Who would Jesus shoot-to-kill, bishop asked?
-18/11/05
Christian peace organisations a
Who would Jesus shoot-to-kill, bishop asked?
-18/11/05
Christian peace organisations and church groups are questioning the anti-terrorism stance adopted by the Anglican Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Rev Tom Butler, when he this week defended the Metropolitan Police ëshoot-to-killí policy.
Dr Butler was speaking during a two-hour debate in response to the 7 July London bombings at the General Synod of the Church of England, meeting in London from 15-17 November 2005.
While highlighting civil liberties ìanxietiesî about certain aspects of the Terrorism Bill, which is currently passing through Parliament, he said that armed police might sometimes have to respond with lethal force to suspected suicide bombers.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4, the Bishop of Southwark described such killings as a lesser of two evils. ìSometimes we have to judge between two things that are wrong to produce the best result,î he told an interviewer.
He added: ìObviously, killing somebody is never a right thing to do, but if it prevents many other people being killed, it may be the only thing to do.î
However the UK Christian think-tank Ekklesia has responded by saying that the role of Christian leaders is not to endorse violence as public policy, but to create alternatives to it.
ìWhile we should respect the tough decisions that the police and others have to take in dealing with terrorists, it is sad to hear a representative of the Gospel supporting killing as an appropriate policy option,î said Ekklesia co-director Simon Barrow.
He continued: ìThe police shoot-to-kill policy backfired disastrously the first time it was employed, resulting in the death of an entirely innocent Jean Charles de Menezes. Experience suggests that it contributes to a cycle of violence, rather than being an effective antidote to it. We have to examine the bigger picture too.î
He added that it was dangerous, and often misguided, to calculate that a greater good would come out of a basically wrong action.
Civil liberties, human rights and religious groups, including Muslim organisations, have said that the police policy should be to disable and disarm potential bombers, not to risk gunning down innocents or creating martyrs.
Arab news media have interpreted Bishop Butlerís response as saying ìsaying police officers should be allowed to gun down suspected suicide bombersî (The Peninsular, Qatar).
Ekklesiaís Simon Barrow commented: ìThis isnít a marginal question for the Christian community. Jesus prevented a supporter using violence at his arrest and called on his followers to respond to evil with good. Where we should be focussing our resources is on conflict transformation, arguing against the religious legitimation of violence, and building alternatives to the culture of armed hatred.î
Mr Barrow said that it was unhelpful and over-simple for the churches to think that they could have short-term answers to every human dilemma.
ìChristian conscience sometimes has to say ënoí to courses of action which might seem immediately justifiable, but which actually divert us from the better way to which the costly message of Christ points,î he explained. ìThis isnít irresponsibility, itís alternative realism.î
Concluded the Ekklesia co-director: ìWhile we canít reduce the complex ethics and politics of this situation to ëwho would Jesus shoot-to-kill?í, itís not a question we can avoid either ñ and the core of the answer points in a different direction to the bishopís response.î
After its debate, the Church of England General Synod called on the Government not to erode basic human rights. It also urged greater understanding of the underlying causes of terrorism.
The Bishop of Southwark, who was recently made an honorary doctor of literature by the South Bank University in London, summarised: ìDepriving people of their liberty on mere suspicion, even with judicial safeguards, is a very serious matter.î
Two months ago four Anglican bishops issued a report entitled ëCountering Terrorism: Power, Violence and Democracy Post 9/11í. It controversially criticised the Iraq war and called for acts of reconciliation to be part of an attempt to address the grievances that lay behind the growth of terrorism.
During this weekís Church of England debate Dr David Tweedie, from Warwick, told Synod: ìSomeone has to ask how, as Christians, we address suicide bombers, suicide bombers who survive, and those who send suicide bombers out… It is extremely difficult. Yet we are called to forgive.î
[Also on Ekklesia: Beyond the politics of fear: An Ekklesia response to the London bombings; and Of bishops, bombs and ballast]
Who would Jesus shoot-to-kill, bishop asked?
