GREAT BUSINESS of the present | waited for permission; but he life is, to secure an interest in an instantly smote the servant of the imperishable habitatiou. Coseley. B.H.D. ON PEACE SOCIETIES. To the Editors of the Baptist Magazine. It is not with any intention of defending war, that I trouble you with some remarks on the Dialogue on War, part of which appeared in your Magazine for February; but, feeling an ardent desire to see Christians adopt scriptural sentiments on this subject, I regret that any argument should be used in support of a pacific system, which does not appear to be well founded; I beg leave, therefore, briefly to discuss two or three of the arguments in that paper. The writer relies greatly on the disapprobation shewn by our Lord when Peter used his sword in his defence: quoting the words of Christ, "He that useth the sword shall die by the sword." No one of the Evangelists relates all that passed on that occasion; let us see what we learn from the various particulars when united. The Evangelist Luke informs us, (chap. xxii. 26,) that Jesus Christ had said to his disciples, "He that hath no sword let him sell his garment and buy one;" and when they said, "Lord, behold here are two swords;" he said, "It is enough." Taking for granted, that their Lord had provided the swords for self defence, as soon as the officers attempted to apprehend Jesus, they eagerly asked, (and who in such circumstances would not have done the same,) "Lord, shall we smite with the sword?" All, except Peter, seem to have high priest, and cut off his ear; and Jesus said, "Suffer ye thus far;" and he touched his ear and healed it. The Evangelist Mark (xv. 7,) only relates the above fact, and adds no more. St. Matthew (xxvi. 52–54,) adds to the admonition already quoted, the following words: "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou not that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?" and in the gospel by St. John, the following words are added: "The cup which my Father hath given me shall I not drink it?" : We learn, then, I think, from the whole history, that they misunderstood the design of their Lord-that Jesus Christ wished to teach Peter that he had acted wrong in not waiting for his permission; for that, if he had thought fit to oppose force by force, he could have commanded the service of angels; but that to have done so, would have been inconsistent with his design in coming into the world. This last inference, which is clearly deducible from the above quotations, seems to render the whole so peculiar to the case of the Messiah, as to leave little, if any thing, of general application. If it be ever applicable to our circumstances, it is, I imagine, in cases of persecution for conscience' sake. But, it is argued, by your correspondent, that our Lord Jesus Christ said, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews,' (John, xviii. 36;) plainly forbidding all attempts to establish, or to extend, or to maintain, his kingdom in the world by such weapons as the sword. To that object, and to that only, it appears to me, is the text fairly applicable. The examination of these passages has occasioned my anticipating an argument of the writer of the Dialogue, that because we are not permitted to defend our religious privileges, which are the most valuable, we are bound to infer, that we cannot be allowed to defend our civil liberties. As the various directions of Christ, quoted by your correspondent, so far as they are applicable to us, evidently respect the spirit with which we are required to induce persecution on a religious account, I conceive that the reasoning which applies them to our civil rights is inaccurate. We may, I think, safely conclude, that our Lord wished also to inculcate another important lesson. He designed, I apprehend, to teach them to distinguish between his religion, which was personal, which conferred no power, nor political importance; and the Jewish theocracy, which was national, which was raised into considerable political importance, and commissioned to use the sword unsparingly. It was, perhaps, absolutely necessary, thus to teach men, who were born Jews, the difference between the two dispensations. Your correspondent argues, that a nation which shall conscientiously abstain from war, may depend on the Divine protection, because the Jews were protected during the absence of the males, when they went up * three times a year to worship at Jerusalem. Without availing myself, as I might do, of the argument to be derived from the express command, and the express promise to the Jews, I beg to suggest, that we ought to discuss this subject purely on Christian principles, and to reject all arguments derived from the peculiarities of Judaism, for or against war. That a nation which seeks peace in the spirit of peace, and is willing to make some sacrifices to secure it, will succeed, and will obtain the Divine blessing, I feel no doubt. Unfortunately, rulers have too often thought it their interest to go to war; and so little have the nations they governed been influenced by the peaceful spirit of the gospel, that they