custom has come to us from apostolic times. Clement of Rome wrote, "Let the strong not despise the weak, and let the weak show respect unto the strong. Let the rich man provide for the wants of the poor; and let the poor man bless God, because he hath given him one by whom his need may be supplied." So also Justin Martyr: "And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through his Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows, and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourneying among us, and in a word takes care of all who need."

"2

An appreciation of God's great gift, which is commemorated in the Eucharist, will prompt us to liberality toward the poor. Where the benevolent spirit is wanting the love of God does not dwell. "Whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?" (1 John 3. 17.)

No duty is more earnestly inculcated in the New Testament than charity. No specific rule as to the proportion we should give is laid down, but it should be as God has prospered us. The importance attached to beneficence by Christ makes it evident that Christians should practice it to the utmost of their ability.

1 First Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. xxxviii. 2 First Apology, chap. lxvii.

ARTICLE XXV

OF A CHRISTIAN MAN'S OATH

As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ and James his Apostle; so we judge that the Christian religion does not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the Prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment, and truth.

I. THE ORIGIN

This Article was composed in 1553 by the English Reformers and has never been changed. It was taken by Wesley without abridgment.

II. THE AIM

It has reference to the same turbulent, disorderly factions described in Article XXIV, combating their objection to the taking of oaths for judicial purposes. Their scruples are alluded to in contemporary documents: "Moreover, neither do the Anabaptists leave the lawful use of oaths; and in this they proceed contrary to the sense of Scripture, and the examples of the fathers of the Old Testament, as well as the apostle Paul, nay, of Christ, nay, of God the Father whose oaths are often mentioned in the Sacred Writings."1

1 Reformatio Legum, chap. xv. The Society of Friends, in their refusal to take or administer an oath, as also in their objection to all war, as inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel, revived the opinions of the Anabaptists. The law has been modified in their favor, and instead of making an oath in courts of justice they are allowed to make an affirmation. This privilege was first granted to the Quakers and Moravians, and now anyone objecting to take an oath has the same privilege. False affirmations are, of course, no less liable than false oaths to the penalties of perjury.

III. THE EXPOSITION

As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ and James his Apostle.

The passages of the New Testament alluded to in the Article are the following: "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: but I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil" (Matt. 5. 33-37). "But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation" (James 5. 12).

Jesus and James intended to condemn and to correct an evil habit of profane swearing in common conversation. The Jews swore by a great variety of things-by heaven, by earth, by the head. The evil custom has been perpetuated. Speaking of the people of Palestine, Dr. Thomson says: "This people are fearfully profane. Everybody curses and swears when in a passion. No people that I have ever known can compare with these Orientals for profaneness in the use of the names and attributes of God. The evil habit seems inveterate and universal.

The people now use the very same sort of oaths that are mentioned and condemned by our Lord. They swear by the head, by their life, by heaven, and by the temple, or, what is in its place, the Church. The forms of cursing

and swearing, however, are almost infinite, and fall on the pained ear all day long."1

The evil practice prevails to a great extent now in Christian lands. In common conversation men swear by heaven, by Jesus, and by many other names and things. Such oaths, uttered carelessly and without intention of harm, entail guilt. "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain" (Exod. 20. 7). Profane swearing by any name the Almighty God may bear, or by any of his attributes, is a specific violation of the third commandment, and God will not hold the offender guiltless.

None of the oaths adduced by Christ as specimens are judicial oaths, and it is quite evident that in neither passage is the formal tendering of oaths in a court of justice under consideration.

So we judge that the Christian religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the Prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment and truth.

Some such oaths are alluded to in the New Testament: "For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife" (Heb. 6. 16). There is the example of God himself: "Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us" (Heb. 6. 17, 18).

"The oath is a divine institution, the colloquial abuse of

1 The Land and the Book, vol. i, p. 284.

which is forbidden by Christ as profanity. So far is this from abolishing the true oath, which is an end of all strife, the Lord's purpose was to forbid its colloquial desecration in order to secure its solemn sanctity."1

One may properly refer to the case of the Lord himself when he was on trial before the high priest. He was solemnly adjured, that is, put on his oath, and though he had maintained silence before he did not now refuse to answer. "And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God" (a solemn adjuration which every Jew was bound to answer truly), "that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said" (Matt. 26. 63, 64). The same account is given by Mark: "I am" (Mark 14. 62). Here our Lord's action forms the best commentary upon his words. This may be taken as decisive that the words of Christ in the Sermon on the Mount have reference to "vain and rash swearing" in conversation, and not to judicial oaths. The words of James are clearly founded upon the words of our Lord. The marginal rendering in the Revised Version confirms it: "Swear not, neither by the heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath: but let yours be the yea, yea, and the nay, nay."

The "prophet's teaching" referred to in the last clause of the Article is found in Jer. 4. 2: "And thou shalt swear, The Lord liveth, in truth, in judgment, and in righteousness; and the nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him shall they glory." These are the only conditions on which judicial oaths are permissible.

1 Whedon, in loco.