Six sermons preached in Ireland in difficult times by Edward, Lord Bishop of Cork and Ross.

THE CHRISTIAN Law of the Sword, Both as to its Publick and Private Use. Briefly stated in a Sermon preach'd at Christchurch Cork, &c. Octob. xxiii. 1685.

The TEXT. Matth. xxvi. 52.

—Put up thy Sword into its place: for all they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword.

TO the end we may more perfect∣ly comprehend the true occasion and full import of these words, it will be expedient to look back to the

forty seventh verse, where we find our Lord betrayed into the hands of an armed Rabble, a great multitude with Swords and Staves, they are there called. After the Traytors Ceremonies and the Solemnities of the Treason were over, St. Peter (the best spirited, or most metall'd, person amongst all our Lords Followers) sensi∣ble of his Masters danger, having a Sword, drew it, and strook a Servant of the High Priests, and cut off his Ear (ver. 51.) As to the hurt done to the person wounded, our Lord forthwith miraculously cured that: But as to Good St. Peters Officiousness (for so it is to be named rather than Service) that received no other entertainment but check and chiding, and that in three verses together; of which the Text is the first: Then Jesus said unto him, put up thy Sword into its place: for all they that take the Sword shall perish by the Sword.

Which words need a little Explanation, at least for restraining two phrases, in them; else they will scarce be admitted as uni∣versally true. For neither can it be said, that all, who in any sense take the Sword, are thereby guilty of Sin; nor even that all who sinfully take the Sword do, as to the event, actually perish by the Sword.

[As to the Check here given to St. Pe∣ter;

Put up thy Sword into its place, I may suppose that plain enough: especially see∣ing another Evangelist hath reported it, Put up thy Sword into its Sheath. That truly (I mean the Sheath) is the only due place of a Sword, when it is by Peters, or indeed by any Clergy-mans side. Let it, I say, be kept in the Scabbard, if a Cler∣gy-man wear it: or rather let him not wear it at all; as mindful that his Coat is a more-legal Defensative to him than his Weapon. Si Clericus Arma ferens ver∣beretur, non incidit in Canonem verberans. vid. Gloss. ad Causam 17. Quest. 4. Cap. Quisquis inventus fuerit. But this by the by.]

The Reason given of this Check is much more dubious. For they that take the Sword, &c. and who are they that take the Sword in our Lords sense, or in the way here reprehended? Some have answered, they who take it (ut interficiant) with an intent to kill: but that's too large. For both Magistrate and Civil Officers, as well as Military men, take it with this intent, yet without sin. Gratians answer in the Canon Law is much better, and indeed very full and clear (Ille Gladium accipit, qui nullâ su∣periori ac legitimâ Potestate jubente vel con∣cedente in sanguinem alicujus armatur. Caus.

23. Qu. 4. Ille Gladium) He takes the Sword, says he, who is armed against the Life of any one, without the Command or Commission of a superiour lawful Power. So that there is a wide difference betwixt accipere Gladium & suscipere, taking the Sword, and re∣ceiving or undertaking it. The supreme Magistrate and those commissionated by him receive or undertake the Sword; the Magistrate from God, who has committed it to him by putting him in the place he holds; the Civil Officer and Souldier from the Magistrate, who has commissionated both: But they take the Sword, who of their own rash or headstrong Will usurp it to themselves, be it on pretence soe∣ver.

Now such, saith our Saviour, shall perish by the Sword. But is this true? Have all Murderers or Rebels since our Lords saying these words gone out of the world by vio∣lent Deaths? Or have not some (most no∣torious & principal ones, even in our own memory) dyed in their beds? they have so indeed; but our Lord reports here matter of Law, not of History or Prophesi••. As to the Event it is not true, that all w•••• take the Sword perish by the Sword; but as to the Sentence of the Law and demerit of the Sin, there can be nothing of more constant

and perpetual truth, than that all such are guilty of Murder, and incur the Penal∣ty, or really forfeit Life. The Law in this case seems in a manner of the same date with mankind. For in the Old world, when Cain had murder'd his Brother Abel, It shall come to pass, saith he, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. This Fear, or Expectation of his, could arise from no∣thing else, but the demerit of his Sin, by reason of some Law, either innate or even then promulgate for the punishing Murder with death. But upon the reinstating man∣kind upon earth, after the Floud, it was immediately in terminis or expresly pub∣lisht, Genes. ix. 6. Whoso sheddeth mans Bloud, by Man shall his Bloud be shed. It is by Moses's Law reinforced; Life for Life, Exod. xxi. 23. And for ought I can see, the Execution under it was as quick as the Law; for amongst the Jews, at Common Law, if I may so speak in their State, the person or persons next akin were the Aven∣gers of Bloud, and they slew the Murderer as soon as they could meet him; nor do I find any Tryal in case of Murder amongst the Jews till the Cities of Refuge were set up, and even then, in case of manifest and plain Murder, the Tryal did not lie; but as before said, the Avenger of Bloud was to

slay the Murderer as soon as he met him. Numb. xxxv. 15, 16, &c. Thus was the Law in this matter before our Lords time; and he in the Text rather gives it an Evangelical Sanction, than mitigates it. So that as to the merit of the Crime, by le∣gal Sentence, there can be no Question. And I may truly add, that there is no case wherein God more frequently takes the Forfeiture, or actually executes the Sen∣tence of the Law, in this world, than in the case of doing violence to the Lives of others. So far is this our Lords Speech true even as to the Event also, that perhaps not one Murderer in ten dies the death of other men.