have generally found it an easy thing to inflame the public mind, and thus obtain all necessary support, even to their most criminal plans of ambition and slaughter, and therefore they have seldom, if ever, tried with sincerity to preserve peace. It Of those who govern the na tions of the earth, however good the presages of the present day may be, I do not, like your correspondent, expect much. will, I apprehend, be by enlightening the community, in every country, by convincing mankind that the same principles of equity and moderation are binding on a nation as on an individual, that this happy change will be effected. Is not the poet correct in asserting, that "War is a game, which, were their subjects wise, Kings would not play at?" That war is lawful in certain cases, has been generally admit Exod. xxxiv. 23, 24. + Cowper. ted. Christians, who have thought | sailing in the ship which he usuon the subject, I suppose, com- ally commanded. About eight monly restrict it to self-defence; years afterwards, in one of his letbut, then, some of them trans-ters to Dr. Haweis, when he relate this term with such latitude, corded this event, he added,as destroys the principle. During the time I was engaged in the Slave Trade, I never had the least scruple of its lawfulness."* Perhaps a similar confession on the subject of war, from the pen of some retired soldier, a few years hence, may produce as much astonishment in the minds of a future generation, as that of Mr. Newton in the minds of those who listened to the discussions on the Slave Trade. I think, of all the evils that war has inflicted on this country, nu But there are others who argue in favour of the lawfulness of war generally. They infer from the acknowledged piety of a Gardener, a Bluckader, and other good men, who have been soldiers, that war cannot be unlawful; for if it be, such men would not have engaged in it. To say nothing of the objection, in Christian morals, to deriving our ideas of right and wrong, from the opinions and conduct of fallible men,-to pass by the fact, that few, if any, of these young men who are edu-merous and dreadful as they are, cated for military life, ever hear there is not one which a Christian the arguments which may be has more reason to deplore, than urged against war,-that they the warlike spirit which has been enter on the profession of arms so generally imbibed, during the generally before their character last twenty years. The grave and is formed, and with the sanction sober speech of Christians has of those who have adopted, with- been corrupted; they have learnout examination, the popular opi-ed to talk of the splendour of war, nion that war is lawful; yet if and the glory of victory; and to we acquaint ourselves with his-attribute to the return of peace, tory, in which we trace the con- the inevitable cousequences of a duct of men, and with biography, long protracted and ruinous war. in which we ascertain the motives If, by the various institutions and feelings of individuals, we of the present day, the youth of shall find that many men of un- all ranks and every nation bedoubted piety, have, for want of come thinking Christians, I am due consideration, continued in persuaded the warlike spirit a course of conduct so evidently which has been so universal, will repugnant to the dictates of Chris-be annihilated in a short period. tianity, that we are astonished on a review of their conduct. One memorable instance of this kind occurs to my recollection.The late excellent Mr. Newton, the rector of St. Mary, Woolnoth, was, it is well known, engaged in the Slave Trade for years after he became pious, and he quitted it, not from any doubt of its being lawful, but because a sudden attack of illness prevented him from At present I imagine, from the intercourse I have had with Christians of all denominations, that there are comparatively but few who have thought on the subject of the lawfulness of war, or the limits which ought to be prescribed to it. A time of peace is a * See Letter XIII. in "An Authentic Narrative, communicated in a Series of Letters to the Rev. Mr.(now Dr.)Haweis;" originally published in the year 1764. of peace, than on the hasty and exultant resolutions of princes? I should rejoice to see the attention of Christians, of all denominations, excited to this subject, and to see them co-operate in the abolition of war, as they did in the abolition of the Slave Trade; but I fear the present Society will not be able, from its plan, to unite all the friends of peace: I cannot time when we are best qualified to examine it with calmness and deliberation; let us then diligently apply ourselves to the investigation, recollecting, that we are required to govern our minds and spirits, as well as our conduct, by the revealed will of God; and that we are not, on this point, aný more than others, allowed to become conformed to the world. Your correspondent contem-therefore help wishing to see a plates the "Holy Alliance" with society formed with the same obrapture; he seems to feel a sure ject, (to promote permanent and and certain hope that the mo- universal peace ;) but who