The Military Draft (by Phillip Kayser)

Over the past few decades I have heard several politicians propose a mandatory military draft. If this were to happen, it would be important for Christians to already know what the Bible says about this subject. I believe there are at least three Biblical reasons why Christians should oppose any future mandatory conscription: 1) While there is a moral duty before God for citizens to defend liberties by fighting in just wars, Deuteronomy 20:5-9 mandates that magistrates allow citizens every opportunity to opt out of any war. 2) The best militaries are composed of people who freely desire to defend their homeland.[1] 3) Other Scriptures related to conscription show that the Biblical ideal is a willing enlistment.[2]

continue reading here


 

Remember the Time an Islamic Invasion was Crushed in 4 Hours? (by Geoffrey Botkin)

Yes, it was a long time ago.  444 years to the day.  A jihadist invasion of Europe was stopped in its tracks in a head-on contest of wills.  The battle lasted a mere four hours.  The weaponry of battle was primitive, but the Islamists were totally defeated, and retreated into obscurity.  You would think that Europe would remember the day they were saved from an Islamic act of war.  But to do this requires the discernment to tell the difference between peace and war, and between historical revisionism and history. 

continue reading

  

Oliver Cromwell Vanquishes the Islamic Pirate Threat, Liberates Captives (Theonomy Applied)

While Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland, Oliver Cromwell set out to vanquish the threat posed by Islamic Barbary Pirates, who were abducting and enslaving subjects of the Commonwealth at sea. A fleet sent by Cromwell brought about the liberation of English and Dutch captives, as well as articles of peace that included protection for subjects of the Commonwealth, including Scotsmen, Irishmen, and Englishmen.

The following is from "White Slavery in the Barbary States" by Charles Sumner:

The coasts of England were now protected; but her subjects at sea continued the prey of Algerine corsairs, who, according to the historian Carte, now "carried their English captives to France, drove them in chains overland to Marseilles, to ship them thence with greater safety for slaves to Algiers."

The increasing troubles, which distracted and finally cut short the reign of Charles the First, could not divert attention from the sorrows of Englishmen, victims to Mohammedan slave drivers. At the height of the struggles between the King and Parliament, an earnest voice was raised in behalf of these fellow-Christians in bonds.

Waller, who was orator as well as poet, exclaimed in Parliament, "By the many petitions which we receive from the wives of those miserable captives at Algiers, (being between four and five thousand of our countrymen,) it does too evidently appear, that to make us slaves at home is not the way to keep us from being made slaves abroad."

Publications pleading their cause, bearing date in 1640, 1642, and 1647, are yet extant. The overthrow of an oppression so justly odious formed a worthy object for the imperial energies of Cromwell; and in 1655,—when, amidst the amazement of Europe, the English sovereignty had already settled upon his Atlantean shoulders,—he directed into the Mediterranean a navy of thirty ships, under the command of Admiral Blake.

This was the most powerful English force which had sailed into that sea since the Crusades. Its success was complete. "General Blake," said one of the foreign agents of government, "has ratified the articles of peace at Argier, and included therein Scotch, Irish, Jarnsey, and Garnsey-men, and all others the Protector's subjects. He has likewise redeemed from thence all such as were captives there. Several Dutch captives swam aboard the fleet, and so escape their captivity."

Tunis, as well as Algiers, was humbled; all British captives were set at liberty; and the Protector, in his remarkable speech at the opening of Parliament in the next year, announced peace with the "profane" nations in that region.

To my mind no single circumstance gives a higher impression of the vigilance with which the Protector guarded his subjects than this effort, to which Waller, with the "smooth" line for which he is memorable, aptly alludes, as

telling dreadful news

To all that piracy and rapine use.

Charles Sumner, White Slavery in the Barbary States (Boston, MA: John P. Jewett and Company, 1853), 40-42. We have modernized the spelling.

Narragansett Indians Threaten the Pilgrims - and how the Pilgrims Respond

In the days of Plymouth Colony, the Pilgrims—who were few in numbers—were threatened with war by the powerful Narragansett tribe. But the odds do not necessarily intimidate men of faith. Check out Governor William Bradford's response to the threat:

[A] Narragansett man walked defiantly into the colony and threw down a bundle of arrows tied together with a snakeskin, a message from the sachem Canonicus. Bradford did not know what to make of it, but both Squanto and Hobomok agreed that it was a challenge and an insult. Bradford knew that the Narragansetts could gather together hundreds of warriors; he could gather about fifty or so. But any sign of weakness, he felt, would mean disaster. 

