Submitted by rlp on Fri, 10/31/2008 - 08:13.
Here is the final part in the series of three. I posted these years ago but have rerun them and reworked part three extensively.
Part One
Part Two
In the spring of 2004, the serial killer known as BTK shocked experts around the world by reappearing after what were thought to be 20 years of dormancy. Because serial killers are almost always unable to stop killing once they start, it had been assumed that BTK was either dead or in prison. As it turns out, Dennis Rader had apparently gotten too old for the physical rigors of murder. He was married and gainfully employed, living in a suburb near Wichita. He was also the president of his church council. He seemed content to gaze upon the trophies of his past crimes and enjoy those memories.
In Radar’s first known crime he killed a family of four. All of their deaths were brutal, but one seemed especially so. He hung their 11-year-old daughter in the basement and became sexually aroused by this act.
Many crimes are understandable to the average person. We understand how someone who wants a computer might steal one. We understand how a man might cheat on his taxes or embezzle from his company because he wants money. We can even understand, somewhat, how an exhausted and inexperienced single mother might become enraged and violently shake her child. But we confront the limits of our understanding when we consider a man like Dennis Rader. We only know that his crimes were horrific. We do not understand how a man can become sexually aroused by the death throes of an 11-year-old girl. We don't know the nature of his condition or how he came to be this way, but any reasonable person will agree that something is not right inside him. It is the reality of this kind of human brokenness that gives rise to two paradoxes, the first social and the second theological.
The first paradox is that the more horrific the crimes of a killer, the angrier and more punitive we become as a society. When a serial killer is caught, novels are written about him. The details of his crime—often with pictures—are published in every newspaper and on the Internet. Our collective anger grows until it boils over. We talk of tough punishments around the water cooler at work. We say that no fate is too horrible for a monster like this. If the death penalty is available, we push for it, and it is granted. After some years, we put the killer to death in a public spectacle that attracts the same levels of news coverage and attention. Everyone sighs in relief. That's one killer who won't kill again.
In Dennis Rader's case, he was convicted of multiple murders. In each case he bound and tortured his victims. The death penalty was not available in his state at the time of his crimes, so he was sentenced to a maximum security prison. The length of his sentence is so long that parole is not a possibility. He now spends 23 hours a day in his cell. Isolation in such a setting is an extremely unpleasant and awful way to spend the remainder of your life. And yet this punishment was not enough for the district attorney's office. After he was convicted, sentenced, and incarcerated, they made several legal appeals to have all reading materials banned from his cell as well.
It was not enough that he sit alone in a cell for the next 30 years. They wanted him to sit in his cell with nothing to read.
The irony is obvious: the more horrible and unimaginable the crime, the more convinced we are that something is seriously wrong with the person who committed it. We call the person sick or crazy. We say that he is out of his mind. One would think that our desire for vengeance would be lessened by that fact. It is not. Our desire for vengeance in these cases is very primitive. We are like villagers sacrificing a person to appease an angry, evil god that we do not understand but fear greatly.
Another paradox is theological in nature. The most conservative Christians - the ones most convinced of a literal hell where flames will lick at the damned for all eternity - are often the ones who demand the death penalty for violent killers. They do this fully believing that these men will be tortured in hell for all eternity.
The vengeful desire behind this is completely contrary to the spirit of Christ, the one these Christians claim to serve. It would seem to any reasonable person that conservative Christians would be the ones most opposed to the death penalty and the most passionate about keeping these men alive. After all, if a man is alive, he might yet be saved from the fires of hell.
In the face of these paradoxes, I'd like suggest appropriate social and theological responses to serial killers and other violent psychopaths who put society at risk.
First, until we can confidently claim to understand what causes people to become a psychopathic killers, we have no business putting them to death or subjecting them to punitive punishments. They must be incarcerated for our protection, but their punishment should not be punitive beyond that. Since we cannot imagine how a person could simply choose to become a psychopath, it seems reasonable to admit there is a possibility that psychopathy has genetic or biological components. If such a thing is even possible, we owe these unfortunate individuals the dignity of limiting their punishment to simple incarceration and not subjecting them to further, punitive punishments.
“Mr. Rader, your actions indicate that you are bat-shit crazy. We have no idea what caused you to become a psychopath, but we can’t let you run around killing people. So I’m afraid you’re going to have to stay in a maximum security prison for the rest of your life. However, since it is likely that you are the unfortunate winner of a dark, genetic lottery, here’s a few magazines and a list of available books in the prison library. And yes, you can watch Oprah a couple of times a week.”
It's not going to hurt anyone to allow Dennis Rader to occupy his mind while he sits in isolation. And though our anger tempts us to desire more punitive punishments, the truth is, no one is going to find peace in knowing that he is deprived of such occupations.
My second thought is specifically for my Christian brothers and sisters, whom I pray will listen to me, for I speak these words only from a desire to do what is right and to follow in the spirit of Christ. We should never support the death penalty for any reason, if only because our spiritual tradition teaches that redemption is possible for anyone. True, the prospect for emotional well-being for these men is slim, but spiritual redemption is more than that. We have to believe that even Dennis Radar has a spark of humanity in him and could therefore seek and find some measure of forgiveness.
This is why we say Christ had to die for our sins. Not to pay back an angry God, but because that is the ancient story that makes clear the cost of setting things right again. Do you believe what you preach, or don’t you? If so, the way you treat even the least of these should reflect the words of your beloved gospel.
David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam killer, became a Christian while in prison. Those who know him say that this conversion was sincere. He wrote letters to the families of his victims, not asking for forgiveness but promising them that he would never seek parole. He said the comforting knowledge that he was never going to leave prison was the only thing he could give them.
He has not shown up for a parole hearing since writing those letters.
The kind of Christianity that spoke to David Berkowitz is the most conservative, simple, and seemingly unsophisticated evangelical Christianity. Perhaps this is because men like David Berkowitz once dealt in blood. Having seen human blood flow, they know the power of the central Christian story. It speaks their language, we might say.
