What kind of people are these?

[bones_IV]

It is naive to think that forgiveness without justice leads to peace.

ncrcafe.org/node/513/print

Here is what’d happen if Sr. Chittister became Amish.

photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3284/1064/1600/chittamish.jpg

 

[Dale_M]

It is naive to think that forgiveness without justice leads to peace.

There is many things Sr. Joan and I don’t agree on, but in this article
she doesn’t say that we should ignore justice. Quite the contrary, she says we should have achieved justice more fully if we had gained the cooperation of the world instead of blindly lashing out on our own.

Here is what’d happen if Sr. Chittister became Amish.

Really, Bones, that kind of childish humor is beneath you.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Who called the police?

The Amish all talk about how they forgive the gunman.

The Amish talk about how they deplore violence.

The obvious result in the Amish, or whoever, calling the police to a situation like this is that the police will use force “violence” against the gunman to protect the young girls. The gunman probubly would not have shot himself and simply walked away after insureing that all the young Amish girls were dead, had the police not showed up. An Amish action of calling the police, if it was the Amish who called the police, certianly can be considered the cause of the gunman’s violent death, I would think.

So who called the Police?

Was it the non-violent Amish people who called the Police?

Did the Amish people not do what Americans in general do to protect themselves? That is to use force (the police) “violence” to protect themselves from violence?

 

[system]

Who called the police?

The Amish all talk about how they forgive the gunman.

The Amish talk about how they deplore violence.

Actually. The Amish talk very little to outsiders. Where are you getting this?

Sounds like you have your mind made up.

The obvious result in the Amish, or whoever, calling the police to a situation like this is that the police will use force “violence” against the gunman to protect the young girls. The gunman probubly would not have shot himself and simply walked away after insureing that all the young Amish girls were dead, had the police not showed up. An Amish action of calling the police, if it was the Amish who called the police, certianly can be considered the cause of the gunman’s violent death, I would think.

So who called the Police?

Was it the non-violent Amish people who called the Police?

Did the Amish people not do what Americans in general do to protect themselves? That is to use force (the police) “violence” to protect themselves from violence?

Perhaps reading a couple newspapers would answer your questions. If you cannot afford them, go to your local library.


I live within an hour of the place where this happened. In this area you’ll find Mennonites, Amish, Quakers, and more. And although I don’t agree with all they believe, they are truly non-violent peaceful people.

If you’re going to accuse them of something, come out now and say it.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Who called the police?

The Amish all talk about how they forgive the gunman.

The Amish talk about how they deplore violence.

The obvious result in the Amish, or whoever, calling the police to a situation like this is that the police will use force “violence” against the gunman to protect the young girls. The gunman probubly would not have shot himself and simply walked away after insureing that all the young Amish girls were dead, had the police not showed up. An Amish action of calling the police, if it was the Amish who called the police, certianly can be considered the cause of the gunman’s violent death, I would think.

So who called the Police?

Was it the non-violent Amish people who called the Police?

Did the Amish people not do what Americans in general do to protect themselves? That is to use force (the police) “violence” to protect themselves from violence?

Calling the police is not a violent act.

They live in a community unto themselves, one of nonviolence, but not without law. To not call the police would have been at the very least irresponsible, not only to themselves and their children, but to the greater non-Amish community also. I’m not sure I understand why you would feel this a betrayal of their nonviolent culture.

 

[deb1]

I haven’t read the second article yet, but the first one annoyed me with its illogical jump in thinking.

Yes, the Amish forgave the killer of their children and this is wonderful. They are a true example of Christianity. But if the killer had not committed suicide I doubt that they would not have asked for his release from prison. Forgiveness does not trump justice.

The poster who pointed out that the Amish called police is correct. The Amish did not simply sit down and allow their children to be abused, they used the power within their means to save their daughters.

Forgive the terrorist? Absolutely. But to sit and allow yourself and your children to be brutalized is as evil as the original acts themselves. More importantly I think that the Taliban would have construed this as weakness on our part.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Calling the police is not a violent act.

