set it free in this manner That the Consequence of so doing would be Slavery and not Liberty pag. 356. ERRATA PAge 12. Line â—…lt read obtaining p. 35. for too r. to ib. after what add is more Common p. 40. l. 2 r. Author p. 44. l. 20. r. net so illâ—…itedly p. 45. l. 1. dele of ib. 23. f. us r. as p. 49. marg r. dure p. 57. marg del in bis p. 64. l. 3. f. becomes r. comes p. 68. l. 11. r. if not to be p. 73. l. 21. del is p. 78. l. 1. r. what p. 80. l. 10 del Manliness and the â—…ks foll p. 107. l. 22. r. loss of p. 110. marg r. Agostini p. 119. f. NON COMPOS r. FELO DE SE. p. 136. l. 1. f. must r. may p. 139. l. 8. â—…r supposing p. 146. l. 9. r. Friends p. â—…47 l. 25. r. Bacchanalia p. 151. marg r. projecere p. 160. l. 7. r. Anaxagoras p. 169. l. 11. r. Numantia p. 173. l. 7. f. is r. his p. 175. l. 10. f. till r. ' t is p. 176. l. 12. r. mdanâ—…lic p. 177. l. 20. r. but how p. 178. l. 17. r. that though he p. 191. l. 21. del p. 227. l. 24. r. suthâ—… one p. 233. l. 26. del 〈◊〉 it p. 242. marg f. lib. 4. r. lib. 43. p. 271. l. 10 del of p. 291. l. 8. del any ADDENDA Page 20. Line 13. after has any right to Punish him add that is as to those Faults which he câ—…its against himself as Intemperance c. ib. l. 22 after Destruction of it add If it be â—…s Crime as shall be prov'd There are some litteral Mistakes as also in the Pointing occasion'd by the Transcribing which the Reader is desir'd to Correct or Excuse Lately Printed THE Certainty of the Christian Revelation and the Necessity of Beleiving it Established In Opposition to all the Cavils and Insinuations of such as pretend to allow Natural Religion and reject the Gospel By Francis Gastrell B. D. and Preacher to the Honourable Society of Lincoln's-Inn A Conference with a Theist in 4. Parts By W Nicholls D. D. Printed for Tho. Bennet AN ESSAY Concerning SELF-MURTHER c. Introduction TO treat of this Subject by such Arguments only as may be drawn from Reveal'd Religion or to mix these and such as may be brought from Natural Reason together wou'd be to raise the greatest Prejudices in those Persons who are most concern'd For they who undertake to defend the Lawfulness of Self-Murther of which there are many in this Age proceed chiefly upon Natural Principles and will not hearken to any Thing from Revelation till these are answered Wherefore my Design at present is to consider this Action according to the Principles of Natural Reason only To this purpose it might perhaps be thought necessary by some People to prove in the first Place the Being of a God But since this has been both readily allow'd and studiously maintain'd by the most considerable Advocates of Self-Murther I shall take it to be granted and upon this Supposition endeavour to prove that Self-Murther is naturally unlawful CHAP. 1. Man considered in the Individual The State of Nature Of Humane Life What and from whence it is Where the absolute Propriety of it is to be plac'd BY Self-Murther I mean a Man's depriving himself of Life wilfully and advisedly For the proving this Act to be unlawful we are to consider what Humane Life is From whence Man receives it Where the absolute Propriety or Dominion of it is to be plac'd And to what End it was bestow'd Man consists of a Rational Soul and Body united together naturally Humane Life is the Result of this Vnion There was a Time when neither Soul nor Body had any Being therefore the Soul cou'd not be the Cause of it self much less cou'd the Body be so But the Being of each and the Union of both and the Continuation of the same Union must be owing to that All-wise All-mighty Vniversal Cause which is called God This I suppose will easily be granted and if so it will lead us to the fixing the true Propriety or Dominion over Humane Life the absolute and lawful Power to dispose of it All absolute Propriety is either Original or Derivative each of which is twofold of Men or of Things In the present Argument the Life of a Man is the Man and not a Thing he that destroys the Life of a Man destroys a Man and he that destroys a Man destroys the Life of a Man However one of these may be of use to illustrate the other and if we know by what means Original Propriety of Things is acquired we may the more easily discover whether Man has any Original Propriety of his Life or no. Original Propriety of Things comes by taking possession of that which belongs to no body or which has been forsaken by those to whom it did belong or else by making or producing something out of that which is no Bodies which last seems to give the best Title of Propriety as being not only the possessing but the giving a kind of new Being to the Thing Now I. Man cannot have the Original Propriety of himself by any of these ways because he could not make himself nor can he be ever so derelinquished or forsaken by the great Cause of his Being as to remain independent and absolute but while he is he must belong to the same Cause thro' which he at first was besides he cou'd not take possession of himself before he was nor cou'd he be at the same time both the Person taking possession and the Person possessed If Man then has not the Original Propriety of himself no other Creature