bear arms, thou art to die by the sword." Maximilian replied, "Thanks be to God."

He was twenty years three months and seventeen days old; and when he was led to the place of execution he spoke thus: "My dear brethren, endeavour with all your might that it may be your portion to see the Lord, and that he may give you such a crown." And then with a pleasant countenance he said to his father, "Give the executioner the soldier's coat thou hadst gotten for me; and when I shall receive thee in the company of the blessed martyrs, we may also rejoice together with the Lord."

After this he suffered. His mother Pompeiana obtained his body of the judge, and conveyed it to Carthage, and buried it near the place where the body of Cyprian the martyr lay. And thirteen days after this his mother died, and was buried in the same place. And Victor, his father, returned to his habitation," rejoicing and praising God that he had sent before such a gift to the Lord, himself expecting to follow after."

I shall only observe upon this instance, that it is nearly pure and unmixed, or that it is but little connected with idolatrous circumstances; or rather, that the unlawfulness of fighting was principally urged by Maximilian as a reason against entering upon a military life. Let us now find a case where, when a person was converted in the army, he left it, pleading this principle as one among others for his dereliction of it:

Marcellus was a centurion in the legion called "Trajana." On a festival given in honour of the birth-day of Galerius, he threw down his military belt at the head of the legion, and, in the face of the standards, declared with a loud voice, that he would no longer serve in the army, for that "he had become a Christian."-" I hold in detestation," says he, addressing himself to all the soldiers, "the worship of your gods,-gods, which are made of wood and stone,-gods, which are deaf and dumb." So far Marcellus, it appears, seems to have been influenced in his desertion of a military life by the idolatry connected with it. But let us hear him further on this subject: "It is not lawful," says he, "for a Christian, who is the servant of Christ the Lord, to bear arms for any earthly consideration." After a delay of more than three months in prison, which delay was allowed for the purpose of sparing him, he was brought before the præfect. Here he had an opportunity of correcting his former expressions. But as he persisted in the same sentiments, he suffered. It is remarkable that, almost immediately after his execution, Cassian, who was the notary to the same legion, refused to serve any longer, by publicly throwing his pen and accomptbook upon the ground, and declaring at the same time that the sentence of Marcellus was unjust. When taken up by the order of Aurelianus Agricolanus, he is described by the record preserved by Ruinart, to have avowed the same sentiments as Marcellus, and like him to have suffered death.

It may not, perhaps, be necessary to cite any other instances, as opposed to that of Marinus, to the point in question. But as another occurs, which may be related in few words, I will just mention it in this place: Martin, of whom Sulpicius Severus says so much, had been bred to the profession of arms, but on his conversion to Christianity declined it. In the answer, which he gave to Julian the Apostate for his conduct on this occasion, we find him making use only of these words: "I am a Christian, and therefore I cannot fight."

Now this answer of Martin is detached from all notions of idolatry. The unlawfulness of fighting is given as the only motive for his resignation. And there is no doubt that the unlawfulness of fighting was as much a principle of religion in the early times of Christianity, as the refusal of sacrifice to the Heathen gods; and that they operated equally to prevent men from entering into the army, and to drive them out of it on their conversion. Indeed these principles generally went together, where the profession of arms presented itself as an occupation for a Christian. He, who refused the profession on account of the idolatry connected with it, would have refused it on account of the unlawfulness of fighting. And he, who refused it on account of the guilt of fighting, would have refused it on account of the idolatrous services it required. In the early times of Christianity each of them was a powerful impediment to a military life.

SECTION IV.

Early Christians then declined the army on account of one among other persuasions, that it was unlawful for Christians to fight-their practice examined further, or into the fourth century-shown from hence that while Christianity continued pure, Christians still declined the military profession-but as it became less pure, their scruples against it became less-and when it became corrupt, their scruples against it ceased-Manner in which the Quakers make the practice of those early times support the meaning of the scriptural passages which they adduce in favour of their te

net on war.

As it will now probably be admitted that the early Christians refused to enter into the army, and that they left it after their conversion, on account of one among other persuasions that it was unlawful for them to fight, I must examine their practice as it related to this subject still further; or I must trace it down to a later period, before I can show how the Quakers make the practice of those early times support the meaning of the scriptural passages, which they advance in favour of their tenet

on war.

It may be considered as a well-founded proposition, that as the lamp of Christianity burned bright in those early times, so those, who were illuminat

ed by it, declined the military profession; and that as its flames shone less clear, they had less objection to it. Thus, in the two first centuries, when Christianity was the purest, there were no Christian soldiers. In the third century, when it became less pure, there is frequent mention of such soldiers.And in the fourth, when its corruption was fixed, Christians entered upon the profession of arms with as little hesitation as they entered upon any other occupation in life.

That there were no Christian soldiers in the first and second centuries has already been made appa

rent.

That Christianity also was purest in these times there can be no doubt. Let us look at the character, which is given of the first Christians by Athenagoras, Justin Martyr, Minucius Felix, and others of the early Christian writers. According to these, they were plain and neat in their apparel, and frugal in their furniture. They were temperate in their eating and drinking. They relinquished all the diversions of the times, in which they saw any tendency to evil. They were chaste in their conversation, tempering mirth with gravity. They were modest and chaste in their deportment and manners. They were punctual to their words and engagements. They were such lovers of truth, that, on being asked if they were Christians, they never denied it, though death was the consequence of such a religious profession. They loved each other as brethren, and called one another by that name.They were kind and courteous, and charitable be