Revenge: a path that leads to nowhere. Love: a path to peace of soul.

According to novelists and literature experts, when writing a story there are five categories that captivate the reader: the Love story (Romeo and Juliet), the Mistaken Identity (the Prince and the Pauper), stories of Greed (Treasure Island), Redemption (Les Miserables), and then there is the story of “Revenge” (Count of Monte Cristo).

All deal with emotions that push the characters to act and do certain things that can make the story captivating. The theme of Revenge, however, seems to be one that has an inherently negative and somewhat evil focus, even if the person on the receiving end of revenge has what’s coming to him. The story of the Count of Monte Cristo is about a man who is so taken advantage of and abused that once he breaks out of solitary confinement and finds amazing riches, he is hellbent on revenge against those who have wronged him. Unlike the recent movie that came out a few years ago, starring Jim Caviezel, where the count gets his way in the end, killing the bad guy, getting the girl, and reuniting with his son, only to find out that his revenge wasn’t as satisfying as he’d hoped, the book’s ending is much more dire. So carried away with his thirst for revenge he loses everything he’s gained to achieve his goal. His enemy dead, his money squandered and the girl and his own child lost, his revenge ultimately destroys him. Powerful and captivating story, yes, but a tragedy indeed.

I would think however that all of us at one point of our lives desired revenge against someone. Wether we were wronged or made fun of, or were bested by our foe, we’ve probably have said to ourselves before “I’m gonna get him”, “one of these days”, or “she’s gonna pay for what she said.”

I remember having this thought when I was in elementary school towards a school bully. I remember sitting and thinking of all the ways I could get back at him or the words I should have said but didn’t think of at the time. But the effort to keep thinking of this was too draining and finally I abandoned those thoughts and found something else more fun and cheerful to occupy my time.

But for many, in more serious situations, vengeance becomes an obsession. they cannot abandon those thoughts so easily. Jesus’ Commandment in the gospel to ” love your enemy” truly challenges these basic instincts. How can you love your enemy? It can seem a truly difficult and impossible demand.

But as the story of the Count truly shows the act of revenge only gives a passing satisfaction. A documentary on W5 a while back interviewed those who were addicted to revenge. Those addicted would send nasty emails to ex boyfriends or girlfriends, would find the persons car and scratch it, then on to the next act. Nothing seemed to be enough. In one case a doctor murdered his ex partner because he felt he had been betrayed.

Psychologically revenge wants to make you feel that you’re better then the other, that you have humbled the other, put them in their place. Revenge deals with the selfish need to feel that you are one up on the other. The feelings of satisfaction after a vengeful act however are usually passing and the desire for revenge does not really leave. The people interviewed kept going back to do more and more things to exact revenge. Nothing is enough.

Those who have overcome these feeling of revenge and psychologists often state the maxim: the best revenge is a life well lived. In a certain way this is true. But Christ’s teaching challenges us further. “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.” Offer the other cheek. How can we do this? It sounds odd, even against our instincts. Basically Jesus is telling us, do not let yourselves be crushed by the bad and evil deeds others may do to you, don’t get caught up in their game. Don’t let evil trap you in its ways.

First, the Christian must recognize and know themselves as a son or daughter of God, beloved by God. The Christian is called to love, and to love their neighbor as God loves them. We are all called in the Gospel to love as God loves. It is the highest form of love. There are three kinds of love in the Greek language; Eros: that of the passionate love; Philia: the love between family and good friends, and Agape. Agape describes an active feeling of benevolence towards the other person; it means that no matter what that person does to us we will never allow ourselves to desire anything but the highest good for that person; we will always go out of our way to be good and kind to him. It is true however that we cannot love our enemies as our closest and dearest friends. This would be unnatural to do so and even wrong. We can see to it however that no matter what our enemy does to us, insults and injuries, we will not seek anything but their good. Love of our dearest, is easy and natural. Love of our enemy is not of the heart but of the will. We do not need then to feel love for our enemy, but only to “will” love. It is something which only by the grace of Christ we may will ourselves to do. Christ gave the example from the cross when he forgave those who crucified him. Thus this type of love, agape, calls for forgiveness and is the truest way to peace of soul.

The Golden rule: “do to no one what you would not have done to you”. It comes to us from the Old Testament and is stated many times and many wise men and women repeat this wise way of life. But Christ as always pushes us further. It is not enough to not do what we don’t want others to do to us. Christ puts it in the positive: “Go out and do to other what you would want to be done to you”. Jesus pushes us to walk the extra mile; to give not just our best, but our all. “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do this. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you?”

Many times when we are forced to examination of our conscience we tell ourselves comforting things “well I’m not such a bad person, I haven’t killed anyone, I’m faithful to my wife and family. I’m no different than the next guy. etc…” The follower of Jesus doesn’t compare himself to his neighbors or however society accepts as valid conduct today. It is God with whom we are to compare ourselves, it is Jesus who is our measure as Christians.

Jesus tells us not to content ourselves with what commandments we do not transgress, but to demand of ourselves the best we have to offer to God and neighbor. We must ask then “What does Jesus Do?” and respond: Well let me do as he does, love as he loves. Jesus is kind to the man who bring him joy and equally kind to the man you grieves his heart, God’s love embraces saints and sinners. This doesn’t mean to let people walk all over us and take advantage of our goodness, but it does mean to follow the highest good. Truly, it is this love that we must copy, for it is this kind of love that will make us Christ-like; it is this love that changes the world, it is this love that is redeeming and life-giving.


5 responses to “Revenge: a path that leads to nowhere. Love: a path to peace of soul.”