He had the snakeskin stuffed with bullets and sent back to the Narragansetts with a message: "If they had rather have warre then peace, they might begin when they would; they had done them no wrong, neither did they fear them, or should they find them unprovided." The Narragansetts refused to even touch the snakeskin, but had it sent back. They did not attack.

Gary D. Schmidt, William Bradford: Plymouth's Faithful Pilgrim (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Books for Young Readers, 1999), 114.

Image from New England, Old and New by Old Colony Trust Company, 1920.

Pilgrim Profile: Myles Standish - the Iron-Nerved Puritan Warrior

(purported picture of Myles Standish.)
Myles Standish: "an iron-nerved Puritan, who
could hew down forests and live on crumbs."

posts in this series: 
part 1: Myles Standish
part 2: William Brewster
part 3: William Bradford
part 4: Edward Winslow

With Thanksgiving approaching, we thought this would be a great time to release a series of profiles on the Pilgrims. We begin with Myles Standish (1584-1656) - "the Iron-Nerved Puritan Warrior."

From Americana magazine:

The militant character of the colony was Myles Standish. During the war between Spain and Holland he was a soldier in the service of the latter country. Afterward he joined in Leyden the Pilgrim emigration to America, more likely in a spirit of adventure than through any religious enthusiasm. He was not a member of Robinson’s church, nor did he become a member of the Plymouth Communion. He was a dissenter from the dissenters. His military knowledge was of value to the colonists, and on their second exploration in search of a suitable place to land, he commanded sixteen armed men, each with his musket, sword and corslet.

After the founding of Plymouth, he was appointed military commander of the colony. In the fall of that year he undertook an expedition to explore Massachusetts Bay. They also explored the broad plains known as “Massachusetts fields,” the gathering place of the Indian tribes, which comprises a part of what is now Quincy, Massachusetts.

The new colony at Weymouth, Massachusetts, planted in 1622, incurred the enmity of the Massachusetts Indians and a plot was formed by them to destroy it. The plan was revealed to the Plymouth Colony by [Chief] Massasoit, and Standish with a force of men was ordered to their aid. Arriving at the colony, two of the Massachusetts Indian chiefs, Pecksuot and Wituwamat, with a half brother of the latter, were enticed into a room and by Massasoit’s advice the Indians were killed by Standish and his men. This was the first Indian blood shed by the Pilgrims; a general battle ensued, and the Indians were defeated, though there were no lives lost. This victory of Standish spread terror among the savages; the head of Wituwamat was exposed to view at Plymouth as a warning to deter the Indians from further depredations.

As Plymouth Colony's military commander, Standish was "resolute, stern,
bold, and of incorruptible integrity."

Captain Standish was the military commander of the colony during his lifetime. He commanded the Plymouth troops in their expedition against the Narragansett Indians in 1643, and ten years later, when there was danger of hostilities with the Dutch, he was one of the council of war and was appointed to the command of the troops. His wife Rose, who accompanied him on the Mayflower’s voyage, died January 29, 1621. His courtship of Priscilla Mullins has been made a subject of romance by the poet, Henry W. Longfellow. Although his envoy, John Alden, won his chosen bride, there does not seem to have been any illwill created between them, as they remained close friends until death, and later generations of Standish and Alden families intermarried. He married for his second wife, Barbara; a tradition says she was a sister of his first wife. She came to the colony on the ship Ann in 1623, and was the mother of all his children. 

Captain Standish was prominent in the civil affairs of the colony. He was for many years assistant on one of the governor’s council. He was a commissioner of the United Colonies; a partner in the trading company; and for many years treasurer of the colony. He, with a number of the other colonists, removed from Plymouth and founded a town to which was given the name of Duxbury, in honor of Duxbury Hall, in his native parish in England. Here he lived the remainder of his life, and the site where he built his house became known as Captain’s Hill, a name it bears to the present time; here he died October 3, 1656. A granite monument to his memory was erected on this hill in 1888, the shaft is one hundred feet in height, and upon it stands a statue of Standish looking eastward; his right hand, holding a copy of the charter of the colony, is extended toward Plymouth, while his left hand rests upon his sheathed sword.

Captain Standish was of small stature, of great energy, activity, and courage. He was able to impress the hostile Indians with awe for the English. He was “an iron-nerved Puritan, who could hew down forests and live on crumbs.” He was resolute, stern, bold, and of incorruptible integrity. 

