dency, as will appear to any impartial reader, that will pleafe to weigh them with what goes before and follows. But if you call this perfecution, to be fure it must be fo to fight for religion: and if it was unlawful for O. Cromwell to fight for liberty of confcience, who was of a fighting principle, what think you of punishing people because of their confcience, that would not fight with you? You are very tender of a fudden, if it may but brush at us; while you do not confider the blow you give yourselves and your own friends, that have but too fignally appeared in that spirit and practice. The Lord inform, and forgive

them.

You justify calling us filly enthufiafts,' for believing it is not lawful to fwear;' and fay, you are of the fame mind, because we, without reafon, by the dictates of our own fancy, which we call God's fpirit, oppofe the faints practice of old; of which it was prophefied it should be used under the gospel, was fo by the apoftles and primitive Chriftians, nay, by God himself; therefore the Quakers are filly enthufiafts.' Thus you.

6

Now we think this will not prove us enthufiafts, nor filly; for we argue from a text, and not our own dreams and fancies. Had we only pretended the authority of a private revelation for this affertion, and that not true, then it had been enthusiasm, and we enthufiafts, in the worst sense: it is filly indeed, to call an opinion grounded upon an exprefs text of fcripture, either enthusiasm or filly, when there is not a plainer text for one God, than this of our Saviour's against fwearing, Matt. v. 34. "Swear not at all." But if we had overstrained it, where is the filliness of it? Is it enthusiasm, or filly, to fhut out all vain fwearing, by fhutting out all fwearing? The advantage of that exceeds the disadvantage of lying in evidence, when that lying is made as punishable as forfwearing. What filliness or enthusiasm is in this, pray you? Scotland and Holland think no fuch thing, that have indulged that tenderness,

Ff3

And

And if the text be but seriously confidered, the inference we make is beyond exception.

First, The tendency of that fermon upon the mount, is to fhew, that the righteousness of the gofpel excels that of the law; as in the cafe of adultery, divorce, revenge, &c. But the law forbad falfe and vain fwearing; therefore this must refer to that which was not forbidden under the law. This is acknowledged by many learned men, and in particular one of our own nation, bifhop Sanderfon, in his "Latin lectures, of "the obligation of an oath :" but we, for another reason, that fhall anon be mentioned, think he yet narrows the extent of that evangelical precept, for he refers to vows only, and not fwearing in any cafe; but we, to fwearing at all. And our reafons are, first, If it had been vows only, there had been no need of subftituting any way of speaking in the room of it. And, fecondly, If the text cannot therefore refer to vows in particular, fwearing at all must be intended; or nothing is forbidden, that was not forbidden under the law. Thirdly, Chrift's prohibiting fwearing, and fubftituting fomething in the room of it, and that fomething purely referring to the way and manner of Christians declaring the truth, it is, to us, evident, that he comprehended all cafes wherein the truth of a thing is in doubt, and confequently the end of fwearing: fo, fays Chrift, "Let your ó, your speech, or your word, be yea, yea; or nay, nay." It is rendered communication in our tranflations, that it might refer only to common difcourfe, that word being fometimes fo understood; and yet communication comprehends all acts of juftice, as well as other parts of life for if it comprehends difcourfe in dealing, it alfo comprehends the evidence of that dealing, and the laws of just dealing; and confequently the word communication cannot leffen the real force of our fense of the text; but the words of the text do plainly exprefs a degree, if not a form, of declaring truth, be it yea or nay. And fince truth-speaking takes in and relates to controverfies among men, as well as other

parts

parts of human converfe, this text is a measure of truthpeaking on all thofe occafions alfo. Fourthly, now how far Chriftian men may go in declaring the truth, or where they are to be bounded, the text is plain, viz. a double, but bare, averment, or denial: "Let your "word or fpeech be yea, yea; nay, nay: that is, Let your answers, whenever you are asked the truth of a matter, go no farther than a fimple affirmation, or negation, which you may double, if you please.' Fifthly, The reason Christ gives for bounding his followers within yea, yea, and nay, nay, excludes all oaths, yea, all that is more than yea, yea, and nay, nay; to wit, that "they come of evil," because they proceed from diftruft, infidelity and impatience: a fimple affertion declares truth; more, is a training of the mind, and but to ftoop to unreasonable incredulity, which hath an evil rife. Now what is more than yea, yea; and nay, nay; Why imprecations are more, an outward fign denoting an oath is more than yea, yea, and nay, nay; and confequently cometh of evil, because below a Chriftian's truth and fincerity to gratify. Sixthly; and truly the text is fo far from excluding judicial cafes, that it ferves chiefly to relate to evidence upon differences. 1. Because it is in the room of the fwearing the law allowed, which was true swearing: and, 2. Because of doubling the affertion yea, yea ; for a fingle yea is enough for a Chriftian in ordinary cafes. Well, but you oppose to this, the prophecy, Isaiah, xix. verf. 18. to which, if you please, we will add two more, chap. xlv. 23. and Jer. iv, 2. and make your best of them: for befides that it begs the queftion, that the prophet treated of gofpel-times, and not of fome happy time before the period of their difpenfation, God might speak to them in the language of their time to be interpreted in a more fpiritual fenfe; and this the place quoted by you fhews: for, vers, 21. mention is made of oblation and facrifice, that shall be offered in that day, which, in a Jewish fenfe, is not true of gofpel-times; but in a gofpel-fenfe, to wit, prayers and praifings, with heart and voice, is true. So

