Debate: The Muhammad drawings: Is this a case regarding freedom of speech?
Politiken 13th February 2006
By Henrik Zahle, Professor, Dr. jur., Copenhagen University
The government has through four months kept itself - and still keeps itself - back from directly criticizing the publishing of the drawings, with referral to that “we have freedom of speech in Denmark”. Jyllands-Posten has also, the magazine claims, wanted to defend the freedom of speech by publishing the drawings. But what do we in fact understand about the freedom of speech? And is this truly strictly primarily a case regarding freedom of speech? Freedom of speech is not only a legally regulated freedom, but there can anyhow be reason to examine the legal understanding of the concept. Freedom of speech in legal terms means a freedom to express oneself, without the expression resulting in negative sanctions. That one can express oneself, is therefor, that one’s expression can not be punished by the authorities, result in liability or similar. And the risk of private sanctions can in a broader sense be part of determining the freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech constitutes the framework for expressions in many special configurations. The different forms of expressions are covered by different more outlined freedoms - media freedom, political freedom of speech, freedom of research, artistic freedom etc. If we look at the expressions, that can occur within each of these fields, it is clear, that the legal approach is entirely insufficient in forming basis for a societal relevant assessment of expressions. We stand for instance at an art exhibition and look at a painting; one says, that it is a bad piece of work - and the artist answers “We have freedom of speech!”. But, is this not an answer, that derails the debate regarding the artwork itself? Certainly nobody has contested the artists’ ‘freedom’ to paint, as he or she would like to. By referring to freedom of speech, the artist derails the debate regarding the content of the artwork and talks instead about something that nobody has contested, namely the artistic freedom. Or a politician argues for a given view, another politician attacks it, and the first answers “I surely have freedom of speech!”. This answer also constitutes an evasion, where the one, that refers to the freedom of speech, pulls out of the political debate.
The drawings are not only a violation of the Islamic image ban, but some of them are also in their message violating untrue. A picture of a bearded man with a bomb can hardly be read as anything else than an identification of Muhammad with terror, and thereby the illustrator ascribes terror activity to anyone, who associates themselves with Muhammad. The cultural editor of Jyllands-Posten claims, that the drawings should be understood as such, as it is only some, and not all Muslims, that are linked to terrorism, but there is no substance for that point of view in the drawings.
To defend the publishing of this drawing by referring to freedom of speech, is as evading as the prior examples regarding art and politics. That the editorial office works within the framework of the freedom of speech, does not constitute any argument for publishing particularly these drawings. The artist must as the politician and the newspaper editor argue for the value of particularly this expression in the concrete situation.
Some would maybe wish, that there in a country with freedom of speech were not any sanctions against expressions other than those, that follow the law. The freedom of speech should thus exclude any sanction, when just the expression is legal. Hereto I must answer, that this point of view contains an unreasonable and exaggerated focus on the legality and is basically socially irresponsible. If I and everyone else only were obliged to take that consideration to other people, that was expressed and demanded by the law, the society would dissolve. All human cooperation - association with colleges, neighbors, shoppers - are based on a well developed and fine meshed consideration for others, not only for family and friends, but also for strangers, that can have a need for care. This vital culture of consideration also applies to expressions: We can not just keep ourselves within the limits of the law, but must in many ways show care in our act of expression, and care is obviously particularly important, when the expression comes out of a mass media or concerns a sensitive political subject. It is not politeness, that is required, but responsibility, that implies, that one makes oneself clear, who the expression could reach, makes oneself clear, what meaning it could have for these, and what impact it can have for one to express oneself. The content of the expression can make it necessary and justifiable to hurt, but then one must admit and take responsibility for these offenses.
Freedom of speech is not a line in the sand by the law, where it is just a matter of being on the right side. The freedom of speech gives each of us, that are so lucky to live in a society with freedom of speech, an opportunity to unfold, and that unfolding, that we so decide to, we must answer for, i.e. we must argue for it within the space of expression, that it lies in. The one who, express themselves, can bee met by critique and in worst case condemnation. The one who, condemn, does not deny freedom of speech, but criticizes the concrete expression, and the one who, is criticized, can not defend themselves by just referring to freedom of speech, but must give answers within the same discourse.
