unlawfull Ergo. To be more carefull to provide for the safety of their worldly goods than of their soules is wretchednesse and desperate folly which all those doe which by unlawfull meanes would preserve their estates Such mutes are so farre from being worthy of having their estates preserved by this course that therefore they should the rather lose them and themselves be the more cruelly and ignominiously entreated for being guilty of two horrible crimes first that whereof they are indited and for which they refuse to answer to be legally tryed the second is their contumacious rejecting of all just and legall courses of tryall and active obedient subjection to authority requiring their submission Touching their second and third motives of standing mute with respect onely to the matter of their worldly credit the same is meere folly because by this course they doe farre more discredit and make themselves infamous in regard that ipso facto they make themselves guilty of a double crime both of that whereof they are indited and also of contumacy against authority and law and the death of pressing that they suffer is the just reward of their obstinate mutenesse besides all their other demerits it is chiefly the morall manner of dying that is comfortable and honourable wherein such mutes are wanting Their fourth motive which is from feare proud impaciencie of suffering uniustly or inimically by others in the course of ordinary legall triall is most vaine for why should we wrong our selves that we may escape being wronged or insulted over by others this was the practise of Saul to kill himself that he might prevent being insulted over and mocked by the uncircumcised Philistims the matter of the greatest triumph to our enemies over us is to give them a victory by our owne hands both over our bodies and mindes as such mutes doe to their eternall destruction Such mutes are not onely guilty of their owne deaths but also by that course they subiect themselves to everlasting damnation both in soule and body both because they die impenitently and wilfully in a sinfull way of their owne obstinate procurement and choise and also doe cast away their soules in departing this world in uncharitable manner without either confession or clearing of themselves in lawfull manner of the crimes for which they are indited and arraigned and so perish as outlaws against both God and humane authority whose fact is equivalent to direct self-murder by wittingly and willingly doing that unlawfull act which they know will inevitably subiect them to death without hope of escape §. 6. About malefactors arraigned for crimes how they are to answer to the question Guilty or not guilty Question 2. A second question considerable about the foresaid subject is touching malefactors indited and arraigned at the barre of Iustice before a lawfull magistrate to be tryed upon their lives for some capitall crimes that they have done as petty treason burglary murder or the like touching their lives whether when they hold up their hands at the barre and are in legall manner asked the question whether they be guilty or not guilty of such a fact whereof they are indited and which indeed they themselves know they have done whether I say are they bound in conscience and may they answer affirmatively that they are guilty without any danger of being indirectly guilty of self-murder Answer They that confesse themselves to be guilty are indirect self-murderers For resolution of this question I answer that when a man is accused of such a capitall crime and is therefore brought to a legall triall whereunto he is subjected for finding or not finding him to be guilty of that fact upon the verdict of which enquiry Law and Authority is satisfied and determines their proceeding with the party for him upon that question whether he be guilty or not guilty before the triall to confesse himselfe to be guilty so by his owne onely witnesse and verdict casting himselfe upon the losse of his life hee may in a strict construction and in some sort be accompted culpable of indirect self-murder Exception Except it be in case to save innocents from suffering wrongfully for his fault or that it be for greater good of the State of the Church or of his owne Soule when the fact can no otherwise be knowne or proved against him but by his owne confession Touching a voluntary and full confession after conviction and condemnation I know none that is not of opinion that it is necessary for the salvation of the malefactors soule although his body do perish as Achan did Ioshua 7.20 That such an affirmative answer of guilty to that question makes the answerer I say in some sort indirectly guilty of self-murder although they are not the worst men morally considered that doe so I will make it plaine Reasons 1. First a malefactor by such an affirmative answer anticipates and deprives himselfe of that legall triall whereby it were possible for him to have escaped and not to have beene found guilty of that capitall fact for which he is indited and therefore by dying upon his owne onely confession witnesse and verdict which hee needed not to have done he is guilty of indirect self-murder Now for a man that hath in danger of life lawfull choise of two waies the one most certainely mortall the other more doubtfully deadly if hee choose and perish by the former he is indirectly a self murderer because he willingly rejected the latter and safer whereby he might have lived thus it is in this case of answering guilty before the triall 2. Secondly it is a naturall axiome that no man is bound to betray himself Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum quisque tenetur defendere seipsum Vnusquisque praesupponitur esse bonus donec probetur esse malus and that every one is tied to defend himselfe A Traytour saies D. Kellet Miscel li. 1. p. 164. may without sin plead not guilty that is not proved guilty at your barre where every one is presupposed to be good untill he is proved to be bad I am not guilty so farre that I am bound to accuse my selfe and this is saies hee the allowed generall acceptation of that usance For further manifestation hereof it is to be considered that the question and answer is made in a humane civill Court wherein hee is demanded not whether in Conscience but whether in Law he be guilty whereby he is bound to confesse no more against his life than can be legally proved against him specially seeing he answers not upon oath or adjuration which binds the examinate or prisoner at the barre in conscience upon obligation of religion to depose the truth concerning himselfe knowne onely to that deponent and according to whose owne testimony hee is to be acquited or condemned Of answering upon oath about crimes concerning a mans selfe but this being most unreasonable to make a man witnesse Jurie and Judge in his owne cause
