Pain without Grace

Lately, I've noticed a concerning trend on my news feed. See if you can pick up on it:

"This light is freakin' long! #firstworldproblems"

"I wish people would be more considerate! Sheesh."

"Feeling lonely today. #foreveralone"

"This song speaks to me. [posts "Human"]"

If you're like me, you probably caught a deep lack of grace. Unfortunately, though, these posts aren't coming from unbelievers. They're coming from Jesus' followers.

Before I start sounding like I'm complaining about complaints, let's get some facts straight.

Pain is real.

Friends, if you ever find yourself in a painful, confusing, or frustrating situation, the last thing I want you to do is minimize it, or even worse, pretend you are full of grace, when in reality you just want to yell at the world. I know that pain exists, and it hurts. So please, don't fake it. Of course, I appreciate it when you choose not to rant to hundreds of people on a public network, but if you do it, I'm not going to judge you.

God's grace is more real.

Yes, I'll admit, I do believe some things are "more" real than others, in the sense that they can be experienced at a deeper level than other things. That's exactly what I hold to in terms of pain and grace. As I said earlier, I believe that pain can be so incredibly deep. However, I also believe that God is sovereign and omnipotent at the same time as he is loving and full of  grace. Because of this, I can know that his grace is perfect, and filled with his power. And he has all power. That means that his grace is perfect in power. It is mighty. It is unbeatable. It is beautiful.

And I believe that no matter how deep your pain is, whether you want to express that by venting over a stoplight, or feeling something much darker, God's grace has more than enough power to transcend that. God is a god of miracles, a god of compassion, a god of power, a god of justice, a god of love, a god of grace.

So, that's my problem with statuses and attitudes like I so often see. Let me be clear that I am so often guilty of this exact problem, probably more frequently than any of you. And yet, when I see this incredible reality, that God is so full of grace he sent his only son to die for ME, you can bet I realize I have a problem. I fail to see the whole picture.

I've been stuck at lights when I'm running late. And God's got me there for a reason.

Both my parents have been terminally ill. And I've come out stronger by God's grace.

I've had huge disappointments. And God has given me bigger visions than ever before.

Try to get this picture: An infinite, almighty, powerful, perfect being is so creative and loving and joyful he creates a universe, with innumerable stars, planets, and galaxies. In one of those galaxies, in a certain solar system, centered around a single one of those innumerable stars, he creates a planet. And he fills it with plants, water, animals, mountains, valleys, insects, and lots of beautiful, unique minutia, each with their own DNA. Then, he creates humans. Because he's perfectly loving, he gives them a choice to follow him or not. When they choose not to, he's so full of grace and compassion that he gives his son up to the worst kind of humiliation and death, in order that both his justice and grace may be fulfilled in bringing people back to communion with him. And then he fills them with his own spirit, so that they can live in ultimate joy and peace with him. Meanwhile, he's preparing an incredible new world for all of them to live in for all eternity. And through all this, he's managing every little detail of the universe, and loving you like you're the only person alive.

That love is so deep, so rich, and so perfect, that nothing -- not hell, not demons, not death itself -- can separate you from it. It transcends everything.

My friends, you are only human. You do experience incredible disappointment. But you have the opportunity to be a part of the one story that is older than time, the one love that will never fail, the one relationship that will always satisfy, the one dream that will truly be greater than your wildest imaginations: the one, pure, holy, undeniable grace of God.

Rest in him.

~Meridian

Gladness, Hunger, and Glory

Anyone who knows me remotely well is very aware that my deepest desire, other than to see my Savior in his glory, is to end the killing of innocent children in America. I've probably concocted a hundred plans in my mind since I was very young on just how I'm to accomplish this: writing, film, medicine, education, statistics, pure politics...you name it. And recently, I've had cause to rejoice at the incredible victories being won across various states on this pressing issue. Yet, there is so much work that is still unfinished, in an area where my talents could help fill the void. And that, my friends, is why I wrote this post.

One of the many godly people in my life is very fond of quoting Frederick Buechner, who once said, 

The place where God calls you is the place where your deep gladness and the world's deep hunger meet.

I'll admit it: the first time I heard that quote I wasn't sure how well it settled with me. What about people who are called to be janitors? Fishermen? Something, well...simple?

And then I read Martin Luther:

All our work in the field, in the garden, in the city, in the home, in struggle, in government-to what does it all amount before God except child's play, by means of which God is pleased to give his gifts in the field, at home, and everywhere? These are the masks of our Lord God, behind which he wants to be hidden and to do all things.

 And it all made sense. You see, God is a God who uses means. I post a lot about his infinite sovereignty over all things, but it's rare that I'll post on the doctrine of vocation because it is just so simple. God can, and in fact, does control the whole world. And yet, he chooses to use means. He chooses simple people, like you and like me, to accomplish things big and small. In the end, he uses every action for his great glory. How cool is that? You and I get to be part of a bigger plan, a bigger purpose...It's like any great saga: Each of the characters, regardless of their silent presence or hugely noticeable dialogues, serves a purpose. Yet this is a thousand times better, because you and I are wrapped into the tale of all history. That is, his story.

The question begs, then, what is each of us to do? It's a question which has been on my mind almost perpetually these last few months, as my friends and I are choosing our various paths in life. One friend is choosing dance, another neuroscience, another education, and still others are undecided. I've realized more than ever that I'm so dependent on my Savior's grace. And it's caused me to ask myself who I am and where I'm going.

One of my favorite teachers, Mr. B., once taught me rhetoric. And there he taught me something which left me in a contemplative mood for weeks:

Theorein (verb, Greek): To gaze intently.

Mr. B. explained that this word is often the word used in the Bible to describe people who have seen the face of God. He then showed us this image, pasted on my mind for weeks:

God showed Moses his face. And, in the Greek translation of the manuscript, Moses did theorein: he gazed intently, in total awe and amazement of Yahweh. Once he had seen this, he was given a command to lead the people of Israel out of their captivity. Notice his response:

 But Moses said to God, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?”

And God said, “I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you[b] will worship God on this mountain.” 

 Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.[c] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

And, after a few more complaints raised by Moses, and many more assurances from God Almighty, these are the Lord's words:

Then he will let you go.

My friends, each of us has a deeply ingrained, God-given passion. Whether it's engineering, teaching, politics, medicine, or art, you have it, and you know it. If you don't know it, you have only to ask.

Sometimes it's so difficult for us to understand the words of 1 Peter 2:9, yet I think they address the issue at hand:

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may declare the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

If you are in Christ, you are part of that. That is your heritage.

The place where God calls you is the place where your deep gladness, the world's deep hunger, and, I might add, God's deep glory meet.

Soli Deo Gloria.

~Meridian

I AM

Excuse me. I am not. But don't worry...I know I Am. :)

If you've already read/heard Louie Giglio discuss this topic, the underlying concept of what I'm about to say won't be new to you, but perhaps the applications will be.

Lately, my life has been confuddled with a multitude of different activities and academics. And all it's done for me is pile into a big heap of worry, stress, and uncertainty. I know, great way to start your senior year.

I find myself asking questions. Who am I, really? What was I made to be? What will I study? Where will I go? What will I do? When will it happen? Can I afford it? Will I be happy?

My thoughts whiz by me at a million miles a minute. And ultimately I end up completely exhausted, unable to sleep, and more than a little stressed. What good is it all doing me?

Frankly, none. But recently I found encouragement in Louie Giglio's excellent book, I am not but I know I AM. That is, if God's name is I AM -- he is goodness, he is greatness, he is power, he is love, he is strength, he is kindness, he is mercy, he is justice -- then my name must be I am not -- not good, not great, not powerful, not loving, not strong, not kind, not merciful, not just. But God in his excellent greatness has called me out of darkness into his marvelous light. It reminds me of Plato's cave, only I'm no longer chained down: I've been set free! What's more amazing, I am part of a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that I may declare the excellencies of him who did this great work. (1 Peter 2:9) But the most mind-blowing, humbling part of the whole deal is that God -- the one who is all goodness, greatness, power, love, strength, kindness, mercy, and justice -- sent his own Son to die for me the worst death, a death stripped of all goodness, greatness, power, love, strength, kindness, mercy, or justice. He looked on him as if my sin was his, and he looked to the future. He saw me, and despising his own Son, he loved me. I, dead in my sins, sick with a gross and unsightly nature, was looked on and loved by this great God. This God who is everything. His name says it all: I AM. And I have to realize, with much humility and gratitude, that I am not. 

