Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

for the purpose of printing and circulating a few tracts, on the evils of war, and the unchristian character of the whole war-system. Dr. Chalmers's sermon was preached and published that same year. It is not at all probable, even if the society had been organised previous to the publication of the discourse, that so obscure a movement could have come to the knowledge of the great preacher. And yet it will be observed that the Doctor expresses, with eloquent emphasis, his conviction of the inestimable service which might be rendered to the cause of universal peace by the formation of such a society. We really attach no little importance to this singular coincidence, and the independent testimony which this eminent man, following out his own conclusions, in his remote Scottish manse, was unconsciously giving to the necessity and excellence of a project, which at that very time was being matured in the minds of a few Christian men, of kindred spirit, amid the toils and tumults of the great Metropolis. And it is very striking, also, how Dr. Chalmers notices and refutes, as it were, by anticipation, one of the most plausible objections urged against the peace movement, regarded as a positive and distinct organisation. "War will never cease," is the dogmatic and not very intelligent cry of multitudes, "until the gospel universally prevails. It is useless and absurd to form a separate society for the purpose. Better use your efforts to preach and spread the gospel, and leave the natural effects of that

to

accomplish the object you desire." We shall have occasion, hereafter, to examine more at large the soundness of this species of argumentation. But in the meanwhile we ask the attention of objectors of this class to the following declaration of sentiment from one whom none of them can suspect of having been less jealous for the honour or less confident in the power of the gospel than themselves.

"It is only by the extension of Christian principle among the people of the earth, that the atrocities of war will be at length swept away from it; and each of us is hastening the commencement of that blissful period, who, in his own sphere, is doing all that in him lies to bring his own heart, and the hearts of others, under the supreme influence of this principle. It is public opinion which, in the long run, governs the world; and while I look with confidence to a gradual revolution in the state of public opinion-from the omnipotence of gospel-truth working its silent but effectual, way through the families of mankind-yet I will not deny that much may be done to accelerate the advent of perpetual and universal peace, by a distinct body of men embarking their every talent, and their every acquirement, in the prosecution of this as a distinct object. This was the way in which a few years ago, the British public were gained over to the cause of Africa. This is the way in which some of the other prophecies of the Bible are at this moment hastening to their accomplishment, and it is in this way, I apprehend, that the prophecy of my text* may be indebted for its speedier fulfilment to the agency of men, selecting this as the assigned field on which their philanthropy shall expatiate. Were each individual member of such a scheme to prosecute his own walk, and come forward with his own peculiar contribution, the fruit of the united labours of all would be one of the finest collections of Christian eloquence, and of enlightened morals, and of sound political philosophy, that ever was presented to the world. I could not fasten on another cause more fitted to call forth such a variety of talent, and to rally around it so many of the generous and accomplished sons of humanity, and to give each of them a devotedness and a power far beyond whatever could be sent into the hearts of enthusiasts by the mere impulse of literary ambition.

Isaiah ii. 4.

"Let one take up the question of war in its principle, and make the full weight of his moral severity rest upon it, and upon all its abominations. Let another take up the question of war in its consequences, and bring his every power of graphical description to the task of presenting an awakened public with an impressive detail of its cruelties and its horrors. Let another neutralise the poetry of war, and dismantle it of all those bewitching splendours which the hand of misguided genius has thrown over it. Let another teach the world a truer and more magnanimous path to national glory than any country of the world has yet walked in. Let another tell with irresistible argument how the Christian ethics of a nation is at one with the Christian ethics of its humblest individual. * * * * Let another pour the light of modern speculation into the mysteries of trade, and prove that not a single war has been undertaken for any of its objects, where the millions and millions more, which were lavished in the cause, have not all been cheated away from us by the phantom of an imaginary interest. This may look to many like the Utopianism of a romantic anticipation-but I shall never despair of the cause of truth addressed to a Christian public, when the clear light of principle can be brought to every one of its positions, and when its practical and conclusive establishment forms one of the most distinct of heaven's prophecies, that men shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks, and that nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn the art of war any more."Chalmers, vol. xi. 83-85.

