Posted on 10/09/2003 10:08:01 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
The nineteenth century essayist Orestes Brownson made a similar point:
"Loyalty," Brownson writes, "is the highest, noblest, and most generous of human virtues, and is the human element of that sublime love or charity which the inspired Apostle tells us is the fulfillment of the law." Loyalty is more specifically human or particular than the supernatural virtue of charity. And charity cannot replace loyalty as a political or national passion. So Christianity elevates "civic virtues to the rank of religious virtues [by] making loyalty a matter of conscience." Brownson even asserts that "he who dies on the battlefield fighting for his country ranks with him who dies at the stake for his faith." More precisely, "Civic virtues are themselves religious virtues, or at least virtues without which there are no religious virtues, since no man who does not love his brother does or can love God."(source)
Any search through pre-20th century literature is bound to find similar examples, like this Hopkins poem, not to mention the tradition of chivalry. Why then the change, I wonder? Perhaps because General Patton's stand has prevailed: the rhetoric of war is no longer about dying for one's country(if it ever was), but in making the other sunavabitch die for his.
However, the confession of Apollonius was that of the first article of the creed; it was a confession that the true God is the creator of all things.
Bump for a truly glorious post, Fester. BBL
Would you consider Jesus Christ to be someone who "wears his religion on his sleeve?"
That is a just hope, IMO. As for qualifications relating to the label of "martyr," well, that is not so important. Others here have hit on some differences between Christian and Muslim faith (as to martyrdom), and I think the differences are hard to express accurately, but not so difficult to understand accurately.
Ummmm .... I think the radical Muslims DO put others on trial. Infidels and all that. I would guess that Muslim pretenders qualify for the "infidel" label. It is an impermisible exercise of ability, for humans to kill other humans in the name of religion. The victim of such travesty will get his just reward, whatever it is. As will the perpetrator.
Oh yes. But does it happen that Muslims are put on trial and asked to deny their god or else suffer death? If so, does their death qualify as martyrdom in the strict sense?
I don't think infidels necessarily get a "fair trial" and a chance to express the "proper faith." In any event, I think the label of "martyr" is not so important to the person who becomes one. God sorts us out just fine, without our help in affixing labels.
I think the word "infidel" has been mutually applied to Muslim and Christian, so I'm not sure which you mean here.
"In any event, I think the label of 'martyr' is not so important to the person who becomes one. God sorts us out just fine, without our help in affixing labels."
Of course our own labels effect neither objective reality nor the end results WRT the judgment of God, but they are a means to sort things out in our own minds. Furthermore, just as God uses "word" to create and sustain life, there is more than a label or two at stake here.
At bottom I seriously doubt many are put to death these days solely because they confess that their life comes from God alone. These days innocents are killed just because they are an "inconvenience."
As to my application of the word "infidel," I'd have to review my original comment -- I think I meant it as applied by Muslims to non-Muslims, but it could equally be used by anybody who wanted to attach a pejorative label to justify an impermissible exercise of human power.
I support the "sorting out" of temporal reality, and of ultimate destiny, by humans. I tend away from labels in that endeavor, because we tend to become preoccupied with the "proper assignment of labels" (so what). Arguments over what labels mean should be brief. In order to advance a discussion, agreement about the meaning of labels should be easy to reach.
All that as a matter of agreeing. There is more at stake than a label or two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.