PAGE TITLE: http://phillipjensen.com/
ARTICLE TITLE: Bali Bombers
DATE: Thursday 6
November 2008
AUTHOR: Phillip Jensen
AUTHOR INFORMATION: Phillip Jensen is an Australian clergyman of the Anglican Diocese of
Sydney and the Dean of St Andrew's Cathedral. He is the brother of Peter
Jensen, the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney. In 2003 Phillip became the Dean of
Sydney at St Andrew’s Cathedral and Director of the Sydney Diocesan Ministry
Training and Development (MT&D). As Dean he is guiding the Cathedral in its
development as a thriving city church with the gospel clearly proclaimed as the
Bible is taught. He has planted congregations which are connecting with the
city dwellers, workers and players. As Director of MT&D he continues his
lifelong passion for training people in ministry as he leads the department in
providing ongoing training for ministers in the Sydney Diocese. In conjunction
with these roles, Phillip continues to accept many invitations to carry on his
work of expounding the scriptures at local, national and international
conferences. Currently he is developing a variety of visual media Bible
teaching opportunities which are broadcast on TV each week on the Australian
Christian Channel, and posted on different websites in Australia and
internationally.
 |
|
Phillip Jensen
|
Bali Bombers
A regular
article written by Phillip Jensen in his role as Dean of Sydney at St Andrew's
Cathedral.
Originally Published:
6th
November 2008
At the time
of writing Australians await with ambivalence the execution of the Bali
bombers. It is widely expected to happen this weekend.
Many strong
emotions are expressed about this sentence—from outrage that it has taken so
long, to indignation that we condone the barbarity of execution.
These men
killed over 200 people, 88 of whom were Australians. They did it in a
cold-blooded manner, not targeting military personnel or strategic objectives
but apparently innocent holidaymakers. There is no doubt they are guilty for
they are proud of their work. They are totally unrepentant, and seem to enjoy
their notoriety.
One
victim's mother recently said: “The day that I wake up and they're dead, I will
be happy.” Yet other victims' families do not want them executed.
The reasons
for peoples' opposition to the death sentence varies. Some are simply opposed
to the death sentence. Others think the death sentence gives the bombers what
they want: martyrdom. Still others think the death sentence is too light. As
one mother put it: “If it was my choice, crudely, I would have their penises
shot off so they can't reproduce and their hands cut off so they can't make
another bomb and then let them rot in prison forever.”
Few topics
demonstrate so clearly Australia's moral confusion.
Our
political leaders are opposed to capital punishment. They have removed it from
Australian law. They oppose it on the world stage of diplomacy. They appeal
against execution on behalf of all Australian citizens overseas irrespective
how heinous their crimes.
But yet as
politicians they wish to maintain public support. And the public have never
agreed with the blanket rejection of all executions. The public have a
well-developed intuitive sense of ‘justice’ that requires retribution for
crimes. In particular the public have not agreed with clemency being shown to
the Bali bombers. So the politicians are going very softly on these executions.
Some people
oppose capital punishment as a matter of absolute morality. It is always wrong
under all circumstances. They argue that executions are essentially barbaric.
They reject retribution and vengeance. They say that executing people reduces us
to the same level of guilt as the killers—even if we are killing the guilty and
the guilty killed the innocent.
But most
people argue against executions for pragmatic reasons. The courts often make
mistakes and the death sentence allows for no errors. It never rehabilitates
anybody. It does not prevent crime happening. In the case of the Bali Bombers
they argue that there will be riots against the West, and the raising up of
other terrorists. Furthermore, they argue that it will increase the likelihood of
the execution of some Australians who are also awaiting execution in Indonesia.
But the logic of pragmatism does not adequately meet the victim's appeal for
justice.
Vengeance
is the motivation for justice as it calls for retaliation and retribution. It
gives people what they deserve. It is what justice is all about. Remove
retaliation, and justice is reduced to amoral social engineering. Without
retributive justice, governments become totalitarian tyrannies.
Like anger,
vengeance is right—and like anger it is very difficult to control. We should be
angered by criminal inhumanity like rape, paedophilia, torture and the
holocaust. Not to be angry at such iniquity is to share in its guilt for we are
accepting evil. Even mercy requires justice—for without justice, mercy becomes
the acceptance of evil. Without the right to exact punishment, forgiveness is
meaningless acquiescence.
But the
problem with vengeance is the difficulty to control it—especially if victims
administer it. It is hard for victims to remain cool headed enough to be sure
of the guilt of the perpetrator. Vengeance easily gives rise to payback
killings and communal vendettas.
Furthermore
it is difficult for the victim or their families to deliver justice without
losing control and exceeding just retribution. It is important that two eyes
are not taken for one or two teeth removed for one. In sinful hearts, righteous
indignation easily spills over to excessive punishment.
But what of
capital punishment—taking away somebody's right to life?
Rights
always imply duties. Our right to life is the duty not to take it from others.
The very passage that teaches the right to life also teaches the punishment for
taking a life. “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed”
(Genesis 9:6). The death sentence is part of the justice and mercy of God.
But it is
not up to us to avenge ourselves. God has given the work of justice to
governments—“the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the
wrongdoer.” (Romans 13:4). We are to turn the other cheek rather than to repay
evil for evil. “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of
God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”
(Romans 12:19).
God is
angry, and in his just anger punishes sin—even with death. He warned Adam
against eating the fruit saying “in the day that you eat of it you shall surely
die.” (Genesis 2:17). As the scripture teaches us “The wages of sin is death”
(Romans 6:23) and “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of
sins” (Hebrews 9:22).
That is why
Jesus died to pay for sin—not his but ours. His death atoned for sin—turning
aside God's righteous anger. When Abel's blood was shed by his brother—it cried
out for justice. When Jesus blood was shed for his brothers—it fulfilled
justice and declared mercy and pardon to all who trust in him. By his execution
God upholds justice while extending mercy.
Yet while
it is true that the wages of sin is death, “the free gift of God is eternal
life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).
No comments:
Post a Comment