The Courage of Erika Kirk
The Charlie Kirk memorial has elicited many reactions, as one would expect. Given the length and size of the occasion, there will always be parts of the memorial that we might wish to change. Notwithstanding, there were some memorable moments and one of them particularly struck me: Erika Kirk forgave her enemy, the killer of her deceased husband. As the eighteenth-century Anglican clergyman, Laurence Sterne, once said, “Only the brave know how to forgive…a coward never forgave; it is not in his nature.” Erika’s words were not just divine, but brave. Forgiveness in this context is the most courageous thing one can do, just as it was when Christ was on the cross and he prayed for the forgiveness of his murderers. We know who the true children of God are by their willingness to forgive their enemies (Matt 5:44–45; 6:14).
Some Christians, however, wonder whether she was able to offer forgiveness to a person who has, as far as we know, not repented. Until her words were spoken, forgiving the killer(s) of your family was considered by some to be a weak liberal Christian thing. But because she represents conservatives, these same people regard her words as heroic. I don’t deny they are, but I don’t honor her act merely because she’s on the right side; I honor her words because it is the Christian thing to do. Far too many today still base their opinions of right or wrong almost entirely on who is making the claim.
As all sins are committed against God; no one can forgive sins in the way that God can. His authority is unique, peculiar to him. All sins, whether mediately (stealing someone’s purse) or immediately (cursing God), are committed against God. Sometimes the neighbour is the medium, but the sin is still against God. Why is this important? Because if we forgive our neighbour, this does not relate to the guilt of his sin, but rather to the harm that has been done to us.
Erika Kirk’s forgiveness of her husband’s killer was entirely appropriate. She was offering forgiveness based on the harm that has been done to her (and others) because of the loss she has experienced. She was not, I think, saying that the killer is now justified before God. She was saying, “you have harmed my family (and many others); you have hurt us; but I forgive you for this harm.”
The distinction between guilt and harm is a good one and allows us to offer sane advice to those who are in a place where they are wondering whether they need to forgive or not. Erika did what her soul, aided by the grace of Christ, enabled her to do in that moment.
It is very likely the killer’s guilt remains. He needs to repent before Erika and before God if he is going to be saved. He may even repent, be saved, and still face the death penalty (Rom. 3, 13). Christians can accept both outcomes.
The glory of the gospel is revealed at precisely these key moments. One might think that Stephen would have been a little surprised to see the Apostle Paul arrive in glory not long after Stephen had been there worshipping his Savior. Paul gave approval to Stephen’s death and was therefore a type of murderer (Acts 8). Our theology as Christians demands of us a great deal at times. And we must be able to pray that one day Charlie and his killer will embrace each other in glory: “here’s to you, Mr. Robinson, Jesus loves you more than you will know.”
We can pray that justice will be done to the murderer (i.e., he will die for these killings), but that mercy will also be shown to him (i.e., he will repent and be saved).
Whatever we do, let’s not cast aspersions upon Erika Kirk’s words of forgiveness because we want to take this opportunity to critique the details of her theology. Theological precision has its place, and there are some instances where I think we do need to insist upon repentance for reconciliation in a church context (i.e., “if your brother sins…”). Elders in church contexts possess a unique authority in relation to forgiveness and church discipline where repentance is required (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). But the personal exercise of forgiveness offered by Erika Kirk is something different than what is demanded of shepherds in an ecclesiastical context regarding church members.
Johann Lavater, a nineteenth-century Zwinglian theologian, once said, “He who has not forgiven an enemy has never yet tasted one of the most sublime enjoyments of life.” Erika forgave and so can read Mark 11:25 with a clear conscience and great assurance of faith. She has done what God requires of her and now leaves to God what only he can do. She is free and while sorrowful, yet still rejoicing (2 Cor. 6:10).
“A more glorious victory cannot be gained over another man than this, that when the injury began on his part the kindness should begin on ours” (John Tillotson). This is the way of Christ, the way of Erika Kirk, and the way of God’s people, who will always have the victory. But true courage really is turning the other cheek, forgiving our enemies, and praying for those who harm us.
Mark Jones is a pastor, professor, and writer of many books and articles.
Photo By Gage Skidmore – https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/54617253027/, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=174841151