Whoa.

So, as I've gone through my daily life, I've been asking myself how God, in his omnipotent greatness, truly satisfies my desires. As I study like some kind of SAT-maniac, and begin to stress over not having high scores, I pray aloud, Lord, you are the source of all wisdom, and I am not. I trust you. My day goes on, and suddenly I panic about my debate case. And I pray, Lord, you are the winner of every argument, and I am not. Speak to me. Again, I can find peace. Then, I realize I have to determine a college application and nervousness overwhelms me. But the Lord is good to remind me of himself, and I pray, Lord, you are the great shepherd, and I am not. Lead me.

These little acknowledgements of the Lord are not magic spells, but they do amazing work on my heart. Each time I remind myself of the Lord's presence and relevance in my life, I realize all over again just how beautiful it is that HE IS GOD, and I am not. 

Many of you will remember the song, "He's got the whole world in his hands." That song was my favorite as a child. I loved to sing it over and over and do all the motions with it:

He's got the whole world in his hands

He's got the whole world in his hands

He's got the whole world in his hands

He's got the whole world in his hands

Looking at it, the song seems pretty repetitive. After you've sung it a few times, you get the idea and you're ready for it to end. But I think there's something profound to learn here: God really does have the whole world in his hands. Because God's name is I AM, and thus, we are not. Even so, he chooses in his goodness to keep the whole world in his hands.

Somehow that's easier to believe as a child. A child's parents feed him, clothe him, shelter him, take him everywhere. His troubles consist of scraped knees and broken Lego sets. Then, at some point, he realizes the world is much bigger than he will ever be able to handle. More than a thousand of him could handle. More than the whole world can handle.

It's no wonder John Newton wrote his infamous hymn, "Amazing Grace." Newton was a slave ship captain, an adulterer, and a drunk. His youth was spent on women and wine. Then, in a

terrible storm, God caught Newton's attention. In months, Newton went from being a slave to sin to being a preacher of freedom, both man's and God's. Newton was considered the worst kind of heathen: no man on earth could have turned around his life. And, God didn't have to do it. After all, he is God. But he did it for Newton.

And he did it for me. And for so many of you. So my stresses come. Tomorrow, I'll study for the SAT. I'll research for debate. I'll work on essays for college applications. I may even do some political work. And you know what? God's name is still I AM.

Soli Deo Gloria!

~Meridian

[i am not]

Mingling Bloods

My favorite class has got to be, without a shadow of a doubt for one teeny instant, omnibus class. It's filled with elaborate tales of daring heroes, malicious villains, hopeless paupers, and abundantly wealthy monarchs. In omni class, we talk about philosophy, life, history, literature, theology,and  politics; and amidst all that we answer some interesting questions. For instance, "Should we seek out bad friends in order to influence them?"

It is this question that I wish to address. First off, a clarification: When I say "bad," I mean someone with a lack of good character, and when I say "friend," I am using the term casually,but that term will be expounded on throughout the course of this article. Hopefully you will find this both useful and interesting. So now, allow me the honor of taking you on a journey through a very unique creation, one that has existed for all time, and yet, which no one, outside of the grace of God, can understand.

The Origins of Friendship
While I already clarified my meaning of friendship, I think it is helpful to realize that this was only a launching pad I was willing to employ for the purposes of introduction. In actuality, the word "Friend" has a complex etymological background that forces us to realize some interesting things about true friendship. According to mw.com, the etymology of the word is as follows:

"Middle English frend, from Old English frēond; akin to Old High German friunt friend, Old English frēon to love, frēo free."

So, in other words, as Noah Webster put it in 1828,

"We see the radical sense is to free; hence, to be ready, willing, or cheerful, joyous, and allied perhaps to frolick."

What does this tell us as wise, modern Americans who think so much more brilliantly than prior generations? ;) Well, it should inform us that we have a problem with our definition of friendship. In other words, what I defined friendship as in the first place is just downright wrong. That's really acquaintance. The next level of knowing another person is generally referred to as "friendship," but I'll call it familiarity: the point in time where you are become more deeply knowledgeable about the habits, tastes, and interests of the other party. The next stage, often called a close friendship, is what I might call a friendship: a level of vulnerability and openness with one another. Finally, though, we reach what I call true friendship: being completely open with other person, and having no need whatsoever to be concerned with what they will think, having them know you forward and backward, and not caring that they do. That's what a true friendship is, in my opinion. So, I will be using these terms a bit to describe what I am trying to get at with my evaluation of the friendship process, and my eventual answering of the original question placed forward, "Should we seek out bad friends in order to reach out to them?"

Why Does Friendship Exist, and Where Does it Start?
Now that I've given a lengthy introduction, hopefully that underlayment will be firm enough that these top layers, if you will, can go much faster than the previous two. :)

Friendship exists because God has created mankind in his own image. God is a relational God, and we inherited that quality. As a result, friendship is actually essential the well being of a person, and at the very least a good idea for survival. Throughout history, many other purposes of friendship have arisen: protection, confidence, comfort, and even understanding. Yet, they all come from the root cause of God's bestowment upon us of friendship.

So where does friendship begin? Well, everyone knows this (or should), but it has to begin with a meeting of some sort. In today's technological world, this may not necessarily be a physical meeting, but there must be a form of introduction. Secondly, there must be a connection of some sort. This doesn't necessarily mean you'll hit off right away, but there needs to be some connection (i.e. interests, common activities, faith, background, etc.).

"I'm Nobody! Who are you?

Are you -- Nobody -- Too?

Then there's a pair of us?

Don't tell! They'd advertise -- you know!"

-Emily Dickinson

 Finally, there needs to be opportunity for this relationship to grow. A friendship is nothing more than a mere acquaintance if the persons involved have no opportunity through which to develop their relationship. The one possible exception is that of believers in Christ being friends with one another. However, even in this case, this is just a step deeper than acquaintance in the knowledge department, but is marked (or should be marked) by brotherly love.

How a Friendship Blossoms (and Why it Must)

"Wishing to be friends is quick work, but friendship is a slow ripening fruit."

-Aristotle

And so it is. We all know from experience that even in "bosom friend" cases such as that of Anne and Diana, having a deep, true friendship takes time. The true friendship is a lifelong process.

"New-made friendships, like new wine,

Age will mellow and refine.

Friendships that have stood the test --

Time and change -- are surely best;

Brow may wrinkle, hair grow gray;

Friendship never knows decay."

-Joseph Parry

This is the general rule, and such a friendship must be consistently developed, or it will never reach that level of depth. However, there are a few cases in which exceptions are made, such as that of Jonathan and David.

"As soon as he had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul."

-1 Samuel 18:1

It's interesting the situations God will put us in for such a friendship. At any rate, it is typically a good idea to nurture a friendship, especially one just budding. At this stage, anything could happen. Go with the flow, but keep in mind some cautions: Do not share personal information too quickly at this stage, but do not act secretive either. Both can end up in a disaster. But don't let that hold you back, and enjoy this friendship for goodness' sake! =D Also, make sure that you find the good qualities in this person. That shouldn't be hard if you are making wise friend choices (and yes, I know, that contradicts what I suggested at the beginning of this post, but hold on, you'll see later where I am going). By making wise friend choices, admiration should be natural.

One Small Step for Individual, One Giant Leap for Friendship-kind
Well, I hope this isn't terribly boring you as we go through the stages of a friendship, but even if this is the body of my writing, you will see why later. I promise. For now, stick with me. After all, that's what a friend does, right?

Hopefully. If a relationship of any sort is going to grow. The order of these two things is not crucial, just that they both happen: a) one individual must impact the other to the point of change, and b) confidence must arise. Typically, those two will happen in that order, but different friendships work in different ways. Not surprisingly, most relationships, even bad ones, follow this order of events. For instance, look at wars. Most often what happens is the two nations get to be familiar with each other. One might store up weapons or invade a little on the other nation. The difference between a friendship and war, though, is that war is a result of the fact that mankind is fallen. Thus, the second step is anger, rather than confidence. Moving back after that little aside, though, we must acknowledge that these two things must take place. Period. Hopefully, I've made my point, but just to drill it in a little further, here are some quotes for my personal affirmation.

