_Answ._ 1. In the full and properest sense of the word, it is before God no oath if there be no intent of confirming your speech by an appeal to God, or to that which you swear by. As a ludicrous washing and using the words of baptism, is no true baptism, no more than a corpse is a man. (And thus it is true which the papists say, that the intention of the baptizer is necessary to the being of baptism; that is, it is necessary to the being of sacramental administration to the baptizer himself, before God, that he really intend to baptize; and it is necessary to the being of baptism before God in the person baptized, that he himself if at age, or those that have power to dedicate him to God if he be an infant, do really intend it; and it is necessary to the being of the external ordinance _in foro ecclesiæ_, before the church, that both the baptizer and baptized do profess or seem to intend it.) 2. But if you use such words as are the ordinary form of an oath in a language which you understand, so as the hearers may justly suppose you to understand it, it is an oath, _coram hominibus_, before men, and in the latter narrower sense of the word. And it shall be obligatory and pleadable against you in any court of justice by those you swear to; yea, and God himself doth take you thereby to be obliged thus to men: and if it be a profane, causeless swearing, men must call it an oath; for they see not the heart; even as they must take him to be baptized that professeth to intend it; and _in foro humano_, it is so indeed: and God himself will account you a sinner, even one that useth the external form of an oath, and that which before men is an oath, to the wrong of his name and honour, and to the scandal of others. And it will not excuse you that you knew not that it was an oath, or that you knew not the nature of an oath, or that you rashly used it, not considering that it was an oath; for you were bound to have known and to have considered; you should have done it, and might have done it if you would. But if they were words which you could not know to have been the form or expressions of an oath, but the hearers might perceive that you meant no such thing, but something else, then you are excusable, if you had just cause to use them.
[Sidenote: How far swearing by creatures is a sin.]
II. As to the case of swearing by creatures, how far it is sinful; it is just like the case of worshipping images, or by images. He that worshippeth an image or any creature as God, and ultimately terminateth his worship in it, doth commit direct and full idolatry;[491] which is so much the greater sin, by how much the baser the thing is which he idolizeth. But if he make the image or creature but his medium of that worship which should be immediately offered to God, in whom it is ultimately terminated, then it is not gross idolatry, but it is false and forbidden worship of the true God. But if the creature be made but the medium of that worship which God would have offered him by a medium, then it is lawful so to use or worship it (as to honour and admire God as appearing in his works; to give that worship or honour to our parents and rulers as his officers, which is ultimately terminated in God). Just so is it in the case of swearing; for swearing is a part of the worship of God. He that sweareth by any creature as a god, or as the avenger of those that by falsehood elude the judgment of man, doth commit idolatry in it;[492] as Julian did when he swore by the sun (which he praised by his orations and worshipped as God). But he that only sweareth so by a creature, as to intend God ultimately as the witness and avenger, but yet so as that the creature only is named, or so named as hath an appearance of idolatry, or tendeth to entice the mind from God, or scandalously to obscure his honour, or in any other forbidden way, doth swear by the true God intentionally, but in a sinful manner. But he that directly sweareth by God, (upon a just call,) and by the creature (or nameth the creature rather) but in a just, and clear, and inoffensive subordination to God, is excusable. So we use to lay our hands on the Bible and thus to swear, So help me God, and the contents of this book. Thus on great occasions many good men in their writings to clear themselves from some calumny have said, I call God, and angels, and men to witness. Many in naming creatures intend rather a curse than a swearing by the creature: as, If it be not so, let God destroy me by this fire, or this water, &c.
_Quest._ Is it lawful to lay hands on the book and kiss it in swearing as is done in England?
_Resp._ To take an oath as imposed in England with laying the hand on the Bible and kissing it, is not unlawful.
_Proved_ 1. That which is not forbidden by God is lawful (before God). But so to take an oath is not forbidden by God----Therefore, &c. The minor will be sufficiently proved by disproving all the pretences of a prohibition. The major needeth no proof.