The sum then of what our Lord avows to back his Rebuke, or the Check he gave St. Peter is this;

That all those who of their own accord, and without due Authority, attempt or take away the Life of another, are before God guil∣ty of Murder, and deserve the Punishment thereof, which is, to fall by the Hand of Justice.

And for the asserting hereof, I do not think it is possible, I will not say to urge, but even to devise any Evidence of such advantageous circumstances, as this in the Text: I will therefore press it more di∣stinctly.

It has ever generally been esteemed law∣ful to repel Force with Force. Now we see our Lord was here most forcibly seised, and that as was evident in order to suffer all the Violence and Cruelty, which Malice could exercise upon him: yet never be∣fore appeared such Innocence and Holiness in humane Nature, as from his very Con∣ception and Cradle, had shone in him. Whether the Powers which commanded his Seisure were just or no, we will not now examine; it is most sure, their use of their Power against him was the unjustest of any Instance assignable from the foundation of World. Further, St. Peter was one of our Lords Followers, and, if the Holy Je∣sus had had an House, Menials. Add here∣to, the Person in whose defence he drew was so extraordinary, that not only his Words, but even his Presence might seem to warrant any act that was capable of being good, if done in his behalf. Last∣ly, even himself and his Brethren were in danger from that Rabble, as well as his Master. What a multitude of concurrent circumstances are there here to justifie St. Peters act? Especially, I say, his own de∣fence, the defence of his Brethren; nay, the defence of God himself in humane Nature, and all in a most just Cause, against Power

more unjustly and more hellishly used, than ever any Power was or could be on the face of the Earth; and both before and in the behalf of a person vested with Power pa∣ramount to all under Heaven. Good God! can there be ever Case again like to this, so much, I say, as imagined? Yet for all this Peter is chid for his attempt; Put up thy Sword into its place: for they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword. No Cause then so just, which can warrant pri∣vate men to attempt the Life of others, without Authority from them, to whom God has entrusted the Power of the Sword.

For the further evidencing hereof I will lay down and make good the seven follow∣ing Conclusions.

First. God alone originally and sovereignly hath the power of humane Life and Death. Of the truth whereof there needs no other (as indeed there can no more solid) reason be given, than this, that he alone gave, or could give Life at first, and still he alone preserves and continues, or indeed can con∣tinue it. Mille viae Mortis; there are a thousand ways of extinguishing Life, but either the Gift of it or the Continuance of it is alone from God. We, poor mortals, are so far from being able to give Life to

any thing, that we do not yet know what it is. That we live we know; what Life is we know not: but daily Experience in our Friends and selves teacheth us, the the very preserving it in being, when gi∣ven, at least to the term we would, is be∣yond the power of Art, Industry, Strength or even that little Omnipotent (as it is too usually looked upon) Money it self. A minute of it cannot be purchased by all the Treasures on or under Earth. Psal. xlix. 8, 9. The Redemption of the Soul, that is, the prorogation of Life (as there the phrase most certainly signifies) is precious, and it ceaseth for ever: None can give to God a Ransome for it, that he should live for ever, and not see Death. Any and all the least retrievals from it are of God alone, and proper to his Almighty Power, Psal. lxviii. 20. He is the God of Salvation even in this kind, and to God the Lord belong the Issues from Death. Now seeing it was he alone, who when he had formed the Body of the first Man, breathed into him the Breath of Life, so that Man became a living Soul, seeing also it is he, whose Visitation preserveth mans Spirit, how can it in Rea∣son or Justice be conceived, that any be∣sides him should have Sovereign Power of Life and Death? How should any have

right to take away, what neither they by themselves, nor by any principal from whence they derive, could ever give? God therefore alone, I say, has original and sovereign power of Life and Death.

2. The derivative Power hereof in every Kingdom or Commonwealth is immediately in the supreme Magistrate alone; that is, God has in every such publick Body commit∣ted this Power to none immediately, but to those whom therein he has made Su∣preme.

By the Supreme Magistrate in every Na∣tion, I mean that Civil Power, whose acts are not under the Controll of another, so that they may be annull'd or made void at the pleasure of other hu∣mane Will. Now such Ma∣gistrates the Apostle St. Paul uses to style Powers, Rom. xiii. 1, 2. Tit. iii. 1. And touching such Power, or (which is the same, for he there uses the terms Powers and Ru∣lers indifferently for one another) touch∣ing such Ruler, he says expresly, ver. 4. He is the Minister of God (Gods Agent or Vicegerent) a Revenger to execute wrath

upon every one that doth evil. He is the Mi∣nister of God, to wit, He alone immedi∣ately within his Territories, and no other but from, by or under him. Nor can there be a greater proof hereof than our Lords Practice here in the Text. Might any person, not being Supreme Magistrate, claim to himself a right to take the Sword, how is it possible that St. Peter should have been reprehensible in drawing his Sword, in the circumstances he did, upon the mixed multitude of Jews and Romans sent by the Authority of the Sanhedrim and Roman Prefect? If there had been any Power of this nature in any private per∣son, not derived from the Supreme Pow∣er, certainly he could not have wanted it in the present juncture. Yet you hear how solemnly and severely our Lord re∣prehends him for the Attempt. And as neer as Christ was to his Death at the time of this Event in the Text, before he departed out of the world, he put another Seal to this truth. When Pilate after our Lords first Arraignment before him, and upon a strict Examination, a little arro∣gantly thus expostulates with him, viz. Knowest thou not that I have power to cru∣cifie thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, thou couldest have no power

