Swearing Oaths
Again, 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.—Matthew 5:33-37 (KJV)
I am still learning Quaker theology, but their beliefs on the swearing of oaths is quite interesting. As the passage above clearly states, Jesus spoke against the swearing of oaths and the making of vows. While we can filter this through a first-century lens and explore the culture of the day, but there are older passages on the subject as well.
These are the things that ye shall do; Speak ye every man the truth to his neighbour; execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates: And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the Lord.—Zechariah 8:16-17 (KJV)
When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee. That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a freewill offering, according as thou hast vowed unto the Lord thy God, which thou hast promised with thy mouth.—Deuteronomy 23:21-23
But let us set aside the scriptural admonishments for a moment, and consider a modern practical example or two.
Picture an elected politician or appointed public official swearing an oath of office. We all know that politicians are often openly corrupt even on the campaign trail. Public choice economics has explored the corrupting effects of power. Many psychological studies have shown the destructive effects of authority. And we all surely know how often politicians break their campaign promises. How then can such an oath be deemed honorable, even if the government were a noble institution on the whole? If the official swears to uphold a destructive and oppressive system that violates the liberty of others, how is there virtue in such action?
Now imagine a court trial. A witness is sworn in to testify, and says something like, "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God." Does this oath prevent errors or falsehood? Can such a ritual really assure honest testimony? Clearly the evidence available to us indicates not. As such, it is a personal insult to the virtue of an honest man, or an insult by the dishonest man to the intelligence of jury.
Lastly, consider the loyalty oath taught in public schools to children. It is an oath of fealty, plain and simple. Children are taught to recite this oath without any understanding of what it means, literally brainwashing them. How is this virtuous? If you are religious, how can you swear such an oath when government operates entirely though violation of God's laws against theft, murder, fraud, deceit, and outright lies?
Swear no oaths. Live your life so no honest person would have need to question your honesty. Reject those who demand your oaths of allegiance, because they are unworthy of it. Simply let your "yes" mean yes, and your "no" mean no. If you are uncertain, make no absolute statements, and specify your degree of uncertainty. Always endeavor to uphold truth.
If you like this post, please comment, follow, and resteem!
I am glad you are looking into quakers. It is the religion that fits me.
I think restricting from swearing oaths really is a kind of oath.
You'll find as many views on Quakers as individual shoes in the Meetinghouse.
I really loved this post and it gave me a lot to think about. My faith requires strict oaths and I find that less and less that people follow these like they used to. The thing is, man follows oaths less and less a lot these days it seems. We can witness with the decline of marriage and the increase in non apprenticed work areas. I have been reading different topics about it off and on. I have been using this library at http://dqc.esr.earlham.edu:8080/xmlmm/searchForm.jsp for reading and it has quite a bit of resources in it. Might I ask, what faith or religion are you in your daily life? Why the interest in Quakers?
I have a generally Protestant Christian background, and a deep opposition to the State that has grown the more I have learned about it. Statism is a religion, and a death cult at that. Unfortunately, it has poisoned many churches as well. Quakers have a long history of honest theology and peaceful rebellion against tyrants. And then there's Ben Stone of BadQuaker.com, also on Steemit as @badquakerdotcom.
Might I ask why your faith requires oaths? Swearing oaths has no effect either way to my mind. Either you will drive toward your ideals, or you will not, regardless of your vow. I fear the popularfocus in society is too much on outward profession of things and too little on the inward action that demonstrates real beliefs.
As a tangential thought, I am reminded of a scene from the Lord of the Rings—The books, not the movies—where Elrond and Gimli discuss oaths regarding their quest:
Nice points. I am not a religious person and I find it funny a country which supposedly has a separation between church and state requires people to swear on a bible to testify in court. As a free thinking American I also find the pledge of allegiance rather insulting.
To be fair, the concept of "Separation of Church and State" is rather muddled in the popular perception. The phrase isn't even in the Constitution, which merely says in the First Amendment that government can't establish a state religion, mandate any particular denomination, or prohibit people from belonging to any religions.
I would argue that statism is a religion. It has its hymns, temples, mandatory tithes, and a belief in a Supreme Authority that transcends mere mortals like us, despite being a system entirely designed and operated by human beings, all of whom have less than altruistic or honorable intentions.