RETURN TO
MAIN CHAT PAGE
American Civil War Home Chatroom
Transcript (Oct. 29, 2006) "For God and Country:
The Role of Religion in the Civil War": an online
chat with author Michael Aubrecht
(continued)
TOPIC 5
10/29/2006 10:06 pm (et) MAubrecht:
The last subject that I would like
to briefly share with you tonight deals with the
good and bad of religion in war. I have strived
above to present 4 uplifting subjects, but there is
also a "darker-side" to faith, and negative
repercussions that can result from it. I like to
call this: THE DOUBLE-EDGE SWORD OF THEOLOGY. This
is more of an opinion piece and I don't want to
preach or get political. However, it plays a part
in our conversation and should be addressed.
10/29/2006 10:06 pm (et)
MAubrecht: I did a Q&A with "The Free
Lance-Star" that dealt with this specific topic.
Over the course of the interview I was asked to
correlate the roles of religion "then vs. now" and
what the "pros and cons" are. The article was
entitled "Religion, war can be a risky combination"
and was penned by a great reporter (and co-worker)
named Michael Zitz. I will be quoting him
throughout this section, but in the effort to save
time, I'll be mixing him and me - instead of
quoting everything separately.
10/29/2006 10:07 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Faith and fearlessness are
admirable traits, but they also can be dangerous.
Historically, religion has always played a part in
every major conflict, whether for good or evil. The
GOOD is that faith in one's God can provide a great
sense of strength and comfort to soldiers and
civilians. The BAD is that it can also be distorted
for the justification of aggression and atrocity.
Simply stated, it can be a blessing as well as a
danger.
10/29/2006 10:07 pm (et) MAubrecht:
I think that it's pretty fair to
say that both the acts of religion and war should
always be practiced for the betterment of mankind.
Unfortunately, sometimes it backfires. My own
definition of 'human nature' includes mankind's
"innate ability to foul things up. I think one of
our most important tasks is to learn from our own
mistakes." In essence, the role of religion in the
Civil War (IMO) directly impacted the events that
were witnessed - both good and bad.
10/29/2006 10:08 pm (et)
MAubrecht: In regards to Stonewall Jackson,
the strength of his faith, and his belief in
Presbyterian doctrine that states that our deaths
are predestined, played a role in how he conducted
himself on the battlefield. This resulted in both
triumph and tragedy. He himself repeatedly stated,
"My religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in
battle as in bed. God has fixed the time of my
death." He added, "I do not concern myself about
that, but to always be ready, no matter when it may
overtake me." This (IMO) is a wonderful way to
live, but I see it as being somewhat problematic in
a war zone.
10/29/2006 10:08 pm (et)
amhistoryguy: logs off.
10/29/2006 10:09 pm (et) MAubrecht:
The belief that his time of death
was already determined, enabled him to stand,
unflinchingly, amid the chaos on the battlefield
(often, it inspired his troops to achieve victory
against all odds), but in another way, this "divine
inspiration" was self-destructive and contributed
greatly to Jackson's untimely demise. He also may
have felt protected as he stated, "Our God was my
shield. His protecting care is an additional cause
for gratitude."
10/29/2006 10:09 pm (et)
amhistoryguy: enters the chatroom.
10/29/2006 10:09 pm (et)
MAubrecht: In other words, his feeling of
invincibility (as a soldier for the Lord), combined
with no logical fear of death (on the battlefield)
made him incredibly courageous, and a little
careless at times. I consider Jackson as similar to
George Patton in some respects. He was a ferocious
warrior who preached the swift and total
destruction of the enemy. Although he took no
pleasure in waging war, he believed that the
quickest way to end a conflict was to give no
quarter to the enemy. He urged his superiors to
attack when at all possible and his intentions were
to cripple the opposition into surrender.
10/29/2006 10:10 pm (et)
MAubrecht: Faith made him somewhat cautious,
as he often depended on prayer when making
decisions, but it also made him careless, as it
instilled a false-sense of security at times. This
(IMO) may have played a role in his accident at
Chancellorsville. The bottom line is that a
commander of his ranking should not have been
anywhere on the field where he might be susceptible
to "friendly-fire" - or any fire for that matter.
