Why is it that while hymns resonate deeply within Christian worship, the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” often feels out of place, even avoided, in many churches? This iconic song, deeply embedded in American patriotic culture, is known by many, even if just through its tune echoing in the children’s song “Booster.” However, for a significant number of Christians, its powerful melody is overshadowed by a message they perceive as fundamentally at odds with Christian teachings. This article delves into the heart of this controversy, exploring why, despite its spiritual undertones and biblical references, the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” is considered by many to carry an anti-Christian message. We will unpack its origins, analyze its theological implications, and contrast its message with core Christian beliefs to understand the reasons behind this significant divergence in perception.
Unveiling the Origins: Julia Ward Howe and the Civil War Context
To understand the controversy surrounding the “Battle Hymn Of The Republic Song”, we must first journey back to its creation during the tumultuous era of the American Civil War. The song was penned in 1861 by Julia Ward Howe, a prominent northern writer and social activist deeply committed to the abolitionist cause. For Howe, the Union’s fight was not just a political or territorial struggle; it was a moral crusade, a righteous battle against the perceived evils of the Confederacy. This conviction fueled her desire to contribute to the Union cause, not with weapons, but with words.
The spark for the “Battle Hymn” ignited during a trip to Washington D.C. in November 1861. As Howe and her companions traveled, they found themselves amidst marching regiments of Union soldiers. To lift spirits and pass the time, they sang popular war songs of the day. Among these was “John Brown’s Body,” a song already in circulation among Union troops, commemorating the controversial abolitionist John Brown with the rousing line: “John Brown’s body lies a-mouldering in the grave, but his soul is marching on!”
The tune’s infectious rhythm resonated with the marching soldiers, who readily joined in the singing. It was then that a companion turned to Howe and suggested, “Mrs. Howe, why do you not write some good words for that stirring tune?” This simple suggestion planted a seed. Inspired by the fervor of the moment and her deep-seated beliefs, Howe awoke early the next morning with verses forming in her mind. These verses, born from the fervor of wartime and a conviction in the righteousness of her cause, would soon become the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.”
Published in 1862, the song rapidly gained popularity, spreading like wildfire through Union army camps. It became a rallying cry, sung with fervor before battles and with jubilation upon news of Union victories. Howe herself articulated the purpose behind her creation, stating, “Something seems to say to me, ‘You would be glad to serve, but you cannot help anyone; you have nothing to give, and there is nothing for you to do.’ Yet, because of my sincere desire, a word was given to me to say, which did strengthen the hearts of those who fought in the field and of those who languished in the prison.” This statement reveals the core intention behind the “Battle Hymn”: to bolster the morale and resolve of Union soldiers, framing their fight as a divinely ordained mission.
It is crucial to acknowledge that critiques of the “Battle Hymn” are not rooted in taking sides in the historical conflict of the Civil War. The issue lies not in judging the rights or wrongs of the Union or Confederacy, but in examining the theological message embedded within the song itself and its implications for Christian faith.
Decoding the Theology: Religious War Propaganda
The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” is undeniably rich in biblical language and imagery. Julia Ward Howe, deeply familiar with scripture, wove these elements throughout her lyrics. Phrases like “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord” and “He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored” resonate with familiar biblical themes. However, while the song certainly possesses a spiritual veneer, its underlying message, according to many Christian interpretations, veers sharply away from genuine Christian theology.
The core contention is that the “Battle Hymn of the Republic song” functions as religious war propaganda. It strategically employs biblical imagery, twisting and repurposing it to serve the specific agenda of the Union cause. Instead of promoting a message of universal love, peace, and redemption central to Christianity, the song, it is argued, uses religious fervor to “strengthen the hearts” of soldiers as they engaged in deadly conflict with their fellow Americans in the South. Far from being a hymn that glorifies God in a manner consistent with Christian teachings, critics argue that the “Battle Hymn” inverts biblical meaning to justify warfare and nationalistic fervor, making it fundamentally anti-Christian in its theological essence.
Misinterpreting Revelation 19: The Coming of the Lord
The opening lines of the “Battle Hymn,” “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord,” immediately evoke powerful imagery associated with the Second Coming of Christ. The phrase “coming of the Lord” is indeed a significant concept in Christian eschatology, often linked to passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:15 and James 5:7-8. While the exact phrase “coming of the Lord” doesn’t appear in the Book of Revelation, the imagery within the “Battle Hymn,” particularly in its first verse, draws heavily from Revelation 19.
Revelation 19:11-16 paints a vivid picture of Christ’s return:
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, “King of kings, and Lord of lords.”
This passage undeniably depicts violence, war, and judgment as integral aspects of Christ’s return. The imagery of Christ on a white horse, a symbol often associated with Roman military conquest, and the description of him treading “the wine press of the fierce wrath of God” are potent and undeniably militaristic. Howe poetically echoes this imagery in the line, “He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored.”
However, the crucial point of contention arises from the intended application of this imagery. The critique argues that Howe did not write these lyrics to inspire a reliance on God’s ultimate judgment, but rather to provide a divine sanction for Union troops to inflict violence and death upon their Southern adversaries. This interpretation suggests that the “Battle Hymn” misappropriates the powerful and complex imagery of Revelation 19, transforming it into a justification for earthly warfare and a validation for Americans to destroy enemies they deemed morally reprehensible. The song, in this view, becomes a tool for sanctifying human conflict rather than a hymn focused on the transcendent and ultimate judgment of God.
As Howe continued to craft verses, driven by her desire to “offer service to their cause” of the Union soldiers, even core tenets of Christian faith like the gospel, the birth of Christ, and the concept of sacrifice were seemingly twisted to further justify the war effort. Lines like:
I have read a fiery gospel writ in burnished rows of steel; “As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace shall deal” Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel, Since God is marching on!
