\_Fot the Tablet) No. Ja lji. column , ojthe Ifl j From the Columbian Magazine. M Enquiry into the confijtency of Oaths with Rea son and Chrijlianity. IN discussing this question, I shall firft mention the objections to oaths, which are founded in rea son ; and, secondly, the objections to them which are derived froi*i the precepts and fpiiit of the Christian religion. 1. Oaths produce an idea in the minds of men, that there are two kinds or degrees of truth ; the one intended for common, and the other for so lemn occasions. Now, this idea is directly cal culated to beget a want of reverence for the sup posed inferiir kind of truth; hence men are led to trifle with it in the common affairs of human life. I grant that some men will tell the truth, when urged to it by the folcmn formalities of an oath, who would not otherwise do it: But this proves the great mifchief of oaths in focicty ; for as these men are called upon to speak the" truth 999 times in common life, to once they are called Upon to fwe.-.r to it, we have exactly 999 fulfelioods to one truth told by them. How extensive, then, must be the mifchief of this great disproportion between truth and falfehood; in all the affairs of human life ! It is wrong to do anything that shall create an idea of .wo kinds of truth. There is a scale of fallehoods; but truth has no degrees or sub-divisions. Like its divine author, if is an eter nal unchangeable UNIT. 2. The practice of swearing according to hu man laws, appears to be the cause of all the pro fane swearing, which is so universal among all janks of people ; for if there are two modes of speaking the truth, it is natural lor men to prefer that mode which the laws of our iountry have en titled to the firft degree of credibility: hence men swear, when they wiih to be believed, in common conversation. 3. Oaths have been multiplied upon so many trifling occasions that they have ceased, in a great degree, to operate with any force upon the most solemn occasions : hence the universal prevalence of perjury in courts, armies and custom-houses, all oyer the world. This fa<t is so notorious in that a law has lately been pafled in that island, which requires a bond of £. 200, instead ot an oath, from every Captain that enters his vtjflel in the custom house, as a security for his veracity in the manifeft of his cargo, and for the amount of his duties to the Government. Reason and scripture (when perfectly under stood) are never contrary to each other; and re velation from God can never give a sanction to that which is so evidently absurd, and unfriendly to the interests of human society. Let us proceed then to examine the bible, and here we shall find, that oaths are as contrary to the precepts and spi rit of Chrillianity as they are to found reason. _ Before I mention either the precepts or the spi rit of the gospel, which militate against oaths, I fnall firft mention a few of the cases of swearing Which I find upon record in the new testament. I shall firft mention the precedents in favour of this practice, and then the precepts and prece dents against it. The firft precedent I shall produec, is taken from the example of the devil, who addueftes our Saviour in an oath,- in Mark v. 7. " What have I to da with thee, Jesus, tliou son of the most high God ? I adjure thee by CWthat thou torment me not." Afecond precedent is taken from the example of the high prielt, who addrefles our Saviour 'in an oath, iu Matthew xxvi. 63. "I adjure the; "fays he, just before he contents to his death, "by the thing God, that thou tell us whether thou be tlid Christ the son of God." It has been said that there was noun propriety in this mode of expres sion, otherwiie our Saviour would have rebuked it:, but let it be remembered, that he stood be fore the tribunal of a high priest, as a prisoner, and not as a teacher; and hence we find he submits in, file nee to all the profane infultsthat were offer ed him. He moreover accomplished by thisfilence a pro phesy refpe«ting himfelf, that when he should be led to judgmehr, he should be " dumb, and open nor his mouth." 1 cter furnifhes a third example in favour of swearing. " And again he denied".