D-Day Remembered


It has been 65 years since that fateful day in June 1944, when allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy. On that day, thousands died, but the tide was turned. The Nazi advance was firmly checked, and the end of the war was in sight. Less than a year later the war in Europe would be over, while the war in the Pacific for a few more months.

I'm not a militarist, but I'm also not a pacifist. As much as I may abhor war, I do think that WW II was a war of necessity. That is not to say that all the war aims were justified or moral, but the war itself can be defended. Today, the new President made his first visit to a D-Day observance. Most of the soldiers from that day have either passed away or they are reaching old age. The youngest participants would be in their early 80s.

May we remember and honor their courage. May we also pray that the day would come when our young men and women would no longer be faced with such a responsibility.

Comments

Can Christian participation in any war be justified? How? How does killing, even to save civilization, participate in active discipleship of Jesus Christ? Alexander Campbell was a pacifist who wouldn't even justify the Civil War, despite his loathing for slavery.

So, when you say "necessary war" and "justified," I have to ask "justified for whom?" "necessary for what?" D-Day should be remembered--but in my view it shows the costs of war and injustice--for WWII grew out of the seeds of the unjust "victor's peace" of WWI. Had the pacifists been listened to, Hitler and Mussolini would never have come to power.

Necessary war always sounds to me like "necessary sin." But I'm biased--I am a former soldier who came to see that I could continue wearing the uniform or follow Jesus, not both.
Robert Cornwall said…
Michael, as you know I'm not a pacifist. You are correct, had WWI been settled differently, the Fascists may not have arisen. As a Christian my first inclination is to nonviolence and peace. But I'm not sure that the US/England had a choice in 1939-41.

As I was thinking about writing this yesterday, I looked at Niebuhr on Pacifism, knowing that Obama has looked to Niebuhr for direction. His sense is that if one wants to be truly pacifist then one should, like Anabaptists be consistent and pull back from any government involvement.

I don't know that there is any good answer here. This was my attempt to reflect on something I struggle with.

I think Sherman is right -- War is Hell. The Civil War demonstrated once and for all that you can't play at war. It's for keeps.
I think Reinhold Niebuhr's views on war have done more to lead mainstream churches away from biblical faithfulness, and more to soothe lightly the souls of Christian politicians (from Carter to Obama) than any other theological figure. As brilliant as Niebuhr was, I have to say that most of his influence in the U.S. is, at best, unfortunate.

It places pragmatism above faithfulness.

I don't think this can be answered just by saying, "I am not a pacifist." The question is,"How can you justify refusing to be pacifist when Jesus so clearly demands it as part of faithful discipleship?"

Maybe honoring soldiers who have died in war, placing wreaths on tombs, etc. is part of the problem. Maybe it keeps us committed to systems which make new wars more likely and keeps us from developing the imagination, virtues, and institutions for creating a just peace instead.

Popular Posts