The saddest irony is that conservative Christians who once called for his death also had the gospel language that finally spoke to David Berkowtiz’s heart.
rlp
David Berkowitz's website. It is maintained by his friends.
Wikipedia article
Bookmark/Search this post with:
There is a limitation of
There is a limitation of sorts when coolly viewing such considerations.
In spite of my Christian conviction had I stumbled upon the grizzly attacks taking place I would have done everything in my power to restrain the attacker. If I had a gun it would be used. Most probably emptied into the assailant. No qualms on my part. No twinge of conscience. No second thoughts.
We can be a bit more 'civilized' or 'Christianized' when we are removed from the situation by geography or time. But when in the midst of such a horrendous crime being done there is nothing wrong with slaying the bastard.
Not to say he may have 'repented' had I first read him the 4 Spiritual Laws. But in my limited theological view God can certainly work out all the kinks the second that 9mm round went through his head.
Any reasonable Christian would indeed do all they could to prevent such a horrendous event from ever occurring. Even you Preacher. No need to be objective about it. No need to weigh the pros or cons from a theological standpoint. I would do anything including killing any would be assailant while in the incredibly emotionally charged state I would be in if I stumbled upon such a setting.
I don’t believe I am sick or warped or an incomplete Christian. Don’t believe I am violating any supposed passivity stance of Jesus that is implied. I would react as the situation dictated. I pray I never am in such a situation. But I do know it is a possibility.
In the grand scheme of things God can indeed work it all out for the good. Not a doubt in my mind. But I would not be remiss for using deadly force to preserve life. Especially an innocent 11 year-old girl.
C'mon, that's a different
C'mon, that's a different question altogether. If I found someone hurting a child I would stop them and if I had to kill them I would. I'm talking about what we should do as a society when we catch a lunatic and have him in custody. Do we need to kill him? And what should a Christian's response be. Don't muddy the issue by mixing it up with what you should or shouldn't do if you found someone hurting a child.
And what do we do after a
And what do we do after a person is already dead. Saddam Hussein was executed for his crimes, but that wasn't enough. Reports after the fact reveal he was taunted on the gallows, and stabbed 6 times after he was dead...
Just for arguments sake
Just for arguments sake let's back up a well known story, oh say about 2-3 hours. The Samaritan (remember, he hasn't earned the 'Good' moniker yet) is cruising down the Jericho road in his souped-up donkeyGT when he happens upon a robbery in progress. Screeeeech! He yanks back hard on the reins and that donkeyGT stops on a shekel! Proceeding with the greatest pangs of compassion, yet with caution, he approaches the violent deed taking place. The hapless victim is ruthlessly beaten half-to-death. And to further add insult to injury, he is stripped of his clothes! The robbers split with the loot. So the Samaritan cries out after them, "I implore you in the name of the LORD to cease your thieving ways!" Now he is upon the poor victim that lies unconscious and bleeding profusely. He took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkeyGT, carried him to an inn and took care of him...
Cut to a few days later. The man groggily wakes up and can't believe his good fortune! The last thing he remembers is being put upon by a heartless band of thugs. He asks the innkeeper how he ended up in a nice clean bed on the mend. The innkeeper relates the story of the 'Good' Samaritan who brought him in on his very own donkeyGT ambulance. Praise God! What a happy testimony time! He wants to meet this anonymous benefactor. The innkeeper arranges a reunion. They get together and over a few falafels and beer the stranger relates his story. And wouldn't ya know it...the countenance of the recuperating gent suddenly changes when he realizes the Samaritan was there all along! "What! You didn't even try to stop them!" he intones. "Why not?" The Samaritan relates how he is a follower of the Good Teacher who admonishes His disciples to be a pacifist at all times. He could not violate the sacred decree or his own conscience...
But he did pay for all that intensive care...
And the recuperating victim, chagrinned, hangs his head and goes away sad. Not even the LORD seems to care for the downtrodden or the oppressed, he thinks to himself. And His followers are very noble putting their money where their actions should be. I sure don't want to have any of them as my neighbor, thank-you very much! What if I were traveling with my wife and children...?
Let's title this parable: The Not-so-Great Samaritan...
What does this have to do
What does this have to do with capital punishment? Suddenly there is this group of comments about whether or not you should defend people. Please, stay on the issue.
This isn't even an issue. I've never met anyone who wouldn't defend someone in trouble. So here:
RLP's position on this OTHER issue. "Help people if you see them being harmed. Throw your body into it. Protect children. All of that. And if you end up even killing someone, you were in an impossible situation. No one blames you."
Okay? Fair enough? Now back to the issue of capital punishment of criminals who have been caught and are no danger to society because they are in jail.
interesting
I'm interested by the above comment for a couple of reasons. First, it's entirely built on a hypothetical situation, as the Samaritan didn't come upon the scene while it was happening, but some time later. If Jesus wanted to tell a story to approve defensive violence to save the downtrodden and oppressed, he could have told the story to indicate that. Let's make up our own stories instead of using stories of his that aren't relevant to our points.
Second, this article that we're all reading isn't about defensive violence at all. It's about what to do after the violence has already happened. How to treat a human who engages in violence in light of the fact that our faith teaches that redemption is always possible.
This article is about vengeance, which we know Jesus to be against. It's not the same as defending the downtrodden and oppressed; so that's a discussion for another article. We know that he is willing to offer compassion and redemption to murderers, and we are being asked to consider our own obsession with vengeance in light of this.
Amen, thank you.
Amen, thank you.
So, yes, we can all be
So, yes, we can all be hypothetical up to a point I suppose.
We are all guilty of some trangression. We could insist on judgment and not mercy. Of course then we are in no position to exact our version of justice.
I have no problem with the concept of captial punishment. It is not The Church that was setup as the agent of wrath to punish evildoers (Rom 13).
Being that governments are civil expressions of law and order it is not detrimential to a pluralistic society to have capital punishment. As I understand it, capital punishment a long and drawn out process providing ample time for any convicted person to make themselves right with whatever god they wish.
Using the above example of defensive violence is it then a matter of pre-meditation vs. knee-jerk reaction? If so, then can due process really be vengeance? He who takes a life forfeits their own. No need to get all vengeful about it. That is why the 'state' takes the place of the one offended. Some impersonal judicial process that is meant to remove the hot-headed vigilante approach of personal vendetta.
The state can be compassionate with their treatment of the prisoner. Compassionate with lethal injection. Seems very compassionate to me.
Now if you would feel it a bit more visceral for the family of the victims to be able to stone the perpetrator then I could understand more the concept of vengeance introduced into such a situation.
You cannot draw a nice neat line in or around the concept of capital punishment and choose it to measure someone's Christianity by such. No need to get fired up about someone else's idea of civil justice in a world that needs to have law and order as a restraint of evil. Don't attempt to get God on your side of the argument either. It is a cheap attempt at deifying an imperfect manner to mete out justice in an imperfect world. That is why I would not want The Church running the government. That is what kings and rulers are for.
Forgive the executioner for pushing the plunger. Grieve for the victims. Provide for the college tuition of the victim's children. Pay for their upbringing. Make sure the family of the victims have all the counseling and help that can be offered. Make sure every base is covered for the victim's surviving friends and family. That is what Jesus requires. But we haven't heard that in any presentation yet either.
Once you have adressed every need of the victims to the nth degree (that extra mile Jesus referred to), then come back and discuss the proper manner to treat the criminal.
No one wants to be the bad guy in a very bad situation. But one sided compassion really is no compassion at all.
Capital punishment is not a theological consideration. It is not a misuse of civil authority. It is not evil. It is not misguided. You may have firm convictions for or against it. But don't use Jesus as the champion of such pro or con stances. It only makes Him out to be molded into the image of the user. All other concepts then less than worthy of consideration. Such supperiority is what Gordon dislikes about pushy fundamental evangelical Protestant Christianity. Just a thought.
Now wait a minute. I can't
Now wait a minute. I can't find any theological or Biblical justification for me as a Christian to want to kill someone who is not a danger. And I made a good case. If it threatens a Christian who has allowed himself or herself to simply follow along with our culture on this issue, well, what should I do? Not say what I think?
This is a blog. It is SUPPOSED to be a forum where I write honestly about what I think. I didn't jump in someone's face in the context of a relationship and shout them down. That would be a judgmental thing to do. I certainly didn't say that people who believe in capital punishment cannot be Christians. They can. But I think they are wrong. So yeah, this is what I think. More importantly, it's what the New Testament calls for...in my opinion.
Capital punishment is not a theological consideration?????
How is capital punishment not a theological consideration. It is entirely a theological and philosophical issue.
Gordon is wrestling with the topic as all good preachers and theologians do.
The issue of the victims is important as well. That however is a separate issue.
Blessing,
Bill
bill.finley@gmail.com
Totally. We can all be
Totally. We can all be hypothetical. I don't mind using hypothetical situations to prove a point, I just think that making a hypothetical situation out of a story that Jesus was using to make a specific, very different, point is a bit much. I don't want to sound like I meant to say hypocritical at all; not at all where I was going. I don't think anyone is being hypocritical or un-Christian here, or that anyone's Christianity is being measured by me.
Anyway. I don't want to act as though the state carrying out capital punishment is the state's version of vengeance. I don't think it necessarily is or is not, though it probably sits on both sides of that issue at times. I'm not particularly arguing in favor of or against the state's use of capital punishment, though I am very against it and I do think it is a theological issue.
I think the issue we are considering is how a Christian should look at a person who is or could be on death row, apart from anything the state may practice. Many Christians do support the death penalty, as Gordon is saying, and they do so with their own belief that the killed person is going to burn in hell forever. That is a theological issue: why we would want to send someone to hell any sooner than the latest possible moment is a valid question to ask of ourselves.
And sure: take care of the victims. That's admirable. I think it's a given in the minds of most Christians, though, while having an individual compassion for the guilty party is not a given. By that I mean me, not the state. I should support anything that could allow for his redemption.
I hope I made myself a little clearer; I didn't mean to sound as though I'm discussing anyone's individual Christianity or the concept of the church governing a state and apologize if I came across like that: both issues are outside the scope of my thoughts here.
Yes, I get the drift here
Yes, I get the drift here from both you and Gordon now.
That 'hell' issue the burning one then? Capital punishment is just the means to send an errant person to perdition?
I think the issue should be moot if one does not believe in such a hell, correct? And with ample time for anyone to repent, is there a problem with executing a murderer? Especially a serial killer.
What happens in the afterlife part of Gordon's considerations. If he does not buy into that eternal furnace concept the death penalty should be more palatable I would think.
Sure there are those hell-fire-brimstone types that preach a gleeful God all giddy over roasting sinners on a spit for all eternity. I am not one. Don't like that idea of God. He did setup an Old Testament death penalty though. In the only theocracy there ever was. Can't say it didn't cross His mind. Now we may want to couch our hypothetical understanding of hell in terms of eternal firey tormment or simply an unknown factor of what happens behind the veil. I think that God has it all sorted out. Just my simple view of death. Same with the murder victims. No time to make themselves right with God. But God must have some way to rectify such a thing whether in a split second here or over there. I don't think God is limited in anyway by our actions here. Not caught off guard. Not surprised. Certainly not hell-bent for wayward sinners to be tossed into hells flames like kindling.
I don't think the New Testament is as clear as it is made out to be regarding how earthly governments are to be run. The kingdom? Certainly. But civil governments are here to maintain law and order. As such I see it a morally neutral issue, not a theological one. How the individual Christian lives a life of non-violence and compassion is not the way of the world. Governments are. As Jesus pointed out to Pilate. God did give power to take life then just as it is today.
