!

to perform, and fhews the folly of fuch diftinctions; and that, let them fwear by what they will, they are bound by their oath ; and therefore forbids his difciples to bind themselves, by faying, "Swear not all, neither by heaven, nor earth, nor Jerufalem, because it is the fame as if they fwore by God; nor yet by their head, because they could not make one hair white or black. ---All their fwearing by their head was of no avail in that respect, and therefore it was a folly to call for curses upon their heads to bind themselves to perform any thing, as was the cuftom among the Jews; and Chrift commands them to let their communications be yea, yea, and nay, nay; that is, If you determine to perform any thing, say you will do it, and do not bind yourself with an oath; for whatsoever is more than this cometh of evil; it is either a fnare of the devil, or will be likely to draw you into one.

Another reason why I think it is vows our Lord forbids is this---they were a part of the ceremonial law, and of course fell with it in the general abolition of Jewish rites and ceremonies, and therefore needed not to be infifted upon separately; but if it had been oaths for confirmation, it would appear to me neceffary to be mentioned by each of the evangelifts and in all the Epiftles; whereas it was only spoken of in the gofpel by Matthew and in the epiftle of James; and it is remarkable, that they wrote exprefsly to Jews, who were in the habit of binding themfelves in the way I have been treating of.

It may be objected, that the difficulty ftill remains as to what James hath faid upon this fubject---" But above all, my brethren, fwear not all, neither by heaven, nor by earth, nor by any other oath; but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay, left ye fall into condemnation," To this I would reply, if it is clearly proved that his master did not mean to prohibit oaths for the confirmation of a fact before the civil magiftrate, his fervant had not authority to do it, especially as what he fays is a quotation of that faying of our Lord we have been treating of. But I think an attention to the context will clearly fhew the true fenfe that James attached to this command. It fhould be observed, there is nothing in the context that relates to fwearing before magiftrates; for James is exhorting the persons to whom he is writing to patience under affliction, by the example of Job and others; and fhews, that in them they have feen the defign of the Lord in afflicting his faints, that it is good; and then, as it was the cuftom of the Jews, especially those who did not perceive this defign, to bind themselves to perform fomething to God, if he would deliver them out of

ita

it, so he exhorts the Jewish converts to be careful of this, and, inftead of impatiently defuing to be delivered from their affliction, and, as though God were to be influenced by fuch oaths, to avoid them, and patiently to endure, as knowing the Lord is abundantly compaffionate and merciful; and that, if they were humbled under his mighty hand, he would, in due time, raise them up; that is, when the affliction had answered the good defign for which the kind Father of mercies had fent it; and therefore, instead of binding themselves by oaths, in hopes of deliverance, he exhorts, if any are afflicted, let them pray. And knowing alfo, it was a cuftom, in time of profperity to bind themselves to do fomething for the temple, as a mark of gratitude to God, he fays, Is any one chearful, let him fing pfalms, and fhew forth his gratitude by finging the praises of that Being who giveth us all things richly to enjoy ; let him fhew forth his gratitude by vifiting the fatherless and widow in their afflictions, and keep himself unfpotted from the world; let him do good and communicate; for it is with fuch facrifices God is well pleased; better than with all the vows he could make. And, as another reason why they should not bind themselves with an oath to perform any thing, he adds, Left he fall into condemnation, by not being able to perform what he has bound himself to do, either through the uncertainty of life, or a deprivation of the means, which at prefent may appear to be in his power; and fo he might come under condemnation, by not being able to perform that which is gone out of his lips, a free-will offering to the Lord.

From these confiderations I am decidedly of opinion, that oaths before a magiftrate for confirmation are lawful, and no where prohibited in the New Teftament; at the fame time I deplore the frequency of them, because it takes off that folemnity which should accompany an appeal to the immortal God; which ought to be done with the deepest confideration and reverence; and for want of which this land groaneth because of fwearing. My reason for writing on this fubject is not to encourage the multiplication of oaths, but because I know many weak minds are burthened, and their perfons and property expofed to danger, by conceiving that Chrift has forbidden them to fwear. To fuch perfons the clearing up this matter may be of fervice: to the world it can do no injury, for they will fwear the fame, whether our Lord hath forbidden it or not.--But there are Chriftians who, either for want of inclination or opportunity to examine, are undetermined either one way or the other, and yet are in the habit of fwearing, and fall into

that

that condemnation mentioned by Paul-..." He that doubteth is condemned." If what I have written is the truth, and calculated to do good, I fhall rejoice; but if I fhould be mistaken, I I fhall efteem that man my friend that will endeavour to convince me of my error.

December 17, 1798.

S. THOMPSON.

SIR,

ΤΗ

LETTER

To the Editor of the UNIVERSALIST'S MISCELLANY.

