A journal, a travelogue, a to-do list, a memoir, a discussion board -- this could be anything. Whatever else it is, may it be a place where the name of Jesus is glorified.
As you ponder the life of the soldier, I retransmit a column I sent to your Mother, along with her response. It arises from our PM’s excellent trip to Afghanistan to see our troops.
Love,
Grampa> > That was EXCELLENT!! Thanks Dad. Love to both > xoxoxox Leslie > > > > >Subject: Rex Murphy > >Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 11:05:02 -0500 (EST) > > > >Here is the copied column > > > >Inside the strict faith of unfaith > > > >REX MURPHY > >From Saturday's Globe and Mail > >Read Bio > > > >| Latest Columns > >Stephen Harper ended his address to the Canadian > >troops with what has become a signature salutation: > >“God bless Canada.” > > > >We must presume that when he says “God bless > Canada,” > >that that is precisely what Mr. Harper hopes for. > It > >is not rote. > > > >Mr. Harper is a Christian. He believes in God. And > >from everything I've read about the Prime Minister, > >his is a serious belief, not some decorative shawl > >worn to court others of similar persuasion, or an > item > >affixed to the campaign bio to signal “community” > with > >the great number and variety of Christians in this > >country. > > > >For those who have junked religion, passed it by or > >simply never had time for it, the practice of > invoking > >the Creator can seem quaint, tedious, and utterly > >passé. For more militant secularists, who are in > their > >fervour and stridency more often than they would > wish > >a mirror of the fundamentalists they frequently > >deride, the invocation can be positively > “offensive.” > > > >I'm not very sympathetic to this latter posture, as > I > >have not often observed the secularists willfully > or > >voluntarily moderating the intensity or expression > of > >their convictions out of deference to the very many > >others who are not of like mind. Just as one > example, > >people curse and swear (even these words seem dated > in > >these triumphalist secular days) with an ease and > >abandon, in public and private, at home and at > work, > >without the least thought that there may be others > >present to whom foul or blasphemous language > carries > >much more than an edge of rudeness and discomfort. > > > >“Too bad” is often the unspoken rider to a good > blue > >streak mingling “Christ” and the “F-word” in all > its > >variations within the hearing of those who have not > >yet discovered the utility and glee of absolutely > >uninhibited speech. Those who are still believers, > >those to whom the name of their Saviour is still > >sacred, and for whom verbal obscenity is still > >instinctively repulsive, are more or less told, in > >another of the elegancies of our age, to “get > > > >used to it.” > > > >I can but speculate that Mr. Harper may — in his > own > >way, either mischievously or otherwise — be > returning > >the favour. It may be the Christian imperative to > turn > >the other cheek, but scripture, I think, is silent > on > >the question of whether, when the one side gives > you > >the verbal finger, you may not cock a lexical digit > in > >return. > > > >Ardent non-believers are every bit as squeamish as > >their opposites. > > > >Perhaps, given the ascendancy and complacency of > >non-belief in Western culture, and the ever more > >numerous and thick barricades against any > >manifestation of belief in the public domain, > >non-believers think the field is entirely theirs. > And > >so, Mr. Harper's “God bless Canada” may be > something > >more than a mere annoyance to them: It may be the > >first shadow of a doubt — and nothing is more cruel > to > >a fundamentalist than the approach of doubt — that > the > >ascendancy they assume is complete is a fiction. > > > >That would be intolerable. The faith of unfaith > cannot > >abide a discrepancy between its reality and > reality. > >The thought that religion might have a meaning and > >significance for a great many of their fellow > >citizens, beyond its anthropological and historical > >significance, that it might mean something here and > >now, and that it should be expressed, is a horror > of > >an insight. In our secular dispensation, God is at > >best an empty word, a hollow signifier, and the > idea > >of reverence for his Name is at best the reflex of > >yokels. Time magazine asked the question 40 years > ago, > >Is God Dead? and did not “stay for an answer.” > > > >I am aware that there is another objection to Mr. > >Harper's habit of asking God to bless our nation, > and > >I'm not sure if this objection has a sectarian > basis > >or not. It is that President George Bush also > >frequently “signs off” his speeches with the > parallel > >formula of “God bless America.” > > > >In this case, the objection is not so much that Mr. > >Harper is wearing his faith on his sleeve, as that > he > >is shining a light on his pro-Americanism and, > >furthermore, that he is miming the zealotry of the > >“fundamentalist” Mr. Bush. In some quarters, that > is a > >far deeper (it is mortal with a vengeance) sin than > >the mere public display of an active faith. > > > >Over whole regions of the Western world, otherwise > so > >cleansed of even the vocabulary of religious > >observance, being pro-Bush may be the last heresy. > >That position, among those who style themselves > >progressives, speaks not so much of a failure of > >intellect; it is a flaw of the spirit, an > >irrationality so profound that it must have a > >supernatural (and likely demonic) source. > > > >Still, both Mr. Harper and his critics, at least > here, > >meet on common ground. They are both invoking a > higher > >power to aid them in confronting the world. For the > >anti-Bushites, any belief in the goodness of Mr. > Bush > >is a tear in the fabric of reality. > > > >Personally, I see nothing wrong with a politician > >invoking a higher power. I find some comfort in the > >idea of a leader acknowledging one. > > > >Rex Murphy is a commentator with CBC-TV's The > National > >and host of CBC Radio One's Cross-Country Checkup. > >
Lauren,
ReplyDeleteAs you ponder the life of the soldier, I retransmit a column I sent to your Mother, along with her response. It arises from our PM’s excellent trip to Afghanistan to see our troops.