"Beginnings of New England," Americana (American Historical Magazine): Volume 13 (New York: The American Historical Society,  January, 1919 - December, 1919), 223 - 225.

Battlefield Victory Belongs to the Great God Almighty

by Steve C. Halbrook

And ye have seen all that the Lord your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the Lord your God is he that hath fought for you. ...

For the Lord hath driven out from before you great nations and strong: but as for you, no man hath been able to stand before you unto this day.
One man of you shall chase a thousand: for the Lord your God, he it is that fighteth for you, as he hath promised you.
Take good heed therefore unto yourselves, that ye love the Lord your God.
Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, even these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you:
Know for a certainty that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the Lord your God hath given you. (Joshua 23:3, 9-13)

When God is on a nation's side, the odds are insignificant; if God so wills, one man can chase down a thousand. This is because God has all power, and He controls all things. While it is often the case that numerical advantage has its benefits, it is not always the case; strength in numbers is not the ultimate advantage—but God's strength is. 

As the bold Jonathan stated, "there is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few" (1 Samuel 14:6b). 

Or, as the book of Hebrews says,

And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions. Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. (Hebrews 11:32-34)

David, of course, slew the mighty giant Goliath by the power of God, Who delivered Goliath into David's hand (1 Samuel 17:49-51). As David says before slaying Goliath:

Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied. 

This day will the Lord deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel. 

And all this assembly shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the Lord's, and he will give you into our hands. (1 Samuel 17:45b-47)

Gideon and his mere 300 men set to flight the host of Midian after God turned the swords of the Midianites against one another (Judges 7:18-22). Then there is Samson—who, after the Spirit of God came upon him, became a one-man army who slew a thousand Philistines with simply the jawbone of an ass (Judges 15:14, 15). 

Since God is in control, the odds are insignificant. He can
just as easily topple a kingdom with one man as He can
with a million.

More recently in history, the great military commander Oliver Cromwell understood the great truth that God—not numbers—is the ultimate military advantage. Writing about Cromwell and the English Civil Wars, Cromwellian scholar Blair Worden states:

Repeatedly after his victories Cromwell urged parliament to 'give God all the glory' for them. Repeatedly he lamented man's tendency to attribute military success not to the Lord himself but to his 'weak instrument', a sin which robbed God of the 'glory' and 'praise' which were his due.[1] 'God is not enough owned' in parliament's victories, complained Cromwell in 1645; 'we look too much to men and visible helps: this hath much hindered our success'.[2] Man's vanity and ingratitude in triumph might incite the Lord to limit, even to withdraw, his favour. Jeremiah 17:5, 'Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord', was a favourite text of Puritan and Cromwellian politics. It was God that gave courage and skill to his troops, who were helpless without him. It was God who pierced the enemy's counsels, God who 'infatuated' the royalists and hardened their hearts and lulled them into overconfidence. During the siege of York in 1644, parliamentarians, though invited to be grateful to God for giving their forces there, 'as a meanes', a numerical advantage, were simultaneously warned to 'put not confidence' in it, an error that would 'provoke God'.[3]  

After winning the Battle of Preston,
Cromwell urged the Commons to consider
"the disparity of forces on both sides; that so
you may see, and all the world acknowledge,
the great hand of God in this business."

Sometimes the Lord pointedly placed his forces at an initial disadvantage, in numbers or in the site of battle. After the victory at Preston in 1648, Cromwell requested the Commons to reflect on 'the disparity of forces on both sides; that so you may see, and all the world acknowledge, the great hand of God in this business'.[4] The triumphs of 'our armies' in that year, achieved against all the odds, persuaded John Owen that 'their work was done in heaven before they began it. ... The work might have been done by children, though he was pleased to employ such worthy instruments. They see, I doubt not, their own nothingness in his all-sufficiency.'[5] Soldiers who won after staring defeat in the face liked to observe that 'our extremity was God's opportunity to magnify his power'.[6] Dunbar, where triumph was snatched from defeat, prompted a spate of such reflections. The Lord, exclaimed the minister Sidrach Simpson to Cromwell, 

hath stepped out of heaven to raise those who were even as dead, and to judge his adversaries ... he is a God mighty in battell, in wisedome going beyond the subtility of man ... he hath by a few, weake, weaned ones, that the mighty might not glory in their might, but in himself alone. ... You were before too many, too vigorous when you smote your adversaries. Till you had felt all that the colde earth, and want of provisions in a strange countrey, could doe to you (wherein [the enemy] so much trusted for a conquest) it was not tyme for God to put to his hand.[7]

