Thank you so very much for your insight on this matter. I agree with you whole-heartedly, although it had not even entered my mind until I read this article.

We as Christians must set the example as the wife of the missionary in India did (Staines I think was the name) when her husband and son were killed by Hindu extremists.

The closure that you spoke about cannot come watching another man die with vengeance in your heart. I am somewhat disappointed in Mr Ashcroft that he would offer this to the victims families, but I'm sure he has his reasons. We need to be in prayer that we don't regress back to the place where we are entertained by death and suffering. It is bad enough that the entertainment industry is pulling us that way.

Keep Brother Ashcroft in prayer he is a good man and in a very difficult position, I certainly do not envy him.

Thank you for sharing what the Lord has given you with people on the internet. I have been greatly encouraged by your messages. God bless you, your family, and this ministry.

Until He returns, Rich

I usually very much enjoy your e-mails. However, I distinctly believe that this is one that should not have been published. For one Christian leader to publicly speak out against another Christian leader is not a good thing to do. All of we Christians (Assemblies of God and otherwise) should all be thankful to have John Ashcroft as our Attorney General. We may not agree with him in every decision that he makes, but that does not mean that we should attack him.

I am a very conservative person. However, if one of my loved ones had been killed in that bombing, I might have wished to see the death of the one who caused it. I do not know, because I am not in that position. I do not feel that I can condemn those hurting people who want to see it. Will it bring closure for them? Probably not, because we know that only Jesus Christ can do that for them. But, our Attorney General cannot mandate that they get their closure from Christ. We can only pray for them that they will find true peace in Jesus Christ.

I was in my home about 13 miles from the bombing site when it occurred. I heard the blast, and knew that something had happened. Almost immediately, I heard the news report of what had happened. My daughter was working only about a mile from the site, and one of my good Christian friends ran the day care center. This act of terrorism has caused many people much distress. I may be more in sympathy with them because I am closer to the problem than you are. All I ask is that you do not send out any more negative publicity about our Christian brother who made the decision that the people so personally affected by the bombing could watch it on closed circuit television. He definitely is in the limelight right now and needs our prayers - not our criticisms.

In Christ, Jean

Thank you for your thoughtful and helpful response to the Circular. Let me assure you that I have very high regard for our Attorney General. This is enhanced by the fact that his father was pastor of the church where my wife once was a member. Please do not understand my comments to be an attack on John Ashcroft, but only as a statement of disagreement concerning the action that has been taken. I trust you will agree that there are times when Christian brethren disagree, as in the case of Paul with Peter. There is such a thing as respectful disagreement. Perhaps the words "with all due respect" should have been used in this article.

ED

I heartily disagree with your statements, Sir. Some of these people will have no closure at all until that ungodly man dies, can you not understand that? You know, in your heart, that Timothy McVeigh, without an outright act of Jesus appearing before him and asking him to accept Him as his Savior and Lord, and to repent of all his sins, that McVeigh is not going to go to heaven. So, please let these heart-broken people try their best to put their broken hearts at rest. I know that you would say for them to give their pain and agony to Jesus and leave it there - but have you had your little child blown to bits by a mad bomber? No, I think not, nor have I. Put yourself in their shoes, please, and don't be so high and mighty. Let them try their best to reconcile their hearts, minds, emotion and spirits, and if this will help them at all, then keep out of it, Sir, except to pray for them again and again, without malice in your heart toward them, nor towards our Attorney General.

God bless you, and all whom you love.

Always, Tulsabutterfly

Thank you for your response to the Circular article. Please know that there is absolutely no malice in my heart toward anyone involved with this terrible tragedy. And I have suffered through the death of both of my sisters, one to disease, and the other due to a senseless accident caused by another driver. I have some experience, although no one's grief is the same as another's. My concern is only that we as a society may be headed down a road which may lead eventually to the place where people who are not personally touched by a particular crime will get some delight over watching another human being die. Your suggestion is well taken, let's join in prayer for all who have been so harshly affected, that they, by God's grace, will be able to move on with the assurance given to us in Romans 8:28.

Have a wonderful day in the Lord, ED

I thank you, Sir, for your kindly response to mine. Yet, if you are well acquainted with the wonderful Book of Revelation written by John, you will certainly know that people will have no conscience, as it also says in Romans, Chapter One. I think, as we daily observe what is going on around us, and in the world, we are seeing the Word of the Living God coming true.

God bless you as you go about His work.