The government is not in a position, that makes it meaningful to apologize the legal expression of a newspaper. But a drawing for debate in a newspaper is part of the public debate, and nothing hinders the government from commenting a contribution to debate, on the contrary it is its’ task to participate in the democratic debate with the citizens in the society, that the government is assumed to govern. Such a comment could be dissociation or condemnation, as we also have seen from other governments. A political condemnation does not constitute an inroad into the freedom of speech. The condemnation is in fact political, when we as here presume, that the expression is legal. It is in this regard not relevant to be told, that the prime minister personally would not have stood for the drawings that they published, because on the contrary a reference to, what “I personally would not have done” is often a formula for, how one avoids taking a stance about that, which another one has done.
The governments’ stubborn stance of ‘no-view’ is easily interpreted as an approval of the publishing and content of the expression. It is this point of view, that surely is ascribed the ‘silent’ government.
The essence in the case seen from the point of view of the cultural editor of Jyllands-Posten seems to be, that there have been examples of ‘self censorship’, that have halted drawings of Muhammad. I agree with, that it is an important journalistic task to overcome forces, that hold back information and other expressions. This is not least the case, if there are threats of violence and other illegalities, that hold the expression back. But at the same time it must be considered, whether there - besides the illegal barriers - are other considerations, that argue against the publishing. It is good to overcome illegal and unacceptable barriers for the publishing of expressions - here we agree - but that by itself, that an expression has encountered an illegal barrier, does not make it right to publish without further consideration. In the present situation Jyllands-Posten has not only caused violent reactions and economic sanctions in the Middle East, but also violated many peaceful and silent Muslims, and it is the risk of the last, that should have kept the editor from publishing the drawings, while it now have become the violent reactions and the economic sanctions, that bring the government and chief editor into the picture.
With a paraphrase of a text by Villy Sørensen: that we have the right to express ourselves, does not mean, that we are right. It is neither against democracy nor human rights to maintain, that Jyllands-Posten had (legal) right to publish these drawings, but (politically and morally) should have refrained from doing it. It is the violation of initially Danish Muslims, and subsequently Muslims of all kinds, that is and has been the problem of the case from the start. To make the case into a question regarding freedom of speed is to avoid this problem.
Thursday 14 June 2018
JEWS, CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS - 2013
Jews, Christians and Muslims
Berlingske 15th December 2013
Feature Article
By Dean Anders Gadegaard
When religion is made the ‘apple of discord’ in the public debate, it is false labeling description. The Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy scripts all proclaime the faithful’s responsibility to love their neighbour.
The Danish society and the Danish cultural values are based on a Christian view of humanity. But after the migration of the last decades, Denmark has to a higher degree become a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. Some voices in the public debate attempt to deny this, some even to counteract this, but the fact is, that Denmark today is inhabited by a lot of people with different backgrounds, skin-colors, opinions, values and faiths. And in a globalized world, and an EU that aims at free labour mobility, we can expect to see even more diversity in the future.
During the last 25 year’s political discourse, these differences have to a higher degree been cause to conflict and confrontation, and in some instances even persecution: ‘The foreign worker’ has been met with hate and opposition, refugees subjected to miserable conditions in an inhumane asylum-system, religious minorities have been subjected to suspicion and surveillance. In this continuous debate religion has played a not unimportant role. And faith is more often made to point of dispute rather than the opposite.
With this feature article we want to clarify, how this conflict seeking argumentation does not correspond with the Abrahamic religion’s own values, and is in direct contradiction to the message of the holy scripts. In common Judaism, Christianity and Islam preach love of one's neighbour and brotherhood, not only among its own followers, but between all humans. All three religious beliefs emphasize their followers love and care for one’s neighbour - regardless of either the neighbour is a fellow believer or a stranger. The biblical word for ‘neighbour’ is ‘the next’. My next is my closest in the village, my relative, my countryman. In third book of the Torah, chapter 19, verse 18 the command of love of one’s neighbour is emphasized for the Jews and Christians: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. That much one should appreciate one’s neighbour: One should love him/her as much, as one loves oneself. In a famous Jewish story a heathen comes to the famous rabbi Hillel and demands to learn Judaism while standing on one leg. Hillel answers: ‘What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation’.