Cromwell's intimate ally Oliver St John agreed: God had delayed the battle until the enemy, 'relying uppon and bosting in the arme of flesh, [had become too] confident ... therefore hath the Lord soe ordered the busines, that wee may see it was not our owne sword, nor our owne bow, but his right hand, and his holy arme that hath gotten us the victory.[8]

However, rebellion against God can easily lead to the chastisement of God's people at the hand of other nations. For instance, in Judges 2 we read:

And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim:

And they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the Lord to anger.

And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.

And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of spoilers that spoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies round about, so that they could not any longer stand before their enemies.

Whithersoever they went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for evil, as the Lord had said, and as the Lord had sworn unto them: and they were greatly distressed. (Judges 2:11-15)

Thornwell on the CSA:
"Our republic will perish like 
the Pagan republics of 
Greece and Rome, 
unless we baptize it in the 
name of Christ."

Judges 3 describes how God strengthened Eglon, king of Moab against Israel:

And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord: and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the Lord.

And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees. (Judges 3:12, 13)

After the South was defeated in the War Between the States, Robert Lewis Dabney believed that "A righteous God, for our sins towards Him, has permitted us to be overthrown by our enemies and His."[9] 

During this war, James H. Thornwell submitted a paper in December 1861 to the first General Assembly of the Southern Presbyterian Church at Augusta, Georgia, to petition the Congress of the Confederate States of America to recognize in its constitution Jesus Christ as the highest political authority. 

But while the Confederate Constitution acknowledged God, it would never specifically acknowledge the name of Jesus Christ. And, while only God knows the reason why He didn't grant the South victory, perhaps it was for this reason; a refusal to "Kiss the Son," per Psalm 2. As Thornwell's paper states:

God is the ruler among the nations; and the people who refuse Him their allegiance shall be broken with a rod of iron, or dashed in pieces like a potter's vessel. Our republic will perish like the Pagan republics of Greece and Rome, unless we baptize it into the name of Christ. "Be wise now, therefore, 0 ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth; kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little."[10] [editor's note: from Psalm 2:10, 12a; verse 11 is omitted]

Notes

____________________________

[1] W. C. Abbott, ed., Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, 4 vols (Cambridge, MA: 1937-47), i. 360, 365, 505-6, ii. 38, 124-5, 127, 143, 144, 160, 171, 235, 261, 262, 325, 330, 377, iii. 54, 71, iv. 871. Cited in Blair Worden, God's Instruments: Political Conduct in the England of Oliver Cromwell (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012, 2013), 40.

[2] Abbott, Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, i. 340. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 40.

[3] The Scottish Dove 17 May 1644, 246. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[4] Abbott, i. 637-8. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.
[5] W. H. Goold, ed., The Works of John Owen, 24 vols (1850-5), viii. 97-8. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[6] The Parliamentary or Constitutional History of England, 24 vols (1752-63) ('Old Parliamentary History'), xiii. 286. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.
[7] Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[8] Cited in Ibid.
[9] Robert Lewis Dabney, A Defence of Virginia: And Through Her, of the South, in Recent and Pending Contests Against the Sectional Party (NY: E. J. Hale & Son, 1867), 356.
[10] Dr. James H. Thornwell, "Relation of the State to Christ," Christian Nation, 19 February 1902, 3.

   

How to Fight Like a Christian (John Weaver)

Part 1



Part 2

The Atom Bomb & Just War Theory (Bill Potter)

"On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, causing an explosion of re-evaluation on the principles of just war for decades into the future. Respected Christian teachers since at least Augustine of Hippo have advocated from the Scriptures that non-combatants such as women and children should not be targeted in a military campaign, but is it excusable to do so if it will bring a quicker end to a long and destructive war?

"Also, what are some of the forgotten curious providences surrounding the invention of the atom bomb? Hear this and more in Bill Potter's talk on the atom bomb."

