Mockingbird on Confederacy

[passerby]

I'm a fan of Mockingbird, but I feel a little uneasy about this article, at least during this time of unrest:
https://mbird.com/2020/06/under-robert-e-lees-shadow-growing-up-in-the-lost-cause/

I understand how venerating confederate history, statues, and flags can put up a big barrier to blacks hearing the gospel. But they have run this article during a time of moral panic, where it seems mob rule is in effect for determining which parts of our history should be erased and which should be kept. The defacement and now likely removal of the Robert E. Lee statue in Richmond is a case in point. For many people, it is about memory of ancestors and far from a tribute to slavery. But even if it will always carry the stain of slavery, it is still part of the history--for better or worse--of that city. It is part of this utopian urge that Lutherans (and Mockingbird people) should resist. I just heard they toppled the statue of Columbus in Richmond and threw into a lake. So the moral panic (and it has to be called that) has spread beyond black issues, and again we get to the matter of the everyday meaning that these statues and objects have for people. Whatever exploitation of natives Columbus participated in, these statues have other more beneficial meanings for people, and not only Italian-Americans. Where does it end? I read they want to remove the name of famous prime minister William Gladstone from Liverpool University because his father was involved in the slave trade! God help us.   

[D. Engebretson]

On another thread (LCMS Lutherans Marching and Quoting Black Liberation Theologist James Cone) a very insightful lecture was posted by black theologian Dr. Baucham.  He makes the point that "racism" and its related 'sin' of owning slaves is the new "unpardonable sin."  His example was Jonathan Edwards. And he contrasted this Christian leader with MLK who was a "serial adulterer who denied tenets of the Christian faith" who is treated very differently, and that because of race. 

"White privilege" is also the new sin for which we must repent and make reparation.  I don't think that this wholesale dismantling and removal of history is furthering the discussion in a meaningful way.  It is causing a warped view of sin and repentance. Although he was brought up and later confirmed in the Episcopal church, it would seem that Robert E. Lee is now considered as one who has also committed the "unpardonable sin" and is a shameful smear on our entire history, his whole life considered worthless because of one item. 

Who will remain standing once we purge our country of those who do not fit the current standards of righteousness? 

[Charles Austin]

Passerby writes:
For many people, it is about memory of ancestors and far from a tribute to slavery. But even if it will always carry the stain of slavery, it is still part of the history--for better or worse--of that city.

I comment:
For better or worse? It will always be worse.
A friend from South Carolina, full disclosure, he is a liberal, says that the monuments and the generals who are on those monuments are there because they were defenders of slavery. Period. If it is a “memory of ancestors“, it is not a memory that should be glorified but a memory which should be repudiated.
Slavery in the south and in our history is more than a “stain.” It is and remains a monumental atrocity. There should be no Monuments glorifying any part of it or the generals who defended it.
It should be noted that many, if not most of those monuments were directed during the latter part of the 19th century, the time when “the south shall rise again“ was in vogue and when laws continued the repression of the former slaves.
And we should not re-cast it in theological terms. Maybe some of those general repented, maybe not. But in terms of civil justice, their “crimes” against the people of their time, Not to mention the rebellion against The legitimate authority of the United States remains.

[peter_speckhard]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

[Matt Hummel]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

That’s SAINT Thomas More to you, bucko... 😉

[peter_speckhard]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

That’s SAINT Thomas More to you, bucko... 😉

I can’t believe you endorse burning Lutherans at the stake, and declare it to be good and God-pleasing, which is the only possible interpretation of why you would choose to honor someone who did terrible things. You personally, Matt, are demonstrating your pure hatred toward me. The Man for All Seasons must not be allowed to survive this season of silliness. After all, he lived in the past. That alone makes him complicit in history, which is bad.

