A Brighter Day Begins with His Word.

Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691 • SECTION 62

Part 62

← A Christian Directory, Part 3: Christian Ecclesiastics

_Rule_ XLV. He that voweth absolutely or implicitly to obey another in all things, is bound to obey him in all lawful things, where neither God, nor other superior or other person is injured; unless the nature of the relation, or the ends or reasons of the oath, or something else, infer a limitation as implied.

_Rule_ XLVI. Still distinguish between the falsehood in the words as disagreeing to the thing sworn, and the falsehood of them as disagreeing from the swearer's mind. The former is sometimes excusable, but the latter never.

There are many other questions about oaths that belong more to the chapter of contracts and justice between man and man; and thither I refer them.

[47] Viris gravibus vehementer displicere animadverti, quod ab indis testimonium jure-jurando exigitur, cum constet eos facillime pejerare, utpote qui neque juramenti vim sentiant neque veritatis studio tangantur, sed testimonium eo modo dicant, quo credunt. Judici gratissimum fore, aut a primo suæ factionis homine edocti sunt. Hos igitur jurare compellere et ipsis exitiosum propter perjuria, &c. Acosta, p. 345.

[48] Vid. Sanderson de Juram. Prælect. vii. Sect. 14. Juramentum oblatum reluctante vel dubitante conscientia non est suscipiendum: 1. Quia quod non est ex fide peccatum est. 2. Quia jurandum est in judicio: quod certe is non facit qui contra conscientiæ suæ judicium facit, &c. ad finem.

[49] See the fourteenth Article of the church of England, against voluntary works, over and above God's commandments, as impious.

[50] Stoici indifferentia distinguunt: 1. Ea quæ neque ad fœlicitatem neque ad infœlicitatem conferunt, ut sunt divitiæ, sanitas, vires, gloria, &c. Nam et sine his contingit fœlicem esse; cum earum usus vel rectus fœlicitatis, vel pravus infœlicitatis, author sit. 2. Quæ neque appetitum neque occasionem movent, ut pares vel impares habere capillos, &c. Laert. in Zenone.

[51] Plutarch. Quest. Roman. 44. Why may not priests swear? Resp. Is it because an oath put to free-born men, is as it were the rack and torture offered them? For certain it is that the soul as well as the body of the priest, ought to continue free, and not to be forced by any torture. Or that we must not distrust them in small matters, who are to be believed in great and divine things? Or because the peril of perjury would reach in common to the whole commonwealth, if a wicked, and ungodly, and forsworn person should have the charge and superintendency of the prayers, vows, and sacrifices made in behalf of the city? Page 866.

[52] See before, chap. iii. gr. direct. 10.

[53] See part i. chap. ix. tit. 2, 3.

[54] See Casaubon's Exercit. 202.

[55] Cotta in Cic. de Nat. Deor. l. 1. to prove that some hold there is no God, saith, Quid de sacrilegis, de impiis, de perjuris dicemus, si carbo, &c. putasset esse Deos, tam perjurus aut impius non fuisset, p. 25, 26.

[56] One of Canutus's laws (26.) was, that perjured persons, with sorcerers, idolaters, strumpets, breakers of wedlock, be banished the realm: cited by Bilson of Subject. p. 202. How few would be left in some lands if this were done!

[57] Plut. in Lysand. Cicer. de Leg. lib. iii. Curt. lib. vii. Arist. Rhet. c. 17.

[58] Ælian. Vari. Hist. lib. xiv.

[59] Though as Moder. Polic. saith, Princ. 7, It is a huge advantage that man hath in a credulous world, that can easily say and swear to any thing: and yet so palliate his perjuries as to hide them from the cognizance of the most. Gabionitarum irritum fœdus, calliditate licet extortum, nonnullis intulisse exitium, &c. Gildas in Prolog.

[60] Haud amentum justitiæ est fides, i. e. dictorum conventorumque constantia et veritas. Cicero.

[61] Lege distinctionem Grotii inter ἐπιορκεῖν et ψευδορκεῖν, Annot. in Matt. v. 33. Modern Policy, (supposed Dr. Sandcroft's,) Princ. 7. 1. We are ready to interpret the words too kindly, especially if they be ambiguous; and it is hard to find terms so positive, but they may be eluded indeed, or seem to us to be so, if we be disposed. 2. Some are invited to illicit promises, _qua illicite_, because they know them to be invalid. 3. Some are frighted into these bonds by threats and losses, and temporal concernments, and then they please themselves that they swear by duress, and so are disengaged. 4. Some are oath-proof, &c.

[62] It is one of Solon's sayings in Laertius, p. 51, Probitarem jure-jurando certiorem habe. What will not an atheistical impious person say or swear, for advantage?

[63] Nunc nunc qui fœdera rumpit, Ditatur: Qui servat eget. Claudian.

[64] See Dr. Sanders. p. 47, and 197.

[65] Cicero de Leg. lib. 1. proveth that right is founded in the law of nature, more than in man's laws; else, saith he, men may make evil good, and good evil, and make adultery, perjury, &c. just by making a law for them.

Public domain in the USA; original historical text digitized by Project Gutenberg.

Project Gutenberg source record →