HERE is nothing gives me more real fatisfaction than to hear of eminent men having noble and exalted views of their great Creator; and I think nobler views of him none have than those who profess the doctrine of the Universal Reftoration. But I cannot fay that I was not somewhat surprised that your correfpondent J. H. Prince (fee vol. ii. p. 370.) fhould fo readily acquiefce with Dr. Edwards in placing the Author of the Whole Duty of Man in the number of its votaries, merely on account of an expreffion in a prayer contained in that work. The words of the prayer are--" Vouchsafe to caft thy countenance on thy well-beloved fpoufe the church; but let it be that amiable and merciful countenance whereby thou pacifieft all things in heaven and in earth, and whatsoever is above heaven and under the earth." I am apt to think, if the words are attended to, they will be found to contain an idea which Universalists are strangers to: they can go with the author as far as he prays that the countenance of Christ may be' to the church that whereby he pacifieth all things in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, for fo far the Scriptures go: but the Scriptures fay nothing of his pacifying "whatsoever is ABOVE HEAVEN," and therefore Univerfalifts have no idea of fuch things.

Now, if we conclude, from the feeming univerfal benevolence contained in this fentence of the prayer, that its author was therefore an Univerfalift, we must conclude likewise, that moft, if not all, the preachers in London are of this fentiment; for it is very feldom, that the moft rigid Calvinist talks of the love of God, but he speaks of it as free, unbounded, and held out for the acceptance of all; the reason of which is, in my opinion, because it is a truth contained in the Scriptures, and whoever preaches from the Scriptures, muft, in fome degree, preach the

doctrine

doctrine of Univerfal Love. Again, if it be inferred from the before cited expreffion that its author was an Univerfalist, the followers of Swedenbourg may as reasonable imagine him to be of their fentiment, for the whole of his prayer is addressed to Chrift, as are all the prayers of that fectary.

But that the Author of the Whole Duty of Man did not believe the doctrine of the Universal Restoration, we have his own words in the very book alluded to, as well as in other of his writings. In the Preface to the above mentioned work, concerning the Neceffity of caring for the Soul, § 7. fpeaking of lofing the foul, he fays---" In a word, we may lose them in hell, whence there is NO FETCHING THEM BACK, and so they are loft for ever.". "Think with yourselves, how will be able to endure everlasting burnings. If a small spark of fire, lighting on the leaft part of your body, be fo intolerable, what will it be to have the whole caft into the hottest flames? So that when you have spent MANY THOUSANDS of years in that unspeakable torment, you shall be NO NEARER coming out of it, than you were the first day you went in."

you

Again, the fame author, in his treatise on the Causes of the Decay of Chriftian Piety, confidering that one caufe is having wrong notions of the justice of the Deity, fays---" It would be more long than useful to recite the feveral errors that have fprung from this one. That of Origen, that the devil fhould finally be faved, is a noted and pregnant inftance; which could be derived from nothing but the unequal apprehenfion of God's juftice and mercy; and besides all other ancient, we have many branches of a later growth, that spring from the fame root---a fet of plaufible falfities, which would quench the unquenchable fire, and kill the never-dying worm; I mean those allaying foftening descriptions fome of this age have made of hell, fome changing the kind, others abating the intensenefs, or at least the duration of thefe torments; each fubftracting fo much from this Tophet, that they have left atheifm an eafy task to take away the reft; and may give fufpicion they mean to visit that place, which they are fo induftrious to make eafy. But whatever they do themselves, it is fure this is the way to send others thither."

After these quotations there remains very little to fay to prove that Dr. Edwards and J. H. Prince are in an error in their judgment concerning tbe Author of the Whole Duty of Man; and I think, had they read the work they quote from, they would have different ideas of the fentiments of its author. As to the expreffion in the prayer, it seems one of those incoherent

and

and inconfiftent phrafes which the authors of them do not un derstand; and may be parallelled by one ufed by a Calvinist who wrote about the fame time, viz. "If there were any of the Lora's people in hell, the blood of Chrift would bring them out.

I fhould not have taken up this fubject were it not that I know your love of truth and fair representation; and that I feared fome of your readers might be led into an error, and that others, who believe not the glorious doctrine your Mifcellany diffeminates, might be led to think it wanted the tef.. timony of eminent men, and therefore preffed them to that, fervice. But, I think, that doctrine, like the great luminary of heaven, wants not a taper to augment its glory.

W. BURTON.

SELECT SENTENCES.

E fhould take a prudent care for the future, but so as to enjoy the present. It is no part of wisdom to be miferable to-day because we may poffibly be so to-morrow.

Fine fenfe and exalted sense are not half fo valuable as common fense. There are forty men of wit for one of sense: and he that carries nothing about him but gold, will be every day at a lofs for ready change..

It has been obferved by many, that the hours we pass with happy prospects in view are more pleafing than those crowned with fruition: in the firft cafe we cook the difh to our own appetites, in the latter nature cooks it for us.

He that is in bed all a fummer's morning, lofes the chief pleasure of the day; he that gives up his youth to indolenceundergoes a lofs of the fame kind.

Economy is no difgrace; 'tis better living on a little, than out-living a great deal.

Let reafon go before every enterprize, and counfel before every action.

ANSWER TO QUESTION ON PSALM XLIX. 9.

SIR,

ON

(See vol. ii. p. 369.)

C.

I ex

N reading the paffage referred to by T. K. in the last Mifcellany, that person's alarm became my own. amined feveral verfions without any fatisfaction; I referred

then