"I love you,

Not only for what

You have made of yourself,

But for what

You are making of me."

-Roy Croft

Before I give the second one, allow me to point out that we are assuming here that, as this quote suggests, before we can even get to the being influenced part of friendship, there must be admiration (see previous section.) Moving right along now...

"Perhaps he too make have walked the same road

With a much troubled heart and burdensome load,

To find peace and comfort somewhere near the end,

When he stopped long enough to confide in a friend."

-Anonymous

Isn't that a glorious feeling, when you have a friend like that? Just being able to confide, knowing that your friend has something in common, maybe even being a "Nobody," as Emily Dickinson put it; being desperate; and then realizing that you had no reason to be desperate all along? That is a sure sign that real friendship is either embodied, or just about to be.

"We just click, I guess!"
Well let's hope it's a lot more than that. "Clicking" is great, but true friendship is going to be deep, and you will discover yourself more at a loss for words to describe your friend, or otherwise, eager to spew out everything about them, because you want the world to know just how amazing they are! That's love, and that's a deep kind of friendship. Not surprisingly, there are many quotes on this that speak so much more eloquently than my words ever could, so allow me to set them before you in the most logical manner I can arrange.

"True friends stab you in the front."

-Oscar Wilde

Oh my, yes they do. My very best friends do it, and as much as it hurts, I appreciate it so very much. The only way to truly become a better person is to rest in the grace of the Lord, spend time with him, and have good friends. Possibly counting books, by the way. ;) Be willing to change. Without this you cannot have a successful friendship. If you do have room for growth, though, not only will you grow, but your friendship will, too, to the point where,

"To mingle friendship far is mingling bloods."

-Shakespeare

Logically, if you are both stabbing each other in the front every once in a while, your bloods ought to mingle. And what will result? Most definitely mingling bloods. So what happens when bloods mingle?

"Friendship is a single soul dwelling in two bodies."

-Aristotle

Definitely not always an easy thing, because you might become so much alike that you will have a hard time balancing one another out! But still, it is remarkable, and each new day as friends should only enrich this beautiful symbiosis.

"For what is your friend that you should seek him with

hours to kill?

Seek him always with hours to live."

-Kahlil Gibran

Symbiotic relationships are essential to life for some creatures. So they become in true friendship, as this quote so elegantly remarks. Don't get together just to kill time: be friends to live in time. Sooner or later, you will find yourself saying,

"I would not wish any companion in the world but you."

     -Shakespeare

Now, let me point something else out: if your friendship is at this point, you are either really super-best friends, or more likely, you are married to your best friend. This, by the way, in case you haven't noticed is always the way it should be, in every marriage, though sadly many people have fallen from it. Still, though, whether or not we are talking about marriage or super-best friendships, Shakespeare got it dead-on right, and right in line with Scripture.

 "A man of many companions may come to ruin, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."                                                                    -Proverbs 18:24

What on earth did this have to do with my intro?
It's a good thing that introductions and conclusions are always supposed to line up, or you might have thought I'd never get around to anwering my original question. Or perhaps that thought already crossed your mind. At any rate, here is my answer.

Just to refresh yor mind, my question was that of whether we should seek out "bad" friendships in order to reach out to these people? Well, now that I've taken you through the steps of a friendship, this should be pretty easy to answer. Number one, realize that you won't necessarily have to seek out such friendships, because God might bring them into your life anyway. In that case, embrace it. But in both situations, start very cautiously (though openly and in a friendly manner) with an acquaintance. It's important to determine who is going to be the influencing party here. If you feel you might be more influenced, be extra careful to keep your relationship at the lower levels, the ones preceding influence and confidence. If, however, you feel you might be the influencing party, go ahead and allow yourself to move forward very slowly. As I have shown you in this essay, the further along a friendship gets, the easier it is to be influenced. Watch it, but don't be afraid to befriend people like this. It's the great commission. Go for it!

The Ultimate Friendship
I want to make one final point before I leave you. The best friendship you ever can have, or ever will have, is with Jesus Christ. If you haven't accepted him as your personal Lord and Savior, do so right now! You may sufffer for it, but it will be the greatest choice you ever made. TRUST ME. I did it.

"The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him, and he makes known to them his covenant."

                         -Psalm 25:14

It is so true, and it is demonstrated through God fulfilling his covenant by Jesus. Jesus LAID DOWN HIS LIFE FOR YOU!! Be friends with him. Live with him in paradise for eternity. Serve him and worship him here on earth and forever.

 "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you."

-John 15:13-14

Thank you, Father! And thank you all for taking a while to read through this post. I hope it blessed you as much as I was blessed to write it.

Soli Deo Gloria!

-Meridian

Eloquence Embodied

Winston Churchill: Eulogy for Neville Chamberlain

House of Commons
November 12, 1940

Since we last met, the House has suffered a very grievous loss in the death of one of its most distinguished Members, and of a statesman and public servant who, during the best part of three memorable years, was first Minister of the Crown.

The fierce and bitter controversies which hung around him in recent times were hushed by the news of his illness and are silenced by his death. In paying a tribute of respect and of regard to an eminent man who has been taken from us, no one is obliged to alter the opinions which he has formed or expressed upon issues which have become a part of history; but at the Lychgate we may all pass our own conduct and our own judgments under a searching review. It is not given to human beings, happily for them, for otherwise life would be intolerable, to foresee or to predict to any large extent the unfolding course of events. In one phase men seem to have been right, in another they seem to have been wrong. Then again, a few years later, when the perspective of time has lengthened, all stands in a different setting. There is a new proportion. There is another scale of values. History with its flickering lamp stumbles along the trail of the past, trying to reconstruct its scenes, to revive its echoes, and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days. What is the worth of all this? The only guide to a man is his conscience; the only shield to his memory is the rectitude and sincerity of his actions. It is very imprudent to walk through life without this shield, because we are so often mocked by the failure of our hopes and the upsetting of our calculations; but with this shield, however the fates may play, we march always in the ranks of honour.

It fell to Neville Chamberlain in one of the supreme crises of the world to be contradicted by events, to be disappointed in his hopes, and to be deceived and cheated by a wicked man. But what were these hopes in which he was disappointed? What were these wishes in which he was frustrated? What was that faith that was abused? They were surely among the most noble and benevolent instincts of the human heart--the love of peace, the toil for peace, the strife for peace, the pursuit of peace, even at great peril, and certainly to the utter disdain of popularity or clamour. Whatever else history may or may not say about these terrible, tremendous years, we can be sure that Neville Chamberlain acted with perfect sincerity according to his lights and strove to the utmost of his capacity and authority, which were powerful, to save the world from the awful, devastating struggle in which we are now engaged. This alone will stand him in good stead as far as what is called the verdict of history is concerned.

But it is also a help to our country and to our whole Empire, and to our decent faithful way of living that, however long the struggle may last, or however dark may be the clouds which overhang our path, no future generation of English-speaking folks--for that is the tribunal to which we appeal--will doubt that, even at a great cost to ourselves in technical preparation, we were guiltless of the bloodshed, terror and misery which have engulfed so many lands and peoples, and yet seek new victims still. Herr Hitler protests with frantic words and gestures that he has only desired peace. What do these ravings and outpourings count before the silence of Neville Chamberlain's tomb? Long, hard, and hazardous years lie before us, but at least we entered upon them united and with clean hearts.

I do not propose to give an appreciation of Neville Chamberlain's life and character, but there were certain qualities always admired in these Islands which he possessed in an altogether exceptional degree. He had a physical and moral toughness of fibre which enabled him all through his varied career to endure misfortune and disappointment without being unduly discouraged or wearied. He had a precision of mind and an aptitude for business which raised him far above the ordinary levels of our generation. He had a firmness of spirit which was not often elated by success, seldom downcast by failure, and never swayed by panic. When, contrary to all his hopes, beliefs and exertions, the war came upon him, and when, as he himself said, all that he had worked for was shattered, there was no man more resolved to pursue the unsought quarrel to the death. The same qualities which made him one of the last to enter the war, made him one of the last who would quit it before the full victory of a righteous cause was won.