By putting himself in harm's way, Jackson
unwillingly jeopardized the entire command.
10/29/2006 10:10 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Now, this "casual" attitude may
have been due to a feeling of providence that
Jackson often boasted of - and after reading piles
of post-war transcripts, I have come to the
conclusion that his staff believed it too. This
goes back to the "hero-worship" syndrome that may
have clouded all of their judgment. That is what
makes his accidental wounding so ironic - and sad.
A man so loved by his troops - ultimately "killed"
by his troops (pneumonia finished him off).
10/29/2006 10:11 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Still, it is this historian's firm
opinion that Thomas Jackson was a great man and
that religion was THE foundation for what made him
such a brilliant and fearless leader. I would not
have published an entire book on the subject if I
didn't think that Christianity was the cornerstone
in the foundation of what made "Stonewall" a "stone
wall". He lived every day for the fulfillment of
his duty. In the end, perhaps this Christian
soldier's biggest victory was not in defeating his
foes on the battlefield, but in convincing others
to serve both God and country. Ironically,
Christianity may have also played a role in his
death as it made him feel "untouchable."
10/29/2006 10:12 pm (et)
MAubrecht: That is why I refer to faith as a
"double-edged" sword in times of war. Religion can
bring comfort to those left at home, and those
deployed abroad. It can inspire the brave to be
braver, instill a sense of mercy for those you
oppose, and spread a renewed lifestyle to one who
was previously unfamiliar with the teaching of
Christ.
10/29/2006 10:12 pm (et) MAubrecht:
BUT… it can be used to spread evil
ideology, inflame division, and justify acts of
atrocity. It can also be perverted, or politically
skewed, for the recruitment and execution of an
unrighteous cause. We have seen this before, and we
still see it today. Holy Wars are rarely "holy" at
all.
10/29/2006 10:12 pm (et)
MAubrecht: In regards to America's Civil War,
I think that religion played a more positive than
negative role.
10/29/2006 10:12 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Although the period represented one
of the darkest times in our country's history, it
also witnessed a great revival and later, the
positive healing power of faith. That is why I have
dedicated my writing career to studying and
presenting it as I think we can all learn by these
believer's examples, regardless of the color of
their uniform. We should all strive to share the
stories of their faith, sacrifice, and glory for
future generations. They certainly earned it.
10/29/2006 10:13 pm (et) MAubrecht:
May God bless ALL of them.
10/29/2006 10:13 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Also, in closing, I wanted to add
that there is a new museum that is being
established by Liberty University that will focus
specifically on the religious aspects of the war…
10/29/2006 10:13 pm (et)
MAubrecht: It is called The National Civil
War Chaplains Research Center and Museum. Their
mission is to educate the public about the role of
chaplains and religious organizations in the Civil
War; to promote the continuing study of the many
methods of dissemination of religious doctrine and
moral teachings during the War; to preserve
religious artifacts; and to present interpretive
programs that show the influence of religion on the
lives of political and military personnel. I'll be
sharing more on this project as it progresses and
you can read about it over on my blog…
10/29/2006 10:14 pm (et)
MAubrecht: I thank you all, and I'd like to
post the TRIVIA QUESTION now, and after that we can
chat about whatever you like. The first person to
email the correct answer to me at StlrsFan1@aol.com
will get the books. I'll reply to the winner later
to get a mailing address. Here we go. Good luck.
10/29/2006 10:15 pm (et) MAubrecht:
WHAT INSPIRED QUOTE FROM THOMAS
JACKSON is inscribed over the Jackson Arch entrance
to the present-day VMI Barracks? (Hint: This
particular principle is attributed to the Reverend
Joel Hawes and first appeared in an 1851 work,
"Letters to Young Men, on the Formation of
Character")
10/29/2006 10:15 pm (et)
MAubrecht: Congrats in advance to the winner.
