Should public officials be forgiven for past misdeeds?

[public hermit]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven? I realize this is a very general question and that it does depend on the "misdeed" in question. But, there seems to be a growing lack of mercy when it comes to past failures, at least in US politics.

I am especially interested in how Christians think about digging up past misdeeds and using them against a political opponent. Given that grace and mercy are such a significant part of the Christian faith, how are we to think about this? Don't we assume, as Christians, that people can change and become better people?

Currently, it doesn't seem to matter if a person has significantly changed for the better. It seems if something can be dug up, it will be used regardless of the current character of the person. And yet, as Christians, we assume that people can and do change. So, it seems to me this current climate of mercilessness is incompatible with a Christian understanding of grace and mercy. But, maybe it's different for politics.

How far back should past misdeeds be taken into account, if at all?
Does the current character of the individual matter if it differs from their past actions?
What are your thoughts about, what I see as, the severe lack of mercy in our current politics and society?

 

[dzheremi]

I think everybody should be, public official or not.

 

[public hermit]

I think everybody should be, public official or not.

I do, too. Maybe I didn't phrase the OP in the right way. Do you think there is a growing lack of mercy in current politics, and society in general? What do you think is the appropriate Christian response to this? I would think we would hear more from Christians in the public forum concerning the need for mercy, but I'm not really seeing that. Maybe it can all be chalked up to political expediency. I don't know.

 

[public hermit]

Another thought I have had about this subject: If my assessment is correct (and it may not be), the increasing lack of mercy in politics (and society) presents a unique opportunity for Christians. We are called to differentiate ourselves from the world, or to be not-like the world (1 Peter 1:15-16). Maybe in our current context this is one of the ways we are to show what holiness is, by being merciful in a merciless world (i.e. being merciful as our Father is merciful).

Theophilus Rising: A Unique Moment for Grace

 

[Silverback]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven? I realize this is a very general question and that it does depend on the "misdeed" in question. But, there seems to be a growing lack of mercy when it comes to past failures, at least in US politics.

I am especially interested in how Christians think about digging up past misdeeds and using them against a political opponent. Given that grace and mercy are such a significant part of the Christian faith, how are we to think about this? Don't we assume, as Christians, that people can change and become better people?

Currently, it doesn't seem to matter if a person has significantly changed for the better. It seems if something can be dug up, it will be used regardless of the current character of the person. And yet, as Christians, we assume that people can and do change. So, it seems to me this current climate of mercilessness is incompatible with a Christian understanding of grace and mercy. But, maybe it's different for politics.

How far back should past misdeeds be taken into account, if at all?
Does the current character of the individual matter if it differs from their past actions?
What are your thoughts about, what I see as, the severe lack of mercy in our current politics and society?

Many modern nations have the concept of "spent Convictions" a certain amount of time goes by, and your convictions are no longer held against you.

Not in the United States, Although some misdemeanor offences can be expunged, most felonies you carry for life. Then there are the other associated things that really stack the odds against you. Excessive fines, that you can never get paid off, court cost, restitution, $60 per day while cooling your heals in county, and medical/dental co-pays if you use those facilities. Then there are costs associated with parol/probation, monthly drug test, classes, transportation, and counseling.

Your car may have been impounded, if no one can get it out for you, it's auctioned off.

if you go to prison in at least one state, your house, and belongings are seized, and sold to pay for your incarceration In prison.

There's a saying "every sentence is a life sentence"

 

[public hermit]

Many modern nations have the concept of "spent Convictions" a certain amount of time goes by, and your convictions are no longer held against you.

That reminds me of the concept of "Sanctuary" in medieval Europe. Of course, exile was a part of the deal.

https://www.history.com/news/church-sanctuary-asylum-middle-ages

Not in the United States, Although some misdemeanor offences can be expunged, most felonies you carry for life. Then there are the other associated things that really stack the odds against you. Excessive fines, that you can never get paid off, court cost, restitution, $60 per day while cooling your heals in county, and medical/dental co-pays if you use those facilities. Then there are costs associated with parol/probation, monthly drug test, classes, transportation, and counseling.

This is so true. Our incarceration and justice system is not about reform. Maybe the growing lack of mercy we're seeing in politics is a symptom of a larger societal ailment?

 

[dzheremi]

I do, too. Maybe I didn't phrase the OP in the right way. Do you think there is a growing lack of mercy in current politics, and society in general?

Without a doubt.

What do you think is the appropriate Christian response to this?

Emphasize it, both in your churches and in your interactions and discussions with and about everyone. Like for us in the Coptic Orthodox Church (just for example), the refrain of the communion melody for the first week of Lent proclaims "Blessed are those who have mercy / Who give to the poor and fast and pray / The Holy Spirit will fill their hearts / The Son will show them mercy on judgment day." (And then the verses give examples of that, in the rogation of the Ninevites and so on.)