The Prince of Condé on Trusting in God for Military Victory

The Huguenot leader and general Louis I de Bourbon (1530-1569), or the Prince of Condé, exclaimed the following during the Battle of Jarnac:

My friends, true noblesse of France, here is the opportunity we have long wished for in vain! Our God is the God of Battles. He loves to be so called. He always declares Himself for the right, and never fails to succor those who serve Him. He will infallibly protect us, if, after having taken up arms for the liberty of our consciences, we put all our hope in Him. Come and let us complete what the first charges have begun; and remember in what a state Louis of Bourbon entered into the combat for Christ and for his native land![1]

Unfortunately, the Prince of Condé died in the battle, which the Hugeunots ultimately lost; God does not always grant His people victory in battle, but sometimes chastens them as a loving Father. Nevertheless, Condé's words have merit: God is indeed a God of Battles, and he can and often does grant victory to those who trust in Him. 

Notes
_______________________

[1] Henry M. Baird, History of the Rise of the Huguenots of France: Volume II (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1896), 302.

The New Model Army's “Laws and Ordinances of War" (Theonomy Applied)

In 1642 during the English Civil War, a military code was published for the Parliamentarian army titled “Laws and Ordinances of War established for the better conduct of the Army.” It “became the laws under which the New Model [army] and the armies of the Commonwealth and Protectorate were governed.”[1] 

As such, the code was employed by the great military and political leader Oliver Cromwell, who ascended to supreme commander of the New Model Army—which never lost a battle—and would ultimately become Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England.

The “Laws and Ordinances of War" was so influential that some of its articles of war were enacted by the army of the subsequent Restoration, and thus became part of the English military code.[2] 

Unlike contemporary military codes that at best only have some commands regarding a soldier’s duty to man (the second great commandment), this code first and foremost includes commands regarding a soldier’s duty to God (the first great commandment)—the fear of Whom is foundational to treating one’s fellow man justly, and thus keeping the second great commandment. It should come as no surprise that the modern, non-Christian way of waging war is inhumane because God Almighty, the source of justice, is not acknowledged.

The code begins by requiring reverence for God and divine worship, both of which, if neglected, could invite God’s curse on the military and cost it any hope of victory:

I. Blasphemy.—First, Let no man presume to Blaspheme the holy and blessed Trinity, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost; nor the known Articles of our Christian Faith, upon pain to have his Tongue bored with a red-hot Iron. (Of Duties to God, I)

II. Cursing.—Unlawfull Oathes and Execrations, and scandalous acts in derogation of God's Honour, shall be punished with loss of Pay, and other punishment at discretion. (Of Duties to God, II) 

III. Neglecting Divine Worship.—All those who often and willfully absent themselves from Sermons, and Public Prayer, shall be proceeded against at discretion: And all such who shall violate Places of Public worship, shall undergo severe Censure. (Of Duties to God, III)[3] 

Related to the third law above, the first part of a later section of the code states: 

Commanders must see God duly served.—All Commanders are straightly charged to see Almighty God reverently served, and Sermons and Prayers duly frequented. (Of the Duties of Commanders and Officers in particular, I.)[4]

The "Laws and Ordinances of War" took measures to curb sins
common to warfare, such as theft, pillage, rape, and murder.

The code moves on to Second Table of the Law prohibitions. Soldiers can be prone to abusing the power of the sword to indulge in sinful desires at the expense of their neighbor—namely, intimidation, theft, pillage, unnecessary destruction and violence, rape, torture, and murder. As such, this code wisely took measures against such abuses, as we see in the following prohibitions scattered throughout the code:

Unnatural/ abuses.—Rapes, Ravishments, unnatural abuses, shall be punished with death. (Of Duties Moral, II)

Theft.—Theft and Robbery, exceeding the value of twelve pence, shall be punished with death. (Of Duties Moral, IV)

Provocation.—No man shall use reproachful, nor provoking words, or act to any, upon pain of imprisonment, and further punishment as shall be thought fit to be inflicted upon enemies to Discipline and service. (Of Duties Moral, V)

Seizing upon dead men’s goods.—No man shall take or spoile the Goods of him that dyeth, or is killed in Service, upon pain of restoring double the value, and Arbitrary punishment. (Of Duties Moral, VI)

Murder.—Murder shall be expiated with the death of the Murderer. (Of Duties Moral, VII)

Waste and extortion.—None in their March through the Countries shall waste, spoil or extort any Victuals, Money, or pawne, from any subject, upon any pretense of want whatsoever, upon pain of death. (Of Duty in Marching, I)

Taking of Horses out of the Plow.—No Soldier shall presume, upon no occasion whatsoever, to take a Horse out of the Plough, or to wrong the  Husbandmen in their person or Cattel, or Goods, upon pain of death. (Of Duty in Marching, II)

