From the Trunk IV

The following is a very lengthy paper I wrote at age 23, during the months between my roommate's death and the trial of her murderer. I struggled fiercely with the idea of capital punishment during those months, because it was no longer just an abstract idea about which I could philosophize. Now it had a face and a name, and that personal aspect necessarily influenced my thinking, causing me to re-evaluate my long-held belief that execution of a criminal was O-K. I was also troubled by the attitudes of some Christians which I perceived, at the time, as vengeful and hateful.

In retrospect, I think I misunderstood these people, and my own ability to judge was clouded by my emotional attachment to the situation. I found it difficult to distinguish between my desire for personal vengeance, my belief that this man should be shown the love of Christ through his people, and the duty which the state has to execute justice.

In my memory, this paper had been a diatribe against capital punishment, but as I read through it the other day, I realize it only expresses hesitation regarding modern criminal punishment practices. I have, hopefully, matured in my understanding - I am less optimistic about the "rehabilitation" of repeat offenders of violent crimes, and because of a greater awareness of the depth of human depravity, I believe capital punishment is not only appropriate, but necessary. I still believe we would do well to carefully and biblically examine the way our justice system operates. (BTW, I have not corrected errors in wording, grammar, logic, biblical interpretation, etc...this is the essay in its original form. I was just a "Kid"!)

The Christian and Criminal Punishment

by: Lori Waggoner - 1989

In determining what a Christian's reaction to and involvement in modern day systems of justice should be, we must first determine his role and the extent of that role in a non-Christian world. Some would argue that, because our citizenship is in heaven and our hopes and goals are "other-earthly", we need not be concerned with the aspects of earthly citizenship. However, God has ordained that we live out our existence here on earth even after our new birth and clearly we cannot, nor does He ask us to, evade the accompanying responsibilities. What exactly is the essence and nature of our responsibility?

First, we must clarify that our responsibilities are not primarily political, though they may have political implications or significance. The fact that governmental systems ultimately make the "rules" and determine how the forces of good and evil must be met, requires some political/governmental involvement if we wish to affect change. Keep in mind though, that affecting political change is only a vehicle - a political means of reaching a non-political goal. When we recognize the necessity for such involvement, we are compelled to address, from a Biblical standpoint, our attitude and response to government

Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, and I Peter 3:13-17, all speak to our response to governmental authority. Romans says that rulers are ordained by God and we are therefore subject to their powers. They are not a threat to us, but rather a deterrent of evil and are authorized to execute punishment on those who exercise evil. That makes for fairly easy interpretation to those of us in the "free world" whose government's values adhere reasonably close to traditional Judeo-Christian values. But what significance do these passages hold for those Christians who suffer under stifling regimes that actively persecute the church of God and demand the church's dispersion? Is their only choice to submit to those authorities who view their spiritual activity as evil and separate themselves from the church? I should think not. Most would agree that Divine authority exceeds, and thereby limits, human (or governmental) authority so that if a political mandate violates the law or character of God, then we are exempt from obedience; however, we recognize that our non-compliance may subject us to punishment by that government according to their law.

Obviously, we will at times find our commitment to the principles and ways of God to be diametrically opposed to a government's position. Scripture demands that we acknowledge and respect authority, but it does not necessitate that we adopt their values as a means of subjecting ourselves to them. Our values are derived from Scripture alone and do not conform to the public policy of the day. Government may restrict the ways in which we implement our values in society, and when they do, we should seek reform through non-violent, legal means.

We conclude then, that achieving our goals may require political involvement or invoke political opposition, yet the goals themselves are not political.

I would suggest that our primary goals and responsibilities are societal. In stating that, I am not advocating a "social gospel" as it is known today. Society cannot and will not attain redemption by achieving the highest societal good. I am simply recognizing that "society" is a sum representation of its individual parts, the people. That is precisely where our Christian obligations lie - with individual people or, in Biblical terms, our "neighbor."