over me, except it were given thee from above. John xix. 10, 11. In which words, if we consider who Pilate was, namely, the Roman Governour sent to them by Cesar (the Su∣preme) we have a most plain Testimony, that however wicked Supreme Powers may be, or however wickedly they may use their Power, yet is their Power given them by God, and none may invade it, or take upon him to exercise it, but as they shall impart or delegate it. The Power of the Sword therefore, or of Life and Death, is by God committed only to the Supreme Magistrate, that is, as I presume none here will scruple, within these Kingdoms to his Majesty.

Thirdly. From hence it necessarily fol∣lows, that No one of himself can be Lord of his own Life. For he is no more to execute the power of the Sword upon himself, than upon another; because he, as well as others, is a Subject. I know the contrary practice, namely dispatching a mans self out of life has been celebrated as an heroically virtuous act by divers Hea∣thens, and some great persons amongst them have been admired and commended for it extremely.

But of all Examples, Heathen mens are surely least to be drawn into Rules, for

the Authorising of doubtful Actions. [There is a Book also writ by a Christi∣an Doctor of our Church, which is rather slandred than truly reported to maintain the Lawfulness of Self-slaughter. But those who have read and understand that Book, know, the Authors design therein was but to move men to more charitable Judgment than usually is put on such, who lay vio∣lent hands upon themselves; and that he perswades (amongst others) by this great Argument; that the Act does not ever pre∣clude Repentance, but that 'tis possible the very Attrition, which some such persons may be thought to have (in articulo mor∣tis) in the very expiring, their Souls may be interpreted by God as a sincere Sor∣row. Now his supposing this act pardon∣able upon Repentance, admits it to be a Sin; and then being by us known or even but strongly conceived to be so, it will be damnable. For he that doubteth is damned, if he act, because he acteth not of Faith. Rom. xiv. ult.] To be short, the instan∣ces we find of it in Scripture are only of wicked and desperate men, and that when they have been rejected by God, forsaken by his Spirit, and an evil Spirit has seised them. Thus as to Saul, long before that desperate act of falling on his own Sword;

(1 Sam. xxxi. 5.) The Spirit of God had de∣parted from him, and an evil Spirit from the Lord troubled him; chap. xvi. 14. that is, he was in a sort permitted to the Devil to be actuated by him. So as to Judas, after the Sop Satan entred into him, (John xiii. 27) and then he quickly sold and betray∣ed his Master, and went and hanged himself. Laqueo Traditor periit. Laqueum talibus de∣reliquit, says St. Austin (ad Petilianum.) The Traytor dyed by the Halter, and left the Halter only to such as himself. The like deplorable and dreadful condition, as to his spiritual concerns at least, may we rea∣sonably conclude that Devilish Counsellor Achitophel to have been in, when being enraged that Absolon would not take his hellish Advice, he also went home and hanged himself. Besides these three, I re∣member no instance in Canonical Scri∣pture of any who directly slew themselves. Sampson indeed, as in case of other Mira∣cles done by him, so by immediate and extraordinary impulse of the Spirit of God (that is, by Divine Warrantie and Command) pull'd down the Philistines great Hall of Judgment upon them and himself amongst them: But this is only parallel to a great Soldiers going on cer∣tain death, to defeat the Enemy, when

duly commissioned so to do! and there∣fore must not come into account here. There is besides in the Apocryphal Books an instance of one who acted most barba∣rous violence on himself; first falling on his own Sword, and then pulling out his very own Bowels, and throwing them a∣mongst his Enemies, rather than he would fall into their hand to dye by them: and he is there commended for that inhumane act, which is stiled dying manfully. 2 Mac∣cab. xiv. 42, &c. But as that Book, ac∣cording to what the Author of it himself in the two last verses confesses in effect, was not written by Divine Inspiration, so were there nothing else in it to prove it Apocryphal, this alone that it commends what is so much against Nature both for the matter and manner of the Action were abundantly sufficient.

But besides, [it is most true, what was well said in another case by an old Bishop of Carlisle in Richard the Seconds time, We are not to live by examples, but by Laws.] The Law of God runs indefinitely, and so (because there is no ground for a Re∣striction as to this case) universally, thou shalt not murder; that is, neither another, nor thy self. Which Interpretation must, indeed of necessity, be admitted here; for

that our Lord himself makes the Love which we bear to our selves, to be the measure or standard of the Love we owe to others. Thou shalt love thy Neighbour, saith he, as thy self. Which extending to all the Precepts of the second Table, will as to this run thus; thou shalt no more mur∣der thy Neighbour than thy self; that is, first of all thou shalt not murder thy self. And though there be not in the Law of God any Precept more particular or more ex∣presly prohibitive as to this act, (as nei∣ther is there upon very grounds, against several other most unnatural Sins that might be named,) yet is there all Reason in the world against it. For, let us faith∣fully examine, Is the Root whence this act proceeds such from whence good Fruit may be expected? Is its true cause at any time good or truly praise-worthy? Was there ever person, yet who laid violent hands upon himself, who did it not either out of Pride, Cowardice, Rashness, or mad Despair? Out of Pride, I say; because either he would not crouch to his betters, or else see his equals become his superiors: or out of Cowardice, as afraid to suffer what his Enemies might put him to; (now in both these cases, is it not more brave to dare to live? or out of Rashness and Madness, or Despair; as impatient of pre∣sent

evils, and hoping in this Life no bet∣ter state. And if out of any of these, is it at all commendable? True Philosophy it self taught better, and for∣bad, Injussu Imperatoris, id est Dei, de Praesidio & statione vi∣tae decedere.

