Author: John Stonestreet and Andrew Carico
In his Confessions, Augustine tells of Alypius, a friend who despised the gladiatorial games because of their “barbaric” public killings. His friends dragged him to the arena anyway, and, though he tried to shield his eyes, the excitement of the event got the better of him. Soon, Alypius, drunk on the bloodlust, became an enthusiastic fan, returning repeatedly and bringing friends.
This story is relevant again given the recent controversy surrounding the scheduled Dec. 3 execution of convicted Fort Hood terrorist, Nidal Hasan. While Secretary of War Pete Hegseth initially said the death by firing squad would be livestreamed, so people would know the consequences for such actions, the idea was ultimately rejected.
The uproar about whether to livestream an execution in the U.S. raises interesting questions about the death penalty. In their book, By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed, scholars Ed Feser and Joseph Bessette offer a biblical, historical, and philosophical defense. The book’s title comes from Genesis 9:6, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.” They also discuss Romans 13, which affirms the state’s right to bear the sword against the wrongdoer.
In addition to the traditional arguments that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to violent crime and restores the balance of justice, the authors noted that in 2012—the year with the most recent available data when their book was written—one-quarter of the 43 executed by the state came to believe in God. For example, a double murderer told his mother before his execution that “this is the only way God could save me.” In a nutshell, for Feser and Bessette, the death penalty serves the common good.
However, to livestream an execution raises additional questions. In a culture that seems increasingly drawn to the grotesque and outlandish, and where “liking” and “sharing” are so encouraged, livestreaming an execution makes it a spectacle. The Bible addresses this almost directly in Deuteronomy:
And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.
In other words, even in a lawful execution, the image of God should not be degraded by leering eyes or leaving it to prey. This was in sharp contrast to most of the ancient world. Even where capital punishment was not just allowed but common, for God’s people, desecration mattered.
Today, a distinction should be made between an execution being public, and it being “livestreamed.” Reportedly, Hasan’s execution will now be viewable for immediate families of victims but not streamed around the globe. As Neil Postman warned decades ago in Amusing Ourselves to Death, television (and now livestreaming) revalues how we view everything, including human life and dignity, according to its “entertainment value.”
The Church can help the broader culture understand the worldview implications and soberness of crime and punishment, including the death penalty. Chuck Colson himself wrestled with capital punishment for years, concerned that the justice system was prone to mistakes, which would lead to executing the innocent. His perspective changed when he read C.S. Lewis’ essay, “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment,” in which Lewis argued that it strips man of his dignity as a free moral agent by treating his criminal behavior as the result of being “sick” or “in need of therapy.” Lewis wrote: “To be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we ‘ought to have known better,’ is to be treated as a human person made in God's image.”
As Chuck wrote, in response to this essay,
I realized that this went right to the heart of a central precept of Judeo-Christian belief. The Scriptures teach that people are responsible for their own behavior. The object of justice is . . . to balance the scales of justice. And sometimes the only way to do that is to give the offender his just desserts: capital punishment.
By removing the livestream, the dignity of Hasan as a human being is preserved, even as he receives justice for his actions, while shielding others from indulging in base desires for bloodlust or vengeance. To be just, the execution of Hasan cannot be about therapy or vengeance, but justice and the preservation of human dignity.