F f 4

it

it is in the cafe of fwearing, they fhall fwear in that day, as they facrifice in that day; that is, a Christian's • oath fhall be his folemn word; and the difference is · not greater between them, than between the facri'fices and oblations of beafts and birds under the law, ⚫ and the spiritual facrifices and oblations of the hearts, wills and affections of people under the gofpel:' and thus, you fee, that prophecy ftands you in little ftead.

9.

But you object the practice of the apostle, Rom. i. "God is my witnefs." 2 Cor. xi. 31. "God "knoweth I lie not." Gal. i. 20. "Before God I "lie not." And you add, If these are not formal

oaths, you would fain know what are?' In which, if you will not be offended, we will fay, as well as think, you have not been ingenuous to be fo hard upon us, before you had firft stated and agreed with us what an oath is; for if that be difputable, (as it may be for what you have done to fettle it) you argue at random. Premifes must ever be agreed by difpu. tants, or nothing can follow clearly and fatisfactorily. We may fay the fame thing you fay, without allowing it the fame force and extent; nay fwear, perhaps, in your opinion, though not in our own; the fame words. being an oath, and not an oath, as they may be used and applied in different manners. For if you fhould think that an oath, which we think none, and you argue for fwearing by proofs, which for that reafon are none to us; how do you prove fwearing lawful, or convince us that not swearing at all is filly and enthufiaftical, when you have not yet adjusted what is swearing at all? This had been well worth your Mercury, for it had been informing, and fhown good reading.

But you put it off thus, after citing the apostle's words, "God is my witness," &c. If these are not formal oaths, we would fain know what are.' In which you shift your poft, and turn querifts, instead of answering questions.

But having fuch fuppofed able men to deal with, we are not willing to put it off fo; and therefore re,

turn

turn it upon you, to ftate what an oath is, which you fo zealously recommend; denying, on our part, any of those texts to be an oath; as did Bafil the Great, upon Pfalm xv. And Gregory Nazianzen, in his Dialogue against Swearing and bishop Sanderson, in his Defence of Jofeph, in his Oxford Lectures ;* which will much better defend the apoftle from your imputation.

<

For what you fay of Tertullian, you wrong him extremely, and your reader alfo, by not telling him where to find it: for in his Apology, chap. xxxii. whence, we fuppofe, your objection is taken, he does equivocally and improperly own fwearing, That they fwore, though not by the genius of Cæfar, yet, for the health and safety of Cæfar, juft as they did facri"fice.' Hoc falvum effe volumus, & pro magno id juramento babemus. • Our wishing well to Cæfar, we have, or account, for an oath, or instead of an oath. And, as the Pythagoreans fay, There is in all reasonable 'creatures an oath or tie, viz. A mind not to tranfgrefs the law of God:' and, as Clemens Alexandrinus fpeaks, That a good man fwears by his deeds." So Tertullian urged upon them, That the Christians facrificed for the health of Cæfar as well as they; < but it was in the Chriftian way, by pure prayers? So that as he was for facrifice, he was for fwearing. Thus to Scapula. C. 1, 2.

And in his book of Idolatry, chap. xi. I fpeak not of perjury,' fays he, because it is not lawful to fwear.' And, chap. xxxi. He that figns a bill of fecurity, containing an oath, is guilty of fwearing, and tranfgreffes Chrift's command, who hath commanded not to fwear.' And speaking of the temptations Christians were expofed to, if they fhould launch into the traffick of the world, he adds, Not to speak • of forfwearing, feeing it is not lawful fo much as to < swear.'

We are the longer upon this, because he is one of your authorities.. Your other is Athanafius, That he purged himself by an oath, pleading the apostle's

• example."