Ok. I'm finished. Any thoughts, questions comments?
XXXXXXXXX
10/29/2006 10:15 pm (et)
ks: Another MODERATOR'S note...this
one to YOU, Michael. ;) Next time you send me an
advance text copy, don't give me the trivia
question and answer. That way *I* can play. ;) BTW
great job!
10/29/2006 10:15 pm (et)
ks: ?
10/29/2006 10:16 pm (et) MAubrecht:
hahaha! I forgot about that...
10/29/2006 10:16 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Yes, your question ks?
10/29/2006 10:16 pm (et)
amhistoryguy: ?
10/29/2006 10:16 pm (et) ks:
Notice how I'm presuming there will
be a NEXT time. ;)
I'm
not one to typically delve into "what ifs", but
this one interested me. You stated earlier about
Jackson seeing the CW as a "holy war". How do you
think he might have responded to the LOSS of that
holy war? Of course I realize some might state that
they'd possibly not have lost had Jackson lived.
Let's not make that the premise for this question.
:) What's your considered opinion on how Jackson
would have responded to the loss of the war?
10/29/2006 10:17 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Great question - let me type...
10/29/2006 10:19 pm (et)
MAubrecht: My latest project is called
"Nathan Bedford Forrest: Saint & Sinner." It is
more dark and edgy than my previous books and after
studying the post-war mindset of Forrest, I have
started to look at my first 2 subjects (Jackson and
Stuart) and wonder how they would have dealt with
defeat. Not well I think. I believe he would have
come around (I mean even Jubal Early did
eventually) but Jackson (IMO) would not have
embraced unity w/ the north - at least initially.
And I firmly believe that he would have tried to
talk Lee out of surrender.
10/29/2006 10:20 pm (et)
MAubrecht: BTW: sorry for the typos -
obviously my prepared stuff had the benefits of
spell checker.
10/29/2006 10:20 pm (et) ks:
I tend to believe that as well
about him trying to talk Lee out of surrender.
10/29/2006 10:20 pm (et) MAubrecht:
am?
10/29/2006 10:21 pm (et)
amhistoryguy: While religion
certainly played a huge part in the war, secession
and war also seems to have in some ways divided
religion too. The division of the country was
mirrored within a number of religions as well, was
it not? Otherwise would not have religion attempted
to end the war.
10/29/2006 10:22 pm (et) Basecat:
?
10/29/2006 10:22 pm (et) MAubrecht:
I think that unlike today, religion
was entrenched in every aspect of 19th-Century
society. It had to be considered in all decisions.
I haven't studied divisions within denominations,
and that could be a great topic. I will say that
many of them probably looked at their neighbors as
equals in the church regardless of political
affiliations (just a guess).
10/29/2006 10:23 pm (et)
NJRebel: ?
10/29/2006 10:23 pm (et)
MAubrecht: basecat... then NJ.
10/29/2006 10:24 pm (et)
Basecat: Michael...First off fine chat.
It's a topic that really is not delved into as much
as it should when dealing with the Civil War. Have
read Woodworth's book on Religion during the war,
and would like to know if you recommend any other
titles that deals with this aspect of the war?
10/29/2006 10:25 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Yes absolutely. First, the Richard
Williams book that I mentioned above "Stonewall
Jackson: The Black Man's Friend" and…
10/29/2006 10:26 pm (et)
NJRebel: Re your comment about religions
and the denominations... from what little I have
researched, I think you will find the splits start
denominationally about fifteen years prior to 1860.
10/29/2006 10:26 pm (et)
MAubrecht: "Christ in the Camp" is another
good one.
10/29/2006 10:26 pm (et)
mobile_96: ?
10/29/2006 10:27 pm (et)
MAubrecht: NJ - there were "theological"
splits from the colonial-period on. It seems that
politics infiltrated even the New World's churches
as they had back in England. Yes mobile...
10/29/2006 10:28 pm (et) mobile_96:
did you find denominations split
politically?
10/29/2006 10:29 pm (et)
MAubrecht: I think that many split on social
issues more than anything.
