Pursuing Holiness

This was truly frustrating to read.

(CBS/AP) A German court on Monday handed the maximum sentence of 15 years in prison to a Moroccan convicted of being an accessory to murder for aiding the Sept. 11 attackers.

A federal appeals court had convicted Mounir el Motassadeq, a friend of three of the suicide pilots, of the charge in November and sent the case to a state court in Hamburg for sentencing.

Just before Monday’s verdict, the 32-year-old defendant exchanged charged words with an American co-plaintiff whose mother died on board one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center.

Dominic Puopolo Jr. earlier joined prosecutors in calling for the maximum penalty, urging the judges to consider the “human and emotional cost” of the 2001 attacks.

El Motassadeq, a slight bearded man, turned to Puopolo to say, “I understand your suffering. … The same thing is being done to me, my kids, my parents, my family — my future is ruined.”

Puopolo, granted permission to respond, said he forgave el Motassadeq, and reminded him that he will one day be freed.

“You have a chance to rebuild your life and be back with your family. Others don’t,” Puopolo said. “Your life is not over, but my mom’s is.”

I’ve written about forgiveness from a Christian viewpoint several times. It’s necessary - for the person doing the forgiving. And even when the person is not repentant, we still have to forgive them, again, for our own sakes. (And just to recap - forgiveness does not require a continuing relationship.) Puopolo said on Larry King Live that it is his faith that is getting him through this. So I’m glad - whatever faith Puopolo adheres to - that he has been able to forgive his mother’s killers. But for the defendant complain that his future is ruined is outrageous. And a lousy fifteen years!?

Puopolo contributed to achieving even this small victory by quitting his job and moving to Hamburg - and German law is so terrorist-friendly that it is a victory, in context - remember, this was the maximum sentence. But it’s still disgusting to think this scum will walk free in fifteen years.

Dominic J. Puopolo Jr., a Miami Beach computer consultant whose mother was killed in the attacks, said it has been an uphill battle for the prosecution ever since. “Everybody was saying this case was lost from day one,” said Puopolo, who moved to Hamburg in August to keep tabs on the proceedings. “There was a heavy sense of that in the courtroom.” Puopolo attends the Motassadeq retrial each day and is allowed to question witnesses under a German law that gives the relatives of victims the right to assist in the prosecution. He said he planned to come to Hamburg only for the opening of the case, but decided to remain for the duration out of respect for his mother, Sonia Morales Puopolo, a passenger on the doomed American Airlines Flight 11 that took off from Boston. Puopolo said U.S. investigators have played cockpit recordings for family members of the victims that make clear his mother was tortured by the hijackers before the jet crashed into the World Trade Center. Such knowledge, he said, makes it especially difficult for him to watch Motassadeq move freely through the courthouse and realize that there is a possibility no one in Hamburg will be held accountable.

Two hits from foreign courts in one day, where the war on terror is concerned; first Pakistan, now Germany. Obviously they can’t change their laws and apply them retroactively, but the fact is that they have not changed the laws, so that future terrorists will receive the same lenient treatment. It’s not just America who is not taking this problem seriously.

Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Is It Just Me?, Mark My Words, The Random Yak, Don Surber, DragonLady’s World, Mensa Barbie Welcomes You, Conservative Cat, The Backping Blog, Rightwing Guy, Wake Up America, Faultline USA, stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, Dumb Ox News, High Desert Wanderer, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

written by Laura

A few days ago I posted Bravery, which had some pretty strong statements on divorce and stated that I believe Christians ought to be ashamed of the fact that the divorce rate in the Christian community is as high as the non-Christian rate of divorce.

I found in the referrer log that someone searched Google for “ashamed divorced Christian” and came to Pursuing Holiness, which was the number two search result. Maybe I’m reading too much into that search string, but I concluded that a Christian got divorced and now feels ashamed of it. That Christian, perhaps seeking comfort and maybe advice, came here and read something they’ve probably already figured out. Divorce is almost always a bad idea. No help was offered in that post, and in all honesty I don’t feel qualified to give it beyond saying this:

Forgiveness is yours. Take it. There may be consequences for the sin of divorce, as there were consequences for David’s sin of adultery and murder. But David was still a man after God’s own heart because he repented. He asked for and received forgiveness from the God who loved him. Through all the consequences of his sin, God was with him. And he will be for you, too.

UPDATE: Interesting perspective on a commenter’s blog: Mike from The Gates Are Open has a series on divorced Christians. 1 2 3

written by Laura

Forgiveness and Acceptance Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

We are required to forgive. That is a truism that Christians are taught early on, seventy times seven. But further study revealed that forgiveness does not necessarily imply acceptance (Part 1) and forgiveness of an unrepentant person is very different from forgiveness of a repentant person (Part 2) and what Biblical forgiveness really looks like. I have spent years depending on the fact that I can forgive someone - specifically, family members - and yet have no further contact with them. I relied on the concept that it counts as forgiveness, I’ve fulfilled my obligation as a Christian, and nothing more needs to be done. On Saturday (Part 1) I learned that David forgave Absalom but did not permit him back in his life - and study revealed that was the correct decision, because Absalom was not really repentant, as his behavior proved. Ah, vindication… yet in Part 2 on Monday morning I found that forgiving repentant and unrepentant people are two entirely different functions. Worrisome. And then we returned from our church’s fall festival that night and discovered a phone message from a relative we have not spoken to in years. God, in his graciousness, had prepared me for this in Part 2, with John Piper’s sixth point - “6. seeking reconciliation so far as it depends on you,” and I knew I could not protest my husband making a return phone call. I don’t know how it will all turn out, but I’ll do my part and I’m trusting God to do His.

Today I studied the second sermon in John Piper’s series on forgiveness, Forgive Just As God in Christ Also Has Forgiven You. He focuses on

Ephesians 4:32-5:2

And be kind to one another, tender- hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you. Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you, and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.

How did God in Christ forgive us? With a self-sacrificing, undeserved, covenant love. Using Thomas Watson’s forgiveness definition of:

1. resisting revenge,
2. not returning evil for evil,
3. wishing them well,
4. grieving at their calamities,
5. praying for their welfare,
6. seeking reconciliation so far as it depends on you,
7. and coming to their aid in distress.

Piper says “This week I’m asking, how can we do that? What gives us the freedom and the ability and the incentive and the power to forgive those who sin against us? Some of you have been wronged so deeply and hurt so badly that forgiving would be as great a miracle as flying.” He finds the answers in Ephesians 4:32-5:2. In order to really pursue holiness, we need to rely on God’s power, to imitate him, and to remember that to whom much is given, much is expected.

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for possession, so that you might speak of the praises of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; (1 Peter 2:9 MKJV)

Could anyone be given more than we have? And with that in mind, can we decide to seek reconciliation, remembering that we are required forgive all, but only to seek to reconcile with those who are repentant, not those who are unrepentant. For the unrepentant, we need only wait and respond to their genuine repentance if and when it comes. I should have known God would not require more of me than he would equip me to do.

written by Laura

Forgiveness and Acceptance Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

After reading George Morrison’s sermon, Acceptance in the Beloved, and being uncomfortably convicted in my stance that you can forgive someone and then avoid them for the rest of your life, I did some soul searching and some Google searching. I’m particularly a fan of John Piper, his books have had a profound impact on my life. Don’t Waste Your Life, Desiring God, and When I Don’t Desire God all really hit me where I live, stripped away the church facade and showed me what I ought to be doing. In my pursuit of holiness, those books were new pairs of running shoes just at the time my old ones were wearing out.

John Piper has a three sermon series on forgiveness. Part one, As We Forgive Our Debtors, helps identify what forgiveness is, and is not. The Lord’s Prayer says, “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. ” (Matthew 6:14-15 MKJV) Forgiveness, or lack of it, reveals how much we trust Christ. If we trust Him, we can emulate His way of life.

Thomas Watson asked, “When do we forgive others?” and answered the question, “When we strive against all thoughts of revenge; when we will not do our enemies mischief, but wish well to them, grieve at their calamities, pray for them, seek reconciliation with them, and show ourselves ready on all occasions to relieve them.” (Thomas Watson, Body of Divinity, p. 581) John Piper breaks it down:

Here is forgiveness: when you feel that someone is your enemy or when you simply feel that you or someone you care about has been wronged forgiveness means,

1. resisting revenge,
2. not returning evil for evil,
3. wishing them well,
4. grieving at their calamities,
5. praying for their welfare,
6. seeking reconciliation so far as it depends on you,
7. and coming to their aid in distress.

All these point to a forgiving heart. And the heart is all important Jesus said in Matthew 18:35—”unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

That number 6 worries me… and then Piper goes on to describe what forgiveness is not. (Oh, joyful hope!) He says that forgiveness is not the absence of anger at sin, and it’s not the absence of serious consequences of sin. He refers back to Thomas Watson again:

Question: Is God angry with his pardoned ones?

Answer: Though a child of God, after pardon, may incur his fatherly displeasure, yet his judicial wrath is removed. Though he may lay on the rod, yet he has taken away the curse. Correction may befall the saints, but not destruction. (Thomas Watson, Body of Divinity, p. 556)

Piper cites several examples, including David, who bore serious consequences for his sins re: Bathsheba, in Numbers, where the Lord forgives the people for their disbelief but refuses to let them enter the promised land, and references Psalm 99:8 - “O Lord our God, Thou didst answer them; Thou wast a forgiving God to them, and yet an avenger of their evil deeds.”

He also clarifies that forgiveness of a repentant person does not look the same as forgiveness of an unrepentant person.

In fact I am not sure that in the Bible the term forgiveness is ever applied to an unrepentant person. Jesus said in Luke 17:3-4 “Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times a day, and returns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ forgive him.” So there’s a sense in which full forgiveness is only possible in response to repentance.

But even when a person does not repent (cf. Matt. 18:17) we are commanded to love our enemy and pray for those who persecute us and do good to those who hate us (Luke 6:27).

The difference is that when a person who wronged us does not repent with contrition and confession and conversion (turning from sin to righteousness), he cuts off the full work of forgiveness. We can still lay down our ill will; we can hand over our anger to God; we can seek to do him good; but we cannot carry through reconciliation or intimacy.

David forgave Absalom, and was later nagged into permitting him back into the palace. Absalom returned the favor by immediately beginning to plot against David. (2 Samuel 15) He was never truly repentant. David did well to forgive him, but it was a huge mistake to let him back in.

Thomas Watson said something very jolting:

“We are not bound to trust an enemy; but we are bound to forgive him.” (Body of Divinity, p. 581)

You can actually look someone in the face and say: I forgive you, but I don’t trust you. That is what the woman whose husband abused her children had to say.

But O how crucial is the heart here. What would make that an unforgiving thing to say is if you were thinking this: What’s more, I don’t care about ever trusting you again; and I won’t accept any of your efforts to try to establish trust again; in fact, I hope nobody ever trusts you again, and I don’t care if your life is totally ruined. That is not a forgiving spirit. And our souls would be in danger.

Sometimes it seems like all of Christianity comes down to motive. Salvation - did you mean it when you prayed for salvation or were you succumbing to pressure at the final campfire at youth camp? Service - are you doing it for your glory or for God’s? Worship - are you totally focused on adoring the Lord or are you irritated that the usher asked you to slide in so the latecomer can sit in your precious end seat of the pew? And now forgiveness - have you given up on the desire to punish the transgressor yourself, by denying them reconciliation? IF they were truly repentant and wanted to reconcile - which again does not necessarily imply an ongoing relationship but certainly could - would you be able to do it?

written by Laura

Forgiveness and Acceptance Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

George Morrison’s sermon for today is entitled Acceptance in the Beloved.
To the praise of the glory of his grace through which he hath made us accepted in the beloved— Ephesians 1:6

Forgiveness Does Not Necessarily Imply Acceptance
It ought to be noted carefully by all who ponder the interior life that acceptance is something different from forgiveness. One might be forgiven and not accepted. If a man wrought me some deadly injury, by the grace of heaven I might forgive that man; yet I might warn him that he must keep his distance and never cross the threshold of my home. So conceivably might God forgive the guilty sinners of mankind and yet forbid them entrance to His dwelling-place. At the pleading of the woman of Tekoah, David forgave Absalom. Yet for two years that forgiven child never looked upon his father’s face (2 Samuel 14:28). The palace gates were barred for him; he had no access to the royal chambers; he was forgiven, but he was not accepted. Acceptance is reconstituted fellowship. It is liberty of access to the palace. It is an authoritative welcoming to the home and heart of God. And though always this implies forgiveness, the two are not identical whether in the affairs of earth or heaven.

I have had problems with forgiveness for years, rationalizing that yes, I’m required to forgive, but not required to let that person back into my life. Does the woman who has been raped have to forgive the criminal? Yes. Does she have to visit him in jail? Uh…. NO. Duh. The bible says David forgave Absalom. Not, “said he forgave him,” i.e. lied, but that he actually forgave him. Yet he still locked him out of his life after forgiveness. That system works for me. Very convenient. And it might even be true. Right now especially this is a great deal more than a concept to me - after you forgive someone, as a Christian, what further obligation do you have toward them? And I’m going to be studying it and thinking about it a lot; enough so that I have created a new category for it. More tomorrow, but I close with this uncomfortable passage from George Morrison’s sermon:

Acceptance Is Another Miracle of Grace
It ought again to be noted that acceptance does not necessarily follow on forgiveness. It is not an inevitable consequence; it is an added miracle of grace. When the prodigal took his homeward way he had a deep conviction that he would be forgiven. But he had no assurance that he would be accepted and so have the run of the old home. Forgiven, he would have been well content to be as the lowest of the hired servants and lodge with the other servants in the shed. The father forgave him when he ran to meet him. There was fatherly forgiveness in the kiss. But what amazed the prodigal and broke his heart was the welcome which followed on forgiveness. The ring on his finger, the robe upon his back, the filial liberty in the old home, these were the acceptance of the prodigal. He might have been forgiven without these. These were not of the essence of his pardon. These were the signs and tokens of a love that could never do enough for the forgiven. That is why the apostle tells us here that the amazing experience of acceptance is “to the praise of the glory of His grace.” Acceptance is not a necessary corollary. It is not an implication of remission. It is an implication that we are in the hands of One who in His love can never do enough. He might pardon us and make us hired servants; but love can never be content with that. It crowns forgiveness in the welcome home.

written by Laura