Rod, point of information: the bundle was not a bunch of pots. It was his armor and weapons, symbolizing the fact that his life of violence was holding him in sin.
And no, I’m not a pacifist. But good soldiers are not those who are obsessed with their calling, any more than good accountants are. And they certainly aren’t those who, like De Niro’s character, joyfully enslave and oppress the defenseless.

the thing i like about the Christian idea of forgiveness isn’t that you have to ask Jesus to forgive you. he already did. he knows you’re a messed up, sinful individual, but he’s totally over it.
the key is that you have to accept that forgiveness. you have to believe that you can be forgiven, that you’re not a lost cause. whether you believe in Jesus or not, the concept of self-forgiveness is an important one. a lot of people simply give up on themselves, or get wrapped up in their past transgressions, or feel like they need to undergo some kind of dramatic attonement like dragging heavy armor up a hill. they make it into an obstacle that they don’t believe they can ever overcome.

One of the things I have come to realize over the years is that forgiveness makes so much more sense than anything else you can do. It’s the only option that you can get anything out of. We’d like to think that withholding forgiveness constitutes some sort of punishment or justice, but like the old cliche says, the only person who is hurt by it is yourself. There’s just nothing to be gained by refusing to forgive.

The film that is central to Sullivan’s work, and reviewed by Green above, is the award-winning documentary As We Forgive, directed by Laura Waters Hinson and narrated by Mia Farrow. (www.asweforgivemovie.com)
Trailer can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK0W4jx2OZY
AWF is also currently engaged in a nationwide campaign called the ’40 Days of 4Giveness’ that invites universities, churches, and other groups to engage their communities on the topic of radical reconciliation through a screening of the film that benefits the Living Bricks Village. The campaign hopes to see more than 40 more homes of reconciliation built in the village as a result.

The Amish can afford to be forgiving because they live within nations that have unforgiving court systems. The Amish can afford to be nonviolent because they live within nations that have violent militaries. If everyone were forgiving all the time, criminals and attackers would take over everywhere, and there would be no civilization.
Forgiveness is a luxury, like your wonderful gourmet foods and wines.

If you want to read the full story behind these accounts of radical forgiveness in Rwanda, check out the book inspired by the film. As We Forgive: Stories of Reconciliation from Rwanda (by Catherine Claire Larson, Zondervan 2009) covers seven true stories of forgiveness in the wake of Rwandan genocide.
From Publishers Weekly
Rwanda—bloodied, scarred and nearly destroyed by the 1994 brutality of the Hutu genocide of Tutsis—is now called an uncharted case study in forgiveness by author Larson, who was inspired by the award-winning film As We Forgive. Individual stories form prototypes: there is Rosaria, left for dead in a pile of bodies, who forgives her sisters killer. And Chantal, whose family is brutally murdered yet who forgives her neighbor for the crimes. Devota, mutilated and left for dead, survives, forgives and eventually adopts several orphans. Each story is horrible and deeply personal as Larson mines the truths of forgiveness deep in each ones tale. Helpful interludes offer readers hands-on ways to facilitate forgiveness and take the next step to reconciliation in their own lives. This isnt an easy book to read or digest, yet its message is mandatory: Forgiveness can push out the borders of what we believe is possible. Reconciliation can offer us a glimpse of the transfigured world to come. (Feb.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Unearned forgiveness is mercy. Granting the unearned in spirit or matter is immoral since it leads to the destruction of your values and thereby your life. Earned forgiveness is justice. Justice is the rational trade of value for value in matters of spirit. Justice is the moral choice since it leads to the preservation of value and life. See “Atlas Shrugged” for more details.

Good Lord, Polistra–forgiveness is not a luxury; it’s a necessity. And not just for the Amish or those who live apart from the world, but for those who live in the world as well.
Otherwise, things like violent road rage would be a national pastime. Oh, wait…

I wrote a movie review once of The Mission. I watched the scene several times in slow motion of Rodrigo murdering his brother. The director was smart enough to have the warrior cut the armor free using the same knife. Maybe I am wrong, but it makes so much sense.
Divine Mercy. Lent next week. Eat your chocolates, and practice Mercy.

