Justice and Mercy

Nomodiphas: Why do you think the government is barred from being merciful?

Philosophos: What is the difference between justice and mercy?

Nomodiphas: Apparently justice is what we are entitled to by right. To protect rights justice requires that we be held responsible for our actions when we violate the rights of another. Mercy on the other hand would be like a free gift . . . or maybe better put, not getting what we deserve, not receiving some negative consequence. If I harm another, I violated a right of theirs and justice requires (in order to protect their rights) that I be held responsible for my action and be punished in proportion to my crime. Mercy would be withholding that punishment from me. What I deserve would be punishment; mercy would be me forgoing punishment, i.e. not getting what I deserve.

Philosophos: In order to get mercy one has to have done something wrong and be in a place to justly deserve punishment, but not be held to account and given the punishment they rightly deserve. Am I correct for saying this?

Nomodiphas: Yes.

Philosophos: Is there another term for not holding one to account and erasing the wrong done against you?

Nomodiphas: Yeah, that is forgiveness.

Philosophos: Who can forgive a wrong?

Nomodiphas: What do you mean? Anyone can forgive a wrong.

Philosophos: If someone harms or wrongs you, can I forgive them for it?

Nomodiphas: No. OK, I get what you mean. Only the person who has been wronged can forgive the one who has wronged them.

Philosophos: So when the government decides to give a criminal mercy, say they give the criminal treatment or rehabilitation when the criminal deserves punishment, or they punish the criminal to a lesser degree than the crime warrants—in essence, what is the government doing?

Nomodiphas: To some degree they are forgiving the wrong that the criminal perpetrated.

Philosophos: That is exactly what they are doing. But like we said before, who can forgive wrongs?

Nomodiphas: Only the person who has been wronged can forgive the one who wronged them.

Philosophos: Exactly if I am beat up or robbed, only I have the ability to forgive the one who harmed me. You do not have any more ability to forgive the one who harmed me then the government does. The government has no right to forgive the harm that criminals do to their victims. The government cannot be merciful to criminals for in doing that it fails to be just to victims. When the government forgives criminals that have wronged others instead of holding them to account, it perverts justice and thereby undermines its very reason for existence.

The government does not allow us to exist; we allow the government to exist. It is our creation and it has a responsibility to carry out its functions. The government’s function is to administer justice. When the government fails to do this we as citizens have a responsibility to hold it to account and modify it if it is necessary. We are responsible for our government and if we fail to make sure it functions justly, we will pay the penalty—but we’ll talk more about this later.

Nomodiphas: Before we go on can I ask a quick question?

Philosophos: Of course, go ahead.

Nomodiphas: What about the fact that God forgives sins? How can He do that if sins are directed towards people?

Philosophos: That’s a really good question. It is true that in one sense wrongs are directed against people, but in another sense all sins are ultimately against God. For example, King David had an affair with Bathsheba and killed her husband Uriah to cover up his wrongdoing. It is obvious that he wronged Bathsheba and Uriah, but in his prayer to God he said ‘I have sinned against you alone God.’ David recognized that he had broken God’s commandments and that this was a rebellion against God. In one sense he had wronged the individuals involved, in another his sin was against God. The religious leaders of Jesus’ day recognized this principle. That is why when Jesus forgave sins they got so upset, they knew only God could forgive wrongs done against another person. Speaking of God’s forgiveness of sins there is one more danger in the government confusing justice and mercy.

Nomodiphas: What is that?

Philosophos: Our society seems to think that whatever we have a need for, we have a right to. As a criminal I need treatment, so I have a right to treatment. Or I am homeless and I have a need for food and shelter, so I have a right to food and shelter. Because I have rights to these things, the government (i.e. the people, you and me) has an obligation to provide them—and provide them we do. There is an obvious threat to the liberty of the citizens when the government takes power and over expands itself, but there is another problem more subtle than that. If we have a right to whatever we have a need for then Christ’s sacrifice was not an act of mercy. We were in need of a Savior. If need=right, then we had a right to a Savior and Christ had no choice in the matter. The cross was then not done out of love, but out of obligation. But the Bible says Christ’s sacrifice was out of love. If justice required it, the Bible is a lie. Further this notion perverts the gospel message and it perverts our response to it. If the cross was not an act of mercy, then we have no reason to be thankful for it. We were due it and deserved it like we deserve our paycheck. When the notion of rights gets expanded to include needs, those with needs don’t ask and are not grateful, they are demanding and smug.