[lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat

  • From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:08:00 -0800

Well Julie, here is the trouble you can get into by not developing an
argument as I asked you to.  The juxtaposition of this hymn with my note
suggests that you believe that Christians are just as bad as Islamic
Fundamentalists, or that this Hymn shows that Christians are just as warlike
as Islamic Fundamentalists.  Perhaps there are others, but these two occur
to me first: that you intended something hostile to Christianity for reasons
known only to yourself ? for they aren?t developed as an argument.   Now if
you had something benign in mind, something that hasn?t occurred to me, you
should not blame me for not having thought of it.  It is your responsibility
to be clear.  

 

Who wrote this hymn and what is it about?  A British preacher wrote it for
school children.

Baring-Gould wrote about this hymn, ?Whit-Mon­day is a great day for school
fes­tiv­als in York­shire. One Whit-Mon­day, thir­ty years ago, it was
ar­ranged that our school should join forc­es with that of a neigh­bor­ing
vil­lage. I want­ed the child­ren to sing when march­ing from one vil­lage
to another, but couldn?t think of any­thing quite suit­a­ble; so I sat up at
night, re­solved that I would write some­thing myself. ?Onward, Christ­ian
Sol­diers? was the re­sult. It was writ­ten in great haste, and I am afraid
some of the rhymes are faulty. Cer­tain­ly no­thing has sur­prised me more
than its pop­u­lar­i­ty. I don?t re­mem­ber how it got print­ed first, but I
know that very soon it found its way into sev­er­al col­lect­ions. I have
writ­ten a few other hymns since then, but only two or three have be­come at
all well-known.?  http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/o/n/onwardcs.htm

So he wrote it for school children to march to but isn?t it about Militant
Islamic type war as Julie seems to suggest?  Any Christian will recognize
that Baring-Gould takes his theme from Ephesians 6.  Paul uses warfare as an
analogy for the Christian?s fight against evil.  Christian war against evil
and not against physical forces.  ?For our struggle is not against flesh and
blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers
of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly
realms.? Ephesians 6:12

 

Lawrence

 

 

  _____  

From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:25 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat

 

  Onward, Christian Soldiers 

Text: Sabine Baring-Gould, 1834-1924 
Music: Arthur S. Sullivan, 1842-1900 
Tune: ST. GERTRUDE, Meter: 65.65 D with Refrain 

  _____  

1.  Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war, 
    with the cross of Jesus going on before. 
    Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe; 
    forward into battle see his banners go! 
Refrain: 
    Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war, 
    with the cross of Jesus going on before. 
 
2.  At the sign of triumph Satan's host doth flee; 
    on then, Christian soldiers, on to victory! 
    Hell's foundations quiver at the shout of praise; 
    brothers, lift your voices, loud your anthems raise. 
    (Refrain) 
 
3.  Like a mighty army moves the church of God; 
    brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod. 
    We are not divided, all one body we, 
    one in hope and doctrine, one in charity. 
    (Refrain) 
 
4.  Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane, 
    but the church of Jesus constant will remain.
    Gates of hell can never gainst that church prevail; 
    we have Christ's own promise, and that cannot fail. 
    (Refrain) 
 
5.  Onward then, ye people, join our happy throng, 
    blend with ours your voices in the triumph song. 
    Glory, laud, and honor unto Christ the King, 
    this through countless ages men and angels sing.
    (Refrain) 


========Original Message======== 


Subj:

[lit-ideas] The Strident Voice of Defeat


Date:

1/11/2007 1:59:06 P.M. Central Standard Time


From:

lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx


To:

Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


Sent on:    

 

I noticed quite a long time ago in Islamic theology that they believe God
decides who wins a battle or a war.  I also noticed that American
politicians were paying little attention to that.  During the Bush Sr. &
Clinton Administrations the U.S. gave various Islamic groups reason to claim
victory.  Whether it was Al Qaeda or Saddam?s Iraq, they were encouraged and
exerted themselves even more because Allah was on their side.  Allah had
given them the victory.  We need to be especially careful of that now in
Iraq.  As Thomas Barnett said in the interview Brian posted, if we don?t do
it right, we shall very likely have to go back.  

 

I?ve been reading the Brian-recommended The Looming Tower, Al-Qaeda and the
Road to 9/11 by Lawrence Wright.  Wright provides an excellent example of
how defeat is viewed.  On page 38 Wright writes, ?. . . The speed and
decisiveness of the Israeli victory in the Six Day War humiliated many
Muslims who had believed until then that God favored their cause.  They had
lost not only their armies and their territories but also faith in their
leaders, in their countries, and in themselves.  The profound appeal of
Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt and elsewhere was born in this shocking
debacle. A newly strident voice was heard in the mosques; the voice said
that they had been defeated by a force far larger than the tiny country of
Israel.  God had turned against the Muslims.  The only way back to Him was
to return to the pure religion.  The voice answered despair with a simple
formulation: Islam is the solution. ?

 

?. . . The primary target of Egyptian Islamists was Nasser?s secular regime.
In the terminology of jihad, the priority was defeating the ?near enemy? ?
that is, impure Muslim society.  The ?distant enemy? ? the West ? could wait
until Islam had reformed itself.  To Zawahiri and his colleagues that meant,
at a minimum, imposing Islamic law in Egypt.

 

?Zawahiri also sought to restore the caliphate, the rule of Islamic clerics,
which had formally ended in 1924 following the dissolution of the Ottoman
Empire but which had not exercised real power since the thirteenth century.
Once the caliphate was established, Zawahiri believed, Egypt would become a
rallying point for the rest of the Islamic world, leading it in a jihad
against the West.  ?Then history would make a new turn, God willing,?
Zawahiri later wrote, ?in the opposite direction against the empire of the
United States and the world?s Jewish government.?? 

 

The Schmoos slogan, the more Islamists we kill, the more we create is of
course nonsense.  There is nothing like that in Islamic tradition.  If we
kill the Militant Islamic enemy and in the process defeat him, then Allah
has somehow allowed this.  It is inconceivable to them that Allah would
favor infidels, so there must be some other reason.  A variety of other
reasons have been produced but the one we are most concerned about is the
reasoning of Islamic Fundamentalism.  Islamic Fundamentalists argue that the
less than orthodox Muslims who were defeated deserved to be defeated.  The
way to achieve victory is to return to pure religion.  What we see now in
Iraq are many who fancy they adhere to Pure Religion fighting against us and
our protégées in the new Iraqi state.  Yeah, it?s expensive but we need to
tread carefully now.  If when we leave, the Islamic Fundamentalists can
declare victory, that is if we don?t leave the present Iraqi government in a
very strong position, then we shall be buying trouble for ourselves.  As
Barnett suggests, we shall probably have to go back again.  We won?t save
money by leaving prematurely.

 

Lawrence

Other related posts: