On the 18th of April, 1861, a carriage was making its way down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, headed toward the office of the Presidential Secretary, Francis Blair. Blair had been advised by President Abraham Lincoln, to offer the occupant of the carriage the command of the entire armed forces of the United States in preparation of an impending war with the Confederacy.

Robert E Lee

On his journey to Blair, Robert Edward Lee, a Colonel in the United States Army, must have been aware as to the subject of the imminent discussion. A true soldier of courage and brilliance, Lee had served his nation more than admirably in the war with Mexico, and was known for his excellence and balance of character. He was also the favoured candidate of the outgoing General, Winfield Scott. History written by both friend and foe would assess Lee to be one of the greatest military commanders who ever led an army into battle.

Abraham Lincoln for his part, knew Lee to be a loyal American,; Lee had even commented publicly on one occasion: "no north, no south, no east, no west … but the broad Union in all its might and strength past and present." Lee's family had been integral in the Revolutionary War against Great Britain, both as politicians and army officers; the Lees' were considered by many to be among the 'aristocracy' of the United States. However, as the carriage pulled up to its destination, the man who stepped out, was an American, second, but a Virginian, first, and as a Virginian, he lived within rifle shot of the North; but he was, and always would be, a Southerner. As Lee later recollected:

"If the Union is dissolved and the government disrupted, I shall return to my native state and share the miseries of my people and save in defence will draw my sword on none … I declined the offer he made me to take command of the army that was brought into the field, stating as candidly and as courteously as I could, that though opposed to secession and deprecating war, I could take no part in an invasion of the Southern States". (Freeman, 1991, p. 110)

Lee would later be offered by the President of the Confederate States, Jefferson Davis, the command of the Army of Northern Virginia, a position he would accept, "in defence" of his State. The American Civil War (1861-1865), would drag on even though the South was outnumbered, due in no small part to the tactical and strategic brilliance of one man, General Robert E. Lee, a man who despised both slavery and disunion, but who loved Virginia more than he abhorred any other political principle. Ironically, although astute in many matters, President Lincoln had failed to gauge what was at the core of the man to whom he had offered the trust of his entire Army.

The German poet, Goethe, in his novel "Elective Affinities", describes a situation by which those who were once attracted toward one another, ("an affinity"), are torn apart by a change in circumstance; hence they "elect to be together" and "then elect to be apart". For Goethe, the theory is that we bind ourselves according to that which we are most passionate about, the more we yearn or love something or someone, the tighter we bind. To bind ourselves requires a degree of maturity and commitment. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the decision made by Robert E. Lee, the historical fact is, that when faced with a decision to make, Lee chose, and chose on the basis of what would do his conscience best. Lee did not vacillate in a grey world, he had the courage to elect an affinity; and each of us is required to elect an affinity of varying degrees of gravity throughout our lives. As mature adults we are required to commit.

Many today suggest that all religions are relative, and that our beliefs should be formed according to the principle: "Surely, I can choose my own God, and accept from each of the world's religions what I will!" In choosing to relativise all religions, including Christianity, the individual in question seeks to 'elect' the widest possible 'affinity', something admirable when one considers the universal biological brotherhood and sisterhood of all peoples. However, by so doing they avoid an important conundrum posed by the English author, C.S. Lewis. According to Lewis the Christian message is a message which is all or nothing with regard Jesus of Nazareth.

As Lewis writes either Christ is God or His words should not be promulgated at all. "The idea of a great moral teacher saying what Christ said is out of the question. In my opinion, the only person who can say that sort of thing is either God or a complete lunatic suffering from that form of delusion which undermines the whole mind of man''. (Lewis, 1992, pp. 36-37) The concluding imperative for Lewis is as simple as it is harsh; each individual must choose, they must 'elect' their 'affinity' either for or against Christ, you must commit yourself, one cannot be a Christian and a moral relativist: "You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to". (Lewis, 2002, p. 52)

For this reason, Christ (who is so often portrayed as a saccharine individual in faded blue jeans, kicking a soccer ball with children), clearly spelt out what is at the same time an invitation is also a possible source of great division: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth: it is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come to set son against father, daughter against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law; a person's enemies will be the members of his own household". (Matthew 10: 34 - 36, The New Jerusalem Bible)

As we are born with genetic differences and live in varying cultural contexts and epochs, divisions based on likes and dislikes will always occur among peoples. These differences are however not as important as that fundamental, perennial and universal question as to what is the meaning of our lives, and on what values base we shall conduct our actions. We need to be aware that what we 'elect' to believe in, or what we choose to orientate our lives towards, is in fact something worth living and dying for, something worth the energy of our passions, something which transcends all time. Our greatest affinity in life should thus be toward our highest good — and that good is God. After this need is accepted and addressed, the individual must answer for themselves who or what shall be their God? The answer to this question should determine for that person whether Jesus of Nazareth was God or fool; for with Christ, no one can be a slave of two masters, he must love one more than the other. (Matthew 6: 24)

Photo Credit:
The photo used in the headline and footer graphics is of Zoltan, Amanda's music producer. It's one of the photos I'm using in the design of his new website which you can see a sample of at www.zoltan.com.au. The pair of them have been out at Holy Cross College in Ryde all day today coaching the whole school in the singing for a big liturgy coming up at Homebush Bay on 17th March to celebrate the 200th Anniversary of the Patrician Brothers. Over the next few weeks they're progressively visiting all the Patrician Colleges coaching the students in the music for this liturgy. …Brian Coyne

©2008 Dr Andrew Thomas Kania

[Andrew Kania's Archive]