|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Other Cheek
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
I'd be interested to hear some opinion on the issue of revenge, especially in view of how it fits in with theistic theories and practices.
I have been the victim of an act of revenge so severe that my life has changed quite profoundly, and such that I live in a state of constant grief. The revenge was perpetrated by someone whom I had hurt, and for that I remain truly and sincerely sorry- and not merely because it was the reason for their seeking revenge. However, even the perpetrator would I think admit, now that time has done its work in starving the various passions of their oxygen, that the punishment of their revenge is truly disproportionate to the crime that drew it.
I'm wondering therefore about the whole issue of revenge, and if and when it can be justified, and if and when it becomes a bigger wrong than the wrong that birthed it. It seems probable that people who have a grasp of Christian theology will have some interesting things to say about the matter, since it appears to play a hugely important part of that religious philosophy and features so prominently in its scriptures. In my impoverished understanding, Jesus Christ gave the instruction that revenge is a sin and they who are wronged should not seek retaliation but should accept in grace the wrongs they suffer.
Can revenge ever be a wrong that rights a wrong?
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I'm sorry to hear you've been the victim of revenge, and of the proverb "revenge is a dish best served cold".
The chief problem with revenge is that it is almost inevitably disproportionate, and has been (from a Biblical perspective) ever since Genesis 4:24 when Lemek made the following threat: quote:
If Cain is avenged seven times, then Lamech seventy-seven times
Careful readers will note that the previous threat to avenge Cain seven times is recorded as having been made by God a few verses earlier.
This is, to put it mildly, annoying for Christians.
The explanation (or at least mine) is to say, as the Bible also does, that vengeance is God's prerogative, and that we can count on him to be both just (i.e. not disproportionate in his responses) and merciful.
A further problem is that a lot of our Western sense of retributive justice kind of overlaps with the idea of revenge.
The concept of restorative justice is an attempt to offer an alternative.
It is Christian in origin but applied by many communities, including in non-Christian contexts.
(On a theological level, it leads to a lot of re-examination of some received wisdom, for example the correctness of viewing the work of the cross in terms of divine punishment and revenge)
It's not perfect, has its limits, and has the challenge of overcoming prevailing social norms accepted by judges, victims, perpetrators and the general public alike, but has a lot to recommend it and can be implemented informally just as effectively as formally.
[ 29. July 2016, 08:40: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Macrina
Shipmate
# 8807
|
Posted
I'm struggling with this a bit at the minute.
I've been forced out my home because of a series of bad choices made first by my flatmate, then the person she did a job for and then the person who managed my flatmate's work.
All of these people have, in various degrees, lied to me, threatened me and put my life in danger. None of them set out to hurt me, all of them will have acted in ignorance or weakness and I know that because of this I should respond gently.
What I actually want to do is scream and yell and swear and demand that they DO something to make up for this.
The person who threatened me is in prison and I find myself asking hard questions about why they made the choices they did and what their life must have been like to make those choices justifiable. My flatmate gets to access the full support of the law and criminal justice system and I feel I can't be angry at her or take it out on her because she was affected too. Her manager has never and will never meet me but has dropped the pebble in the pond that started this.
I am left with no house right now, my possessions strewn across the city and reliant on the kindness of friends. This feels monstrously unjust and I am stamping on multiple impulses to be unkind or to take actions that will help me but hinder my flatmate and those involved. I want to but ultimately it won't do me or them any good so I am sitting here and just trying to deal.
Posts: 535 | From: Christchurch, New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Two things to think on. The soft one
quote:
According to Goodreads by Chloe Neill:
The best revenge is a life well lived
and the far less soft one from a couple of Bible verses
quote:
Hebrews 10:31
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God
.
and
quote:
Deuteronomy 32:35
Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.’
On the whole, Judaism sought to limit revenge, acknowledging the weakness of humanity with much of the law aimed at setting limits. Christianity goes further asks us to hand over the right to revenge to God. It seems daft but my experience suggests that the God who knows all is a far more thorough revenge seeker than I will ever be.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morgan
Shipmate
# 15372
|
Posted
quote:
Jesus Christ gave the instruction that revenge is a sin and they who are wronged should not seek retaliation but should accept in grace the wrongs they suffer.
Can revenge ever be a wrong that rights a wrong? [/QB]
I don't think that a wrong can right a wrong, even though it is often difficult to think of another way to react.
Revenge is ineffective and unhelpful to both the wronged party and the one who wronged them. However, passive acceptance can also be self-destructive and I don't believe that this was Jesus' way either.
Wrongs do need to be recognised and acknowledged. It should be clear to both parties that a wrong has occurred or at the very least that the damaged party sees the causative action as a wrong.
Jesus asks us to love our enemies and do good to those who seek to do us harm. This good may take many forms including courtesy, forgiveness, helping the person to make amends if they are willing to do so, and ensuring as far as is possible the 'enemy' is prevented from repeating their transgression.
Preventative action is both self-protection and love of the enemy in preventing their further sin. For example, the thief may need help to overcome the reason for their sucombing to theft, and/or may need to be placed in a position away from temptation. The sharp tongue may need attention to self esteem or anger management. The criminal may need support to recognise and manage the consequences of their actions.
