the Mind will let some Ejaculation forth towards its Beloved. The Love towards its Beloved shuns its Offence.And albeit such a One must be conversant in those Things that the Care of this Body and such like Things call for; yet will he avoid as Death itself to do those Things that may offend the Party so beloved, or cross his Design in obtaining the Thing so earnestly desired: Though there may be some small Use in them, the great Design, which is chiefly in his Eye, will so balance him, that he will easily look over and dispense with such petty Necessities, rather than endanger the Loss of the Greater by them. Now that Men ought to be thus in Love with God, and the Life to come, none will deny; and the Thing is apparent from these Scriptures, Mat. vi. 20. But lay up for yourselves Treasures in Heaven. Col. iii. 2. Set your Affection on Things above, &c. And that this hath been the Experience and Attainment of some, the Scripture also declares, Psalm lxiii. 1. 8. 2 Cor. v. 4.

Sports and Plays draw Men from the Fear of God.And again, That these Games, Sports, Plays, Dancing, Comedies, &c. do naturally tend to draw Men from God’s Fear, to make them forget Heaven, Death, and Judgment, to foster Lust, Vanity, and Wantonness, and therefore are most loved, as well as used, by such Kind of Persons, Experience abundantly shews, and the most serious and conscientious among all will scarcely deny; which if it be so, the Application is easy.

§. X.

Fifthly, The Use of Swearing is to be considered, which is so frequently practised almost among all Christians; not only profane Oaths among the Profane, in their common Discourses, whereby the Most HOLY NAME of GOD is in a horrible Manner daily blasphemed; but also solemn Oaths, with those that have some Shew of Piety, whereof the most Part do defend Swearing before the Magistrate with so great Zeal, that not only they are ready themselves to do it upon every Occasion, but also have stirred up the Magistrates to persecute those, who, out of Obedience to Christ, their Lord and Master, judge it unlawful to swear; upon which Account not a Few have suffered Imprisonment, and the Spoiling of their Goods.

All Swearing is forbidden—But considering these clear Words of our Saviour, Matt. v. 33, 34. Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old Time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself but shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oaths. But I say unto you, Swear not at all, neither by Heaven, &c. But let your Communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of Evil. As also the Words of the Apostle James v. 12. But above all Things, my Brethren, swear not, neither by Heaven, neither by the Earth, neither by any other Oath; but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay, lest ye fall into Condemnation. I say, considering these clear Words, it is admirable how any one that professeth the Name of Christ can pronounce any Oath with a quiet Conscience, far less to persecute other Christians, that dare not swear, because of their Master Christ’s Authority. For did any one purpose seriously, and in the most rigid Manner, to forbid any Thing comprehended under any General, can they use a more full and general Prohibition, and that without any Exception? I think not. For Christ, First, proposeth it to us negatively, Swear not at all, neither by Heaven, not by the Earth, nor by Jerusalem, nor by thy Head, &c. And again, Swear not by Heaven, nor by Earth, nor by any other Oath. Secondly, He presseth it affirmatively, But let your Communication be yea, yea, and nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these, cometh of Evil. And saith James, Lest ye fall into Condemnation.

Without Exception.Which Words both all and every one of them do make such a full Prohibition, and so free of all Exception, that it is strange how Men that boast the Scripture is the Rule of their Faith and Life, can counterfeit any Exception! Certainly Reason ought to teach every one, that it is not lawful to make void a general Prohibition coming from God by such Opposition, unless the Exception be as clearly and evidently expressed as the Prohibition: Neither is it enough to endeavour to confirm it by Consequences and Probabilities, which are obscure and uncertain, and not sufficient to bring Quiet to the Conscience. For if they say, That there is therefore an Exception and Limitation in the Words, because there are found Exceptions in the other general Prohibition of this Fifth Chapter, as in the forbidding of Divorcement, where Christ saith, It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his Wife, let him give her a Writing of Divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his Wife, saving for the Cause of Fornication, causeth her to commit Adultery; if, I say, they plead this, they not only labour in vain, but also fight against themselves, because they can produce no Exception of this general Command of not Swearing, expressed by God to any under the New Covenant, after Christ gave this Prohibition so clear as that which is made in the Prohibition itself. Also Oaths before a Magistrate.Moreover, if Christ would have excepted Oaths made before Magistrates, certainly he had then expressed, adding, Except in Judgment, before the Magistrate, or the like; as he did in that of Divorcement by these Words, Saving for the Cause of Fornication: Which being so, it is not lawful for us to except or distinguish, or, which is all one, make void this general Prohibition of Christ; it would be far less agreeable to Christian Holiness to bring upon our Heads the Crimes of so many Oaths, which by Reason of this Corruption and Exception are so frequent among Christians.

