How do we forgive Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?

[OneSheep]

There is an argument to be made that though the U.S. was formed as a nation with Christian values, our value of forgiveness has eroded considerably. Entire groups in our society have common hatred or resentment of a particular group, religion, or other criterion as a written or unwritten requirement for affiliation.

How many of us find comradery with people who share a common resentment? Sometimes I listen to talk radio, and I hear what is essentially a “resent the Muslims” party. In other stations you might find a “resent the conservatives” party or a “resent the religious” party. And let us observe the “resent the progressives” party. I am not talking about political parties, I am talking about circles of people who have shared resentments.

Arguably, the only acceptable social stance in the U.S. is the “hate Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot” party. To forgive them, rather than hold something against them, is against our societal mores. And of course, there is the totally counter-productive “hate the racists” party, of which we are all “called” to be members by our society and media.

In the Church, however, there is no place to uphold resentment against anyone. The Church is, in part, the “forgiveness party”, where non-forgivers are still included, but inspired to forgive.

I am not saying that resentment does not have its place. For example, when we resent racism, we are internally guided by that resentment, and we avoid it. That is a very positive function. However, when we encounter such racism in others, we are called to forgive once we realize that there is someone we hold something against.

Our calling, as Christians, is to forgive.

 

[simpleas]

OneSheep

… If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, …

Yes, of course, I have no quarrel with that. But the court may perhaps decide that the need “to protect the safety of persons” entails deterring other prospective Muslim terrorists, and it may possibly further decide that sentencing this particular Muslim terrorist to death is likely to make a positive contribution to such deterrence. I have no idea if the court will, in the event, make that decision. All I can say is that, if I were serving as a member of the jury, I think I would probably be inclined in that direction. It is an overstatement to say that “I want DT to die.” No, I don’t. But, on the other hand, I have no particular reason, either, for wanting him to live. What I want is to save the lives of the potential victims of other Muslim terrorists in the future. If the death penalty seems to be the right way to achieve that aim, then so be it.

Somehow I don’t believe the death penalty has ever helped people to love, forgive and care for each other.

 

[BartholomewB]

Somehow I don’t believe the death penalty has ever helped people to love, forgive and care for each other.

I expect you’re probably right. On the other hand, it may have helped – by acting as a deterrent – to save the lives of people who might otherwise have been murdered. Somehow I don’t believe that saving innocent lives is wrong.

 

[simpleas]

I expect you’re probably right. On the other hand, it may have helped – by acting as a deterrent – to save the lives of people who might otherwise have been murdered. Somehow I don’t believe that saving innocent lives is wrong.

I think it is right to save and protect innocent lives too. But I also think that people who carry out these terrorist acts aren’t thinking if they get caught they maybe put to death, I think some actually welcome it. It’s sad that people get into that way of thinking, that other peoples lives are worthless and that they will achieve more in the next life if they die as a martyr or whatever it is that they come to believe is reality for them.

Thanks.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Good Morning Ridgerunner,

I repeat, it is indeed our call to forgive if we hold something against anyone regardless of the circumstances.

Then the call to forgive does not apply, just as stated in the OP.

This disrespect is projected. All of us have our individual “rulebooks”, and some victims in this context would take offense, and others not. There is nothing in the CCC or in Catholic teaching that discourages people from forgiving, and to make such a rule like “do not forgive violators you hold something against when you are not directly affected” would be clearly against gospel values. Like I said, if a person takes offense at forgiveness or any act the call is for forgiveness.

If Dzhokhar and his brother had forgiven Americans for their acts overseas, they would not have bombed the event. Can you see the global importance of such forgiveness? We have no evidence that the brothers were directly affected by U.S. action, but they clearly resented U.S. activity against Muslims, and held something against us.

Do you see what I mean? Jesus was not only concerned about individuals and their well-being (forgiveness of those we resent contributes to our well-being), but He was dedicated to a “Kingdom” in which forgiveness is the norm. It is human to resent those who do harm, so we can never stop such resentment from occurring. However, we can certainly encourage and inspire people to forgive.

Please join us, Ridgerunner, in encouraging people to forgive.

Thanks.

I will not call on people to forgive wrongs that do not affect them. It is disrespectful to the actual victims to appropriate their right to forgive the wrongs done to them.

You are assuming Tsarnaev’s motives. Radical Islam does not need motivations other than their belief that infidels must die. Being an infidel is reason enough for them. What did those Ethiopian Christians ever do to ISIS? Nothing. They were killed because they are Christians, and for no other reason.

But even if Tsarnaev was somehow motivated by a belief that there must be retaliation against infidels if they kill Muslims, even in war, (some do believe that) that is not even close to an acceptable reason or excuse.

We have laws, juries and judges to determine the guilt of Tsarnaev and just punishment for him. Most accept that. Emotional involvement in that is not required of me by Jesus or by anone else.

Do I personally hate Tsarnaev? No. I can’t possibly know what’s in his soul and I do not wish evil upon him. But if he did what he’s convicted of doing (and of that, I have little doubt) then I believe justice should come to him. I certainly do not forgive his actions, and would not ameliorate what the law says should happen to him.

 

[OneSheep]

I will not call on people to forgive wrongs that do not affect them. It is disrespectful to the actual victims to appropriate their right to forgive the wrongs done to them.

Good Evening, my friend.

I understand, but everyone has the right, and the calling, to forgive those we hold something against. No rights are being appropriated when we forgive, from the heart, those we hold something against. I don’t know why you wish to belabor the point. If you held nothing against the brothers, you are not called to forgive them. If one does, like I did, then the call to forgive is very clear.

Discouraging people from forgiving those they hold something against, for any reason whatsoever, is contrary to the Gospel.

You are assuming Tsarnaev’s motives. Radical Islam does not need motivations other than their belief that infidels must die. Being an infidel is reason enough for them. What did those Ethiopian Christians ever do to ISIS? Nothing. They were killed because they are Christians, and for no other reason.

Prejudice and demonization do not come out of thin air. Read about the brothers, and you will find that they sought justice, they sought vengeance. And yes, they lumped Americans together, just as many racist Americans lump Muslims or other groups. Such racism and xenophobia can be the fabric of many affiliations.

You are saying that “being an infidel is reason enough for them”, yet I am “making the assumptions”? We need to feel free to make assumptions, Ridgerunner. I start with assuming the “best”, and understand/forgive that, then I assume the “worst” and then I understand/forgive that. This was not a case of killing of random infidels, even though that may actually happen for those holding the broadest of grudges. They wanted to kill Americans, make us pay for what we do overseas. We can understand without condoning.

But even if Tsarnaev was somehow motivated by a belief that there must be retaliation against infidels if they kill Muslims, even in war, (some do believe that) that is not even close to an acceptable reason or excuse.

This thread is about forgiveness, Ridgerunner. Understanding, a virtue and a gift of the Spirit, helps in the process of forgiveness. Understanding leads to the reasons, not the excuses. Excuses are means by which a person tries to escape consequence.

Perhaps you are confused about forgiveness, that you are thinking of it as a means to escape consequence? This is not what Jesus addreseed.

We have laws, juries and judges to determine the guilt of Tsarnaev and just punishment for him. Most accept that. Emotional involvement in that is not required of me by Jesus or by anone else.

Do I personally hate Tsarnaev? No. I can’t possibly know what’s in his soul and I do not wish evil upon him. But if he did what he’s convicted of doing (and of that, I have little doubt) then I believe justice should come to him. I certainly do not forgive his actions, and would not ameliorate what the law says should happen to him.

We can understand a person’s actions. When I have understood a person to the point that I can honestly say, “I could have done what he did, given the motives involved and his scope of the situation.” then I have reconciled with the person in my mind. I don’t actually have to see him face-to-face. I have already forgiven.

It is extremely difficult to separate a person from their behavior, and I have found such attempt practically impossible. I heard about what the brothers did, I felt horrible for the families of victims and those whose lives were wasted and maimed forever. I deeply resented the brothers, and found them worthy of death. Realizing that I held something against the brothers, I obeyed the call to forgive, and with a lot of prayer and understanding, I did, and now I feel whole again. Forgiveness is not about the forgiven, it is about our own relationship with God and those we are called to love.

We are called to love our enemies, Ridgerunner, and such love begins with forgiveness. Now, will you join me, and the Church, in this endeavor? I know, you don’t think it is right, and those of many other religions agree with you. The Gospel says differently. Feel free to say “no” to my question, I will not hold it against you.

If we forgive our enemies, our faith tells us that we can change the whole world.

And if the call offends you, forgive me.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Good Evening, my friend.

I understand, but everyone has the right, and the calling, to forgive those we hold something against. No rights are being appropriated when we forgive, from the heart, those we hold something against. I don’t know why you wish to belabor the point. If you held nothing against the brothers, you are not called to forgive them. If one does, like I did, then the call to forgive is very clear.

Discouraging people from forgiving those they hold something against, for any reason whatsoever, is contrary to the Gospel.

Prejudice and demonization do not come out of thin air. Read about the brothers, and you will find that they sought justice, they sought vengeance. And yes, they lumped Americans together, just as many racist Americans lump Muslims or other groups. Such racism and xenophobia can be the fabric of many affiliations.

You are saying that “being an infidel is reason enough for them”, yet I am “making the assumptions”? We need to feel free to make assumptions, Ridgerunner. I start with assuming the “best”, and understand/forgive that, then I assume the “worst” and then I understand/forgive that. This was not a case of killing of random infidels, even though that may actually happen for those holding the broadest of grudges. They wanted to kill Americans, make us pay for what we do overseas. We can understand without condoning.

This thread is about forgiveness, Ridgerunner. Understanding, a virtue and a gift of the Spirit, helps in the process of forgiveness. Understanding leads to the reasons, not the excuses. Excuses are means by which a person tries to escape consequence.

Perhaps you are confused about forgiveness, that you are thinking of it as a means to escape consequence? This is not what Jesus addreseed.

We can understand a person’s actions. When I have understood a person to the point that I can honestly say, “I could have done what he did, given the motives involved and his scope of the situation.” then I have reconciled with the person in my mind. I don’t actually have to see him face-to-face. I have already forgiven.

It is extremely difficult to separate a person from their behavior, and I have found such attempt practically impossible. I heard about what the brothers did, I felt horrible for the families of victims and those whose lives were wasted and maimed forever. I deeply resented the brothers, and found them worthy of death. Realizing that I held something against the brothers, I obeyed the call to forgive, and with a lot of prayer and understanding, I did, and now I feel whole again. Forgiveness is not about the forgiven, it is about our own relationship with God and those we are called to love.

We are called to love our enemies, Ridgerunner, and such love begins with forgiveness. Now, will you join me, and the Church, in this endeavor? I know, you don’t think it is right, and those of many other religions agree with you. The Gospel says differently. Feel free to say “no” to my question, I will not hold it against you.

If we forgive our enemies, our faith tells us that we can change the whole world.

And if the call offends you, forgive me.

I address this because it is not the teaching of Jesus or the Church, but is being presented as if, somehow, it is.

I find it particularly troublesome when it is combined with encouragement to a political argument; specifically that Americans somehow deserve having their limbs blown off and their children killed because America opposed the perps and people like them overseas. That’s an awful, awful way to see it. It excuses evil and assumes that if we somehow get ourselves into the minds of those who commit evil, that the evil itself is something other than what it is.

