I have overcome riches, I have overcome ambition, I have mastered flattery fear hath nothing to object against me, drunkenness hath nothing to charge upon me, anger is afraid of me: I have won the garland, in fighting against these enemies. See his Epistles to Homodorus.

Thos. Secker, Archbishop of
Canterbury.

WAR in all cases is accompanied with dreadful evils; of which we are apt to consider the heavy expense, as if it were the only one, and forget the sufferings and miserable deaths of such multitudes of human creatures, though every one of them is a murder, committed by the authors of this calamity. Works, vol. iii. p. 376.

But War is also a state of no less wickedness than calamity and terror. Whenever it breaks out, one side, at least, must have acted grievously contrary to humanity and justice; contrary too, in all likelihood, to solemn treaties, and that from no better motives than little resentment, groundless or distant fears, eagerness of gaining unnecessary advantages, restless ambition, false glory, or wantonness of power. To such detestable idols are whole armies and nations deliberately sacrificed; though every suffering thus caused is a heinous crime, and every death a Murder. Works, vol. iii. p. 390.

in all his holy mountain;' that when assaulted by wicked men, he should be led as a lamb to the slaughter,' and should make no resistance.

6

At the nativity of Christ, the angels sung, not the glories of war, nor a song of military triumph, but a hymn of peace: Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, and goodwill towards men.' The words and works of Christ are in perfect unison; examine every part of his doctrine, and nothing will be found that does not breathe peace, speak the language of love, and savour of charity.

How very instructive, that the descent of the divine Spirit upon our Saviour was in the likeness of the innocent, inoffensive dove! What emblem more significant of its nature and tendency! And how fully his meek, unresisting conduct proves its effect! Does it influence men differently now, that they, though professing to be his followers, and governed by this dove-like spirit, can be cruel, wrathful destroyers of each other?

At the commencement, and in the course of his public ministry, he taught such doctrines as these :

'Resist not evil, (or, more properly rendered, resist not the injurious.)He that takes the sword shail perish by the sword.-All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye also to them-Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.-Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.-Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of God.-Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill, and whosoever shall kill, shall be in danger of the judgment. But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.-Ye have heard that it

hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them

that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you.' The apostles follow out their Master's instructions, by recording in their writings such admonitions as the following:

'See that none render evil for evil to any man.-Avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath.-Follow peace with all men.-As much as in you lieth, live peaceably with all men.— No murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. If God be for us, who can be against us?-Who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?-Casting all your cares on God, for he careth for you.-We may boldly say, the Lord is my helper, I will not fear what man can do to me.--Though

we walk in the flesh, we do not war after (i. e. according to) the flesh; for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal.Some affirm that we say, let us do evil that good may come, whose damnation is just.-Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.'

With a variety of similar passages, all breathing the same pacific and forgiving spirit.

It is true, that John the Baptist, when inquired of by the soldiers, what their duty was, does not bid them lay aside their profession, but merely exhorts them to abstain from violence. This is easily accounted for, and it would be wrong to construe it into an indirect approbation of war, since the soldiers never put the question, whether their profession was a lawful one, but merely what, as soldiers, they should do? And John, like him whose forerunner he was, would not interfere with civil or political arrangements, he having higher objects in view. Besides, does not his very reply, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely,' show plainly enough what his views of their profession were, and how much exposed he considered them to be to every kind of rapine and injustice. Obedience to the Baptist's injunction is wholly incompatible with war, which is a system of violence through

out. Only hinder soldiers from doing violence to any man, and you stop at once the whole progress of war; so that if the directions of John are insisted on as Gospel authority, they will prove much more against the lawfulness of war, than in favour of it.

Our Lord says, (Luke xiv. 31) 'What king going to war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an embassy, and desireth conditions of peace.' Doubtless, our Lord's design was to warn people to count the cost, before they professed to be followers of him; that they might not be deceived nor discouraged, and that they might act from principle, and not from hypocrisy. And he inculcates these things, by referring to the example of kings in their consultations about war. These references to war being introduced merely for the illustration of other subjects, will no more prove the lawfulness of war, than the reference of the Apostle to the Olympic games for illustration, will prove the lawfulness of these Heathen feats.

