Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

pute of having eclipsed the whole human race in feats of valor and deeds of arms?"

"This is a serious question. It affects the vital interests of every freeman; and the course of our government makes it necessary, that these States should pause and reflect, before it be too late. We have escaped from one war with a crippled constitution; the next will probably destroy it; therefore let the motto of the state be-PEACE."

These extracts may suffice for a specimen of what warriors themselves have thought of their own profession; and, could we trace the whole course of war, and look into the hearts of its greatest demigods, we should probably find, that most of them regarded it in their best moments with disgust and abhorrence. Ancient heroes reflected little on the nature and results of this custom; but modern warriors rarely, if ever, attempt to justify it, except as a last expedient for protection or redress. Even they are the advocates of peace, and look upon themselves as its armed guardians, and upon the military system of Christendom as the best means of preventing war. They are sadly mistaken on this point; but their view of it shows how general and deep is the abhorrence among civilized men of a custom so savage and baleful.

THE

ARTICLE III.

PREJUDICES IN FAVOR OF WAR.

PREJUDICES OF EDUCATION IN FAVOR OF WAR, AND THE
BEST WAY TO COUNTERACT THEM.

THE advocates of peace, like other reformers, have found that the prejudices of education are among the most serious obstacles to the cause they seek to promote. From infancy to manhood, the mind is exposed to influences which tend to bias it in favor of war. It is maintained that, so long as these continue to operate, the abolition of this custom, so ruinous to the temporal and spiritual interests of men, cannot reasonably be expected.

But before an evil can be removed, it must be exposed. It will, therefore, be my object, in this essay, to treat of the prejudices of education in favor of war, and suggest the means by which they may be counteracted.

In the first place, I shall attempt to show the fact that such prejudices exist, and the manner in which they are inculcated.

These prejudices chiefly pertain to the lawfulness, the necessity, and the glory of war. They are gradually formed as knowledge is acquired, and they gain strength as the intellectual and moral character is developed. From age to age they have existed, and have alike been excited and confirmed by impressions made on the youthful mind, by parents and teachers, by respected clergymen and popular orators, by arts and literature, by military establishments, and the omnipotent voice of public opinion. That these prejudices may be distinctly seen, I shall present them separately, while it must be remembered that they often act in concert from the cradle to the full development of mind.

No principle is oftener inculcated, or supposed to be more firmly established, than that war may be, and often has been, right. Wherever we turn our eyes, we see youth indoctrinated, even by the most honored and beloved in the community, in the lawfulness of war. The disposition to view favorably this custom is implanted in the nursery. The boy, before he is able to solve a moral question of difficulty, is told exciting stories of the warfare of his fathers;-how gallantly the minister of the parish, perhaps, headed, like a bishop of feudal times, the armed yeomanry, and incited them to revenge and slaughter. He hears, with peculiar interest, his worthy old grandmother relate the noble deeds of her husband, or father, or brothers in "that righteous cause," the American Revolution; or he beholds over the mantel-piece the engraved image of "the father of his country" splendidly arrayed in military costume, or else, what is not less imposing, his head encircled by winged angels with a laurel crown. When he reads his Bible, he is often directed to those passages which record the heroic exploits of the illustrious leaders in the Jewish theocracy, or the praises of the Israelitish women who sung, "Saul hath slain his thousands, but David his tens of thousands," without being told that those heroes were appointed by God as instruments of punishment against idolatrous Canaanites, just as angels were sent to destroy the cities of the plain. With what interest does the youth, when he first reads the beautiful allegory of Bunyan, contemplate the ideal conflicts of Christian and Great Heart, without being instructed in their spiritual import! If he is permitted to hear the inflated eloquence, which is too often poured forth in the temple of the Prince of peace on our great national jubilee, he hears of nought but exalted virtues developed in a

battle-field, or of a patriotism which, when rightly viewed, may be nothing but the desire of elevating one's country at the cost of another's, regardless of the injury to the moral and spiritual interests of both.

But there are more direct influences which operate on the mind, and lead to the persuasion that war is right. As soon as the youth is taught to study and discuss great ethical subjects, he is indoctrinated in the fundamental error, "that a distinction exists between the rules which apply to us as individuals, and as citizens of the state;—that the pacific injunctions of Christ from the mount, and all other kindred commands and prohibitions of the Scriptures, have no reference to our conduct as members of the political body;" in other words, that a public man, or body of men, may lawfully do what could not, on the principles of the gospel, be justified in a private individual. He is constantly told, that a nation, though composed of individuals who are bound to obey, even unto death, the settled laws of truth and justice as enforced by the precepts and final example of Christ and his apostles, has no conscience! and hence, forsooth, because one nation sets at defiance the laws of God, because the world is bad, force must be opposed to force, evil may be resisted with evil! Dr. Paley says, and the notion is frequently believed and taught, "that in the transactions of private persons, no advantages can compensate to the public from a breach of the settled laws of justice; but, in the concerns of empires, this may safely be doubted,-nay, even that it may be necessary for Christians to resign themselves to a common will, though that will is often actuated by criminal motives, and determined to destructive purposes!" That is, if it appears, on the maxims of expediency, to the rulers of a nation that war is desirable, all the individuals of that nation are bound by duty to encourage that war, however base the motives which may really have caused it, and disastrous it may prove to the best interests of mankind!! If good may come from slaughtering men, women and children, we may slaughter them! If good may result from stratagem and crime, we may practise them! Oh, when shall good men learn and teach the universality of Christian obligation! How long shall the philosophy of expediency supplant the plain injunctions of the gospel! How long shall the wisdom of this world be more valued than the oracles of God!