Love,
Grampa>
> That was EXCELLENT!! Thanks Dad. Love to both
> xoxoxox Leslie
>
>
>
> >Subject: Rex Murphy
> >Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 11:05:02 -0500 (EST)
> >
> >Here is the copied column
> >
> >Inside the strict faith of unfaith
> >
> >REX MURPHY
> >From Saturday's Globe and Mail
> >Read Bio
> >
> >| Latest Columns
> >Stephen Harper ended his address to the Canadian
> >troops with what has become a signature salutation:
> >“God bless Canada.”
> >
> >We must presume that when he says “God bless
> Canada,”
> >that that is precisely what Mr. Harper hopes for.
> It
> >is not rote.
> >
> >Mr. Harper is a Christian. He believes in God. And
> >from everything I've read about the Prime Minister,
> >his is a serious belief, not some decorative shawl
> >worn to court others of similar persuasion, or an
> item
> >affixed to the campaign bio to signal “community”
> with
> >the great number and variety of Christians in this
> >country.
> >
> >For those who have junked religion, passed it by or
> >simply never had time for it, the practice of
> invoking
> >the Creator can seem quaint, tedious, and utterly
> >passé. For more militant secularists, who are in
> their
> >fervour and stridency more often than they would
> wish
> >a mirror of the fundamentalists they frequently
> >deride, the invocation can be positively
> “offensive.”
> >
> >I'm not very sympathetic to this latter posture, as
> I
> >have not often observed the secularists willfully
> or
> >voluntarily moderating the intensity or expression
> of
> >their convictions out of deference to the very many
> >others who are not of like mind. Just as one
> example,
> >people curse and swear (even these words seem dated
> in
> >these triumphalist secular days) with an ease and
> >abandon, in public and private, at home and at
> work,
> >without the least thought that there may be others
> >present to whom foul or blasphemous language
> carries
> >much more than an edge of rudeness and discomfort.
> >
> >“Too bad” is often the unspoken rider to a good
> blue
> >streak mingling “Christ” and the “F-word” in all
> its
> >variations within the hearing of those who have not
> >yet discovered the utility and glee of absolutely
> >uninhibited speech. Those who are still believers,
> >those to whom the name of their Saviour is still
> >sacred, and for whom verbal obscenity is still
> >instinctively repulsive, are more or less told, in
> >another of the elegancies of our age, to “get
> >
> >used to it.”
> >
> >I can but speculate that Mr. Harper may — in his
> own
> >way, either mischievously or otherwise — be
> returning
> >the favour. It may be the Christian imperative to
> turn
> >the other cheek, but scripture, I think, is silent
> on
> >the question of whether, when the one side gives
> you
> >the verbal finger, you may not cock a lexical digit
> in
> >return.
> >
> >Ardent non-believers are every bit as squeamish as
> >their opposites.
> >
> >Perhaps, given the ascendancy and complacency of
> >non-belief in Western culture, and the ever more
> >numerous and thick barricades against any
> >manifestation of belief in the public domain,
> >non-believers think the field is entirely theirs.
> And
> >so, Mr. Harper's “God bless Canada” may be
> something
> >more than a mere annoyance to them: It may be the
> >first shadow of a doubt — and nothing is more cruel
> to
> >a fundamentalist than the approach of doubt — that
> the
> >ascendancy they assume is complete is a fiction.
> >
> >That would be intolerable. The faith of unfaith
> cannot
> >abide a discrepancy between its reality and
> reality.
> >The thought that religion might have a meaning and
> >significance for a great many of their fellow
> >citizens, beyond its anthropological and historical
> >significance, that it might mean something here and
> >now, and that it should be expressed, is a horror
> of
> >an insight. In our secular dispensation, God is at
> >best an empty word, a hollow signifier, and the
> idea
> >of reverence for his Name is at best the reflex of
> >yokels. Time magazine asked the question 40 years
> ago,
> >Is God Dead? and did not “stay for an answer.”
> >
> >I am aware that there is another objection to Mr.
> >Harper's habit of asking God to bless our nation,
> and
> >I'm not sure if this objection has a sectarian
> basis
> >or not. It is that President George Bush also
> >frequently “signs off” his speeches with the
> parallel
> >formula of “God bless America.”
> >
> >In this case, the objection is not so much that Mr.
> >Harper is wearing his faith on his sleeve, as that
> he
> >is shining a light on his pro-Americanism and,
> >furthermore, that he is miming the zealotry of the
> >“fundamentalist” Mr. Bush. In some quarters, that
> is a
> >far deeper (it is mortal with a vengeance) sin than
> >the mere public display of an active faith.
> >
> >Over whole regions of the Western world, otherwise
> so
> >cleansed of even the vocabulary of religious
> >observance, being pro-Bush may be the last heresy.
> >That position, among those who style themselves
> >progressives, speaks not so much of a failure of
> >intellect; it is a flaw of the spirit, an
> >irrationality so profound that it must have a
> >supernatural (and likely demonic) source.
> >
> >Still, both Mr. Harper and his critics, at least
> here,
> >meet on common ground. They are both invoking a
> higher
> >power to aid them in confronting the world. For the
> >anti-Bushites, any belief in the goodness of Mr.
> Bush
> >is a tear in the fabric of reality.
> >
> >Personally, I see nothing wrong with a politician
> >invoking a higher power. I find some comfort in the
> >idea of a leader acknowledging one.
> >
> >Rex Murphy is a commentator with CBC-TV's The
> National
> >and host of CBC Radio One's Cross-Country Checkup.
> >