After 64 years the National Cathedral expels Robert E. Lee/caption
In 1953 was it really wrong to commemorate Gen. Robert E. Lee in the stained glass of Washington D.C.s National Cathedral? For context a typical statement from this post-war unifier from March 15 1866:
We shall have to be patient and suffer for awhile at least; and all controversy I think will only serve to prolong angry and bitter feelings and postpone the period when reason and charity may resume their sway."
Politically correct progressives it seems are in a cultural jihad with his ghost. A modern-day McCarthyism-style fervor to annihilate the famous figures populating their own Confederate history. Its analogous to a real-life Fahrenheit 451": tearing down statues of their forebearers instead of burning books. However the goal to eradicate threatening ideasboth sets of objects representis identical. Unfortunately Democrats demented dogma has recently shuttered the windows of a national religious landmark.
After a two-year debate the cathedrals governing board voted to remove two 4-by-6 foot stain glass panels. Related to church windows what do parishioners typically see other than emanations of color and beautiful designs? Still the fact that they depict two important Confederate generals Lee and Gen. Thomas Stonewall" Jackson now means they must be purged. Per Church officials this sudden eyesore" is a barrier to our important work on racial justice and racial reconciliation." A convenient excuse of the self-righteous to perpetrate retribution against demonized and defenseless targets. Flawed as they may have been werent these American soldiers also Christians? Thus to utilize Scripture as a guide:
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked Lord how many times shall I forgive my brother Confederates who sins against me? Up to seven times? Jesus answered I tell you not just seven times but seventy-seven times!" (Matthew 18:21-2)
As their religions prime directive is forgiveness why have these church elders sown dissension instead?
Hence their brief deconsecration service was a farce. A hypocritical effort to mask scorn via a respectful" ritual toward disparaged subjects. Yet liberals self-serving perpetuation of an ancient grievance has no relevance for example to Lees post-war actions. In this matter their ire is a bizarre and destructive (often violently expressed) mind-set. Thus as the acknowledged face of the Confederacy Gen. Lee is a scapegoat for Democrats own existential crisis of conscience. In short they use his image to inflame todays political landscape. Their groundless accusationsas their unfounded ragehave no bearing on him then as now.
Neither do their baseless claims of his influence have any connection to race relations in America of 2017. Our widespread celebration of diversityas demonstrated by commonplace interracial marriageis a case in point. Those needing a more blatant example of societal evolution need only consider the last occupant of the Oval Office. What greater honor can be bestowed upon anyone to represent all Americans then electing that person to helm the country?
Speaking of obvious truths the Cathedral Chapters unfortunate determination is actually an insult to the gift and the legacy of the completely blameless United Daughters of the Confederacy (and a private benefactor). After all they raised the funds and donated the windows to the church. Thus for 64 years the Daughters intention was to honor the past not justify its mistakes. This fact was even acknowledged by religious progressive Gary Hall the former dean of the cathedral who stated in 2015 that the prominently placed panels signified a desire to foster reconciliation between parts of the nation that had been divided by the Civil War." Historically that means the Confederacys descendants commissioned the windows as an act of contrition: to promote unity and healing. In other words precisely what Lee did during the Reconstruction Era. Therefore what reflective message could be more appropriate in a hallowed space than that one? To the well-informed removing the windows only abets ignorance of the past. Quite an enlightened" decision in this topsy-turvy political climate!
Tragically such visual beauty has also become a Rorschach test for polarizing partisans in the MSM. For example The Washington Posts Colbert King misconstrued:
The solemn truth was inescapable: The windows honored a system that rested upon black subjugation and white supremacy. They were a stain on the cathedral and were as the chapters removal resolution stated inconsistent with the churchs current mission to serve as a house of prayer for all people. ... They had to go."
Interestingly this columnists spouse Gwen is a member of the Cathedral Chapter. She voted to strip the nave of these offensive" artifacts too. Given the Kings collective advocacy of vanquishing the National Cathedrals silent symbols of a bloody war fought to uphold a traitorous Confederacy rooted in slavery" perhaps they should complain about the open display of crucifixes next? After all didnt the Ku Klux Klan (read: the militant arm of Southern Democrats) habitually burn crosses to terrorize minorities? Arent these archaic instruments of Roman torture as off-putting to the delicate sensibilities of their flock as their newly condemned windows?
As followers of Christ what would Jesus do?
David L. Hunter is an Associate Editor at Capitol Hill Outsider. Hes on Twitter and blogs at davidlhunter.blogspot.com. He is published in The Washington Post The Washington Times FrontPage Mag and extensively in Patriot Post Canada Free Press and American Thinker.