can pretend to it and therefore it remains only that it should be in God And in Him indeed it is in the strictest manner not by producing him out of that which was no Bodies but by making him out of that which he created out of nothing and by being independent Himself and not only causing but sustaining and comprehending all Things II. As to any derivative Propriety or Dominion which Man may be suppos'd to have of his Life if we consider such Propriety as absolute and independent which it must be if it gives him a Right to dispose of his Life as he pleases he can have no such Propriety neither because this is contradictory both to the Nature of God and Man 1. This cannot be derived from any but God but God cannot divest himself of such absolute Dominion or Propriety because this wou'd make Man from the time in which God shou'd do this so independent that God would have no further Right over his Life and therefore cou'd not in any Case threaten him with Death nor command him any Duty under the Penaity of any Punishment In a word this wou'd hinder God from being Omniporent for he cannot be so who has not a Power over all whether Persons or Things 2. Altho' we shou'd suppose
and necessary it may be suppos'd sufficiently to warrant any Man's Obedience when the Publick Judgment declares that it is so But the chief Question is from whence this Power is deriv'd to the Publick by whom it was granted Some suppose it to be granted by Man himself upon a kind of compact for Protection but though Proâ—…tion may be one great End of this Power yet it is generally agreed that this Power cannot be conserr'd on the Publick by every particular Man because God alone has the absolute Propriety of humane Life Man has no such Power himself and what he has not he cannot make over to another Mr. Hobbs will have it to come from Man but then to decline this Objection and secure his darling Principle of Self-preservation he says This is not done by Man's transferâ—…ing any right of his own but by laying down the right which he has to hurt others His own Words are these * â—…viathan part 2. chap. 28. page 162. The Subjects did not give their Sovereign that Right but only in laying down theirs strengthned him to use his own as he should think fit for the Preservation of them all so that it was not given but left to him If I take this right this is a very odd distinction for if a Man has any right to hurt others for his own Preservation then as he is bound to Preserve himself so he is bound to retain that Right and yet if he lays it down he parts with it as much as if he actually gave it away He told us just before * Ib. p. 161. That in the making of a Common-wealth every Man gives away the Right of defending another but not of defending himself In several Places †Leviath part 1. chap. 14. he repeats and inculcates this that no Man can ever part with the right of defending himself no not after Lawful Tryal and Condemnation If this be so How can he lay down the right which he has to hurt others since by so doing he must be left in a great measure defenceless and liable by his own Consent not only to be hurt but to be actually destroy'd as in all Capital Punishments Wherefore not withstanding Men chuse to struggle thus rather than have any thing to do with God while they frame their Political Systems Yet it seems plain that such a Power as we are speaking of can be deriv'd from no other but God who alone having the absolute Propriety of all humane Life can alone have the right to give some Men Power over the Lives of others and who having fram'd Man in such a manner that Civil Society is necessary for his Security and Improvement and yet such Society not to be preserv'd without such a Power must upon these Considerations and also as he is a wife and just Being and as he who wills the End must will the Means necessary to that End must I say be supposed to grant to the Magistrate such a Power a Power to hazard Life himself and to oblige others to do so in defence of the Publick From what has been said may appear that the Power or Authority which any Government has to require Men to hazard their Lives for the Publick Good is derived from God himself that the time and manner of doing this depends upon the Publick Judgment and that Man is thus warranted for hazarding his Life accordingly To return then to the Instance above-mention'd of a Man's giving a Magistrate his Plank in a Shipwreck If a Man may hazard his Life for the Publick Good then if there be some particular Person in whom the Publick Power and Publick Judgment is lodg'd from whom all the Springs of Action derive their Motion who is in effect the Life the Soul of the whole Body and in whom the Liberty and Property as we love to speak of many Millions centers and may be lost and among the rest his Life also who shall be concern'd for this Publick Persons safety then we may conclude that any Man may hazard his Life even to the utmost danger to preserve such a Person yet in these Cases we are to remember Life is only hazarded not abandon'd much less positively destroy'd and that for such extreme hazard Men may justly suppose that they have Authority from God