- (fays Matthew obap. xxvi. 72.) " with an oath, I know not the man." It would seem from this account, that a bare affirmation was so cliaracteriftic of a disciple of Jesus Christ, that Peter could not use a more dirett method to convince the maid, who charged him with being a follower of Jesus of Nazareth that he was not a Christian, than by having re courl'e to the Jewilh and pagan practice of taking an oath. 6 Herod, furnifhes a fourth instance of ftvearing in Matthew xiv. 7. when he promised to give the daughter of Herodias whatever she should ask of him : sue afced for John the baptist's head in a charger : the King repented of his hasty promise ; " nevertheless, for the oaths fake, and them which fat with liini at meat, he commanded it to be given her." Here it is evident he would have violated a common prpmiSe. Butif common pro mises are not held Sacred, and binding, there is an end of a great portion, of truth in society, and of all the order and happiness which arise from it. To Secure constant and universal truth, men (hould Swear always or not at all. h. fifth precedent for swearing we find in the xix of Atfts and 13th verse. " Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil Spirits, the name of the Lord Jesus, faying, we adjure thee, by JeSus whom Paul preaclieth. And the man in whom the evil spirit was, leaped on them, and overcame them; so that they fled out of the house naked and woun ded." 1 _ The la ft precedent for swearing that I (hall men tion, is the one related in Adts xxiii ' 21ft. It con tains an account of forty men who had bound themselves, by an oath, not to eat or drink, until they had killed St. Paul. It would seem that this banditti knew each other perfectly, and that they would not a<fl together under the form of a com mon obligation. The occasion indeed, seems to require an oath. It was an aflociation to commit murder, lam disposed to SuSpedt that oaths were introduced originally to compel men to do things that wire contrary to justice, or to their confid ences. In mentioning the precepts and precedents that are to be found 111 the new telbament again ft swear ing, the following striking paflage, taken from Matthew v. verses 34, 35,' 36, 37, Jhould alone determine the quellion. Kl Swear not at all, nei ther by Heaven, for it is God's throne ; nor by the earth, for it isliisfootftool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Neither fhalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your com munication be yea, yea; nay, nay ; for whatsoe ver is more than these, cometh of evil." I know that these words are said to be levelled only against profane swearing in common conver sation ; but this will appear improbable, when we refleA upon the frequency 2nd number of oaths which were admitted by the Jewish institutions, and that the principal part of the discourse of our Saviour, from whence that paflage is taken, is in tended to shew the corruptions or imperfections of those uilhtutions, and the Superiority of the cof pel dispensation over them. There is a peculiar meaning in the reason which is given for the prohibition of swearing in this precept, viz. that any thing more than a bare af firmation, cometh of evil. Yes, it came originally from the universal prevalence of falfehood in So ciety ; but the Christian religion, by opening new sources of moral and religious obligation and by discovering more fully the beauty and re wards of truth, and deformity and future punish ment of sals ehood, has rendered the obligation of oaths wholly unneceflary. They comported with the feeble dilcoveries of the Jewish, ,and nume rous corruptions of the Pagan religions ; but they are unneceflary under that full and clear manifelt ation ot the divine will which is contained in the gospel. Cefar's wife should not be fufpetfted— \Vith how much more propriety should this be said of the veracity of a Chriflian, than of the chasti ty 'be wife of a heathen Emperor. Every tune a Christian Swears, he exposes the purity and truth of his religion to suspicion. " As for you Petrach your word is Sufficient," said the Car dinal Colonna, in an enquiry into the cause of a riot that happened in his family, while that cele brated poet was a member of it ; and in which he exacted an oath from every other member of his family, not excepting his own brother, the Bi lhop oi Luna, ihe fame address should be made to every Christian, when he is called upon to de clare the truth, " You believe in a future state of rewards and punishment—you profefs to be the follower of that Being who has inculcated a re gard for truth, under the awful consideration of ,1 s omniscience, and who has emphatically styled TRUTH -' : Tour word > there f° re > » A Nobleman is permitted, by the laws of Eng land, to declare the truth upon his honor. The projeffion of Chnftianity is declaredin scripture to be an h.gh calling, and Christians are Said to be prjejis and Kings Stange! that perSons of Such high rank, should be treated with leSs reSpett than EnglilhNoblemen; and still , 110 re strange! that pei Sons pollefiiug theSe august titles should betray iheir llluftrious birth and dignity, by conforming to a practice which tawds so much to invalidate the truth and excellency of their relio-i on It is very remarkable, that in all the accounts we have of the of our Saviour with his diSciples, and of their subsequent intercourse with each other, there 13 no mention made of a Angle oath being taken by either of them Perhaps there never was an event in which the highest degrees of evidence were more neceflary than they were to eftabliih the truth of the reSur' re<fhon of our Saviour, as on the truth of this mi ncle depended the credibility of the ChriftTan religion. But an the establishment of the truth of this great event, no oath is taken, or required The witnefles of it Simply relate what they Saw' and are believed by all the dhiiples, Lt/to™', wl}o Hill remembered too well the prohibition nf his mailer, fwcar mt at all, to ast for an oath t remove his unbelief. 