If we as a pluralistic society through due process elect to suspend all capital punihsment, then I will not be upset nor campaign to have it reinstated. Other countries have done so. I do not see it as a sign of weakness nor a sign of enlightened civility. It is a matter of people choosing a form of government with its related criminal and judicial system that represents it the way the people want it to. I wish it were possible to have government enact kingdom laws that represent God better. How do you legistlate morality? Or make it unbiased. I am not a Dobson type. And I do not want the religious left or right making government do their bidding. Just my personal opinion here. Not gospel.
wow?
Well, Gordon, I for one thought you did quite an eloquent job of trying to stretch us outside our natural, base desires for vengeance into something approaching the mercy Jesus would call us to. I liked the way you worded it.
The death penalty issue came up in my state a few years back and I used my available circle of influence, not huge but I like to think not completely inconsequential either, to write in my opposition to it.
Yeah,, hypothetically speaking, I cannot even begin to imagine what I would feel if I or someone in my family were victimized by such a sociopath. But here's what I told my circle: my read on what Jesus said remains true no matter what my own personal feelings and reactivities, and I need my society and my leaders/government to protect me from my own vengeful desires and be the "bigger thing" with its mission to maintain civilization, not further the cause of chaos and anarchy.
Anyway, peace! - Karla
Amen. -g
Amen.
-g
Similarly related to this post
I keep this clip of text handy to remind me about who I am without Christ.
Getting What We Deserve
Wesley Allan Todd tortured, molested, and murdered three boys in Vancouver, Washington, fifteen miles from our home. Dodd was scheduled to be hanged—the first U.S. hanging in three decades—shortly after midnight, January 4, 1993.
At dinner that evening, both our daughters, then eleven and thirteen, prayed earnestly that Dodd would repent and place his faith in Christ before he died. I agreed with their prayer … but only because I knew I should.
I stayed up and watched. Reporters from all over the country crowded around the prison. Twelve media representatives were firsthand witnesses to execution. When they emerged thirty minutes after Dodd died, they recounted the experience.
One of them read Dodd’s last words: “I had thought there was no hope and no peace. I was wrong. I have found hope and peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Gasps and groans erupted from the gallery. The anger was palpable. How dare someone who has done anything so terrible say he has found hope and peace in Jesus? Did he really think God would let him into heaven after that he’d done? Shut up and go to hell, child killer—you won’t get off so easy! The idea of God’s offering grace to Dodd was utterly offensive.
And yet---didn’t Jesus die for Dodd’s sins just as He did for mine? No sin is bigger than the Savior. Grace is, literally, not of this world. I struggled with the idea of God saving Dodd only because I thought too much of myself and too little of my Lord.
I’d imagined the distance between Dodd and me as the difference between the South and North Poles. But when you consider God’s viewpoint from light-years away, that distance is negligible. In my standing before a holy God, apart from Christ…I am Dodd. I am Dahmer. I am Mao.
The thought horrifies me, but it’s true. It was also true of Florence Nightingale and Mother Teresa. This isn’t hyperbole; it’s biblical truth. Unless we come to grips with the fact that we’re of precisely the same stock—fallen humanity—as Dodd and Hitler and Stalin, we’ll never appreciate Christ’s grace.
You say you want justice? You want Dodd and those like him to “get what’s coming to them?” Be careful! Are you also willing to take what you have coming? There’s a four-letter word for it: Hell.
My sins and yours, including our self-righteousness, nailed Jesus to that cross as surely as the sins of any child killer, terrorist, or genocidal tyrant. Let’s be thankful we’re not getting what we deserve!
If God isn’t big enough to save Dodd and Dahmer, He’s not big enough to save me.
The Grace and Truth Paradox
From Chapter 5: A Closer Look At Grace.
By Randy Alcorn, 2003
i do not believe in
i do not believe in vengeance
but i do believe that if someone is a threat to people then that needs to be taken care of
if life in prison will do that then that is fine, if they get out through some loophole or another and are allowed to kill again then that isnt enough
vengeance and justice arnt important. what is important is protecting people and that is what needs to be considered
another thought... If that
another thought...
If that criminal, however heinous their offense, "finds Jesus" while awaiting the death penalty, why not send him to his happy reward?
If you do not want to believe in a horrendous hell nor wish to send them there, get 'em saved & send them to their heavenly reward!
Seems like a win-win situation to me.
Or we could accept a life incarcerated with no chance of parole. What would be considered 'compassionate' treatment? What would violate such? Could you accept hard labor? No tobacco? No TV? No air conditioning? WWJD as a prison warden?
Preservation of life a noble thing. I can agree with the desire to protect & keep people from harm. After a terrible crime that results in horrendous death the victim suffered, is it uncivil to hold such a person accountable?
I do think that compassion certainly can be extended. However, I do not believe it is entirely based on not executing a serial killer.
I would think a truly repentant person would accept the consequences of their actions. And then submit to the civil authority to execute them. If they only wish to preserve their own life though it seems the repentance to be somewhat conditional. Maybe offer them the option of suicide? Why not? That could be compassionate.
The one problem with capital punishment in some cases is the room for doubt about the one convicted. In those instances I can opt for life in prison rather than execution. But in the case of a known serial killer it may be misguided to think that not executing them is the more compassionate thing. Life in prison not a great option either. Induce a coma? Minimize tax payer dollars for upkeep? How about giving them the option to donate their organs for medical purposes? Or volunteer for medical research as a test case. I think there could be more options than just life in prison. I think we could take a bad situation where the criminal had no respect for human life & turn it into a positive for others.
In this grand consideration that is very extensive & one that cannot be reduced to one side or the other, is it a sin for the executioner to push the plunger? Do they violate Jesus' kingdom standard? Do they sin? Sin in the very sense of commonly understood evangelical Protestant teaching?
I think you have to answer that question also. If capital punishment is directly in opposition to the kingdom, is the blood of the criminal on all our heads? If so, is the blood of the victim on us also?
Since it is being argued that capital punishment is a theological consideration, it must be viewed in greater detail. Maybe the idea of personal responsibility not that clear in New Testament scripture. I do not see Jesus as being against capital punishment. Did not promote such a campaign against the Roman government. I do agree that all Church history involved in the taking of human life for whatever religious reason was always wrong. The Church never had a commission nor a command nor a right to execute anyone. All infidels or heretics or enemies of God were never fair game. Civil government does have a place to exercise such rule however. I think the thief on the cross understood that point. He repented. Accepted responsibility for his criminal acts. And Jesus welcomed him into paradise that day.
