And the precondition for reconciliation in these circumstances is to be able to point to something which can be redeemed from the horrors of war and its accompanying slaughter; some “good” which could not have been realized or anticipated beforehand. For example, a kind of relationship and a degree of intimacy and disciplined trust which simply could not have existed without the trauma of conflict. In Christian thinking, Jesus was in some way perfected through suffering. Nobody quite understands what this means, because Christians generally recognise that he was a pretty good example to us before his crucifixion. But somehow the crucifixion added an inner dimension to it all, which had not existed before. It is expressed in various grossly inadequate ways, by saying Jesus reconciled us to the Father, or atoned for our sins; but I think perfected through suffering is the best. So with the problem of England and Germany, in elevating a personal problem into a symbol of national reconciliation, it had to be possible to say, “good has come out of evil”. That was only possible if the relationship, which symbolised that reconciliation, could not have existed without the conflict; and one vivid but inadequate way of describing it all is to say that I tried to recreate between humans the same relationship or indwelling that is supposed to exist between God and the soul. I believe Mozart was correct in his opera Cosi fan Tutte to portray the emotions that grow naturally between people as ephemeral in this world, and always subject to the arrival of “the fresher faces” that Browning mentions in his poem “Any Wife to Any Husband”. For there to be any permanence, the Deity must be involved.
But how to involve the Deity? How better than by invoking His creativeness? But to create what? The fulfilment of our wishful thinking; to create a world of infinite variety and infinite absurdity? Or to help create a world after His own heart? And if the latter, does it not mean modelling our creativeness on His relationships with us? I understand, maybe incorrectly, that the fundamental difference between Christianity and Islam is that our God seeks man’s friendship, whereas most Muslims say Allah would demean himself by seeking his friendship. If this is correct, then Christians can invoke the creativeness of God, though few of them do; but is it not meaningless for Muslims to invoke a creativeness when they have no pattern to imitate or develop? If Muslims are content with this situation; well and good. But they may live to regret it. How can it be an advantage to cut yourself off from all that is most creative in yourself? And is it not a great evil to try to compel others to conform to your inadequacy, when we are all inadequate? Which is better: to create, or to stifle creativeness? To choose greater life, or lesser life? And is not the good the enemy of the best?