Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Written Contracts in the Name of Idols. Tacit Consent.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter XXIII.—Written
Contracts in the Name of Idols. Tacit Consent.
But there is a certain species of that class,
doubly sharpened in deed and word, and mischievous on either side,
although it flatter you, as if it were free of danger in each; while it
does not seem to be a deed, because it is not laid hold of as a
word. In borrowing money from heathens under pledged334
securities, Christians give a
guarantee under oath, and deny themselves to have done so. Of
course, the time of the prosecution, and the place of the judgment
seat, and the person of the presiding judge, decide that they knew
themselves to have so done.335
| 335 This is, perhaps, the
most obscure and difficult passage in the entire treatise. I have
followed Oehler’s reading, and given what appears to be his
sense; but the readings are widely different, and it is doubtful
whether any is correct. I can scarcely, however, help thinking that the
“se negant” here, and the “tamen non
negavi” below, are to be connected with the “puto
autem nec negare” at the end of the former chapter; and
that the true rendering is rather: “And [by so doing] deny
themselves,” i.e., deny their Christian name and faith.
“Doubtless a time of persecution,” such as the present time
is—or “of prosecution,” which would make very good
sense—“and the place of the tribunal, and the person of the
presiding judge, require them to know themselves,” i.e.,
to have no shuffling or disguise. I submit this rendering with
diffidence; but it does seem to me to suit the context better, and to
harmonize better with the “Yet I have not denied,” i.e., my
name and faith, which follows, and with the “denying
letters” which are mentioned at the end of the
chapter.—Tr. | Christ
prescribes that there is to be no swearing. “I wrote,” says
the debtor, “but I said nothing. It is the tongue, not the
written letter, which kills.” Here I call Nature and
Conscience as my witnesses: Nature, because even if the tongue
in dictating remains motionless and quiet, the hand can write nothing
which the soul has not dictated; albeit even to the tongue
itself the soul may have dictated either something conceived by itself,
or else something delivered by another. Now, lest it be said,
“Another dictated,” I here appeal to Conscience whether,
what another dictated, the soul entertains,336
| 336 Mr. Dodgson renders
“conceiveth;” and the word is certainly capable of that
meaning. | and
transmits unto the hand, whether with the concomitance or the inaction
of the tongue. Enough, that the Lord has said faults are committed in
the mind and the conscience. If concupiscence or malice have ascended
into a man’s heart, He saith it is held as a deed.337
You therefore have given a guarantee; which
clearly has “ascended into your heart,” which you can
neither contend you were ignorant of nor unwilling; for when you gave
the guarantee, you knew that you did it; when you knew, of
course you were willing: you did it as well in act as in thought; nor
can you by the lighter charge exclude the heavier,338
| 338 Oehler understands
“the lighter crime” or “charge” to be
“swearing;” the “heavier,” to be “denying
the Lord Christ.” |
so as to say that it is clearly rendered false, by giving a guarantee
for what you do not actually perform. “Yet I have not denied,
because I have not sworn.” But you have sworn, since, even
if you had done no such thing, you would still be said to swear, if you
have even consented to so doing. Silence of voice is an
unavailing plea in a case of writing; and muteness of sound in a
case of letters. For Zacharias, when punished with a temporary
privation of voice, holds colloquy with his mind, and,
passing by his bootless tongue, with the help of his hands dictates
from his heart, and without his mouth pronounces the name of his
son.339
| 339 See Luke i. 20, 22, 62, 63. | Thus, in his pen there speaks a hand clearer
than every sound, in his waxen tablet there is heard a letter more
vocal that every mouth.340
| 340 This is how Mr. Dodgson
renders, and the rendering agrees with Oehler’s punctuation. [So
obscure however, is Dodgson’s rendering that I have slightly
changed the punctuation, to clarify it, and subjoin Oehler’s
text.] But perhaps we may read thus: “He speaks in his pen; he is
heard in his waxen tablet: the hand is clearer than every sound; the
letter is more vocal than every mouth.” [Oehler reads thus:
“Cum manibus suis a corde dictat et nomen filii sine ore
pronuntiat: loquitur in stilo, auditur in cera manus omni sono
clarior, littera omni ore vocalior.” I see no difficulty
here.] | Inquire whether a man
have spoken who is understood to have spoken.341
Pray we the Lord that no necessity for that
kind of contract may ever encompass us; and if it should so fall
out, may He give our brethren the means of helping us, or give us
constancy to break off all such necessity, lest those denying
letters, the substitutes for our mouth, be brought forward against us
in the day of judgment, sealed with the seals, not now of witnesses,
but of angels!E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