The true Chri∣stian, like a good Soldier, must not forsake his post, except the great Emperor of the world, the Al∣mighty God, by his Law or Providence, command him thence.

[ Malus servus creditus est, saith Ʋlpian, qui aliquid fa∣cit, quo magis se rebus huma∣nis extrahat, ut puta laque∣um torsit, &c.

He's adjudged an ill Servant (by the Civil Laws) who but prepares any thing to dispatch himself out of this world; as if he fit an Hal∣ter, mix Poison or the like; And much more such is he, who destroys himself by any of these: For such a Servant plainly steals himself thereby out of his Masters Service, and so does every man himself out of Gods, who removes himself hence before God dismisses him.

Nay the Laws we spoke of go further as to this point affirming, ( Neminem Dominum membrorum suorum)

none to be Lord of his own Limbs; nor is it by them ordinarily permitted to any, without the consent of his Superiors, so much as to cut off a Limb, for the saving the rest of the Body. Which, though pos∣sibly in some circumstances too strict, yet shews according to the sense of those Law∣givers (who were reputed, and I believe not unjustly, some of the wisest in the world) that there is no one of so private a condition, in whom his Prince and Coun∣trey may not so far challenge a right, as to divest him of the sole power of dispo∣sing of himself.

I will conclude this point of Self-slaugh∣ter (which, by this time, I think I may be bold to stile Self-murder) with a fa∣mous passage of St. Austin, transcribed out of him into the body of the Canon Law.

This, saith he, we say, this we affirm, this we by all possible ways avow, that no one may bring voluntary death upon himself, to escape thereby a∣ny temporal pains, least he fall into e∣ternal

ones: No one may do it by rea∣son of anothers sins, lest he thereby be∣gin to have most grievous sin of his own; nor because of any of his own past sins, for the curing of which by Re∣pentance, he has more need to continue in life. Nor through desire of a better life, which may be hoped for after death; because a better Life after Death, be∣longs not to him who is guilty of his own Death.

This then is our third Conclusion; No one is Lord so much as of his own Life.

Fourthly. Whosoever therefore pretends or exercises a Power over other mens Lives, must either derive that Power from the Su∣preme Magistrate to whose Dominions he be∣longs, or in case he do not, he becomes by such Exercise or Attempts, either an Ʋsurper, or Murderer, or both. If he pretend to a pub∣lick Power herein, not deriving it as afore∣said, he is an Ʋsurper, and that, as gene∣rally it comes to pass in all Usurpers, is as much as a publick Murderer. If he exer∣cise only a private Power, as suppose in righting or avenging himself or any third person against some single injurious man, he hereby becomes a private Murderer: at least before God, in case the Life of him∣self, or of any other, be but hazarded by

his Act. This is most plain: for having no such Power in himself, and it being by God committed only to the Magistrate, he can never come by it regularly and in Gods way, except he receive it from them, to whom God has committed it. Thus, though the whole remains of Sauls House were in open Hostility against David, and Ishbosheth particularly so keen an Enemy to Davids person that he sought his Life, yet when Baanah and Rechab under pretence to do David a Service, and avenge their Lord the King of Saul and his Seed, go in privately to Ishbosheth's House, and take off his Head to bring it as a present to Da∣vid, David pronounces Sentence against them both as Murderers; because though there were a publick Quarrel, yet these two officious wretches, having no Com∣mission to act or interpose therein, could not derive any Right or Authority for what they did either from God or Man. 2 Sam iv. 9, &c. Admit Ishbosheth did de∣serve Death, yet these men had no right to inflict it on him. Thus as to our fourth Conclusion.

The fifth is, The Magistrate exerciseth this Power of the Sword, either in the Admi∣nistration of Civil Justice, or of lawful War. A third way, I think, cannot be assigned:

and therefore, as we will more fully touch by and by, whosoever pretend to have received Power of Life and Death from the Magistrate but are neither Civil Offi∣cers, or legitimately enrolled in the Mar∣tial List, are still by such pretence no bet∣ter than Murderers.

First, as to matter of Civil Justice: the persons usually commissioned herein, are either those who dispence the Laws, as Judges, Justices, and the like; or those who execute them, as Sheriffs and Ʋnder-Officers. That both these sorts of men must derive their Power from the King as Supreme, or else cannot act warranta∣bly, I think none will question. We have precedents enough in the Jewish Kingdom. In Davids time, 2 Sam. viii. 15, 16, &c. But more explicitly afterwards: 2 Chron. xix. 5, 6. to the end; Jehosophat there set Judges in the Land, some fixed, as it would seem, through all the fenced Cities of Judah City by City: others itiner ant, who went out and returned to Jerusalem. ver. 8. And the Subordination of Officers to the ordinary Judges, as well as of the Judges to the Supreme Powers, we have account of, not only in the Old Testament, but even from our Lord himself in the Go∣spels. Matth. v. 25. Luk. xii. 58. Here

is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Magistrate (we render it) or Prince, that is he who has Power to appoint the Judge: The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Judge, who is to determine Controversies between Bloud and Bloud, according to Law and Commandment, Statutes and Judgments. And lastly here is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Exactor, as the word signifies, whose business it was to put or see put the Sentence in Executi∣on.