I had the singular experience of passing in a day from being one of his most prominent opponents and critics to being one of his principal lieutenants, and on another day of passing from serving under him to become the head of a Government of which, with perfect loyalty, he was content to be a member. Such relationships are unusual in our public life. I have before told the House how on the morrow of the Debate which in the early days of May challenged his position, he declared to me and a few other friends that only a National Government could face the storm about to break upon us, and that if he were an obstacle to the formation of such a Government, he would instantly retire. Thereafter, he acted with that singleness of purpose and simplicity of conduct which at all times, and especially in great times, ought to be the ideal of us all.

When he returned to duty a few weeks after a most severe operation, the bombardment of London and of the seat of Government had begun. I was a witness during that fortnight of his fortitude under the most grievous and painful bodily afflictions, and I can testify that, although physically only the wreck of a man, his nerve was unshaken and his remarkable mental faculties unimpaired.

After he left the Government he refused all honours. He would die like his father, plain Mr. Chamberlain. I sought permission of the King, however, to have him supplied with the Cabinet papers, and until a few days of his death he followed our affairs with keenness, interest and tenacity. He met the approach of death with a steady eye. If he grieved at all, it was that he could not be a spectator of our victory; but I think he died with the comfort of knowing that his country had, at least, turned the corner.

At this time our thoughts must pass to the gracious and charming lady who shared his days of triumph and adversity with a courage and quality the equal of his own. He was, like his father and his brother Austen before him, a famous Member of the House of Commons, and we here assembled this morning, Members of all parties, without a single exception, feel that we do ourselves and our country honour in saluting the memory of one whom Disraeli would have called an "English worthy."

If you know much about these two men and their relationship, you will at this point be left in utter astonishment. What an incredible man Churchill was, and so gifted with words! Thank you Mr. Baker for giving me this analysis assignment, thank you Jake H. for the subject suggestion, and thank you God for Winston Churchill!! I look forward to meeting him someday.

Meridian

My Top 10 Favorite Novels...

...in no particular order, because I love them all.  (And the Bible isn't on here because it is not a novel, but that is my favorite book ever =D) Most of these books I have read multiple times, and for the ones tat I haven't read more than once, I have every intention to do so.  Go read these books. And love them like I do. :)

 A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens. A remarkably moving look at life during the French Revolution. This book had me overwhelmed, amazed, laughing, and even sobbing. Definitely one of the greatest works of literature available.

 Ishmael, by E.D.E.N. Southworth. This book is a sort of rags-to-riches story of a young illegitemate child. He is truly a lovable character, and his life is an inspiring one. Ishmael is out of print, and to my knowledge is only available through Lamplighter Publishing, but do get it! It's sequel, Self Raised, is very good, as well, and satisfies the tragic ending of the first book.

 Tales of the Resistance, by David and Karen Mains. What a book! This is a children's allegory of the Gospel, and is part of a trilogy (Tales of the Kingdom and Tales of the Restoration are the other two books). My friend Cooper recommended it to me, and rightly so! I read the entire book in one sitting, and was brought through smiles, tears, anger, and joy. Tales of the Resistance is a must-have for any family!

 The Chronciles of Narnia series, by C.S. Lewis. If you aren't already familiar with this series, do get acquainted. Enter the story of two children who stumble upon the magical experiments of the absurd Uncle Andrew. Before they know what to think, they are thrust into a wood with mystical pools of water, and the adventure begins! Another allegory, summarizing the key elements of the entire Bible. Absolutely life-changng.

 The Lord of the Rings trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkien. Lewis and Tolkien both were members of a group of writers known as the Inklings (from which this blog borrows its title), and have become famous for their friendship. Tolkien has erected a true masterpiece of literature as he tells the tale of a magical ring, a fat little "hobbit," and a handful of people thrust together in a mission to destroy this ring. A very compelling story, again one that brings out all sorts of emotions. While I wouldn't call this one an allegory, it does take key elements of Scripture and beautifully portray them in this epic fantasy.

 Elsie Dinsmore, by Martha Finley. A sweet, inspiring story of a young girl who, despite having everything in worldly terms, has only one wish in the whole world: to meet her father. Practically an orphan, yet one who is heiress to plantations and mounds of wealth, Elsie is the dearest little character you'll encounter. This book might be a little more geared to girls, but it is really quite suitable and enjoyable for the whole family.

 Beowulf, unknown author. I know. Right now you are thinking, "GEEK!" Well that's because I am one. But seriously, this is an awesome book. I've read it four times in the last three years. It is poetry, yes, but very easy poetry. Readable in two hours. At least I've done it. :) By the way, get the Seamus Heaney translation. Best translation ever, especially since you get the opportunity to learn a little Old Norse along the way.

 The History of the Kings of Britain, by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Let the real geek arise. Technically, this is not a novel, but there are enough historical innacuracies that I count it as one. Matthew, my brother, who read this at age ten (yes, he is just slightly intelligent), LOVED it! Even if you hate history, though, and you can't stand acts of blood and gore, and you think that medieval people were stupid, you're going to love this book. I can almost guarantee it. Give it a little patience, because it takes time to get used to for some people. This book is HILLARIOUS, given a chance to show itself. Really, who can pass up five-foot men carrying eleven-foot giants for five miles and throwing them over cliffs? You can also find the basis for all the legends of King Arthur and Merlin in this book. The only thing I might skip is the prophecies of Merlin. They're kinda weird. :P

 Emma, by Jane Austen. Hahaha! That's all I can say about this book. It is hillariously amusing, and brings in a sweet romance as well. Most definitely worth reading. Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility are other favorites by Austen.

 The Pilgrim's Progress, by John Bunyan. What a story! You most likely know that this is an allegory, and you may or may not know that it is the most widely selling book in history, only surpassed by the Bible itself. Yes, it is that good! You can read it in the Old English, or get various translations of it. I'e read it both ways. I distinctly remember being about nine or ten years old and actually memorizing whole chapters of the abridged version! Excellent stuff. Very convicting, and inspiring as well.

Well, those are my ten. If I could have, I would have listed dozens more...books like Jane Eyre, The Secret Garden, Little Lord Fauntleroy, Deadline, Little Women, The Nine Tailors, The Great Gatsby, Till We Have Faces, Anne of Green Gables, and a billion others for good measure. :) Plus, I could have a huge list of non-fiction, But, I have restrained myself, and your job in return is to read all the books in this list.

Bye then!

Meridian

Changing the world through our daily struggles

Have you ever felt like you are reaching for something you will never quite get your hands on? It's right there, waiting to be done...You want to change the world. You want to do something great. Hold that certain job. Write that award-winning novel. Visit Antarctica. But you are so bogged down by daily life, it seems it will never happen. Things keep getting in the way. Or maybe it's just that the right opportunities aren't there. Whatever your case, you aren't alone. Countless others have faced this same plight. But, God is his gracious sovereignty will fulfill your dreams when he fulfills your dreams. As I brought up recently, St. Augustine once said that, "He serves you best who is not so anxious to hear from you what he wills as to will what he hears from you." Sometimes, we must surrender dreams, and exchange them for God's will, which is always the most glorious path in the long run. Quite honestly, I don't even know why I am posting this today. Perhaps it is because I recently heard that one of my friends, Sarah, who has had a life-long dream of going to Oxford, is going to be attending this coming semester. Maybe it is because of the music I'm listening to. I don't know. But, at any rate, I just felt like I needed to share a few things with you.

First, this passage after David realizes that his dreams will be fulfilled I by his son Solomon. It is interesting to note David's reaction to this knowledge. Rather than being frustrated, saddened, jealous, or even passively submissive to God, he ensures that it will be all ready for Solomon to take over.

1 Chronicles 22

 ¹Then David said, "Here shall be the house of the LORD God and here the altar of burnt offering for Israel."

David Prepares for Temple Building

 ²David commanded to gather together the resident aliens who were in the land of Israel, and he set stonecutters to prepare dressed stones for building the house of God. ³David also provided great quantities of iron for nails for the doors of the gates and for clamps, as well as bronze in quantities beyond weighing, ⁴and cedar timbers without number, for the Sidonians and Tyrians brought great quantities of cedar to David. ⁵For David said, "Solomon my son is young and inexperienced, and the house that is to be built for the LORD must be exceedingly magnificent, of fame and glory throughout all lands. I will therefore make preparation for it." So David provided materials in great quantity before his death.