  1. RobertOrzechowski left this response on February 27th, 2007 at 12:58 pm:

    I am not sure I agree with your concept of revenge. Revenge is the desire to “equalize” and not to lower the other person. It is a reflex emotion. Person A harms person B. Person B wants revenge. He wants equalization and he wants Person A to feel exactly what he went through because Person A is completely oblivious to the hurt he caused.
    Much of Jesus’ teachings on “love your enemies” is revered but not followed even today. The terrorists attacked on 9/11. The response was to invade Afghanistan. Did Jesus not say “Love your enemies”? What happened is that a reaction to an aggression was to counter it to achieve justice.
    Revenge can distort the human perspective in its attempts to achieve its ends. However, it is a universal theme of action causing a reaction.
    If Jesus is calling us to love our enemies then there should be a passivity when terrorist strikes Israel, the U.S. or any other place in the world. We should love our enemies who curse us and spit on us. By that definition, should we not love Satan? Should Jesus and God not be raising an army against Satan in Revelations? Should God not be loving His enemies instead of trying to vanquish them?

  2. Fr. Stephen Otvos left this response on February 28th, 2007 at 12:54 am:

    I have a feeling your confusing revenge with the cardinal virtue of Justice. Yes, we should love our enemies, but Satan? He has made his choice for all eternity, father of lies, and although a creature of God we cannot love what he has become because he is what he has made himself to be, evil, anti Christ, anti life. Loving others, wether enemies or not, as God loves them is the true path that transforms the world, and this is Christ like, this is the Cross of Jesus, and this builds the Kingdom.

  3. RobertOrzechowski left this response on February 28th, 2007 at 4:05 pm:

    Father Steven,

    I would like to pose to you some rational thought to what you are preaching. I would like to include some statements that reflect Catholic teaching that I am sure that everyone agrees with.

    1) God is the creator of all. Nothing can exist without Him.

    2) God is loving and good.

    These two statements prove a problem to Catholicism and I have even posed this question to Father Dowd who is still working on a response.
    When God created Satan, Satan was a good angel. How was it that Satan (Lucifer) was able to have an option to choose evil? That option had to have been made by God. Therefore it is God who has made evil. Free will is a tool but the option of evil had to have been invented by God.
    Now going back to my two statements - God is creator and God is loving and good - the first statement implies that everything requires God to exist - even Hell. Satan and hell have to owe their existence to God. Therefore the dynamic relationship between God, Jesus and Satan are seen in a new light. If God has created evil then what are his motives for sending His only son into the world to counter something that He himself created?
    It also creates a problem when one mentions God’s “Kingdom”. A kingdom implies inclusion and exclusion with borders. It implies limitations. Does God’s kingdom include hell? If not, how does hell exist without God’s support since He is the creator of all?
    In conclusion, the origin of evil is crucial to explain because it then affects everything. You cannot have an all powerful omnipotent God that divides Himself against His own creation. Something does not add up here.

    Another interesting point you bring up. “He (Satan) has made his choice for all eternity, father of lies, and although a creature of God…”. Is Satan eternal? The implication here is that he is….if not then his choice would not last until all eternity but would be a thing of the past.

    Cheers
    Robert

  4. benedictus left this response on March 3rd, 2007 at 1:38 pm:

    Robert,

    As you know, the “option to choose evil” is called free will. God did create angels and men with free will. If something doesn’t have free will, it is a “thing”, a machine. It is not something created in the likeness of God who is perfectly Free and yet perfectly Good. But it not God who has made evil because “evil” (in it’s strictest sense) is the absence of something good. It is the absence of light. It is the absence of truth. It is the absence of justice. It is the absence of joy. It is the absence of peace. In the same way, God did not create “hell” as hell is not really a physical place but a state of someone that is “disconnected” to the source of all goodness : God. Thus it is true that the “Kingdom of God” has borders : the borders of eternal love, eternal truth and eternal life.

    As for Satan, he is a pure spirit. He doesn’t “make decisions” based on prior knowledge or things to come. He exercises his free will in an instant present that encompasses all time. He didn’t “choose” (past tense) to disobey God or hate— he chooses (present tense) to disobey and hate, and since he’s a pure spirit, with “one foot” in eternity (and thus perfect knowledge), his decision is final. So he’s really a shell of the good creature that was created by God. He’s now pure evil (entirely disconnected from God) and the only goodness that he has is the metaphysical goodness of “being”. But since we can’t hope for his (it’s) redemption and that he represents pure hate and pure pride, there’s no point in praying for him or wishing him well. He’s the angelic/demonic face of sin, and God wants us to hate sin…. because it is what cuts us from him.

  5. RobertOrzechowski left this response on March 3rd, 2007 at 10:54 pm:

    Benedictus,
    I understand your position but you have not addressed my point. Let me put the problem in an analogy. In “Let’s Make A Deal” the host God has created door number one. That is all things good. Out of that door came Lucifer (he was originally good). At this point, God is good and all of His creation reflects him which is good. Are you with me?
    Now, Lucifer at some point “falls”. The problem here is there is a door number 2!! Lucifer could not have created something out of nothing. He had to be given the choice of evil from God. God had to have presented that Door number 2 in order for Lucifer to choose it.

    Question: How can a kingdom of an unlimited, supreme, omnipotent God have a kingdom with borders??? It makes no sense.

    You also did not address the problem of the omnipotence of God. The Christian definition of God is the most highest supreme force over everything. How could hell exist without the force of God? For the idea of Satan and hell to exist (even if it the absence of good)it must require the breath of God. In other words, the complete opposite of an all powerful living God can only be one thing - inexistence.
    These arguments are based on my two premises:
    1)God is the only omnipotent creator
    2)God is only good (this definition itself is limiting which could therefore contradict number one)

    I believe like Father Tom that all religious convictions should stand up to rational scrutiny.
    Cheers
    Robert


Leave a response