There are offenses that we as a culture consider unforgivable. Murder, child molestation, adultery: These are the three that come to mind right now. Crimes that seem to absolve us from the responsibility of offering forgiveness and reconciliation.
How do we apply “mercy” in these situations?
I’m not going to pretend I have a pat answer. I don’t. But too often our society as a whole or individuals within it make clear, by their words and actions, that some violations of human dignity place the offender irrevocably beyond redemption. And if we as Christians, and Catholics in particular, are going to be serious about this extraordinary jubilee year of mercy, we have to wrestle with the reality that this isn’t how God would have us approach life’s hardest questions.
1: Capital Punishment.
The language of capital punishment is couched in “justice,” but it’s certainly not a Christlike vision of justice. Execution doesn’t bring a murder victim back; it only satisfies human desire for revenge. There are all the practical arguments about the gargantuan expense of automatic appeals, and then there is this:
2. Sexual Abuse.
Child molestation is a hard case, and especially so within the Church, where we’ve seen abuse of power by some priests, and a tendency by the hierarchy to prioritize protecting its own over protecting the vulnerable. But don’t forget that molestation happens just as often, maybe more, within families, schools and other community organizations. In all these cases, a sincere desire to do good has gotten twisted into something ugly and damaging to both victim and perpetrator. But how did that twisting take place? People don’t become abusers in a vacuum. We reserve all our mercy for the children and act as if the perpetrator deserves none, even though many of them were themselves victims at one point. Are they not also in need of our mercy?
3. Infidelity.
And then there’s adultery—considered by many as the one deal-breaker in a marriage, the only offense a spouse doesn’t have to forgive. Yet the vows we offer when we marry don’t include asterisks. It’s frighteningly easy for marriages to get clogged up with resentments, demands, and failures to communicate. Those inevitably flow in both directions, and they can drive people to betray the one they love most. In the aftermath of infidelity, there’s a hard choice to be made: Do you just throw away the years you’ve spent together, the love you have shared? Or do you try to address the problems and make a new start? It’s hard, painful work to reclaim a marriage, but I’ve seen it done, and it begins with mercy.
Mercy posts, I am discovering, almost inevitably double as “No Easy Answers” posts. Mercy issues a huge challenge to our human sense of justice. We don’t want to see gray areas. We want to classify people as bad guys and good guys, and see the good guys rewarded while the bad guys are punished. But if we are to be followers of Christ, we have to strive to see the world as he did, not as we would.
I think it might all begin with ‘repentance’ instead of mercy?
No, I don’t think so. I think we are called to be merciful even when someone is not repentant. It may take a different form, but mercy can’t be conditional, if we are to model Christ. Don’t you think?
Yes we try to emulate Christ, but as humans who can be destroyed by other humans it is not always wise to not have conditions. To me boundaries are conditions. For example I don’t believe in putting people to death, mercy to me might be life in jail to others mercy is giving someone their freedom. But this isn’t always wise. In other examples Some would say it is unmerciful not to give someone a second chance – not always true – it would be unwise to give an unrepentant cheater, unrepentant murderer, unrepentant most things a second chance. Maybe mercy guided by wisdom is what I mean. also when we ask God for forgiveness we are to go to him confessing and repenting our sins.
Yes, that is true–mercy doesn’t have to mean no consequences. That makes sense.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Kathleen M. Basi wrote:
>
Interesting topic to read this morning; I’m killing time until opening arguments in a high-profile criminal trial. I work for the defense attorney. Until I got in this business I never really thought of criminal defendants as people with parents, kids, spouses, friends. etc. Now, our clients are all well-heeled, and so that may be easier to see than in the criminals in the orange jumpsuits in state court, but the reality is, they are people too.
We don’t always recognize that we’re trained to dehumanize people who do bad things…
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Kathleen M. Basi wrote:
>
“But if we are to be followers of Christ, we have to strive to see the world as he did, not as we would.”
I think this is the key.
And then we all have long discussions over exactly what that means…but it’s good to keep it in mind.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Kathleen M. Basi wrote:
>