Solomon Charged to Build the Temple

 ⁶Then he called for Solomon his son and charged him to build a house for the LORD, the God of Israel. ⁷David said to Solomon, "My son, I had it in my heart to build a house to the name of the LORD my God. ⁸But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 'You have shed much blood and have waged great wars. You shall not build a house to my name, because you have shed so much blood before me on the earth. ⁹Behold, a son shall be born to you who shall be a man of rest. I will give him rest from all his surrounding enemies. For his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quiet to Israel in his days. ¹⁰ He shall build a house for my name. He shall be my son, and I will be his father, and I will establish his royal throne in Israel forever.' ¹¹"Now, my son, the LORD be with you, so that you may succeed in building the house of the LORD your God, as he has spoken concerning you. ¹² Only, may the LORD grant you discretion and understanding, that when he gives you charge over Israel you may keep the law of the LORD your God. ¹³ Then you will prosper if you are careful to observe the statutes and the rules that the LORD commanded Moses for Israel. Be strong and courageous. Fear not; do not be dismayed. ¹⁴With great pains I have provided for the house of the LORD 100,000 talents^[a] of gold, a million talents of silver, and bronze and iron beyond weighing, for there is so much of it; timber and stone, too, I have provided. To these you must add. ¹⁵You have an abundance of workmen: stonecutters, masons, carpenters, and all kinds of craftsmen without number, skilled in working ¹⁶gold, silver, bronze, and iron. Arise and work! The LORD be with you!"
 ¹⁷David also commanded all the leaders of Israel to help Solomon his son, saying, ¹⁸"Is not the LORD your God with you? And has he not given you peace on every side? For he has delivered the inhabitants of the land into my hand, and the land is subdued before the LORD and his people. ¹⁹Now set your mind and heart to seek the LORD your God. Arise and build the sanctuary of the LORD God, so that the ark of the covenant of the LORD and the holy vessels of God may be brought into a house built for the name of the LORD." 


Isn't this remarkable? David got everything ready for Solomon.

In this second example I want to share with you, it is a movie trailer. But it is as true a story as the story of David. If you haven't seen Amazing Grace, stop reading this and go watch it.

Wow. That's all I can say when I think about this man's life. Realize God's plans, and let them be your dreams. You may just change the world.

May God bless you in your pursuit to follow him!

Meridian

How the Classics Have Formed My Worldview: On Serving God

It's been a few days since I promised to post. :) School has been heavy, but I do actually have a Socrates quote that I was able to use in today's post. Enjoy. =D

Classical quotation:
"When mind runs mad, dishonors God,
And worships self and senseless pride,
The Law eternal wields the rod."
-Euripides
Scriptural evidence: But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed...You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. -Romans 2:5, 2:23
My interpretation: This one is pretty self explanatory. Essentially, these two selections from Ancient literature and the Bible say exactly the same thing. We could even rearrange the Euripides quotation so that it would be in the same order as the Biblical passage. It would read like this (some transliteration done here for the purpose of making sense):

When mind worships self, the Law eternal wields the rod.
The mind runs mad and dishonors God.

Or something like that. Not very poetic, but you get the idea. :)

Classical quotation:
"He serves you best who is not so anxious to hear from you what he wills as to will what he hears from you." -St. Augustine
Scriptural evidence: ...Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done. -Luke 22:42 AND "And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us." -1 John 5:14
My interpretation: Even Jesus prayed this way! We must present our petitions before God, but we must also be willing to hear whatever God will have us hear, and to make that our will, rather than trying to force our petty agendas on a God who rules the universe.

Classical quotation: 
"And His will is our peace;
it is that sea to which wholly moves
what He and Nature create."
-Dante 
Scriptural evidence:  ⁷ In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, ⁸which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight ⁹ making known^[c] to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ ¹⁰as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth." 
-Ephesians 1:7-10
My interpretation: Dante had it almost exactly right here. The only thing I would change, based on this passage from Ephesians, and other Scriptural passages, is that God actually creates nature, and nature obeys him...in one sense, you could interpret that to be Dante's meaning, which is what I will do for my purposes here. Isn't it remarkable the sense of security that the reader hears in Paul's voice when you read this passage? Indeed, God's will should be our peace, because his will is over everything.

Classical quotation:
"God must surely always be represented as he really is, whether the poet is writing epic, lyric, or tragedy." 
-Socrates (or Plato, whichever you will accredit it to from Republic)
Scriptural evidence:   
²⁴ "If I have made gold my trust
   or called fine gold my confidence,
²⁵ if I have rejoiced because my wealth was abundant
   or because my hand had found much,
²⁶ if I have looked at the sun^[e] when it shone,
   or the moon moving in splendor,
²⁷ and my heart has been secretly enticed,
   and my mouth has kissed my hand,
²⁸ this also would be an iniquity to be punished by the judges,
   for I would have been false to God above. 
-Job 31:25-28
My interpretation: It's interesting how we can, in the words of Job, be "false" to God in so many different ways, often through our actions, and other times our words, as Socrates points out. We are better, though, to intentionally give him the credit due his name than to fall into the pit of not honoring God and ending up having to learn the hard way that he really does control everything. God is amazing, and I think it's about time he started getting some credit, at least from me.

Thanking God for the breath I have now through him, the snow that's falling down by his command, the strength he gives me to move forward each day, and the gift of his Son Jesus Christ at the cross.

Meridian

How the Classics Have Formed My Worldview: On Human Nature

Over the next few days I want to do some posts quoting the classics and showing how classical literature has formed my worldview, formed Western society, and confirmed the formation of Christian doctrine. I am now in my fourth year of officially studying the classics, and I am thriving on it. Hopefully I will be posting 3 quotes or so for 3-5 days, depending on how many quotes I dig out of my files. Some people lately have been questioning my classic-reading, and some of my worldview as well, so here I present you with something of an explanation, including Bible references to back myself up. :) The Bible is my basis for all these things, but I want to show how reading the classics is beneficial to the Christian. Some things I can guarantee you you will wholeheartedly agree with, and others you will strongly disagree with, but here I go anyway. Today's topic: Human nature.

Classical quotation: "You wish to be called righteous, rather than to act right." -Aeschylus
Scriptural evidence: ¹ Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, ² "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat." ³He answered them, "And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" -Matthew 15:1-3
My interpretation: The Pharisees are known to Christians for their hypocrisy. Yet, in some passages, Jesus actually compares any human to a Pharisee. We all want to be called righteous people. Everybody, whether admittedly or not, wants to be reverenced. But we kind of want to be the bad guy, too. This is sin in our lives. Aeschylus had it exactly right: we all want to be known as the good guy, but secretly, we don't want to bother with actually being the good guy.

Classical quotation:
"The soul, which is created apt for love,
The moment pleasure wakes it into act,
To any pleasant thing is swift to move.


Your apprehension draws from some real fact
An inward image, which it shows to you,
And by that image doth the soul attract;


And if the soul, attracted, yearns thereto,
That yearning's love; 'tis nature doth secure,
Her band in you, which pleasure knits anew.


And as fire mounts, urged upward by the pure
Impulsion of its form, which must aspire
Toward its own matter, where 'twill best endure,


So the enamoured soul falls to desire-
A motion spiritual- nor rest can find
Till its loved object it enjoy entire.


Now canst thou see how wholly those are blind
To truth, who think all love is laudable
Just in itself, no matter of what kind."
-Dante

Scriptural evidence: "but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful." -Mark 4:19
My interpretation: Go back to Genesis 1. Read it. In the beginning, whenever God created anything, he called it "good." Then read 1 John 4. You'll discover that God is love. While you're at, skip back to Genesis 3. Then read Mark 4. Read the whole chapter. If you want to know the end of the story, read the book of Romans. But for now let's focus on man's sin problem. See, we are created in the image of God (Genesis 1), and we have been declared good by God. This God is love (1 John 4), which means that if we are created in his image we have a love capacity as well. But we have a sin problem (Genesis 3), and so we are left broken, and no longer good. We are all born that way. We are marred by sin. Still, God in his goodness has left us with pieces of himself, because he loves us still. So, we go after anything resembling love. Sometimes we get it. Other times, we miss. More often than not, we get a generic replica of the real thing. Many times, it turns out to be worse than that: it is folly, sin. Satan messes with us. Read The Screwtape Letters if you want to know how. Dante was right: we are blind, and completely hopeless. We need a Savior (book of Romans) to take our sin and desperation completely away.