The Prophet Muhammad says accordingly: ‘That which you want for yourself, seek for mankind.’ (Hadith Bukhari) and The Quran 4:36 says: ‘to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbour, the neighbour farther away, the companion at your side, the traveller, and those whom your right hands possess’. Imam Hasan ibn Ali (d. 670) furthermore said, that a good neighbour is not the one, who refrains from doing harm to its neighbour, but the one, who endures harm from its neighbour. Exemplary neighbourhood is to be patient with possible inconveniences.
My next and neighbour are not exclusively those who live straight away next to me. It can be the neighbourhood, a work college, a companion at a tourist attraction or the fellow students in a class room. The people one associates with, are all one’s neighbours. Within Islam good neighbourhood is a sign of one’s faith. Without exemplary neighbourhood one can not acquire the qualities of the faithful. One does not distinguish between faith and ethnicity to be classified as neighbour in Islamic theology. Neither in Judaism is my next ‘only’ my neighbour. With basis in, that there only exists one God, Judaism says, that there is also only one humanity: A humanity where everyone enjoys the same justice before God. Twice in his daily service the Jew state (Psalm 145) ‘The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made’.
Third book of Torah chapter 19 verse 34 says: ‘The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt’. In chapter 24 is referred: ‘One law shall be exacted for you, convert and resident alike’. It is Jewish way of thinking to understand the duty towards the stranger as a religious command, why there is no stranger before God. In the Jewish way of thinking there is many ways to God. This means, that people, that practice another monotheistic religion, not only are equal, but also have a part in the coming world. That too is ‘neighbourhood’.
The preacher of Jesus in The New Testament also radicalizes the love of one’s neighbour, that is not to be limited to one’s closest or countrymen, but to everyone, that one comes to stand in relation to, regardless of it is intentional or not. The basic story about this is the parable of The Good Samaritan (Gospel of Luke 10, 25-37), that says, that love of one’s neighbour is specific helpfulness towards who, that needs me - regardless who they are and which group, they belong to. In the Gospel of Matthew 5, 44 Jesus even says: ‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you’. It is not enough just to love those, one is associated with (family, friends, companions) - no, one should love even one’s enemies. Cohesion and reconciliation is a pivotal and relentless part of the Christian faith. God has reconciled itself with us regardless of our mistakes - therefore we owe to do the same to everyone, we have a dispute with. A Christian must always be prepared to be the first, who reaches the hand out for reconciliation and friendship.
The word ‘love’ is not an emotional word in biblical sense, but a word of action. ‘To love’ means ‘to do well towards’. But in other words: You should do just as good towards your neighbour, as you do towards yourself. Everything, that you seek to obtain for yourself and your family, you should in other words be prepared to share with your neighbour, yore companion. As a consequence Judaism is a religion of deed. This means, that only there where the good intention is transformed into action, real Judaism is expressed. The principle is among others found in the relation to the widow and the fatherless: One should not only pay attention to, their existence, but one should provide for them.
In fifth book of Torah chapter 24, is found numerous laws that specifically obliges Jews, among other things in relation to the poor. To leave a corner of the field was a command regarding, that there should be the possibility of, that one, who does not own land, also have the right of crop, and the provision about, that if you forget a sheaf on the field during harvest, you should not go back, for it should belong to the stranger, are in many ways unique.
This is entirely consistent with Islamic way of thought: When one of the fellow believers of Prophet Muhammad, Abdullah ibn Umar, had butchered a sheep, he asked for it to be distributed, starting with their Jewish neighbour. With that attitude good neighbourhood can change an entire local community.
