Y Safle

Have you ever wondered where we get the term “freelancer”?

In the fifteenth century, warfare was changing. The arrival of gunpowder, and especially of cannon, had changed everything. The fall of the great city of Constantinople in 1453 - the final destruction of the Roman empire - served as a demonstration of how cannon could achieve what no army had ever managed - to breach Constantine’s massive fortifications.

Before this final siege, defenders had always held the advantage in a siege situation. Attacking armies were in the field, exposed to counter attack and at the end of long supply trains. But now with cannon the tables were turning. It was now possible to breach the mightiest of defensive walls.

European warfare had also, over the centuries, concentrated on cavalry. Knights, who could ride and fight atop horses, were drawn from the aristocracy, and were a warrior elite that had held sway in a time when there was no money for standing armies. Peasants could be archers, and these were important, but with the return of sufficient currency in europe to pay for them, another important force arose - infantry.

Swiss infantry quickly became some of the most sought after - mercenary armies of infantry who would fight for anyone with sufficient silver to pay their wages, and throughout Europe wars were now won or lost by infantry, and not cavalry.

The reason for this was easy to see. These infantrymen, with their long pikes and spears, if they stood their ground, were nearly impregnable. No cavalry could force their horses to throw themselves on those pikes, and so the cavalry charge was blunted. The independent infantry - the free lancers - were what every army needed.

But there was an important proviso here. The infantry had to stand together. If they lost their nerve - even just a few of them - and broke ranks, then the formation would collapse, the defense would be lost, and the infantrymen could be picked off one by one on the field of battle.

Every free lancer knew what it was to entrust his life to his comrades. The same was true in the defeat of the highlander charge at the battle of Culloden. The charge was defeated because each rifle man was tought to put his bayonet not in the man running at him, but the man immediately next to him. Thus the bayonet could bypass the highlander’s shield. But every infantry man on the field had to entrust his life to his neighbour. This took courage, but also an exemplary level of trust.

So how much do we trust our peers? More to the point, how much can they trust us? Could we be faithful in such situations?

Peter said he would stand by Jesus, but when the soldiers came, he departed and denied his Lord. But never again. Peter later stood firm in his testimony and he died for his trust in the Lord who would save him. Indeed, nearly all the disciples of Christ were eventually martyred for their faith in him. That was trust.

John Wesley was approached by the customs and revenue officer, raising taxes. He was asked what silver he had that he might be assessed for taxation. As a clergyman, it was expected he had reasonable wealth. Wesley replied that he had a teaspoon.

Like so many other Christians, Wesley trusted in God to provide for his needs, and saw no profit in hoarding wealth. He knew where true wealth lay, and did not need the crutch of materialism. That too was trust.

History is replete with examples of people who trusted God to meet their needs, because they understood what trust was.

When we speak of fighting the good fight, do we have any vision of what it would be like to be a free lancer, having the tide of battle wash over us, trusting in those around us to stand firm with us?