Reaction to this news has been relatively similar among people I know: shock, horror, and the lingering question of what could drive a person to do this. Everyone to whom I have spoken believes that this was a grossly immoral act. Many people believe that officials would be right to seek the death penalty in this instance, but others are opposed to this, believing that more killing cannot bring good.
For some, events such as these are faith-shaking. If God is loving, if he is real, and if he is as powerful as believers claim, then how could such a tragedy be allowed to happen?
There are people that use these events as evidence to support a conclusion that any one of these things is untrue of God.
Those among the Westboro Baptist Church crowd have already posted a video (that I have admittedly not watched) entitled "God Sent The Shooter...Again!" For people in this group, God is real and powerful, but not loving.
There are those in atheist groups who believe this is evidence that God is not real.
There are those in groups of believers that will conclude that God is not powerful enough to stop this under the guise of "God has to let people make their own choices." For these people, God is real and loving, but he is apparently unable to stop people that make these tragic choices.
The truth is that all three of these attributes is true of God. He is real - and he is aware of the events that transpire in every theater and city. He is loving - he sacrificed his only begotten son to spare us pain. He has power to prevent and to stop acts of violence or other tragedies - he knows the past, present and future, and he could have made James Holmes have a fatal heart attack prior to him carrying out his awful plan.
For many people of faith, some of the most important truths that require reconciliation are the reality of tragedy and the omniscience and omnipotence of God.
If we operate under the assumption that God is real, all-knowing, and all-powerful, then tragedies force the conclusion that God's goal is not the prevention of tragedy, and that tragedy is not able to prevent his goals from being realized. The real question then becomes 'what does God want?'
This question must be handled delicately. Simply because something has occurred does not necessarily mean that God wanted it to occur in that way. Failure to remember that leads down the path of the Westboro Baptist crowd where the question of 'what does God want?' seems to be answered by 'tragedy.'
God does not want tragedy to befall men, and the life of Jesus Christ himself provides abundant evidence of this:
- Worried about the hunger of those that had come to hear him teach, he fed 5000 people using his power. (Matthew 14:15-21)
- Sympathetic to a lame man who had no one to help him into the pool of Bethesda, the words of Christ gave him the power to walk (John 5:5-9)
- Compassionate to a pair of blind men, Jesus touched their eyes, restoring their sight (Matthew 9:27-31)
- With emotion, Christ raised Lazarus even though he had been dead for days (John 11)
If God does not want us to suffer tragedy, surely he has provided some mechanism to protect against crime and nurture those in need. A careful examination will reveal several methods:
- Families: The fundamental unit of society is designed to nurture and provide for people. Every human being at one point was a child. When born, humans are incapable of communication except to cry when something seems amiss. Babies are not able to move on their own, or even hold up their heads properly. In spite of the weaknesses of young children, there are no fiercer defenders, providers, or instructors than loving parents. When tragedy strikes, a child has a right to a mother and father that will loyally assist them to the limits of their abilities. (http://www.lds.org/family/proclamation/) While the assistance of family should not be limited to young children, the importance of family influence is most obvious in these cases.
- The State: God approves of governmental concepts (not necessarily specific governments). (D&C 134:1) Governments have the power to help defend citizens, and to prosecute the commission of crimes. Guilty individuals can and should suffer the consequences of justice according to the law. The state is treated differently than an individual in God's eyes. In other words, there are cases when God approves of stealing, kidnapping, and killing.
- While it is wrong for an individual to seize property from another, a government in honestly striving to uphold justice may take property. It is common sense to attempt to take from a thief what was stolen and to restore it to its proper owner. For an individual it is stealing; for a government, it might be tax or lawful seizure.
- While it is wrong for an individual to take a person against their will and imprison them, A society appropriately puts those guilty of several types of crimes in prisons and removes their liberties. For an individual, it is kidnapping; for a government, it is imprisonment.
- While it is wrong for an individual to kill another except in self defense, a society is able to take convicts and execute them. This is not the same as a mob, such as the French Revolutionary government that sent people to the guillotine in droves for being aristocrats. This is a government that is preventing a person that is not capable of being rehabilitated from inflicting any further harm. Life-long imprisonment for such individuals cannot guarantee against escape, and does little to prohibit the influence of such toxic persons from affecting inmates that are eligible for rehabilitation and will be returned to society. A person guilty of murder or child abuse is an example of someone that can never be trusted or rehabilitated, even if God may forgive them in the next life. For an individual, it is murder; for a government, it is capital punishment.
- The Church: The State cannot make people good, it can only defend against crimes of commission. Suffering from tragedies may require generosity and kindness, for which there can be no legislation made. No one should expect to stand before God and expect entrance to his kingdom in exchange for the many government programs that were funded using paycheck deductions. This is not charity. Churches and charitable organizations provide real mechanisms of organization for doing good. The generous giving of alms, the provision of service for those in need, the hand of fellowship and brotherhood: these are ideals that are almost universally promoted by all churches. The persuasion to do good can and should come from the conscience-stirring influences found in places of worship.