It's a small thing, perhaps, but it reminds us that we too are in need of mercy, and that mercy is obtainable, and we too should show it to others.

I would think we would hear more from Christians in the public forum concerning the need for mercy, but I'm not really seeing that. Maybe it can all be chalked up to political expediency. I don't know.

It probably depends on the context, and yes, everything is politicized nowadays.

 

[Jamsie]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven?

I believe that when one in the public eye acknowledges their misdeeds then people are quite forgiving. Considering 1 John 1:9 what if the person will not confess, acknowledge, or apologize?

 

[Halbhh]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven? I realize this is a very general question and that it does depend on the "misdeed" in question. But, there seems to be a growing lack of mercy when it comes to past failures, at least in US politics.

I am especially interested in how Christians think about digging up past misdeeds and using them against a political opponent. Given that grace and mercy are such a significant part of the Christian faith, how are we to think about this? Don't we assume, as Christians, that people can change and become better people?

Currently, it doesn't seem to matter if a person has significantly changed for the better. It seems if something can be dug up, it will be used regardless of the current character of the person. And yet, as Christians, we assume that people can and do change. So, it seems to me this current climate of mercilessness is incompatible with a Christian understanding of grace and mercy. But, maybe it's different for politics.

How far back should past misdeeds be taken into account, if at all?
Does the current character of the individual matter if it differs from their past actions?
What are your thoughts about, what I see as, the severe lack of mercy in our current politics and society?

While anyone makes mistakes and/or does wrong in the past, of course, what most people want to see is a real repentance from the wrongdoing -- as shown by the person being really changed, no longer the same as in the past.

No longer doing the wrong.

Example: if in the past the person did the deadly serious sin of verbal reviling of others such as via Twitter, they were on the path to the destruction of the second death: "nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." -- 1 Cor 6:10 -- then we'd want to see that evil entirely ended, 100%. It's not what they did years ago that would matter, but what they have done in the last month or two.

 

[Go Braves]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven? I realize this is a very general question and that it does depend on the "misdeed" in question. But, there seems to be a growing lack of mercy when it comes to past failures, at least in US politics.

I am especially interested in how Christians think about digging up past misdeeds and using them against a political opponent. Given that grace and mercy are such a significant part of the Christian faith, how are we to think about this? Don't we assume, as Christians, that people can change and become better people?

Currently, it doesn't seem to matter if a person has significantly changed for the better. It seems if something can be dug up, it will be used regardless of the current character of the person. And yet, as Christians, we assume that people can and do change. So, it seems to me this current climate of mercilessness is incompatible with a Christian understanding of grace and mercy. But, maybe it's different for politics.

How far back should past misdeeds be taken into account, if at all?
Does the current character of the individual matter if it differs from their past actions?
What are your thoughts about, what I see as, the severe lack of mercy in our current politics and society?

Well if there's been a genuine attempt to rectify that wrong, then yes. If all that's been done is lip service, then probably not unless the misdeed was really minor in scale and out of character.

 

[public hermit]

I believe that when one in the public eye acknowledges their misdeeds then people are quite forgiving. Considering 1 John 1:9 what if the person will not confess, acknowledge, or apologize?

You make an interesting point. At least in Canada that seems to be the case.

Trudeau's support holds after apology for wearing brownface

If someone is unwilling to acknowledge a well known misdeed then that is a different story, I would think.

So, do you think digging up past misdeeds as a political tool is acceptable, no matter how long ago?

 

[public hermit]

It's not what they did years ago that would matter, but what they have done in the last month or two.

So, you would say digging up misdeeds from long ago is not legitimate or acceptable? What if it was especially egregious?

In general, do you agree that our culture is becoming less merciful, or no?

 

[public hermit]

Well if there's been a genuine attempt to rectify that wrong, then yes. If all that's been done is lip service, then probably not unless the misdeed was really minor in scale and out of character.

What is your perception of the current political climate of digging up past deeds, no matter how long ago? Is that acceptable? Do you think the political culture is forgiving as long as one apologizes?

 

[usexpat97]

The bottom line is that we just need good politicians who can AND WILL run the country well, now. Past misdeeds are just an indicator of things to come. Also, there's the flip-side: what about those people who DON'T have a history of egregious misdeeds? They're no-names. Too much fixation on whether to forgive Rep. Conyers, when some mayor in rural North Dakota would probably run the country far better. Isn't the point of democracy to elect the BEST people to office? Hello, you've got 300 million people to choose from.

 

[public hermit]

The bottom line is that we just need good politicians who can AND WILL run the country well, now. Past misdeeds are just an indicator of things to come. Also, there's the flip-side: what about those people who DON'T have a history of egregious misdeeds? They're no-names. Too much fixation on whether to forgive Rep. Conyers, when some mayor in rural North Dakota would probably run the country far better. Isn't the point of democracy to elect the BEST people to office? Hello, you've got 300 million people to choose from.