The Concurrence of the ancient Fathers therein.Neither is it to be omitted that without Doubt the most learned Doctors of each Sect know, That these fore-mentioned Words were understood by the ancient Fathers of the first three hundred Years after Christ to be a Prohibition of all Sorts of Oaths. It is not then without Reason that we wonder that the Popish Doctors and Priests bind themselves by an Oath to interpret the Holy Scriptures according to the universal Exposition of the Holy Fathers; who nevertheless understood those controverted Texts quite contrary to what these modern Doctors do. And from thence also do clearly appear the Vanity and foolish Certainty (so to speak) of Popish Traditions; for if by the Writings of the Fathers, so called, the Faith of the Church of those Ages may be demonstrated, it is clear they have departed from the Faith of the Church of the first three Ages in the Point of Swearing. Moreover, because not only Papists, but also Lutherans and Calvinists, and some others, do restrict the Words of Christ and James, I think it needful to make manifest the vain Foundation upon which that Presumption in this Matter is built.

§. XI.

Object.First, They object, That Christ only forbids those Oaths that are made by Creatures, and Things created; and they prove it thence, because he numbers some of these Things.

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?”

§. XII.

That then which was not from the Beginning, which was of no Use in the Beginning, which had not its Beginning first from the Will of God, but from the Work of the Devil, occasioned from Evil, to wit, from Unfaithfulness, Lying, Deceit; and which was at first only invented by Man, as a mutual Remedy of this Evil, in which they called upon the Names of their Idols; yea, that which, as Jerome, Chrysostom, and others testify, was given to the Israelites by God, as unto Children, that they might abstain from the idolatrous Oaths of the Heathens, Jer. xii. 16. whatsoever is so, is far from being a moral and eternal Precept. And Lastly, whatsoever by its Profanation and Abuse is polluted with Sin, such as are abundantly the Oaths of these Times, by so often swearing and forswearing, far differs from any necessary and perpetual Duty of a Christian: But Oaths are so: Therefore, &c.

Object.Sixthly, They object, That God swore, therefore to swear is good.

Answ.Athan. in pass. & cruc. Dom. I answer with Athanasius; “Seeing it is certain it is proper in Swearing to swear by another, thence it appears, that God, to speak properly, did never swear but only improperly: Whence, speaking to Men, he is said to swear, because those Things which he speaks, because of the Certainty and Immutability of his Will, are to be esteemed for Oaths.” Compare Psalm cx. 4. where it is said, The Lord did swear, and it did not repent him, &c. God swears not by another, but by himself.And I swore (saith he) by myself: “And this is not an Oath; for he did not swear by another, which is the Property of an Oath, but by himself. Therefore God swears not according to the Manner of Men, neither can we be induced from thence to swear. But let us so do and say, and shew ourselves such by speaking and acting, that we need not an Oath with those who hear us; and let our Words of themselves have the Testimony of Truth: For so we shall plainly imitate God.”

Object.Seventhly, They object, Christ did swear, and we ought to imitate him.

Answ.I answer, That Christ did not swear; and albeit he had sworn, being yet under the Law, this would no Ways oblige us under the Gospel; as neither Circumcision, or the Celebration of the Paschal Lamb. Jerome Lib. Ep. Part. 3. Tract. 1. Ep. 2.Concerning which Jerome saith, “All Things agree not unto us, who are Servants, that agreed unto our Lord, &c. The Lord swore as Lord, whom no Man did forbid to swear; but unto us, that are Servants, it is not lawful to swear, because we are forbidden by the Law of our Lord. Yet, lest we should suffer Scandal by his Example, he hath not sworn, since he commanded us not to swear.”

