No, I do not agree that anyone who does something bad deserves punishment. Sometimes they need sympathy and understanding and education and a variety of other things.I think we can all agree that if someone does something bad, he or she should receive punishment.
Now, in your opinion, what (if anything) is the difference between Justice and Revenge?
Let me clarify: sometimes the feeling of guilt could be considered a punishment.No, I do not agree that anyone who does something bad deserves punishment. Sometimes they need sympathy and understanding and education and a variety of other things.
What does that have to do with justice or revenge?Let me clarify: sometimes the feeling of guilt could be considered a punishment.
You said that you don’t think someone who did something rang should always be punished. I was just pointing out what I meant.What does that have to do with justice or revenge?
Very interesting. So justice would have been an eye for an eye in that culture. Revenge could be the same or worse depending on the feelings of the person who was wronged. However, mercy and forgiveness supercede both justice and revenge.Just a quick thought on the matter: you can choose not to act on a vengeful desire, even if you live in a culture which permits it.
I mentioned a case in the past where an Iranian woman was blinded by having acid thrown in her face. The sharia courts decided she had the right to demand the man be blinded with acid, but she chose to forgive him. I don’t know if he went to prison instead.
And then in the very next chapter, he tells us who does have the authority to avenge: God, though his servant the civil power.Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. (Rom. 12: 17-21.)
It’s quite possible, of course, that government officials could be motivated by private feelings of vengeance. But ideally, they are simply instruments through which the punishments of God are carried out.Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (Rom. 13: 1-4.)
This is actually not that different to the sharia example. It was the civil authority which acted as an instrument through which the punishment of God is carried out (according to their understanding of matters, of course).I think St. Paul lays out the difference between justice and revenge very nicely in his Epistle to the Romans. First he tells us that ordinary citizens must
And then in the very next chapter, he tells us who does have the authority to avenge: God, though his servant the civil power.
It’s quite possible, of course, that government officials could be motivated by private feelings of vengeance. But ideally, they are simply instruments through which the punishments of God are carried out.
Yes. Another thing I find interesting about the example is how the woman chose to take the higher path - but it was the option to chose either way that made the forgiveness so significant.Very interesting. So justice would have been an eye for an eye in that culture. Revenge could be the same or worse depending on the feelings of the person who was wronged. However, mercy and forgiveness supercede both justice and revenge.
It’s one of Jesus’ main points.Yes. Another thing I find interesting about the example is how the woman chose to take the higher path - but it was the option to chose either way that made the forgiveness so significant.
I agree with your post. Although I also think that revenge can include the idea of proportionality, so that a person is “repaid in kind”, so to speak.Justice is a Virtue. It was defined by Aquinas as the Virtue by which we give to one what he is due.
It is Justice to give food to the hungry. It is also Justice to give one who transgresses the punishment that they are due.
Revenge deferrers, in that it does not care for what punishment is rightly due, by rather the punishment that the offended one desires to give.
The practice of Justice is virtuous, the practice of revenge is not.
Have you ever visited someone in prison, Paziego? I can assure you that the prisoners in those prisons are not restrained by constructed concepts; they are restrained by steel bars, concrete walls, razor wire and gun towers – all of which are constructed, and all of which are quite real.Crimes are a constructed concept with no independent reality…
Nonsense. When Saint Dismas, “the good thief,” hung on the cross next to Our Lord, he asked Jesus to have mercy on him. Jesus responded by forgiving Dismas of his sin. Our Lord even went on to tell Dismas that he would be in Paradise that very evening. Our Lord did not, however, stop the punishment that the civil authorities had imposed upon Dismas. Our Blessed Lord did not stop Dismas’ execution.If you forgive someone you cannot continue to hold them accountable for crimes, because you are setting the conditional that they must make up for it. But there is no conditional forgiveness…