Social
Statements | Death Penalty
This social practice statement [1]
was adopted by a more than two-thirds majority vote at the second
biennial Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America, meeting in Orlando, Florida, August 28-September 4, 1991.
A Climate of Violence
Violent crime is as ancient as the
human family. Since Cain slew Abel, the blood of countless victims
has cried out to the Lord (Gen 4:10). Our hearts, too, cry out to
the Lord who gives life. We grieve with the family and friends of
the victim--the violated one.
Violent crime has a powerful, corrosive
effect on society. Bonds of trust, the very assumptions that allow
us to live our lives in security and peace, break down. Instead of
loving, we fear our neighbor. We especially fear the stranger.
The human community is saddened by
violence, and angered by the injustice involved. We want to hold
accountable those who violate life, who violate society. Our sadness
and anger, however, make us vulnerable to feelings of revenge. Our
frustration with the complex problems contributing to violence may
make us long for simple solutions.
Such are the circumstances under which we,
as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, speak to the death
penalty. At the request of a number of congregations to synod
assemblies, and in response to the memorials of those synods, the
1989 Churchwide Assembly placed the issue of the death penalty on
the church's social agenda. Discussions on the death penalty then
took place in local churches and at synodical and regional hearings.
Points
of View
Members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America have
different points of view with regard to social issues. [2]
While the Spirit makes us one in our faith in the Gospel,
we can and do vary in our responses to the Gospel.
While we all look to the Word of God and
bring our reason to the death penalty issue, we can and do assess it
with some diversity. Social statements of our church do not intend
to end such diversity by 'binding' members to a particular position.
[3]
Social statements acknowledge diversity and address members in their
Christian freedom.
This church has not finished its
deliberation on the death penalty. Members of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America continue the deliberation, upholding
together the authority of Scripture, creeds, and confessions; the
value of God-given life; and the commitment to serve God's justice.
Members continue their discussion, knowing they have in common the
goals of justice, peace, and order.
As a church united in resistance to hate
(Luke 6:27), we minister to an often vengeful society. As a Church
united in joy over the good news of God's healing grace, we minister
to a battered society. As a church heeding the call to do justice (Jer
22:3), we minister to a broken society. As a church united for
mission, we organize for ministries of restoration.
An Affirmation
On the basis of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions we hold
that, through the divine activity of the Law, God preserves
creation, orders society, and promotes justice in a broken world.
God works through the state and other structures of society
necessary for life in the present age. [4]
The state is responsible under God for the
protection of its citizens and the maintenance of justice and public
order. God entrusts the state with power to take human life when
failure to do so constitutes a clear danger to society.
However, this does not mean that
governments have an unlimited right to take life. Nor does it mean
that governments must punish crime by death. We increasingly
question whether the death penalty has been and can be administered
justly.
Ministries of Restoration
Lutheran theological tradition has maintained that society is
ruled by the Law and is influenced and nourished by the Gospel.
Renewed by the Gospel, Christians, as salt of the earth (Mat 5:13) [5]
and light of the world (Mat 5:14), [6]
are called to respond to violent crime in the restorative way taught
by Jesus (Mat 5:38-39) [7]
and shown by his actions (John 8:3-11). [8]
For the Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America, following Jesus leads to a commitment to restorative
justice. This commitment means addressing the hurt of each person
whose life has been touched by violent crime. Restorative justice
makes the community safer for all.
It is because of this church's
ministry with and to people affected by violent crime that we oppose
the death penalty. Executions focus on the convicted
murderer, providing very little for the victim's family or anyone
else whose life has been touched by the crime. Capital punishment
focuses on retribution, sometimes reflecting a spirit of vengeance.
Executions do not restore broken society and can actually work
counter to restoration.
This church recognizes the need to protect
society from people who endanger that society: removing offenders
from the general population, placing them in a secure facility, and
denying them the possibility of committing further crime (i.e.,
incapacitating them). Our challenge is to incapacitate offenders in
a manner that limits violence, and holds open the possibility of
conversion and restoration.
Doing Justice
Christians live in anticipation of the day when "justice
roll[s] down like waters, and righteousness like an ever flowing
stream" (Amos 5:24). In the meantime, God holds governments
accountable to ensure justice. In a democracy, where government is
by the people, justice is the responsibility of all citizens.
Violent crime is, in part, a reminder of
human failure to ensure justice for all members of society. [9]
People often respond to violent crime as though it were exclusively
a matter of the criminal's individual failure. The death penalty
exacts and symbolizes the ultimate personal retribution.
Yet, capital punishment makes no provable
impact on the breeding grounds of violent crime. [10]
Executions harm society by mirroring and reinforcing existing
injustice. The death penalty distracts us from our work toward a
just society. It deforms our response to violence at the individual,
familial, institutional, and systemic levels. It perpetuates cycles
of violence.
It is because of this church's
commitment to justice that we oppose the death penalty.
Lutheran Christians have called for an assault on the root causes of
violent crime, [11]
an assault for which executions are no substitute. The ongoing
controversy surrounding the death penalty shows the weaknesses of
its justifications. We would be a better society by joining the many
nations that have already abolished capital punishment.
Executions in the United States
Despite attempts to provide legal safeguards, the death penalty
has not been and cannot be made fair. The race of the victim plays a
role in who is sentenced to death and who is sentenced to life
imprisonment, [12]
as do the gender, race, mental capacity, age, and affluence of
the accused. The system cannot be made perfect, for biases,
prejudices, and chance affect whom we charge with a capital crime,
what verdict we reach, and whether appeals will be successful.
