The topic of death can be a controversial topic in modern American Christian circles. Even more so is the topic of capital punishment; that is, the ability for the government to legally execute criminals who commit egregious or excessive crimes against others. The morality of this act has even been called into question by certain notable Christian thinkers of the past few centuries. In his novel Идиот (The Idiot), Fyodor Dostoevsky critiques the practice of state executions through the words of his main character, the young prince Lev Myshkin. He writes:
- Killing someone for having murdered is a punishment infinitely more terrible than a murder by bandits. Whoever is murdered by bandits, knifed at night in the woods or somewhere like that, inevitably hopes until the very last moment that he will manage to save himself…But [with state executions] all final hope, with which it is then ten times easier to die, is removed for certain; here there is a sentence, and in the very fact that there is no escape from it all the horrible suffering lies, and there is no suffering on earth greater than this…No, you cannot treat a man like this! (Dostoevsky, 1869, p. 23)
Here, Dostoevsky appeals to the feeling of the loss of hope and how tortuous it is to put a fellow man through it. The author himself experienced this as he was sentenced to be executed by firing squad years earlier, but was released and pardoned at the last minute by order of Tsar Nicholas I. Many in today’s American Christian climate have adopted a similar view of capital punishment to Dostoevsky’s, seeing the practice as archaic, unnecessary, or even unethical. The purpose of this paper will seek to argue otherwise. Though there is a real concern over the methods of how capital punishment is carried out and controversy over what crimes are deserving of such a severe disciplinary act, God’s infallible word and the testimony of the early Church Fathers, Medieval theologians, and Reformation period theologians affirm that capital punishment is a way in which God uses the State to tangibly enact justice. Therefore, due to the teachings revealed in the Scriptures and the general consensus of the Church throughout history, modern American Christians should support the proper use of capital punishment by the State when dealing with criminals who are fit to receive a penalty of a quick death.
The Biblical Foundation of the Issue
The controversy over the issue of capital punishment begins early on in the Book of Genesis. Upon making His covenant with Noah, God gives several commandments to Noah and His family. In very clear terms, God proclaims, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (English Standard Version Holy Bible, 2016, Gen. 9:6). The Septuagint renders the first appearance of “shed” as “ἐκχέων” and the second appearance as “ἐκχυθήσεται” (Brenton, 1851, Gen. 9:6). These two words are derived from the same root word which can be translated more specifically as “pour out” (2012, The lexham analytical…). In other words, a person who acts so violently as to intentionally cause a person’s blood—the source of their life—to pour out, they too shall have their own blood poured out; that is to say, they shall have their life taken from them. In the eyes of God, such an act done by the proper authorities is true justice in a sinful world. Later on throughout the Pentateuch, God would allow the governing officials of the Israelites to enact capital punishment when dealing with criminals who commit specific egregious sins. These would include murder (Gen. 9:6), rape (Deut. 22:25), bestiality (Ex. 22:19), child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2), bearing false witness in a court of law (Deut 19:16-21), and several others.
Although Christ has fulfilled the ceremonial and civil law (Matt. 5:17) by living a perfect life, He has left the moral law for Christians to abide by today. Thus, there is much controversy in modern Christian circles today over which wicked acts are deserving of capital punishment. Despite this, the ability for the government to give out a sentence of execution to a criminal is nowhere condemned in the New Testament. In fact, the words spoken by the Apostle Paul in his epistle to the Romans seems to indicate that the followers of Christ were not against the State using capital punishment, so long as the sentence was aligned with Christian moral standards. Paul writes, “…for [the one in authority] is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (2016, Romans 13:4). The sword, or “τὴν μάχαιραν” in the Greek (Aland, 2012, Rom. 13:4), that Paul speaks of has been historically understood as “a symbol of the power delegated to governing authorities to enforce acceptable social conduct (Mounce, 1995, p. 244). As the typical use of a sword is for the action of taking life, it follows that Paul is not condemning the use of capital punishment but instead affirming that it may be a necessary punishment given out by the State in order to punish evildoers. Ultimately, if Paul and the other apostles had believed that Christians should not be in favor of the death penalty, it would have made more sense for Paul to either use a different symbol in this passage or to outright condemn the practice of capital punishment once and for all. As the authors of both the Old and New Testaments have affirmed the ethical and proper use of the death penalty, one can now turn to the writings of the Fathers of the early Church who carried on this belief into the first few centuries of the Christian religion.
