Drumclog

Status
Not open for further replies.
Drumclog.jpg
 
From Sketches of the Covenanters by J.C. McFeeters:

One of these armed Field-meetings was held at Drumclog. It was a sweet summer Sabbath, June 1, 1679. The Covenanters had come in large numbers They covered the green sward, sitting among clumps of moss and heather. They were far from the abode of man; nothing there to break the solemn stillness of the Lord's day, except the notes of the heather-cock and the plover. Loudon-hill stood near like a mighty champion. The air breathed softly across the field, and the sky bent silently over the worshipers; the hearts of the people were lifted up in sweet Psalms that echoed over the hills, and a serene joy filled all The Holy Spirit came mightily upon the people; the Lord was among them. Thomas Douglas was the minister. He was one of the three mighties, who afterward issued the Sanquhar Declaration disowning King Charles II. as a tyrant. The sermon was half finished when a signal shot was heard. Mr. Douglas immediately closed the Bible, saying, "You have the theory; now for the practice." 250 resolute men hastily sprang to their feet, lined up, and marched off to meet Claverhouse who was coming with 240 dragoons. The Covenanters halted on an elevation to await the attack. While waiting they sang the 76th Psalm to the tune of "Martyrs." The Psalm was very appropriate; well fitted to arouse the military spirit:

"In Judah's land God is well known,
His name's in Israel great;
In Salem is His tabernacle,
In Zion is His seat."

The troops galloped forward and fired. Their fire drew a vigorous response. The Covenanters aimed with deadly precision; the fighting was desperate; hand-to-hand encounters were frequent. The troops broke and fled, leaving 20 dead on the field. The Covenanters had 1 killed and 5 mortally wounded. Hamilton, Hackston, Paton, Balfour, Cleeland, and Hall were the noble captains that won the day in the name of the Lord of hosts.
Click to expand...
 
Andrew,

I am by no means a pacifist. I served in our nations armed forces and support the need for military intervention when it is warranted. My question is this: what is the biblical justification for fighting, "...in the name of the Lord of hosts"? It there a difference between the Old and New Testaments in regards to warfare in the name of the Lord? Would we consider WWII to be have been fought, "in the name of the Lord of hosts"? What would be the difference?

These questions have always troubled me. I would be interested in your view(s).
 
I think, simply put, the war in which the Covenanters found themselves during the Killing Times was a war explicitly waged against the people of God who would not confess that the king of England was king of the church but instead confessed that Christ alone was king of the church. It was a not a war against another nation for political or economic ascendency; it was a war that strived to bring the Church of Scotland to bow the knee to King Charles II. It was a direct assault on the crown of Christ. As an example of lawful resistance to tyranny, it is hard for me to think of a clearer example of just war theory put into practice.

WWII was also (for Americans) a just war of self-defense. (Setting aside for the moment the question of FDR's possible foreknowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor and other such considerations.) However, it was an attack on America, a non-Christian nation, by another non-Christian nation, Japan. It was not an attack on Christ's church or the crown perogatives of Christ; it was started by a suprise attack on innocent citizens of a non-aggressor nation. Thus, if FDR had responded to the attack on Pearl Harbor with a declaration of war against Japan in the name of the Lord, he would have made a mockery of what it means to fight for the cause of Christ.

Self-defense is just, but not all self-defense is conducted in the name of the Lord.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top