Object.Eighthly, They object, That Paul swore, and that often, Rom. i. 9. Phil. i. 8. saying, For God is my Record. 2 Cor. xi. 10. As the Truth of Christ is in me. 2 Cor. i. 23. I call God for a Record upon my Soul. I speak the Truth in Christ, I lie not, Rom. ix. 1. Behold, before God I lie not, Gal. i. 20. and so requires Oaths of others. I obtest thee (saith he) before God and our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thess. v. 27. I charge you by the Lord, that this Epistle be read to all the Brethren. But Paul would not have done so, if all Manner of Oaths had been forbidden by Christ, whose Apostle he was.

Answ.To all which I answer, First, That the using of such Forms of Speaking is neither Swearing, nor so esteemed by our Adversaries. For when upon Occasion, in Matters of great Moment, we have said, We speak the Truth in the Fear of God, and before him, who is our Witness, and the Searcher of our Hearts, adding such Kind of serious Attestations, which we never refused in Matters of Consequence; nevertheless an Oath hath moreover been required of us, The Ceremonies of an Oath.with the Ceremony of putting our Hands upon the Book, the Kissing of it, the lifting up of the Hand or Fingers, together with this common Form of Imprecation, So help me God; or, So truly Let the Lord God Almighty help me. Secondly, This contradicts the Opinion of our Adversaries, because that Paul was neither before a Magistrate that was requiring an Oath of him, nor did he himself administer the Office of a Magistrate, as offering an Oath to any other. Thirdly, The Question is not what Paul or Peter did, but what their and our Master taught to be done; and if Paul did swear (which we believe not) he had sinned against the Command of Christ, even according to their own Opinion, because he swore not before a Magistrate, but in an Epistle to his Brethren.

Object.Ninthly, They object, Isa. lxv. 16. where speaking of the Evangelical Times, he saith, That he who blesseth himself in the Earth, shall bless himself in the God of Truth; and he that sweareth in the Earth, shall swear by the God of Truth; because the former Troubles are forgotten, and because they are hid from mine Eyes. For behold I create new Heavens, and a new Earth. Therefore in these Times we ought to swear by the Name of the Lord.

Answ.I answer, It is ordinary for the Prophets to express the greatest Duties of the Evangelical Times in Mosaical Terms, as appears among others from Jer. xxxi. 38, 39, 40. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. and 40. and Isa. xlv. 23. I have sworn by myself, that unto me every Knee shall bow, every Tongue shall swear. Where the Righteousness of the New Jerusalem, the Purity of the Gospel, with its spiritual Worship, and the Profession of the Name of Christ, are expressed under Forms of Speaking used to the Old Jerusalem under the Washings of the Law, under the Names of Ceremonies, the Temple, Services, Sacrifices, Oaths, &c. Swearing is expressed by Confessing under the Gospel.Yea, that which the Prophet speaks here of Swearing, the Apostle Paul interprets expresly of Confessing, saying, Rom. xiv. 11. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every Knee shall bow to me, and every Tongue shall confess to God: Which being rightly considered, none can be ignorant but these Words which the Prophet writes under the Law, when the ceremonial Oaths were in Use, to wit, Every Tongue shall swear, were by the Apostle, being under the Gospel, when those Oaths became abolished, expressed by, Every Tongue shall confess.

Object.Tenthly, They object, But the Apostle Paul approves Oaths used among Men, when he writes, Heb. vi. 16. For Men verily swear by the greater, and an Oath for Confirmation is to them an End of all Strife. But there are as many Contests, Fallacies, and Differences at this Time as there ever were; therefore the Necessity of Oaths doth yet remain.