Classical quotation:
"My sin was all the more incurable because I imagined that I was not a sinner." -St. Augustine
Scriptural evidence: "³And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. ⁴In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. ⁵For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants^[a] for Jesus’ sake."
-2 Corinthians 4:3-5
My interpretation: the Gospel that is veiled proclaims that men are sinners. This is a secret kept by the world that Satan would have no man know, but the work of Christ prevents him from having his way.   At some point or other, whether here on earth in finding salvation through Christ, or at the judgement day when all men who are not already proclaiming Christ as king shall be condemned, all men shall have to see their sin for what it is. Still, man's nature will reign for a little while in every human (except for Jesus, of course). Thus, we are like Augustine. We do not understand our own sin until God's revelation touches us.

Today I talked a lot about sin. There is hope though! I love this hymn, and I hope it penetrates you as deeply when you are reading this as it penetrates me now.

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound;
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

'Twas Grace that taught my heart to fear;
And Grace my fears relieved!
How precious did that Grace appear
The hour I first believed!

Through many dangers, toils, and snares
I have already come.
'Twas Grace that brought me safe thus far,
And Grace will lead me home.

When we've been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun;
We've no less days to sing God's praise,
Than when we've first begun.

In Awe of Him,
Meridian

Ashes at Dawn: 10 Reasons why the Trojan War was Unjust

“NO! This is unjust! I won’t have it!” She screamed. Grabbing her forcefully by the arms, the men dragged her on to the ship which would take the helpless young woman back to the foreign and dreaded city of Troy. Suddenly she was thrust into an unfamiliar, though richly decorated chamber. Sensing someone else’s presence in the room with her, Helen turned around. Then she stood there, as still and cold as ice. It was Paris.

For centuries, people have sought to understand conflict, the human struggle for conquest, and ultimately, war, in all its complexity. Every civilization has a need to comprehend the mortal endeavor for triumph and equity. What is war? Why does it exist? Most importantly, is any given war just? The last of these three is the question this essay shall seek to answer in the context of the Trojan War, which occurred sometime between 1334 BC and 1180 BC.1  In this work, the standard of criteria the author will hold to for a just war is found in the Just War Theory. On this rationale, there are ten valid reasons that demonstrate how the Trojan War was unnecessary and unjust.

All argumentation must be founded on reason. Without a sound basis, an argument is irrelevant. As a result, a brief explanation of the authors of and key ideas in the Just War Theory is necessary to this discussion. In the secular world, the Just War Theory dates as far back as the ancient Roman philosopher Cicero. In his work, De Officiis, Cicero began to lay a foundation for the theory by stating, “The only excuse, therefore, for going to war is that we may live in peace unharmed; and when the victory is won, we should spare those who have not been blood-thirsty and barbarous in their warfare.”2 By this, Cicero instituted the principle of becoming involved in war solely for the achievement of peace, as well as the ideal of not harming innocent civilians in the process of warfare. Fast-forward a few hundred years, and one will come across a man named Augustine. A fellow proponent of just wars, Augustine stated in his City of God that, “A just war, moreover, is justified only by the injustice of an aggressor; and that injustice ought to be a source of grief to any good man, because it is human injustice. It would be deplorable in itself, apart from being a source of conflict.”3 In making this statement, Augustine was clearly arguing that war should only be a possibility when something truly unjust and abominable has occurred. Even in that case, he would make the argument that it should distress the human heart deeper than just to the point of anger. In other words, war, according to St. Augustine, really ought to be deeply felt and gravely needed before it takes place. Let several centuries pass, and the final link in the history of the Just War Theory is making his case. St. Thomas Aquinas, an Italian priest and theologian, in his Summa Theologica, addresses the question of war as always evil. In response to this issue, before affirming the points already founded by Cicero and Augustine, Aquinas adds, “I answer that, in order for a war to be just, three things are necessary. First, the authority of the sovereign by whose command the war is to be waged. For it is not the business of a private individual to declare war, because he can seek for redress of his rights from the tribunal of his superior.”4  A legitimate authority, according to Aquinas, must be the one to wage war. He goes on to confirm Cicero and Augustine’s points as true, biblical, and valid. By the work of the remarkable trio that is found in Cicero, Augustine, and Aquinas, we are presented with the three most fundamental points in the Just War Theory: 1) that war must be a means to the end that is peace, and must not violate the rights of innocent civilians; 2) that there must be a valid cause for the war, and 3) that a legitimate authority must declare the warfare. Rearranged, these points begin to loosely form the three aspects of what has become known as the Just War Theory: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and Jus post Bellum.

The contemporary reader will be quick to wonder what is meant by these Latin terms. When translated to English, they read: “Right to the war,” “Right in the war,” and “Right after the war.” These three categories answer the question of what is a just cause for waging war and who can declare it; what are the proper ways to conduct a war; and what is a legitimate reason to end a war, as well as how it should be ended. Let these three points be examined. First, jus ad bellum. This is the most important and fundamental issue in all the just war theory, because the beginning will usually set the tone for everything else. Essentially, jus ad bellum is constituted of: a just cause, comparative justice, competent authority, right intention, probability of success, last resort, and proportionality.56 These terms being somewhat ambiguous, allow some definitions to be provided.
Just cause requires that an innocent person’s life be at stake before war ensues.
Comparative justice demands that one party be much more greatly injured than the other party. Competent authority states that a legitimate ruler must declare the war.
Right intention insists that the only aim of a war is to deal with the issue at hand, and not to win territory.
Probability of success asks that the war be reasonable in the measures it is likely to use for its cause.
Last resort makes it clear that a war is only just when all peaceful means of resolution have been first sought out.
Proportionality, finally, says that the amount of harm must be equal to or less than the amount of good accomplished in the war.
All these are requirements that a war must meet before it even begins, in order for it to be a truly just war.

The second aspect of a just war is jus in bello. This part of the Just War Theory deals with what happens during the proceedings of the war. As a continuation of jus ad bellum, many of the components of jus in bello closely resemble the components of jus ad bellum. Jus in bello is defined by: distinction, proportionality, military necessity, fair treatment of prisoners of war, and no means mala in se. Again, some clarification is necessary.
Distinction is that property of just war which ensures that only combatants are battle targets, rather than civilians.
Proportionality deals with the question of how many civilian lives taken in battle are too many, relative the size of the problem.
Military necessity sets forward that minimalistic force should be used in battle.
Fair treatment of POWs reminds the militant that once someone is a prisoner, he is no longer a threat, and should not be maltreated.
The final point of jus in bello, no means mala in se, prohibits weapons or tactics of mass destruction or unnecessary evil.

Lastly to be considered in the Just War Theory is jus post bellum, which lays out guidelines for properly ending a war. The five points that build this concluding argument are: just cause for termination, right intention, public declaration and authority, discrimination, and proportionality.  As previously, allow clarifying definitions to be placed.
Just cause for termination is based on a thorough agreement of surrender of the party in the wrong.
Right intention, as it explains by itself, is that requirement of just war which states that war may not be ended for revenge, or to avoid dealing with recompense for wrongs in war.
Public declaration and authority says that an official must publicly declare the war as ended.
Discrimination requires discernment in seeing who is free to go, and who needs further punishment as part of the settlement.
Proportionality ensures that if any terms of surrender are agreed upon, they must be proportionate relative the size of the original problem.
These seventeen laws of war are the components of The Just War Theory as we now know it. Categorized into three groups, jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum, they provide a thorough review of how a war ought to be justly brought into existence, justly fought through, and justly concluded. With this foundation now given in full, it is natural to continue by applying these principles to an actual war. The war in question is, as was previously stated, the Trojan War, and will be analyzed in a very slow-motion, step-by-step process, starting right at the beginning.

