jrovira at drew.edu
Thu Jul 7 22:36:43 EDT 2005
There's also something questionable about translating rules of personal
conduct intended only for Christians to principles of civil government.
Paul repeated Christ's injunction to love your enemies in Romans 12,
but that didn't keep him from observing that civil government "does not
bear the sword for nothing" in Romans 13. It is not the responsibility
of civil government to forgive sins, simply because you can't forgive an
offense committed against another person, only those offenses committed
The victims of the London attacks and their families have to decide for
themselves how to apply the principle of forgiveness, but it's the
responsibility of the British gov't. in this instance to "bear the sword."
There is nothing we can do in response to terrorism to stop the next
attack other than catching terrorists before they attack again. We
project weakness and/or forgiveness, and they will attack. We project
strength aggressively, and they will attack. I think we need to accept
the fact of violence as a part of our lives indefinitely. There's no
magic wand we can wave to make it go away.
Carol Barton wrote:
> RE: [Milton-L] LondonSu Fang Ng's comment is an interesting one, in this
> " I am shocked by what happened today in London and do not think that
> violence should be condoned. Yet, I do not see that Carroll Cox had done so
> when he expressed his sympathy for other victims of violence. Yes, he was
> being polemical, but he was responding to Carol Barton's very provocative
> statement: "May the misery they've caused return to them "an hundredfold."
> As she says in a later post, the phrase is from the Old Testament and one
> that encourages vengeance and further violence. What good would that do?
> What about turning the other cheek? What about forgiveness?"
More information about the Milton-L