10/29/2006 10:30 pm (et) MAubrecht:
But like I said, I have yet to
study that. What a fantastic topic though!
10/29/2006 10:30 pm (et) MAubrecht:
I can say that I have studied the
origins and history of the Presbyterian Church, and
that they have had divisions over both politics and
social issues - AND I fear that they are not done.
10/29/2006 10:31 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Anyone else?
10/29/2006 10:31 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Once again, I would like to thank
ks, and shotgun, and basecat for inviting me to
speak here tonight. I had a great time and hope
that we can do it again. Perhaps next time I'll
show you a side of JEB Stuart that you may not be
aware of - his spiritual one. Thanks again. Will
this still be up tomorrow ks. I'd like to read it
and mention it on my website at:
http://www.pinstripepress.net (see how I
shamelessly plugged my site.)
10/29/2006 10:33 pm (et)
amhistoryguy: Thank you MAubrecht
10/29/2006 10:33 pm (et)
mobile_96: And I thank you also
10/29/2006 10:33 pm (et)
ks: Thank YOU, Michael. It's
impressive to hold people's interest through 2.5 or
so hours. Your work and enthusiasm for the subject
is obvious.
10/29/2006 10:33 pm (et) NJRebel:
Michael, great and
informative....looking forward to more chats
10/29/2006 10:33 pm (et) MAubrecht:
You are all most welcome. And I
didn't mean to cut anyone off. I just saw a pause
and looked at the clock. I can stay. Oh, and
congrats basecat on winning the trivia question!
10/29/2006 10:34 pm (et) Vickie:
thank you MAubrecht
10/29/2006 10:34 pm (et)
ks: LOL! bluelady's the trivia queen,
but logged off in time to give you a chance,
Basecat. :-D
10/29/2006 10:34 pm (et) Basecat:
Michael...THANK You. Very
informative and interesting chat.
10/29/2006 10:34 pm (et)
MAubrecht: Thanks Vickie. It was my pleasure.
10/29/2006 10:35 pm (et)
Basecat: I guess I resolved to be the
trivia winner I knew I could be...LOL..;)
10/29/2006 10:35 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Thanks Steve - I email you on the
books. I'll personalize them for you.
10/29/2006 10:35 pm (et) ks:
At one point as there were many
questions I even wondered if we should have
continued proceeding with all you'd prepared for
tonight. No matter how interesting the topic, you
can only expect to hold people at the screen for a
limited amount of time IMO.
10/29/2006 10:35 pm (et)
mobile_96: good thing you had faith in
yourself Base
10/29/2006 10:36 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Ha-ha - nice... the answer was:
"You may be whatever you resolve to be".
10/29/2006 10:36 pm (et)
ks: Let me quickly add, glad you
forged ahead. Worked out well.
10/29/2006 10:36 pm (et) MAubrecht:
I think now that I have one under
my belt, perhaps the next time (as I invite myself)
I'll only do 3 topics with more time to chat back
and forth. 10-pages of material is a bit much.
10/29/2006 10:37 pm (et)
Basecat: Mobile...IIRC, that was number one
in Stonewalls famous book of maxims...
10/29/2006 10:37 pm (et) ks:
Agreed. And as for inviting
yourself, believe I already mentioned "next" time
in my comments. ;)
10/29/2006 10:38 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Will this still be up tomorrow? And
may I post a transcript on my site (spell checked
of course) :)
10/29/2006 10:38 pm (et)
Basecat: It will be up, and am sure Shotgun
will make a copy for the archives as well.
10/29/2006 10:38 pm (et) ks:
Yes, it will still be up tomorrow.
We don't clear the posts until Sunday night.
10/29/2006 10:39 pm (et)
MAubrecht: Great! Well I have to say that I
have had a wonderful time and look forward to doing
this again. Also looking forward to some of you
guys/gals doing one. I know there is more knowledge
in this chatroom than in most classrooms.
10/29/2006 10:41 pm (et) MAubrecht:
Have a great evening all. Good
night.
END
|