24. Dr. Paley’s Evidences of Christianity
I think that Dr. Paley has, in another and a later work, given us stronger arguments in favour of peace than the Moral Philosophy gives in favour of war.
In the Evidences of Christianity we find these statements:
“The two following positions appear to me to be satisfactorily made out:
First, that the gospel omits some qualities, which have usually engaged the praises and admiration of mankind, but which, in reality, and in their general effects, have been prejudicial to human happiness.
Secondly, that the gospel has brought forward some virtues, which possess the highest intrinsic value, but which have commonly been overlooked and condemned.
The second of these propositions is exemplified in the instances of passive courage or endurance of suffering, patience under affronts and injuries, humility, non-resistance, and placability.
The truth is, there are two opposite descriptions of character under which mankind may be generally classed:
The one possesses vigour, firmness, and resolution, is daring and active, quick in its sensibilities, jealous in its fame, eager in its attachments, inflexible in its purpose, and violent in its resentments.
The other meek, yielding, complying, and forgiving, not prompt to act, but willing to suffer, silent and gentle under rudeness and insult,
suing for reconciliation where others would demand satisfaction, giving way to the pushes of impudence, and conceding and indulgent to the prejudices, the wrong-headedness, and the intractability of those with whom it has to deal.
The former of these characters is, and ever has been, the favourite of the world.
Yet so it has happened that, with the Founder of Christianity, the latter is the subject of his commendation, his precepts, and his example, while the former is in no part of its composition.
This morality shows, at least, that no two things can be more different than the heroic and the Christian characters.
Now it is proved, in contradiction to first impressions, to popular opinion, to the encomiums of orators and poets, and even to the suffrages of historians and moralists,
that the latter character possesses most of true worth,
both as being most difficult either to be acquired or sustained, and as contributing most to the happiness and tranquillity of social life. If this disposition were universal, the case would be clear; the world would be a society of friends.
Whereas, if the former disposition were universal, it would produce a scene of universal contention. The world would not be able to hold a generation of such men.
If, in fact, the latter disposition is partial, if a few are actuated by it among a multitude who are not, in whatever degree it does prevail,
it prevents, allays, and terminates quarrels, the great disturbers of human happiness, and the great sources of human misery, so far as man’s happiness and misery depend upon man.
The preference of the patient to the heroic character, which we have here noticed, is a peculiarity in the Christian institution, which I propose as an argument of wisdom.”
These are the sentiments of Dr. Paley upon this great characteristic of the Christian morality. I think that in their plain, literal, and unsophisticated meaning they exclude the possibility of the lawfulness of war.
The simple conclusion from them is that violence, devastation, and human destruction cannot exist in conjunction with the character of a Christian.
This would be the conclusion of the inhabitant of some far and peaceful island, where war and Christianity were alike unknown.
If he read these definitions of the Christian duties, and was afterwards told that we thought ourselves allowed to plunder and to murder one another, he would start in amazement at the monstrous inconsistency.
Casuistry may make her “distinctions,” and philosophy may talk of her “expediencies,” but the monstrous inconsistency remains. What is the fact?
Muslims and Pagans do not believe that our religion allows war. They reproach us with the inconsistency. Our wars are, with them, a scandal and a taunt:
“You preach to us,” say they, “of Christianity, and would convert us to your creed. First convert yourselves; show us that you yourselves believe in it.”
No, the Jews at our own doors tell us that our wars are evidence that the Prince of Peace has not come. They bring the violence of Christians to prove that Christ was a deceiver.
Thus do we cause evil to be spoken of the way of truth:
Thus are we, who should be the helpers of the world, its stumbling-blocks and its shame. We, who should be lights to those who sit in darkness, cause them to love that darkness still.
Well may the Christian be ashamed for these things. Well may he be ashamed for the reputation of his religion.
And he may be ashamed too, for the honoured defender of the Christian faith who stands up, the advocate of blood, who invents subtle sophisms and searches over the fields of speculation to find an argument to convince us that we may murder one another!
This is the “wisdom of the world” – that wisdom which is emphatically called “FOOLISHNESS.”