Remembrance Day
There is a memorial in the pass at Thermopylae. Which can be translated: "Go stranger and to the Spartans tell, that here obedient to her laws we fell." It commemorates the last stand of three hundred Spartans, who held the army of Xerxes I at bay while the Greek city states prepared to respond to the invasion. I was raised on this story. As well as that of Horatius. As Lars Porsena approaches Rome to try to conquer it the city fathers debate who will hold the bridge while they chop it down.
Then up spake brave Horatius, the Captain of the Gate,
"To every man upon this earth death cometh soon or late
And how can man die better than by facing fearful odds
For the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his gods."
And Remembrance Day, or as we called it "Armistice Day" was a day to remember and honour the men who had fought and died to preserve our freedom.
After The Great War people began to reflect on the carnage of the battles and the utter horror of the mechanized killing machine that is modern war. There was a great revulsion. When I look at the films of that war, I am astounded that people could do that to each other.
Farley Mowat has a wonderful book called And No Birds Sing which describes his experiences in World War II. It begins with the excitement and adventure and ends with the grinding, mind numbing horror of the war. He wrote it to combat the old lie that was raising its head once more, "It is sweet and fitting to die for one's country."
I was reflecting the other day on how people try to reconcile these two things. They say we don't have to glorify war in order to honour the men who served. Actually, it doesn't work that way. To rephrase it, "You don't have to glorify the fire bombing of Dresden in order to honour the men who did it." You can't actually glorify people for committing war crimes. To honour the men who served you have to believe that they were doing a good thing.
Are there causes worth fighting for? God, Queen and Country, in that order, as my Conservative friend used to say.
Are there causes worth dying for? We celebrate the martyrs, who witnessed to their faith at the cost of their lives.
Are there causes worth killing for? Ah, there's the rub. As General Patton put it, "Your job is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." If we are to follow the example of Jesus, it would appear that the ultimate cause is worth fighting for and is worth dying for, but is not worth killing for.
The article by Teilard de Chardin on Nostalgia for the Front takes a completely different view. He felt nostalgic for the front because he felt a deep sense that the monstrous killing machine that was the front was a great act of creative destruction. That the forces of evolution were destroying the old world and creating a new one. And it was immensely exciting to witness it.
We are horrified by the destruction, the suffering and the death. But the creation of the new is always based on the destruction of the old. God created a world of change. A world where things pass away. A world where people die.
We are accustomed to thinking of war as a bad thing. As at best, a necessary evil. But what if it is essential to the creation.
Then up spake brave Horatius, the Captain of the Gate,
"To every man upon this earth death cometh soon or late
And how can man die better than by facing fearful odds
For the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his gods."
And Remembrance Day, or as we called it "Armistice Day" was a day to remember and honour the men who had fought and died to preserve our freedom.
After The Great War people began to reflect on the carnage of the battles and the utter horror of the mechanized killing machine that is modern war. There was a great revulsion. When I look at the films of that war, I am astounded that people could do that to each other.
Farley Mowat has a wonderful book called And No Birds Sing which describes his experiences in World War II. It begins with the excitement and adventure and ends with the grinding, mind numbing horror of the war. He wrote it to combat the old lie that was raising its head once more, "It is sweet and fitting to die for one's country."
I was reflecting the other day on how people try to reconcile these two things. They say we don't have to glorify war in order to honour the men who served. Actually, it doesn't work that way. To rephrase it, "You don't have to glorify the fire bombing of Dresden in order to honour the men who did it." You can't actually glorify people for committing war crimes. To honour the men who served you have to believe that they were doing a good thing.
Are there causes worth fighting for? God, Queen and Country, in that order, as my Conservative friend used to say.
Are there causes worth dying for? We celebrate the martyrs, who witnessed to their faith at the cost of their lives.
Are there causes worth killing for? Ah, there's the rub. As General Patton put it, "Your job is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." If we are to follow the example of Jesus, it would appear that the ultimate cause is worth fighting for and is worth dying for, but is not worth killing for.
The article by Teilard de Chardin on Nostalgia for the Front takes a completely different view. He felt nostalgic for the front because he felt a deep sense that the monstrous killing machine that was the front was a great act of creative destruction. That the forces of evolution were destroying the old world and creating a new one. And it was immensely exciting to witness it.
We are horrified by the destruction, the suffering and the death. But the creation of the new is always based on the destruction of the old. God created a world of change. A world where things pass away. A world where people die.
We are accustomed to thinking of war as a bad thing. As at best, a necessary evil. But what if it is essential to the creation.