66

UTOPIA.

"A THOUGHTFUL judge of sentiments, books, and men," says John Foster, "will often find reason to regret that the language of censure is so easy and so undefined. It costs no labour, and needs no intellect, to pronounce the words foolish, stupid, dull, odious, absurd, ridiculous. The weakest or most uncultivated mind may thereby gratify its vanity, laziness, and malice, all at once, by a prompt application of vague, condemnatory words, where a wise and liberal man would not feel himself warranted to pronounce without the most deliberate consideration, and where such consideration might, perhaps, result in applause." There is no term in the language to which these remarks apply with greater pertinence than that at the head of this article. To brand a thing as Utopian," is deemed sufficient by many to preclude all enquiry, and to consign the matter so designated, to summary and final contempt. And yet, how few among those who troll this term so glibly from their tongues, have any distinct conception of what it means, or even any correct idea of its historical origin! As "the discerning public" are accustomed frequently to apply this epithet to the Peace Movement, we propose to furnish them with a brief account of its rise and import, so that, should they be inclined to honour us again in the same way, they may use the phrase with a little more intelligence, if with a somewhat less contemptuous emphasis. Utopia, then, is the title of a kind of philosophical romance written by the celebrated Sir Thomas More, one of the most beautiful characters that ever lived. On the downfall of Cardinal Wolsey, he was made Chancellor by Henry the Eighth, and finally perished on the scaffold, by the will of the same brutal tyrant. His object in writing this work seems to have been, to enable him to express his sentiments on various matters connected with social and political science, and the government of states with greater freedom, than would have been possible in any other form than that of a fiction. Under cover of describing the constitution, laws, and administration which prevailed in the imaginary island of Utopia, More delineates his own ideas of a perfect Commonwealth. The account of this island he purports to have received from one Raphael Hythloday, whom he met in Flanders, on occasion of visiting that country as ambassador for Henry the Eighth, "for treating and composing some differences of no small consequence between that monarch and Charles, the most

[ocr errors]

Serene Prince of Castile." "This Raphael," he says, "is a Portuguese by birth, and was so desirous of seeing the world, that he divided his estate among his brothers, and run fortunes with Americus Vesputius, and bore a share in three of his four voyages that are now published, only he did not remain with him in his last, but obtained leave of him, almost by force, that he might be one of those four-and-twenty who were left at the furthest place at which they touched in their last voyage to New Castile." More was introduced to this person by Peter Giles, born at Antwerp, who is a man of great honour and of good rank in his town." In the frequent conversations that ensued between him and Raphael, during which they discussed many most important questions connected with the philosophy of government, hearing the former frequently advert to the admirable laws and customs which prevailed among the Utopians, More at last begged of him earnestly that he would describe that island very particularly to them." "I will do it very willingly," said he, "for I have digested the whole matter carefully, but it will take up some time." "Let us go, then, said I, and first dine, and then we shall have leisure enough.” "Be it so," said he. "So we went in and dined, and after dinner we came back and sat down in the same place. I ordered my servants to take care that none might come and interrupt us; and both Peter and I desired Raphael to be as good as his word; so when he saw that we were very intent upon it, he paused a little to recollect himself, and began in this manner:" "The island of Utopia, in the middle of it, where it is broadest, is two hundred miles broad, and holds almost at the same breadth over a great part of it; but it grows narrower towards both ends." He then describes the form of the island, and the nature of its coasts, and adds: "But they report (and there remain good marks of it to make it credible) that this was no island at first, but a part of the Continent. Utopus, that conquered it (whose name it still carries, for Abraxa was its first name), and brought the rude and uncivilized inhabitants into such a good government, and to that measure of politeness, that they do now far excel all the rest of mankind, having soon subdued them, he designed to separate them from the Continent, and to bring the sea quite about them, and in order to that he made a deep channel to be digged fifteen miles long, * * * and having set vast numbers to work, he brought it to a speedy conclusion, beyond all men's expectations. ***There are fifty-four cities in the island, all large and well built." He then proceeds to give a full account of the laws, manners, customs, and institutions of the Utopians, in doing which, he contrives to introduce many enlightened views on government and society, together with some speculations that would be deemed bold and daring even in our own day.

