To The Right Honorable John C . Diefenbaker Prime Minister of Canada Ottawa

Sir:

The Classes Eastern Ontario, Hamilton and Toronto of the Christian Reformed Churches in Canada, with a view to forthcoming legislation on the subject of Capital Punishment, herewith humbly submit to your attention a Statement expressing their convictions in this important matter.

Although we arc thoroughly convinced that for the benefit of human society our sovereign God has accorded distinctive ministries to Church and State, we believe nevertheless that it lies within the domain of the Church’s ministry to interpret the Word of God whenever it speaks on points at which the two spheres intersect. It is only from the Word of God that we take courage in addressing ourselves to you as the Supreme Magistrate in this matter of Capital Punishment.

Contemporary debate on the issue of the Retention of Capital Punishment demonstrates anew the weakness and inconclusiveness of human sentiment, whether it be the sentiment of the utilitarian, the humanitarian, the moralist, or the legalist. This inconclusiveness is an added incentive for us to turn again to the Word of God. For here, and only here, we as human beings may discover the majestic and merciful will of God, who alone can be trusted to safeguard the honor of his name and the true interests of mankind.

From the Scriptures we learn that all punishment is basically a divine prerogative. “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord’” (Romans 12:19). God is our supreme Lawgiver and Judge, who alone has the right to demand respect for the laws of life which He has ordained. Now He has made it abundantly clear that no man can violate the laws of life, which are His laws, with impunity. “For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap” (Galatians 6:7). “For he will render to every man according to his works” (Romans 2:6). Should sin cease to be regarded as sin, and therefore as punishable, as those advocate who speak of it as only a sickness, then man could no longer be treated as a creature accountable to God. The resulting loss of human dignity would be irreparable. By punishing the transgressor God honors him as a creature who has to come to terms with the Holy One who avenges evil and rewards the good.

From the Scriptures we likewise learn that in the exercise of alI punitive measures the clement of retribution as a manifestation of divine displeasure with sin and crime is fundamental. It is the retributive wrath of the living God which constitutes the awe-inspiring background of the Atonement accomplished by our Savior. “He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole” (Isaiah 53:5; Romans 5:9). Clearly there is no reconciliation with God without the appeasement of His holy indignation. On the plane of earthly justice, which ought always to mirror the divine, the element of retribution is therefore to be regarded as having priority over the possible effects of deterrence or correction, however beneficial these effects may be.

The same Scriptures teach us that God empowers the civil magistrates to serve as executors of His wrath upon wrongdoers. Without such delegation of power no human agency, whether parents in the home or rulers in a state, could claim the right to punish a fellow creature. But the Word of God is unambiguous in attributing to the civil magistrate the right to punish the transgressor. Our Lord Himself, facing His earthly judge, said: “You would have no power over me unless it has been given you from above” (John 19:11 ). To this utterance may be added the apostolic teaching: “For there is no authority except from God…Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment” (Romans 13:1, 2). “Be subject for the Lord’s sake…to governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right” (1 Peter 2:13, 14).

Currently, however, the right of the State to inflict the death penalty is called in question. From the Scriptures it is evident that the right to impose the ultimate sanction of death is no less well-founded than the right to impose other forms of punishment or deprivation of freedom. The civil magistrate “does not bear the sword in vain” (Romans 13:4); that is, the sword in the hands of the magistrate is not an ornament, nor is it merely a symbol of deterrent power in general, but it is specifically a symbol, as it was once an instrument, of the power of taking the life of a wrongdoer. The universal (pre-Mosaic) legislation laid down in Genesis 9:1–7 is no less specific in its prohibitory and mandatory clauses. It declares for all time that “whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.” Here the death penalty is specifically declared to be the punishment of murder, the premeditated, violent assault on another person’s life, on the ground that this crime constitutes an assault upon God’s image-bearer.

Having established the State’s right to inflict capital punishment, we .do not have far to go to establish also the duty to inflict it. The language of Scripture itself implies both a right and a solemn obligation for the civil magistrates to be the executors of the wrath of God upon murder (Genesis 9:5, 6). The power of “the sword” is no empty phrase (Romans 13:4). It is only by enforcement that the majesty of the law against murder is vindicated.

We recognize that the implementation of earthly justice is subject to human fallibility. The responsibility of the magistrate to pronounce a just sentence increases with the gravity of the crime committed. Every precaution must therefore be taken to prevent a miscarriage of justice. But the possibility of such miscarriage does not justify the official dereliction of duty.

In closing, we realize that when a people loses its sense of the sanctity of life and drifts from a Christian awareness of the majesty of the divine law, it will at the same time and in the same measure lose all sense of the benevolent character of retributive justice. When such moral and spiritual atrophy takes place, it may become impossible for a government to maintain the death penalty. We would warn, however, against a premature yielding to this process of spiritual deterioration, since, from a Christian point of view, abolition must be regarded as retrogressive. The punitive justice of God is a fundamental article of the Christian faith and forms the basis of the gospel of the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ which is our hope for the renewal of society. One of the noblest preachers of this Gospel declared to the magistrate before him: “If then I am a wrongdoer, and have committed anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek to escape death” (Acts 28:11).

We earnestly request your careful consideration of this Statement and assure you, and your government, of our continuing prayers.

Humbly submitted on behalf of these Classes, John Vriend, M.A. Th. B. Secretary of: The Committee for Correspondence with the Government of the Eastern Canada Interclassical Conference of the Christian Reformed Church.

See the reference to this document on page 6 of this issue.

H.J.K.