Always, Tulsabutterfly

This was incredible. Thank you. It should be published in every Christian periodical in the world. A real eye opening critique that is food for thought.

Thank you, Brian

This insightful reflection prompts me to share a few things.

A dear friend of mine, Carol Tures designed/wears a 7 medallion necklace in protest of the death penalty. Each medallion represents a different kind of execution i.e. hanging, lethal injection, electric chair, etc. Her ministry has been extremely active in advocating a moratorium on the death penalty in Texas.

One of Carol's recent e-mails describes how a Midwestern church is all set to ring its bells when McVeigh is executed in May. Do you think - somehow you could (through your wonderful site here) recruit church leaders to Ring their bells also?

Carol plans to alert the local media: re: inviting church leaders to ring church bells here in El Paso, TX. Thank you for your consideration of my note.

Blessings, Mary Ann

I'm not sure I understand your note. If your friend is against the death penalty, why would she want church bells to ring? Isn't that a kind of celebration of the death penalty, rejoicing in the death of a criminal? Please know that I am not against the death penalty. The point of my article was simply to express a concern that we as a society may be headed down a road which may lead eventually to the place where people who are not personally touched by a particular crime will get some delight over watching another human being die.

I'd rather think that church bell ringing symbolized peace to everyone, and not rejoicing. It's difficult at best to comprehend the entire picture. Mass killings - willingness to witness execution. I pray that the victims' families get through the May event with the least pain possible. And, I pray that God has mercy on the bomber. Some say the bomber is evil personified. I look at him as an amoral person.

Your question raised awareness of - how different people view certain actions.

Mary Ann

Unless your child, sister, wife or loved one perished in this horrific act of terrorism, you have absolutely no room to judge and should keep your opinions to yourself. These people have every right to see justice served, as in many parts of the bible. Eye for an eye

Please know that I am not against the death penalty. The point of my article was simply to express a concern that we as a society may be headed down a road which may lead eventually to the place where people who are not personally touched by a particular crime will get some delight over watching another human being die.

ED

Forgive me, I do agree with you that "Pay per View" of this execution for those not personally involved in this act is morbid.

I agree with the views you have expressed here. I can not see where any good, public or private can be gained here.

David

I agree with you comments about watching the bomber die. It bothers me that anyone who call themselves a Christian would want to watch him. We should be coming together and praying for his salvation. I know the act he committed was horrible but we also should forgive him. I can't imagine what the family went from the lost of their family member but watching the bomber get executed will not bring closure to this episode.

Your frined in Christ, Loretta

I feel the same as you because any person who does what this person supposedly did has to not only be mentally sick but not saved. However I did not have a child or loved one killed as a result of this horrible event so it is easier I would guess for me to feel as I do about this. I will pray that before McVeigh sits in the "chair" that someone or something will cause him to realize that Christ died for him as well as me.

In Christ, Roger

I'm sorry that you feel this way, but you cannot equate the decision of the Atty. General to allow the families of those who were killed in the blast with a "public execution". It has long been customary to allow the victims families and several others to witness the execution. In addition, he has not allowed the execution to be recorded.

I don't believe what many of these people are viewing this execution for is "gratification".

You may have strong beliefs, and they may be well thought out. But your shot at "compassionate conservatism" was uncalled for. It was obviously a veiled insult of President Bush and/or his policies (which is sinful in and of itself).

In my humble opinion, it was wrong of you to imply what people's motives are and were. How would you honestly know that people are seeking "gratification", are looking at death as "life's treat", or that they have not forgiven this man?

Most knowledgeable counselors will tell you that closure comes particularly from an external event which can. If forgiveness is not there as well, granted, closure will be a hard thing to attain. However, we cannot second guess these people who have undergone such a horrible and tragic circumstance.

Just some thoughts, Ed

Thank you Ed for your thoughtful response. I regret that my comments were taken to be a "veiled insult". My intent was only to point out that, in my opinion, this policy is not consistent with "compassionate conservatism", a designation which I happen to strongly agree with. Also, if I may, the use of the word "gratification" should only be used in the limited context of the idea of obtaining closure, and the words, "life's treat" was used when expressing concern about the direction this policy could lead us to in the future. And you are right to point out that there may be some who will be aided in seeking closure, and we certainly don't want to second guess them.

Your comments have helped with clarification.