You make some good points. Past misdeeds can certainly be an indicator of things to come. But, as Christians we do hold that people can change. I believe even non-Christians can change. It worries me that by digging up things from way back we are setting a precedent that says the opposite, i.e. that people can't change.

You're right, people who we know nothing about aren't necessarily pillars of virtue. They may be rapscallions, we just don't know it.

I do believe it is about electing the best people. Where are they? Aren't the best people sometimes those who have made significant mistakes and yet grew from them?

 

[hedrick]

Unfortunately, it depends. I thought about this when Kavanagh was being considered. I'm going to be hypothetical, i.e. I'm not going to comment on which of these possibilities is actually true.

• Actual rape would be really serious. Maybe you could recover from that, but it would be nearly impossible.
• Frat boy bad attitudes towards women. I think if that actually happened, he should acknowledge it, and his treatment of women as colleagues since should demonstrate that it's no longer the case. (Incidentally, I should note that not all fraternity members are frat boys in this case. In grad school I knew a largely Christian fraternity whose members were fine people.)
• Denying and making excuses (assuming it really happened) would make one suspect that the attitudes still exist.

I'd say the same in general. Some things are serious enough that they should be disqualifying. Others aren't, but it should be clear that the attitudes leading to them no longer exist, and normally there should be acknowledgement and repentance.

 

[usexpat97]

• Actual rape would be really serious. Maybe you could recover from that, but it would be nearly impossible.

The issue with rape and other serious crimes is that they don't happen in isolation. You're not just an otherwise good guy, but you committed rape. There were a series of poor decisions and lesser crimes leading up to it.

 

[Go Braves]

What is your perception of the current political climate of digging up past deeds, no matter how long ago? Is that acceptable? Do you think the political culture is forgiving as long as one apologizes?

Well it all depends on what the past deed was and if it was an isolated event or part of a pattern. There's been several politicians who've had pictures from 20, 30 years back of them in black face, brown face, at a costume party or what have you. Something like that, if it's not accompanied by a whole lifetime of other similar things, I think a sincere apology will do.

With things that would have caused the person to be arrested had the statute of limitation not expired, that's another matter. As are things that were malicious, perverse, evil in intent. Especially if they aren't isolated to a youthful wrong where a life mostly on straight and narrow path since has shown some repentance. Or even if they were in youth but were especially awful and not just badly ignorant.

 

[Halbhh]

So, you would say digging up misdeeds from long ago is not legitimate or acceptable? What if it was especially egregious?

In general, do you agree that our culture is becoming less merciful, or no?

It's legit to consider long ago deeds of significant magnitude if, and only if, the person hasn't truly reformed but is still justifying or misrepresenting or excusing their wrongdoing.

Are people less merciful? That's a hard question to gauge, as it seems I'm living in a world here locally full of merciful people.

Talk shows are sometimes unmerciful, but talk shows don't represent regular people that well.

This could help -- I think Trump slandered Mexicans by suggesting most immigrants from Mexico are not good, but instead criminal...

but if Trump showed up at my doorstep I would be delighted (and surprised), and would eagerly invite him in and be so happy to have him visit (if he would), and would invite him to dinner in my home, and would be so happy to eat with him, and I would love him.

Got that?

I'd love him. But I'm not planning to vote for him.

Not unless he truly reforms, and stops doing evils in a current-today manner. Even though I think he's got the right position on the single most important issue for America, that China tries to undermine our economy. Even with Trump being almost the only person doing the right response...even then, this 1 great thing is not enough to win my vote when combined with the evils he has been doing, namely the slanders.

 

[jgarden]

Should the past misdeeds of elected officials, or those running for office, be forgiven? I realize this is a very general question and that it does depend on the "misdeed" in question. But, there seems to be a growing lack of mercy when it comes to past failures, at least in US politics.

I am especially interested in how Christians think about digging up past misdeeds and using them against a political opponent. Given that grace and mercy are such a significant part of the Christian faith, how are we to think about this? Don't we assume, as Christians, that people can change and become better people?

Currently, it doesn't seem to matter if a person has significantly changed for the better. It seems if something can be dug up, it will be used regardless of the current character of the person. And yet, as Christians, we assume that people can and do change. So, it seems to me this current climate of mercilessness is incompatible with a Christian understanding of grace and mercy. But, maybe it's different for politics.

How far back should past misdeeds be taken into account, if at all?
Does the current character of the individual matter if it differs from their past actions?
What are your thoughts about, what I see as, the severe lack of mercy in our current politics and society?

A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate must resign or be rejected. If a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.
— Hippolytus of Rome

Christian pacifism - Wikipedia
**********************************************************
The early Christians strongly discouraged their members from holding public office and/or participating in the military based on the premise that one cannot serve 2 masters!

Christians in America identify too closely with the Constitution, government and nationalism - all of which are strictly secular inventions designed to make the population easier to govern!