Pressing charges against a persecutor

[Guest]

Hi,

Fortunately for me, I have not been beaten up because of any christian activities I have engaged in - although it has happened to friends of mine in the past, and wanted to hear what other peoples opinions on what would be the appropriate respons I am considering this in light of Jesus' words to 'turn the other cheek' and how that works itself out in modern society.

Hypothetical scenario: A Christian involved in evangelistic ministry is attacked and [severely] beaten up by a person who objects to their evangelistic activity. The Christian is aware of who it is that has beaten them up.

Ethical decision 1: The police arrive and ask the Christian person who was beaten up if know the attacker. [They do - but should they 'dob in' their attacker or refuse to identify the attacker. Should they say they know them but refuse to say who it was, or identify them but say they don't want charges laid]

Ethical decision 2: The police have caught the attacker, and have sufficient evidence to prosecute them. Should a Christian press charges? Should the Christian ask the police not to prosecute them?

On the one hand in a modern Western state we have every [legal] right to engage in evangelistic activity and therefore are within our rights to object strenuously to violent attack - especially on the grounds of our evangelistic activity. On the other hand does Jesus command to turn the other cheek mean not only that we don't stop them beating us up, but that we also take action to help them to get away with it when lawful authorities intervene on our behalf. Or should we merely tell the truth about what happened and let the police do as they will?

This seems somewhat ambiguous because St Paul informed the Roman authorities know about the plot against him [Acts 23:16-22]

I am interested in how other people view this.

thanks

David.

[Guest]

I invite you to read the following article from the December 2006 issue of THE VOICE, the official newsletter of the Evangelical Anabaptist Fellowship, before expressing your view.

AMISH EXEMPLIFY GOD’S LOVE

In early October of this year, a gunman, Charles Carl Roberts IV, a 32 year old milk truck driver near Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania, carried an arsenal of guns into an Amish one-room country school, and shot ten girls. Five died, and five others were seriously injured. One will likely be permanently disabled.

Before the shooting started, Roberts released all the boys, and also allowed the teacher to leave. When his horrible intentions became evident, one of the older girls, Marian Fisher, begged Roberts to shoot her and let the others go. When the police arrived, having been called by the teacher, the gunman began shooting the girls, and Marian Fisher was one of the five girls killed. When police stormed the schoolhouse, Roberts killed himself, but not before he had completed his grizzly mission.

In the days that followed, five funerals were held in the community. Dressed in white, the girls were laid to rest by the Amish community as it struggled to come to terms with this horrendous tragedy. Why had it happened? What did it mean?

It was hard to understand why Roberts, married and with three children, had done this terrible deed. According to his family, he had not shown this kind of violence in his behaviour before, and was described as a good husband and father. He provided a small clue in his response to one of the girls who asked him before he shot her, why he was doing this. “He was angry with God,” he said. In notes left for his family he expressed similar feelings: that he was doing this because of a decade’s old grudge.

What was astonishing was the response of the Amish community. There was no rancour, no public display of anger, no calls for tougher gun laws, no expressions of hatred toward the Roberts family. Their response was one of grief, forgiveness, and support for the gunman’s family. One of the Amish men, a grandfather of one of the victims, said that he hoped the Roberts family would stay in the community because of the support they would receive from the Amish. Amish elders visited the Roberts family and extended their condolences and offers to help. Amish attended the funeral of the gunman, and mourned with the family. The Amish were also quoted as saying that even though they could not understand why this tragedy had happened to them and their children, they accepted this as God’s plan for their lives.

The Amish response was so different from the response one might have anticipated. News reporters asked the usual questions, trying to probe the depth of their anger at Roberts, at his family, and their desire for justice to be done. The answers were so different, that the media hardly knew what to make of them.

Instead of being consumed by these negative attitudes, the Amish expressed love, forgiveness, acceptance, and compassion. For centuries they have read the Bible and believe in God’s way of salvation. This provided them with a compass. They believe that Jesus in his death on the cross forgave their sins, and in so doing provided a model for how to deal with sin and violence, namely to be outrageously generous in forgiving. They accepted the model of Jesus on the cross who prayed that his executioners would be forgiven. They followed the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, in which he said, “If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.” [Matt. 5:38], and, “I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” [Matt. 5:44].

In a sense, it is astonishing that so many people found the Amish response to this shooting astonishing. Should this not have felt right for all who claim to be Christian? Is this not the true Christian response in similar situations? The fact that we were astonished illustrates how hard it is to truly live according to the teachings of the Bible. It is so easy to be influenced by other, non-forgiving responses.

What can we learn from the Amish? Character is important. The exemplary response by the Amish did not happen suddenly, nor by chance. It was shaped over centuries of teaching and practice. How the Amish acted in a moment of crisis was simply consistent with the strong Christian faith they had nurtured, and that had nurtured them, for many years.

Community is important. The strong, biblical character they displayed is shaped by living and worshipping together. They drew strength from God and from each other. Their insights and responses were formed as they listened to sermons, prayed, sang hymns, shared fellowship meals, and raised barns together.