ED

I usually read your Circular with interest and with the idea of gleaning some thought which may help me understand the Lord better or even to understand my fellow man better. But as an Assembly of God Pastor, I take exception to you deliberately noting that our Attorney General is from the Assemblies of God. Was that necessary? You seem to be saying that the Attorney General in fact is in error because of his denominational affiliation and further that he in in error regarding his decision according to the scripture. That may be your personal view, but please do not use your circular to advance you point of view by making accusatory remarks about a member of a particular denomination. You are critical of the fact that he will allow 250 people to view the "Bomber's" death, however, I would remind you that not all conservative Christians hold the same views about such things. And in fact the scripture does not directly address this issue at all. I personally believe the Attorney General may not have Christians in mind at all in allowing the viewing. Many of the victim's families are not believers and do not understand the issue of closure from a Christian perspective. Give the Attorney General some slack !. What would you do if you had the country breathing down your neck.?? I , meanwhile, will continue to enjoy your Circular.

God Bless, Larry

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my article. You raise a good point about my inclusion of the denominational affiliation of the Attorney General. My reason for doing so was to register surprise - I too am an Assembly of God pastor, and while I agree with capital punishment, it seems out of character for us to accept the idea that viewing another person's death would be acceptable as a method of bringing closure. Also, while a person may be very supportive of our new Attorney General (as I am), that does not mean they must not address issues which they feel may lead us down a path we do not want to go.

Again, thank you, and may the Lord give you a wonderful Day, ED.

I thank you for taking the time to respond to my note. I was looking at your point of mentioning our denomination from a different perspective. I was looking at blame as the motive, however, as I re-read your article, I can see that it was indeed your intent to focus on the "surprise" factor of him taking the position that he has. Thank you for a little insight.

I feel it is important to mention that until a person has suffered the kind of loss that these people experienced we should not judge the needs they have for closure. Experiencing violence against oneself or ones family and dealing with the aftermath is a very special and unique challenge. God made it very clear in the Old Testament the kinds of punishment and consequences that He expected to be given when laws were broken. Capital punishment was included. He created us and understands our nature better than we do ourselves. While Jesus taught us to not be vindictive, and taught us that partially administered justice was unjust, I find no evidence that He taught us to stop punishing people for crimes committed. Let us help our fellow Christians and our fellow man to heal from their wounds, not scold them or judge them for having needs we don't understand.

I am a Pentecostal Holiness preacher and have been for over 30 years and I have no desire to watch the 'Bomber Die' as you said in your e-mail. However I do strongly disagree with your harsh attack on the Attorney General as an Assembly of God conservative Christian trying to do his job. I don't think he make his decision because of his denomination, nor because he is a born again conservative Christian! I think he bases his decision on the fact that many who were harmed and hurt by this bombing wanted for their own personal reasons to watch this execution for their own personal closure!

When Christians start bashing other Christians in high government position, that to me is much worst in God's eyes than some well meaning people wanting and needing closure because of the devastating pain that was created in their lives by a demon possessed person.

My prayers go out to our Attorney General, to the murder who now must die and to you in your non-Christ like attitude and spirit toward Christians in positions of decisions and authority. May God forgive for your critical spirit and place your in His grace and favor!

James

If subscribers are allowed to comment, I will do so!

I see no reason why conservative Christians should be prevented from observing the transaction of justice. The reality of the "Bomber's justice" is more authentic than the violence and multi-murders viewed each day on TV as entertainment. This viewing will be authentic, it will have many true messages, reactions, responses, and satisfaction of justice. In by-gone days, a note reading "justified" often followed the punishment of men like the Bomber.

It seems strange that objections to justice for such a heinous crime can be made to appear compassionate, intellectual, and even sane! Thanks

One of the issues of concern here is the use of the media. Unfortunately, because we have become accustomed to watching murders on TV, we have become desensitized to death. The fear is that this same attitude will ultimately common when we also watch executions on TV. There are always observers to executions, but being there, and watching on a screen are not the same thing. If this were the only concern, arranging for a personal viewing of this execution may be acceptable.

Thank you for your comment, ED.

Just thought I'd write to say I completely agree with you, and I hope you don't catch too much static from "that element".

Thanks very much.

David

I don't with agree at a high level with many of things I read in your circulars when I actually read them. Sometimes they interest me, however, so I have stayed subscribed.

In "Watching the Bomber Die", your circular about the execution of Kevin McVeigh, I feel compelled to point out that I am in strong agreement.

