An Enquiry into an Origin of Honour; and the Usefulness of Christianity in War by Bernard Mandeville
page 105 of 173 (60%)
page 105 of 173 (60%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
Hor. What is that, pray? Cleo. Idols, that are their own Worshipers, and sincerely adore themselves. Hor. I don't know but there may be, in your Way of construing Things: But I came with a Design to discourse with you on another Subject. When you said in our last Conversation, that _a peaceful Disposition and Humility were not Qualities more promising in the Day of Battle, than a contrite Heart and a broken Spirit are Preparatives for Fighting_, I could not help agreeing with your Sentiments; yet it is a common Notion, even among Men of very good Sense, that the best Christians make the best Soldiers. Cleo. I verily believe, that there are no better Soldiers, than there are among the Christians; and I believe the same of Painters; but I am well assured, that the best in either Calling are often far from being the best Christians. The Doctrine of _Christ_ does not teach Men to Fight, any more than it does to Paint. That _Englishmen_ fight well is not owing to their Christianity. The Fear of Shame is able to make most Men brave. Soldiers are made by Discipline. To make them proud of their Profession, and inspire them with the Love of Glory, are the surest Arts to make them valiant: Religion has Nothing to do with it. The _Alcoran_ bids its Followers fight and propagate their Faith by Arms and Violence; nay, it promises Paradise to All, who die in Battle against Infidels; yet, you see, how often the _Turks_ have turn'd Tail to the _Germans_, when the latter have been inferiour in Number. Hor. Yet Men never fight with greater Obstinacy than in Religious |
|