The Christian’s relation to God is also reflected in his way of action - or lack of action - towards their neighbours and guests: In the Gospel of Matthew 25, 31-45 the sheep are separated from the goats depending on, whether one has given food, water and clothes to the poor, provided for the strangers and sick and visited inmates in prison. Jesus says: ‘Whatever you did - or did not - for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me’.
Love and care for next and neighbour are unavoidable in all three Abrahamic religions. And it is not limited to the believer’s closest, or people of same faith or origin. It embraces all humans, the believer stand towards - close as well as remote. In the Gospel of Matthew 22, 34-40 Jesus even calls love to God and the next for the most important command of the law. When religion thus, in the public debate, is made ‘the apple of discord’, it is false labeling description: The Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy scripts all proclaim the responsibility of the believer of both loving their neighbour and caring for him or her. To argue for the opposite is to go against the word of in common The Torah, Bible and Quran, and to do it with one of the holy scripts in the hand, is direct misrepresentation.
It is our hope and aim, that Danish Jews, Christians and Muslims will take these words to heart, and be able to appreciate those values of love of one’s neighbour and good neighbourhood, that our three religions have in common. We encourage both believers and non-believers in Denmark to remember the holy scripts, think about their meaning today and make an effort for good neighbourhood.
http://www.b.dk/kronikker/joeder-kristne-og-muslimer
Berlingske 15th December 2013
Feature Article
By Dean Anders Gadegaard
When religion is made the ‘apple of discord’ in the public debate, it is false labeling description. The Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy scripts all proclaime the faithful’s responsibility to love their neighbour.
The Danish society and the Danish cultural values are based on a Christian view of humanity. But after the migration of the last decades, Denmark has to a higher degree become a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. Some voices in the public debate attempt to deny this, some even to counteract this, but the fact is, that Denmark today is inhabited by a lot of people with different backgrounds, skin-colors, opinions, values and faiths. And in a globalized world, and an EU that aims at free labour mobility, we can expect to see even more diversity in the future.
During the last 25 year’s political discourse, these differences have to a higher degree been cause to conflict and confrontation, and in some instances even persecution: ‘The foreign worker’ has been met with hate and opposition, refugees subjected to miserable conditions in an inhumane asylum-system, religious minorities have been subjected to suspicion and surveillance. In this continuous debate religion has played a not unimportant role. And faith is more often made to point of dispute rather than the opposite.
With this feature article we want to clarify, how this conflict seeking argumentation does not correspond with the Abrahamic religion’s own values, and is in direct contradiction to the message of the holy scripts. In common Judaism, Christianity and Islam preach love of one's neighbour and brotherhood, not only among its own followers, but between all humans. All three religious beliefs emphasize their followers love and care for one’s neighbour - regardless of either the neighbour is a fellow believer or a stranger. The biblical word for ‘neighbour’ is ‘the next’. My next is my closest in the village, my relative, my countryman. In third book of the Torah, chapter 19, verse 18 the command of love of one’s neighbour is emphasized for the Jews and Christians: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. That much one should appreciate one’s neighbour: One should love him/her as much, as one loves oneself. In a famous Jewish story a heathen comes to the famous rabbi Hillel and demands to learn Judaism while standing on one leg. Hillel answers: ‘What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation’.
The Prophet Muhammad says accordingly: ‘That which you want for yourself, seek for mankind.’ (Hadith Bukhari) and The Quran 4:36 says: ‘to parents do good, and to relatives, orphans, the needy, the near neighbour, the neighbour farther away, the companion at your side, the traveller, and those whom your right hands possess’. Imam Hasan ibn Ali (d. 670) furthermore said, that a good neighbour is not the one, who refrains from doing harm to its neighbour, but the one, who endures harm from its neighbour. Exemplary neighbourhood is to be patient with possible inconveniences.
My next and neighbour are not exclusively those who live straight away next to me. It can be the neighbourhood, a work college, a companion at a tourist attraction or the fellow students in a class room. The people one associates with, are all one’s neighbours. Within Islam good neighbourhood is a sign of one’s faith. Without exemplary neighbourhood one can not acquire the qualities of the faithful. One does not distinguish between faith and ethnicity to be classified as neighbour in Islamic theology. Neither in Judaism is my next ‘only’ my neighbour. With basis in, that there only exists one God, Judaism says, that there is also only one humanity: A humanity where everyone enjoys the same justice before God. Twice in his daily service the Jew state (Psalm 145) ‘The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made’.
Third book of Torah chapter 19 verse 34 says: ‘The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt’. In chapter 24 is referred: ‘One law shall be exacted for you, convert and resident alike’. It is Jewish way of thinking to understand the duty towards the stranger as a religious command, why there is no stranger before God. In the Jewish way of thinking there is many ways to God. This means, that people, that practice another monotheistic religion, not only are equal, but also have a part in the coming world. That too is ‘neighbourhood’.
The preacher of Jesus in The New Testament also radicalizes the love of one’s neighbour, that is not to be limited to one’s closest or countrymen, but to everyone, that one comes to stand in relation to, regardless of it is intentional or not. The basic story about this is the parable of The Good Samaritan (Gospel of Luke 10, 25-37), that says, that love of one’s neighbour is specific helpfulness towards who, that needs me - regardless who they are and which group, they belong to. In the Gospel of Matthew 5, 44 Jesus even says: ‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you’. It is not enough just to love those, one is associated with (family, friends, companions) - no, one should love even one’s enemies. Cohesion and reconciliation is a pivotal and relentless part of the Christian faith. God has reconciled itself with us regardless of our mistakes - therefore we owe to do the same to everyone, we have a dispute with. A Christian must always be prepared to be the first, who reaches the hand out for reconciliation and friendship.
The word ‘love’ is not an emotional word in biblical sense, but a word of action. ‘To love’ means ‘to do well towards’. But in other words: You should do just as good towards your neighbour, as you do towards yourself. Everything, that you seek to obtain for yourself and your family, you should in other words be prepared to share with your neighbour, yore companion. As a consequence Judaism is a religion of deed. This means, that only there where the good intention is transformed into action, real Judaism is expressed. The principle is among others found in the relation to the widow and the fatherless: One should not only pay attention to, their existence, but one should provide for them.
In fifth book of Torah chapter 24, is found numerous laws that specifically obliges Jews, among other things in relation to the poor. To leave a corner of the field was a command regarding, that there should be the possibility of, that one, who does not own land, also have the right of crop, and the provision about, that if you forget a sheaf on the field during harvest, you should not go back, for it should belong to the stranger, are in many ways unique.
This is entirely consistent with Islamic way of thought: When one of the fellow believers of Prophet Muhammad, Abdullah ibn Umar, had butchered a sheep, he asked for it to be distributed, starting with their Jewish neighbour. With that attitude good neighbourhood can change an entire local community.
The Christian’s relation to God is also reflected in his way of action - or lack of action - towards their neighbours and guests: In the Gospel of Matthew 25, 31-45 the sheep are separated from the goats depending on, whether one has given food, water and clothes to the poor, provided for the strangers and sick and visited inmates in prison. Jesus says: ‘Whatever you did - or did not - for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me’.
Love and care for next and neighbour are unavoidable in all three Abrahamic religions. And it is not limited to the believer’s closest, or people of same faith or origin. It embraces all humans, the believer stand towards - close as well as remote. In the Gospel of Matthew 22, 34-40 Jesus even calls love to God and the next for the most important command of the law. When religion thus, in the public debate, is made ‘the apple of discord’, it is false labeling description: The Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy scripts all proclaim the responsibility of the believer of both loving their neighbour and caring for him or her. To argue for the opposite is to go against the word of in common The Torah, Bible and Quran, and to do it with one of the holy scripts in the hand, is direct misrepresentation.
