their right. An action therefore fo evidently calculated to produce fuch general good, can never be confidered in an evil light, but may fairly be pronounced, a commendable and valuable difcharge of focial duty.

In this place, therefore, it may be proper to remark, that when our Savior Chrift fo earnestly forbade all fwearing, it must not be interpreted as if he pofitively excepted against all kinds of oaths. His command extended only to all vain fwearing, and perjury of every denomination, either in the name of God, or of his creatures; as doubtless was the too common custom in the course of trade, and daily converfation, even in his time. And the wife reafon of our Bleffed Lord's caution in this respect, was clearly this; that every Chriftian's word, fhould be as facred in matters of this nature, as though he bound himself in every affertion by an oath. For every Chriftian's atteftation, faith a holy Father of the Church, (St. Jerome) should be fo true, as equally to be regarded with an oath itfelf. Another primitive Father, (St. Chryfoftom) declares the fame opinion. It is not good to fwear, fays he, for why should they make ufe of oaths to whom it is not lawful to speak a faljebood to each other; and to the idle objection, that it may be neceffary fometimes to fwear, when they who buy or fell will not believe: the fame pious writer makes this reply, that whofoever dependeth on this excufe, declares himself to be unjuft, or treacherous; for if he were a man of fterling credit, and his deeds, the certain confequence of his words, there could be no neceflity for any oath, becaufe whoever employeth truth and uprightness of dealing with his neighbor, can have no need of fuch fufpicious fupport as fwearing, to commend his character. For men will not miftruft the word of thofe whofe honor is approved, and when a perfon finds his word fo little regarded as to require the addition of an oath to

lend

lend it weight, he may well conclude his credit is fufpected; for none are generally lefs believed, than they who are addicted to frequent fwearing: a curse hath been denounced against it by God himfelf, as may be thewn from many paffages of Holy Writ, in which his heavy difpleafure is recorded againft this crime.

But another weak objection hath been advanced by those whofe habit of common swearing would willingly take fhelter in fome excufe. They inquire whether they may not continue the practice without offence, provided their oaths are qualified by truth? To whom it may be answered, that even though the things they would enforce by fwearing should not be falfe, yet, as by the frequent use̱ of oaths, they will naturally fwear on many trifling occafions without thought, and when there can be no neceffity for it; confequently by so doing they most certainly take God's name in vain, and are highly blameable in this respect, as also in lowering the facred nature of an oath, by rendering that a common thing, which was defigned to be employed alone, for the most folemn purposes. And if we are obliged to conclude these guilty upon the principles of religious precept; how highly impious must they be judged, who abufe God's facred Name continually, not only in the business of their common traffic, and the more infignificant concerns, but daily, in all places and on all occafions; whether at their meals, in recreation, or common difcourfe, as if none of these things could be performed but the dread name of the Moft High must wantonly be applied, irreverently used, and taken in vain; by which the parties do impiously blaspheme and frequently forfwear themfelves, to the great contempt of God's commandment, and the calling down his just and heavy displeasure.

3

THE

THE SECOND PART.

THE great fin and danger of common fwearing, and all kind of perjury, having been generally declared to you; and alfo having explained what oaths are not unlawful, nor contrary to God's command, and the neceffary properties or conditions required to prevent their being finful, as likewife what benefits are derived from legal oaths, and the great evil attending fuch as are unjustly taken; it is now neceffary to inform you further, in what other refpects the name of God may be taken in vain, befides the inftances already mentioned.

There are two different ways in which men may be equally guilty of this offence. First, when they fail in fulfilling the good and lawful promifes they have made and fworn to; and secondly, they no less abuse the fanction of God's holy name, when they call upon him to confirm their vows of things to be performed, which are evil in themfelves, and when they fulfil the fame.

Of the former crime we have two remarkable inftances in Holy Scripture, as likewife of the punishment inflicted on the offenders, for flighting their juft engagements, confirmed by oath. The first relates to the folemn league and faithful promife of perpetual friendship which Joshua and the people of Ifrael made with the Gibeonites, as recorded in the ixth chapter of Jofhua; notwithftanding which many of them were murdered afterwards in the days of Saul, contrary to the folemn treaty, and the faith of nations given for their protection. At this we read the Lord of Heaven was fo difpleafed, that he caufed a fore

and

and general famine upon the country, which lafted for the space of three whole years, nor would God withhold the fcourge, till the offence was in fome degree atoned by the death of the feven fons or near relations of the Prince, who had thus tranfgreffed. The fecond example is, that of King Zedekiah, who had promifed friendship to the King of Chaldea, upon his making him King over Judah and Jerufalem; but when afterwards he violated the oath which Nebuchadnezzar had made him fwear, and rebelled against him, God fuffered this heathen prince to invade the land of Judea, who befieging the city of Jerufalem, compelled King Zedekiah to flee, and overtaking him in his flight, he first flew his fons before his face, then put out both his eyes, and binding him with chains of brafs, he carried him a miferable captive to Babylon. And thus was the judgment executed upon him which the prophet Ezekiel fo exactly mentions in the xvii. 18. Seeing he defpifed his OATH, by breaking the covenant (when lo he had given his hand) therefore thus faith the Lord God, as I live, furely I will recompence it upon his own head.

By these relations, you cannot fail to fee how feriously God fhews his abhorrence of thofe who violate an honeft promise made by oath, and fançtified by the witnefs of his moft Holy Name. As to the nature of the other crime, the fcripture affords as many proofs of God's difpleasure against thofe, who regardless of the evil tendency of their hafty promifes, do yet confirm the fame by oath, and add to both thefe faults by executing their finful refolutions. At prefent I fhall only mention the three well known circumftances attending Jeptha, Herod, and the wicked conduct of the Jews towards the Apoftle of the Gentiles. Concerning Jeptha, we read in the xith chap. of the Book of Judges, that when God had given him the victory over the children of Ammon, he made an injudiciVOL. I.

I

ous

ous vow, through a falfe principle of devotion, that he would offer as a facrifice to God, that person of his family, who fhould meet him firft upon his return home. In confequence of this most inconfiderate promife, his only daughter fell a victim to this improper oath, the being naturally the first, with mirth and joy, to welcome his arrival; and thus the engagement he fo rafhly made, against God's everlafting purity of will, and the law of nature, involved him in a double offence against his Maker. The iniquity of Herod's conduct, is equally familiar to you; for having promised to the damfel who danced to please him, (and bound himfelf by an oath) that he would give her whatsoever the asked, even to a moiety of his kingdom; fhe being inftructed by her wicked mother, demanded the head of John the Baptift, as related in St. Matthew's Gofpel, xiv. Herod, we find, had not refolution to refift this barbarous request, but through unfeeling pride, on account of his oath, and for the fake of those before whom he made it, he cruelly confented to the effect of his hafty promife, and performed it, in the murder of that moft holy Prophet. And laftly, the malicious Jews, as we fee at large in Acts, xxiii. were violently guilty of this fame offence, when they made an oath, and bound themselves by curfes, that they would neither eat nor drink till they had flain Paul. This was the effect of a furious, cruel, and mifguided zeal, which hurried them to abuse the nature of an oath, and for which, no doubt, the judgment of Heaven in time overtook them. From hence we may fufficiently collect, how very cautious men fhould be before they enter into any engagement, and ratify it by an cath; that the thing they for promife, be not only good and honeft in itself, and no ways contrary to God's commandments, but alfa that they have power faithfully to perform it: for promifes of this defcription must be most facredly

kept.