I've been reading Rodney Allen's fascinating book "Threshold of Terror." It's about the last hours of the Monarchy at the time of the French Revolution, specifically, the attack on the Tuileries on August 10, 1792.
To be perfectly honest, the search for the truth, behind the "he said...he said" supposedly eye witness accounts is not always rivetting, except in as much as it demonstrates a continuing belief in absolute reality which is unusual nowadays. (I grow tired of being told that history is always written from someone's perspective, and that truth is, therefore, always relative to one's point of view). One of the enduring questions about the fight that began on the grand staircase of the palace, for example, has always been "Who fired first?" Was it the insurgents, under the sans-coulotte General Santerre, or was it the Swiss Guards, sworn to protect the King? It's refreshing to hear Allen say that, although differing reports were given from all sides, SOMEONE must have fired first! Hallelujah! Absolute history exists.
This means, of course, that we are not necessarily dinosaurs when we say, "Christ has died. Christ is risen." We are also claiming that truth exists. It is not mere wishful thinking to proclaim the bodily resurrection of Christ, as if it was just "truefor us." Something happened in the Garden Tomb on the third day. It is not just a matter of perspective; that's why we are bold to proclaim - as history - an empty cross, an empty tomb, and a risen Savior.
One other point from this book bears mentioning. There is a lengthy discusssion of the overthrow of the legally elected Municipal General Council of Paris by the radicals under Huguenin, claiming to represent the People. It's clear that the slowness of the Council and its ponderous attention to procedure, allowed it to be outmanouevered and manipulated by the Jacobins. In the end, the moderate middle was far too timid to uphold the Constitution. They became mere marionettes, dancing to the beat of the revolutionary drum, until they became expendable. The radicals used legal language to dress up their illegal acts, and they did not stop until they got their way. They had another agenda, and they were singleminded in pursuing it, then in enforcing it with threats. Eventually, even the National Assembly was bullied into inactivity; those who opposed signed their own death warrants.
Now, I'm not suggesting that Madame Guillotine is lurking for those who oppose the radicalism so beloved of the extreme left in the PC(USA), but I believe the example does demonstrate that, unless the Constitution is defended vigorously, it will end up being abused by those with their own agenda. The radicals of revolutionary France had no intention of obeying the Constitution, they merely wanted to use it for their own ends. I fear that the extreme left of the Presbyterian Church has as little regard for our Constitution, and that they will not rest until they have bent it to their will.
Presbuteros
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)