Summary killings are a crime regardess of who does it.

A free society regardless if it is a Federalist or Democratic cannot allow elected officials or their agents to perpetuate violence upon people they suspect of committing a crime. If we do we eventually will have to look over our shoulders to see if we are being watched. Politicians are eager to capitalize on our fears.

It is becoming more common for police and elected officials to see themselves as judge and jury dispensing inappropriate summary justice on the streets. It is also becoming more common for citizens to look the other way because they fear crime taking over their community. The Constitution does not allow those who are there to enforce the law to be put in the position of becoming judge and jury.

Politicians are supposed to make the laws, police officers are supposed to enforce the laws and the judiciary is supposed to determine what happens when evidence is presented to them of lawbreaking. This separation has become blurred over the last few years as more and more politicians are winning elections playing on the fears of the citizens, but citizens need to understand we will eventually lose our freedom if we allow this to continue. Americans or citizens of any country must never sacrifice their liberty for false security.

Politicians will claim that the reason they act as they do is because the judicial system is flawed and criminals are not being convicted. That is not justification to ignore the constitution and laws. Politicians should be taking action to reform the judicial system not become judge, jury and executor of suspected criminals. When politicians and police become judge, jury and executor they also become criminals.

I am not sure killing drug dealers without giving them an opportunity to have their day in court or offering any rehabilitation programs or adequate rehabilitation programs is a humane process. This subject is very personal to me and I realize my views may be influenced by personal family experiences. My brother who died in 2004 of cancer in the ninth grade started smoking marijuana. He did use and sell marijuana to friends to supply his needs. He could have been a victim of summary street justice. He was fortunate that he received a trial and spent time in prison. He got out opened a business and became quite successful, married and raised a family. I just do not think any elected official or police officer would have been justified of robbing him of his life.

I do not accept the end justifies the means. I do not accept short cutting the legal procedure as a valid solution to crime. I do accept and whole heartily believe those involved in summary killing are criminals themselves and should be tried in the judicial system they flaunt. Their sentence should be severe since they are suppose to be role models for regular citizens.  

I realize a lot of citizens disagree with me.

We know that some who have been sentence to death for crimes were eventually found to be innocent. Mistakes are made even when the accused is given a 'fair' trial. How many suspected criminals killed by summary killers were innocent and they were denied a 'fair' trial.

What is the difference in Martial Law and summary killings? Both deny suspects of their international human rights. Politicians involved in or who encourage summary killing cannot guarantee laws will apply equally to all.

A society that does not demand that their police officers who shoot without legal justification face conviction are condoning summary killing. A policeman recently shot a young man in Chicago 16 times killing him. The young man is said to have had a knife in each hand while walking down the street. It took one year before the Chicago elected officials brought charges against the policeman and they only did so after pressure from the black community was put on them. How can any society justify 16 shots by one policeman in one victim?

The 6th Amendment states: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…” The right to a jury trial was designed by our founders to be a fundamental right bestowed upon our citizens and a means to keep the government under control of the people.

When a defendant exercises his right to a jury trial, it is the jury of his peers that decides whether the defendant is guilty or not. In these circumstances a great deal of control is relinquished by the government and put into the hands of the citizens.

The right to trial by jury takes the control of the outcome of a criminal case away from the government and gives it to the citizens. This right, though it has its limitations, is essential in maintaining liberty and imposing restraint on the government.

Let us not forget the summary killings in the South perpetrated by the KKK. The membership of KKK consisted of a lot of Southern policemen and politicians. They were self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. Do we want to return to those days?

The KKK did largely bring their barbaric justice to the black communities in the south, but blacks were not the only ones lynched by the KKK. They lynched Jews, foreigners, rapist (black or white), northerners, wife beaters (black and white), Catholics, homosexuals, communists and thief’s (black and white). I am sure today drug dealers and drug users would be their victims. They were white men, consisting of a lot of politicians, that thought they knew best how to deal with society’s problems. Their illegal actions were accepted by the citizens out of fear of the blacks which then became fear of any and all suspected law breakers or people they disagreed with in general.

