Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words; for because of these things the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience." (Eph. v. 5, 6.)

"Teach us, O Lord, the way of thy statutes; and we shall keep it unto the end. Turn away our eyes from beholding vanity; and quicken thou us in thy way." (Ps. cxix. 33, 37.)

LECTURE XI.

DIVORCEMENT.-SOLEMNITY OF OATHS.-SUBMISSION TO INJURIES.

31. It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement.

32. But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery.

Another case is here specified, in which the allowed practice of the Jewish nation was either a perversion of their law, or altogether contrary to it. Moses had permitted marriage, under certain circumstances, to be dissolved. (Deut. xxiv. 1-4.) In consequence, divorces on the most frivolous pretences had now become disgracefully frequent.

Our Lord corrects this evil by bringing things back to the original regulation; " for in the beginning it was not so." Moses had relaxed the rule "for the hardness of men's hearts." Christ commands a man to cleave unto his wife, and not to separate himself from her except on the legitimate grounds of infidelity.

33. 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.

34. But I say unto you, Swear not at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne:

35. Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king.

36. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head: because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37. But let your communication be, Yea, yea, Nay, nay: for whatever is more than these, cometh of evil.

These words expose another error of the scribes, who explained away the third commandment, confining it to the letter and neglecting the spirit. They maintained, that as long as the name of God was not actually introduced, the commandment was not broken, provided a man kept clear of perjury. Thus perverting Numb. xxx. 2: "If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not break his word; he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth."

Christ sweeps away at once all vain subterfuges; Swear not at all. Let your communications be plain and simple, yea, yea, nay, nay.

Because of the strictness of these words, one sect

of Christians considers it unlawful to employ an oath even for the solemn purposes of a court of justice. Such scruples, when sincere, deserve respect; and certainly we should be able to give good reasons why we admit a practice which seems contrary to the literal terms of scripture. There are cases, however, when we are led to do So, "comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” This appears to be one of these cases.

Because, first, it was allowed, nay commanded by the law of God himself, that matters should be solemnly settled by an oath taken of the parties. Instances may be found in Exodus xxii. 11, and 1 Kings viii. 31.

Secondly. Because, under the law, we read frequently of oaths being solemnly required and given, by those too who were governed by the especial direction of God; and this practice is nowhere reproved, or said to have been followed by the Divine displeasure. See Joshua ii. 12, 17; 1 Kings ii. 42, 43; 2 Kings xi. 4; Nehem. v. 12.

Thirdly. Because, under the gospel, the example of St. Paul proves that the, serious invocation of God's name is not unlawful. See 2 Cor. i. 23; 1 Thess. ii. 5.

These reasons show that our Lord is here speaking of the light and wanton use of sacred words; and that we may, without scruple or grief of conscience, comply with those laws of our country which require us, on certain occasions, to ratify our declarations upon oath. It is, however, an evil much to be lamented, when such oaths are unnecessarily or rashly multiplied, and mixed up with

the concerns of trade and commerce and the transactions of ordinary life. The grounds on which our Lord condemns the mode of swearing which had become habitual among the Jews, show that an appeal to God is only to be made with great solemnity and reverential awe. Let all be on their guard, that they do not acquire a habit of expression of the same kind, and introduce sacred words into common discourse, without meaning perhaps, but for that very reason not without profaneness. The practice betrays a state of mind awfully dangerous, because it is a practice which cannot exist where there is a proper sense of God, and of the soul, and of eternity.

If men obeyed the Christian precept, "Lie not one to another;" a bare affirmative, yea, yea; a bare denial, nay, nay, would universally satisfy. Any thing beyond this, cometh of evil: cometh of the deceit which is in our hearts, and the falsehood which is in our practices, which make men distrustful of one another.

38. Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

29-42.

39. But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil; but who- Luke vi. soever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40. And if any one will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.

41. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.1

1

The officers of public magistrates sometimes did this, pressing into their service the persons whom they met, their horses or carriages, for expedition sake..

42. Give to him that asketh thee; and from him that would borrow of thee, turn not thou away.

The law of Moses enacted, that "if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth :" (Levit. xxiv. 19; see also Ex. xxi. 24, 25.) This was appointed, not as private vengeance to the injured person, but as a legal punishment to the offender. Perhaps, however, it was abused as if to justify a desire of retaliation. If so, the spirit of the Jewish law condemned it no less than the Christian; which says, "Thou shalt not avenge nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord." Again, Again, "Say not thou, I will but wait on the Lord, and he (Prov. xx. 22.) At all events, our Lord takes the opportunity of showing, that the forgiveness, not the prosecution of injuries, must be the character of his disciples: they must rather yield to evil, than resist it; for "

(Levit. xix. 18.) recompense evil;

shall save thee.”

charity endureth all things:" they must rather resign a claim, than urge it to the utmost; for "charity seeketh not her own:" instead of being sensibly alive to every encroachment, they must "overcome evil with good."

Such is the general rule. Public justice, public duty, and in many cases, important private interests, must of course make exceptions to the letter of these rules. Christ himself appealed to the law, against the injustice with which he was smitten: "One of the officers which stood