We regret to say, however, that the inhabitants of this model commonwealth do not prohibit war, or abstain from warlike exercises and preparations. On the contrary, we are told, that they "accustom themselves daily to military exercises and the discipline of war, in which not only their men, but their women likewise, are trained up, that so in cases of necessity they may not be quite useless.' This proves, among other things, with what little comprehension of its meaning the word Utopian has been applied as a term of reproach to the advocates of permanent and universal Peace. Nevertheless, on this very subject of war, these islanders entertained some views which would be still regarded by most Christian nations as very eccentric and peculiar, The chapter "Of their Military Discipline," begins thus :"They detest war as a very brutal thing, and which, to the reproach of human nature, is more practised by men than by any sort of beasts; and they, against the custom of almost all other nations, think that there is nothing more inglorious than that glory that is gained by war." And again, "They would be both troubled and ashamed of a bloody victory over their enemies, and think it would be as foolish a purchase as to buy the most valuable goods at too high a rate. And in no victory do they glory so much as in that which is gained by dexterity and good conduct without bloodshed. They appoint public triumphs in such cases, and erect trophies to the honour of those who have succeeded well in them, for then do they reckon that a man acts suitably to his nature when he conquers his enemy in such a way that no other creature but a man would be capable of it, and that is, by the strength of his understanding. Bears, lions, boars, wolves, and dogs, and other animals, employ their bodily

force one against anotber, in which, as many of them are superior to man, both in strength and fierceness, so they are all subdued by the reason and understanding that is in him.'

We must admit, indeed, that these are sentiments rational and Christian enough to deserve to be branded as Utopian, in the same manner as the phrase is applied to the doctrines of the Peace party in modern times.

There are other things, also, in this remarkable old book, at which many Christian statesmen, and politicians, and "practical men," of this enlightened age, would smile as exceedingly odd and fantastic. In one of the preliminary conversations, for example, which took place between the author and Raphael Hythloday, Mr. More, struck with the rare information which the latter had gathered in his extensive travels, and the enlarged and philosophical ideas which he entertained, exhorted him to apply his time and thoughts to public affairs; "and this," he adds, "you can never do with so much advantage as by being taken into the counsel of some great prince, and by setting him on to noble and worthy things." "You are doubly mistaken, Mr. More," was the reply, "both in your opinion of me, and in the judgment that you make of things: for as I have not that capacity that you fancy to be in me, so if I had it, the public would not be one jot the better, when I had sacrificed my quiet to it. For most princes apply themselves more to warlike matters, than to the useful arts of peace; and in these I neither have any knowledge, nor do I much desire it. They are generally more set on acquiring new kingdoms, right or wrong, than on governing those well that they have; and among the ministers of princes, there are none that either are not so wise as not to need any assistance, or at least that do not think themselves so wise that they imagine they need none. Now, if in such a court

one should but propose anything that he had either read in history, or observed in his travels, the rest would think that the reputation of their wisdom would sink, and that their interests would be much depressed, if they could not run it down; and if all other things failed, then they would fly to this, That such and such things pleased our ancestors, and it were well for us if we could but match them. They would set up their rest on such an answer, as a sufficient confutation of all that could be said; as if this were a great mischief, that any should be found wiser than his ancestors; but though they willingly let go all the good things that were among those of former ages, yet if better things were proposed, they cover themselves obstinately with this excuse of reverence to past times. I have met with these proud, morose, and absurd judgments of things in many places, particularly once in England."

