Religion and capital punishment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most major world religions take an ambiguous position on the morality of capital punishment. Religions are often based on a body of teachings and scripture that be interpreted as either favouring or repudiating the death penalty. Some denominations, such as Judaism and the Roman Catholic Church, teach that while the death penalty is hypothetically permissible in certain circumstances, it should be abolished in the modern world. In the past, some religions either sentenced men to death for failing to convert or actually converting. Even now, according to Afghan religious law, a Muslim could be sentenced to death for conversion to Christianity [1]. The relationship between religion and the death penalty is further complicated by the fact that it is common for the followers of a religion to disagree with its official teachings on the subject.

Contents

[edit] Buddhism

There is disagreement among Buddhists as to whether or not Buddhism forbids the death penalty. The first of the Five Precepts (Panca-sila) is to abstain from destruction of life. Chapter 10 of the Dhammapada states:

Everyone fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill.

Chapter 26, the final chapter of the Dhammapada, states "Him I call a brahmin who has put aside weapons and renounced violence toward all creatures. He neither kills nor helps others to kill". These sentences are interpreted by many Buddhists (especially in the West) as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the death penalty. However, as is often the case with the interpretation of scripture, there is dispute on this matter. Thailand, where Buddhism is the official religion, practices the death penalty, as do many other countries where the majority of the population are Buddhist, such as Sri Lanka, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. Moreover, almost throughout history, countries where Buddhism has been the official religion (which have included most of the Far East and Indochina) have practiced the death penalty. One exception is the abolition of the death penalty by the Emperor Saga of Japan in 818. This lasted until 1165, although in private manors executions conducted as a form of retaliation continued to be conducted.

The first precept of Buddhism focuses mainly on direct participation in the destruction of life. This is one reason that the Buddha made a distinction between killing animals and eating meat, and refused to introduce vegetarianism into monastic practice (see Vegetarianism in Buddhism). In Jataka, which tell stories of the past lives of the Buddha, Boddisatva (a previous incarnation of the Buddha) actually kills someone to save another person's life, though because of this action, he was no longer able to achieve enlightenment in that particular life. Therefore, few (if any) Buddhist groups issue blanket decrees against Buddhists being soldiers, police officers or farmers (which in Buddhism is classified as a profession involved in destruction of life), and some argue that the death penalty is permissible if it is used for preventative purpose. In general, Buddhist groups in secular countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan tend to take anti-death penalty stance while those in Thailand, Sri Lanka and Bhutan where Buddhism has strong political influence, the opposite is true. Almost all Buddhist groups, however, oppose the use of the death penalty as a means of retribution.

[edit] Christianity

The execution of Christ is the centerpoint of most Christian cosmology. This particular story of capital punishment has been heavily invested with meaning by Christians over the centuries. Most Christian denominations have held that Christ's execution was a unique event metaphysically. Moreover, the suffering of Christ on the cross became an iconic image, depicted over and over again in Christian artwork. This has undoubtedly colored the Christian perception of capital punishment.

While officially the Catholic Church is--with some qualifications--opposed to capital punishment, among other Christian denominations there is disagreement as to whether or not it is permissible. Furthermore, not all Christians follow the official teaching of their church on the matter. Christians in countries that practice the death penalty are more likely to support its use than those in countries in which it has been abolished, so that, for example, capital punishment has far greater support among Christians in the United States than in Europe.

Those in favor of capital punishment often point to passages in the Old Testament of the Bible that advocate the death penalty such as Genesis 9 which states, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." Those against tend to select their passages from the New Testament that advocate love, forgiveness, and mercy. In the Antithesis of the Law, Jesus says:

You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also…"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.

In the Pericope Adulterae of the Gospel of John, a story is told of a woman who was caught in the act of adultery. The Old Testament Law demanded that she be put to death by stoning; Jesus saves her life by requiring that the first stone be cast by someone who has never sinned, and rather than take that role himself, simply tells the woman not to transgress again. Another verse quoted often by supporters of capital punishment is Romans 13:4, "...But if you do evil, be afraid; for [the governing authority] does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil". Supporters point to the fact that a sword is an instrument used for killing rather than scourging.

Interpreting the Bible as a story of man's redemption through repentance to Christ, some Christians argue that by executing a murderer one is cutting short his life and taking away his opportunity to repent, and that it denies the role of his cross putting an end to all subsequent blood atonement for sins. Some conservative Christian groups who believe in a literal Hell argue that all who die without repentance automatically go there, and point out that many serial killers, including Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy, became born again Christians in prison.

Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ and so gives precedence to the New Testament of the Bible. Therefore pro-death penalty arguments that seem to give precedence to the Old Testament have been criticized by groups such as Quakers and some non-Christian critics who wish to show inconsistency in the views of pro-capital punishment Christians.

[edit] Catholicism

The Catholic Church is opposed to capital punishment as practiced in most nations in the modern world, viewing death penalty as an invalid form of punishment as it is non-reformative and non rehabilitative. However the official teaching of the Church is that the death penalty is permissible but only in certain rare circumstances. Church doctrine is that a death penalty can be necessary at times when a society does not have the means to keep its citizens safe from criminals, but that Catholics are called to oppose the death penalty if the condemned can be successfully kept behind bars to protect society. If, however, the condemned poses a threat to the well-being of society and is not likely to be able to be kept behind bars then under the principle of double effect in order to protect life, the implementation of a death penalty is permissible. The exception to the prohibition on the death penalty allowed by the Church is rare in the modern world, except in some third world countries in which governments are unstable or corrupt.[2]

Pope John Paul II was strongly opposed to capital punishment as an individual, and described it as part of a "culture of death". The current Pope, Benedict XVI, has previously stated whilst Prefect of The Congregation for The Doctrine of The Faith, that capital punishment is completely irreconcilable with the Christian Catechism, indicating a position similar to that of his predecessor.

Despite the official teachings of the church many Catholics support the death penalty, especially in countries in which it is practiced.

[edit] In the United States

Although the Catholic and liberal Protestant churches in the United states have maintained official positions against the death penalty since the 1950s and early 1960s this is not necessarily reflected in the views of their members. Conservative Christians argue that the Bible does not have explicit prohibition against death penalty so it is permissible. Members of the Catholic Church are more likely to oppose the death penalty while most conservative Protestant groups support it—exceptions to this rule include the Amish and Mennonites, who oppose capital punishment.

[edit] Hinduism

A basis can be found in Hindu teachings both for permitting and forbidding the death penalty. Hinduism preaches ahimsa (non-violence), but also teaches that the soul cannot be killed and death is limited only to the physical body. The soul is reborn into another body upon death (until Moksha), akin to a human changing clothes. The religious, civil and criminal law of Hindus is encoded in the Dharmasastras and the Arthasastra. The Dharmasastras describe many crimes and their punishments and calls for the death penalty in several instances.

However the Mahabharata contains passages arguing against the use of the death penalty in all cases. An example is a dialogue between King Dyumatsena and his son Prince Satyavan (section 257 of the Santiparva) where a number of men are brought out for execution at the King's command.

Prince Satyavan says: Sometimes virtue assumes the form of sin and sin assumes the form of virtue. It is not possible that the destruction of individuals can ever be virtuous.
King Dyumatsena replies: If the sparing of those who should be killed be virtuous, if robbers be spared, Satyavan, all distinction between virtue and vice will disappear.
Satyavan responds: Without destroying the body of the offender, the king should punish him as ordained by the scriptures. The king should not act otherwise, neglecting to reflect upon the character of the offence and upon the science of morality. By killing the wrongdoer, the King kills a large number of his innocent men. Behold by killing a single robber, his wife, mother, father and children, all are killed. When injured by wicked persons, the king should therefore think seriously on the question of punishment. Sometimes a wicked person is seen to imbibe good conduct from a pious man. It is seen that good children spring from wicked persons. The wicked should not therefore be exterminated. The extermination of the wicked is not in consonance with the eternal law.

[edit] Islam

Islamic scholars state that whilst the Qur'an professes the basic principle that everyone has the right to life, this principle allows for an exception when a court of law demands it. Their precept is "Do not kill a Soul which Allah has made sacred except through the due process of law". This exception authorises the administration of capital punishment when Islamic law dictates. This is the line taken by most countries in which Islam is the state religion or the principal religion, for example, throughout the Arab world and in Indonesia and Malaysia. Moreover, in Islamic jurist theory, it is wrong to forbid something which is not forbidden.