himself as they are Members of any Civil Government And though the danger be great yet 't is very seldom that Men fall into certain Death upon these Accounts as might be shown easily But suppose it should be so yet in this Case an honest good Man does not mind any thing but to do his Duty to pursue faithfully the End for which Life was given and if Life should be lost in this pursuit this is not his desire nor his fault 't was not his aim to die but to do as he ought nay gladly wou'd he have lived had Life been consistent with his Virtue but when this came in Question both Death and Life became indifferent and though he Chooses neither he accepts reaâ—…y of either as they offer themselves in his way to his Duty This I find confirm'd by the School-men in a harder Case than any above-mention'd Suppose a powerful Tyrant shou'd bring the last City of any State to the greatest Extremity by all the sad Consequences of a long and prosperous Siege as loss and wearineâ—…s of Men Famine Contention Corruption and no hopes of Succour shou'd be left suppose that after this he shou'd refuse all Articles of Submission and shou'd threaten Destruction by Fire and Sword unless they deliver'd upto him some one particular innocent Person This City say they * 〈◊〉 de Valenâ—… Tom. 3. Disput. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 8. Punct 〈◊〉 may not â—…ly deliver him up though they know him to be Innocent but that very Person may deliver up himself and yet without being guilty of destroying himself because as abovesaid his chiâ—… end is the doing so much Good not the Dying his particular intention his design that he had in view continually was to save his Country and this being the only means which was left he resolves to incur the greatest danger to 〈◊〉 purpose and yet in all this is positive only as to the doing of his Duty and far from being positive as to the destroying of his Life To compleat this Argument let us now see 2. How great the difference is between this and Self-murther and consequently how unreasonably the one is made a plea for the other He that hazards Life for the Publick does this in obedience to the Laws both of God and Man he that destroys his own Life does this in disobedience to the Laws of both the first by observing the true End of Life does what God and Nature primarily design'd as most proper to preserve Life and if he loses it 'tis by the violence of others the latter neglecting the true End of Life destroys it wilfully by the most positive act of injustice to God his
to that in particular 1. Since God himself who is absolutely free chooses to act always according to some Method which is a Rule to Himself the same with right and eternal Reason and yet His Liberty is not prejudic'd by acting so then although Man is oblig'd to act by some Rules Laws or Principles yet since they issue out from the same Fountain of Eternal Reason this is not any Prejudice to his Natural Liberty 2. Since it has been prov'd that these are some of those Rules viz. That the end for which a Creature is made or has Life given him ought to be observ'd that Gods Propriety ought not to be desiroy'd that whatever may prove destructive to Civil Society ought to be avoided And since the killing of ones self has been prov'd to be a direct breach of every one of these Rules then it follows that Mans Natural of Liberty can be no just 〈◊〉 for Self-murther The same Argument will serve also against all unwarrantable hazarding of Life and running into great and unnecessary dangers especially by Duelling Likewise against all Vices of Excess and Intemperance which concerning a Man's own Person only seem to be within the bounds of his Natural Liberty II. In the next place I am to shew the difference between the Liberty and Slavery of the Mind and Body and whether any Evil that oppresses the Body can be destructive to the Liberty of the Soul As Man consists of a Soul and Body his Liberty must be consider'd in Relation to both Man's Liberty as to his Soul or Mind consists in the free use of its Faculties Vnderstanding and Will in such a manner as was just now shewn his Slavery as to his Mind consists in the losing the free use of these and in their subjection to Irregular Passions and Appetriâ—…es Man's Liberty as to his Body consists in the free use of its Powers as to Motion and Sensation and his Slavery as to this in the Abridgment of this Motion or in its being at anothers disposal In the decay of Sensation or in its becoming greivous to him in Pain and Torture * Vid. Somnium Scipionis Now if we consider the Dignity of Humane Nature Man's Liberty must depend upon the Mind chiesly for when all is done the Mind is the Man Mens cujusque is est quisque the Body is but of very small Consideration in comparison of the other the Body may be enslaved without a Man 's own sault it being liable to outward force as well as inward decays of Nature but still the Mind may continue free This cannot be enslav'd but by a Man 's own fault and when it is so its Liberty may be recover'd again if the Person pleases and therefore there can be no occasion of Self-murther upon this Account Plotinus †Apud Macâ—…obium lib. 1. cap. 