Sweet Only to Those Who Have Not Tried It
If people saw a battle before they praised one, would anyone still choose war? The essay answers by reading the human body, the Gospel and the arguments of war's defenders in turn.
Nature armed the bull, the lion and the boar, and made man naked, soft and able to weep, a creature built for friendship. Beasts fight from hunger or fear and seldom their own kind; men forge weapons to kill men. Against the defenders of war Erasmus takes their proofs one by one: Peter fought, but before he was truly a Christian, and soon denied his master; every prince has a title, and none ever lacked one. Even an unjust peace, he concludes, is better than a righteous war.
- war
- peace
- violence
- human nature
- christianity
- nonviolence
- justice
- christian ethics
Enter a dialogue
- Nature armed the bull with horns and the boar with tusks, you write, but sent man out naked and soft. What was he made for?
- Of all creatures, you note, only humans were given tears and laughter. Why should those two gifts count as evidence against war?
- A young man is eager to enlist and has never seen a battle. What would he notice first if he stood in one?
- Defenders of war point out that Peter himself drew a sword to protect Christ. Why does his example fail to persuade you?
- Christians call the Turks enemies of the faith. Why would you rather win them over by Christian living than defeat them in a crusade?