Mr. More and his friend Mr. Peter Giles continuing still their importunate exhortations, that he would betake himself to political affairs, he further replies, in the following extract, in which the reader will observe there is a fine ironical reference to the long and sanguinary wars, which the English kings had been waging against France, on some pretence of a presumptive title to the French crown, and which had left nothing to the nation, after an enormous expenditure of blood and treasure, but the barren nominal glory of Agincourt and Poictiers:

"And if, after this, I should propose to them (that is, to the princes and courtiers) the resolutions of the Achorians, a people that lie over against the isle of Utopia to the south-east, who having long ago engaged in a war, that they might gain another kingdom to their king, who had a pretension to it by an old alliance, by which it had descended to him; and having conquered it, when they found the trouble of keeping it was equal to that of gaining it, for the conquered people would be still apt to rebel, or be exposed to foreign invasions, so that they must always be in war, either for them or against them, and that therefore they could never disband their army; that in the mean time taxes lay heavy on them, that money went out of the kingdom, that their blood was sacrificed to their king's glory, and that they were nothing the better by it, even in time of peace; their manners being corrupted by a long war; robbing and murders abounding everywhere, and their laws falling under contempt, because their king, being distracted with the cares of the kingdom, was less able to apply his mind to any one of them: when they saw there could be no end of those evils, they by joint counsels made an humble address to their king, desiring him to choose which of the two kingdoms he had the greatest mind to keep, since he could

not hold both; for they were too great a people to be governed by a divided king, since no man would willingly have a groom that should be in common between him and another: upon which the good prince was forced to quit his new kingdom to one of his friends (who was not long after dethroned) and to be contented Iwith his old one. To all this I would add, that after all those warlike attempts, and the vast confusions, with the consumptions both of treasure and of people that must follow them, perhaps, upon some misfortune, they might be forced to throw up all at last; therefore, it seemed much more eligible that the king should improve his ancient kingdom all he could, and make it flourish as much as possible; that he should love his people and be beloved of them; that he should live among them and govern them gently; and that he should let other kingdoms alone, since that which had fallen to his share was big enough, if not too big for him. Pray, how do you think would such a speech as this be heard?' 'I confess,' said I, 'I think not very well.'"

[ocr errors]

And now, in taking our leave for the present of Utopia, we ask our readers whether they think it would be a great reproach upon the wisdom of our statesmen, or injure very seriously the happiness of mankind, if there were to be a slight infusion of some of these Utopianisms we have quoted into the sentiments and measures of those who rule the world?

THE GREEK QUESTION.

Now that the dispute between our own Government and that of Greece has been adjusted, it may be well to examine the case a little, in order that we may see how wisely and temperately states are governed. The facts, or such at least as are patent and prominent to the eyes of all Europe, are these-A few years ago, during some popular émeute at Athens, the house of a Portuguese Jew, who wears the singularly inappropriate name of Don Pacifico, was attacked and pillaged by a foolish and fanatical mob. We have never been able clearly to understand what process of metamorphosis it was that converted this person into an English citizen, so as to bring him under the august protection of the Foreign Office. Such, however, seems to have been the case; and by virtue of this privilege, he has succeeded in inducing Lord Palmerston to undertake the task of collecting the debts which he affirms are owing to him by the Greek Government for the above outrage. Associated with this, was the case of a Mr. Finlay, an Englishman residing in the same city, on whose grounds King Otho is said to have trespassed a few feet, in order to enlarge his garden. He also claims a pecuniary compensation for the value of his ground. Out of these two cases, mainly, have the two Governments contrived to fabricate the " very pretty quarrel" which at one time seemed not unlikely to embroil all Europe in war. The whole sum in dispute did not amount to £10,000, and the question, one would think, might have been settled without much trouble, by the adjudication of two or three men of business of ordinary capacity. It is said, indeed, that the Greek Government repeatedly proposed to refer the matter to arbitration. But so simple a method of solving international difficulties, finds no favour in the eyes of diplomatic wisdom. And mark the result. After considerable correspondence respecting these claims, which are generally allowed to have been grossly exaggerated, especially those of M. Pacifico, an enormous armament, consisting of thirteen or fourteen largest-sized steamers and ships of the line, are ordered to blockade the Piræus, to seize and detain all Greek vessels engaged in commerce. Let our readers carefully remember that the object of this expedition was to recover a debt of something more than £8000. How much expense will be occasioned to the tax-paying people of this country by the employment of this immense fleet, acting the part of a bum-bailiff for Don Pacifico, we cannot ascertain, as the Government, evidently out of very shame, have refused the returns to that effect which Mr. Cobden