Answ.I answer; The Apostle tells indeed in this Place what Men at that Time did, who lived in Controversies and Incredulity; not what they ought to have done, nor what the Saints did, who were redeemed from Strife and Incredulity, and had come to Christ, the Truth and Amen of God. Moreover, he only alludes to a certain Custom usual among Men, that he might express the Firmness of the Divine Promise, in order to excite in the Saints so much the more Confidence in God promising to them; not that he might instigate them to swear against the Law of God, or confirm them in that; no, not at all: For neither doth 1 Cor. ix. 24. teach Christians the vain Races, whereby Men oftentimes, even to the Destruction of their Bodies, are wearied to obtain a corruptible Prize; so neither doth Christ, who is the Prince of Peace, teach his Disciples to fight, albeit he takes Notice, Luke xiv. 31. what it behoveth such Kings to do who are accustomed to fight, as prudent Warriors therein. Secondly, As to what pertains to Contests, Perfidies, and Diffidences among Men, which our Adversaries affirm to have grown to such an Height, that Swearing is at present as necessary as ever, that we deny not at all: Deceit among the False, not the true Christians.For we see, and daily Experience teacheth us, that all Manner of Deceit and Malice doth increase among worldly Men and false Christians; but not among true Christians. But because Men cannot trust one another, and therefore require Oaths one of another, it will not therefore follow, That true Christians ought to do so, whom Christ has brought to Faithfulness and Honesty, as well towards God as one towards another, and therefore has delivered them from Contests, Perfidies, and consequently from Oaths.

Object.Eleventhly, They object, We grant, That among true Christians there is not Need of Oaths; but by what Means shall we infallibly know them? It will follow then that Oaths are at present needful, and that it is lawful for Christians to swear; to wit, that such may be satisfied who will not acknowledge this and the other Man to be a Christian.

Answ.Truth was before Oaths. I answer, It is no Ways lawful for a Christian to swear, whom Christ has called to his essential Truth, which was before all Oaths, forbidding him to swear; and on the contrary, commanding him to speak the Truth in all Things, to the Honour of Christ who called him; that it may appear that the Words of his Disciples may be as truly believed as the Oaths of all the worldly Men. Neither is it lawful for them to be unfaithful in this, that they may please others, or that they may avoid their Hurt: For thus the Primitive Christians for some Ages remained faithful, who being required to swear, did unanimously answer, I am a Christian, I do not swear. What shall I say of the Heathens, some of whom arrived to that Degree? For Diodorus Siculus relates, Lib. 16. Heathen Testimonies against Oaths.“That the giving of the Right-hand was, among the Persians, a Sign of speaking the Truth.” And the Scythians, as Qu. Curtius relates, said, in their Conferences with Alexander the Great, “Think not that the Scythians confirm their Friendship by Swearing; they swear by keeping their Promises.” Stobæus, Serm. 3. relates, That Solon said, “A good Man ought to be in that Estimation that he need not an Oath; because it is to be reputed a Lessening of his Honour if he be forced to swear.” Pythagoras, in his Oration, among other Things hath this Maxim, as that which concerns the Administration of the Commonwealth: “Let no Man call God to witness by an Oath, no not in Judgment; but let every Man so accustom himself to speak, that he may become worthy to be trusted even without an Oath.” Basil the Great commends Clinias an Heathen, “That he had rather pay three Talents, which are about three thousand Pounds, than swear.” Socrates, as Stobæus relates, Serm. 14. had this Sentence, “The Duty of good Men requires that they shew to the World that their Manners and Actions are more firm than Oaths.” The same was the Judgment of Isocrates. Plato also stood against Oaths in his Judgment de Leg. 12. Quintilianus takes Notice, “That it was of old a Kind of Infamy, if any was desired to swear; but to require an Oath of a Nobleman, was like an examining him by the Hangman.” The Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus saith, in his Description of a good Man, “Such is his Integrity, that he needs not an Oath.” So also some Jews did witness, as Grotius relates out of Maimonides, “It is best for a Man to abstain from all Oaths.” The Essenes, as Philo Judæus relates, “Did esteem their Words more firm than Oaths; and Oaths were esteemed among them as needless Things.” And Philo himself, speaking of the Third Commandment, explains his Mind thus, viz. “It were better altogether not to swear, but to be accustomed always to speak the Truth, that naked Words might have the Strength of an Oath.” And elsewhere he saith, “It is more agreeable to natural Reason altogether to abstain from Swearing; persuading, That whatsoever a good Man saith may be equivalent with an Oath.”

