Oaths. Help please!

[GLam1761]

Vows have been made both in the Old and New Testa-
ments, the classic is the Vow of the Nazarite, (Num. 6)
a forty day fast of consecration to God, this vow was
made by Jesus when he fasted and prayed forty days
in the desert. In Battle, one of the Judges of Israel,
Jephtha, made a vow to sacrifice to the Lord the first
thing to meet him when returning home.(Judg. 11),
In the new testament, Paul made a vow and cut off
his hair(Acts 18:18) So it is NOT discouraged partic-
ularly in the Bible, but there is a danger of the devil
USING that against you if you fail to provide satisfact-
ion for the vow that you have vowed.

 

[De_Maria]

I’ve looked into another thread about this, and I have copied and pasted one of their replies concerning those saying it’s hyperbole below:

Good thanks.

Are we to say they meant, it is ok to swear if you think it is necessary? …

We’re in the same boat on this one, as we are with the Just War Doctrine. Before St. Augustine, you will not find one ECF who agrees with a Just War. War is condemned.

So, unless we’re going to reject the authority which Jesus Christ placed in the Church, we need to obey the Church. This is the precise reason that Jesus Christ gave her His authority. So that we could always look to her guidance. This is also the reason that she is given infallibility, so that we should not fear that her Teaching is false.

Of course, although the Church does not forbid the taking of oaths in Mass or in prayer or in a court room or to take office, swearing and taking the Lord’s name in vain is still a sin forbidden in the Commandments.

 

[phil19034]

No, their teaching was quite unequivocal. My point was that they were wrong about other things, and, based on the totality of Sacred Scripture, not just on a couple cherry-picked verses, they were wrong about oaths as well.

They were not wrong… it was discipline for a different time.

Oaths in themselves are not wrong. But some oaths are evil.

In the early Church, the Emperor was considered divine and it was not uncommon for Romans to attempt to make Christians swear an oath using the Emperor as a divine being.

This would have been blasphemous. It would be no different than a Christian today being forced to swear an oath to the Buddha or the devil.

So we have to understand it in context… the Church Fathers were teaching the people to refrain from Oaths that would have resulted in them breaking the First Commandment because those Roman oaths recognized the Emperor as a god.

 

[phil19034]

@Jestersage, @De_Maria, here is a link with some quotes from Ante-Nicene Fathers:

Early Christian Dictionary

I’ve spent the last two years in the writings of St. Augustin, and antipathy to oaths is all through his writings. However, I’m not going to go back and comb through 8000 pages looking for specific references. It’s enough that I say that I have read his teaching that swearing was wrong. If you do not choose to take my word for it, that is no skin off my nose.

Oh, and by the way, oaths and creeds are by a long shot not the same things.

Edit to add: St. John Chrysostom also taught in his homilies on the Book of Acts that oaths should be avoided at all costs.

D

NOTE: the website you posted was created by Anabaptists. While there are quotes in there, Anabaptists and other protestants often take the Church Father out of context.

The context the Church Fathers were often discussing had to do with being forced to swear an Oath to Caesar. And also, how (even today) we should be saying “I swear to God that happened, etc.”

The problem with Oaths is that if you break them you are committing moral perjury. So it’s best to refrain from unnecessary oaths or oaths that can be problematic.

 

[De_Maria]

Vows have been made both in the Old and New Testa-
ments, the classic is the Vow of the Nazarite, (Num. 6)
a forty day fast of consecration to God, this vow was
made by Jesus when he fasted and prayed forty days
in the desert. In Battle, one of the Judges of Israel,
Jephtha, made a vow to sacrifice to the Lord the first
thing to meet him when returning home.(Judg. 11),
In the new testament, Paul made a vow and cut off
his hair(Acts 18:18) So it is NOT discouraged partic-
ularly in the Bible, but there is a danger of the devil
USING that against you if you fail to provide satisfact-
ion for the vow that you have vowed.

Thanks for that. I didn’t look up vows.

Have I misunderstood?

I think Lam has come up with the key to understanding this topic.

Origen doesn’t seem to have anything against “vows”.

Origen, 23rd Homily on Numbers (185-253)

"I will express what the words of the Apostle mean, but I am afraid that some will be saddened. Do not refuse yourselves to each other, unless through a mutual agreement for a given occasion, so as to free yourselves for prayer, and then come together again; it is therefore certain that perpetual sacrifice is impossible for those who are subject to the obligations of marriage…I therefore conclude that only the one vowed to perpetual chastity can offer the perpetual sacrifice."

That’s a reference to priests making a vow of celibacy. Since all the Early Church Fathers were priests, and all offered the perpetual sacrifice (i.e. the Eucharist).

The one problem is the meaning of the word, vow. It means a solemn promise. Whereas an oath, invokes God. But, if a priest is making a solemn promise, to whom is he making the promise? Isn’t it to God?

You might say, no, not necessarily, but the fact is that Priests and nuns are married to God. So, there is no one else to whom they would be making the promise.