To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THAT war is a great evil, few persons will be disposed to deny, so recently after a war which has been unexampled in its duration and extent, and the direful effects of which are still felt in every city, hamlet, and cottage of Europe. But though war is an evil, abstractly considered, yet I imagine it is only one of many which are inseparable from the present state of humanity, but which, by the gracious dispositions of an all-wise Providence, are ultimately made the instruments of good. The hurricane and thunder storm are necessary for preserving the salubrity of the atmosphere. The history of the past exhibits numerous instances in which "the walls of Zion have been built in troublous times;" and prophecy leads us to expect, that the path to that state of rest and of peace which awaits the church of God, lies through many storms and convulsions of a political nature. This being the case, it becomes an ob ject of considerable importance to ascertain the line of conduct which is proper for the Christian, when his country is engaged in war; and I propose, therefore, to make a few remarks upon some late publications intended to enlighten the pub. lie on this important subject.

The first is entitled, "A Solemn Review of the Custom of War, shewing that War is the Effect of popular Delusion, and proposing a Remedy."-Now, though every sincere Christian must deplore the necessity of war, I am not aware that, in this country at least, war can be viewed as a custom: neither can it be considered as always the result of popular delusion. The author of this tract himself refers it to a different source. "By what means," he inquires, "is it possible to produce such a change in the state of society, and the views

The other means proposed, are, "liberal contributions" for the purpose "of diffusing light," the establishment of printing presses for the circulation of tracts, the addresses of Christian ministers from the pulpit, the education of youth in the principles of the Society, the concurring aid of all Bible Societies, and Societies for propagating the Gospel. It is added; "But our hopes and expectations are not limited here. The Societies of Friends and Shakers will come in, of course, and cordially contribute to the glorious object." Having enlisted this numerous body, the writer's anticipations are greatly extended, obstacles are foreseen, but are believed not to be insurmountable; and he even exclaims, "God will aid in such a cause; and the time is at hand, when this prediction shall be fulfilled."

Now, Mr. Editor, I as devoutly wish that wars may cease as the writer himself. But in the mean time, we must take care lest, in the prospect of universal peace and love, we forget those more immediate duties, indispensable to us as the subjects of a government which, without boasting, may in a peculiar manner be considered as appointed of God" for the punishment of evil-doers, and the praise of them that do well." All that is required of us is a dutiful subjection to the government under which we live, as unto God, in all things lawful; in so doing we shall best approve

ourselves as the servants of Him who is "King of kings and Lord of lords."

Again; should the government determine that war is unavoidable, what must be the conduct of this "most powerful association," acting upon its avowed principles?— Surely they must step forward in all their might, and declare their determined opposition to war in the abstract-to all war;-that without the employment of force they will not contribute to the exigencies of the state; and sooner lay down their lives than be actively employed in warfare. How this line of conduct can contribute to support government, I am unable to perceive. Were it possible to realise the views of this Society, the effect must be, to paralyse the arm of power, introduce discord, confusion, and bloodshed into the very bosom of society, and lay the country open, as an easy prey, to any unprincipled and ambitious aggressor!

In the second tract of the Peace Society, an attempt is made to es tablish a doctrine nowhere recognised in Scripture; namely, that all the precepts contained in the New Testament, addressed to individual Christians, are equally applicable to "professing Christian states and political bodies;" and it is demanded by what authority is the sense restrained" to individuals? All the answer which can be required, is reducible to this simple position; that, throughout the New Testament, no precepts or instructions are addressed to states or political bodies, of any description whatever. The reason is obvious for the faith and hope of the Gospel have respect exclusively to individuals who repent of their sins, believe in Christ Jesus, aud obtain mercy and a good hope through grace, that they shall in due time become participators of "an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away."

Surely self-defence is a duty in

cumbent on Christians individually; and if such should hold the reins of government in any country, it would consequently be their duty as governors to bend the whole energies of the nation in defence of the just rights of their country, against all aggressors. With regard to private individuals, I hesitate not to affirm, that all associations of Christians which shall attempt to overawe the civil governments under which they live, on any pretext and in any manner whatever, act in direct opposition to their duty to the powers that be," which are ordained of God.

In the third tract, the views of the Society are supported from the practice of the early Christians. Yet the very first instance mentioned, shews that the Christians of those days had not forgotten the instructions of the Apostles; for it is quoted from Tertullian, that in sundry rebellions against the Roman emperors, "not a Christion could be found in any of the rebel armies." It is probably true, that about the year of our Lord 200, some Christians refused to enter the army on account of the pagan rites commonly observed in the camp; and that others, having misapplied certain passages of Scripture, held themselves bound to abstain from all war. But neither of these facts can, in the smallest degree, affect the question at issue.

We are next informed, that war "includes robbery, fraud, de-. bauchery, hatred, resentment, and the exercise of all the bad passions of our nature." But here I naturally turn my recollection to the Christians of our army and navy, who, at different times, have stood forward and "turned the battle from our gates"-who have shed their blood in defence of all that is dear to us as members of a wellordered civil community. And I think we are entitled to say, with confidence, that these were not

guilty of those crimes; but, on the contrary, that pity for our deluded enemies a disposition to do them every office of kindness and humanity, whenever duty rendered this practicable a firm confidence in the blessing of God on their exertions-a magnanimous contempt of danger, when opposed to duty a patient perseverance in a cause to which they had devoted their lives and a generous forbearance in the moment of victory, shone conspicuous in their conduct during the arduous struggles in which this country has been repeatedly engaged.

But it is further affirmed, that war "includes bloodshed, not unawares, which is the scriptural definition of murder:" and it is inquired whether a dispensation has been granted to any of the potentates of the earth, to alter the nature of vice! Is this a fair interpretation of Scripture? Was it unawares that the avenger of blood pursued the inadvertent homicide, and, if possible, shed his blood? Was it unawares that certain transgressors were stoned to death; that the enemies of Israel were put to death without mercy, and that rebellions were quenched by the blood of thousands of Israelites? And were all the deaths produced by these means necessarily murders, because not effected unawares?

This tract concludes with the inquiry, whether it would not be better for princes to settle their differences by arbitration, than by the sword? Unhappily for the suggestion, one of two things would be requisite; namely, arbiters to whom all would submit, or some third power able to compel those who might prove refractory. But would not war still be necessary in order to compulsion; at least till some man shall devise an easier method of inducing independent governments to act contrary to their inclinations?

The fourth tract is occupied with

extracts from the writings of Erasmus, on the subject of war, tending to shew its baneful effects. I pass on to a more recent publication to the same effect, entituled “Pictures of War," an octavo volume, occupied almost exclusively with extracts from ancient and modern authors, magazines, &c. tending to shew that war is attended with the loss of many lives, destruction of property, general distress, and ́innumerable other evils. A work of the description now under consideration, professing no claims to originality, can be viewed only in connection with the sentiments which it is employed to disseminate. These I cannot pass by unnoticed, involving as they do an important part of the every-day duty of Christians. In general, I pre. mise, that it is not the duty of every Christian to occupy himself with the more profound questions of political economy. But of this there can be no doubt, that under the Gospel as under the Law, it is the duty of all to "fear God and the king, and meddle not with them that are given to change ;"to be of a meek and humble disposition, and not at all disposed to "meddle with matters great, or things too high for them." I regret that this line of conduct has not been more uniformly followed in the publication before me, and that the author did not pay more` deference to the example of John the Baptist, who, "like Him whose forerunner he was, would not interfere with civil or political arrangements" (p. 233); and that of our Lord, "who paid tribute money, which went to support military power, and set the example of giving no just cause of offence to any" (p. 235): and this although the tribute might even go in support of war, idolatry, or foolish games. Again (p. 238), “If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight," said our blessed Saviour; that is, in support of his kingdom. Is it possible that

any person of ordinary capacity, who reads this passage in its natural connexion with the sacred context, should for a moment suppose that it absolutely prohibits fighting in all cases? In like manner, when it is predicted, that "all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword," can there be any reason to think that any thing more than the employment of the sword in support of religion (in place of fleeing from persecutions) is prohibited to private Chris. tians ?

