UPFRONT November 27, 2006 Issue

'Kindness for kindness'

STEVE GRAHAM, MANAGING EDITOR

When a gunman attacked a Pennsylvania schoolhouse last month, killing five children and injuring five others, the world marveled at the response of that small Amish community. Living their faith even in such a time of great tragedy, the people in the village of Nickel Mines did not even express anger, much less vengeance. They did not condemn the gunman, who took his own life, and showed Christian love and concern, embracing his own bereaved family.

Unlike so many of the headlines that tell of "eye for an eye" retaliation for wrongs committed, that example of true forgiveness made news because it stood in such stark contrast—and because of the awesome power of love it so honestly and nobly proclaimed. Without a doubt, that forgiveness brought, and continues to bring, vital healing to all involved in that community, and to the world beyond.

A statement made in a Boston Globe editorial shows fresh, timely relevance—though it's been in our clip files for 23 years! " 'Retaliate' is a curious word," it says, "for it is only in the last hundred years that its present meaning—harm for harm—has driven out an opposite meaning—kindness for kindness—after the two had coexisted since the early 17th century" (July 22, 1983).

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

ITEMS OF INTEREST