In substance, though, he did not say anything new or indeed anything to lift the cloud of numbness people feel. He simply appealed for unity and understanding and the sub-text was unity on his terms and understanding of his position. Just go along with everything I am saying and doing. Towards the end he said he was willing to talk to those who are sincere and he appealed strongly for sincerity, criticising foreign states who opposed his policies as insincere.
It is certainly fitting that we remember those who have shown such great love that they laid down their lives for their friends (John 15:11). These are people who left home for an uncertain future. They lived rough in the bush, often hunted like animals, hungry and tired and always insecure. And then there were the moments when they had to fight, sometimes in confused circumstances and always with that terrible fear that any moment could be their last. Yes, such people are heroes and every country honours its fallen who gave their lives so that other could live in freedom.
But as I ponder, I wonder should a memorial of these men and women be used for some other purpose than simply giving thanks for them, honouring them and remembering them? Is it really right to harness such a solemn moment to passing political advantage? To appeal to people to see the world as I see it and to imply that the heroes would do just that?
I cannot see the propriety of saying a single word at such a moment in the service of a current agenda. Let their courage and their sacrifice stand for itself. We are called to be silent in awe before such self-giving. To build up the solemnity of the occasion and then to trivialise it by claiming the heroes endorsement of present policies is leave us, not uplifted, but frustrated and angry.
Post published in: Opinions