moved for. We need not say, that it will exceed ten times the amount of the litigated sum; while the injury inflicted on Greece, by the total suspension of its commerce for several months, has been estimated at least two millions of pounds sterling. And this was for the recovery of £10,000! ~ 'Yes,' it will be said, but it will not do to judge such matters by sordid principles of pecuniary loss or gain. Other considerations of higher moment are involved. The national honour must be maintained and vindicated.' Well, take the transaction on that ground. And we ask of the most punctilious stickler for national dignity, How much glory have we gained in the eyes of Europe and the world by this valiant and magnanimous exploit? Was it a gallant and honourable thing for the most powerful maritime nation on earth to employ its enormous naval superiority against so feeble and helpless a kingdom as Greece? Did any Englishman feel proud of his country while that huge squadron was vapouring, and blustering, and playing the bully in the Piræus in order to terrify, by a cheap display of courage, a Government which all the world knew had not the smallest means of resistance? Did other nations look on with feelings of admiration and envy, or with those of unmitigated indignation and disgust, at this glorious spectacle? Why, surely, no one can doubt, that heavily as we are mulcted in purse by these "fantastic tricks,' we suffer a yet more grievous damage in character; and we do heartily rejoice to believe that there is a public opinion now forming among the brotherhood of nations, which Governments, however irresponsible to legal control, cannot afford long to despise.*

There is, however, another pretence, sometimes half-hinted, rather than openly avowed, in vindication of this miserable Greek business. It is said, or insinuated, that though the claims of Don Pacifico were, no doubt, sufficiently contemptible in themselves, yet there were secret reasons of State which rendered it expedient to take advantage of these as a ground of quarrel with Greece, in order that England might have an opportunity of making a great demonstration of in the Mediterranean Sea. To establish and enforce power British influence in opposition to the pretensions of Russia, is believed by many to have been the object of this expedition. If this be so, then the justification is, if possible, worse than the deed itself. It is founded on the grossest political immorality. The little kingdom of Greece was intended, it seems, to suffer the part of the whipping-boy formerly kept in attendance on youthful princes, whose miserable doom it was to undergo vicarious castigations for all the misdeeds and shortcomings of young royalty; so that the latter, whose own person was too sacred to be touched by the pedagogic birch, might, nevertheless, be admonished into obedience and wisdom by witnessing the writhings and hearing the screams of his unfortunate substitute. And thus, it seems, the peace, the dignity, and the entire commerce of a feeble and friendly nation, largely engaged in trade with our own people, must suffer the most serious detriment, not for any demerit of its own, but to enable us to read an indirect and menacing lesson to Russia, and maintain our status and power in the administration of European affairs, And have we succeeded even in this direction? Are the Greek Government and people, smarting with mortification and shame at the indignity we have inflicted upon them in the face of all Europe, more or less likely now than they were before to accept our patronage and counsel, in preference to throwing themselves into the arms of Russian influence and protection? And have we improved onr position in regard to this latter power? Will

* We have seen it stated that the cost of a first-rate man-of-war of 120 guns, when afloat with its full complement of men, and including the interest on the original outlay, cannot be less than £400 a day.

not this assault upon Greece be regarded as a sign of British insolence and ambition, and treasured up, as a convenient pretext for fresh encroachments, by the Emperor of Russia? We do solemnly believe, that, in every possible respect, we are as a nation worse off for this sinister and cowardly intervention, furnishing another illustration of the truth, which statesmen are so slow to learn, that

"Human intelligence bent on deceit

Becomes a midnight fumbler; human will,

Of God abandoned, in its web of snares
Strangles its own intent."