Peace and reconciliation are God’s way. We live in a society saturated with violence. There is violence on the school grounds, on TV, in movies, on our streets, in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. The Amish response to violence challenges all of us to rethink how we respond to violence, hatred, and war. Their insight is that God’s way of dealing with evil and violence is not to create a balance between crime and punishment, but rather to reach out with forgiveness, and to transform an enemy into a friend, give confidence to those who are smitten, and take a chance on those who feel they are rejected. War and violence is not the way. Even as a nation, we need to learn this regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We are to love each other as God has loved us. By extending love, reconciliation and forgiveness to the Roberts family, the Amish recognized that to carry rancour is not only to hurt the other, but it also destroys your own self. To forgive frees both the victim and the perpetrator from the corrosive power of hatred and vengeance. Our society often sees love as weak, and force and violence as powerful. The Amish experience suggests that the opposite is true. The Bible teaches this, now the Amish have helped us see it. By extending the healing power of forgiveness to the Roberts family, they tried to ease the burden they knew the Roberts’ family would have to bear because of their husband’s, father’s, son’s and brother’s deeds. They tried to do what they could to heal the pain so that it wouldn’t continue its corrosive force for generations.

The Amish proclaimed the gospel of Christ. We don’t often see the Amish in their quiet, unassuming, unpretentious way as being evangelists. And yet, in this episode, they proclaimed the gospel of Christ in a most powerful way for all to hear and see. They were evangelicals in the true sense of the biblical understanding of this term, namely, proclaiming the gospel (evangel) in deed and word.

[Guest]

I agree wholeheartedly that the response of the Amish in this particular situation has been an exemplary display of Christian love and principle.

However, it would have been more to the point had the gunman lived and been captured by the police. In that scenario, what should they have done? Should they have refused to press charges? Should they have refused to say what happened?

It is clear to me that whatever the gunman had done, his family and friends are innocent of any crime and therefore it is actually evil to subject friends or family to persecution on account of the actions of the gunman.

What the Amish have actually demonstrated is actually 'going the extra mile'. They did not hold the friends and family accountable for the gunmans actions - as is right - and nobody should hold them accountable because they are innocent. So what the Amish have done in this that is exemplary is to actively reach out to people that many people would be uncomfortable with - even though they are actually innocent.

These friends and family of the gunman are hurting precisely because they are likely to be persecuted [unjustly] on account of the sins of their relative/friend. So the Amish have reached out to those who would normally be overlooked as needing compassion at this time - despite that it may engender some personal discomfort because of their relationship to the person who caused them pain - but in defiance to those who would persecute innocent people on account of the actions of their relative.

So the question that I am actually asking is this:

What should a Christian do, if the gunman had got away [initially] and then had been captured by the police? Should they have refused to say whether it was he that committed the crime?

Should they merely tell the truth about events and let the police take whatever action they deem fit? Should they lobby the police to relese the gunman and not charge him? It is the response to the gunman that I am concerned with rather than his family/friends.

thanks

David.

[Guest]

to me, submitting to govt authorities requires that we not allow criminals, particularly violent ones, to escape unpunished. in your first scenario, the man who beat up the evangelist may do so again and again if nothing ever comes of it. might he come to christ if the person he beats up doesnt press charges? possibly. but the person who is beaten up can still forgive him, even if he is arrested by the police for his acts.

just my thoughts.

TK

[Guest]

TK,

I think you got it right; I was thinking much the same thing. I once saw a newsmagazine program about some rascists who lynched a black teenager in the South - an innocent kid they hanged just because he was black. His mother was a Christian and the inteviewer asked her if she could forgive the men who killed her son. She replied "I already have". I don't recall her objecting to the men being punished.

dbuddrige,

Consider this scenario: You live in a neighborhood among many families with small children. You have a 5 year old daughter. You find out that a man in the neighborhood has raped your daughter. Do you report him to the police, not report him to the police but warn the neighbors, or keep quiet and forgive him? And what if your daughter was 17 years old and a Christian girl. Should she keeep quiet and forgive him?

But this is not to the point either. Your question was specifically in regard to being persecuted because of being a Christian. In regard to bearing the cross, in one of his books Joachim Jeremias remarked that under the law of the time, a man condemned to crucifixion was considered "dead" from the point he was comdemned and that those who might inflict pain on him on the way to crucifixion could do so with impunity. As I recall Jeremias believed turning the other cheek and cross bearing was about being persecuted as a Christian. He may be right.

Dallas Willard would, I believe, say we are to turn the other cheek "as appropriate." He thinks we badly miss the point of the Sermon on the Mount if we take it as a collection of rules or laws rather than as principles.

I guess I didn't answer your question. To me the key is always "what would be the loving thing to do? Would it be loving to allow men to persist in crime? How would doing nothing affect others? Or would it be best to make a point of forgiving them as a witness to your faith? The answer is not easy.

Paidion, you posted:

Their insight is that God’s way of dealing with evil and violence is not to create a balance between crime and punishment, but rather to reach out with forgiveness, and to transform an enemy into a friend, give confidence to those who are smitten, and take a chance on those who feel they are rejected.

This would only apply on a personal level but God instituted government to deal with criminals, Romans 12:4 "For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil."

If we keep silent about criminal activity, are we thwarting God's will?

[Guest]

to me, submitting to govt authorities requires that we not allow criminals, particularly violent ones, to escape unpunished. in your first scenario, the man who beat up the evangelist may do so again and again if nothing ever comes of it. might he come to christ if the person he beats up doesnt press charges? possibly. but the person who is beaten up can still forgive him, even if he is arrested by the police for his acts.

I agree TK, The bible says that "love fulfills the law" but in Matt 23.23 Jesus called "justice" the weightiest part of the law and justice demands this person pay for his crime and that society does have the right to be protected. The victim should forgive the attacker mostly for his or her's own benefit and to demonstrate Christ's light to the world but justice must be served also.

[Guest]

I dont think it is right to let a person go who is not acting according to the law.

Also, " IF any man lack wisdom let him ask of GOD for he gives to all men
liberally and upbraideth not."

Personally, I would turn him in.