Thus we see how this Civil Power of the Sword was legally and orderly deriv∣ed, diffused and managed amongst the Jews. And the same God of Order still governs the world, and both does, and ever will delight in Order.

Secondly. When Civil Justice cannot take place, the Magistrate exercises the Power of the Sword in lawful War. Some∣times Offenders are too numerous for civil Punishments, and stand in justification of their Crimes against the Powers which God has ordained. Sometimes not so much a few private persons, as whole Na∣tions, at least those who manage Natio∣nal concerns, may be injurious to a neigh∣bouring People: And in such case Justice cannot be done without War. Now here also the Magistrate bears not the Sword in

vain: but he is to raise what armed Force he sees fit, for the righting or defending himself or people. And his people are to be obedient to him, to stand by him with Lives and Estates, and to serve him in the War; And whomsoever he Commissions, not only may, according to the tenor of their Commission (which by the way they are to take care they do not exceed) but ought, to use the Sword; for supposing the War lawful, the Duty of the Subject in this case follows by necessary conse∣quence.

Now you'l say, when is a War law∣ful?

1. When there is such necessity of it as before suggested; that is, when Publick Justice or Right cannot take place without it; and when the Benefit, which is sought by it, is ample enough to countervail all the visible mischiefs of the War. In which case the Supreme Power is Judge; not the peo∣ple, who cannot be supposed competently to understand the publick state of things and circumstances.

2. When the War is made by the Autho∣rity that has Power to make it; namely, by the Supreme in every Nation. For we have heard, though the Cause be just, e∣very one may not of his own head take

the Sword, but a lawful Commission is to be expected.

3. In the general, it is requisite also to a lawful War, that it be publickly proclaim∣ed: that is, Justice should be demanded, the obstinate summoned to their Duty, and no proceeding till such Duty or Justice be refused. Somewhat very near this God expresly commanded the people of the Jews, Deuteronom. xx. 10, 11, &c. When thou comest to a City to fight against it, thou shalt proclaim Peace to it—And if it will make no Peace with thee, but will make War against thee, thou shalt besiege it, &c. But if Justice may be had with Peace, Peace certainly is to be prefer∣red.

Lastly. Even War it self should be ma∣naged lawfully; and Justice, Redress, or Sa∣faction only sought, not Revenge. Cruel∣ty should be as much forborn, and Mercy as much exercised as publick Safety would admit. These things will be further use∣ful to us by and by. In the mean while let this stand as our fifth Conclusion. The Magistrate exercises the Power of the Sword either in Civil Justice or lawful War.

Sixthly. All designed taking away the Life of man, otherwise than in a way of Civil

Justice or lawful War (and that also, unless by such only as are respectively commissi∣oned by the Magistrate) is Murder; yea the very Attempt of it Murder in the Eye of God. For, out of these two cases, no man can have any thing to do lawfully with the Sword.

You'l say, What should a man do in case of his own ntcessary Defence? I an∣swer.

1. I may not directly and ordinarily design to take away anothers Life in my own defence. It may so come to pass that I may be so unhappy as to be necessitated to do that, from whence it may ensue: but, if I be guiltless of Bloud therein, my killing the man was indirectly, by accident and consequent, not by design. The thing I designed, or ought to have designed, was only disabling him, and thereby securing my self: the killing the man in this behalf falls out beyond my intention, in case I am innocent. And even this, the utter dis∣abling a man to hurt me, ought not ordi∣narily, I say, to be done: for ordinarily a man may defend himself, if he will be prudent, and use all advantages he has, without hazarding his own or his Neigh∣bours Life, and perhaps without mu••ila∣ting eithers person.

But it will be said, This case of Self-Defence comes neither under Civil Justice nor Lawful War. I answer therefore,

2. 'Tis mixt of both. In case I am set upon by Robbers, or by like unreasona∣ble men, who attempt my Life, besides that the Law of Nature gives me a War∣rant to defend my self against lawless Vio∣lence, every honest peaceable Subject may in such circumstances where other Officers cannot be had, be supposed by an impli∣cit or virtual Concession or Commission of the Magistrate, to be an Officer to bring such miscreants to Justice; which bringing them to Justice, next to our own Defence, should be a principal part of every mans design in repelling Violence by Violence.

Again, it is fairly enough reducible to lawful War. For I am sup∣posed in the present case assaulted with Weapons of War; and the Prince has not opportunity to com∣mand Civil Officers or ar∣med men to my Relief and Protection. I cannot there∣fore but interpret I have his Leave to fight in Defence of the Peace and my self, against the Enemies of the Prince, of his Laws, and Government; for such all Robbers and

Hectors are. If there were in the case any opposing of those who were sent by the Magistrate, though by abuse of his Power, as it was in St. Peters case in the Text, I could pretend to no right in my own Defence, but I must submit.

