Why were oaths so important in the 17th Century?
Oaths and Conscience
■ ‘conscience is of a divine nature, and is a thing
placed by God in the midst between him and man,
as an arbitrator’
■ ‘What is an oath? An oath, is a religious, and
necessary confirmation of things doubtful, by calling
on God, to be a witness of truth, and a revenger of
falsehood.’
The Oath as a Means of Coercion
■ Oath of Supremacy Extended to House of Commons (1571)
■ Oath of Allegiance (1605)
–
"For as the Oath of Supremacy was devised for putting a difference between the
Papists and those of our profession, so was this oath.”
■ Oath of Supremacy Extended to House of Lords (1606)
■ Protestation Oath (1641)
■ The Negative Oath (1645)
■ "Now OATHS are so frequent they should bee taken like pills, swallow'd whole, if you
chew them, you will find them bitter, if you think of what you sweare, twill hardly goe
downe."
The Engagement
Controversy
■ "I do declare and promise, that I will be true and
faithful to the Commonwealth of England, as it is now
established, without a King or House of Lords."
Oaths Declining Importance?
■ ‘It appears also that the oath adds nothing to the obligation. For a covenant, if
lawful, binds in the sight of God, without the oath, as much as with it; if unlawful,
bindeth not at all, though it be confirmed with an oath.’
■ Casuistry: the use of clever but unsound reasoning in relation to moral questions. It
refers to the application of theoretical rules, which perhaps aren’t quite relevant, to
solving moral problems.
Conclusion
■ 'Promises, covenants, and oaths… are the bonds of
human society’