[D. Engebretson]

In terms of "civil justice," who is completely worthy to have a monument erected to their memory?  "Crimes against the people of their time" is a fairly broad category.  Given the atmosphere of our time, I suspect that the definition of those worthy of respect and honor will continue to shift and change, now more rapidly than before.  I was quite appalled when I learned that monuments to fire fighters were defaced with spray paint.  Why are they now the enemy of the people?  Of course, anything to do with law enforcement is stained by the crimes of a few.  There was a picture of the head of an actual pig on a stake placed by a police department.  So all police officers are now "pigs"? We have war memorials to those who fought and died in wars going back to the Revolutionary war.  However, Vietnam was not particularly popular, and many at that time wished to highlight war atrocities of some to color the work of the many.  And all of those who died took part in a very violent event where lives were taken by killing. Many are anti-war and anti-military.  So the memorials to them will be off limits as well?  Once such a movement of deconstruction begins it is hard to slow the momentum or redirect its wrath.  All who stand in its way ultimately suffer.  Unless you happen to be in the favored category of the moment. 

[passerby]

Passerby writes:
For many people, it is about memory of ancestors and far from a tribute to slavery. But even if it will always carry the stain of slavery, it is still part of the history--for better or worse--of that city.

I comment:
For better or worse? It will always be worse.
A friend from South Carolina, full disclosure, he is a liberal, says that the monuments and the generals who are on those monuments are there because they were defenders of slavery. Period. If it is a “memory of ancestors“, it is not a memory that should be glorified but a memory which should be repudiated.
Slavery in the south and in our history is more than a “stain.” It is and remains a monumental atrocity. There should be no Monuments glorifying any part of it or the generals who defended it.
It should be noted that many, if not most of those monuments were directed during the latter part of the 19th century, the time when “the south shall rise again“ was in vogue and when laws continued the repression of the former slaves.
And we should not re-cast it in theological terms. Maybe some of those general repented, maybe not. But in terms of civil justice, their “crimes” against the people of their time, Not to mention the rebellion against The legitimate authority of the United States remains.

Public monuments and statues having different meanings and memories for different people. A statue of Theodore Roosevelt in New York may carry negative emotions for Italian-Americans who know of Roosevelt's anti-immigrant Italian sentiment and his approval of the lynching of Italians in New Orleans while environmentalists remember fondly his conservation efforts. 
It is true that these statues in the South were erected during the late 19th century and were related to the "South shall rise again ideology" (even if their descendants have not espoused  these ideas for 40 years!). But it is also the case that veterans of the Civil War were passing away during this time and these monuments were seen as memorials to them.

[Daniel Lee Gard]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

That’s SAINT Thomas More to you, bucko... 😉

Nah....it is Mr. More.

"Saint" is more appropriate to those he martyred, like  Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbury, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.

[pearson]

But in terms of civil justice, their “crimes” against the people of their time, Not to mention the rebellion against The legitimate authority of the United States remains.

Strictly in terms of "civil justice" -- if you substitute "the Holy Roman Empire" for "the United States," Martin Luther might qualify for this kind of reassessment.

Tom Pearson

[DCharlton]

My great-grandfather was an immigrant to South Carolina from Germany.  He and my great-grand mother were married in Charleston.  He served in the Georgia Light Artillery in the Civil War.  We have a few records that indicate he fought at Shiloh as was commended by his commander.  After the war, he and my great-grandmother moved back to Germany.  My grandfather and his siblings returned to the United States in the 1890s.

Did he fight in the Army of Georgia because he believed in slavery, because he was drafted, or for some other reason?  We don't know.  As a resident of Georgia, he served in the state army.  Is it wrong for the State of Georgia to honor people who fought for the state?  Are they at fault because their state chose to be on the wrong side of history?  Should I travel to Germany and tear down his tombstone?  If in 100 years, the general consensus is that the Iraq War was unjust, will we tear down all monuments to the men and women killed in those wars?

[Charles Austin]

We are not talking about the in-the-ranks soldiers and there are relatively few monument to them. The monuments in question are those dedicated to the generals.
And every topic and every, situation, especially in this modest forum, will collapse under the weight of “what if, what if, what if,”  or “Shall we?shall we? Shall we?“

[Matt Hummel]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

That’s SAINT Thomas More to you, bucko... 😉

Nah....it is Mr. More.

