Terrorism, Crime, and Forgiveness

This past month we once again noted the anniversary of 9/11 and remembered the 3000 innocents who died on that horrific Tuesday morning. It is ironic that this past month Scotland released the terrorist (Al-megrahi) convicted of the bombing on Pan Am Flight 103 which killed 270 innocents after serving 8 years in prison. The Scottish minister of justice said it was done in the name of compassion. In the name of “compassion” the Scottish minister became a minister of injustice. Notwithstanding the behind-the-curtain deal for oil that Great Britain made with Libya to make this happen, the notion that some other party, and not those directly made to suffer by the horrific acts of the offender, should take upon himself the decision to forgive and release the offender is an outrage to common sense, common decency, and morality. Several arguments can be made against such “forgiveness.”

First, fairness (i.e. justice) requires that what is done for one must be done for others in similar circumstances. Hence, what will the Scottish government do with all those others who are in prison for murder who become terminally ill? Will it release them as well? Not likely. Is Mr. Al-megrahi (and will he be) the only prisoner ever to become terminally ill while in prison? Can you hear a terminally ill prisoner ask the warden: “If Mr. Al-megrahi was released after killing 270 people, why are you keeping me here when I only killed one?” Of course, those who committed lesser crimes should have an even better case: “I only robbed a bank, why am I not released to my family?” Can you imagine the warden replying: “I’m sorry. You don’t qualify. Your crime is not severe enough; you didn’t kill enough people to be forgiven.”

Second, the function of the state is not to administer forgiveness, but to administer justice. If in the modern world, the state has taken from victims the right to exact justice in the interest of dispassionate impartiality, then at least let the state leave victims the prerogative to forgive. By taking away that prerogative, the state completely crushes and disempowers victims, leaving them to wallow in their grief now compounded with bitterness and resentment.

Third, forgiveness requires repentance. But you may ask: “Didn’t Jesus say that we should forgive our enemies?” Yes, we need to forgive OUR enemies, not someone else’s. There is a one to one correlation between the offender and the offended. The Lord’s Prayer says: “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass AGAINST US.” There is no evidence in the Bible of indiscriminate forgiveness, much less of forgiveness by those not directly victimized. Even Jesus did not forgive everyone. As Jesus hung on the cross with the two thieves on each side, they were mocking him. Later one of the thieves repented and chastised the other thief for his mockery. It was to the repentant thief that Jesus said “Today you shall be with me in Paradise” (Lk. 23:42-43). To the other thief he said nothing. Repentance is the prerequisite for forgiveness (Lk. 24:47; 2 Cor. 7:10; 2 Pet. 3:9). The Scottish minister obviously thinks himself more merciful than Jesus.