At an early age I was introduced to public officials acting as judge, jury and executors. I was twelve and went to spend the summer with relatives in Alabama. My cousin by marriage was the sheriff. One Saturday night his son and I were allowed to ride with him in the patrol car.  He arrested a young black man for “standing” on the corner in the downtown area at night. He put the young man in the back of his patrol car under the pretense of carrying him to jail.

On the way to the jail we stopped for coffee at the local café. He opened the back door of the patrol car and he told the Blackman to stay in the car while he drank coffee. The car door was left opened.  I kept watching the man from the café window and later I realized my cousin was watching to. I finally had the courage to ask what if he gets out of the car and runs away. His reply came with a hardy laugh, “I hope the ‘nigger’ is that stupid then I will shoot him and we do not have to take him to jail.” The young man was smart enough not to run and he was turned lose in the café parking lot. A few years later he was returning for the summer from college in Tuskegee and got off the bus on the highway and was taken by the KKK and lynched.  That is what they did to 'uppity niggers' that went to college. I have never forgotten that and have since had a real distaste for injustice regardless of who inflicts it - bullies, police officer, politicians, judges, religious leaders or citizens.

 

What do you think God requires of us?

God requires all people to practice justice, kindness and humility.  Everyone, even the poor and weak, are to be treated justly. The word kindness is found 247 times in the Bible. There is no question that God requires us to help (serve) others. Humility is to be at the core of our character. We are to give God the credit for the good in our life and God does not like people who boast. We should all ask ourselves regularly how we are living out God’s call for justice, kindness and humility. We make a choice to obey or not.

If God requires justice, kindness and humility from the people then God requires it of the church, since the church is the people of God and not a building. The church should serve members, non-members, believers and non-believers.

Churches that serve those outside the church grow and example of this is Resurrection Methodists Church in Kansas City, Kansas. They give millions of dollars and members time each year to provide services for people outside their church and over the past twenty-five years have become the largest Methodist Church in the world. They live their faith with their pastor setting the example.

Not all churches are like Resurrection Methodists instead of focusing on serving others they are focusing on lighting in the church.  The battle of the music worship war lasted thirty years and was a focus on self and personal preferences instead of God and others. Let’s hope bright lights or subdue lights do not do the same.

What will be your reply when you meet Christ face to face and He asks ‘what did you do for the least of my people’? The choices you make now will determine what you say then so make wise choices. Choices made, whether bad or good follow us forever and affect everyone in their path in one way or another.

Your legacy will be based on the choices you made! If your legacy is based on the choices you made then it is obvious that your choices can affect future generations. Are you making choices that you want your children and grandchildren to model? Choice after choice will write the story of your life.

Unfortunately we are tempted to make emotional choices that satisfy our immediate need or want. We read in Jeremiah, “The heart is deceitful above all things and can be dangerous.” It is easy for us to deceive ourselves to get what we want. We all have talked ourselves into things that we knew in the end might not be good for us. Making debt (buying on credit) is a perfect example of this.

Be honest with yourself and you will make better choices. Ask yourself do you really need that new house or car at this time? Regrets are related to bad choices and bad choices can bring shame and pain that will last a lifetime. Any choice that brings honor to God is a good choice! Any choice that is just, kind and done with humility is a good choice!

 

 

Is there a purgatory?

The Bible does not mention the exact word “purgatory,” but instead it makes reference to a place which one could understand to be what Catholics refer to as purgatory.  To claim that just because the word purgatory does not exist in the Bible does not necessarily mean such a place does not exist at all. 

The word “Trinity” is never found in the Bible and some wonder whether this is a Biblical doctrine or not, but the absence of a term used to describe a doctrine does not necessarily mean the term is not Biblical. The issue is does the term accurately reflect what the Scripture teaches? 

Protestant churches teach the doctrine of the Trinity, as well as Catholics.  If other denominations teach the concept of Trinity then why do other denominations immediately reply there is no purgatory simply because the word purgatory is not found in the Bible?  Why do they deem one word valid and the other not based on the word appearing in the Bible?  Purgatory or Trinity both are words not found in the Bible.