Forgiveness is not a luxury. It is a command for us Christians. I do think that that there are psychological benefits, but mainly its an identification with grace. Jesus makes that point very clear in the parable of the unforgiving servant.
Matt 18:21-35
It the Lord’s Prayer Jesus tells us that forgiving others is a part of our prayer and an acknowledgment that we ask God for forgiveness. All that said, its extraordinarily hard.
the best example I know is:
wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/jaas/periodicals/JJAS/PDF/2009/11_193-210.pdf

Polistra – there is an important distinction to draw between governments and individuals that you may be missing. You’re correct, the Amish are protected by living in a country whose government brings justice to criminals and protects its borders, and that is a good thing. Governments should do that. But the topic of forgiveness being discussed right now is from individual to individual – forgiving those who hurt us personally. And that is not a luxury. Anyone anywhere can do that.
And in terms of governments meting out justice, I think the rules change slightly in situations like that facing Rwanda – for the government to try to bring justice to every person who committed murder during the genocide would devastate nearly half of the population, and would not bring healing. The reconciliation and forgiveness project is the best solution that I can see. So in this instance forgiveness becomes a national concern. But government bodies are very rarely faced with that type of situation.

Polistra – there is an important distinction to draw between governments and individuals that you may be missing. You’re correct, the Amish are protected by living in a country whose government brings justice to criminals and protects its borders, and that is a good thing. Governments should do that. But the topic of forgiveness being discussed right now is from individual to individual – forgiving those who hurt us personally. And that is not a luxury. Anyone anywhere can do that.
And in terms of governments meting out justice, I think the rules change slightly in situations like that facing Rwanda – for the government to try to bring justice to every person who committed murder during the genocide would devastate nearly half of the population, and would not bring healing. The reconciliation and forgiveness project is the best solution that I can see. So in this instance forgiveness becomes a national concern. But government bodies are very rarely faced with that type of situation.

Another testimony of extravagant, Christ-inspired forgiveness out of Rwanda is the book Left To Tell by Immaculee Illibagiza. After watching her parents and brothers butchered to death by her “neighbors,” she holed up in a minister’s bathroom for months with 6 or 7 other women, learning to let go of her bitterness with repeated recitations of the Rosary. When the genocide subsided, Immaculee sought out her family’s murderers in order to forgive them. Now married and living in the U.S., Immaculee leads delegations–affiliated with the UN, if I’m not mistaken — of Rwandan survivors back to their homeland to reconcile with those who committed the atrocity. Amazing story.

Forgiveness does NOT require that we abandon justice or even force! I can personally forgive my attacker and still press charges for both justice and protection of myself and other potential victims. Heck, I can forgive someone and still decide that continuing to be in relationship with them is unhealthy or even dangerous. I can forgive my enemy and still fight against his attempts to force evil on the world. It is a shallow, immature person who must hang onto animus and anger in order to pursue justice, protection and work against evil. If you must be angry and unforgiving in order to pursue justice then either what you are forgiving isn’t worth pursuing justice over or your sense of morality is gone. But refusing to forgive is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die. Pointless.

Rod wrote: “For me, though, if not for the power of God, I know I wouldn’t have it within my abilities to forgive something like this.”
Rod, what do you mean by that? I think it is very likely that no Gods exist. I haven’t experienced a God or anything remotely similar to a God. So, I think it is very likely that if one is able to forgive the kind of act that you have described, then one is able to do so without God’s existence, because I think it is very likely that no Gods exist.
Now, maybe your point is that you would be unable to forgive something like this without your BELIEVING that one or more Gods exist. First, perhaps some people shouldn’t forgive the kind of act you have described. Second, I suspect that your BELIEVING that one or more Gods exist is not necessary for you to forgive this kind of act. I know that millions of people who haven’t believed that one or more Gods exist have been able to forgive this kind of act. And I suspect that you are not so different than those millions of people.