In like manner, if I my self begun the Quarrel, and were the first assailant: for in both these cases I were injurious to the Magistrate and could not reasonably in∣terpret any such Favour from him belong∣ing to me. But being thus illegally at∣tempted, I have Justice, the Law of Na∣ture and of my Prince upon my side: I act under and not against the Equity of this sixth Conclusion.

Seventhly and lastly. It being evident by what has been abovesaid, that the Military as well as Civil Sword belongs only to the Supreme Magistrate; therefore the levy∣ing or waging War without or against his Commission is (by the Text) Murder, and perhaps upon other grounds more. It is certainly such a taking the Sword, as deserves perishing by the Sword. To speak the same thing in terms more ac∣commodate to our Government: For any person or persons to levy or make War within these Kingdoms without the Kings Commission or against those who are com∣missionated

by him, is, I say, and ever has been, by the Evangelical Law in the Text, Murder: and certainly, by right Reason as well as by other Law, somewhat more than Murder, namely, Rebellion and Trea∣son. It is indeed the most dreadful and complicate Murder imaginable. It is first direct and plain Murder of all who fall by our hands. It is further Murder of our selves; of our Souls by Sin, of our Bo∣dies by exposing our own Lives. Lastly, it is Murder of all we draw in with us, and that, as of our selves, both as to Soul and Body, without Gods great Mercy. But it is, besides all these, most proper and plain Rebellion; for it is a plain in∣vading the Kings Right, and in part, or so far forth, a dethroning him; and there's no doubt, but if it succeed, it ends in total dethroning and murdering him too. After all which said, I may chal∣lenge both our old and later, our open∣faced and our demure Rebels to make bet∣ter of it if they can.

Upon the whole, the sum is, the Kings Majesty is amongst us the Fountain of all Power Civil and Military. Without a Commission from him, express or virtual, as before determined, none may either privately or publickly take the Sword;

or if they do, by the Law of God, though they act never so privately, they shall pe∣rish by the Sword, they have run into the Guilt, and incur'd the Punishment of Mur∣derers.

Now by way of Application

First, for our own Direction in the hum∣bling our Souls before God for our Sins: We may see by what has been said the ture Nature, and learn the true Names of ma∣ny of those our Sins, in the view of style of which possibly we have been too fa∣vourable. All the rash Attempts we have made on our own or others Life, how∣ever they have escaped the Sentence of human Laws, are by the Law of God no less than Murder: He that taketh the Sword shall perish by the Sword; that is, as we have heard, deserves it as a Murde∣rer. All those Duels and Rencounters, which our Wine, Passions, or other dis∣orders, nay which the Importunity of As∣sociates, which false-named Friendship and vain Honour, have at any time engaged us in, however we have come off, are be∣fore God so many acts of Murder, and we our selves, (toties quoties) Murderers. To which private Sins of our own, if we

add those direct and actual Murders which are and have been committed in this Na∣tion, not only in Duels (a barbarous Custome yet in all ages, especially these later most impiously frequent) but Mas∣sacres and Rebellions (not to speak of o∣ther more private methods of Murders on occasion of Robberies and by malicious lying in wait, Poison, Trechery, false Accusations, and some like ways of killing men, under pretence of Justice;) if, I say, we add all these together, good God! under what a weight of Bloudguiltiness does this Nation lye! And what need have, even the inno∣cent, to be in daily Prayers to God, that some overflowing Scourge sweep not them away with the guilty! But much more then, what need have all that have been guilty, (and particularly, if any of them, who had their hands in the work of this time was four and forty years, do yet sur∣vive, what need have they) to be not only in Prayers but Tears night and day, if so be their unchristian taking, and in∣humane using of the Sword, may be for∣given unto them. Sure it is, whatsoever some men may flatter themselves and o∣thers, Sins of so deep a dy will never be forgiven without profound Repentance.

I have heard there are many persons a∣broad

in this Kingdom at present, who utterly deny there was any Rebellion of the Irish at the time we assign it: nay, I have read some of their Papers giving an ac∣count of those Commotions, as they would be content to have them termed, that style them [Justissimum sanctimúmque Bellum pro Fide.] A most just and holy War for the Faith. I could wish from my heart that all the Cruelties which were then, or have been since acted, were utterly forgot, and I beseech God forgive them, as far as any of the Actors or the Abettors of them are yet in a state remissible. But I cannot consent to, nor endure to let pass un∣controlled such miscalling of things, lest men, supposing the things to answer the names, carry all away, in a course of self∣deceit and flattery, to their own and others destruction.

