Approximately seventy years ago, a wartime summit took place on a battleship that included President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. It turns out that, when Sunday arrived, the two planned and participated in a worship service aboard the ship. Thousands of British and American sailors participated. It was a distinctively Christian service.
Robert Morrison reported at NRO online:
The president and the prime minister led their ships’ companies in a church parade. The sailors shared hymnals. The prime minister selected the hymns — Roosevelt’s favorites, and ones that Winston judged would be known by most of his battle-hardened English ratings. “O God, Our Help in Ages Past,” “Eternal Father, Strong to Save,” and “Onward, Christian Soldiers” were the familiar tunes voiced by 4,000 male voices, their sound reverberating from the forbidding gray mountains that ringed this sheltered bay.
The Royal Navy chaplain read from the book of Joshua. “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee, saith the Lord. Be strong and of good courage.” Roosevelt choked back tears, so moved was he by the scene played out for him. Churchill wept openly.
Consider the manner in which our society has become post-Christian; and the manner in which liberals tend to insist on a rigid, extraconstitutional degree of separation between church and state. It is extraordinary that a veritable lion of liberalism like Roosevelt-- who is an object of veneration in certain circles-- would have led and participated in such a service in an official capacity.
They sung one of the great hymns of the Christian tradition:
O God, our help in ages past,
Our hope for years to come,
Our shelter from the stormy blast,
And our eternal home.
Under the shadow of Thy throne
Still may we dwell secure;
Sufficient is Thine arm alone,
And our defense is sure.
Before the hills in order stood,
Or earth received her frame,
From everlasting Thou art God,
To endless years the same.
- Thy Word commands our flesh to dust,
- Return, ye sons of men:
- All nations rose from earth at first,
- And turn to earth again.
A thousand ages in Thy sight
Are like an evening gone;
Short as the watch that ends the night
Before the rising sun.
- The busy tribes of flesh and blood,
- With all their lives and cares,
- Are carried downwards by the flood,
- And lost in following years.
Time, like an ever rolling stream,
Bears all its sons away;
They fly, forgotten, as a dream
Dies at the opening day.
- Like flowery fields the nations stand
- Pleased with the morning light;
- The flowers beneath the mower’s hand
- Lie withering ere ‘tis night.
O God, our help in ages past,
Our hope for years to come,
Be Thou our God while life shall last,
And our eternal home.
Ah, but that was then; this is NOW!
Our living Constitution has evolved to the point that we see the grievous abuse of "our rights" that the above represents, don't we?
Posted by: bubba | August 31, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Thanks for this post. The commitment to victory played an important role in the outcome of WWII. We have not had the commitment since then, and no victory. And if the enemy had prevailed in WWII, is it likely that the Germans and Japanese would have then squared off to see which would rule the World? Hitler would never be satisfied with half a loaf.
Posted by: Ken Hill | August 31, 2011 at 11:30 AM
Funny, I've yet to see or hear of anyone shooting at people as they stroll about the parking lot at Lawndale Baptist Church. Not one shot fired. Why are you so scared of the minority when people of your like-mind still control this nation? Is this some sort of a rallying cry, an effort to prepare the Christian Soldiers leading up to extermination of liberals, Catholics, ethnic, minorities, Jews, Muslims and anyone else who refuses to march in lock step with the believers? Or are you really that scared?
Keep carrying the water-- you'll need it to wash the blood from the believers' hands.
Posted by: Billy Jones | August 31, 2011 at 01:32 PM
Billy, really...
"...people of your like-mind still control this nation..."
That is not even remotely true. And if there were a desire to exterminate the groups you mention, I suspect you might know about it by now.
Be assured, genuine Christians do not fear the circumstances such as those which we now face. Our hope is elsewhere. But we do insist on religious liberty.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 31, 2011 at 01:42 PM
Joe, you have all the religious liberty in the world.
Posted by: Billy Jones | August 31, 2011 at 01:48 PM
Billy, in fact there are some very serious threats to religious liberty that are arising. Read the "Religious Liberty" section of the Manhattan Declaration to learn more:
http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration/read.aspx
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 31, 2011 at 02:07 PM
I wonder how any Jewish or Muslim sailors would have reacted? Just shut up and sing, like you mean it.
Posted by: Jim Langer | September 03, 2011 at 10:22 AM
Of course, if the European Jews had just gotten with the pogrom earlier, and had shut up and sang, they would have been better off, right? Also note how long it took FDR's administration to allow them to be welcomed here. Even liberal lions get the occasional thorn in their paws.
Posted by: Jim Langer | September 03, 2011 at 10:26 AM
Jim, I think we have to assume that the American Jewish population had many big supporters of FDR. And I doubt they were substantively harmed by this particular church service.
I think the height of Muslim immigration did not come until the 1960's and thereafter-- thanks in large part, I seem to recall, to immigration legislation pushed by Ted Kennedy. They would not have been substantively harmed by this service either. It is not described as primarily a denominational, sectarian service. It is, however, clearly monotheistic.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 04, 2011 at 03:16 PM
No one said "substantively harmed". but clearly not treated with equal respect for their religious beliefs, which preclude praying to Jesus. How does one tell an airman or sailor risking his life to disregard such disrespect? Why must Jesus be the one and only name prayed to in such an instance? Why not leave it at "God", period? I know, in this historical case, it was because such ecumenical/non-denominational prayers were not the custom. Why is it so anathema now to many who insist on singling out the name of Jesus above all?
Posted by: Jim Langer | September 04, 2011 at 11:25 PM
Those who call upon the name of Jesus, if they take His deity seriously, oft tend to insist upon doing so. They tend to view it as a limitation upon their own religious freedom if they are not allowed to do so.
It is not clear that is what happened, however, during this particular religious service on the battleship involving FDR and Churchill. It is not clear that anyone was praying to Jesus or calling upon His name.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 05, 2011 at 09:24 AM