Islamic scholars also point out that Sharia contains many safeguards to prevent miscarriages of persecution. Sharia also has a clear injunction that strict equivalence must be observed; therefore if a woman kills a man, or a man kills a woman, or a slave kills a free person, or a free person kills a slave, capital punishment cannot be applied. One notable characteristic of Sharia is that the family of a murder victim can pardon the murderer. In Islam, the victim and/or the victim's family are the judges for all crimes; they decide what the punishment shall be under the supervision of a jurist who knows the Qur'an.

List of cases in which the transgressor is required to be killed by well established Sharia views (This list is not complete):

[edit] Judaism

While allowing for the death penalty in some hypothetical circumstances, scholars of Judaism are broadly opposed to the death penalty as practiced in the modern world. The Jewish view of all laws in the Bible is based on the reading of the Bible as seen through Judaism's corpus of oral law. These oral laws were first recorded around 200 BCE in the Mishnah and later around 600 CE in the Babylonian Talmud. The laws make it clear that the death penalty was only used in very rare cases. The Mishnah states that:

A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death even once in seventy years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: Had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death (Mishnah, Makkot 1:10).

Historically Rabbinic law developed a detailed system of checks and balances to prevent the execution of an innocent person, and these were so restrictive as to effectively legislate the penalty out of existence. The law requires that:

  • There must have been two witnesses to the crime, and these must conform to a prescribed list of criteria. For example, females and close relatives of the criminal are precluded from being witnesses according to Biblical law, while full-time gamblers are precluded as a matter of Rabbinical law.
  • The witnesses must have verbally warned the person that they were liable for the death penalty
  • The person must then have acknowledged that he or she was warned, and yet then have gone ahead and committed the sin regardless.
  • No individual was allowed to testify against him or herself.

Today, the State of Israel only uses the death penalty for extraordinary crimes. The only execution ever to take place in Israel was in 1962, against convicted Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. However, Israeli employment of the death penalty has little to do with Jewish law.

In Orthodox Judaism, it is held that in theory the death penalty is a correct and just punishment for some crimes. However in practice the application of such a punishment can only be carried out by humans whose system of justice is nearly perfect, a situation which has not existed for some time.

[edit] Quotations

So, at least theoretically, the Torah can be said to be pro-capital punishment. It is not morally wrong, in absolute terms, to put a murderer to death ...However, things look rather different when we turn our attention to the practical realization of this seemingly harsh legislation. You may be aware that it was exceedingly difficult, in practice, to carry out the death penalty in Jewish society ...I think it's clear that with regard to Jewish jurisprudence, the capital punishment outlined by the Written and Oral Torah, and as carried out by the greatest Sages from among our people (who were paragons of humility and humanity and not just scholarship, needless to say), did not remotely resemble the death penalty in modern America (or Texas). In theory, capital punishment is kosher; it's morally right, in the Torah's eyes. But we have seen that there was great concern—expressed both in the legislation of the Torah, and in the sentiments of some of our great Sages—regarding its practical implementation. It was carried out in ancient Israel, but only with great difficulty. Once in seven years; not 135 in five and a half. (Rabbi Yosef Edelstein, Director of the Savannah Kollel)

[edit] Orthodox Judaism

In practice, however, these punishments were almost never invoked, and existed mainly as a deterrent and to indicate the seriousness of the sins for which they were prescribed. The rules of evidence and other safeguards that the Torah provides to protect the accused made it all but impossible to actually invoke these penalties…the system of judicial punishments could become brutal and barbaric unless administered in an atmosphere of the highest morality and piety. When these standards declined among the Jewish people, the Sanhedrin...voluntarily abolished this system of penalties (Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan in Handbook of Jewish Thought, Volume II, pp. 170-71).

[edit] Conservative Judaism

The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before their would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them… There is another reason which argues for the abolition of capital punishment. It is the fact of human fallibility. Too often we learn of people who were convicted of crimes and only later are new facts uncovered by which their innocence is established. The doors of the jail can be opened, in such cases we can partially undo the injustice. But the dead cannot be brought back to life again. We regard all forms of capital punishment as barbaric and obsolete... (Part of a responsa by Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser on capital punishment approved by the Rabbinical Assembly's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards in 1960. Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1927-1970, Volume III, p.1537-1538)

[edit] Notes

  1. ↑ For a detailed discussion on the Roman Catholic Church's view on capital punishment see chapter 3 of Pope John Paul II's encyclical, Evangelium Vitae.

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/l/Religion_and_capital_punishment.html"