I have a simple question for
I have a simple question for you. Do you wish that David Berkowtiz, the clearly guilty Son of Sam killer, had been given the death penalty? Is that what should have been done? He would have been killed. Or are you glad that he was put in prison for life and later found forgiveness and, apparently, a new life in Christ?
No need to answer here. I'm not looking for that. We all tend too get rather defensive once we've made a statement. I'd just like you to consider it, as I have.
Please allow the logic of the question to rule the day. Do not say, "Well, I wish he had gotten the death penalty and become a Christian during the 10 years or so it would have taken to carry it out."
That would be avoiding the question, I think. The point of the question is in discovering where your ultimate values lie.
RLP
I couldn't agree more. I believe when Jesus said love your enemies, do good to those who use you he meant it. As his followers we should try.
I know how close I have come to doing some awful things and I don't consider myself a bad person. I can't imagine how awful it would feel to not be able to stop because of some "brokenness". I like that word. Brokenness implies we can be fixed, but only if we are alive.
Heaven and hell, in my opinion, are right here on this earth. It is up to us which we create.
Okay I'm off my soap box....
Brenda
Okay Gordon, I have always
Okay Gordon, I have always been a fan of yours. Still am. And by fan I mean you are the closest thing to being an honest, transparent preacher I think mirrors a true calling.
I admire your writing ability. Would even be covetous if not for the encouragement I get from reading whatever it is you are addressing.
In these musings I have chosen to be devil's advocate of sorts only because I see the issue of capital punishment just by itself a very serious one. Add to that the theological intrigue of kingdom principles & Jesus' intent & there is far more to grapple with than the simple yes or no as it is presented.
As you can tell, I too have thought long & hard about it. I attempted to capture all the main issues I have wrestled with. And it has been years & years of "looking at both sides now" without really knowing it completely.
You presented your questions with this very interesting opening line: "...do you wish..."
BTW, I am not feeling threatened or defensive here. I will answer as honestly as you do in all of your writings.
Well, I wish it were possible to prevent such horrendous crimes from happening in the first place. And I must conclude God lets it happen. Gave those serial killers the will & the means to inflict terrible harm on others. I wish it were prevented. Period.
I do not know Berkowitz or the family of his victims. I can only attempt to put myself in the victim's family's shoes. Would I 'wish' for the death penalty?
Yes I would. And I would also wrestle with that seemingly impossible issue of forgiveness. Not being bitter. Not being hateful. Not being poisoned by the very ugliness Berkowitz elected to act out. Not being crippled for the rest of my life by the shear brutality of the crimes committed. How dare he. I would hope I could get to the place Mrs. Moskowitz eventually got to.
And then you begin the next part of your question this way: "...are you glad..."
Glad he had the privilege of having ample time to repent & find Jesus? Not elated in that sense. Not jumping up-and-down gleeful. Not fist pumping "Hallelujah!" glad. Not even mildly relieved. Again, the timing was off. I am curious though. Maybe even hopeful God truly impacted his life & has made peace with his maker. And yes, I do believe if the death penalty were the outcome Mr. Berkowitz would be ushered to it with Jesus by his side. Just like the one thief on the cross. Should that have been the right thing or best thing or the desired thing?
I think that would have been appropriate. Acceptable. And this I really believe, not wrong. Berkowitz by his own admission willing to accept whatever punishment was to be meted out. For that I am thankful. Clear admission of guilt. Full responsibility for his crimes. And since he cannot undo the harm he did, God would certainly be able to work it all out on the other side when he met his victims once again.
That is where I am at along this journey at this time. In spite of all the pain & suffering & actions that cannot be reversed, God somehow by letting it all happen in the here-and-now must have it all worked out behind the scenes. He is big enough to sort it out. Big enough to answer your "meet Jesus before they died" hypothesis for his victims:
Donna Lauria, 18
Christina Freund, 26
Virginia Voskerichian, 19
Alexander Esau, 20
Valentina Suriani, 18
Stacy Moskowitz, 20
Preach: Do you think these young people found Jesus, were forgiven & had a chance for God to change their lives before it was snuffed out prematurely by a .44? I certainly hope so. If not, that would be the far greater tragedy...
Fair enough. Smart, gentle,
Fair enough. Smart, gentle, openly asked and challenged. You and I would surely be able to talk peacefully about this.
In my case, I don't think people get sent to hell that way, so I don't have that motivation either to worry about the victims or grant Berkowitz grace because of hell. He took their lives. Of course I also wish it didn't happen.
But any fair look at his life would convince a reasonable person that he was insane. Seriously schizophrenic. I invite you to go to any website and read the letters he wrote to the police. Or perhaps look at photos of the walls of his house with the weird writing all over it.
Getting back to the original point of this, what do you do with a person who is crazy? And if we don't understand their mindset, I think we can at least allow them to live. Though I am all for life without the possibility of parole. My quoted, imaginary statement to Dennis Rader in this piece illustrates my feeling.
We differ. So be it.
Be at peace. I am at peace with you.
gordon
Gordon: Yes, you & I could
Gordon: Yes, you & I could easily sit down to a round of fine Texas beer & grapple with this consideration & be the better for it. Your stance is one that I too have considered & weighed & asked God about. My 'convictions' not held as strongly as yours I perceive. You are the passionate one in this conversation. I, on the other hand, more a ponderer (if that is a word) that knows I would not be the same person dealing with the theoretical considerations if the ugly reality of having loved ones brutalized by a violent crime was my personal experience.
So, I have to grant myself leeway to experience the entire spectrum of human emotion: outrage, grief, anger, hate, vengeance, shock, numbness, etc. And then carry that through a lengthy trial & sentencing. All the while eerily removed from the judicial process & not able to have my wishes fulfilled at any time during the proceedings.