We wish particularly to fasten the attention of our readers on the singularly appropriate and convincing illustration which this case affords of the advantage and urgent necessity of such International Treaties of Arbitration as Mr. Cobden proposes. The peculiarity, and, in our judgment, the special value and excellence of the Arbitration Scheme, consists in this:-That it binds the parties to submit the disputed point to competent adjudication as soon as it arises, so as to avoid the aggravated artificial difficulties with which such questions become surrounded as soon as they are made matters of public discussion-the pride, pique, jealousy, and irritation, personal and national, which grow with such alarming rapidity to augment twofold the original embarrassment. There are some who hold that the friendly mediation or good offices of a third party, to be called in at the time, is the best method of adjusting misunderstandings between Governments. But what has been the result of the recent experiment in regard to that matter? Why, just this:-That the attitude that had been already taken, and the extent to which the national honour had been committed by the measures adopted by our Government, is expressly assigned by Lord Palmerston as a reason why he could not submit the question in dispute to any arbitration, however just and impartial. The statement of our Foreign Minister, as given in the following note from M. Drouyn de Lhuys to General de la Hitte, is most significant and instructive :

note...

:

"I have seen Lord Palmerston this morning. I told him that you were very anxious that the acceptance of our good offices should take, as soon as possible, the body and consistence of an official act, and that I waited impatiently for an answer to my Lord Palmerston agreed with me; only he told me that he would introduce into his note a paragraph for the purpose of well determining the nature of our intervention, which would be, not an arbitration, but a friendly mediation, an interposition of good offices. . . . . I thought it my duty to testify to the Principal Secretary of State the regret I felt at seeing our rôle enclosed in such narrow limits. It is not,' I said to him, 'less than your promises, but it is less than my wishes and my hopes. whatever name you give to the thing, the important matter is, that it will have the effect of immediately stopping rigorous measures, and substituting friendly proceedings for them.' This Minister, in explaining to me, in the most amicable tone, that it would be impossible for the British Cabinet, after having taken the advice of the advocate of the crown, and having engaged itself in the commencement of execution, to blot out all that had been done, and to submit to the decision of an arbitrator all its claims, renewed to me," &c.

Besides,

And what shall we say to the pitiful quarrel between England and France that has sprung out of this Greek question? What can we say, but to deplore, with a mixture of indignation and shame, that the peace of nations should be placed at the mercy of ambitious and intriguing diplomatists, more intent upon over-reaching each other, and gratifying their miserable personal vanity by a superior display of trickery and finesse, than on acquitting themselves gravely and carefully of the solemn responsibility that devolves upon them? We greatly fear, that there has been throughout this seemingly friendly negotiation an utter want of honesty and good faith on both sides. An offer of mediation made for

selfish purposes, and accepted with insincerity and distrust, could not do otherwise than come to a "lame and impotent conclusion." One thing, however, it is most gratifying to observe, that this diplomatic squabble, though designed, on one part at least, as an appeal to the basest and most irrational popular prejudices, in order to effect a diversion from political difficulties at home, utterly failed, on both sides of the channel, in kindling those old international antipathies which have heretofore so often served the purposes of embarrassed statesmen when entangled in their own toils. This is a most happy omen. If the people of both countries only learn resolutely to laugh at these tricks and strifes of their rulers, which, under an affectation of much solemn mystery, frequently involve matters to the last degree puerile and contemptible, they will be far less frequently repeated. This is one palpable advantage we anticipate from the formation of International Peace Committees, in constant friendly communication with each other:-That when any crisis of danger arises they should be ready to guide public opinion into a pacific channel, and be the organs, not less authentic or effective because unofficial, through which real national feeling and will on questions in which national interests are so vitally involved, should find intelligent and emphatic expression. We believe that this every way small misunderstanding is not yet fully adjusted, but continues still to be the subject of notes and dispatches, and endless ambassadorial interviews. They may as well hasten the dénouement of the farce: for, if they do not, we believe that there are myriads of voices in both countries ready to chant, with united and hearty enthusiasm, in the ears of Lord Palmerston and Sir Thomas Wyse, of Baron Gros and General de la Hitte, the burden of the old song—

"Let the men that make the quarrels
Be the only men to fight."

EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF THE REV. W.
CLARKSON,

Missionary from India, at the Meeting of the London Missionary
Society, May 9, 1850.

"I WILL conclude with one remark respecting India's liberty. We wanted to build a Mission House. How was it to be done? I will tell you what the natives did. One Indian convert, a Coolie, a man whose glory it was to wear a sword-a man, the privilege of whose tribe it was to travel armed-such a man, a Christian man of but two years' standing, came with his sword in hand, and said, 'Let that be sold for the Mission House.' My remark was, 'What will you do without a sword?' The answer was, They that take the sword, shall perish by the sword.' The man that travels armed is always in danger, and the man that travels unarmed is the only safe man.' And then came the Indian women, and upon their necks hung the silver necklaces, and on their ankles hung the silver anklets, and on their arms the silver armlets; and the women brought their nose-rings, and their earrings, and their anklets, and cast them into the treasury of the Lord; so that amongst a poor people we collected about five pounds' worth of ornaments, which would correspond, at least, to fifty or one hundred pounds' worth of our own ladies' ornaments.

"Warriors of England! I wish there were some here, but I do not see them. I would say to them, When will you give up your swords?"-Patriot, 13 May, 1850.

Ambition.-Cineas was an excellent orator and statesman, and principal friend and counsellor to Pyrrhus; and falling in inward talk with him, and discoursing the king's endless ambition, Pyrrhus opened himself unto him, that he intended, first, a war upon Italy, and hoped to achieve it. Cineas asked him, "Sir, what will you do then?" "Then," said he, "we will attempt Sicily." Cineas said, "Well, sir, what then?" Said Pyrrhus, "If the gods favour us, we may conquer Africa and Carthage." "What then, sir?" saith Cineas. "Nay, then," saith Pyrrhus, we may take our rest, and sacrifice and feast every day, and make merry with our friends." "Alas! sir," said Cineas, "may we not do so now, without all this ado?"—Lord Bacon's Apothegms.

86

The Herald of Peace, JULY, 1850.

CHRISTIANITY IMMEDIATELY PRACTICABLE.

For thousands of years the world has been groaning beneath the crimes and miseries of war. The earth has been laid waste by its ravages-entire countries have been depopulated-mighty empires overthrown-cities and towns reduced to ruin-countless myriads of human beings slain in every conceivable form of terror and agony-the progress of civilization arrested-the relations of commerce deranged the name of religion dishonoured-the moral sentiments of mankind debauched-the foulest passions of man's nature fostered and invoked into preternatural strength and fierceness, and an amount of crime, guilt, and suffering produced, which is appalling to contemplate. But how comes it to pass that the great majority of Christian men should so contentedly acquiesce in the presence of an evil so enormous, as though a state of war were the normal and inevitable condition of humanity? It is admitted on all hands, that the ferocious spirit in which war originates, and the manifold and gigantic iniquities to which it leads, are in diametrical opposition to the whole character of the Gospel. It is admitted, also, that in proportion as the latter prevails will the former be abominated and driven from among men. It is admitted, moreover,

that no assurances contained in God's Book are more unequivocal and explicit, than those which declare the final and utter extinction of the entire system, through the advancing influence of Christianity. And yet it is an unquestionable fact, that, with these strong convictions, and these lofty and animating hopes, the Christian world has hitherto put forth no earnest and united efforts to bring this abomination of desolations to a perpetual end. And why is this? There are various reasons, no doubt, assigned, to account for so remarkable a fact. The soundness of such reasons we shall endeavour to examine from time to time. We shall for the present confine ourselves to one of the most plausible of those pretexts, on the ground of which many Christians not only abstain from rendering help to this enterprise, but throw upon it the cold shadow of their displeasure or contempt. It is this:-"The abstract truth of the doctrines of Peace is not denied, nor is their theoretical excellence and beauty questioned. The Christian idea of loving our enemies, of overcoming evil with good, of not resisting evil, is all very fine, no doubt, but it is utterly impracticable in the present condition of the world."