What are our obligations toward our neighbor and how are they met? The first and most obvious answer is LOVE. We have a clear Biblical injunction to love our neighbor in the same way we love ourselves. Whenever I make a decision for myself, I view it from every possible angle and evaluate what effects it will have on each aspect of my life - physical, emotional, social, spiritual, and intellectual. I seek to do that which will have the strongest positive implications in the most areas of my life. In this way, I demonstrate that I love myself. Loving my neighbor in the same way, then, would require that I use the same criteria when making a decision that will affect his or her life. Does this decision maximize the good that could result on their behalf? That is, after all, what true love is...seeking the other's highest good.

It is fitting to recall that Christ summed up the law in two commandments: first, love God with all your being and secondly, love your neighbor as you love yourself. In doing this, you will have fulfilled the entire law. Someone in the crowd asked, "Who is my neighbor?" Christ related the story commonly known as "The Good Samaritan." A dying stranger on the side of the road became the Samaritan's neighbor. He recognized the man as wounded and suffering and went beyond himself to heal the wounds and alleviate the suffering. If those who suffer are my neighbors, then all men are my neighbors, for to be human is to suffer. If all men are my neighbors and I am to love my neighbor, then it follows that I am to love all men. True love is always demonstrative.

Let us also consider here the biblical injunction to treat others as we would want to be treated. To make this determination on someone else's behalf, we must place ourselves in the same context by assuming their circumstances and , as far as possible, adopting their mindset. This cannot be achieved absolutely, but it does guarantee more empathetic decision making concerning another party.

These Biblical responsibilities to our fellow man - love and equitable treatment - warrant careful consideration and thoughtful implementation into the very fibre of our lives.

How do our attitudes toward government and society relate to our views of criminal punishment? If I understand God's ordination of governmental systems as equivalent to his sanction of their methods and values, then not only do I find great inconsistencies in God, I also find it unnecessary to involve myself in reversing the injustices done by such government, for in doing so, I would be indirectly thwarting the purposes of God. A few isolated passages of Scripture might lend themselves to such interpretation, but a closer look at the whole will lead to a different conclusion. We approach government with respect and we obey the law, but we evaluate the principles behind those laws very carefully from a Christian worldview.

I acknowledge that these authorities possess the power to mete out punishment for the doer of evil but I have not resigned myself to their discretion in wielding this power. We already noted that governments, especially those filled with unregenerate men, can and do make judgements that conflict with our concept of what is morally and biblically right. Our allegiance must be with the teachings of Christ. I find our current system of criminal punishment by extended isolation and capital punishment not in accordance with New Testament teaching.

The Old Testament is filled with laws concerning justice for those who exercise evil. For instance, one passage frequently referenced by those who favor capital punishment is Exodus 21:6, which states that whoever strikes a man so that he dies, shall himself be put to death. However, the next few verses also command that a man must be put to death for hitting or cursing a parent. "Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth," etc. is the precedent set in Exodus and repeated again in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Each time it is set in a context that requires death for numerous charges of varying degrees. We would find appalling the insinuation that one who curses his mother or father must be put to death today, but we cannot select only those OT laws which suit our purpose. Either they all apply or none do. How can we know? We must look to the New Testament to see if the precedent is negated or upheld.

Very early in the Gospel of St. Matthew (chapter 5), we find Christ addressing His disciples on several issues of the law, one of which happens to be the "lex talionis," or the law of retaliation. His words: "It used to be said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,' but I am telling you not to resist evil. Whoever strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. Or if a man wants to sue you in court for your coat, give him your cloak as well. If a man forces you to take him a mile, take him two miles." Each of the actions here are wrong and seem to deserve some kind of retribution, but Christ says NO! Give to them even more than they ask for or take from you. This is anything but natural! In fact, one of the ugliest, most hideous results of the fall and original sin is the desire we have for revenge - we want to hurt those who hurt us (or we want someone else to hurt them).

We, as claimants of salvation through Christ, should be inherently different in our rationale than the natural man, but I find it startling how many believers assume the same position on vengeance and retribution as staunch unbelievers whose hearts are full of bitterness, envy and hatred. Scriptures are full of teaching such as, "Do not take vengeance into your own hands; stand back and let the Lord punish if He wills." "Do not return evil for evil." "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink." Christ left us a perfect example. When He was insulted, He returned silence. When He suffered at the hands of the Romans, He did not threaten revenge. He simply committed Himself and His persecutors to the One who judges righteously.

