2 of 3

Is it wrong to feel that way?

On one level, there will be a gut reaction—a sense of rage. Rage is natural first response. It is also an appropriate response if we do it before the God of infinite love and justice. It is how I read the imprecatory Psalms, like Psalm 137, which pronounce blessing on those who size and dash the Babylonian little ones against the rock. Those words may sound vengeful. But what is significant is that, this being a ritual prayer, is giving his anger over to God. In the same way, we need to bring our rage before God and the Cross of Christ.

Ultimately, however, we cannot leave it at the gut reaction. There must be a Christian response. And as Christians, the will to embrace and forgive our enemy must be unconditional. How do we respond as Christians, not simply as human beings or as patriots who have legitimate feelings of being aggrieved and assaulted? This is the important question. And the answer lies in reconciliation.

What about justice?

Divine grace does not preclude justice being done. The naming of the deeds as evil and the protection of those who are innocent is extraordinarily important. But none of these things means we should not also seek to forgive the offender and reconcile with the offender. We can never close the door to reconciliation and all our actions must be directed toward the goal of reconciliation. Just reconciliation, of course, because justice is an integral part of reconciliation.

What if the other party—your enemy—sees you as a cancer on the world, as many Muslim extremists view Americans?

The perspective of the other person may not be the correct one and probably is a profoundly skewed one. Enmity, especially strong enmity, has the effect of skewing perspectives on others. However, there might be questions of justice between nations that are at stake here too. We would do well to use this occasion as a nation to ask, "What would cause a person or group of individuals to see us in a way you describe and commit such an act?" Many people from outside this nation, rightly or wrongly, think of the U.S. as this huge giant with economic and military prowess that steps on the toes of smaller nations. That perspective is on the whole not correct, but some of it may be true.

For any victim, particularly us Americans, it is difficult to see ourselves through the eyes of our offender. But for any victim it is the most salutary thing to do. Why was I perceived this way? Why did they act toward me in this way? This in no way justifies the hatred of their behavior toward us—especially when thousands of innocent people are killed—but the sheer exercise of examining our own actions and attitudes can be fruitful, and is indeed essential if we are to reconcile and live in peace with justice.

President Bush has suggested that bringing Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders to justice may require killing them. Would that be just?

We have to protect ourselves from the possibility of such an event happening again. That's an easier prospect when the evildoer can be caught and in some sense restrained. But religious terrorism and suicide bombings are not like other crimes. If you are certain they would repeat the act, trying to stop them and in the process possibly kill them may be required. I think it would be analogous to the situation with Hitler's Germany. I have always felt that Christians like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who attempted an assassination of Hitler, had the right perspective on such acts. Bonhoeffer was convinced that he was doing the right thing—even though doing the right thing entailed doing the wrong thing. He was doing a right thing for which he felt he had to repent. He was doing the right wrong thing. Taking a life is always the wrong thing. The choice Bonhoeffer had was doing the lesser of the evils. However, the fact that one has to do evil and chooses the lesser one doesn't mean it becomes not evil. He must still repent of his sin. The self-righteousness with which we go after those who have assaulted us and the absence of any sense that we ourselves are implicated in their act is to me deeply troubling.

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

September (Web-only) 2001, Vol. 45