Since human beings are fallible, the
innocent have been executed in the past and will inevitably be
executed in the future. Death is a different punishment from any
other; the execution of an innocent person is a mistake we cannot
correct.
It is because of this church's
concern regarding the actual use of the death penalty that we oppose
its imposition. The practice of the death penalty
undermines any possible moral message we might want to 'send.' It is
not fair and fails to make society better or safer. The message
conveyed by an execution, reflected in the attention it receives
from the public, is one of brutality and violence. [13]
Commitments of This Church
As a community gathered in faith, as a community dispersed in
daily life, as a community of moral deliberation, and as a church
body organized for mission, this church directs its attention to
violent crime and the people whose lives have been touched by it.
As a community gathered in
faith:
- we welcome victims of violent crime and
their families, standing with them and for them during their
times of grief and anger;
- we welcome offenders and their families,
supporting them in their recovery;
- we welcome partnership with faith
communities within the correctional system, joining them in
ministries of restoration;
- we welcome people who work in criminal
justice and their families, recognizing the special burden that
accompanies such work.
As a community dispersed in
daily life:
- we continue to offer ministries of
healing and reconciliation to victims of violent crime, to
families of victims, and to neighborhoods that have experienced
violence;
- we recognize and affirm ministries by
those who, in word and action, announce the good news to the
imprisoned and their families;
- we encourage the ministries conducted by
people through their work in the criminal justice system;
- we seek further opportunity to serve
people caught in cycles of violence, and call for training to
respond to the fear and anger of individuals, families, and
society.
As a community of moral
deliberation:
- we invite and encourage moral
deliberation on the causes and effects of criminal behavior, the
function of punishment, and the role of the criminal justice
system--a deliberation grounded in Scripture and informed by
reason and knowledge, including the social sciences;
- we shall discuss criminal justice in
connection with other issues of concern to this church, such as
racism, poverty, abuse, and chemical dependency;
- we ask that available resource materials
be distributed, and that a resource specific to the present
statement be developed, printed, and distributed.
As a church organized for
mission:
- we recognize that the government bears
responsibility for protecting people, and give it our support in
the exercise of this function;
- we commend public officials, and others,
who shape the vision of a just society and work toward it;
- we know the Church is called by God to
be a creative critic of the social order, and to speak on behalf
of justice, peace, and order;
- we urge the abolition of the death
penalty, and support alternative and appropriate punishment for
capital crime, including the possibility of life sentence
without parole;
- we call for an ongoing reform of the
criminal justice system, seeking means of incapacitation that
protect citizens while limiting violence and holding open the
possibilities for conversion and restoration, and for education
for future responsible citizenship in society;
- we direct state public policy offices
and the Lutheran Office
for Governmental Affairs to work against the death penalty
and for alternative and appropriate punishment for capital
crime, such as imprisonment for natural life;
- we ask congregations, synods, agencies,
and institutions of this church to support the work of state
advocacy offices and the Lutheran Office for Governmental
Affairs in effecting the abolition of the death penalty;
- we seek ways to work with our ecumenical
partners, with other faith groups, and with other organizations
with similar goals.
The
following are issues reviewed during churchwide deliberation on the
death penalty. They are offered here as a summary of points of view
presented in the course of developing this statement. Members of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America should be aware of them and
may find some of them helpful for further discussion.
The following notes are referenced in the
text of this social statement by its second endnote. Use
this link to locate the reference to these notes within the text.
In Favor of the Death Penalty
Those who support the use of the death
penalty often do so on the basis of Scripture, especially "you
shall give life for life" (Exod 21:23b) and "let every
person be subject to the governing authorities . . . for the
authority does not bear the sword in vain" (Rom 13:1-7; cf.,
1Pet 2:13-14).
Proponents of the death penalty remind us
that the Lutheran tradition has stressed the scriptural distinction
between Law and Gospel, maintaining the right of the state under the
realm of Law to punish evildoers.
Those who would retain the death penalty
testify to the value of the life God has given and the murderer has
taken; they assert the value of the victim's life by demanding the
offender's death.
Supporters of the death penalty feel it
makes society safer by permanently incapacitating convicted
murderers.
Proponents argue that states have written
death penalty statutes limiting the risk of error and meeting
standards set by the United States Supreme Court.
Advocates of the death penalty claim it to
have a deterrent effect, causing would be murderers to hesitate
before taking actions that could result in the loss of their own
lives.
In Opposition to the Death Penalty
Those who oppose the death penalty often do
so on the basis of Scripture, arguing that Jesus in his teaching
abolished the death penalty in the Law (Mat 5:38-39, assuming the
Sermon on the Mount applies not only to Christians but to all
peoples) and by example (John 8:3-11).
Opponents of the death penalty note from
Scripture and the confessions that God ordained government for the
sake of good order, and oppose a practice they believe to be
violent, unjust, and, therefore, contrary to good order.
Those who would abolish the death penalty
observe that executions violate the sanctity of the offender's life,
which God has given and which God values despite the repulsiveness
of what the offender has done.
Opponents claim the state need not
implement the death penalty to incapacitate safely those who
threaten society, as attested by the international movement away
from the death penalty and toward alternative and effective means of
incapacitation.
Those who would abolish the death penalty
assert that it continues to fall disproportionately upon those least
able to defend themselves, and to run the risk of an irreparable
mistake.
Arguing against the death penalty, people
point to the unlikelihood of proving that the death penalty has a
deterrent effect, and note that executions contribute to a climate
of vindictiveness and violence.
Copyright (C) September 1991 Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America. Produced by the Department for Studies,
Division for Church in Society. Permission is granted to reproduce
this document as needed, providing each copy displays the copyright
as printed above.
|