Finally, it appears you are assuming everyone has an emotional investment in the fate of Tsarnaev; likely a negative one. There is no reason to believe that, and it’s probably not all that common.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You are saying that “being an infidel is reason enough for them”, yet I am “making the assumptions”? We need to feel free to make assumptions, Ridgerunner. I start with assuming the “best”, and understand/forgive that, then I assume the “worst” and then I understand/forgive that. This was not a case of killing of random infidels, even though that may actually happen for those holding the broadest of grudges. They wanted to kill Americans, make us pay for what we do overseas. We can understand without condoning.

What did the Egyptian Copts do that justified their beheading? What did the beheaded Ethiopians do to deserve the same? They did absolutely nothing except be Christians.

It is just as wildly wrong to justify such actions against Americans by invoking political isolationist rhetoric.

 

[OneSheep]

What did the Egyptian Copts do that justified their beheading? What did the beheaded Ethiopians do to deserve the same? They did absolutely nothing except be Christians.

It is just as wildly wrong to justify such actions against Americans by invoking political isolationist rhetoric.

Dear Ridgerunner,

I see, brother, you are thinking that an explanation as to why a person may carry out terror is “rhetoric”. Rhetoric is in the eye of the beholder, so I am thinking that you might have had an emotional reaction to my understanding of why the brothers did what they did. Which emotion did you feel? I said something that you found “wildly wrong”, I think. Do you hold it against me?

You have brought up “political isolationist”, but I do not believe in political isolationism. I am in favor of all of the good causes that government contributes to around the world. What about those of us who would like us to refrain from some of the wars we have been involved in, do you hold such “political isolationism” against them?

You bring up a very important topic, a horrible occurrence, the beheading of the Egyptian Copts. Do you hold the acts of those ISIL operatives against them, as did I?

Give it some prayer, Ridgerunner. If I may say, i think that it is important for me, and all of us (by my own projection) to humbly admit when we resent or hate people. It is normal, natural, and human to hate the people who beheaded those Egyptians. Such recognition of our own hatred is a starting point. It is normal and natural for an American Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jew, or anyone to hate Dzhokar Tsarnaev. Such hatred has its place in the normal functioning of the human. The question is, what do we do with the hatred, once we are aware that we hold something against someone? This is when we turn to the Gospel.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to put down your views. Your views are acceptable to me, I understand them, and you are not wrong in having them. I am describing another way of looking at the whole picture, feel free to reject it.

Have a great day, Ridgerunner!

 

[BartholomewB]

Read about the brothers, and you will find that they sought justice, they sought vengeance.

Justice was never on their agenda, except possibly in the strictly Sharia sense that killing non-muslims is just and leaving them alive is unjust.

And what had vengeance got to do with it? What great harm had the city of Boston, or the state of Massachusetts, or the United States of America, ever done to the two brothers that it needed to be avenged with innocent blood?

Their motives clearly had nothing to do with either justice or vengeance.

 

[OneSheep]

Justice was never on their agenda, except possibly in the strictly Sharia sense that killing non-muslims is just and leaving them alive is unjust.

And what had vengeance got to do with it? What great harm had the city of Boston, or the state of Massachusetts, or the United States of America, ever done to the two brothers that it needed to be avenged with innocent blood?

Their motives clearly had nothing to do with either justice or vengeance.

Hello Bartholomew,

You can see that I have a different opinion about their motive, but let’s put that aside. Let’s investigate your scenario, okay?

Why did the brothers bomb the marathon, what do you think was their motive? Why did they do it?

Thanks for your response.

 

[BartholomewB]

Why did the brothers bomb the marathon, what do you think was their motive? Why did they do it?

That is for the court to tell us.

 

[OneSheep]

Hello Bartholomew,

You can see that I have a different opinion about their motive, but let’s put that aside. Let’s investigate your scenario, okay?

Why did the brothers bomb the marathon, what do you think was their motive? Why did they do it?

Thanks for your response.

Your response:

Bartholomew:

That is for the court to tell us.