the truth and Church is bound to doe the duties of his calling notwithstanding any such former restraint or danger of disobedience to it because the power of the Church is but ministeriall under and according to God rather declarative than Soveraigne therefore what she doth tyes not men here on earth to obey it to the destruction but to the edification of the Church or at least to prevent a greater mischiefe And also because the true Church may doe no such acts of deprivation or suspension whereby to intend or effect the destruction of the Church and therefore in that case transgressing of such restraints is no disobedience to the Church but rather an obeying the intent of the same as in times of persecution we have plentifull examples specially of the Church of the Iewes against the Christians A Caveat Yet herein is to be observed that such performance of duties in that case after restraint bee done in mecke patient manner without tumults or forcible opposition of authority submitting with passive obedience where they cannot lawfully performe active This extends not to warrant any schisme or heresie that esteem themselves only to be the true Church as did the Donatists and others to oppose out of feare of their owne ruine the proceedings and restraints of the more Orthodoxe and generall body of a sound Church whose authority doth preponderate and oversway her apostating members so long as by the doctrine publikely taught in her men may be saved and built up §. 30. Against commission of evill upon any humane command or threats Fourth member about commission of evill upon humane command The fourth member of the case wherein a man ought to expose his life to death in causes concerning religion is when a man is desired commanded or threatned to doe any sinne forbidden by Gods word that then hee doe it not although he therefore doe die as Iosephs practise manifests in resisting his whorish mistris a Gen. 39.12 and the three children that would not upon the Kings command worship the golden Image to save their lives Daniel 3.18 Because it is better for us to die than deliberately and wilfully to sinne against God as the woman with her seaven sonnes did choose 2 Mach. 7. according to S. Augustines judgement who sayes that if it be propounded to a man Vt aut mali aliquid faciat aut mali aliquid patiatur eligat non facere mala quam non pati mala b Epist 204. that either he should doe some evill or suffer some calamity then let him choose rather not to doe evill than not to suffer evill Observe How we are to abhorre sin For we are ever to doe that which may most neerely unite us to God our chiefe good and to shunne what may divide us from him which nothing can doe but our sinnes specially those that consist in the transgression of the negative Commandements and are most opposite to God and incompatible with him and therefore those lawes doe binde ad semper to the alwayes observing of them and cannot be dispensed withall seeing God is unchangeable The evill of sinne should be more terrible to us than death it selfe not onely for that it is the cause of death and imbitters it but also because it deprives us of a greater good of our spirituall life that farre exceeds the naturall The beatificall object that sinne deprives us of is the infinite blessed God from whom to be separated is worse than death it self and in that respect rather than we should sinne we should choose to suffer death which is a glorious kinde of Martyrdome and a meanes of advancement to happinesse for the power and practise of the truth laying downe our lives which is a more undoubted signe of grace and salvation than is the suffering of many for holding the truth in opinion and profession Wee should choose rather not to bee than not to bee happy for the originall and end of our being is better than our being it selfe in regard that our happinesse is not of and in our selves but in and from another who is both our beginning and end §. 31. Of the kindes of sinnes of commission to be avoyded Evils of sin to be avoided These sinfull evills that wee ought thus carefully to avoid and forbeare to death are of two sorts 1. Against the law of nature First those that be directly and absolutely forbidden by the Law of nature as fundamentally unlawfull at all times and in all cases for the contrariety that they have against the nature of God and against the inbred principles of reason and conscience of which no question can be made but that wee are alwaies utterly to shun them notwithstanding any humane command or inforcement that may be to the contrary because no human power can dissolve the obligation of those ingrafted Commandements of God and nature Innata Lex Rom. 2.15 that we may be discharged in conscience from keeping of them which would overthrow both divinity and humanity neither can any free us from the punishment of the transgression of them both because equity and Law requires that the soule that sins shall die and also for that there is no power matchable with Gods and natures to protect or free us by force from their vengeance 2. Against the positive Law of God Secondly the sins that wee are to shun and not wittingly and willingly to do upon any threats or worldly danger or for any profit are those that are forbidden by the positive Law and revealed will of God the violating whereof doth wrong the soveraignty and honor of God who is the absolute and onely independant King of all the world and his will the supreame unerring rule of our obedience throughout our lives our transgression whereof is a breach of that loyalty and due subjection which wee owe to that our highest Lord. To whese positive Law conformity is more properly obedience to God than conformity to the Law of nature is by it selfe considered Because the ground of our conformity to the Law of nature is naturall inclination and Reason equally binding Heathens aswell as Christians But the ground of our conformity to the positive Law of God is principally the soveraigne Authority and Will of God himselfe which kinde of obedience is that which is properly of the Church and her members to God and proceeds from faith love feare c. Evangelicall or Thelogicall graces From which obedience to God no wight can absolve or excuse us that we may lawfully and safely subject our selves to feare to please or to obey any other in opposition or contraty to him and his will Reasons 1. Because there is none above God whose will may be preferred or equalled to his to whom all is subordinate in nature state and imployment 2. Neither is any man Lord over the Conscience either to bind or discharge it contrary to the Law or will of God that we
