Comments on: The Lords Prayer and the Lockerbie Controversy

By: kellamd

kellamd — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 02:47:50 +0000

All the pretty words are just telling us that Christ’s words are completely unuseable in real life.

By: Don Keane

Don Keane — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 22:42:32 +0000

I repeat: Kenny MacAskill’s decision was the ONLY one open to a Christian. I also repeat my remark about doubts regarding the extent of Mr Megrahi’s involvememt in the PanAm/Lockerbie bombing: are people in the US unaware of their government’s (and the IK government’s) obstruction of attempts to have various documents relating to the matter made public (including attempts by relatives of some of the victims of the bombing)?

By: patsw

patsw — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:58:32 +0000

The only person who can forgive is the one offended. The 270 victims cannot forgive their killer. What we the living can only do is apply imperfect justice and mercy in how we try, judge, and punish murderers. Imprisonment has several purposes: protection, deterrence, rehabilitation.

The early release of Megrahi is a great boost to the morale of terrorists and a signal that the West lacks the will to investigate, convict, and punish the guilty according to its own laws.

It can only set us up for another Lockerbie.

By: Third Age League

Third Age League — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:18:34 +0000

To forgive others is not a relative law, but absolute as a super-natural cause for receiving forgiveness. Not because it is arbitrary, but because it is within our nature that as long as we hold non-forgivingness and lack of charity in our heart, we hold judgement for ourselves. We are, then, incapable of receiving the gift of grace from God.

The dilemma, it seems, is this; We CAN NOT forgive all others!

However, it is the super-nature of the spiritual life that what man can not do, God can.

So the reliance upon God’s forgiveness relies on the absolute dependence on the power (which is love) from God to transform our anger,hatred, obtinancy and selfishness to super-natural virtues of love, freedom and charity.

In practice, how do we work with the spirit to cooperate to accomplish in act what is desired?

By looking at our own unremitting non-requitable need for the same forgiveness that we MUST provide for others. Honest self-searching and contrition and seeking ONLY mercy. Broken and emptied we become a channel for that mercy for the whole world.

Their are two aspects discussed here. The first addressed above is the spiritual good of the person.

The second is in regards to temporal social justice, of which, the Lord’s prayer does not speak. The social teaching depends on spiritual and practical prudence consistent with the good of the commonweal.

The desire of a minority for revenge is not a rightful cause of retribution. Again, owning only if this is not the good of the commonweal.

Each of us is dependent on all of us, and all of us is dependent on the spiritual unity of each person. Neither can act spiritually efficiently with out the other.

By: cathyf

cathyf — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 01:41:01 +0000

There is also the special problem of terrorism, which is that terrorism is intended, by its practitioners, as an “evangelical” act. Terrorists do not kill people because they hate them, or because they want money or power, but because they are making a statement trying to convert those of us who witness the terrorism to their beliefs.

Osama bin Ladin explained quite publicly in the 1990′s that westerners had proven themselves weak by their response to terrorist attacks, and that weakness was proof that just a few more attacks and we would surrender.

To encourage those who use the tool of terrorism to think that they can succeed is manifestly evil.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:26:25 +0000

I’m afraid I am going to have to disagree with this article. Forgiveness does not imply a remission of all penalties related to the act. For instance, if someone steals and seeks forgiveness, they generally have to give the money back. If a spouse is unfaithful and his/her partner forgives, it does not mean there are not serious consequences of the cheating, including distrust, disease, or an icy relationship.

It is perfectly consistent to lovingly forgive Mr. Megrahi but still desire punishment, punishment not out of revenge or retaliation, but for other justifiable reasons (setting an example to others, for instance).

After all, God will forgive the most heinous of acts, yet such forgiveness does not remit all punishment. If so, there would be no suffering here on earth or in purgatory.

Furthermore, I find it hard to swallow that Megrahi is not a threat just because he is terminally ill. He probably is, but who knows? The man is an unrepentant killer of 270 people who has served less than one month in prison for each of those deaths. I see no evidence that he is any less of a threat now than he was at any time after the bombing, aside from the fact that doctors say he’ll be dead soon. I pray that he repents of his actions.

By: Don Keane

Don Keane — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:54:26 +0000

Watching Kenny MacAskill on TV here in Scotland, making his announcement about Mr Megrahi made me proud to be a Scot. The decision was the only one open to a Christian, in all the circumstances of the case: including the fact that the extent of Mr Megrahi’s guilt for the Lockerbie bomb has always been in doubt. It’s easy for those not personally affected by the destruction of the PanAm aircraft to withhold compassion and forgiveness: it’s hard for those affected to extend these, and so they particularly are in need – not of the empty words of critical politicians – but of prayers that they may come to the day when they can extend compassion and forgiveness.