Several women stood in the wharf at Argos, buying everything that they wished to take back to their families. “Io,” said a friend of the king’s daughter, “look! Foreign men! Handsome, wouldn’t you say?” Playfully, the girl winked at Io. Hearing the eagerness in her companion’s voice, Io turned. Then, before she could understand what was happening, someone rushed at all the females in their company, and they were being carried onto some Phenician ship they had never seen before. Crying aloud among these “handsome men,” the women clung to one another as they were treacherously taken to Egypt. This, of course, is the way in which Herodotus, in his Histories, describes the origins of the Trojan War. It was Troy’s fault, he says. There is no need to question him. What comes next, though, catches the reader by surprise. He continues his story with the famous rape of Europa as the Greek revenge for Io. Not stopping there, though, it seems that the Greeks rather liked this woman-stealing business, and so “After this however the Hellenes they say, were the authors of the second wrong; for they sailed into Aia of Colchis...[and] they carried off the king’s daughter Medea.”7 After this, Medea’s father came to demand her back. Responding, the Greeks simply said, “You didn’t pay us back for Io. Deal with it.” Of course, this angered the king, but for the time, there was nothing he could do but wait.

Many people are quick to accuse the Trojans of starting the Trojan War. Several reasons are behind this. Namely, the Trojans didn’t last, it is called the Trojan War, and that’s just the way the story goes. They started it. While this is theoretically true, a look at the narrative just given indicates that the Greeks may have had more involvement in it than people think. Up to this point in the conflict, the Trojans have abducted one woman, and the Greeks have abducted two. Knowing what happens next, it is correct to say that in the end both parties abducted two women. If this is the truth, there is something wrong in the picture. According to jus ad bellum, the wrong on one side must greatly outweigh the wrong done on the opposing side, in order for a war to be just. This is what was previously defined as comparative justice. If the reasons given above really caused the Trojan War, then the very first thing the Greeks did in declaring war was to act in denial of comparative justice! This means that they were really starting the war off in a bad direction. In this denial of dignity, the first reason the Trojan War was unjust is established. Both sides of the issue were completely wrong in what they did: neither was justified. Yet war was not justified, either. The Bible, which is the supreme authority under God, says in Psalm 55:20-21, “My companion stretched out his hand against his friends; he violated his covenant. His speech was smooth as butter, yet war was in his heart; his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords.”8  Like the Greeks who refused the king of Colchis his daughter, so the Bible speaks of men whose speech is smooth, but who hold evil around every corner. The problem these men had was in their hearts, where war comes from. In other words, sin didn’t just cause the Trojan War, sin started the Trojan War. Usually, that’s not the best foundation for battle.

As a little boy, Paris had heard the many stories of the abductions that had happened several years prior his birth. Everyone knew these tales. Some were frustrated by them, while others were thrilled to hear interesting accounts like these. Paris placed himself as neutral when he was young. As he grew up, though, Paris began to find he rather liked beautiful women. Maybe if the opportunity arose, he would take advantage of it. Then, one day, while visiting Mycenaean Sparta on business, he saw her. Helen was gorgeous, and wholly captivated him. Her husband was gone at a funeral. In a sudden rush to leave the city, Paris whispered something to one of his servants. Nodding reluctantly, the two men split their ways. As this interaction between prince and attendant had been taking place, the young queen of Sparta was a little farther down the shore, enjoying the cool of the waves in the summer heat. As the manservant came walking along with a companion, Helen turned. “Is someone in need of me?” she asked. Without an answer, the two men took her by force and carried her off toward the ship where she would find Paris waiting for her. At first she found this very unjust and highly undesirable. As time elapsed, though, she became more open to this adulterous abduction. In the meantime, Helen’s husband Menelaos was boiling over in fury, and was relentlessly determined to show his anger to the world. His anger, in fact, became the topic of choice in Homer’s Iliad, and was the ultimate direct cause of the Trojan War.

“Aggression thus attacks the very spine of human civilization itself,” writes one political philosopher.9 Indeed, this is a very true and important statement that must be acknowledged and carefully considered when one looks at the Trojan War. Aggression and violence are not proponents of society, yet this is precisely the cause of the war in question. The Iliad begins with the statement, “Sing, goddess, the anger of Peleus’ son Achilleus and its devastation.”10 Right off the bat, anger is a real issue for the Greeks and Trojans. As the book unfolds, it continues to reveal anger coming out of many of the characters. Anger was the driving force behind the Trojan War. As the reader may recall, however, Augustine stated that war should be caused by injustice that hurts and penetrates the human heart to the point where people want to set it right for whoever was done injustice, not for vengeance or personal gain. This is the aspect of Just War Theory which is called “just cause,” which requires that an innocent person’s life be at stake before war is declared, and that aggression is not the driving point of such war. Seeing how anger is the theme of the Iliad, however, one can safely conclude that this is the second way in which the Just War Theory was violated in the Trojan War.

Let two perspectives on the Trojan War be examined: that of the Trojans and of the Greeks. First, the Trojan position shall be set forward. There is no historical record indicating that the Greeks attempted peace. Yet, if they had set forward some such request,  they would all be meaningless to Paris. He had won Helen, and if Menelaos wanted to use force, that was what he would have to do to get the girl back. Paris’ father, though disgraced and frustrated, was not concerned either. This was his son’s choice, and he would let him deal with it. To the Trojan royalty, the issue of war or peace was of no consequence. The Trojan people, however, may have disagreed and looked down upon this decision to not try to return Helen. While there is no specific evidence for such an argument, one can assert that as many of the Trojan advisors were encouraging of returning Helen, many of the people were probably on this side as well. From the Greek perspective, the king is the key player. Throughout much of the early ancient period, kings were seen as ultimately authoritative. As the saying goes, “So it has been said, so let it be done.” This is the same way in which Menelaos likely would have been treated as king of Mycenaean Sparta. As a result, he expected everyone to do everything he said. When he asked men to join him in battle, it was really nothing beyond a command, especially as these men had already sworn their allegiance to him. It is probable that Menelaos, brought up in some value system not unlike that of later Greeks to come, would have evaluated the potential war situation relative his personal and national fear, honor, and interest, which are the three fundamental points on which most wars, just or unjust, are in some way founded.11 Menelaos’ way of looking at these may very well have been fear of rejection on account of his lack of force in the situation; a desire to bring greater honor to himself and perhaps to his gods by a victory; and finally, a shrewd move of national and personal interest in returning his wife, the queen, to her rightful position beside him, and perhaps moreover, or at the least equally, to conquer Troy. This last issue, as the summation of the previous two points, would explain why Menelaos, in little time at all, had armed and prepared his fleet for battle. He was out to conquer and win glory.

Unfortunately, both Menelaos and Paris were wrong in their handling of the situation surrounding Helen’s abduction. Jus ad bellum has an aspect which the reader may recall as “last resort.” As it explains in its title, a war should only happen when all alternative modes of settlement have been properly pursued and demonstrated to be unavailable or denied in the situation. Yet neither party pursued peace. This automatically makes the Trojan War unjust, because all 17 criteria must be met, especially this one! If peace has not be sought out, then war is really just a pointless game that anyone can start at any time for any reason. This should bother  most people, and just the three points we have touched on from jus ad bellum alone ought to be reason enough to declare the Trojan War unjust. Still, there are seven more reasons we will consider explaining why the Trojan War was unjust.

Whether or not people liked it, the war was beginning. Menelaos had gathered his men, and had armed a thousand ships for battle. “A thousand ships carried the Greek host. They met at Aulis, a place of strong winds and dangerous tides, impossible to sail from as long as the north wind blew. And it kept on blowing, day after day.”12 The Greeks became worried. If their fleet could not get any further, then they might potentially starve and die, be lost from civilization, or simply not get to destroy Troy. Moving forward was crucial. As time went on, Agamemnon, Menelaos’ brother and a fellow Mycenaean king, decided that to be able to move forward more swiftly it was important to sacrifice his child to the gods. As a result, he deceived his daughter, making her believe that she was to be married if she met him at the island where he was. Instead, when she arrived, he sacrificed her. This caused all sorts of familial problems, but the winds did stop, and the Greeks sailed silently onward to Troy, with one life taken, and a thousand ships armed for battle. The war had begun.

In jus in bellum, one of the issues that is hardest to discern is that of proportionality in war. This is the issue of the Just War Theory which links jus ad bellum and jus in bellum, because usually at this point the war hasn’t started (jus ad bellum), but the force prepared is used in battle (jus in bellum).  How much military force is too much force is the question which proportionality tries to answer relative the size of the original problem. When considering the case of the preparatory actions of the Greeks to lay siege to Troy, one can’t help but wonder how just it really was. Helen was one woman, who, though taken by force, may not have been entirely unwilling to go with Paris in sin. To deceive and take the life of a girl entirely uninvolved in the issue, and additionally to have a thousand war ships taken to Troy, is probably too much to recompense for one living, though wronged (and perhaps wrong) person. In this, it becomes clear that even if the Greeks had followed all the rules of jus ad bellum, they still started the war out wrong. It seems the Greeks were hopelessly unjust.