But not only enlightened and approved ethical writers, on the principle" that whatever is expedient is right," inculcate the lawfulness of war, but the honored man of God lifts up his

voice to confirm the general delusion. Says Robert Hall, in one of his printed discourses, "Go then, ye defenders of your country; advance with alacrity into the field where God himself musters the hosts to war. Religion is too much interested in your success not to lend you her aid. She will shed over this enterprise her selectest influence. And thou, sole Ruler among the children of men, go forth with our hosts in the day of battle! Impart, in addition to their hereditary valor, that confidence which springs from thy presence, and pour into their hearts the spirit of departed heroes." Who, surely, could suppose that this declamation was uttered by a man who also had preached and published one of the best sermons on the evils of war which has ever been written?

But the principle, that war is in accordance with the will of God, is more eagerly cherished by the people; and, among that class with which the youth is most prone to mingle, it is assumed as a first truth. How many believe that war is right, because the American Revolution was successfully achieved. Every where we hear it spoken of as "the righteous cause which heaven befriended;" "the good and glorious war; "the most illustrious event recorded in the annals of mankind! O, how differently the English thought, and how differently our posterity may also think, when the moral evils it gave rise to, are more fully developed, when the pacific principles of Christianity are more distinctly perceived!

[ocr errors]

But the prejudices of education respecting the necessity of war are more prevalent, and, if possible, more deeply rooted. They exist wherever the principles of expediency are disseminated and cherished. They are indeed founded on them. They are so intimately connected with the maxims of worldly wisdom, that wherever the latter are recognised as settled rules of action, it is maintained that only the law of violence can secure the safety and prosperity of nations; and hence it has become the fundamental principle of international policy.

But, as few vindicate slavery from principle, so no good and enlightened man approves of war for its own. sake. In every age and country, it has been regarded as a great calamity. It is so unequivocally a scourge, that nearly all conquerors have sought excuses,-pitiful indeed,-whereby they might justify themselves in the eye of the world. But while it has been "denounced as a curse, and decried as an evil," its necessity has been maintained as a remedy for the greater evils of oppression and slavery. The warlike policy has usually been defended as the means, dictated by reason

and experience, to secure ultimate advantage. Hence its immediate consequences have been viewed as necessary evils, and therefore patiently endured, just as the sick man swallows the loathsome drug, in the hope of a more speedy recovery; or as we calmly view the commotion of the elements, in the quiet expectation of a more prolific soil, and a more salubrious sky. Such are the views of the most enlightened defenders of war.

And here I have no reference to prejudices respecting the end to be attained, but simply as to the means usually adopted to secure that end. It would surely be the worst of delusions to suppose we are not bound to do all we can to secure our country's true honor and advantage. I wish to show the fact, that the law of violence is every where inculcated in the system of instruction, instead of the law of love. A discussion of their comparative efficacy is foreign to my present object.

From the cradle to the grave, we are taught to regard the warlike policy as the vital principle of national preservation. This is upheld by the whole range of literature, ancient and modern. Every body knows it was a favorite notion with the poets, orators, historians, and sages of antiquity, that the prosperity of the state depended on the power and disposition to enforce the law of violence. Hence it was made the elementary principle of their institutions. The texture of these institutions is the subject of classical and philosophical study. We are early indoctrinated in the principle on which they are based. Its truth is rarely questioned. Hence we are generally taught, particularly in our histories, that the prosperity of the states of antiquity is mainly to be ascribed to their warlike energies. It is seldom that we are pointed to the industry, knowledge, virtue, and numbers of the middling classes as primary causes of prosperity; or to the vices of self-interest, the extinction of the middling classes, disproportionate fortunes, and the absorbing spirit of egotism, as primary causes of corruption and decay. We are seldom pointed, either by our teachers or our books, to the real canker-worm which devoured the vitals of the great states of antiquity; but we blindly ascribe their ruin to the extinction of a martial spirit, or some other secondary cause. Thus we say that it was the arms of Cyrus, not the virtues and uncorrupted strength of his countrymen, which gave life and energy to the Persian monarchy. Thus we speak of the sun of Athenian glory going down at the battle of Cheronea, and tell our youth that, when the Grecians loved arts, and eloquence, and philosophy, and poetry more than the battle-field, liberty and renown left them for ever. We are early impressed

« ПредишнаНапред »