Part III (Secunda Secundae) Part 142 (2/2)
Reply Obj. 3: He who swears tempts not G.o.d, because it is not without usefulness and necessity that he implores the Divine a.s.sistance.
Moreover, he does not expose himself to danger, if G.o.d be unwilling to bear witness there and then: for He certainly will bear witness at some future time, when He ”will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of hearts” (1 Cor.
4:5). And this witness will be lacking to none who swears, neither for nor against him.
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 89, Art. 3]
Whether Three Accompanying Conditions of an Oath Are Suitably a.s.signed, Namely, Justice, Judgment, and Truth?
Objection 1: It would seem that justice, judgment and truth are unsuitably a.s.signed as the conditions accompanying an oath. Things should not be enumerated as diverse, if one of them includes the other. Now of these three, one includes another, since truth is a part of justice, according to Tully (De Invent. Rhet. ii, 53): and judgment is an act of justice, as stated above (Q. 60, A. 1).
Therefore the three accompanying conditions of an oath are unsuitably a.s.signed.
Obj. 2: Further, many other things are required for an oath, namely, devotion, and faith whereby we believe that G.o.d knows all things and cannot lie. Therefore the accompanying conditions of an oath are insufficiently enumerated.
Obj. 3: Further, these three are requisite in man's every deed: since he ought to do nothing contrary to justice and truth, or without judgment, according to 1 Tim. 5:21, ”Do nothing without prejudice,”
i.e. without previous judgment [*Vulg.: 'Observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing by declining to either side.']. Therefore these three should not be a.s.sociated with an oath any more than with other human actions.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Jer. 4:2): ”Thou shalt swear: As the Lord liveth, in truth, and in judgment, and in justice”: which words Jerome expounds, saying: ”Observe that an oath must be accompanied by these conditions, truth, judgment and justice.”
_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 2), an oath is not good except for one who makes good use of it. Now two conditions are required for the good use of an oath. First, that one swear, not for frivolous, but for urgent reasons, and with discretion; and this requires judgment or discretion on the part of the person who swears.
Secondly, as regards the point to be confirmed by oath, that it be neither false, nor unlawful, and this requires both truth, so that one employ an oath in order to confirm what is true, and justice, so that one confirm what is lawful. A rash oath lacks judgment, a false oath lacks truth, and a wicked or unlawful oath lacks justice.
Reply Obj. 1: Judgment does not signify here the execution of justice, but the judgment of discretion, as stated above. Nor is truth here to be taken for the part of justice, but for a condition of speech.
Reply Obj. 2: Devotion, faith and like conditions requisite for the right manner of swearing are implied by judgment: for the other two regard the things sworn to as stated above. We might also reply that justice regards the reason for swearing.
Reply Obj. 3: There is great danger in swearing, both on account of the greatness of G.o.d Who is called upon to bear witness, and on account of the frailty of the human tongue, the words of which are confirmed by oath. Hence these conditions are more requisite for an oath than for other human actions.
_______________________
FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 89, Art. 4]
Whether an Oath Is an Act of Religion, or Latria?
Objection 1: It would seem that an oath is not an act of religion, or latria. Acts of religion are about holy and divine things. But oaths are employed in connection with human disputes, as the Apostle declares (Heb. 6:16). Therefore swearing is not an act of religion or latria.
Obj. 2: Further, it belongs to religion to give wors.h.i.+p to G.o.d, as Tully says (De Invent. Rhet. ii, 53). But he who swears offers nothing to G.o.d, but calls G.o.d to be his witness. Therefore swearing is not an act of religion or latria.
Obj. 3: Further, the end of religion or latria is to show reverence to G.o.d. But the end of an oath is not this, but rather the confirmation of some a.s.sertion. Therefore swearing is not an act of religion.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Deut. 6:13): ”Thou shalt fear the Lord thy G.o.d, and shalt serve Him only, and thou shalt swear by His name.” Now he speaks there of the servitude of religion. Therefore swearing is an act of religion.
_I answer that,_ As appears from what has been said above (A. 1), he that swears calls G.o.d to witness in confirmation of what he says. Now nothing is confirmed save by what is more certain and more powerful.
Therefore in the very fact that a man swears by G.o.d, he acknowledges G.o.d to be more powerful, by reason of His unfailing truth and His universal knowledge; and thus in a way he shows reverence to G.o.d. For this reason the Apostle says (Heb. 6:16) that ”men swear by one greater than themselves,” and Jerome commenting on Matt. 5:34, says that ”he who swears either reveres or loves the person by whom he swears.” The Philosopher, too, states (Metaph. i, 3) that ”to swear is to give very great honor.” Now to show reverence to G.o.d belongs to religion or latria. Wherefore it is evident that an oath is an act of religion or latria.
Reply Obj. 1: Two things may be observed in an oath. The witness adduced, and this is Divine: and the thing witnessed to, or that which makes it necessary to call the witness, and this is human.
Accordingly an oath belongs to religion by reason of the former, and not of the latter.
<script>