Oaths abrogated by Christ.Who then needs further to doubt, but that since Christ would have his Disciples attain the highest Pitch of Perfection, he abrogated Oaths, as a Rudiment of Infirmity, and in Place thereof established the Use of Truth? Who can now any more think that the holy Martyrs and ancient Fathers of the first three hundred Years, and many others since that Time, have so opposed themselves to Oaths, that they might only rebuke vain and rash Oaths by the Creatures, or Heathen Idols, which were also prohibited under the Mosaical Law; and not also Swearing by the true God, in Truth and Righteousness, which was there commanded? The Testimonies of the Fathers against Oaths and Swearing.As Polycarpus, Justin Martyr, Apolog. 2. and many Martyrs, as Eusebius relates. Tertullian, in his Apol. Cap. 32. ad Scap. Cap. 1. of Idolatry, Cap. 11. Clem. Alexandrinus, Strom. Lib. 7. Origen, in Mat. Tract. 25. Cyprianus, Lib. 3. Athanasius, in pass. & cruc. Domini Christi. Hilarius in Mat. v. 34. Basilius Magn. in Psalm xiv. Greg. Nyssenus in Cant. Orat. 13. Greg. Nazianzenus in Dialog. contra juramenta. Epiphanius adversus Heres. Lib. 1. Ambros. de Virg. Lib. 3. Idem in Mat. v. Chrysostom in Genes. Homil. 15. Idem Homil. in Act. Apost. Cap. 3. Jerome Epistol. Lib. Part. 3. Ep. 2. Idem in Zech. Lib. 2. Cap. 8. Idem in Mat. Lib. 1. Cap. 5. Augustinus de Serm. Dom. Serm. 28. Cyrillus in Jer. iv. Theodoretus in Deut. vi. Isidorus Pelusiota Ep. Lib. 1. Epist. 155. Chromatius in Mat. v. Johannes Damascenus, Lib. 3. Cap. 16. Cassiodorus in Psalm xciv. Isidorus Hispalensis, Cap. 31. Antiochus in Pandect. Script. Hom. 62. Beda in Jac. v. Haimo in Apoc. Ambrosius Ansbertus in Apoc. Theophylactus in Mat. v. Paschasius Radbertus in Mat. v. Otho Brunsselsius in Mat. v. Druthmarus in Mat. v. Euthymius Eugubinus Bibliotheca vet. Patr. in Mat. v. Oecumenius in Jac. Cap. 5. Ver. 12. Anselmus in Mat. v. the Waldenses, Wickliff, Erasmus, in Mat. v. and in Jac. v. Who can read these Places and doubt of their Sense in this Matter? And who, believing that they were against all Oaths, can bring so great an Indignity to the Name of Christ, as to seek to subject again his Followers to so great an Indignity? Is it not rather Time that all good Men should labour to remove this Abuse and Infamy from Christians?

Object.Lastly, They object, This will bring in Fraud and Confusion; for Impostors will counterfeit Probity, and under the Benefit of this Dispensation will lie without Fear of Punishment.

Answ.I answer, There are two Things which oblige a Man to speak the Truth: First, Either the Fear of God in his Heart, and Love of Truth; for where this is, there is no Need of Oaths to speak the Truth; The Punishment of Liars.or, Secondly, The Fear of Punishment from the Judge. Therefore let there be the same, or rather greater Punishment appointed to those who pretend so great Truth in Words, and so great Simplicity in Heart that they cannot lie, and so great Reverence towards the Law of Christ, that for Conscience Sake they deny to swear in any wise, if they fail; and so there shall be the same good Order, yea, greater Security against Deceivers, as if Oaths were continued; and also, by that more severe Punishment, to which these false Dissemblers shall be liable. Hence wicked Men shall be more terrified, and good Men delivered from all Oppression, both in their Liberty and Goods: For which Respect to tender Consciences, God hath often a Regard to Magistrates and their State, as a Thing most acceptable to him. But if any can further doubt of this Thing, to wit, if without Confusion it can be practised in the Commonwealth, let him consider the State of the United Netherlands, and he shall see the good Effect of it: The United Netherlands instanced.For there, because of the great Number of Merchants more than in any other Place, there is most frequent Occasion for this Thing; and though the Number of those that are of this Mind be considerable, to whom the States these hundred Years have condescended, and yet daily condescend, yet nevertheless there has nothing of Prejudice followed thereupon to the Commonwealth, Government, or good Order; but rather great Advantage to Trade, and so to the Commonwealth.