Drawing swords in a quarrel.—No man shall draw any Sword in a private quarrel within the Camp, upon pain of death. (Of Duties in the Camp and Garrison, V) 

Whosoever shall in his Quarter, abuse, beat, fright his Landlord, or any Person else in the Family, or shall extort Money or Victuals, by violence from them, shall be proceeded against as a Mutineer, and an enemy to Discipline. (Of Duties in the Camp and Garrison, XIX)

Burning and wasting.—No man shall burn any House or Barn, be it of friend or foe, or willfully spoil any Corn, Hay, or Straw, or Stacks in the fields, or any Ship, Boat, Carriage, or any thing that may serve for the Provision of the Army without Order, upon pain of death. (Of Duties in Action, IV)

Pillaging without licence.—No man upon any good Success, shall fall a pillaging before license, or a sign given upon pain of death. (Of Duties in Action, X)[5]

In the midst of battle, the code both forbids sparing an enemy wielding
a weapon, as well as killing an enemy who yields.

The code also takes into account the tendency for soldiers to default into the extremes of either bloodlust or unwarranted pacifism. First, in the heat of the battle, soldiers may forget that war is about justice, and instead, in fits of maniacal bloodlust, view war as an opportunity to cut down their enemies with impunity—even when they have peacefully yielded. On the other hand, in bouts of humanistic sentimentalism, soldiers may, at the possible expense of their own lives and the lives of their fellow troops, be tempted to spare enemy troops who have no intention of surrendering. Thus the code takes care to decree the following:

Killing an Enemy who yields.—None shall kill an Enemy who yields, and throws down his Arms. (Of Duties in Action, V)

Saving of men armed with Offensive Arms.—None shall save a man who hath his offensive Arms in his hands, upon pain of losing his Prisoner. (Of Duties in Action, VI)[6]

The code, moreover, recognizes that man’s propensity for unwarranted violence can even occur between fellow soldiers. The “duel” was anticipated, and thus officers were to be vigilant to prevent it:  

Stopping of Duellers.—No Corporal, or other Officer commanding the Watch, shall willingly suffer a Soldier to go forth to a Duel, or private Fight, upon pain of death. (Of the Duties of Commanders and Officers in Particular, IV).[7] 

Commanders were required "to see Almighty
God reverently served, and Sermons and
Prayers duly frequented."

And, just as soldiers are not to wage war unnecessarily on their fellow man, neither are they to wage war unnecessarily on creation itself. Arbitrarily destroying trees is forbidden:  

Spoiling of Trees.—No Soldier shall presume, in Marching or Lodging, to cut down any fruit-trees, or to deface, or spoil Walks of trees, upon pain of severe punishment. (Of Duty in Marching, IV) [8] 

We also find the code recognizing the reality that soldiers can be prone towards sexual immorality while away from their wives and exposed to foreign women. And so it includes the following prohibition:  

Adultery.—Adultery, Fornication, and other dissolute lasciviousness, shall be punished with discretion, according to the quality of the Offence. (Of Duties Morrall, III)[9]

The code also protects soldiers from being defrauded, as the laborer is worthy of his wages:

Defraud of Soldiers pay.— Any Officer that dare presume to defraud the Soldiers of their pay, or an part of it, shall be cashiered. (Of the Duties of Commanders and Officers in particular, III)[10]

Finally, for all the laws of the military code to have their full weight, justice must be respected and intact. Attempts to defy justice were not tolerated:

Braving The Court of Justice.— No man shall presume to use any braving or menacing words, Signs, or gestures, while the Court of Justice is sitting, upon pain of death. (Of Administration of Justice, VII)[11]

Notes
_______________________

[1] Charles Harding Firth, Cromwell’s Army: A History of the English Soldier During the Civil Wars, the Commonwealth and the Protectorate (London: Methuen & Co., 1902), 282.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid., 409. Appendix L. We have tailored language in this code to contemporary English.
[4] Ibid., 418.
[5] Ibid., 412 - 418.
[6] Ibid., 417.
[7] Ibid., 418.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid., 412.
[10] Ibid., 418.
[11] Ibid., 422.

photo credits:

West Gate Towers and Museum, St Peter's Street, Canterbury, Kent. English Civil war armour and flintlock musket.

© Linda Spashett‎ / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 3.0)

Reenactment - The Siege of Bolingbroke Castle Musketeers and pikemen group together.

© Dave Hitchborne / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY -SA 2.0)