First then, admitting, but not grant∣ing, that All That was the true Christian Faith, which the Natives generally then professed, Did they not then enjoy it, and had they not more Liberty of it before they broke out into Arms than ever since? This was not then the Rea∣son, why they took the Sword. But a∣gain, admit this were the Reason, can a∣ny Christian man, who considers what

he says, maintain this Doctrine; That Subjects of their own heads may take up Arms, to obtain what Form of Religion they please for their Country; that is for them, who like not that Form of Religi∣on, as well as for them who like it? This is not only unchristian, but most unrea∣sonable to affirm. But,

Secondly, Was not the Sword taken, not only without, but against the Kings Com∣mission, against those who were actually in Power, representing him, and commis∣sionated by him? It was, I confess, a Calumny cast upon that glorious King and Martyr, Charles the First, that one of the Chieftains of the Rebels had produced His Majesties Commission for taking Arms; and indeed the person we mean did at first pretend so much. But I owe such Justice as well as Veneration to the Memory of that blessed Prince, that I can∣not forbear openly to avow, I my self know the men yet living, who can attest they heard that very person, before his E∣xecution, confess, the Royal Seal was taken off from an Instrument of another nature, (Letters Patents as I remember for some Lands) and cunningly affixed to that for∣ged Commission, His Majesty having been never in the least acquainted with any of

their designs. For these two reasons then it could be no lawful War: The Aggres∣sors had neither lawful Cause nor lawful Authority; their Design, I say, being with∣out and against the Royal Commissi∣on. And,

Thirdly, Let me demand, Was it a War lawfully proclaimed? Or was it not most industriously and marvellously concealed, not discovered but in one place, and that but a few hours (comparatively) before it broke out? Instead of thinking of any Hostility, were not the poor English, that suffered, secure in the Friendship and Fa∣miliarity of their Neighbours, when un∣awares, unarmed, without any Provoca∣tion they were set upon, and—I will not say how handled. Is this either a Just or Honourable way of making War?

Lastly. Was it managed in a lawful and Christian sort? Were the Qualities and Condition of the persons, who fell in the first five months, such as constituted them fit Objects for the Sword of a just War? Or were the kinds of Death, by which they dyed, becoming Christians to inflict? Or was the number of the slain proporti∣onable to any damages could be pretended

to have been sustained by the assailants, even according to the Rules of the most rigo∣rous Justice? [One hundred and fifty four thousand Protestants, Men, Women and Children massacred between the Three and twentieth of October and the First of March following, by computation of the Priests themselves that were present, and were directed by the Principals engaged, to take a just computation; besides all af∣terwards, when they left off to compute, and the multitudes that fell in the War ensuing.] I will not speak so particularly as I could to all these Points; because my design is only to move to Repentance, not to refresh the memory of the injured: But in a word, here is not any one of those points, which constitute a War just, to be found in this dreadful Insurrection and Massacre. Wherefore as to those, who are so impenitent and remorsless as not to allow it to have been, what it has been pro∣ved, a Rebellion; I will only desire of them, because they pretend to be the greatest if not only Kings-men, not to contradict two of their and our most gracious Kings. And here not to speak of several Procla∣mations and Statutes made by the Autho∣rity of King Charles the First of ever blessed

memory, in which this War, as these Gen∣tlemen would style it, is expresly called a Rebellion, (with some aggravating Epi∣thets) and its Authors Rebels (not to speak I say of these, because some may say a Fa∣natick Parliament pen'd them) what will they say of that (now blessed) Kings dy∣ing Penitentials? Did he in them utter any thing, but the sincere conceptions of his ho∣ly Soul? Let then any one peruse Chap. 12. of his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and see if he speaks not there in the express terms we use. Nay, let any one look upon the Statute for the observing of this Day made in the Reign of our late gracious Sovereign Charles the Second, which according to Order was even now read, see what terms are used there. (Now this being the Kings Law, must be taken to be the Kings Lan∣guage.) See in the name of God; not to call one another names, but to give our Sins the true names in our Confessions and Penitentials for them before God. But I have dwelt long enough on this; I will only add, that I am my self far from think∣ing, and would have others far from be∣lieving, that all the Irish Nation are peo∣ple of such an Humour, as those whose Cruelty we give God thanks we were de∣livered

from; or as those others, who will not allow this Days-work to have been Cruelty and Rebellion. There are undoubtedly a multitude of them harm∣less people, and many others generous; good-natured, loyal, and brave-spirited persons. And if after all there be any of a contrary strain, whom what hath been said will not convince of their Sin, I only pray the Lord have mercy on them.—To proceed.

Secondly. From the whole Tenour of this Discourse appears, the utter unlaw∣fulness of Subjects resisting the Prince or Magistrate, whom God has set over them; yea, though it be in the Abuse of his Power. If in such case our Lord Jesus had resisted, Mankind had never been Redeemed. Yet had it been most easie for him, had it been consistent with the Laws, which he was to enact, to have baffled all the Violence, with which he was, or could be assaulted. For though he had but twelve Apostles even at first, and of them only one that dared to fight for him, yet could not I, saith he, have asked of my Father, and he would have given me more than twelve Legions of An∣gels? But this would neither have stood

with his Sufferings, nor with the other Ends of his coming, the Doctrine and Example of most holy Life, which he was to leave unto the World. And therefore, as, in the Text, he most ex∣presly delivers the Doctrine of Non-resi∣stance (Put up thy Sword into its Sheath;) so in the whole Context he practiseth it: Wherefore none can esteem themselves Followers, either of Christs Doctrine, or Example, that is, none can esteem themselves Christians, who shall in the hardest circumstances they can be put; resist their Prince or those that are sent by him.

