my trust is in thee.' But the mob is repelled; they depart, breathing out threatenings and slaughter against A. and his company. Did A. live under the Mosaic dispensation, his prayer of praise and thanksgiving might be conceived in the spirit of the Old Testament hymns for victory. Did he live in the age of the Crusaders, or in that of the Puritans of England. or the Covenanters of Scotland, his prayer would breathe the spirit of the elegies of Tyrtæus, not of the sermon on the mount. But how a Christian minister, the chief actor in such a scene, could offer prayer to a God of holiness, through the Prince of Peace and love, for such a result, I am at a loss to comprehend.

66 Let us now reverse the scene. The mob succeed 'The house is taken by storm. The mob burst in with howls and cries more wild and terrific than the Indian war-whoop; for civilized man, when maddened, is more savage than the savage. How many lives on both sides are lost in that furious struggle! The mob rush in on every side, and the assailed, driven from room to room, are hurled from the windows, or slain within. A. falls with the rest, and goes to give his account for having suffered, when he could have prevented many, if not all, the agonies and miseries of that scene. Can a Christian read, and not tremble at the thought that he should have any hand in those crimes and horrors?

"Now, will not A. acknowledge that, as a Christian, I have the advantage of him both ways? If I succeed, what a contrast to his success! If I fail, perhaps only a single life is lost, and some property injured. If he fail, what destruction of property, what waste of life, what ruin of immortal souls! Would not A. rather live with me, or die with me, than to survive or perish with his fellow-combatants, stained with the blood of guilty brothers, and authors of perdition to many a soul? But my advantages stop not there. If I succeed, the mob depart, with passions calmed and

restrained. Should mine be the first house, might not my course be the means, under God, of saving the city from the fury of the mob? If I fail, the mob depart with revenge satiated, but with no fierce excitement of ferocious feelings. Whether A. succeed or fail, it seems plain, from the exasperated passions of the populace, that nothing but a strong military force could control them; nor then, without desperate conflicts and much bloodshed. The state of the city under my success or failure, compared with his, I leave to the heart and imagination of A. himself, and all the advocates of defensive war. After reviewing the whole ground, will they not confess, with King Agrippa, 'Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian, on the principles of peace?'"*

These are instances or specimens of the popular objections, which are thrown out against the peace doctrine. Others might be easily given, if we had space for noticing every thing of this kind; and perhaps we might add with propriety, they might be as easily answered. Men may rely upon it, that a course of justice, tempered with unfeigned benevolence, will always be attended with the most favorable results. Is it not the mercy of God that leadeth to repentance? And if God's mercy, God's goodness, can thus influence and lead men to pursue a right course, why may not mercy and goodness in men have a similar effect? The fact is, the power of beneficence has never been fully estimated, and never been put fully to the test. When this is done, (and society will never rise upward to the mark of its destination until it is done,) it will be seen that we are not flighty and chimerical, nor even unphilosophical, in our views. Mental philosophers have told us of the power of the resentful passions; not only how they sometimes prompt to injury, but how they have power to restrain others from

* Calumet, Vol. II. p. 176.

doing injury. Political economists have told us of the power of bars, and gates, and prisons, in checking the tendencies to the perpetration of crime. But who, on philosophical principles, has investigated the power of beneficence and forgiveness? Beyond all question, it is the unalterable constitution of nature, that there is efficacy, divine, unspeakable efficacy, in love. The exhibition of kindness has the power to bring even the irrational animals into subjection. Show kindness to a dog, and he will remember it; he will be grateful; he will infallibly return love for love. Show kindness to a lion, and you can lead him by the mane; you can thrust your hand into his mouth; you can melt the untamed ferocity of his heart into an affection stronger than death. In all of God's vast, unbounded creation, there is not a living and sentient being, from the least to the highest, not one, not even the outcast and degraded serpent, that is insensible to acts of kindness. If love, such as our blessed Savior manifested, could be introduced into the world, and exert its appropriate dominion, it would restore a state of things far more cheering, far brighter, than the fabulous age of gold; it would annihilate every sting; it would pluck out every poisonous tooth; it would hush every discordant voice. Even the inanimate creation is not insensible to this divine influence. The bud, and flower, and fruit, put forth most abundantly and beautifully where the hand of kindness is extended for their culture. And if this blessed influence should extend itself over the earth, a moral garden of Eden would exist in every land; instead of the thorn and the brier, would spring up the fir-tree and the myrtle; the desert would blossom, and the solitary place be made glad.

167

CHAPTER FIFTEENTH.

ON EXERCISING THE OFFICE OF CHAPLAIN.

On the subject of exercising the office of military chaplain, we shall be very brief. If wars are wrong on gospel principles, then no man can exercise the office of chaplain in an army, or in any body of men assembled for military purposes, without a violation of those principles. The first inquiry is, What is a chaplain commonly expected to do? If he were merely expected to communicate biblical instruction, and to labor for the personal salvation of the soldiers, with full liberty, both in public and private, to express his sentiments in relation to the unlawfulness and the evils of war, we are not prepared to say that the exercise of his office would necessarily be out of the pale of Christian duty. But this is not the expectation. A chaplain would not be tolerated in an army for a moment, who did not profess to be interested in the success of the war, however iniquitous it might be, and who would not pray for such success. He is a component part of the army, as much so as a surgeon, and is expected to identify his interests and feelings with theirs. Such is the close connection between the chaplain and the military enterprise to which he is attached, and to which he is called to minister, that undoubtedly instances might be adduced of preachers in this situation, who have publicly addressed soldiers on military as well as religious subjects, and have encouraged them with all the powers of their rhetoric in the prosecution of their sanguinary business. Now, when a person accepts the office of a chaplain, he accepts it on the implied condition, that he will dis

charge its duties in accordance with the common practice and the common expectation. Any other supposition would be inadmissible, because it would universally be considered as implying dishonesty If these are correct views, then we maintain that no Christian minister can, consistently with the New Testament, and without sin, exercise the office in question.

FIRST. He cannot preach as he ought to do. Now, it will unquestionably be conceded that a Christian minister is bound to declare the whole counsel and revelation of God; that he is not at liberty to mutilate and to keep back any thing which is important truth. It is true, he may exercise a prayerful and sound discretion in respect to the times and places when it may be proper for him to inculcate certain doctrines; but he is not at liberty to place himself in a situation where he cannot inculcate them at all. But this the military chaplain has done. There is a portion of the gospel which he has virtually pledged himself not to preach; there are some things which he cannot announce without giving great offence to his employers; he is silent, and, from his very situation, must be so. If he were to preach, in the presence of the soldiers, from some of the texts which have been introduced in the course of these discussions, such as "love your enemies,' "dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves," "if your enemy hunger, feed him," "do good to them that hate you," he would assuredly cause great dissatisfaction. If he were to preach from them in the spirit of the gospel, giving them their full import, and pressing their practical application, it would be likely to be received as an insult.

SECOND. He cannot pray as he ought. If there is any occasion, on which his prayers are peculiarly needed, it is on the eve of a battle. The soldiers throng around him; and, with whatever carelessness