Beliefs of the Early Church Fathers
As with the majority of the theological and moral teachings being developed in the early Church era, there were multiple opinions on the topic of capital punishment, especially in regards to what sort of crime should merit such a punishment and how one should react to the penalty of another receiving the death penalty. Nevertheless, one can observe that the prevailing opinion of this era is that capital punishment is indeed a biblical and thus moral good for society. One of the earliest mentions of this idea comes from Clement of Alexandria (150 to 215 AD). In his literary work entitled Στρώματα (The Stromata), he explains that the function of the Law and its temporal punishments are to draw a person out of wrongdoing and into a life of repentance. Clement (1885) writes:
- So that, when one fails into any incurable evil…it will be for his good if he is put to death. For the law is beneficent, being able to make some righteous from unrighteous, if they will only give ear to it, and by releasing others from present evils; for those who have chosen to live temperately and justly, it conducts to immortality. (1.27)
What Clement brings out is that capital punishment, and by extension any punishment given out by the government to the unjust, can and should be for the ultimate good of the one who committed the crime, namely in that they would repent and turn from their wickedness. Without a serious punishment such as capital punishment, criminals who commit egregious crimes may feel little to no remorse or desire for repentance. Thus, receiving the temporal punishment of having one’s life taken away from them by the State may be the very remedy to cure a hardened criminal soul before he or she stands before God.
Another church father, Ambrose of Milan (339 to 397 AD) adds to the conversation on capital punishment with his response to a Christian judge named Studius. This judge inquired of Ambrose if he should be allowed to partake of the Eucharist because he handed the death penalty out to criminals who deserved it according to Roman law. Ambrose (1881) responds by saying:
- You see therefore both what power your commission gives you, and also whither mercy would lead you; you will be excused if you do it, and praised if you do it not. Should you feel unable to do it, and are unwilling to afflict the criminal by the horrors of a dungeon, I shall, as a priest, the more commend you. (xxv.3)
Ambrose makes clear that he will not (nor other priests) condemn Studius the judge for rightly handing out the death penalty, nor bar the man from partaking of the Eucharist. As one sees, Ambrose does stress that Studius has the opportunity to show mercy with his office and give a lighter sentence to criminals when applicable. Such a quote is a reminder that Christians are not bound by only justice or only mercy, but can display and enact both, even when the issue of capital punishment arises.
Lastly, Augustine of Hippo (354 to 430 AD), one of the most notable theologians of the Western Church. He provides an excellent summary of the view of the early Church in regards to interpreting passages like Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17 by clarifying what the word “kill” truly means in such verses. In his extensive work De civitate Dei contra paganos (The City of God), Augustine explains that two specific state offices are allowed to take life: the judge (including the executioner carrying out the judge’s orders) and the soldier. On these two offices, the author states, “And, accordingly, they…have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, ‘You shall not kill’” (1993, p. 27). From Augustine’s interpretation of the commandment, it is evident that he finds no fault in those who take life as a means of fulfilling their office. He does clarify that the person receiving capital punishment must be wicked, indicating that such a punishment is reserved for those who would do great harm to their community if they were allowed to live upon committing the crime. Though the degree to which the specific sentence of capital punishment was given out was debated in the Church, the writings of the early fathers testifies that the State may hand out the sentence of the death penalty to bring wicked people to justice, as well as to repentance.
Beliefs of the Medieval and Protestant Reformation Theologians
As the Church universal continued into the Medieval era, the affirmative perspective of capital punishment likewise persisted. In Book Three, Part II of Summa Contra Gentiles, Thomas Aquinas lays out clearly the Medieval churches view of the subject. He argues that the death penalty is necessary in some cases because “some people pay little attention to the punishments inflicted by God, because they are devoted to the objects of sense and care only for the things that are seen” (Aquinas, 1957, q. 146). He adds that such a penalty must be “sensible and present…to respect justice” (1957, q. 146). This stands in contrast to the modern day opinion of various US states that prefer to hold certain criminals in prison for life rather than give them a swift death. Though the leaders of these states claim that a life sentence is more sensible, data regarding prison life shows the opposite. In fact many lifelong prisoners end up dealing with “violent victimization, impaired health, and the trauma of solitary confinement” as they live out their life sentences (Western, 2021, p. 100). Thus, Aquinas is right to advocate that such wicked men are to be given a respectable sentence of death rather than a lifetime of torture in prison.