These things may be initiated by the wronged party or by a more neutral third person.
I find that prayer helps a lot, as does giving oneself time to be more reflective and less reactive.
Posts: 111 | From: Canberra | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Helen-Eva
Shipmate
# 15025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God
.
and
quote:
Deuteronomy 32:35
Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.’
Christianity goes further asks us to hand over the right to revenge to God. It seems daft but my experience suggests that the God who knows all is a far more thorough revenge seeker than I will ever be.
Jengie
When I am hopping furious with someone I take comfort in the fact that the God of the Old Testament may like to smite the heck out of them (as per quotes above) but then I remember that I'm supposed to love my enemies and wish them well which makes me think I shouldn't like the above quotes. And then I give up because it all seem contradictory. Help?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
I thought the radio 3 announcer said "Weber" but it turned out to be Webern. Story of my life.
Posts: 637 | From: London, hopefully in a theatre or concert hall, more likely at work | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I don't know about revenge, but I think there is confusion between forgiveness for an act, however heinous, and being prepared to take the perpetrator back into one's life, or society, as if nothing had happened.
Frequently when people speak of 'forgiveness' they really mean remission: they seek a cancellation of the consequences of the act.
I'd argue there are some actions which, while the person who suffered ill through them may find it in themselves to forgive, nevertheless means that the person who suffered the ill has had their life, or the life of those they love, so radically altered that there can be no cancellation because the consequences cannot be undone.
IME this is often interpreted as an unwillingness on the part of the injured party to "forgive" when in fact they have forgiven but the clock cannot be turned back and life resumed as if nothing has happened - and this is when people sometimes speak of people taking revenge, which isn't the case at all.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) Sorry to hear that you've been made to suffer, Yorick.
The basis of our law in England stems from the need to gain proportionate justice from wrongs. Our natural desire for justice causes us to be tempted to take revenge, especially if we don't have any other outlet.
Through Christ, we are aware that we must be ready to forgive an unlimited number of times, and leave vengeance to God as only God knows what is in the heart of the perpetrator, and everyone will be accountable to God. For everything. Which means that we must face up to not being perfect too.
I think that we should tell people what impact their actions or words have caused, pray to God that they will be embarrassed by his love, and let go. That is the release of forgiveness.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I don't know about revenge, but I think there is confusion between forgiveness for an act, however heinous, and being prepared to take the perpetrator back into one's life, or society, as if nothing had happened.
Frequently when people speak of 'forgiveness' they really mean remission: they seek a cancellation of the consequences of the act.
I'd argue there are some actions which, while the person who suffered ill through them may find it in themselves to forgive, nevertheless means that the person who suffered the ill has had their life, or the life of those they love, so radically altered that there can be no cancellation because the consequences cannot be undone.
IME this is often interpreted as an unwillingness on the part of the injured party to "forgive" when in fact they have forgiven but the clock cannot be turned back and life resumed as if nothing has happened - and this is when people sometimes speak of people taking revenge, which isn't the case at all.
Yes. There is a difference between forgiveness and trust. You can forgive someone while still recognizing that they are untrustworthy, and appropriate boundaries should be in place to limit the damage they can do.
This is definitely linked with the notion of revenge. The point of forgiveness is to benefit the offended person, not so much the perp. We forgive because if we don't, our hearts are eaten away with bitterness. Revenge, otoh, illustrates the old truism "unforgiveness is like drinking poison and expecting your enemy to die." When we nurture unforgiveness it grows and encompasses far too much territory-- which is why, as noted above, revenge is almost always disproportionate.
to those who have shared their stories of how they have been harmed:
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Forgiveness, punishment and revenge are 3 separate things. Revenge ties me up in blood boiling troubles. Punishment is dispassionate but may satisfy the revenge feelings, something I am working through after the attempted murder and terrible assault against an adult child of mine. Forgiveness lets me move along, though it isn't the perpetrator I will forgive. It is God. The perp needs to be out of my consciousness. Priests are inordinately helpful in sorting this sort of thing.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
I knew a wise rector who said that it is entirely appropriate to yell "Ouch!" when you've been hurt. That isn't revenge.
And I, too, am sorry about all the folks who are struggling with the fallout of revenge and the desire for revenge.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
If, when presenting your gift to the altar, you suddenly remember a brother has a grievance against you, go and make your peace with him. Then come together to make that gift.
(Free translation)
If you feel you have been wronged by someone, go to them and show them their wrong. If s/he repents you have regained your friend. If s/he refuses, return again this time bringing a witness. If s/he again refuses ... treat him/her as an outcast.
(Free translation again)
If you do want to reconcile with your acquaintance but do not feel comfortable doing it one on one, may I suggest looking for a mediation service. There are some out there who will do it for a nominal fee.
It is no good living with such a deep wound. I have had to suffer some myself. If possible, make amends. Please.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
It might help to ask what precisely you want at this moment. Is it to stop hurting? That's a perfectly proper response, and needs no repenting. Is it justice? That too is a proper response, as long as we don't get it confused with the next one... Is it to cause harm to the other person? That's out of court, both by Christian reasoning and by the logic that recognizes that acts of revenge beget one another and grow ever larger.
I regret that you don't have the outlet Christians do, of handing it over to God and letting him deal with it--"vengeance is mine" and all that. Which is probably better said "justice is mine," but it's really hard for ordinary human beings to draw the fine line where one starts and the other ends.
But it may help to remember that most of what you want is a good thing. To stop hurting? good. To recover emotionally, socially, financially, whatever? good. To stop thinking about this endlessly? good. To have justice rather than inequity in the situation? good (though possibly unobtainable). To be able to sleep at night? To move on with your life? Good, good, good.
It is damnably hard to stop yourself from striking back. I know this from experience. But the impulse does leave in time, especially if you work on getting as many of the good things listed above (esp. with the help of a pastor, counselor, or wise older person) and keep playing whackamole with the impulse to harm the other person again, which is the single response that must be quashed and never indulged, even in thought, if you ever want to be free again.
Now to the OP, leaving behind the All Saintsy stuff--
Yes, I think revenge can certainly be disproportionate and create a new injury which is justly resented by the victim. In fact, that is the problem with revenge in a nutshell. If it were proportionate and justly administered, it would be justice, not revenge.
The "justly administered" thing is a problem for us too. In the old days (think OT) justice was usually administered either by the victim or by the local community. Naturally there was no clear line drawn between justice and revenge--if the executioner of justice is the aggrieved person, you're never going to get unmixed motives or perfect carry-out. The most the Law of Moses could do was to limit revenge both in scope ("eye for eye", not life for eye) and in opportunity (the accused could run to a city of refuge and stand trial there instead of facing the guy who was after him with an axe; if the court found merit in his plea ("It was an accident, honest!") he would be allowed to stay in the safe city till the current high priest died, and the avenger of blood could not get at him. This created a cooling off period. It wasn't a perfect system by any means; but neither are ours today.
Now, "can revenge ever be a wrong that rights a wrong?" Well, IMHO the answer is "not really." Justice is what you want, if you can get it (a big if, I know) and failing that, it's usually better to leave the standing injustice in the hands of God (or fate, or whatever you yourself conceive of as dealing with the issue).
Even under the best circumstances revenge is contaminated; it is tainted with anger and hatred and that obscures whatever justice it might otherwise be accomplishing (to both victim and revenger). The goal of justice is to have the person receiving it say "Yes, I deserved that, I see now what I did was wrong." The emotions that go with revenge make that sort of response virtually impossible.
Revenge proliferates--rather like ebola. We all know about feuds that have grown all out of proportion to the original harm. And for some odd reason human beings who harm a person are much more inclined to harm that same person again. It's some sort of obscure psych law: hurt someone, and you'll be tempted to do it again. Do good to them, even much against your desires, and the desire to do harm dies down. Which may be one reason Jesus recommended that we love our enemies, do good to those who hate us, and so on. I can say by personal experience that it "works"--the scare quotes are there because it is by no means an automatic process, and it's about as pleasant as seeing the dentist. But the determination to do good to an old enemy (and certainly to avoid harming them!)--well, even though it hurts like a son of a bitch, it's a good hurt, like the ache of a healing bone.
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Gramps, that is well and good if the person is part of your community, ie known to you and needs to have relationship with you restored to remain part of. Not applicable when it isn't. Gemeinshaft verus Gestellshaft (community of interrelated people who kow eachother, and society, where people are mostly strangers to eachother, sociology terms). We have farmed out justice in our large societies in ways a tribal community hadn't in biblical times. Though some of what Jesus wanted for us - a return to personal relationship Gemeinshaft with everyone- was anahronistic then and ceraintly is today.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Helen-Eva:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God
.
and
quote:
Deuteronomy 32:35
Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.’
Christianity goes further asks us to hand over the right to revenge to God. It seems daft but my experience suggests that the God who knows all is a far more thorough revenge seeker than I will ever be.
Jengie
When I am hopping furious with someone I take comfort in the fact that the God of the Old Testament may like to smite the heck out of them (as per quotes above) but then I remember that I'm supposed to love my enemies and wish them well which makes me think I shouldn't like the above quotes. And then I give up because it all seem contradictory. Help?
The first in New Testament and the second is quoted in the New Testament. So it is not an Old/New Testament thing. Sorry, folks who wish it was.
We have sanitized passion out of God and we do so at our peril. God is not the perfectly rational beneficent being who would not say boo to a kitten. Someone who truly cares for others shares in their passions. God, therefore must sees those God-loves hurt and hurts with them. That he can feel the hurt of all sides leads to emotional turmoil on a scale we cannot fathom. The only thing greater is God's love. Therefore it is not by accident that the Old Testament sees God as seated within the tempest.
When we hand over the desire for revenge to God we only really do so when we let him decide what is appropriate. God may be lenient with the individual or he may be the exact opposite; it is not up to us to question this if we have handed it over. However, while I do not believe we can forgive without handing it over the right to revenge to God, I also do not believe that doing so is the same as forgiving. Forgiveness is to open up to this love of God in its fullness.
Let us not pretend therefore that to love like God is to be a civilized rational adult. It in many ways has more in common with the pre-school playground where emotions rise and fall as quickly as the wind changes. The difference is whereas in the pre-school the passions that drove us were from our ego, here we share in the grand passion sourced from God who loves all.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
(Free translation)
If you feel you have been wronged by someone, go to them and show them their wrong. If s/he repents you have regained your friend. If s/he refuses, return again this time bringing a witness. If s/he again refuses ... treat him/her as an outcast.
Forgive me for being picky, but the translation is poor. Dare I say wrong?
Jesus said not "treat him/her as an outcast." He said rather "treat him/her as a Gentile or tax collector." (Matthew 18)
And how did Jesus treat Gentiles and tax collectors?
Uh huh. You got it.
So a better translation would be
"If they again refuse ... treat them as someone to be loved and evangelized in their great darkness, in the hopes that they will see the light."
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
well said, Lamb. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Thanks! It came from my old Greek professor, a compassionate man who had been a missionary and endured much through the years. A real eye-opener for me.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
The old eye for an eye rule sets a limit on revenge. He must not do more damage to you than you did to him. And in the real world, he probably wouldn't insist on cutting off your hand, he would negotiate a price you would rather pay than lose a hand and he would rather receive than get no compensation for his injury except seeing you suffer too.
I struggle sometimes with "move on" vs wanting to not let someone get away with bad behavior and be reinforced in doing it again (to others, even if I can get the bad actor out of my own life) because there are no consequences to him (or her) for doing it.
I suppose the Bible's point is yes stop bad actors to protect others, but not for personal revenge?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
You make a good point Lamb Chopped. Did not have my Greek NT in front of me.
My point, though,is that is is not so much turning the other cheek as it is seeking resolution to an ongoing and even festering problem. Turning the other cheek really does not do that. Seeking peaceful resolution is more assertive and productive in my opinion.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
(Free translation)
If you feel you have been wronged by someone, go to them and show them their wrong. If s/he repents you have regained your friend. If s/he refuses, return again this time bringing a witness. If s/he again refuses ... treat him/her as an outcast.
Forgive me for being picky, but the translation is poor. Dare I say wrong?
Jesus said not "treat him/her as an outcast." He said rather "treat him/her as a Gentile or tax collector." (Matthew 18)
And how did Jesus treat Gentiles and tax collectors?
Uh huh. You got it.
So a better translation would be
"If they again refuse ... treat them as someone to be loved and evangelized in their great darkness, in the hopes that they will see the light."
I like it. But it's too subtle. Nobody would have got that at the time or since but the most enlightened. Jesus wasn't that oblique. That elliptical. He meant to detach oneself, disassociate oneself. Wherein is wisdom. Which is HOW to treat them above.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by L'organist:
quote:
I'd argue there are some actions which, while the person who suffered ill through them may find it in themselves to forgive, nevertheless means that the person who suffered the ill has had their life, or the life of those they love, so radically altered that there can be no cancellation because the consequences cannot be undone.
Not in this life, at least.
There is, to my mind, a distinction between revenge and justice. Justice is never wrong. Revenge is always wrong. Misplaced revenge is very, very wrong. It was very, very, wrong for David West to be attacked by families of the victims of the Moors murderers. It would have been wrong for the families to attack Brady and Hindley. But it was entirely apposite for Brady and Hindley to spend their lives in prison. We should not seek revenge but we are entitled to justice.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
no prophet...
In the original post I got the impression the poster knew the person who hurt him. Moreover, he admits it was the result of him hurting that person previously.
This is why I recommended not turning the other cheek but to assertively seek reconciliation.
I understand neither one may be of a faith community, or if they are, maybe not the same faith community. That is why I omitted direct mention of the church in my second translation.
I do highly recommend mediation in order to bring reconciliation about. That is why I encouraged a professional mediator.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
I'm very sorry to hear of your grief, Yorick.
I remember very well the sense of fairness I had as a school boy, that the bad feelings caused by my neighbour's minor infringement could be put right by an equal and opposite response. So Stephen smudged my work with his sleeve when he turned round. Annoyed by his carelessness I would elbow him in the ribs, connecting a little too well and hurting him. He would respond to this over-payment by thumping my thigh with his fist, which didn't actually hurt much and, he being my best friend, we were happy to leave it at that, neither with a sense of grievance.
It seemed natural and self-explanatory to behave like this, putting wrongs right with retaliation and finding it a satisfaction. Was it inate, or did I get it from the films and TV I watched? It's the major plot line in everything from Tom and Jerry and Popeye, via almost every cowboy film to almost every action film today: Taken, Independence Day, Star Wars, Bourne and a hundred others. (It is, I think, a particularly American thing.)
I remember the first time I read 'turn the other cheek' and being amazed, fascinated and scandalised by this teaching. Impossible and brilliant.
I think now that God has no part in revenge or violence. I think that justice is lopsided, with no element of payback. I think we are not called to balance right and wrong, good and harm, but to create good out of nothing. Not to settle a conflict with carefully judged responses, but to build relationships and add to possibilities with generosity and risk taking.
I don't know what that might mean to someone whose life has been permanently and seriously harmed by another's actions, but I think we have to look for something that will seem impossible, unnatural, weak and foolish. Not a correction, certainly not a redress, but a new beginning, and probably a dying along the way.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hilda of Whitby
Shipmate
# 7341
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
no prophet...
In the original post I got the impression the poster knew the person who hurt him. Moreover, he admits it was the result of him hurting that person previously.
This is why I recommended not turning the other cheek but to assertively seek reconciliation.
I understand neither one may be of a faith community, or if they are, maybe not the same faith community. That is why I omitted direct mention of the church in my second translation.
I do highly recommend mediation in order to bring reconciliation about. That is why I encouraged a professional mediator.
Gramps49 is right. It's clear that Yorick knows the individual that was hurt. Gramp49's suggestion to find an impartial mediator might well be in order, if both parties agree and the mediator is truly impartial.
I especially agree with L'Organist's post. There can be great pressure put on wronged people to prematurely "move on" and "forgive". Especially in questions of "family unity", when the party who wronged and the party who was wronged are in the same family.
Some people are vengeful, no question. I am not in favor of vengeance. But without knowing what Yorick did to hurt this individual, or what form of revenge the person Yorick wronged has chosen, I can't make an informed decision about whether what happened is actually revenge. These things are none of my business, of course, but this is clearly more than just a philosophical issue to Yorick, at least, because he (I am assuming that Yorick is a man) openly admits that he hurt this individual. I sort of feel like I am being asked in some way to agree that the other person is acting in a highly vengeful manner, and without more info, I can't do that.
Sorry if I have misread anything.
--------------------
"Born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world is mad."
Posts: 412 | From: Nickel City | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
Yes, I'm sorry I was rather vague about the particulars of my case but I feel I must be discrete here. Suffice to say, the hurt I caused this person was unintentional. Their revenge however causes huge pain to me by their ruthless and clever intention (and also collaterally to innocent others, though this was mostly unintentional). Thank you very much for the very moving kindness in your various replies, but the sad facts of my case would I think add little of value to our discussion of the principles.
Is it generally agreed here that revenge does nobody any good? As far as I can tell, it would not seem to have done much to improve the life of the avenger in my case, as I doubt their hours are filled with joy at my grief. But even if they are happy now, I do wonder if that's a good thing in any sense. Is there any imaginable scenario where people are truly improved by exacting their revenge, when this does not conform with either restorative or divine justice as described above?
I do wonder what the point of revenge is. Obviously, the retribution appeals to our deep seated sense of justice and right and wrong and all that, but I wonder what it actually achieves, even in those rare cases where the balance of fairness is perfectly reached. It just seems to me like an additional and unnecessary wrong, and what's the good of that?
[ 30. July 2016, 14:57: Message edited by: Yorick ]
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
I think it's generally agreed, yes. And no, I can't think of a scenario where revenge (as opposed to pure justice) does anybody any good. The schadenfreude etc. creates a personal corruption. It would be better to just let the issue lie. Better than that, of course, would be either justice or mercy repairing the situation--but we can't always get what we want.
IMHO the satisfactions of revenge are like those of scratching a mosquito bite. Nobody scratches for the pure pleasure of scratching; they do it to relieve an itch. But given the choice, they would prefer that neither the itch nor the scratch existed. So with injury and revenge.
Another issue, though, is that it's perfectly possible to mistake someone's action for revenge when it was meant in no such way. I've been in a few situations where I took certain actions in all innocence and realized later that they had fallout for certain other people who assumed I'd done it on purpose to avenge some slight or another. I've also been in positions where we were downright forced to take certain actions (notably, a child protective action) and I'm damned sure the person involved thinks we did it out of spite. In truth, we did everything we could to get out of it, and were finally forced into it by the law and supervisory responsibilities (not to mention God giving us the hairy eyeball if anything HAD gone on to happen due to our neglect of duty).
It sucks (as usual), but it helps to consider whether the person who has committed revenge might have meant something else entirely; or might have intended a smaller revenge than actually happened; or might be just hitting back without a real understanding of just how much pain they are inflicting. Never underestimate human stupidity or self-centeredness or blindness to the impact on others.
[ 30. July 2016, 16:48: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Is there any imaginable scenario where people are truly improved by exacting their revenge, when this does not conform with either restorative or divine justice as described above?
I can't answer for divine vengeance, but as far as restorative justice is concerned, there is no element of revenge. The ultimate focus is on the restoration of both victim and offender such that both can have a proper place in the community. The way forward is not retribution (punishment for breaking a law) but restoration (mending what has been broken).
quote:
I do wonder what the point of revenge is.
I think revenge is a bit like masturbation. It's the prospect of release rather than the situation after it that drives people on. And once you've done it, you find out it doesn't actually satisfy anything.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
The Semitic cultures struggle with the sense of revenge. While both Muslim and Jewish faiths have the eye for an eye model, it is not working out that way.
I think it is one reason why there continuing conflict between the Palestinians and the Israeli's. A bombing leads to a house being destroyed leads to another bombing and on and on.
Before I get jumped on about the Palestinians, let me just say I am pro Palestinian. I think their land was robbed from them and is still being robbed from them. But they are in a continuing cycle that prevents them from talking with the Israelis and vica versa. (And I hate that the US continues to enable this)
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
The chief problem with revenge is that it is almost inevitably disproportionate,
And that the sense of injury is as well. Not only in the evaluation of the damage, but also the source. The victim can be part of the reason there is an injury to start.
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Is it generally agreed here that revenge does nobody any good?
I disagree. I do think revenge does more often cause damage to self as well as target, objectively and subjectively. A problem here is that the responses are from people who believe in a supernatural system of balance.
But there are those who do not and whose sense of importance of self is great enough to ignore consequence to others. Personally, I do not believe that revenge is restorative, but I think it foolish to not acknowledge that there are those who might.
I, too, wish to offer sympathy for your plight. inadequate as my expression of it is.
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I think revenge is a bit like masturbation. It's the prospect of release rather than the situation after it that drives people on. And once you've done it, you find out it doesn't actually satisfy anything.
I had not read this thread when I saw this in the Quotes file. The flippant response I had was gone as soon as I read the OP. However, As noted above, I think it needs a presupposition to be true for it to be accurate that simply is not always the case.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I wonder if the old saw that revenge is a dish best served cold is a way of telling us to allow time to elapse on the original frustration and anger before exacting revenge? That way any revenge may be more proportionate.
Going back to the OP: Yorick, you believe that your original offence has attracted a disproportionate revenge in response to the initial hurt. Could it be that the hurt that triggered this revenge was far more painful to the victim than you accept? That the level of revenge exacted is because you didn't accept how much hurt you originally caused?
I know when I have wanted to exact revenge, the sheer fury of having something that I found devastating dismissed as minor was what drove me to want to make the perpetrator suffer that same pain. I didn't, but I did report them for something they shouldn't have been doing, which would have been a fairly major annoyance.
The problem with setting up some forms of revenge in the first white heat of anger is that it is very difficult to reduce it when you have calmed down. Which is why mediation might be possible after some time has elapsed to make the situation more proportionate - and also get outside bodies involved to help resolve the situation.
I did also plan an additional revenge that would have remained as an irritant should I have carried it out: a children's book dedicated to the person without whom I wouldn't have had the knowledge to write it. Some years later, if I get time I'd still like to produce the book, without the dedication.
Sue Grafton has written as series of Kinsey Millhone alphabet mysteries; she admits the first one was conceived out of her fantasies of murdering her husband as she divorced him. As she reaches the end of the alphabet that foreword has softened and almost disappeared.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I think revenge is a bit like masturbation. It's the prospect of release rather than the situation after it that drives people on. And once you've done it, you find out it doesn't actually satisfy anything.
And, like masturbation, revenge lives in the imagination. The outcome, in reality, would be nothing like the imagined scenarios.
We all tell our own narratives about what happened. The perpetrator is likely to have convinced him/herself of all sorts of justifications and unrealities. Any 'revenge' would add into their feelings of being victim/hard done by/justified in their action.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Isn't revenge one of the drivers of historical religions? "Let's think about the punishment of those who had no punishment in their life. Let's assume they will know punishment after their death." This has been introduced for the comfort of those who had found no justice in life, in many strands of religion. The untruthful devoured by the monster after the weighing of the souls at the entrance to the Duat in Egypt. Sisyphus and Tantalus perpetually punished for their crimes against the gods. There are some nasties in Chinese mythology, and others. Not to mention Hell. Upon which much preaching has dwelt over the centuries.
A very easy trap to fall into.
Perhaps it would be time to dump it, instead of attacking people who preach a God of Love instead of an angry and punishing one.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I wonder if the old saw that revenge is a dish best served cold is a way of telling us to allow time to elapse on the original frustration and anger before exacting revenge? That way any revenge may be more proportionate.
If that was the original intent, it's gone 180 since. The way the saying is used today-- the way it was used in The Wrath of Kahn-- is the exact opposite. It's used to describe a deliberate savoring of the moment of revenge, an extended ruminating on the grievance and plotting the revenge so that the ultimate victory is all the more sweet.
Which, as has been noted above, is exactly the problem with revenge, as opposed to justice, mercy, or grace. It poisons your heart and soul. It keeps you bound to the offending person, giving them space in your gut every day, driving you into bitterness. Another old saying, "choose your enemies wisely, for you will become them."
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I wonder if the old saw that revenge is a dish best served cold is a way of telling us to allow time to elapse on the original frustration and anger before exacting revenge? That way any revenge may be more proportionate.
If that was the original intent, it's gone 180 since. The way the saying is used today-- the way it was used in The Wrath of Kahn-- is the exact opposite. It's used to describe a deliberate savoring of the moment of revenge, an extended ruminating on the grievance and plotting the revenge so that the ultimate victory is all the more sweet.
From all the references I've encountered, this is its original and only meaning.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I have a problem with the idea that "vengeance belongs to the Lord".
First, too often that's just pious words which seek to keep the suffering out of sight and silent.
Second, the phrase is not much help if one is convinced that God is "specially using" you/your church/your position. Then it isn't much of a step to believe that you are enacting God's vengeance. Which is quite a biblical idea really.
And third, Christians might have been taught for years about being kind, being graceful, loving those who hurt us - and truly and honestly believe that this means certain actions are "out" (violence, swearing at someone, trickery, petty acts of hurt) but think that a range of "passive-aggressive" actions are perfectly acceptable.
A while ago I was hearing an author talking about the research she had been doing for a book about the Amish. There this passive-aggressive thing seems to be present to the nth degree - so there is an extreme "slow-burn" simmering disagreement which can take over lives.
The idea that makes most sense to me at this moment is that vengeance is something which needs to be embraced because pretending that the feelings are not there is a problem. One then needs to have constructive avenues to release those passions - which might indeed require violence (against inanimate objects), anger and swearing. By railing against these things (possibly, maybe), we Christians could actually be contributing to something worse.
[ 31. July 2016, 18:11: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Second, the phrase is not much help if one is convinced that God is "specially using" you/your church/your position. Then it isn't much of a step to believe that you are enacting God's vengeance. Which is quite a biblical idea really.
The Bible more than once says exactly the contrary. For instance, Romans 12:18-20 quote:
If it is possible on your part, live at peace with everyone. Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but leave room for God’s wrath. For it is written: “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” On the contrary, “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him a drink. For in so doing, you will heap burning coals on his head.”…
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
The bible says many things, many of them contradictory.
Samson was a tool of God's vengeance. Judges 16.
Of course that's not the whole story. But it is part of the story, so an individual claiming to be the embodiment of the wrath of God is not entirely unprecedented.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I have had doubts about the heaping burning coals on the enemy's head part of that reference.
It could lead to doing all the good things in the expectation of the enemy suffering from them, so that the outwardly good becomes the inward revenge.
Or am I over-thinking it?
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
quote:
The idea that makes most sense to me at this moment is that vengeance is something which needs to be embraced because pretending that the feelings are not there is a problem. One then needs to have constructive avenues to release those passions - which might indeed require violence (against inanimate objects), anger and swearing.
I'm interested in these ideas. On the one hand I lack the skills / personality / history to cover the ground between silent, resentful complicity with an attack on the one hand or massive rage on the other - and making an offender even aware of the offence (though of course they will deny it) seems to be part of something I need to do so as not to boil for hours, days...
So letting out some anger - a 'fuck off' or two - has been uncharacteristic for me, and has _felt_ helpful.
But - I've read (perhaps Ruby Wax's excellent autobiography?) that anger is never cathartic. That's my experience too - I often wake in a state of uncharacteristic peace, but as soon as I fail to play LC's 'wack-a-mole' I lose it, and anger possesses me. Sometimes a time of prayer will get the peace back. Sometimes immersing myself in manual work helps, after an hour or so. I'm strongly inclined to think my using anger will change the game, but not extinguish it - quite the opposite, and who knows what the new game will contain.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The bible says many things, many of them contradictory.
I think the idea of vengeance being God's prerogative, rather than being exercised by humans, is pretty consistent in the NT at least.
And there's a difference between anger - which is entirely legitimate - and how it is dealt with; vengeance is one option in the latter respect, and not a good one.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The idea that makes most sense to me at this moment is that vengeance is something which needs to be embraced because pretending that the feelings are not there is a problem. One then needs to have constructive avenues to release those passions - which might indeed require violence (against inanimate objects), anger and swearing. By railing against these things (possibly, maybe), we Christians could actually be contributing to something worse.
I've long thought that must be part of the point of Psalm 137.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
mark_in_manchester: quote:
So letting out some anger - a 'fuck off' or two - has been uncharacteristic for me, and has _felt_ helpful.
Of course. Swearing seems much more satisfying if you use it sparingly. All this potty mouth (mine, too ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) ) is diluting the delight of a well-said, filthy rant.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I have had doubts about the heaping burning coals on the enemy's head part of that reference.
It could lead to doing all the good things in the expectation of the enemy suffering from them, so that the outwardly good becomes the inward revenge.
Or am I over-thinking it?
I think the 'heaping coals' means that the culprit will be embarrassed - red faced - as you have repaid them with kindness?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick: bold mine
I have been the victim of an act of revenge so severe that my life has changed quite profoundly, and such that I live in a state of constant grief. The revenge was perpetrated by someone whom I had hurt, and for that I remain truly and sincerely sorry- and not merely because it was the reason for their seeking revenge. However, even the perpetrator would I think admit, now that time has done its work in starving the various passions of their oxygen, that the punishment of their revenge is truly disproportionate to the crime that drew it.
Have you ever told the person you hurt that you are sincerely sorry? If not, I would recommend it. Don't mention what the other person did, just apologize. I have no idea what the result would be, but I think it would have an effect on the situation.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I think the 'heaping coals' means that the culprit will be embarrassed - red faced - as you have repaid them with kindness?
That is very much how I interpret it. And importantly it also has the potential to break the cycle of revenge.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Isn't revenge one of the drivers of historical religions? "Let's think about the punishment of those who had no punishment in their life. Let's assume they will know punishment after their death." This has been introduced for the comfort of those who had found no justice in life, in many strands of religion. The untruthful devoured by the monster after the weighing of the souls at the entrance to the Duat in Egypt. Sisyphus and Tantalus perpetually punished for their crimes against the gods. There are some nasties in Chinese mythology, and others. Not to mention Hell. Upon which much preaching has dwelt over the centuries.
A very easy trap to fall into.
Perhaps it would be time to dump it, instead of attacking people who preach a God of Love instead of an angry and punishing one.
I really doubt this, since the tales are almost always IME used as Horrible Warnings--which means the storyteller is envisioning them as something that could conceivably happen to the teller and his/her friends, if not careful. (one rarely gets the chance to tell lengthy stories to one's enemies)
Also, if vicarious gloatfests were the original purpose of these zillions upon zillions of stories, I find it odd that they are rarely used for that purpose today. In fact, when someone DOES use them that way (e.g. Westboro Baptist with their dreadful signs), the vast majority of onlookers shudder as if witnessing a horrible perversion.
Humanity hasn't changed that much. Since the bulk of humanity uses those stories for personal and intra-community policing and apparently always has, I suspect that is what they were originally written/spoken for.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I have a problem with the idea that "vengeance belongs to the Lord".
First, too often that's just pious words which seek to keep the suffering out of sight and silent.
Well, I suppose it could be used that way--but that's a perversion of the idea. And abusus non tollit usum "The abuse of something doesn't invalidate its proper use."
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Second, the phrase is not much help if one is convinced that God is "specially using" you/your church/your position. Then it isn't much of a step to believe that you are enacting God's vengeance. Which is quite a biblical idea really.
Okay, this is precisely what Paul is warning about. They are not to enact vengeance at all, because vengeance belongs to God. Claiming to justified or worse, specially anointed for such a role is to fool oneself and take a decisive step toward personal disaster. If you look through the OT, those who are described as enacting God's vengeance are AFAIR major villains--the Assyrian armies, the Babylonian same, and so forth. Being the "scourge of God" is a really bad career choice, because God breaks such scourges, and with good reason.
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
And third, Christians might have been taught for years about being kind, being graceful, loving those who hurt us - and truly and honestly believe that this means certain actions are "out" (violence, swearing at someone, trickery, petty acts of hurt) but think that a range of "passive-aggressive" actions are perfectly acceptable....
The idea that makes most sense to me at this moment is that vengeance is something which needs to be embraced because pretending that the feelings are not there is a problem. One then needs to have constructive avenues to release those passions - which might indeed require violence (against inanimate objects), anger and swearing. By railing against these things (possibly, maybe), we Christians could actually be contributing to something worse.
This is another case of abuse which does not invalidate the use of a concept.
I think you're confusing justice with vengeance. We are permitted to hunger and thirst for justice, in fact encouraged to do so. But vengeance is out of order, including passive aggressive vengeance (and yeah, I know what that is, I used to write educational material about it). What's the difference? Well, a couple of things that spring to mind are 1) whether you yourself intend to carry it out, 2) in the heat of your own emotions, and 3) in despite of whatever social norms (calling the police? pursuing the matter in court?) already exist for seeking justice.
I'm going to get personal for a moment. As so many of you know (because I talk too much about it, no doubt), we were run out of our previous parish by a sociopath and two accomplices. Believe me, revenge fantasies were a major part of our lives for a long, long time. Pretty much anything would remind us and the whole thing would come boiling up again.
Did we thirst for justice? Damn right, and that was totally appropriate and I'm not ashamed of it. Did we take it into our own hands? No, though the temptation was awful. There were just so many ways we could have gotten back at them, and I know I lay awake at night thinking of them. We had to sit on our hands not to enact them. It was the heat of our emotions that was driving us to do that rather than pursuing proper channels (in our case, through the denominational authorities). We DID pursue the official avenues for justice that were open to us--not to punish but to make the truth about us known and to prevent the harm from spreading to others. But we did not arrange for their punishment, though we probably could have lost them at least one of their jobs and destroyed them and their families socially. We didn't bloody do it, though it was fucking hard not to. Because that would have been vengeance, not justice, and it would have impacted their innocent children.
This meant a helluva lot of biting our tongues. It meant refraining from things we would otherwise have done, like following up on a large loan we had made the offenders and they'd never paid back. (If we'd stayed on good terms, we would have followed it up; but to follow it up AFTER the offense would guaranteed have spilled us over the edge into vengeance, we just couldn't handle being that close, it would be like putting my puppy within biting distance of a steak)
Basically the only thing we could do apart from the very measured actions of official justice (which came to very little use in the end) was to sit on our hands, play whackamole, pray pray pray, and remember that God would deal with it in his own good time. Either the three of them would repent (in which case Jesus' cross covers the whole fucking mess) or they wouldn't, in which case they were in the hands of the one who does not forget the abused.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Coming from a different angle - all things work for the good if we allow it (loose translation).
I have had people seek my harm, and cause me harm, and a few years later I'm better off in some unexpected way as a result.
Like, a junior boss was jealous of me and told the big boss I "lack poise", that was a promotion killer in a job involving presentations. I had no future there.
I had to switch careers. Six years later I was doing more interesting work and earning more than if I had stayed unbackstabbed in that career.
As Joseph says in Genesis after he got promoted to the top of Egypt's government, they intended harm but God used it for good.
One reason to give up revenge and resentment is it binds us to the pain instead of letting us move beyond that and seek God's guidance into "what next, God?" God is a creative artist who can use anything for our good, but we have to be willing to cooperate by embracing God's values and believe in God's goodness and power and love so we can trust that "even this offers me a gift of love from God somehow."
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