Didn't Moses bring down a statement from Mt. Sinai pertaining to this situation? I think it was represented as a "commandment" and as I recall its wording didn't leave much room for interpretation. It went something like this: "You will not kill".

How can the conservative Christian (Assemblies of God) Attorney General justify breaking this founding commandment of Judeo/Islam/Christianity? Does he really think Jesus would agree with such an exception to this rule? The Jesus I learned about certainly would not.

I don't respect that man's "interpretation" of Christianity. I appreciate your speaking out about the subject.

Thanks, Dune

I agree that forgiveness is crucial, but I also recall the Scripture which commands that when a death sentence is appropriate, that those that did the accusing were to cast the first stone. Maybe in seeing this execution, the victims relatives may be brought closer to the punishment their sins deserve, and forgiveness could very well be the outgrowth of that.

Blessings in Messiah, Richard

You make a good point. For me, the viewing of the execution, by itself, is not the issue. In part, it's the use of the TV media. If a victim's family member wished to see a convicted murderer executed, then it should be in person. Placing the media between the two person ends up depersonalizing them both. Then, as mentioned in the article, the concern is that this could open a door to future viewings even by non-involved persons. In a way, it's like allowing the first cloning of humans - where will that lead us? Furthermore, because of the depersonalization of the media, the likelyhood that this will produce "closure" is even more remote.

May the Lord Bless you Day, ED

From what I know of this situation John Ashcroft did not initiate nor suggest the closed circuit TV viewing. From what I hear, he is personally against it, but as a public servant in the area of law his decision to allow this was based on the perceived "needs" of the family members that petitioned him to make a decision. He did not make this decision as a preacher or pastor to his congregation. He did not state that this is the best way for those who will watch to deal with such a thing. My concern is that this may suggest that this is the answer to a hurting

heart and that the convicted might do or say something that only adds to the sorrow of those who watch, but that is their responsibility and decision. Blame should not be laid at the feet of John Ashcroft for this.

Gene

Thank you, Gene, for your helpful comment. You are right, there is individual responsibility which must be borne by all concerned. And I hope you understand that there is no desire to place blame. By any account, this is not an easy situation. A person whose relative has been murdered has a right to request to be present at the execution. In this case the number of such persons could be very large. While we do not want to second guess the decision that has been made, our intent is to point out that if this viewing cannot be done in person, it could be counterproductive to do it on a monitor. Bottom line, we must all continue in prayer, that by all means the glory of God will shine through the darkness.

Blessings, ED

I was dismayed at the responses that were displayed by some of your readers. The definition of retribution is "an eye for an eye." This was specifically repudiated by Jesus in Christian Scriptures. As Christians, we may not use retribution as a purpose for our criminal justice system. Retribution and revenge are closely linked. An eye for an eye means "getting even." So does revenge. When each of us harbors revenge in our hearts, we share in the guilt of Timothy McVeigh who acted out of revenge. We also share in the guilt of Adolph Hitler, who did not act alone, but he and his Nazis were actually avenging the punitive measures taken against Germany by the Allies for Germany's part in World War I. The Nazis attributed the economic distress of Germany during the depression to the Jews, displacing the real cause. When we seek revenge, we participate in the guilt of Annas and Caiphas who sought revenge against Jesus for questioning their authority. We also participate in the revenge of the crowd which felt humiliated to see Jesus under Roman power when they had hoped he would liberate them from the Romans. The spirit of revenge spreads and spreads. When we give in to revenge, we participate in the revenge of parents who abuse their children or spouses who abuse each other. We participate in road rage when we give in to the spirit of revenge. Somehow justice from the Hebrew scriptures has become synonymous with retribution. The original meaning of justice was "to make right again." The reason for punishment in the criminal justice system should be to call attention to the gravity of the crime as a part of the rehabilitation of the offender and to deter others from committing crimes. This effect can be accmplished by incarceration. Some offenders are unlikely to be rehabilitated. Yet nothing is impossible with God.

The financial cost of incarceration at maximum security for 40 years is about three times that of execution, mostly because of the mandatory first two trials. Dangerous criminals can be confined for life. Jesus knew that an execution would not make things right again. That is why he stopped the execution of the woman caught in adultery. Because of the hardness of our hearts, Moses gave us the Old Law. Jesus trusted us to accept his grace and to grow new hearts, hearts of flesh and not stone. Revenge is the name of the evil spirit which infects each one of us. We must root it out, replanting our hearts with the wholesome spirits of mercy and compassion.

Carol