The Bible contains references to many other Christian doctrines, but fails to call them out by name. One might as well deny that there is something called the Bible because no such name is found in the Bible.  If we are going to use the basis for validity of a doctrine on the word used to describe that doctrine being found in the Bible then we might as well deny incarnation because the exact word is not found in the Bible. 

The name does not make the place; the place must exist first, then we give it a name.  Catholics call this place “purgatory” because it means “a cleansing place.” Catholics believe that purgatory is the place that souls are purged of small sins, which prevent their immediate entrance into Heaven. 

Catholics will tell you in Matthew 5:26 and Luke 12:59 Christ is condemning sin and speaks of liberation only after expiation (death), “Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.” Now we know that no last penny needs to be paid in Heaven and from Hell there is no liberation at all; therefore, they say the reference must apply to a third place.

Catholics would also say in Matthew 12:32 it states, “And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”   Here Jesus speaks of sin against the Holy Spirit.  The implication is that some sins can be forgiven in the world to come.  We know that in Hell there is no liberation and in Heaven nothing imperfect can enter.  Sin is not forgiven when a soul reaches its final destination because in heaven there is no need for forgiveness of sin and in hell the choice to go there is already made.

Catholics would go on to say in Revelation 21:27 “…but nothing unclean will enter it, or anyone who does abominable things or tells lies.”  The place that is to be entered (the place to which this passage refers) is heaven (read the text around it for context). 

It is hard for me to state beyond a shadow of doubt there is no purgatory when the Bible clearly implies a place for an purification after we die in the many passages which tell that God will reward or punish according to a person’s life.

It was explained to me, “After shouting at the neighbor about their dog, the angry and stress filled man walks into his house, had a heart attack, and died having just committed a small sin in the final moments of his life.  Remember, this man is Christian and justified by the Lord, yet he committed a sin and died before he could repent.  Does he go to heaven or does he go to hell or does he go to purgatory?  Are all sins created equal?  No, all sins are not equal and justified men of the Lord can make mistakes and sin”.  I believe God is just and would not send anyone to hell in a case like this, therefore I do not agree with the premise of purgatory.  

Catholics most likely would say that it is foolish for me to believe that Christ on the cross covered all my sins, past, present and future, but that is exactly what I believe.  If that is not the case then why did Christ go to the cross in the first place?   I do not believe Christ and the cross relieves me of my responsibility to not sin and I think it is foolish for anyone to think that it does.  Christ on the cross gives no one a license to sin.  I simply have a hard time believing purgatory is part of Gods plan for justice. 

I do not believe gifts or services rendered to the church, prayers by the priests, and masses provided by relatives or friends on behalf of the deceased can shorten, alleviate or eliminate any journey of the soul to a place called purgatory.  I take responsibility for my sins and I believe everyone else must do the same.  God’s judgment of me is only about me and no human being can fix my past after I am dead or before I die.  For me to believe any different seems to me to mean I have a misunderstanding of the atonement of Christ and adds insult to the finished work of the cross. 

I believe the suffering of Christ on the cross paid for all believers’ sins and I do not believe we need to make another suffering sacrifice.  On the cross Jesus said, “It is finished,” (John 19:30).  In the Greek, this was an accounting term which meant a debt was paid in full.  If the payment for our sins was paid in full on the cross, then how could purgatory be a reality?  Hebrew 9:27, “Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.”

I personally do not believe in purgatory, but I will admit there are hints of such a place in the Bible and there are more than hints in the Bible that there is not.  I do not believe anyone is going to go to hell based on what they believe about purgatory, therefore I doubt if the subject is worth debating.  It is just one of the differences Catholics and Protestants have that we will argue about until the end of time, instead of focusing on the beliefs we have in common.

In closing I will confess I taught the doctrine of purgatory for many years because that was what I was taught and I believed at the time.  Now that I am retired and have far more time to study scripture on my own and have more freedom  I have come to doubt the need for a purgatory.