few who know their character, will readily aver, that they adduced a fcripture to prove what it does not, rearing up a fuperftructure without any folid foundation.

(5.) I would obferve, in the words of our excellent Confeffion, That " a vow is of the like nature with a promiffory oath," chap. xxii. 5. This is evident, as from the nature of the thing, fo from holy fcripture, Pfal. cxxxii. 2. David fware unto the Lord, and vowed unto the mighty God of Jacob. Where the latter claufe is entirely fynonymous with the firft. And in Ifa. xix. the Egyptians are faid to fwear to the Lord, ver. 18.; and to vow a vow unto the Lord, ver. 21.; fairly intimating, that their oath and their vow are one and the fame. The whole of fwearing under the Old Teftament, confifted in two things, viz. in fwearing by the Lord, and fwearing to him. Both were practifed before the law, Gen. xxiv. 3,-9. and xxviii. 20, 21, 22. Under the law it was the exprefs command, Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God;-and fhalt fwear by his name, Deut. vi. 13. and x. 20. And in a

laudable and pleafing unto God, which one does by virtue of a vow, i. e. from a promise, however voluntarily made, than what he performs of free will without any fuch obligation. Finally, fays he, by the confent of all the fathers, ⚫ even all other vows befides the baptifmal vow, provided they be lawfully made, are approven as acceptable to God, and ⚫ profitable to ourselves. Therefore I do not depart from this fentiment, nor is there any reafon why I fhould. That rule of the apostle, Phil. iv. 8. is rather to be retained. Now, I fee nothing in vows lawfully made which is not honeft, juft, 'pure, and worthy of praise.' Zanchii Opera. Tom. IV. Col. 632,-636.

time of Reformation, when they fought him with their whole defire, and he was found of them, we read, that they sware unto the Lord, and all Judaḥ rejoiced at the oath, 2 Chron. xv. 14, 15. Agree able to these two manners of fwearing, it is prophefied concerning New-Teftament times, That be who fweareth, fhall fwear By the God of truth, Ifa. lxv. 16. And that the Egyptians fhall fwear To the Lord of hosts.

As I cannot think, with fome, that it is unlawful even in matters of importance to fwear by God, under the New Teftament; as little can I, with others, that it is unlawful to fwear to him: and it is incumbent on those who judge otherwise, to adduce fatisfactory reafons, why they retain the one kind of fwearing, and ridicule the other. Probably it will be faid, that the prophecy bearing that men should fwear by the Lord must be underftood in it's literal fenfe; whereas that which says they shall fwear to him, can be understood only in a figurative. Of this, however, we greatly doubt, till fome folid reafon be affigned for fuch a diftinction.

There is nothing typical or ceremonial in fwearing to God, more than in fwearing by him. In the former cafe we fwear by him, as well as in the latter. As God in his promises to us fwears by himfelf, Heb. vi. 13. fo we, in fwearing to him, fwear alfo by him. As he is one and immutable, fo is the nature of a lawful oath: For therein "the perfon fwearing, folemnly calleth God to witness what "he afferteth, or promifeth; and to judge him "according to the truth or falfhood of what he "fweareth." Confeffion, chap. xxii. fect. 1. Such

a part of religious worship is not peculiar to one age of the church, or to the firft difpenfation of grace, but common to both. It is obfervable, that our bleffed Saviour, when speaking of the spirituality and extent of the law, does no more forbid fwearing to God, than fwearing by him. He exprefly mentions what was faid of old, Thou shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths, Mat. v. 33. The performance of oaths unto God may fairly imply the making of them unto him. But, if it was a duty to perform them, I cannot conceive it could be a fin to make them. This precept therefore is left in full force by our Lord; and being so, no man can difannul it. Whatever was once enacted by heaven, must be reckoned in full force till repealed by the fame authority.

For it is written,

What feems to throw greatest weight into the oppofite scale is, that the words of our prophet, ch. xlv. 23. Unto me every knee fhall bow, every tongue fhall fwear, when quoted by the apoftle are referred to the laft judgment, Rom. xiv. 10, 11. We fhall all ftand before the judgment-feat of Chrift. As I live, faith the Lard, every knee fhall bow to me, and every tongue shall confefs to God. And much to the fame purpose is Phil. ii. 10, 11. But as one, (Vitringa in Loc.) juftly obferves, the apostle here takes the prophet's words in their highest emphasis, or in their moft extenfive fenfe, viz. that all creatures, angels as well as men, fhall at laft, willingly, or by conftraint, acknowledge Meffiah's fovereignty. This, however, bears no prejudice to the bended knee, and the allegiance-oath of his loyal fubjects. They literally bow their knees, Eph.

iii. 14. and why may they not alfo fwear to the Lord?

It also merits our attention, that the oath or woW of the Egyptians, is mentioned as a piece of wor fhip undertaken with cheerfulness, faithfully per formed, and graciously accepted; and therefore is not liable to the objection drawn from the apostle's words. For certain it is, that the forced fubjection of wicked angels and men at the great day, can have none of these qualities. It therefore appears to me, that a vow, or a promiffory oath to God, is as lawful under the New Teftament, as under the Old. Permit me here to subjoin the words of the penetrating Placette, when speaking of vows.

All the queftion, fays he, comes to this, viz. if ' vows are likewise approved under the gospel. • The doctors of the Romish communion, accuse us of maintaining that they are not fo. But, it is certain, that this is not our thought, as many have shown, and particularly Rivet on the Decalogue. -I do not believe that we ought to doubt but vows are lawful to Chriftians *.' (6.) I would obferve, that a vow founds a new obligation, in fome refpect. This is fairly deducible from what our prophet fays of the Egyptians, They fhall vow a vow unto the Lord, and shall perform it. And, fays the Pfalmift, I have fworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments, Pfal. cxix. 106. A man fwearing in this manner is bound to obferve God's law, not only because of the divine authority, but also because of his own oath. A new obligation arises from the creature's,

* Placette Sur Le Veu, p. 317, 319.

own act or deed in vowing. This is the doctrine of our excellent Confeffion, chap. xxii. fect. 6. A vow is that whereby we more strictly bind our* felves to neceflary duties.' And chap. xxix. fect. 1. The facrament of the fupper is faid to feal our farther engagement in, and to all duties which we owe to Chrift. It is the uniform doctrine of holy fcripture, that a vow, a lawful vow, brings him who makes it as under a debt which he ought to pay. Hence it is, that vows, and the payment or performance of them, are generally, if not always, mentioned together, Job xxii. 27. Pfal. 1. 14. lxv. 1. and cxvi. 14, 18. Vow, and pay unto the Lord your God, fays the Pfalmift, Pfal. lxxvi. 11. Better it is, fays Solomon, that thou shouldeft not vow, than that thou shouldeft vow and not pay, Eccl. v. 5. Therefore, it is worse to vow, and not to pay, than not to vow at all. But in what fenfe is it worse, but because it is a greater fin? And how can it be a greater fin, unless fome new obligation be violated? He who, like the Pfalmist, has fworn to keep God's righteous judgments, and yet cafts them behind him, finneth more than he who does the fame, but without any previous vow or oath. And the reason is obvious, the one breaks both the divine law and his own oath; the other breaks the law only. The one fin is more highly aggravated than the other: for, as the venerable compilers of our Larger Catechifm obferve, Sins receive their aggravations from the nature and quality of the offence:-If againft--our prayers, purposes, promifes, vows, covenants, and engagements to God, or men.' Queft. 151.

C c