Now, our argument, for the present, is with those who really accept and reverence the Gospel as an authoritative revelation from God; and we submit with all due respect to such, that by the use of such an objection as we have cited, they are putting into the hands of infidelity a most perilous weapon. And is Christianity, then, after all, an impracticable religion? Is the scheme of life which it depicts, and, apparently at least, enjoins, designed merely as an imaginary model, fit only for one of those Utopian worlds which poets and philosophers have loved to create in their day-dreams; but far too impracticable and visionary to think of its being applied to the actual and "work-a-day world" which men are now doomed to inhabit?

The enemies of our faith are already keen enough to detect and expose the practical inconsistency between the conduct of Christians and the principles they profess.

But if they find us deliberately avowing, that a certain course of conduct is indeed theoretically enjoined by our religion, but that in the present state of the world it is quite out of the question to attempt to embody it in actual life; with what an emphasis of triumphant scorn will they denounce the miserable hypocrisy of those who pretend to have a revelation from God, to which they loftily exact the submissive homage of the world, which is nevertheless according to their own confession too fine and good to be of any present practical use?

But perhaps it will be said, that though this Christian standard is not yet practicable, it is intended to become so, when the world itself is converted to Christianity. In reply to this form of the objection, we have two or three remarks to offer. In the first place we affirm, that it appears on the face of it, unless some reasons, not obvious to ordinary minds, can be assigned to prove the contrary, that Christianity was designed by its Author to be a system which was to come into immediate operation;— that it was meant to apply to and act upon the world, not at some future time, when it had become elevated and purified by a previous process, but in its present, actually existing condition;-that it is not a supplemental and finishing grace, or ornament with which the world is to be beautified, after it has been raised out of its depravity and degradation, but that it is to be itself the instrument in accomplishing that regeneration. And if it is to be the means of regenerating the world, it surely can be so in no other way than by the application of its truths and prin ciples to the world, while it is yet in a state of moral perverseness and corruption. The Gospel proclaims itself as a remedy, but that must be esteemed a singular kind of remedy, which only becomes applicable to the patient after his recovery.

If we are told that in regard to the doctrines of Christianity, they are undoubtedly of immediate application, and ought to be pressed directly and universally upon all men's acceptance, but that it is not so in regard to its precepts; we take leave to ask, On what authority is this distinction drawn between two parts of a system, which seems to the eye of an unsophisticated observer to be singularly homogeneous and coherent, by which one portion of it is made immediately and universally applicable, and the other portion only provisionally and remotely so? We are not aware of any intimation given in the New Testament, absolving Christians from the duty of exemplifying in their own conduct, and of enforcing on the observation and obedience of mankind, those principles which their religion inculcates on questions of social and national morality, or entitling them to conclude that the reducing to practice of this part of the Christian system is postponed to some indefinite and hypothetical futurity. It would appear, indeed, on the contrary, that there are special reasons why those Christian precepts which refer to the social relations of mankind-that very class of precepts which some describe as only coming into force in the Millennium-must, if they are to be of any use at all, be applied to the present condition of the world, for to no other condition can they be imagined to have any adaptation. If we are to love our enemies, it surely must be while there are enemies to love, and not after they have all been converted into friends. If we are ever to pay any heed to the precept, "Resist not evil," must it not be while evil exists, and abounds, and not after it has been chased out of the world by the brightness of the Millennial day?

But, in the second place, when we are told that it will be time enough to talk of abolishing War, when Christian

« AnteriorContinuar »