They live in a community unto themselves, one of nonviolence, but not without law. To not call the police would have been at the very least irresponsible, not only to themselves and their children, but to the greater non-Amish community also. I’m not sure I understand why you would feel this a betrayal of their nonviolent culture.

Hello Jeanette,

I am glad to hear that the Amish religion responsibly stands firmly behind the belief in needing police in America and American military to use lethal force, when needed, to protect America. Even non-violent religions believe that, in certain situations, violence is nessessary to protect the innocent. Sometimes people misunderstand this about non-violent religions.

 

[DWPC]

Some people are really stretching things in petty ways to avoid admitting how, in a horrific situation, the Amish affected by the murders “put their faith where their mouths are”. No one is saying that the Amish religion is correct in theological matters or that they don’t have some substantial community issues, especially about women.

But in Christ’s most fundamental exhortation that we should be forgiving, the Amish of Nickel Mines PA have indeed shamed many Christians. When I learned that the oldest of the dead girls *asked * their murderer to kill them first to save the younger ones, I was stunned to tears that such faith-driven courage still exists.

 

[deb1]

Some people are really stretching things in petty ways to avoid admitting how, in a horrific situation, the Amish affected by the murders “put their faith where their mouths are”. No one is saying that the Amish religion is correct in theological matters or that they don’t have some substantial community issues, especially about women.

But in Christ’s most fundamental exhortation that we should be forgiving, the Amish of Nickel Mines PA have indeed shamed many Christians. When I learned that the oldest of the dead girls *asked *their murderer to kill them first to save the younger ones, I was stunned to tears that such faith-driven courage still exists.

I don’t think that anyone is disagreeing with the fact that the Amish have acted in a deeply moving and wonderfully Christian manner. So, your point that we are stretching anything to avoid admitting something is confusing to me. How are we being petty?

We are only saying that forgiveness does not mean that one forgoes justice. This is not at all a criticism of the Amish. I doubt very seriously that if the killer had lived that the Amish would have asked a judge to let him forgo prison or not have him tried in a court system. That is not saying anything bad about the Amish, at all.

The original article stated that because of the Amish’s example, we should not have defended ourselves from terrorist. That is what we are discussing. Not the worthiness of the Amish’s example.

 

[system]

The original article stated that because of the Amish’s example, we should not have defended ourselves from terrorist. That is what we are discussing. Not the worthiness of the Amish’s example.

Nah. The original article just wondered aloud what it would have been like if the USA could have responded that way.

You can’t help but wonder, when you see something like this, what the world would be like today if, instead of using the fall of the Twin Towers as an excuse to invade a nation, we had simply gone to every Muslim country on earth and said, “Don’t be afraid. We won’t hurt you. We know that this is coming from only a fringe of society, and we ask your help in saving others from this same kind of violence.”

“Too idealistic,” you say. Maybe. But since we didn’t try, we’ll never know, will we?

It was just one of those idealist things, like John Lennon singing in Imagine.

But people jumped on that article and/or this thread as a chance to twist it into something else. Something that belittles the Amish like, ***“See!? They’re not so nice! They’re not so christian!” *** Instead of seeing it as an amazing act of forgiveness.

In a word - despicable

 

[deb1]

Nah. The original article just wondered aloud what it would have been like if the USA could have responded that way.

It was just one of those idealist things, like John Lennon singing in Imagine.

But people jumped on that article and/or this thread as a chance to twist it into something else. Something that belittles the Amish like, ***“See!? They’re not so nice! They’re not so christian!” ***Instead of seeing it as an amazing act of forgiveness.

In a word - despicable

Am I reading a different thread then you? Which specific post is jumping on the Amish or is saying that they are not so Christian? I am simply not reading this attitude in any of the post written here. We all have expressed admiration for the Amish.

 

[DWPC]

We are only saying that forgiveness does not mean that one forgoes justice. This is not at all a criticism of the Amish. I doubt very seriously that if the killer had lived that the Amish would have asked a judge to let him forgo prison or not have him tried in a court system. That is not saying anything bad about the Amish, at all.

The original article stated that because of the Amish’s example, we should not have defended ourselves from terrorist. That is what we are discussing. Not the worthiness of the Amish’s example.