Thirdly, Upon consideration of what has been said, let us be moved▪ to put a due value both upon our own and others Lives: Let us not, at least, so vainly and trivially expose them, as in every mad and rash fit we are apt to do. I will not speak at present of those ma∣nifold indirect ways of Murder, that are in the world: When men do any unlawful or unwarrantable act to themselves or others, by which, though not intenti∣onally, the untimely End of either ensue (as drinking themselves or others into mortal Fevours, Frenz••••s, and a hun∣dred

like acts, this is Murther before God, though indirect indeed, and on∣ly by consequence, yet really and tru∣ly such. My Text confines me more to the Sword-work. And give me leave here a little to insist expresly against that abominable and most unreasona∣ble, but frequent practice of Duel∣ling. I beseech and conjure all men to consider, neither the Old Law of God nor the Gospel make any difference be∣twixt Murder, and what our Common Law calls Man-slaughter. To attempt or design taking away the Life of any, though in never so violent and transient a Passion, is by Gods Law and by the Gospel, Murder. And no Murderer shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven; that is, most surely none, who dyes impeni∣tently such. Now 'tis seldome or never that any man dyes in a Duel, but there dyes one singly or doubly a Murderer and impenitent. For, though murder∣ed, he dyes a Murderer, at least of him∣self, because he had no right to take the Sword; and, according as before∣said, by his taking it unwarrantably, has brought his own Death upon him∣self.

Further, 'tis of all Duellists general∣ly sure enough, neither but would have sped the other; the person slain would as truly have sped his Adversary, as his Adversary has sped him, could he have done it. Wherefore in Will and Inten∣tion he that falls is a Murderer of the Surviver, that is, doubly a Murderer; and in both cases too commonly impe∣nitent, as dying before he comes to Temper sedate enough for Repentance. So that, I say, for the most part, such persons die doubly Murderers, and impeni∣tent; and then, Good God! what is their estate! Consider this in the name of God, all ye that are so wickedly prodigal of your own and others both Bloud and Souls. On what Trifles and ridiculous Puncti∣••io's do you generally venture both? For when was there almost any private Duel heard of, the Occasion whereof was such a wrong, as the Law assigns a man Satisfaction for? This is the gene∣ral Resolution in these cases—I can have no Satisfaction by Law, therefore I'll fight him. Now let us but attend how unreasonable this Resolution is: It a∣mounts plainly to thus much, the Af∣front or (pretended) Injury I have re∣ceived,

is so small, that the Law takes no notice of it: therefore I'll exact the greatest Satisfaction by or against any Law, in any other case, imaginable; for greater cannot be given by Man than the mans own Life. [Nay perhaps, what I design, as a Satisfaction, may be the greatest wrong to my self, the loss of Bo∣dy and Soul, I may dye by it in my Sin. Now is this reasonable, such an one has done me a small wrong, (perhaps none, perhaps has only cross'd me in my humour, possibly too only in my Vices;) but admit he has done me a small wrong, what then? Why, then I will compel him to do me a greater, namely, to kill me in his own defence. Nay, therefore will I do my self the greatest, I will venture both Body and Soul in a most unchri∣stian and unreasonable Revenge. For being in this case, I take the Sword of my own rash will, without any Warrant from God or Man, nay against the Laws of both, may I not expect actually to perish by the Sword? And because I presumptuously, and with an high hand, rush on such vile Sins, to dye impeni∣tently too, and forsaken by Gods Grace; which if I do, how eternally deplorable,

but utterly irremediable, is my Con∣dition?] Oh! that men would but con∣sider these things, and value their own Lives, only as God has valued them! At least, that they would but keep those Laws, which he has made to preserve and secure them! If but this could be obtained, not one in an hundred of those who do, would dye untimely or unnatural Deaths.

Lastly. In case for our Sins God should so punish this Nation, that we should live to see the Sword of War drawn again, let us remember we have been this day taught our Duty in such times. Let us all, that are able or qualified, to take the Sword, take it at his Hands, and in his Defence, who has received the Sword from God; our King's I mean. Let us all stick to the Crown, in its true and legal Descent. This is the only way to keep good Con∣science, and the likeliest way to secure or retrieve Peace. For if Pretenders find few or no Abetters, if the great Body of the Nation take the side, which all good men will take; namely, as said, that of the Royal Authority, all Civil Wars must quickly be at an and; and others, I think and hope, we need not fear.

But God keep far from us all Attempts of any War. And I know no better Preser∣vative from any, than that all would re∣member what our Saviour in teaching St. Peter here, has taught us all, They that take the Sword, shall perish by the Sword.

The good Lord give Peace in our days, and to the God of Peace be all Ho∣nour and Glory now and for ever. Amen.

FINIS.

Notes

• Summa [Potestas Civilis] il∣la dicitur, cujus actus alterius juri non subsunt, ita ut alterius voluntatis humanae arbitrio irriti possint reddi. Grot. de Jur. Bell. & par. l. 1. c. 3. §. 7.
• Pythagoras teste Cice∣ne in Cat. Maj.
• L. Cum autem 23. §. Excipi∣tur 3. De Aedi∣lit. Edict.
• L. Liber ho∣mo. 13. §. ad L. Aquil.
• Hoc dicimus, hoc asseri∣mus, hoc modis omnibus ap∣probamus, neminem sponta∣neam mortem sibi inferre debere, velut fugiendo &c. De Civitat. Dei, l. cap. vide plura causa, 23. Qu. 5. Si non licet.
• Vid. Grot. in loc.
• In reos Maje∣statis & pub∣licos hostes om∣nis homo miles est. Tertullian. Apolog.