Well, the court may or may not tell us that, but the court’s answer to the question does not affect our forgiveness of the brothers. We are called to forgive the brothers, if we hold anything against them, and understanding why they did what they did is part of mature forgiveness.

For example, Jesus said from the cross, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Jesus understood that the crowd wanted justice, and that they were blinded by their wrath.

So, Jesus sets an example as to how to forgive. We can forgive through prayer, as Jesus was praying, and we can forgive through understanding, as Jesus embodied the gift of understanding in his prayer, seeing that the crowd was blind and lacking awareness.

Do you see any parallels with the brothers? If you do not see their blindness, what explanation do you have for their behavior? If we simply say “It’s not my business” or “It’s not for me to know”, then we are shoving away the gift of understanding that can come through prayer.

When we forgive from the heart, in my experience, it actually matters less what their real motives are than what I project that their motives were. Since that is the case, if we don’t know what the motive is, it is fruitful to simply guess! Our mind will come forward with what we truly condemn.

So, are you willing to tackle the question, to guess, or are you going to walk away from the question? This endeavor is an opportunity to become more self-aware, give it a try!

Thanks again, for your response.

 

[BartholomewB]

OneSheep:

if we don’t know what the motive is, it is fruitful to simply guess!

That is where we disagree. You think it is fruitful, I think it is fruitless. I see no reason to indulge in idle conjectures.

 

[OneSheep]

That is where we disagree. You think it is fruitful, I think it is fruitless. I see no reason to indulge in idle conjectures.

The reason is for the purpose of coming to a mature forgiveness and reconciliation in the heart.

We can leave it at that. If you do not have such an investigation in your experience, you will not value it. If or when you feel like digging a little deeper some time, if you are having trouble forgiving someone, give it a shot! If you are capable of forgiving completely without understanding, more power to you, you are blessed!

Thanks.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Dear Ridgerunner,

I see, brother, you are thinking that an explanation as to why a person may carry out terror is “rhetoric”. Rhetoric is in the eye of the beholder, so I am thinking that you might have had an emotional reaction to my understanding of why the brothers did what they did. Which emotion did you feel? I said something that you found “wildly wrong”, I think. Do you hold it against me?

You have brought up “political isolationist”, but I do not believe in political isolationism. I am in favor of all of the good causes that government contributes to around the world. What about those of us who would like us to refrain from some of the wars we have been involved in, do you hold such “political isolationism” against them?

You bring up a very important topic, a horrible occurrence, the beheading of the Egyptian Copts. Do you hold the acts of those ISIL operatives against them, as did I?

Give it some prayer, Ridgerunner. If I may say, i think that it is important for me, and all of us (by my own projection) to humbly admit when we resent or hate people. It is normal, natural, and human to hate the people who beheaded those Egyptians. Such recognition of our own hatred is a starting point. It is normal and natural for an American Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jew, or anyone to hate Dzhokar Tsarnaev. Such hatred has its place in the normal functioning of the human. The question is, what do we do with the hatred, once we are aware that we hold something against someone? This is when we turn to the Gospel.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to put down your views. Your views are acceptable to me, I understand them, and you are not wrong in having them. I am describing another way of looking at the whole picture, feel free to reject it.

Have a great day, Ridgerunner!

Please do not presume to know my “feelings” about anything. You do not know me.

What is hate? Hate is the desire to do evil upon another and perhaps to act on that desire. I have no desire to do any evil to Tsarnaev, and I doubt many do. I do, however, believe society has a right and a duty to exercise justice over him for his wrongs.

Same with the beheaders of the Ethiopian Christians. Those men are doing objectively evil things and, unless they’re demented, know it. The civilized world should act to prevent further such atrocities and bring the perps to justice.

But, of course, when one believes intervening physically to prevent and/or punish evil is, itself, wrong, which your post at least suggests that you do, then one is giving up the idea that there should be protection of others and justice for those who do wrong.