The centurion and Cornelius have been pointed out as Christian soldiers, and highly approved of God for their faith and piety; nor were they (say the objectors) directed by Christ or his apostles to renounce their profession. In reply be it observed, that they were first soldiers and then Christians, and we have no evidence that they continued in the profession of arms; nor are we warranted to say that they were not directed to renounce that profession, as the Scriptures are silent on the subject. But the idolatrous rites enjoined on the Roman soldiers were totally inconsistent with the Christian character, aside from the unlawfulness of war itself; therefore it is very improbable they could or would continue in the military profession.

Two of the disciples, while yet under their Jewish prejudices, addressed our Saviour thus: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, as Elias did?' May Christians ever bear in mind his answer: 'Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them.' Luke ix. 54, 55, 56.

It is objected, that our Lord paid tribute-money, which went to support military power. To this it is replied, that our Lord set the example of giving no just cause of offence to any. Tribute was demanded of him unjustly, according to the existing laws; but, lest fault should be found, he wrought a miracle and paid it. When the rulers of this world call for that which bears their own image and superscription, Christians have no right to withhold from them their dues, for they must render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's.' But how does the lawfulness of war follow from a Christian's rendering to Cæsar his due? Is it because some of the money goes to support war? Probably, of the money which our Lord paid, as much went to the support of idolatry, and the games of the day, as to the support of war.

Our Saviour's words (Luke xxii. 36.) have been thought to authorize warlike measures: He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.' But here is no warrant for hostilities; for, in the first place, a great number of manuscripts, and some of note, besides many of the oldest editions, read the verse as a prediction, 'He that hath no sword shall sell his garment, and shall buy one.' Secondly, The whole expression is evidently figurative, and is intended to give warning of the most imminent dangers, and of a season approaching, when a weapon should be accounted more necessary than a garment.

In verse 38th of the same chapter, after the remark, here are two swords,' our Lord answers, It is enough.' By this phrase, he signified with sufficient plainness, to those who should reflect on what he said, that arms were not the resource they ought to think of. For what were two swords against all the ruling powers of the nation? The import of the proverbial expression therefore is this, 'We need no more;' which does not imply that they really needed, or would use, those they had.

The New Testament does not furnish an instance, (except the reprehended one of Peter's) of an apostle or a disciple using a sword or weapon of defence.

Paul is mentioned as having made use of a captain and guard of soldiers on one occasion, to secure his person. But surely few or none would suppose this an approbation of warfare. He merely made use of these men as officers of the civil power, who were bound by their situation to protect one man against the outrages of another. The same Paul says elsewhere, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal;' and exhorts Christians to put on as their defence the whole armour of God.'

The inconsistency of Christians entering into military service, or engaging in war, is plainly implied in our Lord's remark on the nature of his kingdom, in which he makes a decided distinction between it and the kingdoms of this world. He says,

If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight;' intimating that the sword must be an unhallowed and improper weapon in the hands of his followers, who never can, in pursuance of their true principles, have the least occasion to employ offensive or murderous weapons.

We are commanded by an apostle, to pray for kings, and for all in authority; but it is for this end, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life

in all godliness and honesty.' The magistrate is said, not to bear the sword in vain;' but it is plain from the context, that this is the sword of judicial authority, and not of military engagement. Besides, the expression of bearing the sword,' is evidently figurative, and meant to convey the idea of civil infliction or severity.

In Romans, ch. xiii. we are ordered 'to be subject to the powers that be.' In the enumeration of duties which Christians owe to civil rulers, as laid down in that chapter, or elsewhere in the New Testament, subjection is inculcated; tribute, custom, fear, and honour, are also enjoined, and all these not only for wrath, (i. e. for fear of punishment) but also for conscience sake, (i. e. from reverence for a higher authority.) But there is not a word of injunction on the subject of military services; for, at that rate, a most unnatural and incongruous scene would occur, and Christians in one kingdom might be commanded, and led on to plunge their bayonets in the breasts of their Christian brethren in another kingdom, who might be equally under the command of their rulers. How would this agree with Christ's law of brotherly love, and with the precept, not to take away their's, but to lay down our lives for the brethren?

But what is the character of the national ruler, in the New Testament It is, that he is the minister (or servant) of God.' Now a servant

of God should do only what God commands in his own revelation. And where does God command war? Let the passages be collected from the peace-breathing pages of the Gospel and epistles. But further, it is said, He is the minister of God for good, that is, to the subject or ruled. Now how can this be, if much of his authority, and that too often exercised, consists in calling out and organizing his subjects, that they may contend vi et armis with their fellow-creatures, and extirpate them if possible?