I can envision with the passing of time the expected roller-coaster feelings that would ebb+flow. Just like a terminal cancer patient goes through when hearing their final diagnosis. I would not be immune to the human experience. All emotions raw & strained. It could be the cause of my own mental breakdown. I could possibly go mad myself. And you would get a varied response to your question at any point along the timeline after getting the news of such a brutal event & my final breath.
If you believe in demonic possession, then Berkowitz a classic example. Not in the sense that, "the devil made him do it" & he could not help himself. He was calculated. Cunning. Deliberate in his actions. Not at all like the spasmodic examples Jesus fixed or healed or however it is you understand the way it happened. If it was truly serious mental illness or any of the most severe psychological problems we now categorize for the insane, the good news is it is curable. Jesus did it. He is then the prime example of compassion you & the other posters want to emulate.
Seems David did get to a place of being in his "right mind" as the gospel account portrays. Sitting at Jesus' feet. Can't think of a more idyllic setting. Seems he has made his peace with God. Certainly for even a jaded Christian that is a good thing. I am not convinced that is a get-out-of-the-electric-chair free pass, but it is good that at least this bit of good did happen.
Should we give every captured, convicted serial killer the same chance then? Is there any difference between the long period of time, decades even, for a death sentence to be finally carried out vs. sitting out the rest of their life in prison?
Well, this is purely conjecture, is it not? Such "“grace periods" not clearly spelled out in the New Testament that I can refer to. Is it anymore compassionate? I do not see it as part of the equation. God more than capable of working it out in this life in 10 seconds, or minutes or years. No need for me to worry about thwarting the eternal destiny of any convicted serial killer whose execution is carried out.
If you have a generous theology grand enough to encompass the victims, then I would be willing to apply that to the killer also. No matter what their state of mind is. That is my response to you after we have been engaged in this sensitive exchange.
There is another consideration that I have rolled-around in my pea sized brain: what if the repentance of Berkowitz & his "finding Jesus" & his taking responsibility for his crimes & his continued life of humility & penance & holiness actually can be applied to the eternal resting place account of his victims?
If so, then we would have to consume quite a few more six-packs while contemplating this deeper implication...
Pax.
RLP, thanks for finally
RLP, thanks for finally posting the final piece. And, I agree wholeheartedly with you.
There was a church in Australia that had the following on their front reader-board:
"JESUS LOVES OSAMA"
Oh, the outrage in the community. The horror, the audacity, the shock!
But, isn't this the primary premise in Christianity? Love your neighbor, regardless of who he or she is, what he or she has done?
Why wouldn't Jesus love Osama? Or Berkowitz? Or BTK?
If the fiat position of Christianity is to love and forgive these people, then shouldn't that also be the position of the followers of Christ?
I do not think the issue of
I do not think the issue of Jesus loving even the most horrendous despot or serial killer of child molester or terrorist is in question here. I do believe Jesus loves us all with a love we can only perceive as far grander than we can ever achieve.
And He has all the consequences of those heinous acts worked out. In this consideration then, His being loving & forgiving is not equal to life in prison vs. execution.
It is not difficult for me to envision Jesus ushering a serial killer to the electric chair. I don’t see Him as being horrified or in anguish or morose. Not a sullen Savior in my mind’s eye. He is Life. And He will take care of both victim & perpetrator alike no matter what manner of death they suffer.
I think my position is simply that God has it figured out perfectly. This side of our temporal existence as well as the other. I have to believe that. If not, then all the most horrific things He allows in this life requires a much more vengeful God on the other. And we can agree that vengeance is His, correct?
What if we do participate in His meting out of justice in this life? And if we do want to hold bad guys accountable by imprisoning them for life, then is that nth degree of forgiveness Jesus commanded?
Forgive & forget & release from debt the golden goal as I understand it. No exceptions. It is an all or nothing proposition from God’s POV. If so, then we must make a choice of what that implies for any criminal regardless of the extent of their crime.
Gordon as well as other posters opt for life in prison without parole. That is a conditional choice. It is a matter of degree. Can’t use the absolute & total love of God or His measure of forgiveness if it is decided to lock up someone for the rest of their life. Either you let all criminals go free after you have forgiven them or you apply some degree of punishment for their crime. If so, execution is not being the antithesis of compassion while life in prison is. That argument falls apart in light of the totality with God’s manner of dealing with all sinners. You, me, Berkowitz, Osama, Hitler, Dahmer & Billy Graham...
What I am trying to point out is that the extreme sentence of death is not a hindrance or limitation or a theological wrench-in-the-works for God. If the victims suffered a gruesome death & He takes care of them, then He most certainly will take care of the killer breathing his last on that lethal injection gurney.
There's a difference,
There's a difference, though, between keeping someone locked up because they're a danger to society, and keeping them locked up because we want to punish them. The former is compatible with forgiveness; the latter is, I think, not.
You're right that if the idea was that we should keep these people locked up as punishment, then it wouldn't be clear why we shouldn't punish them more by killing them, given the gravity of their crimes. But I take it the point is, maybe we shouldn't decide what to do in terms of punishment at all. Maybe that's just giving vent to our desire for vengeance. Various aspects of the criminal justice system can, at their best, serve positive functions of discouraging crime or rehabilitating. They have, at least in theory, useful roles to play other than mere punishment. But executing someone does no good for that person, no good for us, no good for anyone.
Dawn, yes, I can appreciate
Dawn, yes, I can appreciate the difference between protecting society from a criminally insane serial killer & executing them. Both provide the same end. And I would argue that in this instance that is a good thing no matter how extreme the punishment.
There are other elements here though that are now part of the consideration. Berkowitz supposedly the embodiment of rehabilitation: he is a "born again Christian" in his right mind. Do you advocate keeping him locked up in prison for the rest of his life as protection? Is that total forgiveness?