It is our hope and aim, that Danish Jews, Christians and Muslims will take these words to heart, and be able to appreciate those values of love of one’s neighbour and good neighbourhood, that our three religions have in common. We encourage both believers and non-believers in Denmark to remember the holy scripts, think about their meaning today and make an effort for good neighbourhood.
http://www.b.dk/kronikker/joeder-kristne-og-muslimer
IN GOD’S MEASUREMENTS - 1946
IN GOD’S MEASUREMENTS
Last Danish Sermons
BY KAJ MUNK
Nyt Nordisk Forlag
Arnold Busck
Copenhagen 1946
EXTRACT
TWENTY SECOND SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY
For The Church of the Holy Ghost in Copenhagen 1943
Therefore it is first and foremost deed, he has called us for, when he made us his disciples. To be Christian is quite the opposite of being passive. There is in fact two ways, by which one can benefit God’s enemy – and I do not know, which of them is the most dangerous. The one is to be active for the evil, the other is to be passive in the good.
Some believe, that to be Christian is church attendance and prayer. It has nothing to do with Christianity – not more than to buy shoe polish has to do with a shoe polisher. Prayer and Bible, that is our arsenal. There we get power and insight for our struggle for the Kingdom of God on earth.
People can delude themselves into believing, that Christianity is to be a saved human. It has nothing to do with Christianity. What good pleasurable feelings one can reach regarding oneself and the relation to the beyond, is not of any interest for Christ. What he asks for, is: Are you a suitable battle ally? To be Christian is a state of eternal conflict. Conflict with God, with oneself, with the world. My own desire is no longer my dictator. I have got higher gods than myself. And what happens in the world, is not unimportant to me. I cannot lock myself up in a church or a place of worship as in a shelter: “Now let the bombs of sin scatter outside! I am alright with God in here.” Then Jesus would tell us on judgment day: “Be not one who says “Lord, Lord!”, should be a part of the Kingdom of Heaven, but one who does God’s will. – You lame and wicked servant, that knew, that I gather, where I did not spread, what have you done with the talent, that I entrusted you?”
“There shall not be spoken politics in the church,” says the devil. He says it with the emperor’s utterance, because the emperor is interested in, that the priests are quite about his filth. And he says it with the devoted Christian’s utterance; for the devoted Christians have deluded themselves into believing, that Christianity does not concern anything else than them and God – and outside lies the world.
The devil lies, as it is his practice.
“But, politics do we hear about in the radio and read about in the news paper.” Yes – but in which way! In the church we should hear about politics, put in relation to God’s will.
“Your Kingdom come”, the father prayed.
If the emperor is a good man, if the state is a truly Christian state, that works for the fruition of God’s Kingdom, then the church will bless them. But do God and emperor collide, then oppose the church, that is unfaithful and quite and by its silence approves the emperor.
And it must not neither just protest in general. It must mention things by its right name.
And it is better to be wrong by speaking than to be wrong by being silent.
Page 26-29
-
There is another area, where the church without weary must keep the people’s demands in sight. Our Danish fatherland is viewed by the Christian congregation as a precious gift. Also there it is the case, that every God’s gift also is a task; his grace is a seed, that must bear fruit. We can not just love our fatherland with a ballot paper, little singalong and little Ewald parties. We call ourselves democrats, but too many stand by their work and skills for the quite opposite idea’s victory. Love can not limbo. God’s curse over those, that want to serve two masters and bear the cloak on both shoulders.
Page 30
-
But that is not enough. It is not Denmark, we should put our lives in for, it is the Christian Denmark, i.e. it is the Kingdom of God on Earth, where the Christian Denmark is a province – where the language is truth, the law is justice, and the tone between people mercifulness.
Page 34
-
We have forgotten to pray in our times. We have understood to use the power of electricity and been so busy with it, that we in addition forgot the spirit’s. Now there are few among us, that have serenity and good faith enough to use this the most immense of all earth’s power sources. But if they may hang on and preserve, so we others get to learn it again, and that there also at us should be a congregation of prayer and service mind and sacrifice will and battle eager. So shall Denmark get its seat not only with honor at the table of peace negotiation, but among the work the light day, that we pray God will soon let shine upon the world.