But this is not all: it is even affirmed (p. 217), that the command, "thou shalt not kill," is imperative on governments equally as on individuals. Yet, unless it can be said that all the other precepts of the Moral Law were addressed to governments, there is no ground for this interpretation. On the contrary, the necessity of taking away human life, on particular occasions, by authority of government, is clearly illustrated by what took place under the Law; and this, with the approbation of those who were raised up and inspired of God, during the infant state of the Jewish commonwealth. We are next informed (p. 239), in direct opposition to the sacred text (Rom. xiii. 1, et seq.), that only to those rulers" who do what God commands in his own revelation," we owe subjection and obedience; and that, otherwise, the Christian might even kill his brother inadvertently in battle. But in just and lawful war, it is no more murder to deprive the eneanies of our country of life, than for the public executioner of justice to put to death the murderer, Yet our author will not admit even of this. He says (p. 146), "The Supreme Being alone possesses a power to take away buman life; and we rebel against his laws, when we undertake to execute death in any way whatever, upon any of his rational creatures." And again; "Let all those laws be repealed CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 193.

which authorise juries, judges, sheriffs, or hangmen, to assume the resentments of individuals, and to commit murder in cold blood in any case whatever."-I beg leave to remind the author, that the Apostle says to private Christians, "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves;" but of the civil power or ruler, "he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him that doeth evil.” (Rom. xiii. 4.)

The supposed "distinction betwixt political expediency and Christian duty" alluded to (p.. 250), may have arisen from inattention to the difference betwixt the duties of a magistrate and those of a private Christian. When well understood, they will not be found in principle at all opposed to each other, nor in practice at all incompatible. But as private Christians, it is no part of our duty to usurp the place of our superiors, by presuming to determine whether any particular war is avoidable or not. Far less, I imagine, should we, with our author, adopt the sentiments of the tract first. noticed, relative to the formation of a powerful association for the purpose of counteracting government on the subject of war. This project, it would appear, was ori ginally of American growth, and may have been administered with the view of weakening the " 'popular delusion," or "war-fever," which, at that time, prevailed. Another writer, whom my author follows to a great extent, reasons in the following manner : "Self-defence is, no doubt, a primary law of nature; but it is of nature only: it belongs solely to the animal life; and the brute creation, knowing no further, act up to the perfection of their nature. Had man, like them, no further privilege than mortal existence, he might be right in following their example." (p. 248.) By what au thority does this writer dispense with a primary law of nature } The whole Moral Law is only E

transcript of the primary law of nature; and this law Jesus Christ came not to obliterate, but to sanction and to fulfil in every respect.

In conclusion, it is perhaps superfluous to remark, that I should be as far as the writers of these pub. lications from encouraging aggression and violence in any form; or from fostering a spirit of national hostility against any country. I apprehend that the injunction of the Apostle (Rom. xii. 18.) is binding on all Christians, whether magistrates or subjects: "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men." know that states and political bodies, like individuals, may be swayed by motives which cannot be approved of on Christian prin ciples. But what then? Are civil governments our subjects, or amenable to our jurisdiction? And if they are not, shall

Christians

league together for the purpose of wresting the sword out of the hands of the civil magistrate, and set themselves up as alone qualified to govern the earth? The question I think dictates its own answer".

X. Y. Z.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer. MUCH has been written, and, in my opinion, much remains to be written, on the introduction of the Madras system of education into Europe, and especially into the United Kingdom; the western division of which has become, in its various relations, the source of deep and even alarming interest. Of its

tions the blessings of that peace which they now enjoy.

"Considering the object of your Society, the promotion of peace among mankind, as one eminently congenial to the

spirit of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I have judged it proper to express these my sentiments respecting your labours, in answer to your communication to me on this subject. ALEXANDER.

6

"St. Petersburgh, July 4, 1817."

"Sir-I received your letter of the 9th of April, with the Numbers of the Friend of Peace' accompanying it, for which I return you my hearty thanks. The object which your Society has in

view is of great importance to the wellbeing and happiness of the human race. Indeed it seems to me to be almost the same as that of Bible Societies; for it is only in proportion as the divine and peaceable principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ prevail in the hearts of men that lasting and universal peace can be expected. A blessed period is promised in the word of God, when men shall learn the art of war no more. This period I understand to be the same as that in which it is prophesied that all men shall know the Lord, even from the least unto the greatest, and that the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord. These latter promises seem to be daily fulfilling in every quarter of the world, by the exertion of Bible and other Christian Societies to disseminate among men the saving and pacific principles of Jesus Christ. They are preparing the way for your Society's gaining its object-peace-universal peace, when men shall learn the art of war no more. Most earnestly praying for every blessing to accompany your labour, in promoting peace on earth and good-will ameng men, I shall reckon it a peculiar bonour to be among the members of such a humane society.

"I remain, Sir, your most
"obedient servant,

"PRINCE ALEX. GALLITZIN."