If we want the criminal to 'pay' for their crime, using the lock-'em-up-throw-away-the-key scenario cannot be couched as being benevolent. It is punishment no matter how one looks at it. Even worse punishment when that person is now mentally stable, coherent, repentant, & taking full responsibility for their actions. Keeping him locked up totally against the Christian ideal of forgiveness & release from debt.
We use that term, "debt to society" rather loosely. If all offenses are against God & that is why He claims vengeance is His, then we are still remiss by not carrying out the kingdom principles of forgive, forget, release when keeping Berkowitz in prison?
Remember that sticky quantity of "7 x 70"? If that serial killer were to be forgiven, released & he killed again, but repented, what is the number we are willing to stop at?
We could surgically remove both arms & legs. Or induce paralysis. Free him & let his church and/or family take care of him. He is no longer a danger to anyone. His mind is sharp. He is free. There are ways to ensure societal protection that could be accomplished outside prison walls.
For the victim's family that would experience a degree of closure if the killer were executed, is this not considered a 'good' thing? Absolutely no redeeming value? Since we are arguing that there is absolutely no situation God cannot redeem, that seems, well, limiting to God...
My concept of God large enough to take care of all that stuff this side as well as the other side. That is why I have no moral or theological red-flags regarding capital punishment. I see no conflict of kingdom interest.
I have referred to the gospel accounts of Jesus' crucifixion between 2 thieves as one that could have made the issue clearer for us. One thief mocked Jesus & requested that He save them both. Jesus could have. Didn’t need to let those 2 thieves suffer a cruel death on a cross. Even that seems extreme to me for the supposed crimes committed. Jesus would not have violated His mission or purpose by saving those thieves while He died as the Innocent One. Might have even been quite the statement to Rome being it was the pinnacle of earthly power at that time. Since this is the only example of Jesus involved in the issue of capital punishment it has to be included in any consideration regardless of one's conclusion.
The passionate stance one way or the other is not without merit. I think feeling strongly about the treatment of criminals is going to be debated for quite some time. And those strong feelings are not being dismissed by me. I just wanted to temper the stance of eliminating capital punishment with regard to those that argue for its universal kingdom application. I am not yet convinced that is the case.
I like the way you timed this piece to follow your "Hell" Series
But I find I react to this much as I reacted to that series: I am most comfortable viewing Hell as a sort of metaphorical trash burner. It's where you go when all spark of the divine has been snuffed out and there is nothing left to work with. Yet, as I say this, I realize I am supposing limits to God in positing that a person could get to a point where there isn't enough left for God to work with. God created ex nihilo, don't we believe?
Hence, the juxtaposition of this series on evil with the series on Hell makes me think that there is something else going on here. We "invented" the idea of Hell--if it is true that we do not find clear evidence for it in Scripture, a point I'm not sure of--not so much because we needed a place for bad people to be punished. Rather, we need a place for Evil to have its headquarters. When I think of the serial killers referenced in your series and in responses to it, I think of people who are possessed by a Satanic force. You, rlp, use the term "bat-shit crazy," but that does not explain the phenomenon any better than the ancient idea of demonic possession.
I once saw a serial killer interviewed on TV. (I wonder if it was David Berkowitz?) He told the interviewer (I will paraphrase my memory of what he said), "If you were wondering what it looks like to be possessed by Satan, well, you're looking at it. So I don't understand why you people don't just go ahead and kill me." At that moment I felt I was looking at a man who wanted to be put out of his misery. He wanted to be snuffed out, made into nothing, because the something he was living with was torture.
I think people who say in their hearts to a murderer, "Go to Hell," mean, "Go and live with your master, and leave the rest of us alone, please, because your presence here creeps us out."
It is still hard for me to get my mind around the idea of David Berkowitz repenting and then being "saved". Does he not suffer, when he remembers the torture he inflicted? What sort of peace does he enjoy? I am bothered by memories of my own sins; I can't imagine how he deals with this burden.
Christian Scholars: Support for the Death Penalty
Your perception of redemption and how it is achieved or observed is wrong.
---REST OF COMMENT REMOVED BY RLP----
Removed not because it was offensive, though it was. That opening is so incredibly insulting and patronizing. And it shows a kind of black and white thinking that's rather sophomoric. But that's not why I removed it.
The reason I deleted it was because it was insanely long. I didn't count the words, but it might have 2000 to 3000 words. This isn't your blog. If you want to write a treatise, post it at your own blog and provide a link. That's blog etiquette.
"Your perception of
"Your perception of redemption and how it is achieved or observed is wrong."
Patently offensive statement. In the future, begin your responses in a manner befitting equal discussion and debate rather than open attack and argument.
"I strongly suspect that any Christian's who support the death penalty do not speculated where the executed murderers may end up after their execution. The reason is clear - redemption is between God and the individual and no one else."
False. What of the Grand Commission? While, ultimately, a person's relationship with God is between them and God, we as followers of Christ are specifically directed to be concerned about the well-being, spiritual and material, of those around us. Killing somebody out of vengeance and, let's face it, convenience is not the way to care for our fellow creatures. You may quote all of the scholars and websites you like, but the bottom line is that based on Scripture it is clear which side of the issue Jesus Himself would come down on and that should be all that matters to Christians.
As Christians, it is not our duty to uphold the status quo. Quite the opposite, we are to shake things up constantly, always challenging that which is unjust and unloving. Isn't that what Jesus did? Aren't we asked to do as Jesus did? "Render unto Caesar" can be taken too far, such as when it contradicts the Grace of God.
In Peace Profound,
Nicholas
redemption & two Christian essays, supporting the death penalty
Shorter try.
Your perception of redemption and how it is achieved or observed is wrong.
I doubt any Christian expects an executed murderer to go to hell.
Why? Because redemption is between the sinner and God. We simply have no way of knowing.
Some death penalty/Christian links - short enough I hope.
(1) Capital Punishment: New Testament Teaching", 1998, Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., considered one of the most prominent Roman Catholic theologians of the 20th century.
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Sacred_Scripture/Sacred_Scriptur...
