Swearing an oath

I was in the bus one day reading through my Catholic Dictionary book by Reynolds. Then I got captured with the content of the book. After a while there was an argument between the bus conductor and one on-board passenger. The passenger was a mobile retailer who advertises and sells drugs. That day after his usual advert, he was about to alight and so requested for his change and he was not given. According to the conductor, the said passenger did give him an exact fare and so he would not collect any change. Then both the conductor and his interlocutor separately convinced the other passengers and the driver that they were sure of each other’s claim. At the end, the passenger requested the conductor to swear by a car key he was holding. The conductor used this words (in pidgin though interpreted in English) “I swear by this key that if it was not the exact fare of 100 naira you gave me, let me die”. I was touched by the words.

Oath taking

Immediately after the drug seller alighted, the second argument started. I was of the opinion that it was wrong for the conductor to swear for the sake of clarity. That from the Christian perspective, swearing an oath in that instance is not the better way to solve such problem. After the oath, the conductor still did not return his change to him. The man left without change. Now my question is “What if that man left while the conductor insisted that he has no change?” It then lead to my second question “Won’t it be much better if he had allowed God to judge both of them fairly?” I so prefer “no oath” for the sake of the power of the tongue and for the sake of human errors too. We should understand that the human nature is not so perfect. Sometimes humans may not be in good state of mind and so may not remember past occurrences so well as in this case. A proof or leave it for God would have been much better. And now he has sworn and I hope nobody dies as he said. “It was an evil swear” I argued.

As I was explaining things to fellow passengers, an old man challenged me. He said “…they swear in churches and courts.

Swearing in court

What will you say about that? I convinced him that the court or churches’ case was quite different. It was the case of an oath of promise. It is an oath of promise like when “…God committed himself with an oath in order to convince those who were to wait for his promise that he would never change his mind." - Hebrews 6:17. And for this reason we end with “so help me God” in the Church and court because it is not even in our own power to fulfill the promises that we keep when we swear the oath. Rather it is by the grace and power of God that such promises are kept as said or stated. So making an oath of promise makes you be in a line of justice, truth, tranquility, transparency, trustworthiness, etc. It gives you a choice of not looking back on your words and so you are guided by your promise. That is why Matthew 5:33 says "You have also heard that people were told in the past: Do not break your oath; an oath sworn to the Lord must be kept."

Therefore the oath of promise looks like you are taking a promise backed up with an oath. This can be understood in Gen 17:7 “And I will establish a covenant, an everlasting covenant between myself and you and your descendants after you; from now on I will be your God and the God of your descendants after you, for generations to come…” and well explained in Hebrews 6:13,18. Verse 13 says "Remember God's promise to Abraham. God wanted to confirm it with an oath and, as no one is higher than God…" and 18 concludes "Thus we have two certainties in which it is impossible that God be proved false: promise and oath. That is enough to encourage us strongly when we leave everything to hold to the hope set before us." Now can we look at this matter professionally? If we do, we will discover that there is oath of promise and an affirmative oath.

Well the affirmative oath is good if and only if the thing sworn is good but if the thing sworn is evil then it becomes non-binding according to the Code of Canon as stated by Mark Giszczak in his blog catholicbiblestudent.com in Law 1198, rules concerning oaths. And that was the oath I was against at the beginning of this write-up; an evil oath. It is surely not good whether affirmative or that of promise.

In conclusion, the CCC 2154 crowns it all for it says as stated by Mark that “The traditions of the Church has understood Jesus’ words as not excluding oaths made for grave and right reasons (for example in court). “An oath, that is the invocation of the divine name as a witness to truth, cannot be taking unless in truth, in judgement and in justice.”

Aguri M. C.