13. gives admirable directious in this case He tells us that therâ—… are two kinds of Death a Philosophical and a Natural one that the first was in our Power but not the latter that if Men would be free from any Evils of Life they may be so by dying Philosophically and this says he is the only voluntary Death that is commendable that which we bring our selves to by Reason not by Poison by Prudaence not by any Weapon As to that part of the Question Whether any Evil that oppresses the Body may be destructive to the Liberty of the Mind This has been in part answer'd The Liberty of the Mind consists in the use of Reason some Evils of the Body as extreme Pain and Sickness may destroy the use of Reason and cause Madness and then the Liberty of the Mind is destroy'd indeed But while Reason remains Liberty must remain also the Mind cannot be enslav'd though beset by various Evils till it basely surrenders up to 'em no more than a City is enslav'd when 't is only beseig'd and defends it self valiantly nay not so much since the Avenues of Reason in those who are adult especially cannot be shut up but on the contrary the greater the Evils are which beset the Body the more may the Mind enlarge its Liberty by the practising of several Virtues which it would not have had the opportunity of exercising otherwise All Virtues are the different ways of the Souls exerting its Power according to the Dictates of right Reason Wherefore if the Evils of the Body give it greater opportunities to exert this Power and require withal that it should be exerted with greater strength and vigour then these Evils will be so far from abridging its Liberty that they will rather enlarge it For the more Virtues is has to practice the more different ways must it have to move in the wider must its range and compass be and consequently the greater its Liberty And as to the Case of extreme Pain in particular which is so commonly pleaded upon this occasion The Liberty of the Body indeed may be lost it may be confin'd 〈◊〉 and tortur'd by Tyrants or Discases but unless this should cause Madness it would not destroy the Liberty of the Mind It must be confess'd the Union of the Body and Mind is very close and all Perception ends in the Soul and therefore the Pains of the Body may be very grievous to it but though very grievous yet rarely to such a degree as to prove destructive to its Reason Extreme Pain is the truest test of a great and upright Mind but although it may force a Man to Lament it need not to Rebel it may affect him with Sorrow but not cast him down into Despair and where Reason struggles faithfully to retain its Power Courage Honour Justice Constancy and great Examples will be called in to help to resist what is sensitive Evil rather than a good Man should fall into what is morally so rather than he should be guilty of an unjust Action to fly from Pain when this is only Coâ—…ardise and Weakness though colour'd over with the Plausible name of Liberty When Pain is encreas'd to such a degree as to destroy Reason the dispute is at an end but let Men have a care lest they should fancy or grant themselves to be Mad only through Impatience and indulg'd Passions and then afterwards make use of their Reason to contrive their Self-destruction If you cry out as 't is usual that the Pain is too great to be endur'd that you cannot possibly bear so much torture What do you mean by this that it will kill you or that you have not strength and patience to undergo it If it will kill you what need of Self-murther the more violent the Pain is the more short will it be and if a Tyrant inslicts it how much better is it as Good Darius said * Forsitan mireris quod vitam non siniam Alicno scelere quam meo mori malo Q. Curtius lib. 5. cap. 12. To die by anothers Wickedness than by your own If you mean the latter trust Nature
but Man alone and since this dread may increase to a very great degree by the niceness of his Reflection and the tenderness of his Conscience there is no Creature that can possibly be so miserable as Man and if this is to no purpose then there is not a Beast an Insect that perishes but has greatly the advantage of this Reasoning Creature this Lord of the World as he has flatter'd himself to be for so many Ages Since then it is certain that Man has such Notions and that God who dispos'd the frame of his Nature in such a manner as to receive 'em early and retain 'em strongly is All-wise Good and Just It cannot be imagin'd that he did this in Vain or only to Disturb and Torment him for as it would not be agreeable to Infinite Wisdom to do any thing to no purpose so it would by no means consist with Insinite Goodness to fix such Principles in the Noblest of his Creatures as must serve to no other End but to make him more miserable than any of the rest These Reasons I hope may suffice to prove to any Unprejudic'd and Impartial Person who acknowledges that there is a God the Necessity and Certainty of a Future State of Reward and Punishment and that too according to Natural Principles As for those Objections that are usually made upon this Occasion That the distinction of Good and Evil depends only upon Humane Laws that the