himselfe in answering negatively Not guilty For although hee knowes and hath elsewhere confessed himselfe to bee guilty of the fact materially considered in the substance of it yet he may be ignorant as most men are whether that fact of his formally considered is or may be found to be treason felony burglary or the like as by the inditement it is charged upon him and in which respect he is to suffer death for it if he do answer affirmatively And although he should certainly know that his fact were such in construction and termes of Law as by his Inditement the same is charged upon him yet is he not to answer affirmatively because not he but the present impannelled Iury are the competent and lawfull Iudges to find or not to find it to be such in that forme and Law quality And therefore hee is bound in conscience to answer negatively Not guilty of such a fact under that forme or terme and Law notion whereby and wherefore his life in that respect may be taken away And so by pleading not guilty hee lies not nor contradicts himselfe but thereby takes the allowed benefit of putting it to a legall triall whether his fact shall bee found against him in that sense and forme as in those Law termes he is charged with the same in his inditement and in which respect onely he can be put to death for it which course if hee should not use of answering Not guilty but that he should stand mute or answer affirmatively Guilty he should be indirectly a self-murderer as hath beene shewed Repli But then it may be further replied when such a malefactor shall after his pleading to the Inditement not guilty bee publickly examined by the Iudge about his fact considered in the substance of it without the vesture of such termes or Law notions put upon it how can he answer negatively against his conscience and former confession before a Justice Answer I answer first the Iudges questions to such an one at publick triall after his negative plea to the bill of Inditement are ministred in favour of the party arraigned both that he may upon better advisement traverse his former confession by his negative answer contrary to the which confession hee is allowed at the barre to plead not guilty And also that hee may not bee cast or condemned upon any evidence or verdit of others against him before he bee heard answer for himselfe what hee can say for the negative in his owne defence against the affirmative evidence or sentence produced against him where it is to be considered that the primary intention and expectation of the Iudge in his questions at triall is that by the prisoners answers hee may the better decerne the truth or falshood of the evidence of others against him and how himselfe may proceed in accepting of the verdit and in giving judgement according to justice and not thereby to wring affirmative answers from the arraigned against their owne lives when others cannot touch them which is contrary to the Law of nature and of God Secondly it is alwaies to be observed by every malefactor that in his answers hee doe not to save his life make any lie neither directly nor yet by equivocation or mentall reservation and also that he doe not so confesse the truth against his owne life that he should thereby make himselfe guilty of indirect self-murder Both which evils hee may avoid by the medium or middle course either of traverse and demurrer delaying and putting off the Iudge and Iury from himselfe to informe themselves by other evidences than his owne or else by silence after his generall negative plea of not guilty replying nothing to such questions as the answers thereof may intangle him either in a lie or in indirect self-murder after which manner of answering nothing our blessed Saviour behaved himself before Pilate Iohn 19.9 Although that such silence or not answering directly may be construed to be an acknowledgement of the fact that he is indited for yet thereby he shall not be active but onely passive in being found guilty and so condemned to die whereby he shall be free of indirect self-murder in that respect The confession of a malefactor upon examination before a Iustice when the same is against his owne life may bee construed to have beene either rashly and unwarrantably done by the Examinate against which therefore he is allowed at his Triall to plead not guilty or else that hee did the same upon some motives and reasons of conscience for the good and salvation of his soule which are things properly belonging to another Court And therefore in humane Courts of Assize the questions and answers in this case reach not so farre as to rack or discover the conscience of a man to the taking away of his owne life by his owne confession which the Law of nature and of God binds a man to preserve Although a capitall malefactor is bound in conscience not to lie in his answers yet he is not bound to reveale all the truth he knowes against himselfe specially where hee is not tied by some speciall divine bond so to doe A negative answer at triall is as strong to save a man as his former affirmative in confession before a Iustice can be to condemne him except either he publickly at his triall acknowledge the same or that there be some other proofe or evidence against him And therefore I conclude that it is not necessary in conscience that whatsoever truth such a man in this case hath once confessed that he should every where and at all times upon interrogatories to be answered at will confesse the same with perill of his life but that hee may be silent or forbeare to answer otherwise than he is bound by the lawes of the Court where he answers For if another be bound to keepe close a mans confession made to him of his secret faults that man is not compellable to disclose the same of himselfe specially against his owne life when he cannot doe the same without being guilty of indirect self-murder as in this case I have shewed by the rules of divinity and right reason for resolving of weak consciences in this point not intermedling to argue and determine the same by the rules of the Common-law of this Kingdome which is impertinent to my profession and beyond my understanding and therefore I leave that worke to the learned of that most Honourable profession to whose cognizance this subject legally considered doth appertaine §. 7. Of indirect self-murder by commission The second degree of indirect self-murder is by commission in divers branches The second meanes of indirect self-murder is by a course of commission or of doing things unlawfully tending to bring a man to his death which is a degree grosser than the former and consists in divers branches 1. Abuse of lawfull things First by abusing lawfull things in transgressing due moderation in their use for time