Something many people do not know or recognize about the Trojan War is why it lasted so long. Thucydides, in his Peloponnesian War, provides a clue to this trivia. If, Thucydides says, the Greeks would have chosen to stick with the siege of Troy, they might have one the war very quickly. Since this is not what they did, Thucydides provides an account of what they did do. “Even after the victory they obtained on their arrival -- and victory there must have been, or the fortifications of the naval camp could never have been built -- there is no indication of their whole force having been employed; on the contrary, they seem to have turned to cultivation of the Chersonese and to piracy from want of supplies.”13 Yes, the Greeks were pirates!  According to Thucydides, the only reason they won after stopping their siege was because of this piracy.

The people have a right to be heard or left alone, and foreigners visiting a land on a mission of war have a responsibility to stay focused on their task without getting in the way of the lives of everyday civilians. Of course, these rules are harder to distinguish when at sea, but basic human rights still apply. Piracy violates such human rights, and it also goes against the policy of distinction in the Just War Theory. When in combat, soldiers need to be able to avoid hurting civilians in their warfare. At times, though, hurting civilians is not a matter of slashing an innocent person’s hand off with your sword: it can be an issue of stripping away one’s property, dignity, or basic rights. These are things which piracy can certainly be prone to do, and usually will do, leading to the conclusion that, yet again, the Greeks failed to observe the rules of the Just War Theory.

For nine long years, the war dragged out. Sometimes there was peace, sometimes there were battles. Yet, regardless of what happened, it was getting long. Everyone was tired of going through the same routines every day, and the war needed to be over. At last, after a long battle that suffered losses to both sides, Menelaos and Paris decided it was time to fight it out one on one. They were, after all, the two most involved characters at the beginning of the war, and even though others had taken command, the issue was still really over their relationship to Helen. So they did fight, and it appeared that Menelaos, Helen’s true husband, would get the victory. Somehow, though (Homer credits this to the gods), Paris made it through and something of a truce was formed. Another problem arose. Pandarus, a Trojan soldier, became persuaded of a need to shoot an arrow at Menelaos, which he did. Though he only injured the Spartan king a little, this rightly frustrated the Greeks, and so they brought the fighting back on.

In a just war, there are no reprisals. This means that when in the midst of war the first country violates the second country, and the latter seeks revenge, the war becomes unjust right at that moment (unless, of course, the party originally in the wrong corrects the violation). For a little while now, this essay has been focusing on the faults of the Greeks. Now, though, it is brought to light that the Trojans were every bit as much at fault as the Greeks were. The act of one person can have huge effects for a whole legion of people, which is something the Trojans now had to experience twice: first in the foolishness of Paris, and second in the foolishness of Pandarus. Due to human nature, people will tend to react harshly when an already difficult situation that was supposed to have been dealt with is suddenly brought up again. Revenge is the word one might use to describe such an act of harsh judgement, and revenge is what the Greeks took. Whether this was correct, is hard to say, but the problem is that the Trojans broke the newly formed peace treaty to continue fighting, making this an unjust war whether or not  one holds to the Just War Theory. So far, six points have been discussed regarding how the Trojan War was unjust:
The violation by both the Greeks and Trojans of comparative justice,
The violation by the Trojans of just cause,
The violation by both the Greeks and Trojans of last resort,
The violation of proportionality by the Greeks,
The violation of distinction by the Greeks, and
The violation by the Trojans of no reprisals.
Four issues remain to be considered, all of which are found in the final, and certainly the most famous episode in the whole of the Trojan War.

The tenth year had come. Knowing by an oracle that they could win this year, the Greeks pressed on, determined to conquer Troy forever. The two cities were not just in common dislike of one another -- they hated each other, and would do anything to win. Anything. Under this method of operation, the Greeks decided they had been through enough. At the end of yet another battle, they disappeared. Their camp remained, with a good amount of the soldiers still there. Yet all was silent for some time. It seemed to fit, too, as Hector had died recently, and under his leadership the Trojan army had held together. War was still present, but for the moment, it was a silent war. Then, one day, someone appeared at the gate of Troy, which had not been opened to anyone throughout the duration of the war. When the guard asked why he should open the gate for anyone, the man replied by directing the guard’s attention to the great object outside the gates: a huge horse made of wood. The man continued to explain that it was a peace offering and a gift for Athena. As he spoke, Greek ships began to sail away in the distance. This overjoyed the people of Troy, and so the gates of the city were at long last opened. The population of Troy was so delighted that all became drunk and slept soundly that night. As they slept, the ships of the Greeks turned around, and prepared themselves for battle. Inside the horse, many Greek men sat waiting for the cue. Then, at their signal, they quietly opened the trap door and jumped out, opening the gate for their fellow soldiers to come in. Then, the city was set ablaze, the men killed, and the women and children taken captive. The war was over.
Today, Troy is nothing more than a pit of ruins in Turkey, with some legends surrounding it. But even these meager ruins lead archaeologists and historians to believe that the Trojan war really may have happened -- and that its end was every bit as unjust as it appears. In the Just War Theory’s standard of jus post bellum, seven guidelines are stated by which a war should be ended.  All of these were completely ignored in the ending of the Trojan War. However, for the purposes of this essay, the four most prominently ignored shall be considered. First, just cause. Just cause demands that if a war is going to be ended, peaceful terms of agreement must be negotiated and agreed upon by both parties. While this was nearly made earlier in the war, the foolish act of Pandarus stopped it from happening, and so there was never a peacefully agreed end. It just ended. Second, discrimination. When a state goes to deal with the punishment of its own people, or of the other nation’s people, it needs to determine who is in the wrong, and who is innocent. The Greeks didn’t bother to think about this -- they went in to Troy and sacked it, along with all its innocent civilians, who didn’t want the war anyway. Third is the issue of proportionality. Probably the most noticeable of all the problems the Greeks had with applying jus post bellum, it is a self-explanatory ordeal. The whole city, on top of all the other issues the Greeks have had with proportion, just for the sake of one person, and to be the king of the hill, is not appropriate: it is appalling. The final way in which the Greeks clearly did not attempt to have a just war was in its rehabilitation of the people. Instead of seeking to help Troy get back to where it once was, Sparta and its allies came in, taking those they wanted, and killing the rest. So much for helping in the restoration of normality. Perspicuously, the Trojan War was highly unjust, unfavorable, and certainly unnecessary.

In this essay, the author has provided a history of and explanation for the Just War Theory, as composed by Cicero, Augustine, and Aquinas; and consisting of jus ad bellum (just before the war), jus in bello (just in the war), and jus post bellum (just after the war). The author has used this explanation to provide ten sound reasons for the condemnation of the Trojan War on the rationale of its justice. These reasons are:
The violation by both the Greeks and Trojans of comparative justice in the abductions of each nation’s women,
The violation by the Trojans of just cause in Paris’ foolish abduction of Helen,
The violation by both the Greeks and Trojans of last resort in not seeking peace,
The violation of proportionality by the Greeks,
The violation of distinction by the Greeks, and
The violation by the Trojans of no reprisals.
7) The violation by the Greeks of just cause for termination in ending without a treaty or agreement of some sort,
8) The violation by the Greeks of distinction in sacking the entire city, rather than distinguishing between targets and civilians,
9) The violation by the Greeks of proportionality in using such a force as destroying Troy, and
The violation by the Greeks of rehabilitation in not given the remaining Trojans a chance.
Because of these facts, the author has argued that both the Greeks and Trojans were at fault, and, as a result, the Trojan War was a failure in justice. So this essay ends right as it began: with injustice. No one really knows what happened to Helen. Some say she was restored as queen of Sparta, others say she died in the fire, and still some say she escaped. In any situation, it is an unknown, as are the fates of the many Trojans who fell to the wrath of  Greece, all because of the Trojan failure to honor women. The injustice of the war, along with Troy and all its glory, is buried, and the fate of all who were there is sealed beyond the sea.