Page 35
-
SECOND SUNDAY IN ADVENT
At The Cathedral in Copenhagen 1943
For to be quite about the sin is to talk the devil’s language. When Christ thundered against the rich, castigated the Pharisees, he was certainly on economic and judicial grounds. When the Christians refused to sacrifice to the picture of the emperor, they were in open uprising. God reached us, if we do not understand, that the church is for just that: in every given moment to actualize eternity.
When there here in this country is raised a persecution against a certain group of our countrymen just because of there origin, it is the Christian right of the church to shout: This is against the constitution of the Kingdom of Christ, that, which is called mercifulness, and it is abhorrent to the free Nordic mind. And the church must go further without weary: should it happen again, then will we with God’s help try to raise the people for uprising. Why a Christian people, that sits passively by, when its ideals are stepped upon, lets the force of corruption into its mind, and God’s anger sinks upon it.
Page 50-51
-
NEW YEARS DAY
At Vedersø Church 1944
I do not stand here to preacher hate against anyone. That is me quite impossible. Not even Adolf Hitler do I hate. I know, what terror and misery the world is thrown into; I know, what debasement my own country has had to experience. I know, that I now in months have not laid myself to rest any night without thinking: “Do they come for me tonight?” And that is not a cheerful thought for one, who loves life, and has enough to do in his deed and is happy for his wife and children. And yet I cannot hate. For humans are of so many kinds and are occupied by all kinds of spirits, and the Savior has taught us the prayer: Forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.
It will never be Christian deed to make itself available for injustice, either it so happens of cowardliness, greediness or stupid compliance.
Page 60-61
-
We know well, that Jesus and his brave apostles did not let themselves scare as such. They would rather walk into death than let themselves scare to do, what was against their conscience. We could do the same. But we are little people. Maybe we should also hope, that God sets the binoculars at the blind eye. But when Danish men without imperative need and by own free drive and choice betray their fatherland and Christianity of corrupt desire for money, then they should also know here from the church, that the wealth, that they acquire by fraud, is Judas money and will lead to their destruction.
In the case of just and unjust one should never ask, whether it pays off, for that is the interest of the devil.
Page 64-65
-
Last Danish Sermons
BY KAJ MUNK
Nyt Nordisk Forlag
Arnold Busck
Copenhagen 1946
EXTRACT
TWENTY SECOND SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY
For The Church of the Holy Ghost in Copenhagen 1943
Therefore it is first and foremost deed, he has called us for, when he made us his disciples. To be Christian is quite the opposite of being passive. There is in fact two ways, by which one can benefit God’s enemy – and I do not know, which of them is the most dangerous. The one is to be active for the evil, the other is to be passive in the good.
Some believe, that to be Christian is church attendance and prayer. It has nothing to do with Christianity – not more than to buy shoe polish has to do with a shoe polisher. Prayer and Bible, that is our arsenal. There we get power and insight for our struggle for the Kingdom of God on earth.
People can delude themselves into believing, that Christianity is to be a saved human. It has nothing to do with Christianity. What good pleasurable feelings one can reach regarding oneself and the relation to the beyond, is not of any interest for Christ. What he asks for, is: Are you a suitable battle ally? To be Christian is a state of eternal conflict. Conflict with God, with oneself, with the world. My own desire is no longer my dictator. I have got higher gods than myself. And what happens in the world, is not unimportant to me. I cannot lock myself up in a church or a place of worship as in a shelter: “Now let the bombs of sin scatter outside! I am alright with God in here.” Then Jesus would tell us on judgment day: “Be not one who says “Lord, Lord!”, should be a part of the Kingdom of Heaven, but one who does God’s will. – You lame and wicked servant, that knew, that I gather, where I did not spread, what have you done with the talent, that I entrusted you?”
“There shall not be spoken politics in the church,” says the devil. He says it with the emperor’s utterance, because the emperor is interested in, that the priests are quite about his filth. And he says it with the devoted Christian’s utterance; for the devoted Christians have deluded themselves into believing, that Christianity does not concern anything else than them and God – and outside lies the world.
