for himself, the chief definitions of an oath, adopted either by modern or ancient writers, I have put together in the Third Part, Section C, so many of those which have offered themselves to my notice, as I thought might be of general interest.

All the definitions which I have been able to examine, may conveniently be arranged under two heads: first, such as contain no expressed imprecation; and, secondly, such as embrace, in more or less explicit language, an imprecatory clause.

Before we adopt or reject any one of those definitions, or substitute any other of our own, I am desirous of soliciting the reader's attention to one or two observations on a question, which appears to me to be of prime importance; and yet, to have been often regarded in a mistaken point of view.

I cannot but consider it in itself an erroneous supposition, and a cause of practical mischief, to consider either that GOD will become a witness of our words in consequence of our calling Him to witness them, or that His judgment will fall upon us in consequence of our invoking it. This error, it is to be feared, derives much countenance and encouragement from our present practice, and the language which we usually employ. The only true state of the case is altogether opposed to this supposition: and we ought habitually to impress upon ourselves and others, that God is and must

be a witness of all we do and say, without our appealing to Him to become so, and that He will punish falsehood and wrong, without any invocation on His vengeance made by ourselves. He does not need us to draw His attention to our words, or to the secrets of our hearts: He does not need our permission to punish, should we dare to utter with our lips, what our conscience knows to be wrong.

The object of the Form of Adjuration should be to point out this; to show that we are not calling the attention of God to man, but the attention of man to God, that we are not calling upon HIM to punish the wrong-doer, but on man to remember, that He will.

On these principles, (which will probably approve themselves to most persons,) if it be deemed necessary to fix upon a precise Definition, I must exclude from mine whatever would imply more on the part of the juror than a pledge, that he is speaking under a solemn sense of the presence of the Deity, the witness of our words and actions, the moral Governor of the world, the Judge of mankind, and the just avenger of falsehood and wrong. It was on similar principles, that the early Christians used to say, "Whatever we affirm, we do so as in the presence of God; and that, to us Christians, is the most solemn oath."

It is not, indeed, always necessary in a moral dissertation, for the writer formally to adopt precise

definitions. It is often quite enough practically, if he takes care to employ the same word in the same sense throughout. I am, however, the rather inclined to propose one in this place, because some of those definitions which have been most current, especially in modern* times, appear to have done much to countenance and propagate the erroneous views to which I have just referred. The following definition, then, seems most nearly to coincide with the view which I have been led by inquiry and reflection to take of the essential nature of an oath. "AN OATH IS AN OUTWARD PLEDGE GIVEN BY THE JUROR THAT HIS ATTESTATION [OR PROMISE]

IS MADE UNDER AN IMMEDIATE SENSE OF HIS

RESPONSIBILITY TO GOD."

Without improperly anticipating what we must examine hereafter, I may, in this early stage of our inquiry, express my opinion, that whether the distinction of the Moravians be too finely drawn or not, were our English oath to be reconstructed, a form of adjuration might be devised, which would appear to the generality of persons unobjectionable-more reverential and pious, and, at the same time, equally secure. The persons sworn

* I have never found either the definition of an oath, or the form of an oath implying the imprecatory clause, acquiesced in by the early Christians. The ages when the most dreadful imprecations were used, and a multiplication of them was relied upon as a greater security for the truth, were the ages of religious darkness and corruption.

would simply declare their sense of the presence of God as the witness of the truth, and their responsibility to Him as the Judge of mankind, leaving the punishment of falsehood to His righteous judgment, without expressly imprecating, in any case, the Divine vengeance on themselves.

CHAPTER IV.

ARE OATHS LAWFUL TO A CHRISTIAN?

HAVING thus endeavoured briefly to trace oaths to their origin, and to take a correct view of their real nature; we must now enter upon the first of those three practical questions which have been already stated in the introductory chapter, and ascertain whether oaths are, in themselves, lawful to a Christian, or whether they are altogether forbidden by the Gospel*.

* First, however, in order to obviate any objection against the application of our arguments in this inquiry, to the case of our present form of oath in England, (an objection, which possibly may arise, in consequence of my definition excluding the imprecatory clause which that form of oath retains,) I would be allowed to observe, that I mean our English legal oath to be included in this inquiry. Indeed, I intend to include every form which might be required by the legislature of any country, in which Christians live, provided neither its words, nor the ceremonies attending its administration, involve a renouncement of our Christian faith, or are derogatory to the honour of God's holy name. It would be an unfair inference from my reasoning, to regard me as condemning all imprecatory forms of adjuration as unlawful, because I consider them less agreeable to the Spirit of the Gospel, and the practice of primitive times, than those forms of oaths which exclude any express imprecation. We might, in many instances, wish that things were otherwise, and yet not condemn them as they are. Some laws it might be highly desirable for a Christian legislature to alter, but which, as long as they remain unchanged, it would be sinful in a Christian to

C