Steve,
I’m afraid you are just going to have to accept that many of us suffer from powerful delusionary experiences wherein we have emotional, intellectual and sometimes even auditory-type experiences of this non-existent God-guy. These delusional experiences can have a powerful effect on sufferers such that they believe unlikely things, are able/willing to do things such as forgive, love and have patience that they would be unlikely to do without said delusions. While to the enlightened such as yourself, these delusions are obviously not related to any reality, disproving them works about as well as disproving any subjective experience such as love, physical pain, etc. It is also not known why so many seemingly normal, mentally healthy, intellectually able people suffer from said delusional experiences or why others don’t. Obviously, we must accept the perceptions of those who don’t suffer from these delusions as representative of reality and discount the perceptions/experiences of those who have experiences of this non-existent God out-of-hand. But demanding that sufferers offer alternative explanations for the source of beliefs, benefits and perspectives which they believe are the results of their delusional experiences is generally pointless.

“Forgiveness is a gift we give ourselves” – I forget where I read that quote but it has stayed with me for years. Holding on to hatred over the harm others have done to us damages us – sometimes even more than the original cruel act – so to forgive is to spare yourself the harm of holding on to all those negative feelings. I have often thought confession and penance were brilliant ideas as it is so necessary for the sinner to be relieved of the burden of their guilt as well as the victim to be relieved by the bruden of their hatred.
Re: Rwanda. I saw a clip and then did some further reading about a program run by the Irish branch of Caritas – they are called Trocaire which in Irish means mercy. The organization is very active in Rwanda running the peace and justice commissions which are local groups that mediate disputes people have so as to promote peaceful ways instead of the tribal vengeance schemes. They also have used story telling and theater both to promote forgiveness and to assist those who did heinous acts to be integrated back into their communities as they are released from prison. It was fascinating and uplifting to watch- they have folks who did wrong perform these plays wherein the wrongdoers speak of their motivations, what they did and how they feel now. The audience is composed of people who were victims of the wrongdoing. It was very dramatic to watch how the audience and the actors respond – very emotional, obviously cathartic and also allows for forgiveness. I was struck by how this approach is culturally so sensible – the tribes have well established patterns of story telling that are very important in their culture as do the Irish and so to see this cultural tradition be drawn upon to promote healing was brilliant. This approach is also being used by Trocaire in the Congo to help integrate the children who were forced into the horrible Lord’s Army and then forced to engage in truly grotesquely horrible acts (including often killing their own parents under duress). They use not only the story telling but traditional forms of dance and it is such a testimony to the power of traditional forms of art to promote understanding and forgiveness. As these plays begin you can see the hostility in the audience but as the play goes on it is as if the hostility in the room melts and people become engrossed in the story telling and begin to empathize with the actors as they either act out or dance the story of their experience.
Given that the perpetrators of this cruelty both in Rwanda and still continuing in the Congo still have to live together – promoting forgiveness and reconciliation is the only way to avoid further violence and retribution.
The Peace and Justice Commission idea is spreading throughout Africa as a means to avoid tribal violence. I have a lot of admiration for the people who are working on this – often at risk to their own lives.

1. me wrote: “I’m afraid you are just going to have to accept that many of us suffer from powerful delusionary experiences wherein we have emotional, intellectual and sometimes even auditory-type experiences of this non-existent God-guy.”
What specific “experiences” are you referring to?
2. me wrote: “These delusional experiences can have a powerful effect on sufferers such that they believe unlikely things, are able/willing to do things such as forgive, love and have patience that they would be unlikely to do without said delusions.”
First, you think these experiences are “delusional” but you still believe that they occurred? Why? That doesn’t make sense to me.
Second, millions of people who don’t believe in any Gods are “able/willing to do things such as forgive, love and have patience.” I’m an example. So, I have reason to believe that any person can do these things without believing that one or more Gods exist. All humans are importantly similar.
And even if some humans are not able to do these things without believing in the existence of God, that is irrelevant to whether I know or am warranted in inferring that God exists. Analogously, some people probably acted good because they believed that Cupid and Thor exist. And they most likely don’t exist.
3. me wrote: “While to the enlightened such as yourself, these delusions are obviously not related to any reality, disproving them works about as well as disproving any subjective experience such as love, physical pain, etc.”
Could elaborate on that? I don’t see your point. What experiences are you referring to? What do you mean “disproving them?” You mean disproving that you have had them? Well, that depends on what they are? Could you tell me more about them?
4. me wrote: “It is also not known why so many seemingly normal, mentally healthy, intellectually able people suffer from said delusional experiences or why others don’t.”
What experiences are you referring to? Millions and millions of “seemingly normal, mentally healthy, intellectually able people” have many false beliefs. For instance, millions of people believe that the universe is less than 10,000 years old. So, that millions of people believe that X is true is not important to whether I know or am warranted in believing that X is true.
5. me wrote: “Obviously, we must accept the perceptions of those who don’t suffer from these delusions as representative of reality and discount the perceptions/experiences of those who have experiences of this non-existent God out-of-hand. But demanding that sufferers offer alternative explanations for the source of beliefs, benefits and perspectives which they believe are the results of their delusional experiences is generally pointless.”
I’m having a hard time figuring out those two sentences. Could you make your point in a different way?