Hopes and Fears of Future Reward and Punishment are not Natural but the Inventions of Politicians to manage Mankind and support Government and that this is prov'd by those who having had the Sence and Courage to assert their Natural Liberty have never been troubled with any thing of this kind nothing can be more Unreasonable than this for first it is plain by the consent of Nations that the distinctions of Good and Evil which are generally the same are sounded in Nature that the force which they have upon Men's Minds is ancienter than Government it self as being from Right Reason which is co-eternal with God As Cicero tells us Nor says he * Nec si Regnante Lue. Tarquinio nulla erat Romae Scripta â—…ex de stupris idcirco non contra illam legem sempiterâ—…am Sext. Tarq. vim Lucretiae attulit Erat enim ratio profecta à 〈◊〉 Natura adrecte faciendum impellens à delicto avocans quâ—… non tum denique incipit lox esse cum scripta est sed tum cum orta est orta est autem simuâ—… cum montos divina Lib. 2. de Legibus if there had been no Written Law against Rapes in Tarquin's Reign would his Son Sextus when he forc'd Lucretia have sin'd the less against this Eternal Law because this was Reason it self rising from the very Nature of Things and prompting Us to Good and restraining Us from Evil accordingly which did not then first become Law when 't was written down but oblig'd from its beginning which was the same with that of the Divine Mind it self So that the Goodness of Humane Laws depends upon their being deriv'd from this Eternal Fountain they do not of themselves determine what is Good and Evil but only declare what was so before to save People the pains of disputing about their Duty and to promote it by the threats of immediate Punishment But of all Pretences that sure is the weakest which would insinuate that the Notions of Good and Evil and the Hopes and Fears which are the effects of them are owing only to the Craft of Politicians and are not Natural but meer Fiction For this very Objection which supposes 'em necessary for Government proves the contrary for if Civil Government is absolutely necessary for Man's Happiness if such Government cannot be preserv'd without such Notions then we must either say that Man was made so imperfect as not to be furnish'd with such Notions such Principles and Rules as are absolutely necessary for him that what was thus omitted by God was supply'd by the Cunning of Crafty Men or that God suffers his Creatures to be impos'd upon by their Brethren to be fill'd with vain Hopes and tormented with vain Fears and that too often to their present disadvantage Or else we must grant that these Notions which are necessary for the general good of Mankind and are also generally embrac'd by them must be Natural In a Word nothing sure can be more reasonable than this Man cannot be happy without Civil Society Civil Society cannot be supported without Man's Passions and Appetites are restrain'd these cannot be restrain'd without the Hopes and Fears of a Future State these Hopes and Fears are generally entertain'd by Man and do restrain him and therefore as they are Natural they must be True and there is a Future Sate accordingly Nor does it signify any thing in this case to boast of Wit and Courage Asserting of Natural Liberty and the being free'd by these means from these Notions What was the Opinion of the Greeks and Romans in this Case were not these People as Famous for their Wit as for their Arms and wou'd it not be as Ridiculous for any single Man to oppose his Sence as his Courage against them and how is Man's Natural Liberty endanger'd by these Notions when it depends upon the direction and assistance of such Principles as are founded on them as has been shewn in the first part of this Chapter Or supposing that some Gentlemen even that one in a hundred which I am sure is many more than I need grant had wholly extinguish'd any such Notions does it follow from hence that there is no such at all or are those few a better Argument of what is Natural to Man than so many Thousand of others What if there be some few that are Deaf or Blind or that have besotted themselves by their Vices shall we conclude from hence that Stupidity or Blindness are Natural and that Seeing and Apprehending are signs of Mens being out of order Though a Man should be free from all sense of Evil and fear of Future Punishment this would be no better Argument that such a Persons Soul was in its proper and natural State than the Bodies being free from all Pain would prove that it was in perfect Health Pain is the effect of some Violence offer'd to Nature in order to put it upon its Guard as the Soul has an outward sense of it by the Body that it may resist or avoid whatever is hurtful to that so it has an inward sense of it in an ill Conscience that it may avoid what may prove hurtful to it self also Now as it would be very strange for any one upon his loss of Feeling in any Part from a Gangrene or Dead Palsey to argue that 't was unnatural for any Man to have the sense of Feeling in that Part so is it no less strange for any one that has lost these Notions of Good and Evil Reward or Punishment in a