death penalty?
By ROLAND CHIA
CAPITAL punishment is
a divisive issue today, even among Christians. Fundamentalist
Christians in America, especially from the so-called Bible-belt,
support the death penalty because it is the explicit teaching
of Scripture, particularly the Old Testament.
Conservative Catholics support the death penalty maintaining that
the practice - which is the right of the State - is in concurrence
with Scripture, tradition and natural law. Liberals (and some
conservatives) have long called for its total abolition.
It is impossible within the limited compass of this essay to examine
this complex issue from every angle. What follows is a brief survey
of the biblical material and the witness of the Christian tradition.
I will also discuss, albeit briefly, the arguments in support
of and against capital punishment, before presenting my own position.
There can be no doubt that the Old Testament sanctions capital
punishment for certain crimes and offences. In the Mosaic Law
there are no less than 36 capital offences that are punishable
by execution by stoning, burning, decapitation or strangulation.
The list includes offences such as idolatry, magic, blasphemy,
murder, adultery, bestiality, incest, and even the violation of
the Sabbath. But the death penalty is seen as an especially appropriate
punishment for murder, for the Noahic covenant presents the following
principle: "Whoever shed the blood of man, by man shall his
blood be shed, for God made man in his own image." (Genesis
9:6).
That capital punishment is an approved punishment that the State
can execute is surely taught, or at least implied, in Romans 13.
The authority of the State is established by God to reward the
good and punish the wicked. The State has the right to wield the
sword in dealing with the wicked.
Although Jesus Himself refrains from using violence, He does not
deny that the State has the authority to exact capital punishment.
He cites with approval the harsh commandment, "He who speaks
evil of father or mother, let him surely die", in His debate
with the Pharisees (Matthew 15:4; Mark 7:10, Cf. Exodus 21:17;
Leviticus 20:9). In His trial before Pilate, Jesus did not contest
Pilate's right to execute offenders but reminded him that this
authority came "from above". (John 19:11).
Support for the death penalty is almost unanimous in the Christian
tradition, particularly in the teachings of the Fathers and Doctors
of the Church. Except for a few like Ambrose, most Church Fathers
maintain that Scripture gives the State the right to exact such
punishment on certain offenders.
Thoughtful objectors of the death penalty have offered four reasons
why capital punishment should be abolished. The first is that
the convict may be innocent. This objection alerts us to the fact
that even the best and most objective justice system is imperfect
and therefore not infallible. The second objection is that the
death penalty whets the appetite for revenge. The third objection
is that the death punishment cheapens the value of life and promotes
the idea that murder in some respects may be condoned. Some see
this as a weak objection: many pro-life advocates are at the same
time advocates of capital punishment because they reasoned rightly
that the innocent and the guilty do not have the same rights.
The final objection will at first glance appear to be compelling:
Christians are called to forgive. Although forgiveness is an important
aspect of the Gospel and the Christian is commanded to forgive,
there must be a distinction between the assailant's relationship
with his victim and with the state. Personal pardon on the part
of the victim does not absolve the offender from his/her obligation
to justice.
The purposes of criminal punishment may be summarised thus: rehabilitation,
defence against the criminal, deterrence and retribution. Can
the death penalty achieve these goals?
Rehabilitation: Obviously the death penalty does not help to reintegrate
the criminal into society - although from the pastoral standpoint
it may cause repentance and reconciliation with God. Defence against
the criminal: Capital punishment is obviously an effective way
of protecting society from the criminal, although some questioned
if such an extreme measure is really necessary. Deterrence: The
death penalty may deter others contemplating to commit similar
crimes, although its power to do so is debatable. Finally, retribution:
The general principle is that guilt calls for punishment; and
the greater the offence, the more severe the punishment.
But since the State, unlike God, is
neither omniscient nor omnipotent, retribution by the State obviously
has its limits.
I believe that the State has the authority to exact the death
penalty although it may choose not to do so. The State may choose
to commute the death sentence to a less severe punishment, like
life imprisonment without parole. However, should the State choose
to put criminals to death, such punishment should be meted out
only to perpetrators of heinous crimes like murder.
The State has the authority to wield the sword, but it must do
so sparingly, and always in the interest of justice.
Dr Roland Chia is Dean of Postgraduate Studies and Lecturer in Historical and Systematic Theology at Trinity Theological College. He worships at the Fairfield Preaching Point in Woodlands.