WAS WINSTON CHURCHILL: A WHITE SUPREMACIST?
Share
The world has gone mad, and if it’s not, then I need to be committed.
Look, I get today’s generation is so darn perfect they have the answer to everything.
Man, do I sound like my parents when they spoke about my generation, some 50 years ago.
But while the Boomer generation worked to change the world following World War 2, I don’t recall a time when we trod over history blaming anyone for how they acted.
Hitler and the Germans were exempt, but then it wasn’t a time for looking back, it was a time to look forward.
We can all blame our parents for the way we turned out, which is untrue.
Given each generations circumstances, parents would have done their best to provide a roof over your head, and food on the table.
When it came to love, well that appears to have been harder in some cases.
So, what is it that has got me going this week.
It should come as no surprise, it’s the Church of England.
“even for allowances of some of the sort of more extreme views in the Church of England, this is really going too far.”
Nicholas Soames, (Winston Churchills grandson)
Yeah, Yeah, the same organisation which I reported rejected the Bible earlier this year, but their latest crime against history although now rectified went too far.
The Daily Mail reported St Paul’s Cathedral provoked uproar by describing a man voted by the British public, as the greatest -ever Briton, as an ‘unashamed imperialist’ and ‘white supremacist’ in an online post about Britain’s great wartime leader, Sir Winston Churchill.
For a whole year no one and I mean no one, picked up on it until it was noticed by a 72-yer-old member of the Friends of St Paul’s who brought it everyone’s attention.
In his letter to the Cathedral hierarchy, he wrote: ‘I believe that some of the language you have used in Churchill’s profile is too heavily charged, condemnatory to the extent that it demonises Churchill. Perhaps this language is a function of ignorance or of political ideology.
Naturally, you can imagine the furore once it was brought to the attention of the media.
Sir Winston’s family were rightly upset by the comment with his grandson, Nicholas Soames calling the remarks ‘deeply offensive, thoughtless, stupid and ignorant’.
Despite the offending text being removed, Soames went on to suggest “even for allowances of some of the sort of more extreme views in the Church of England, this is really going too far.”
“We’re more democratic in who we believe history belongs to, who from the past it includes, and who in the present can benefit from it.”
Historian” Marcus Colla
And as you can imagine Politicians have had plenty to say on the matter as well.
Lee Anderson, deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, said: ‘It is getting ridiculous. Anyone publicising information like this needs to take a long, hard look at themselves and ask themselves why they hate this country so much, its history and its heritage. They are idiots.‘
I think the emeritus professor of sociology at Kent University, Frank Furedi, was correct in summing up the whole situation said: ‘Branding Churchill as an unashamed imperialist and white supremacist, is not only an act of historical distortion, but an attempt to discredit everything positive that Britain stood for in the 20th century.’
The language used by the Cathedral was described as a function of ignorance or of political ideology.
But here’s the thing and you can say it’s typical of the Church of England, but no one and I mean no one has taken responsibility for the attack on Churchill.
Winston was not perfect and often made himself, “a hostage to fortune” with his comments and jokes which would be regarded as unacceptable today.
Unanimously, many agreed it was important to judge the man by his achievements in the defeat of Hitler.
There is a historical saying “cometh the hour, cometh the man.”
This is an apt description of Churchill who, when Britain was in trouble and looking at invasion from German forces, was the man of the hour who led Britain to repel and turn the tide of the war.
The Church of England’s attack on Churchill was not the first in Britain as today’s generation have found fault with the national hero.
It would be fair to say, “this was not their finest hour.”
The expression Cometh the Hour is a cliché.
The Church of England’s attack on Churchill is not the first attack on truth.
After all isn’t this the organisation who along with the Catholic Church claimed over centuries, to act as Gods organisation on earth.
And yet we recently reported how it has continually decried the Bible or parts thereof, as not fit for today’s culture.
John 4:26 speaks about the hour that cometh.
Jesus mentioned many times about the hour, which was coming, and in the case of Calvary the hour arrived for mankind sins to be redeemed and it needed a sacrifice in the form of Jesus.
Today people are incensed by the desecration of the memory of Winston Churchill by the Church of England, but why is it the world accepts the desecration of the name of Jesus.
The fate of the Church of England is sealed Matthew 7:22,23 but how about you as an individual.
Are you outraged and possibly guilty of trampling the name of Jesus into the dust?
Are you outraged and possibly guilty by blaspheming his name?
Are you guilty of these actions because of ignorance as to who it is, Jesus is.
And yet, we can blame past generations because they never taught us who God Is, who Jesus is, and while we take a day of as Christians celebrate his birth and remember his death, you have no idea or even bothered to ask.
We cannot alter history, it is what it is, people like Winston Churchill cannot be held responsible for what we see today as their short comings, we should not be so judgmental. Matthew 7.
I find it disturbing that the Church of England was complicit in this character assassination, either by endorsing it or its failure to follow through and check details were correct.
But this one act raises the question about historical events and people, if the Church of England can change history and it’s happening here in New Zealand, who else can?
We all can learn the lesson here as in New Zealand we have seen statues removed, street names changed where people were honoured for their actions in history, whether it was the right thing to do remains a moot point.
In New Zealand we have had several discussions about how our history should look like to future generations, but the conversations are selective rather than factual.
Some want a sanitized version of how the brutality of colonisation altered the Māori people future.
Māori academics want a more Māori centric view of history condemning the actions of British Forces but overlooking their own injustices towards other tribes.
The Churchill issue raises more questions than it answers as to what history is.
Undergraduates continue to find much to unpack in the answers to the question British Historian E.H Carr raised in 1961, but at his base he believed history’s primary purpose is to stand at the centre of diverse, tolerant, intellectually rigorous debate about our existence, our political system, leadership, society, economy, and culture.
The apostle Paul acknowledging the Bible is among many things a historical book wrote in his second letter to Timothy “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
Departmental Lecturer in European History at Christ Church, Oxford Marcus Colla, stated in an article for History Today.
“We’re more democratic in who we believe history belongs to, who from the past it includes, and who in the present can benefit from it.”
Historians today view the relationship between past and present differently and are more subjective to their own views and once again like today’s media we have opinion served up to us in whatever style or political ideology historians hold, rather than fact, and these are being presented today like that in our education curriculum.
It is up to all of us not to remain ignorant, but to take the initiative to search for the truth about history, about historical figures.
But one part of history which should not be overlooked and that is the lead up to, the life and death of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 45:20 -1 Corinthians 15.34
So, I encourage you to make a start, get to know Jesus and what God has instore for the future.
There’s possibly a church in your neighbourhood, not all are equal, but at a minimum they should be able to point you towards Jesus, they may not know the way but the least they can do is point you towards the cross.
For all it’s faults, even The Church of England should be able to do this task.