0 It is worthy of notice likewise, that no prenof terous oath ot office is required of the difcil,! " when they aflume the apoftolie character and are sent forth to preach the gospel to all nations How unlike the spirit of the gospel arc thole hu' man laws, which require oaths of fidelity every year : and which appear to be founded in t'-e ah surd idea that men a.e at all times the puurdians of their own virtue. There can be no doubr of Chriliians having U l i formly refufed to take an oath in the firlt ao e s 0 f the church : nor did they conform to this paean culloin, till after Chrillianity was corrupted bv a mixture with many other parts of the paean and Jewilh religions. There are two arguments in favour of oaths which are derived from tiie new testament and which remain to be refuted—ill. St. Paul uies ft. veral expreiiions in his epiltles which amount to oaths, and even declares " an oath to be the end of ltrife." It was the character of St. Paid that he became all things to all men. He circiun'cifed as well as baptised Jews, and proves the truth of revelation by a quotation from a heathen poet Oaths were a part of the Jewilh and Pagan insti tutions—and, like several other ceremonies, for some time, continued to retain a ilrong hold of the of the new converts to Christiani ty. St. James, whowaslefs accommodating to these prejudices, bears a teftimonr against oaths', nearly in the fame words, which were before used by his mailer. 2u. It has been said, that the great Jehovah frequently 1 wears, both in the old and new testa ment, and that the angel who is to found the lall trumpet will ""fwear that time /hall be no more." Every expression of thi-. kind ihould be conlidered as an accommodation to Jewilh and Pa gan customs, in order to render the truths of reve lation more intelligible and acceptable. The Su-. preme Being, lor the fame reasons, often afibmes to liimfell .he violent pallions, and even the fea tures and lenles ol men : And yet who can suppose it proper toafcribe either of them to a Bein<r, one of whose perfections confilfa in his exiiting as a pure unchangeable spirit. It oatlis are contrary to reason, and have a per nicious influence upon morals and the order of so ciety ; and above all, if they are contrary to the precepts and spirit of the gospel; it becomes le giiiators and niinillers of the gospel, to consider how far they are responsible for all the falfehood, prolane lwearing and perjury that exill in society. It is in the power of, legislators to aboliih oaths, ex P them from our laws ? and it is in the po\v er ol niinillers ot the gofpel,by their influence and example, to render truth fofimple andobliga tory, that human government lhall be aihamed to a k any other mode of declaring it from chris tians, than by a bare affirmation. The Iriends of virtue and freedom have beheld, with great pleasure a new Conllitution eltabliihed mthe tinted States,whofe objects are ptace,union, J''/ will be in the power of the firft ongre.o that lhall a eft under this Conflitution, to et l le world an example of enlightened policy,by laming laws that /hall command obedience,with out t.ie abhird and improper obligation of oaths. ,-T 1 means they will add the relloration and e , ' hmentof truth, to the great and valuable o jets ol the Conllitution that have been men tioned. PRICE-CURkRNT. PHILADELPHIA. Flour fuperfine, . 37 /s. p T , iarrtl. common, , . „ 2 / rt r j„ . . %f a do . Indian Meal, . . ■> do pftr'h " " * 10 /6. • do. T ' " - *" 1 5f. a iy/6. do. I ?TT' - • - i2 j6. do. - 3 /. , r do. Bcefl " fh ' - - 2/-/ofa 3 L do. — Connt'y, . . f J fdo Mackrcl, . . . ft a r Q do . Herring . _ *j- f | do Sh.p-ftuff, . . yfc a9 r t r.Cwt. C » - - 20 f do Mufcovada Sugar, a 67/6.°' do. James-river, . - 30/ a 4 0/ do. r - - - 3of. a 40/ do. Rappahannock, - o O C do. Maryland, col'd, - 4 /r do. Wcftern Shore, long leaf, a 2 -f do. taftern Shore, - . 2 of a 2 7 f do. f n C t Caro !- - - 35/ - 37/4 <*"• In tenor ditto, - Jr *" do. Leadinpig s , . . do. Rve"'' _ - 7/6. pr. bulhel. Barley, * . " . " # d °" Indian Corn, . a °' do . Kl atS r j * 1/8. a if. do. Haxfeed, . _ V. J da. - - Ifo. a e/S. do. r~ Llvc rpool, - . 4/. do. Kum, Jamaica, _ . As, * ifh pr.galloo, Windward, . %. /// P V trench. - - 2/ do. - -N. England, - . s > 9 . do. ?, r , and y> - - 4 /n. do. - me, Sherry. . 6r a ,\<i. Published by JOHN FENNO, No. 9, Maiphn- Lane, near the Oswego-Market, New-York. *ODDEqOX
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers