Forget ye not that the tenet of forgiveness works both ways

As an American and an amateur student of religions, I am bothered by a related issue. I gather that most Americans, including our president, oppose the decision of the Scottish justice minister to release convicted bomber Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds. Yet many of these same Americans vociferously proclaim to the world that they are Christians.

In fact, there is a close correlation between right-wing patriotism and aggressive professions of Christianity within some segments of the population in the United States.

I wonder what type of Christianity these people believe in. Anyone who has even a passing acquaintance with the recorded teachings of Jesus of Nazareth will know that the virtues he emphasised most strongly were love, mercy and forgiveness.

We often hear this argument from those who oppose Al-Megrahi's release: "He didn't show any compassion to the 270 people he cruelly murdered; why should we show any compassion to him?"

Fair enough, and perfectly consistent with the eye-for-an-eye philosophy of justice taught in the Mosaic law. But since Jesus explicitly rejected that philosophy, it seems strange that anybody claiming to be his follower would embrace it.

We also hear this: "He doesn't deserve forgiveness".

But Jesus never said that forgiveness had to be earned. His disciple Simon Peter once famously asked, "Lord, how often must I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Seven times?"

Jesus replied, "I tell you, not seven times only, but seventy times seven."

He didn't say, "Forgive him if you think he deserves it, or if he repents and promises not to sin again." He taught forgiveness without preconditions.

What was the rationale for such prodigious generosity? Reciprocity. "If you forgive those who sin against you, your Father in heaven will forgive your sins. But if you do not forgive them, neither will your Father forgive you."

Jesus was training his disciples to become fit for the kingdom of God. To attain that state, they had to practice a morality that made almost superhuman demands. Hence his command to love those who hate us, bless those who curse us, and do good to those who do us evil.

I know for sure that if I were a relative of one of the victims of the Lockerbie bomber, I would disagree with Jesus on this issue. I would want revenge. I would want Al-Megrahi to suffer on earth and burn in hell. I would shake my head at Jesus' exhortations to forgive, and mutter, "Not this time. This was too much."

I also know that Jesus' teachings were intended to shape personal morality, not public policy. Any government that adopted forgiveness as a national policy toward its enemies would be committing suicide, because there are lots of nasty people out there who are not so magnanimously inclined. They would be on that government's neck like a rabid wolfpack on an innocent lamb.

But that's not my point. My point is that people who would deny mercy to the Lockerbie bomber set themselves in opposition to the recorded teachings of Jesus. For that reason, whatever other virtues they may have, whatever merits their arguments may have, in this instance they have no right to call themselves Christians.