But it is objected, that these fellow-creatures are robbers, plunderers, and invaders.' But why so? May not the arguments used for enlisting subjects at home be retorted, in regard to these foreigners? These men, whether bad or good, are only 'obeying the powers that be,' in their own country. They are obliged, in consequence of their allegiance to their sovereign, to do us all the mischief they can. And if they are bound apostolically to do what their rulers commanded them, then it is their religious duty to invade, molest, fight with, and murder us!! Thus the holy precepts of inspiration are brought in, or rather are perverted, to sanction the political quarrels of princes, and to bind Christian subjects on both sides, by the most sacred obligations to shed each other's blood, from a principle of conscience! Can any thing be more perniciously absurd, or more awfully impious?

Be it always remembered, that the office of a national ruler is described in Scripture, not in relation to his wars with other nations, but in relation to the peaceable government of his own subjects. This, indeed, is all that a Christian subject has to do with. If a prince, from a spirit of ambition, or from the love of what is falsely called glory, will engage in contests with other nations, let him hire, bribe, or persuade those he can to second his efforts; but Christians have nothing to do with a warfare of this description. Their hostilities are of another kind, directed to other objects, and, promoted by different weapons,

In 1 Pet. ii. 17. we are exhorted to 'fear God, and to honour the king.' It is undeniable, that the second of these exhortations is subordinate to, and depends upon the first. To admit the idea of implicit obedience to magistrates, without regard to conscience towards God, is to condemn the prophet Daniel and his three companions, as well as the holy martyrs, for not relinquishing their faith at the command of princes.

But

Paul's record of his own sufferings and imprisonment for conscience sake, sets aside the plea for implicit obedience. He also defines the Christian weapons of warfare in his time, and of course in every succeeding time, to be not carnal, but mighty through God.' Spiritual and carnal weapons will no more unite under the Gospel dispensation than iron and clay.

Such indeed are the dreadful consequences of war, that it is no marvel if the apostle James thus described their origin: Come they not hence, even from the lusts that war in your members?' And of all lusts, can there be any more detestable than that which produces the selfish and revengeful disposition to injure others?

If war is a Christian duty, why should not the example and precepts of Christ, instead of the example of the heroes of this world, be exhibited to those who fight, in order to stimulate them? Is not Christ as worthy of imitation as the Cæsars and Alexanders of this world? He was a triumphant conqueror, he vanquished death and hell, and purchased eternal redemption for his people; but he conquered by resignation, and triumphed by his death. Here is an example worthy of the highest emulation. And why not animate soldiers by it? Only because it would unnerve their arms for war, and render them harmless to their foes.

The spirit of martyrdom is the true spirit of Christianity. Christ himself meekly and submissively died by the hands of his enemies; and instead of resistance, even by words he prayed, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.'

Stephen, when expiring under a shower of stones from his infuriate murderers, prayed, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.'

Paul, instead of resisting, testified that he was ready not only to be bound, but to die for the Lord Jesus.'

The early martyrs resigned up their Jives with patient submission as wit

nesses for Jesus; and this at a time when, as Tertullian tells us the Christians were sufficiently numerous to have defended themselves against the persecutions excited against them by the Heathen, if their religion had permitted them to have recourse to the sword.' How different the one spirit from the other. The warrior is bold and vindictive, ready to defend his property at the hazard of his life, and to shed the blood of his enemy. The martyr takes joyfully the spoiling of his goods, and counts not his life dear to himself.

Would the pure and beneficent spirit of Jesus have exulted over the desolated plains of Marengo, or the ensanguined waves of Trafalgar? Would he have taught the horrid refinement and boast of modern warfare, the union of carnage with humanity? Would he have conceived the monstrous absurdity of fighting for the preservation of religion, for the security of social order, or for the establishment of universal peace e?

How would such a prayer as the following sound from the mouths of the churches, when united in solemn assembly?

O blessed Jesus, dear redeeming Lamb of God, who camest down from heaven to save men's lives, and not to destroy them, go along, we humbly pray thee, with our bomb-vessels and fire-ships; suffer not our thundering cannon to roar in vain, but let thy tender hand of love and mercy direct their balls to more heads and hearts of thine own redeemed creatures, than the poor skill of man is able of itself to do.'*