 

[OneSheep]

Please do not presume to know my “feelings” about anything. You do not know me.

Ridgerunner,

I looked over my post to you carefully, and I see no such presumption of feelings. Please advise. You used the word “rhetoric”, and rhetoric is meant to bring about emotion. What is rhetoric to one is not to another. I don’t know which emotion it stirred in you, but your use of “wildly wrong” concerning my statement was an indication. I think it is fair to say that it was not indicative of a positive emotion. Do you agree, or am I incorrect?

We live our lives making thousands of presumptions. They cannot be avoided. I’m with you, though, sometimes we don’t like the presumptions that we presume the others are making. And then there are the presumptions we make about the presumptions others make about people’s presumptions…

What is hate? Hate is the desire to do evil upon another and perhaps to act on that desire. I have no desire to do any evil to Tsarnaev, and I doubt many do. I do, however, believe society has a right and a duty to exercise justice over him for his wrongs.

hate
hāt/
verb
1.
feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone).

I was using this form, but all of us also occasionally experience the desire to do evil upon those who do great wrong.

Sure I desired evil to happen to the Tsarnaev brothers, I would have welcomed their destruction - before I forgave. And in order for a judge to be objective, he must also forgive.

Same with the beheaders of the Ethiopian Christians. Those men are doing objectively evil things and, unless they’re demented, know it. The civilized world should act to prevent further such atrocities and bring the perps to justice.

They did not know what they were doing. They did not fathom the value of their victims; their victims were dirt to them, just as the crowd saw no value in the life of Jesus. All of us are subject to such “demention” when we resent people.

But, of course, when one believes intervening physically to prevent and/or punish evil is, itself, wrong, which your post at least suggests that you do, then one is giving up the idea that there should be protection of others and justice for those who do wrong.

There is a difference between protection and justice, and there is a place for both. Who is presuming now… eh?

This thread is about forgiveness. Justice is a different topic. I am usually not such a stickler about staying on topic, but this thread exists for people to exchange notes about how we can forgive. Would you rather distract from that goal? I presume not.

Have a great Tuesday.

 

[simpleas]

If a person has hatred toward persons who have committed murder, they go through a process of thought, prayer, and then forgiveness, would they be prone to become angry again again each time they hear of some terrible murders?

 

[OneSheep]

If a person has hatred toward persons who have committed murder, they go through a process of thought, prayer, and then forgiveness, would they be prone to become angry again again each time they hear of some terrible murders?

Hi Simpleas,

I think that it kind of depends. Does something new happen? Does it look like an escalation? It is always new, I suppose.

Let’s say you hear about a particular group murdering someone you don’t know, and you have taken the steps to forgive, you have forgiven. Then, the same group murders someone very close to you, or commits an additional heinous act or commits the murders while doing something else atrocious. These may trigger a new anger, right?

I think that I have come to a point that I can understand more quickly some of the evils that occur, so I am not so jerked around by emotional reactions sometimes. There is always a dread, though, a bit of discouragement for me when my prayers are not being answered in the way I prefer.

What do you think?

 

[simpleas]

Hi Simpleas,

I think that it kind of depends. Does something new happen? Does it look like an escalation? It is always new, I suppose.

Let’s say you hear about a particular group murdering someone you don’t know, and you have taken the steps to forgive, you have forgiven. Then, the same group murders someone very close to you, or commits an additional heinous act or commits the murders while doing something else atrocious. These may trigger a new anger, right?

I think that I have come to a point that I can understand more quickly some of the evils that occur, so I am not so jerked around by emotional reactions sometimes. There is always a dread, though, a bit of discouragement for me when my prayers are not being answered in the way I prefer.

What do you think?

Yes a new anger.

If like you say you forgive the brothers after some what hating them, you may not be the same
if it’s a murder or some sort of hideous crime against a member of your “inner circle” family’/close friends, would our reactions be very different. It is one thing to say we forgive strangers, quite another if it affects your life.