As the European continent underwent the Protestant Reformation, views like Aquinas’ on capital punishment were carried on by the Reformers, including both German reformer Martin Luther and French reformer John Calvin. Luther explicitly states his affirmation for the death penalty for those worthy of receiving it in his Treatise on Good Works as he discussed the implications of the Fifth Commandment of “Thou shalt not kill” (note: it is considered fifth in the Lutheran tradition, not the sixth as in evangelical traditions). Luther states, “…but we must defend God’s honor and commandment and punish injury and injustice done to our neighbors—against those over us with the sword, against others with words and penalties, yet with sorrow for all those who have earned that punishment” (Luther, 2012, p. 116) Reverend David Ramirez explains, “For Luther, the government was to maintain peace by both force and the administration of laws; however, God, who sits in judgement over all, expected both subjects and rulers to fulfill their particular duties in accordance with His Word” (Ramirez, 2020, p. 118). This understanding of the government’s role and its use of “the sword” is similar to the Apostle Paul’s own view as espoused in Romans 13.
John Calvin, in his Commentary on Genesis, communicates a virtually exact agreement with Luther and the Apostle Paul. Commenting specifically on Genesis 9:6, he states:
- Therefore…God sends executioners from other quarters, who shall render unto sanguinary men their reward. God so threatens and denounces vengeance against the murderer, that he even arms the magistrate with the sword for the avenging of slaughter, in order that the blood of men may not be shed with impunity. (Calvin, 1847, 9.6)
Calvin thus closely links the vengeance of God with the actions of the State, displaying that when a criminal worthy of the death penalty receives their punishment the victims and their family are avenged and given proper justice. Therefore, one sees that these three men (Aquinas, Luther, and Calvin) from three very different traditions (Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist) each hold to the view that the government holds the divine order to punish some criminals with the sword, that is to say, capital punishment.
Conclusion and Ministry Application
In summary, capital punishment as a tool of the State to enact justice is an idea that is not only biblical but historical. God Himself has decreed that some men be put to death for serious crimes (such as murder) in order to bring justice to the victims and their families and to keep the peace within a community. The early fathers of the Church demonstrated that such a teaching is apostolic and permissible for believers. The Medieval and Reformation era theologians likewise agreed, even in the midst of theological turmoil, schisms, and wars. Such unity on one topic such as this cannot be ignored but must be considered by modern theologians and clergy when teaching or preaching on this topic of the death penalty. For the modern pastor, one should approach the topic of capital punishment both biblically and historically. Though they should support capital punishment when necessary, pastors should likewise encourage their parishioners to pray for those who are going to receive the death penalty and for the souls of those who recently have. If the Church of today would hold to the same beliefs regarding the death penalty as those who have come before, such as Augustine or Luther, then she and her members will better understand how God uses the State to keep the peace and properly avenge victims.
References
- Aland, K., et al. (2012). Novum testamentum graece, 28th edition. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
- Ambrose of Milan (1881). Letter xxv: ambrose to studius. From A library of fathers of the holy catholic church, anterior to the division of the east and west. Oxford.
- Aquinas, T. (1957). Summa contra gentiles. (V. J. Bourke, Trans.) Hanover House.
- Augustine of Hippo. (1993). The city of God. (M. Dods, Trans.). The Modern Library.
- Brenton, L. C. L. (1851). The Septuagint Version: Greek. Samuel Bagster & Sons.
- Calvin, J. (1847). Commentaries on the first book of moses called genesis (J. King, Trans.). Cambridge.
- Clement of Alexandria. (1885). The stromata: book I (W. Wilson, Trans.). From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2. (A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, and A. C. Coxe, Eds.). Christian Literature Publishing Co.
- Dostoevsky, F. (1869). The idiot (H. Carlisle & O. Carlisle, Trans.). Signet Classics.
- English Standard Version Holy Bible. (2016). Crossway.
- Luther, M. (2012) Treatise on Good Works: Luther Study Edition (S. H. Hendrix, Trans.). Fortress Press.
- Mounce, R. H. (1995). Romans: vol. 27 of the new american commentary. Broadman & Holman Publishers.
- Ramirez, D. P. (2020). Martin luther and religious liberty. [Doctoral dissertation, Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne]. Academia, https://www.academia.edu/89633865/ Martin_Luther_and_Religious_Liberty
- The lexham analytical lexicon to the septuagint. (2012). Lexham Press.
- Western, B. (2021). Inside the Box: Safety, Health, and Isolation in Prison. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(4), 97–122. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27074127
Leave a comment