Peacemakers, not traitors

That sermon followed a speech made shortly before, in which he questioned the role of the United States' action in Vietnam, its direction, its aims and the little matter of civilian deaths, which we now surgically refine under the fanciful guise of "collateral damage". It has been called a bold speech, but it sent him, like many brave enough to speak out in our current conflict, into the political wilderness.

He spoke out of personal conviction based on his non-violent faith, emphasising that those who followed the current political line of the then US government were without criticism from him and entitled to their own view.

It was a matter for them and their conscience. Dr King, however, was entitled to his own view, which was dictated by his own conscience and God. Now, as in Vietnam, history would be at least be one judge as to what was right and wrong.

As he said, "it really didn't matter to him" what others were doing in their collaboration with the then US administration. He had personally reached a stage of political dissent in his striving for a non-violent response to revenge, where he announced - the day before he died - that he was not frightened of anybody, anymore.

He had been to the mountain top, had seen the promised land and was prepared to die for following God's will, even though he would not get to the promised land at the same time as his followers. His outspokenness meant that even the so-called liberals isolated him from their own political platform.

As the Vietnam situation is of increasingly parallel interest in our current military situation, it may be worthwhile remembering the Vietnam speech of Martin Luther King. It amounted to a walk around the chopping block waiting for the axe, shortly to be delivered by his assassin. It led him to depression and loneliness, whilst speaking out for that which he believed to be true, a situation of exile now faced by the maverick backbenchers George Galloway and Paul Marsden, among others.

The life of the dissident in times of war is notoriously a lonely one. Especially when the accusation of "traitor" is levelled from the lips of governmental front bench armchair generals, shouting from the back room of military operations.

Dr King asserted that there comes a time when our consciences should dictate that we have to admit that our approach to Vietnam - for which now read Afghanistan - was and is wrong. The "adventure" into Vietnam was misguided and ultimately detrimental to the lives of the Vietnamese, as well as those in the United States. We should, Dr King stated, turn sharply from a course that would lead our nations into hell. His prophecy was realised, with riots and a nation confused by the continuation of a war the population could not understand.

Let us not forget that the vast majority of people in the United States do not have passports because they have had little interest in travelling beyond their own back door, let alone to the caves of Afghanistan. The special relationship over the pond with dear old Britain is as far as it gets.

Dr King was denounced as a traitor, a confused preacher - an allegation now being made against those who dare speak out as led to do so by their conscience in the personal battle of faith against the preoccupation of the nation with a war. This battle of conscience is beautifully echoed by Dr King's comment that justice is indivisible - "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere".

We can consider that those who pursue the moral high ground now carpet bombed Dresden - as was Coventry and other cities by the Germans - and delivered two nuclear bombs to a civilian population of Japan. The United States has barely recovered from the long-hidden revelations of the civilian massacre of Mai Lai in Vietnam, by US forces. These things have always happened in war.

Darlington has a proud history of practising religious dissent over the will of the government, going back not least to the 1650s, as recorded in the Journals of George Fox, the early leader of the Quakers. Quakers in Darlington, Durham and Newcastle, for example, were imprisoned, tortured and persecuted for their quest for religious freedom and the right to practice their own faith without being accused - by the likes of the eminent Puritan John Owen - that they were traitors to the nation and moreover, satanic agents.

In the First World War, Richmond Castle in Yorkshire imprisoned those whose conscience led them to die rather than participate in the bloody fields of France. Some 16 of them were led and stoned through the streets of Richmond, on to France and beyond British jurisdiction, where they were tied to crosses as part of "field punishment number one", and left to rot or be shot. These were brave people, not cowards. And if they were to be martyrs, they would do so without bearing arms against another.

This is the difference between them and those misguided British Muslims who, if it is true, are travelling their own journey of potential martyrdom to work with the Taliban in Afghanistan, against allied troops.

Britain has a renowned history of dealing effectively with - to use the guidance of Jesus Christ - those who follow God rather than Caesar, the spirit found in their conscience rather than the demands of the nation.

Witness the state-orchestrated assassinations of Thomases More and Beckett, and, topically, of the public disembodiment of Guy Fawkes, who plotted for his religion against the political government of the day. Maybe this November 5, there will be effigies of bin Laden on some of our fires as we take delight in colourful displays somewhat different from those being daily inflicted upon the Afghan people. The reason why the likes of Marsden, Galloway, the aid agencies and the rising tide of dissenters, is a light that needs to be quickly diffused, as far as the British Government is concerned, is that, as the spirit of those early Quakers in Darlington illustrated, the holy spirit can be the most powerful weapon on earth.

No matter how misguided, those Muslims who travel from their own countries to Afghanistan are indicative of a trend towards the following of the spiritual over the material. The popular trend towards asking questions about the British Government's aims and objectives in the current war indicates a re-examination of priorities that strike at the heart of our consumer-led fast food societies in the West.

Despite falling attendances in church, there is an increasing consideration of the power of the spiritual over the secular. We have not declared war in any formal sense, so I question what legal action can be taken against people from this country who choose to fight abroad. British mercenaries come and go from these shores to work in many countries where their expertise is appreciated. They do not have their passports taken away, nor are they accused of being traitors.

Whether religious dissent in 1650s Darlington, or conscientious objection to military conflict, the spirit is not bound by the confines of national legislation. As Martin Luther King noted in the words of the negro slave song - the spirit of the dissenter is "free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty I'm free at last".

* Glen Reynolds, co-warden of the Friends Meeting House in Darlington, is writing in a personal capacity.