When Christ came, He did not offer a spirit of condemnation (except to the hypocritical religious rulers), but a spirit of compassion. "A man who is not sick does not need a physician," He said. The sicker a man is, the great his need to be healed; likewise, the more ungodly a man is, the more desperately his need for redemption!

Who better to help those enslaved to wickedness to understand that there IS redemption through Christ than the Redeemed Ones? Can we not, as recipients of the grace of "God, minister that grace to others? Certainly we are not pious enough to consider some more deserving than others simply because some manifestations of our fallenness are more visible than others. We are all equally depraved and in need of Christ's forgiveness and restoration. Ephesians tells those of us who have been forgiven and cleansed to forgive in the same way Christ has forgiven us. Obviously, Christ's forgiveness is necessarily different than ours in that it satisfies God's requirement for our justification. We cannot offer justification through our forgiveness, yet we are commanded to forgive as we have been forgiven. What characterizes the forgiveness of Christ toward us? Reconciliation, pardon and restoration.

Christ reconciles us to God - He removes the barriers so that a relationship of love and friendship can be established. He can do this perfectly, not only because He is God, but also because he suffered on our behalf. He empathizes with our humanness because He entered our pain and suffering, taking it upon Himself. We must also bear the pain and suffering of those who have hurt us in order to break down the barriers and to establish a relationship of love and friendship.

In His forgiveness, Christ also extends pardon. Although we still undergo some of the natural consequences of our sin, we escape condemnation and we no longer face the prospect of eternal separation from God (death). He reconciles us and takes away the penalty.

But there is more. Christ not only sets aside His right to vengeance by freeing us from death, He offers us life....restoration. Over time, He teaches us and leads us to a place of higher understanding. Sometimes we rebel, but He continues to prod, teach and lead - always in love - for He is a gracious and patient God. Can we not put aside our claim to revenge and offer the same forgiveness that we have been granted? If we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven.

It is important to note that God does not look over our sin - He is too holy for that. Neither does He completely refrain from inflicting punishment. Hebrews tells us that He chastises His own, but He does so sovereignly, knowing what will ultimately minister grace to each heart. His chastisement, in the end, produces righteousness.

Are our systems of punishment ministered in love and an attitude of forgiveness with the goal being reconciliation, pardon and restoration accompanied by the production of righteousness? Quite the contrary. They often do no more than heighten the anger, bitterness and hostility that already fill the criminal's heart. Neither do the current systems contribute to the prisoner's reformation.

Three basic approaches have been used in the recent past to bring about reform. Early on, the Quakers placed their criminals in total isolation with nothing but a copy of the Bible. In later years, hard labor was instituted as the means to reform. Today, psychiatric care is supposed to offer the most thorough recovery. All of these have failed miserably and crime rates continue to escalate.

Where has the church been throughout these changes? The church is wrapped up in her own interests and, in her pride, has forgotten to minister to the needy. Christians must become concerned with the criminal population, offering them love and forgiveness in tangible ways...through physical, mental, emotional, social and spiritual reform. Christ's earthly ministry was to the whole person and ours should be no less.

We need to collectively address the issues and come to Biblical conclusions and then proceed to involve ourselves in instituting change. The mind and heart of the criminal are complex, and they need understanding just as much as the rest of the human race. I do not advocate the elimination of punishment altogether, I only advocate a serious re-evaluation of the methods and principles behind them. We know from experience and, more importantly, from Scripture that it is the kindness of God that leads us to repentance. Why then, would not the kindness of God ministered through His children, lead the criminal to repentance?

The task is great and requires the committment of many believers willing to offer compassion and forgiveness unreservedly. May God give us the heart and widsom to face the issue of criminal punishment realistically and Biblically and the courage to challenge other to join us in the pursuit of justice, mercy and forgiveness.