(2) "The Death Penalty", by Romano Amerio,
http://www.domid.blogspot.com/2007/05/amerio-on-capital-punishment.html
death to bandwagon hatred and the death penalty
I resonate with all you say, and yet add another self-serving reason for opposition to the death penalty: Who decides?
I don't trust the state, or any gathering of hyped-up jurors with any person's life. Just can't do it. I know we don't live in the old USSR, and obviously our culture goes to considerable lengths to avoid miscarriages of justice. However, I do not know what our future is, or how crafty the prosecuting counsel might be with closing arguments. In our society, bandwagon hatred seems the norm.
Nope, don't trust any state in such God territory.
Gordon: Your series on hell
Gordon: Your series on hell & the subsequent exchanges about serial killers & how these 2 considerations are connected has been helpful. I can only claim at least this one individual has appreciated the chance to visit the issues once again.
Haven't got that "hell" thing all worked out. Not sure we as individuals can 'send' anyone there no matter what we do in this life. I think this one scripture however it applies sums up my view:
"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Matt 10:28
Not sure the execution of a serial killer or the death of his victims fit into the "go to hell" scenario. Not sure that the default condition of all humanity is "eternal fiery torment" with accepting Jesus the only ticket out. I can understand how such concepts came about & why they remain popular today. I just can't reconcile it all though.
What happens at the moment of death? Can't say I know that either. I would like to think we are reunited with loved ones with Jesus somehow arriving on the scene soon after. What is that like for the murderer caught in a shoot out with police & killed? Is the presence of loved ones enough to cause remorse? And then the presence of Jesus with victims in tow the real judgment that follows?
Certainly God can make the best out of the worst situation IMHO. I do believe we will all give an account of our actions here. It must be addressed in the presence of God. If there can be any restitution made I think it would have to be there, not here. Yet if we conclude that there is only punishment on the other side it seems that 'badness' has not been absorbed into Ultimate Good.
I am not a universalist though I do agree with the premise. Not hard for me to accept the hope of such a viewpoint. If our 'will' is indeed a divine part of God that must return to Him with a harvest of good or bad, He may be well within His rights to demand recompense. I know for sure at the time of my death I would not have been able to wipe my slate clean or make up for all wrongs done. Feel sorry? Certainly. Plead for mercy? Of course. Be saddened at missed opportunity? Rue chances blown? Have to face my own self-centeredness squarely? Yes. If I have the privilege of a death bed experience...
Not sure how it goes down in a sudden death situation though.
I don't know that God plays "Gotcha!" with His creation. If we all fall so short of His extreme qualities who then can stand? Does His mercy triumph over judgment?
Anyway, you have been patient with my postings & probings & POVs. Thanks. I appreciate your willingness to stretch the faith of your readers as well as your own.
Pax.
Gordon Atkinson states in
Gordon Atkinson states in his article, “The elusive nature of evil: part three”, that serial killers most likely have genetic or biological components that aren’t right and that no one is going to find peace in knowing that these kind of people are dead or in confinement for the rest of their lives. Do you agree with this argument? Why or why not?
I am convinced there is
I am convinced there is evil. In the case of those that cannot empathize with their victims or even derive enjoyment from their torture+murder I can even allow room for inhuman impulses that drive them to do the horrendous things they do...
Genetic short circuits? Chemical imbalance? Brain defects? Demonic influence? Bad upbringing?
I am not sure that the extreme horror of their actions is proof of any or all the above. Not sure that you can come up with fool-proof tests to pin point the problem.
Do we want to discover the root cause though? In the hopes of finding a cure? Seems Berkowitz in his right mind now. Is that the chance we want for all psychotic serial killers?
One post above states that one serial killer interviewed begged to be put out of their misery. Not sure if that is a real situation or not, but some may suffer terribly themselves. Maybe they are haunted or tormented in their minds. Not sure life in prison the most compassionate thing then.
Since I cannot even fathom the motivation to do what serial killers do it may be easiest for me to categorize all such people as "bat shit crazy" as Gordon puts it. No real capacity for understanding the enormity of their actions. I am not convinced they are unaware of what they are doing. They need to be detailed, calculating, deliberate, cunning, & normal enough to blend in with the rest of the population. If they went about zombie-like & foaming at the mouth it would easier to identify them. But no, they get by with little attention drawn to them.
Regardless of their mental, physiological, emotional, psychological states they are not beyond God's ability to fix. We may want to allow that possibility in this life while they remain incarcerated. I happen to believe it is guaranteed in the next. That is why I have no problem with capital punishment. Without knowing for certain what does happen after death I can allow for a rather generous theology that can work it all out from God's perfect perspective. If, on the other hand, we knew for certain that only divine wrath waits on the other side then we may want to do everything we can to ensure every serial killer has the opportunity to secure eternal fire insurance before they meet their Maker. Not sure how that works out for the victims, but then nobody said that life or death was fair...
death penalty
In general, I am opposed to the death penalty for several reasons. The most important is the fact that our justice system is not infallible, especially in high-profile crimes that cause outrage. If you've locked someone up for life and eventually evidence comes to light that proves the person innocent, you can at least release them. If you've killed them, well . . . .
If you are absolutely, 110% certain that your prisoner is guilty, that's harder. In theory, I still believe that killing someone is not a good way to show that killing is bad, nor does it bring back the victims. On the other hand, I lived near Washington, D.C. in the fall of 2002 when the snipers were gunning down random victims. When I heard the prison sentences, I was startled by my gut-level reaction: "They should FRY!"
Maybe they should. I still don't trust human beings to make that decision, especially in groups where all the individuals can duck responsibility.
I'd rather just say "no death penalty at all" and not have to worry about whether political pressures or racial prejudice have led to a premature conviction, or whether someone who couldn't afford a good lawyer is getting fried while a well-off person, equally guilty, is not. Besides, when we allow the death penalty at all, we have cases like the recent one where someone wanted to expand the death penalty to cases of child rape, and politicians who voted against it were portrayed as being soft on crime or as not caring about the young victims, when in fact they simply did not want to allow the state to take a life for any crime less than taking a life.
Post new comment