-18/11/05
Christian peace organisations and church groups are questioning the anti-terrorism stance adopted by the Anglican Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Rev Tom Butler, when he this week defended the Metropolitan Police ëshoot-to-kill’ policy.
Dr Butler was speaking during a two-hour debate in response to the 7 July London bombings at the General Synod of the Church of England, meeting in London from 15-17 November 2005.
While highlighting civil liberties ‘anxieties’ about certain aspects of the Terrorism Bill, which is currently passing through Parliament, he said that armed police might sometimes have to respond with lethal force to suspected suicide bombers.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4, the Bishop of Southwark described such killings as a lesser of two evils. ‘Sometimes we have to judge between two things that are wrong to produce the best result,’ he told an interviewer.
He added: ‘Obviously, killing somebody is never a right thing to do, but if it prevents many other people being killed, it may be the only thing to do.’
However the UK Christian think-tank Ekklesia has responded by saying that the role of Christian leaders is not to endorse violence as public policy, but to create alternatives to it.
‘While we should respect the tough decisions that the police and others have to take in dealing with terrorists, it is sad to hear a representative of the Gospel supporting killing as an appropriate policy option,’ said Ekklesia co-director Simon Barrow.
He continued: ‘The police shoot-to-kill policy backfired disastrously the first time it was employed, resulting in the death of an entirely innocent Jean Charles de Menezes. Experience suggests that it contributes to a cycle of violence, rather than being an effective antidote to it. We have to examine the bigger picture too.’
He added that it was dangerous, and often misguided, to calculate that a greater good would come out of a basically wrong action.
Civil liberties, human rights and religious groups, including Muslim organisations, have said that the police policy should be to disable and disarm potential bombers, not to risk gunning down innocents or creating martyrs.
Arab news media have interpreted Bishop Butler’s response as saying ‘saying police officers should be allowed to gun down suspected suicide bombers’ (The Peninsular, Qatar).
Ekklesia’s Simon Barrow commented: ‘This isn’t a marginal question for the Christian community. Jesus prevented a supporter using violence at his arrest and called on his followers to respond to evil with good. Where we should be focussing our resources is on conflict transformation, arguing against the religious legitimation of violence, and building alternatives to the culture of armed hatred.’
Mr Barrow said that it was unhelpful and over-simple for the churches to think that they could have short-term answers to every human dilemma.
‘Christian conscience sometimes has to say ëno’ to courses of action which might seem immediately justifiable, but which actually divert us from the better way to which the costly message of Christ points,’ he explained. ‘This isn’t irresponsibility, it’s alternative realism.’
Concluded the Ekklesia co-director: ‘While we can’t reduce the complex ethics and politics of this situation to ëwho would Jesus shoot-to-kill?’, it’s not a question we can avoid either – and the core of the answer points in a different direction to the bishop’s response.’
After its debate, the Church of England General Synod called on the Government not to erode basic human rights. It also urged greater understanding of the underlying causes of terrorism.
The Bishop of Southwark, who was recently made an honorary doctor of literature by the South Bank University in London, summarised: ‘Depriving people of their liberty on mere suspicion, even with judicial safeguards, is a very serious matter.’
Two months ago four Anglican bishops issued a report entitled ëCountering Terrorism: Power, Violence and Democracy Post 9/11′. It controversially criticised the Iraq war and called for acts of reconciliation to be part of an attempt to address the grievances that lay behind the growth of terrorism.
During this week’s Church of England debate Dr David Tweedie, from Warwick, told Synod: ‘Someone has to ask how, as Christians, we address suicide bombers, suicide bombers who survive, and those who send suicide bombers out… It is extremely difficult. Yet we are called to forgive.’
[Also on Ekklesia: Beyond the politics of fear: An Ekklesia response to the London bombings; and Of bishops, bombs and ballast]