"Saint" is more appropriate to those he martyred, like  Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbury, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.

Saint John Almond
Saint Edmund Arrowsmith
Saint Ambrose Barlow
Saint John Boste
Saint Alexander Briant
Saint Edmund Campion
Saint Margaret Clitherow
Saint Philip Evans
Saint Thomas Garnet
Saint Edmund Gennings
Saint Richard Gwyn
Saint John Houghton
Saint Philip Howard
Saint John Jones
Saint John Kemble
Saint Luke Kirby
Saint Robert Lawrence
Saint David Lewis
Saint Anne Line
Saint John Lloyd
Saint Cuthbert Mayne
Saint Henry Morse
Saint Nicholas Owen
Saint John Payne
Saint Polydore Plasden
Saint John Plessington
Saint Richard Reynolds
Saint John Rigby
Saint John Roberts
Saint Alban Roe
Saint Ralph Sherwin
Saint Robert Southwell
Saint John Southworth
Saint John Stone
Saint John Wall
Saint Henry Walpole
Saint Margaret Ward
Saint Augustine Webster
Saint Swithun Wells
Saint Eustace White

Fixed it for you

[Daniel Lee Gard]

Thomas More personally took part in the brutal execution of suspected Lutherans. The church up the street is named after him.

That’s SAINT Thomas More to you, bucko... 😉

Nah....it is Mr. More.

"Saint" is more appropriate to those he martyred, like  Thomas Hitton, Thomas Bilney, Richard Bayfield, John Tewkesbury, Thomas Dusgate, and James Bainham.

Saint John Almond
Saint Edmund Arrowsmith
Saint Ambrose Barlow
Saint John Boste
Saint Alexander Briant
Saint Edmund Campion
Saint Margaret Clitherow
Saint Philip Evans
Saint Thomas Garnet
Saint Edmund Gennings
Saint Richard Gwyn
Saint John Houghton
Saint Philip Howard
Saint John Jones
Saint John Kemble
Saint Luke Kirby
Saint Robert Lawrence
Saint David Lewis
Saint Anne Line
Saint John Lloyd
Saint Cuthbert Mayne
Saint Henry Morse
Saint Nicholas Owen
Saint John Payne
Saint Polydore Plasden
Saint John Plessington
Saint Richard Reynolds
Saint John Rigby
Saint John Roberts
Saint Alban Roe
Saint Ralph Sherwin
Saint Robert Southwell
Saint John Southworth
Saint John Stone
Saint John Wall
Saint Henry Walpole
Saint Margaret Ward
Saint Augustine Webster
Saint Swithun Wells
Saint Eustace White

Fixed it for you

You forgot Blessed Margaret Pole, mother of Cardinal Reginald Pole. And my 14th great grandmother who was beatified in the 1880s in light of her execution by Henry VIII.

Never forget Grandma Maggie! Of course, she never killed anyone herself. Unlike Mr. More.

[DCharlton]

We are not talking about the in-the-ranks soldiers and there are relatively few monument to them. The monuments in question are those dedicated to the generals.
And every topic and every, situation, especially in this modest forum, will collapse under the weight of “what if, what if, what if,”  or “Shall we?shall we? Shall we?“

You simply don't know what you are talking about.  There are plenty of monuments in the south to average soldiers.  A few years ago there was a movement to "re-contextualize" Civil War monuments.  I'm in favor of that.  I am also in favor of city councils, in consultation with the local community, making those kinds of decisions.  This is what was happening in Charlottesville, VA.  What I'm not in favor of is mobs that make no distinction and demand that all monuments be removed.  This is what is happening today.  In one, students from UNC tore down a monument to graduates who fought in the Civil War.  In another case in Michigan, there have been calls to remove a cenotaph from a cemetery.  A third example is the call to exhume the bodies of Confederate soldiers at Arlington and move them somewhere else. Now if you think these people are racists and traitors who deserve no monuments and no gravestones, go for it.  Just exhume your own racist ancestors first, because by todays standards, all white people in the 19th Century were racists.  They certainly benefitted from the genocide of Native Americans.