Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty. Hugo Grotius

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ Informal Exposition of Article I

      Now let us consider the testimony of Holy Writ. Although this method of proof is ἄτεχνον, “not derived from the art [of logic],” it is indeed by far the most certain method. For just as the Will of God—constituting the norm of justice, as we have already indicated—is revealed to us through nature, so also is it revealed through the Scriptures.

      But God has commanded that wars be waged, as undertakings congruous with His Will,^a and has furthermore declared Himself to be their Author and Aid.^b He has even accepted the appellation “a man of war” as appropriate to His own majesty.^c This same point is borne out by the divinely inspired pronouncement of the high priest who assured Abraham that God had delivered Abraham’s enemies into his hands;^d and also by the words of the wise woman Abigail,^e addressed to King David: “. . . my lord fighteth the battles of the Lord.” Indeed, the very fact that God endowed the state established by Himself with this institution of war,^f as a form of defence, alone affords sufficient proof that the said institution is just and should be adopted by other nations whenever a like reason exists. Moreover, I believe all sane men will agree that he who lays down laws to regulate a given act does not disapprove of the act itself, and that this is especially true as applied to God, who does nothing without purpose or erroneously. Yet God prescribed regulations for warfare, through Moses,^g and again, through the forerunner of Christ, as recorded in the New Testament.^h With reference to the latter passage, Augustineⁱ says: “. . . if Christian doctrine condemned all wars, [the soldiers] who sought [ John’s advice], according to the Gospel [of Luke], would have received, instead [of the advice they did receive], the following counsel of salvation: that they should cast away their arms and withdraw completely from military service. The counsel given them, however, was this: ‘Do violence to no man . . .; and be content with your wages.’ Surely [ John] was not prohibiting military service for those to whom he addressed the precept that their due wage [as soldiers] should suffice.”

      Second Informal Exposition of Article I

      The principle stated above¹—namely, that he to whom a given end [16′] is pleasing, cannot be displeased by what is necessary to that end—may be deduced from authoritative passages no less than by a logical process, since all of the laws thus far propounded are also inscribed in Holy Writ. For He who bids us love our neighbour as ourselves,^a gives first place to the true love of self, regarded as the πρωτότυπον, or prototype, whose ἔκτυπος, or image, is love for others.^b If we combine this maxim with the precept laid down by the Creator for mankind,^c we shall arrive not only at the conclusions incorporated in the First and Third Laws, but also at those expressed in the Second and Fourth.² Indeed, since we are admonished by God to deliver them that are drawn unto death,^d we are under a particularly solemn obligation to deliver ourselves. Yet again, we are bidden to “give to him that needeth,”^e and therefore we are bidden to avert need from ourselves. The Fifth and Sixth Laws, too, are implicit in these passages: “Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the Lord”;^f “. . . with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again”;^g “And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise”^h (what ye would not have done unto you, do ye not unto others).^{i, 3} Christ does indeed show us that the law of nations requires that good be done to the doers of good; yet He also says: “. . . all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.”^a This same doctrine was expressed in the Old Law,^b which goes so far as to prohibit us strictly from showing compassion to evildoers. But it often happens that, owing to the power of our adversaries, we are unable to defend ourselves and our possessions, exact that which is due us, or enforce punishment, save by resorting to armed force. Therefore, it is permissible to wage war.

      Other laws, too, are found to have a firm foundation in the Sacred Scriptures. For example, when the advantages of social organization are pointed out to us [in the Book of Ecclesiastes],^c we acquire an understanding of the origin of the state; just as we come to understand the sanctity of magistrates, when Paul^d asserts in no uncertain terms that magistrates “are ordained of God.” From this same source the force of civil laws is derived, as is the power of judgement, given from above by Jesus Himself,^e the Author thereof. Thus Divine Wisdom—of which all human wisdom is but ἀπορρώξ, “a fragment,” or offshoot, as it were—is represented as saying:^f “Counsel is mine, and sound [17] wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength. By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.” Again, what could be clearer than the exhortation of Paul?^g “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.” In all the works of the philosophers—howsoever numerous and wheresoever found—there is no finer passage regarding the justice of magistrates. Do you ask who is the [true] author of this exhortation? The Author is God. For what purpose is it formulated? For your own good. And since God wills that the authority of magistrates shall be sacrosanct, does He not also approve of arms, whereby at times that authority must be defended? But will God extend to magistrates an avenging sword for use against unarmed culprits while refusing to give them a weapon against culprits who are armed, thus affording grounds for that incitement to all wickedness, the belief that “Whatever sin is committed by the many, goes unpunished”?^a By no means! For the individual who sins alone ought not to be in a worse position than those persons who add to their own direct transgressions another evil—namely, the exposure of many people to the contagion of crime, and attack by open violence upon the laws and the public peace—and who are not therefore more in the right than other sinners, but rather, less susceptible to fear and shame.

      From the foregoing observations it follows that some public wars are just. This same conclusion may be confirmed in yet another way.

      Third Informal Exposition of Article I

      For anyone who approves of the institutions established for the attainment of an end, can scarcely fail to approve of the end itself even much more emphatically; and no one is ignorant of the fact that tribute is an institution established primarily for purposes of war. Tacitus^b spoke truly when he said: “there can be no tranquillity among nations unless there are armies, there can be no armies without pay, and pay cannot be provided without the exaction of tribute.” But God Himself, [17′] speaking both through Christ and through the Apostle Paul, ordains the payment of tribute.^a Therefore, from this argument, too, it follows that some wars are approved by God as just.

      First Informal Exposition of Article II

      Second Informal Exposition of Article II

      Third Informal Exposition of Article II

      To the preceding assertion, I shall add the phrase, “even wars on the part of Christians.” For everything permitted prior to the establishment of the Law of Christ and not expressly prohibited by Him, is permissible for Christians;^b we have already shown, and it is universally admitted, that there were just wars before the time of Christ; and He prohibited none of the things that were just according to the law of nature, among which (as we have observed) wars were included. Furthermore, Christ changed no part of the Old Law^c that pertained in any way to justice and moral usage in human activities, under which head we place warfare. The contention СКАЧАТЬ