could narchs who entered into it will in- conscientiously seek the promotroduce the happy æra, so long tion of that object by the publipredicted, so earnestly desired. cation of pamphlets, tending to I cannot contemplate it with such prove the unlawfulness of all war entire satisfaction, or such un- which is not strictly defensive, or shaken confidence. intended, like the attack on Algiers, to recover those who have been unlawfully taken captives. Many who disapprove of the plan of the Peace Society, but who are equally desirous of attaining the object, could, and I have no doubt would take an active part in such a society. The name of Peace Society is pre-oc idea be conveyed in other words? might it not be designated a so Signing such a paper in the hour of victory, when the mind was in a state of self-complacency, and no opposition expected, appears to me to afford but little security for the future pacific conduct of those monarchs. If circumstances arise that irritate the temper, inflame the passions, or present temptations of advan-cupied; but might not the same tage, I fear it will only prove a record of good intentions. Does it amount to much more than a CIETY FOR THE ABOLITION resolution to be virtuous, made in OF WAR? I do not wish to see the absence of temptation? and, any society formed that should be alas! who that knows the world, a rival to that which already exwho that has studied the humanists, but one that might become a character, can place much reliance on such resolutions. Allow me to ask, has no subsequent fact occasioned any misgiving of heart? are all the treaties since entered into by these monarchs, remarkably distinguished by a spirit of equity and moderation? does the boasted glory of the "Holy Alliance" remain still untarnished? or may we not learn from subsequent events, to depend rather on the patient and persevering efforts of the friends coadjutor; and if both societies I am, Sir, ON THE to be devoured by alligators, it is HONOUR DUE TO PARENTS. not to be expected that much filial ALL the relative duties are highly important; when properly discharged they promote the happiness of society, and redound to the glory of God. Were I to draw a scale of these duties, assigning to each its proportionate share of importance, it is probable I should place at the head of that scale the duties of husbands and wives. As the matrimonial connection is the most intimate, so the duties which it involves are the most deeply interesting. Let those who are conscientiously desirous of doing the will of God, in this relation, read frequently, among other passages, the two following, 1 Pet. iii. 1-7, and Ephes. v. 22-33. If the first stroke upon the scale be appropriated to the duties of husbands and wives, the second should express the duties of parents and children. O that parents would duly consider the task they have to fulfil, and endeavour, in an humble dependance upon the grace of God, to be found faithful to their trust! The following thoughts are addressed to children and young people:-" Honour thy father and thy mother!" What does this honour imply? regard should be cherished. But the youths of Britain, are blessed with parents who cherish towards them the kindest feelings, and it is but right that their parents in. nature should enjoy the warmest affections of their hearts. 2. If you honour your father and mother you will cheerfully obey them. Affection does not necessarily nor even generally imply obedience. There may be, very strong affection between brothers, sisters, relatives, and friends; but as no superiority and subordination are implied, no obedience can be required or yielded. It is very different with respect to your parents; the relation of a child to his parent involves the authority of the latter. The wisdom which is supposed to accompany years entitles a parent to respect; besides, he is placed, by Divine appointment,at the head of his family. And if order and happiness are to reside in the family, his will must be obeyed. The command of the sacred scripture is binding, "Children obey your parents in all things, for this is fit." And this obedience should be willing and cheerful. A wise pa, rent will insist upon the compliance of his children, so far as the outward act is concerned; but this, on your part, may be a conformity arising merely from fear and compulsion, while the heart is altogether disobedient. Your parents, in this case, may do 1. If you honour your father and mother you will affectionately love them. The best thing you possess is your heart; and you must honour your parents by giv-themselves credit, while they are ing them your hearts. One of the very darkest features of paganism is mentioned by the apostle; "Without natural affection." Where parental feeling will allow the mother to expose her infant to be eaten up by ants, and the father to cast his son into the river aiming at your real good; but you do them no credit; you render them no honour, while you decline cheerfully to obey them.There is only one exception to this general rule, which I hope is not of frequent occurrence, viz. when the commands of a parent |