Forgiveness is likely to be rational response for the reasons outlined. Why go on destroying?
There is probably a small element of forgiveness in modern democratic and states who have eliminated the death penalty. It’s a way of saying that we collectively as the state can rise above the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth mentality.
Forgiveness takes backbone and an ability to build a relationship which despotic states could not rise to. To me, it’s a humanistic impulse, and one which allows reconciliation between parties that would, if god were fair, be equal in his eyes. The law becomes free.
The dragging of the weapons is the symbolic redressing of an imbalance. Today, in rational states, the admittance or non admittance of penitents would be based on risk to the community. Witches are no longer burned at the stake and people are allowed to be themselves.

The absolute centrality of forgiveness, the possibility of reconciliation and restoration, is indeed what sets Christianity apart. It has its roots in Judaism, of course. The concept expiation on one level, and on a more metaphysical level, the concepts of the Oneness of God and the emphasis on restoring the cosmos to the way they are supposed to be.
But Christ takes these old traditions and fulfills them. He practiced what he taught. In his own person, in his Incarnation, and in his dying and rising again, he makes possible not only forgiveness but reconciliation between all people, and not only that, but the restoration of all things.
It has already begun. It is the Kingdom of God, and it is imminent. I

I think it is very likely that no Gods exist. I haven’t experienced a God or anything remotely similar to a God. So, I think it is very likely that if one is able to forgive the kind of act that you have described, then one is able to do so without God’s existence, because I think it is very likely that no Gods exist.
Does one need to point out that your assessment of what is “likely” is hardly proof?
And even if you’re right, what’s the alternative to forgiveness? To be trapped forever in anger? What fun.

I intellectually understand that forgiving people who’ve wronged you is emotionally better than holding grudges, as there’s plenty of research to back this up too. But I’m always amazed when people do it. Now I’m not bearing grudges towards other people right now. But I haven’t been seriously wronged either (minor league wronged, but nothing major). But if someone did seriously wrong me I’m not sure I could do it.
polistra, nations are different from individuals. Nations have neither friends nor enemies, just interests. Because they are not a single person they neither hold grudges, nor do they forgive.
Also, I’ve hinted about game theory in the past. One of the most famous games is the iterated prisoners dilemma. On the surface it seems simple, but the more it’s studied the greater depth and complexity found. It’s applicable to more situation than anyone anticipated too. For example it can be used to study evolutionary arms races or arms races between nations.
The players choose a strategy and play an indeterminate number of rounds. Now there are many strategies, but they can be categorized as friendly or selfish, forgiving or grudge bearing. The expectation was that selfish grudge bearing strategies would tend to be the winners. But when John Maynard Smith ran simulations using a computer something really unexpected happened. The friendly forgiving strategies won.

Odessa wrote: “Does one need to point out that your assessment of what is ‘likely’ is hardly proof?”
I believe that I don’t know for certain than no Gods exist. But I believe that it is likely that no Gods exist.
Odessa wrote: “And even if you’re right, what’s the alternative to forgiveness? To be trapped forever in anger? What fun.”
I’m not sure I see your point. One can forgive people without one’s believing that one or more Gods exist. I forgive people all the time, and I’m an atheist. Many atheists forgive people frequently.

Steve: “Many atheists forgive people frequently.”
Gee, I bet no one here has ever considered such a thing before! (deep sarcasm) You talk like a college kid in a late night jam session who thinks he’s being provocative by introducing atheism to the mix. It ain’t provocative and this “what-ever-do-you-mean?” feint is insulting to the common intelligence. You’re not even engaging in what was actually said – just putting up quotes and responding to some claim only you wish to see there.

Me wrote: “Gee, I bet no one here has ever considered such a thing before! (deep sarcasm) You talk like a college kid in a late night jam session who thinks he’s being provocative by introducing atheism to the mix. It ain’t provocative and this “what-ever-do-you-mean?” feint is insulting to the common intelligence. You’re not even engaging in what was actually said – just putting up quotes and responding to some claim only you wish to see there.”
Nothing in your previous post reduces the plausibility of anything that I have written. For instance, for the sake of argument, let’s say that I “talk like a college kid in a late night jam session who thinks he’s being provocative by introducing atheism to the mix.” Many people who meet that description frequently make reasonable judgments.
Second, what did you or any other poster write that you don’t think I responded to well enough? I’ll respond to it. Also, if it not inconvenient, please tell me what the person(s) meant by the claim(s). And then I’ll respond to what you think the person(s) meant.

You might be interested is reading Rabbi Boteach’s article/blog (see link) on “Why Christians Refuse to Hate,” written after a visit to Zimbabwe. He brings up some very important points. Here is an exerpt….
“One innocent victim [of Mugabe's brutal regime] was Ben Freeth, a sunny Christian farmer who, after publishing an article in the Western press about the illegal and murderous farm seizures being carried out by Mugabe’s Zanu (PF) party, was savagely beaten and later watched as his farm was burnt to the ground. When I met Freeth in Harare last week he described to me and my friends from the Christian relief organization ROCK of Africa who were hosting us how, in the midst of the assault that fractured his skull, he suddenly reached out and touched the feet of his assailants and said, “Bless you, bless you.” My Christian counterparts were deeply moved by this quintessential story of Christian love for one’s enemy. I, however, was aghast.
Ben is a hero who, at the risk of his life continues to serve as a spokesman for the thousands of white families who have been brutally dispossessed of their land and many of whom have been killed. But I could not help but challenge this aspect of the story. “Every ounce of blessing we have in our hearts has to be reserved for the all the AIDS orphans that I saw dotting this once-proud land. These wretched thugs deserve not our blessing but our contempt, not our love but out hatred.” A debate broke out in the room. I alone maintained my position. My dear friend Glen Megill, a saint who founded ROCK of Africa, said, “Shmuley, Jesus told us to love our enemies.” Yes, I said. But your enemy is the guy who steals your parking space. G-d’s enemies are those who murder His children. And Jesus never said to love G-d’s enemies. To the contrary, the book of Proverbs is clear, “The fear of the Lord is to hate evil.” Psalms reinforces the point. “Those who love G-d hate evil.”
This is something that has always puzzled me. My Christian colleagues at ROCK of Africa are angels. In ten days we distributed corn seed to the poorest villages, gave out mosquito nets, hugged and prayed with AIDS victims, and put on large feasts for hundreds of hungry villagers and children who dwell in mud huts. We colored pictures with orphans in Harare and gave them toys and presents. The hearts of evangelical Christians are enormous repositories of loving-kindness. But why must the heart be so wide as to extend to Mugabe’s killer henchmen? What place have murderers earned in our hearts? The same is true of my many Christian brothers who have told me that their faith commands them to love Osama bin Laden.
My fear is that such distortions of Christian teaching undermine our resolve to confront evil regimes. When Jesus enjoined to ‘Turn the other cheek,’ he meant to petty slights and humiliations. Does any sane person really imagine that he meant to ignore and overlook mass murder?”

I love what you wrote about forgiveness. I got hung up on your reference of “man” being synonymous for humanity.