Does obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ permit the taking of Oaths?

Full Question

Answer

The words of Christ, “Swear not at all” (Matt. 5, 34) and of James, “But above all things, my brethren, swear not” (James 5, 12) appear to answer the question in the negative; yet to some there is, at least, room for dis­cussion, for several reasons, among which may be cited the following :—

1. The Jews were directed to swear by God’s Name. Deut. 6, 13.
2. Abraham, Jacob, David and other persons of note in the Old Testament made use of the Oath. (Gen. 21, 31: 31, 53: 2 Sam. 3, 3S: etc.).
3. God (Gen. 22, 16) and Angels (Dan. 12, 7; Rev. 10, 6) did so.
4. Paul uses expressions, which, while not couched in the common form of an oath, have the essence of one. (Rom. 1, 9; 2 Cor. 1, 23; Gal. 1, 20)..
5. Jesus responded to a most solemn adjuration. (Matt. 26, 53—comp. Gen. 24, 3).

In its highest sense, an oath is an appeal to God as the “discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart,” calling upon Him to witness and record. Within lirnits, if the intentions are true, the exact form will not greatly matter. Rut men have not scrupled to deceive, even when appearing to take an oath, saying one thing with their mouths and another in their hearts ; making distinctions where none existed, in order to be able to tell a lie, or have reservations, without offending their consciences. The Jews in New Testament times were very corrupt in this matter, taking oaths upon the slightest provocation, and not sincerely. This practice Christ sternly rebuked (Matt. 5, 34-7 ; 23, 16-22). His obvious reference to these frivolous oaths and consequent dissimulation, has led to the belief thnt the formal judicial oath is rot affected by the quotations from Matthew and James, especially in view of the reasons tabulated above. It is argued that if the principle of oath-taking is accepted, there can be no objection to its practice, if it is carried out with due recognition of its solemnity. In spite, however, of anything which has been said to the contrary, it is difficult to think that such words as “Swear not at all” and “above all things swear not,” can admit of exceptions. It will be noted that the first of these quotations follows Christ’s references to the correct use of an oath as specified in the Law ; “Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths.” He does not proceed, to emphasise the right use, but says “Swear not at all.” The oath, having been debased, even by the people who should have had the most lively understanding of its nature, was no longer a guarantee of truth. Some think that in view of the examples of Jesus and Paul referred to above, there may be liberty in this matter, but it will be well for them to defer taking an oath until they are honestly certain that they are confronted by situations equal in magnitude-to those by which Jesus and Paul were faced.

In this country everyone has the liberty of using the alternative to the “Oath” provided in the “Affirmation.” The option is so seldom taken, that even members of the legal profession sometimes find difficulty in readily obtaining the correct phraseology, and it often saves embarrassment to be provided with the official form of words as follows : Affidavits, after setting forth the usual particulars of name, address and description, proceed “do solemnly and sincerely affirm as follows,” and the verbal declaration and attestation is; “do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm that the contents of this my affirmation are true” (Daniel l’s Chancery Forms, 5th Ed., p. 13). The verbal affirmation given in Courts before giving evidence is “I solemnly, sincerely and truly declare that the evidence I shall give to this Court shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

One other point before leaving this aspect of the matter. Christ’s words “Let your communication be, Yea, yea ; Nay, nay ; for whatsoever is more than this cometh of evil” (Matt. 5, 37) is a warning against the common habit of embellishing conversation, and emphasising the truth of assertions by such statements as “If this were my last word” etc., often heard even among those professing Christ. Christ says that a Christian should say “Yes” or “No,” and MEAN it.

The “Oath of Allegiance” is not greatly affected by what has already been said, as will be seen if we imagine what the position would be in face of an “Affirmation of Allegiance.” The allegiance required to a State is far beyond what can be promised by those who are described by Paul as “Ye are not your own, Ye are bought with a price; Be ye not servants (slaves) of men” (1 Cor. 6, 19-20; 7, 23) and by Peter as “Not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ” (1 Peter 1, 18-19). If we can persuade ourselves that these are mere figures of speech, or if the Kingdom of God, to which Christ’s servants are related, is simply an increasing goodness in the hearts of men, we may feel free to promise allegiance to an earthly State. If, on the other hand, we are con­vinced that the purchase was real and that the Kingdom is real also, we cannot but realise that as bond-servants to Christ we are his and his alone; and, said he, “My Kingdom is not of this world.”

It is true we have a duty to the State whose privileges and protection we enjoy, but a Christian can, and should, perform this without a specific promise of allegiance.