I disagree. As I read them, the intent of the OP and some responses is clearly to devalue the forgiveness extended by the Amish.

In my catechism days, we learned that reparation and acceptance of just punishment was *necessary *for forgiveness. Implying that forgiveness is somehow imperfect unless it includes rejection of reasonable and prudent civil/criminal reparation or punishment of the offender is meritless and contrary. It refutes the notion of penance too. The post stating that somehow calling the police invalidates the act of forgiveness is nonsense.

Regarding your response, you mis-state the author by saying she wrote that we shouldn’t have defended against terrorists. She doesn’t say that at all. She infers that there’s a great difference between necessary defense of innocents and making war for retribution.

Last week I heard a presentation by a very well-known journalist with considerable expertise in the study of Islamic terrorists. He mentioned that anti-Americanism and support for Al Qaida have declined considerably, but *not *because of invading Iraq and Afghanistan. It went down because the US was seen helping Muslims so much after the Tsunami and the Pakistan earthquake. I think that’s what Sr Chittester was talking about.

 

[deb1]

I disagree. As I read them, the intent of the OP and some responses is clearly to devalue the forgiveness extended by the Amish.

In my catechism days, we learned that reparation and acceptance of just punishment was *necessary *for forgiveness. Implying that forgiveness is somehow imperfect unless it includes rejection of reasonable and prudent civil/criminal reparation or punishment of the offender is meritless and contrary. It refutes the notion of penance too. The post stating that somehow calling the police invalidates the act of forgiveness is nonsense.

Regarding your response, you mis-state the author by saying she wrote that we shouldn’t have defended against terrorists. She doesn’t say that at all. She infers that there’s a great difference between necessary defense of innocents and making war for retribution.

Last week I heard a presentation by a very well-known journalist with considerable expertise in the study of Islamic terrorists. He mentioned that anti-Americanism and support for Al Qaida have declined considerably, but *not *because of invading Iraq and Afghanistan. It went down because the US was seen helping Muslims so much after the Tsunami and the Pakistan earthquake. I think that’s what Sr Chittester was talking about.

The problem might be with myself. I had trouble accessing the second article. I will try again.

 

[fix]

It is naive to think that forgiveness without justice leads to peace.

ncrcafe.org/node/513/print

If I am reading the article correctly it seems to me the author is confusing certain principles. Certainly, we ought to forgive our enemies as the Amish folks did. Who disputes that?

The US government has a grave obligation to protect its citizens. We all may not agree that pursuing the war in Iraq was wise, but the action of the President in attempting to defend innocent Americans is not contary to the Gospel message of forgiveness.

Can we not forgive and practice self defense?

I am not saying I agree with the current Iraq war, but I certainly do not agree with the author if she is attempting to claim simply saying I forgive you is enough to defend against terrorists.

 

[Steven_Merten]

I agree with those saying that one can forgive ones enemy and still call the police to use, even lethal force, to protect themselves. This is what the Amish did. This is, according to many, not against their Amish non-violent religion. This is a good thing.

I think that the author of the article is trying to automatically condemn America in its war against terrorism for doing the same thing the Amish did. This is unjust of the Author.

If the author of the article wants to personally judge the heart of the Amish as good and personally judge the heart of America as bad, for doing the same exact thing, then the author should spell their feelings out this way.

I see no demonstrations in the streets of America yelling, “death to Humas”, “death to Syrians”, or “death to Iranians” the way these nations pour out their hatred for America. I see the Iraqies as happy for the American and coalition gift of freedom and chance to put an end to tyrany and persecution in their country. The Iraqies do not want Saddams death squads or the Taliban murdering their children anymore than the Amish want this gunman murdering their children. Iraqies, Amish and Americans all believe in using even lethal force to protect themselves from those who wish to murder them.

America does not hate those who are trying to murder us. Americans simply want to protect Americans from being murdered by thier enemies in the same way the Amish called the police to use violence, if nessessary, to protect themselves from this man who has hated them by murdering their children.

If the author has set themself up as judge and jury over American and Amish hearts, then the author should spell it out that this is what they are doing and nothing more.