The devil lies, as it is his practice.
“But, politics do we hear about in the radio and read about in the news paper.” Yes – but in which way! In the church we should hear about politics, put in relation to God’s will.
“Your Kingdom come”, the father prayed.
If the emperor is a good man, if the state is a truly Christian state, that works for the fruition of God’s Kingdom, then the church will bless them. But do God and emperor collide, then oppose the church, that is unfaithful and quite and by its silence approves the emperor.
And it must not neither just protest in general. It must mention things by its right name.
And it is better to be wrong by speaking than to be wrong by being silent.
Page 26-29
-
There is another area, where the church without weary must keep the people’s demands in sight. Our Danish fatherland is viewed by the Christian congregation as a precious gift. Also there it is the case, that every God’s gift also is a task; his grace is a seed, that must bear fruit. We can not just love our fatherland with a ballot paper, little singalong and little Ewald parties. We call ourselves democrats, but too many stand by their work and skills for the quite opposite idea’s victory. Love can not limbo. God’s curse over those, that want to serve two masters and bear the cloak on both shoulders.
Page 30
-
But that is not enough. It is not Denmark, we should put our lives in for, it is the Christian Denmark, i.e. it is the Kingdom of God on Earth, where the Christian Denmark is a province – where the language is truth, the law is justice, and the tone between people mercifulness.
Page 34
-
We have forgotten to pray in our times. We have understood to use the power of electricity and been so busy with it, that we in addition forgot the spirit’s. Now there are few among us, that have serenity and good faith enough to use this the most immense of all earth’s power sources. But if they may hang on and preserve, so we others get to learn it again, and that there also at us should be a congregation of prayer and service mind and sacrifice will and battle eager. So shall Denmark get its seat not only with honor at the table of peace negotiation, but among the work the light day, that we pray God will soon let shine upon the world.
Page 35
-
SECOND SUNDAY IN ADVENT
At The Cathedral in Copenhagen 1943
For to be quite about the sin is to talk the devil’s language. When Christ thundered against the rich, castigated the Pharisees, he was certainly on economic and judicial grounds. When the Christians refused to sacrifice to the picture of the emperor, they were in open uprising. God reached us, if we do not understand, that the church is for just that: in every given moment to actualize eternity.
When there here in this country is raised a persecution against a certain group of our countrymen just because of there origin, it is the Christian right of the church to shout: This is against the constitution of the Kingdom of Christ, that, which is called mercifulness, and it is abhorrent to the free Nordic mind. And the church must go further without weary: should it happen again, then will we with God’s help try to raise the people for uprising. Why a Christian people, that sits passively by, when its ideals are stepped upon, lets the force of corruption into its mind, and God’s anger sinks upon it.
Page 50-51
-
NEW YEARS DAY
At Vedersø Church 1944
I do not stand here to preacher hate against anyone. That is me quite impossible. Not even Adolf Hitler do I hate. I know, what terror and misery the world is thrown into; I know, what debasement my own country has had to experience. I know, that I now in months have not laid myself to rest any night without thinking: “Do they come for me tonight?” And that is not a cheerful thought for one, who loves life, and has enough to do in his deed and is happy for his wife and children. And yet I cannot hate. For humans are of so many kinds and are occupied by all kinds of spirits, and the Savior has taught us the prayer: Forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.
It will never be Christian deed to make itself available for injustice, either it so happens of cowardliness, greediness or stupid compliance.
Page 60-61
-
We know well, that Jesus and his brave apostles did not let themselves scare as such. They would rather walk into death than let themselves scare to do, what was against their conscience. We could do the same. But we are little people. Maybe we should also hope, that God sets the binoculars at the blind eye. But when Danish men without imperative need and by own free drive and choice betray their fatherland and Christianity of corrupt desire for money, then they should also know here from the church, that the wealth, that they acquire by fraud, is Judas money and will lead to their destruction.
In the case of just and unjust one should never ask, whether it pays off, for that is the interest of the devil.
Page 64-65
-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)