In the beauty of the lilies, Christ was born across the sea, With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me; As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free, While God is marching on!
These verses, while employing Christian language, are interpreted by critics as repurposing the gospel message and the sacrifice of Christ to serve the aims of earthly battle, blurring the lines between spiritual devotion and nationalistic military zeal.
Contrasting Interpretations: Howe vs. John of Patmos
The Bible itself is no stranger to military imagery. Passages like 1 Timothy 1:18 and 2 Timothy 2:3 utilize military metaphors to describe the Christian life, and Revelation 19 is a prime example of vivid military symbolism within scripture. However, the crucial distinction lies in the intended purpose and theological direction of this imagery. It is argued that Julia Ward Howe and John of Patmos, the author of Revelation, utilize military imagery to fundamentally opposite ends.
Howe, as argued, employed the military imagery of Revelation 19 to embolden Union soldiers as they marched into battle against their enemies. In contrast, the interpretation suggests that John of Patmos utilized Roman military imagery not to glorify earthly warfare, but to underscore the ultimate victory of Christ over all earthly powers, including the Roman Empire itself. The message of Revelation 19, in this view, is not to encourage Christians to seek heroic conquerors in earthly leaders or military generals, but to fix their gaze on Christ as the ultimate victor. If one seeks a heroic figure on a white horse riding to save the day, John directs that gaze not towards any earthly military leader, be they Roman or Union General, but towards Christ alone.
Furthermore, by the time Revelation was written, the “sword” had become a widely understood metaphor among Christians for the Word of God, as evidenced in Ephesians 6:17 and Hebrews 4:12. Earlier in Revelation, Christ is depicted with a sword emanating from his mouth (Revelation 1:16), further reinforcing this symbolic association. The fact that Revelation 19 describes the sword coming out of Jesus’ mouth is interpreted as indicating that the true “weapon” envisioned by John is not “burnished rows of steel” – literal weaponry of warfare – but the transformative power of God’s word.
John then describes how this “sword,” the Word of God, is used to strike down the nations and rule them with a rod of iron. This is seen as a direct contrast to Howe’s application of Revelation’s imagery to embolden soldiers fighting for her nation. In Revelation 19, the nations are not the agents of divine justice or the victors. Instead, the nations, having been deceived by Babylon (Revelation 18:23), are presented as those who are ultimately defeated by the triumphant and penetrating power of God’s word.
The True Victory: The Lamb, Not the Lion of War
The Book of Revelation not only assures believers of Christ’s ultimate victory over evil, but also provides profound insight into how God triumphs. Amidst the pervasive presence of violence and evil in the world, Revelation 5 offers a message of hope and a radical redefinition of power. The chapter introduces the “Lion of Judah,” a powerful and traditionally masculine symbol of strength and victory, expected to conquer and overcome. Indeed, the victorious Lion of Judah is presented as ready to fight for God’s people. However, the stunning revelation comes when John turns to see this conquering Lion.
“And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain.” (Revelation 5:6)
The expected Lion is replaced by a Lamb, and not just any lamb, but a Lamb “as if slain.” This imagery is profoundly significant. It subverts conventional notions of power and victory. The victory is not achieved through brute force or military might, but through sacrifice and love, embodied in the image of the slain Lamb.
Significantly, a similar, often overlooked detail is present in the battle scene of Revelation 19. A careful reading reveals that Christ’s robe is already blood-drenched (verse 13) before the enemies are struck down (verse 15). This detail suggests that the blood on Christ’s garment is not the blood of his enemies, but his own blood, the blood of sacrifice. The victory in Revelation, therefore, is not primarily depicted as a military triumph in the conventional sense, but as a victory won through the self-sacrifice of Christ, symbolized by the Lamb slain.
At the culmination of this conquest, Jesus bears a new and ultimate title: “King of kings and Lord of lords” (verse 16). This title signifies that Jesus supersedes and replaces every other earthly king, lord, or political power that might demand allegiance. Immediately following this declaration of Christ’s ultimate authority, the earthly powers – the kings, the military commanders, the mighty men, the horses and their riders – are all depicted as defeated and consumed (verses 17-18). This underscores the transient and ultimately subordinate nature of earthly power in the face of Christ’s eternal reign.
Julia Ward Howe wrote the “Battle Hymn” to strengthen allegiance to the Union, an earthly nation embroiled in conflict. In stark contrast, Revelation 19 calls for allegiance to Him who is “Faithful and True,” to Christ himself, as opposed to allegiance to the nations of this earth and their often-conflicting kings and military ambitions. While the “Battle Hymn” borrows imagery from Revelation, it applies it to a fundamentally different purpose, diverting the focus from Christ’s sacrificial victory to the justification of earthly warfare.
Choosing Allegiance: Christ vs. Nations
While the “Battle Hymn of the Republic song” is undeniably imbued with scriptural language and imagery, the central argument remains: it fundamentally misses the core message of following Jesus. This is the key reason why many Christians choose not to sing the “Battle Hymn” in worship. The refusal to sing the “Battle Hymn” is not necessarily a rejection of patriotism or national pride, but a conscious decision to prioritize allegiance and worship to Christ alone. It is a rejection of giving ultimate allegiance to any other king, lord, or political entity that is ultimately temporary and subordinate to Christ’s eternal reign. For these Christians, the “Battle Hymn,” despite its powerful melody and patriotic resonance, ultimately represents a misdirection of Christian faith, a call to earthly allegiance rather than a hymn truly centered on the Kingdom of God and the victory of the Lamb.
