Lesson video

Hello, welcome to this lesson on Christianity and the Death Penalty.

My name's Mrs. Robin, and I'm looking forward to working with you today.

In today's lesson, you'll be able to explain different Christian and non-religious views on the death penalty.

Key words that we'll be using are 'death penalty,' 'forgiveness,' and 'justice.

' Death penalty is capital punishment, the execution of a criminal, which is sanctioned by the state.

Forgiveness is letting go of blame against a person for wrongs they have done, moving on.

And justice is what is right and fair.

Today's lesson will form two parts.

We'll be looking at the death penalty, and we'll be looking at Christian responses to the death penalty.

So let's get started on looking at the death penalty.

Also known as capital punishment, the death penalty is the legal ending of a person's life as a punishment for a serious crime.

Laws on the death penalty vary around the world.

In some places, it is fully abolished.

Other places, the laws are mixed.

And in some, it's more regularly used.

So in the UK, the death penalty is fully abolished.

In the U.

S.

, the death penalty is legal in some states, usually by lethal injection.

And in some countries like Russia, the death penalty is retained in law, but it's not been used for many years.

In some countries like China and Iran, the death penalty is actively carried out for a wide range of crimes, and execution by hanging or shooting might still be used.

Let's check your understanding.

Is this statement true or false? All states in the United States have the same death penalty laws.

Pause for a moment if you need to.

Also think about why your answer is true or false and come back when you're ready to check.

Well done if you spotted that that is false, but why is it false? Well, excellent work if you've managed to remember that each state in the U.

S.

has a power to set its own laws, so that's why some allow the death penalty and others do not.

A YouGov poll in February 2022 asked 1,665 British people: "Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the death penalty?" Views range from strongly support to strongly oppose, with tend to support and tend to oppose in the middle.

And the option to say "don't know." So what does this data tell us about public opinion in the UK on the death penalty? Pause for a moment, look closely at that chart, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

You may have noticed the data shows more people oppose the death penalty than support it.

A small group are unsure, and this suggests that public opinion on the issue is quite divided, although leaning against its use.

There is an ongoing debate about whether the death penalty's fair and effective form of justice.

Let's look at the views of two groups.

Amnesty International, which is a global human rights organisation, and Justice for All, which is a US-based advocacy group.

Amnesty International is against the death penalty and Justice for All supports it.

Well, Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases.

It argues that it's cruel, irreversible, and is often used in ways that are unfair or discriminatory.

So it is an organisation that campaigns for its complete abolition worldwide.

Justice for All is specifically based in the U.

S.

and it's an advocacy group.

So it supports the use of the death penalty, speaks in favour of it.

It believes it delivers justice for the victims, deter serious crime, and protect society.

The organisation argues that it's morally justified response to the most severe offences.

Complete this sentence.

"Amnesty International and Justice for All hold opposing views on whether the death penalty delivers." So take a moment, pause the video if you need to, come back when you're ready to check your answer.

So well done if you said 'justice.

' One way to decide on whether the death penalty is ever justified is to apply an ethical theory.

Alan, who's a humanist, is using Kantian ethics to inform his thinking on the death penalty.

Alan says, "Kant supported the death penalty because it's based on retributive justice, so the idea that punishment should fit the crime.

However, he believed moral rules must be universal, and that people should not be treated as a means to an end.

There's always a chance of executing an innocent person, and so the death penalty cannot be universalized.

It also treats the person as a means to satisfy justice, not as someone with dignity.

For me, Kantian ethics shows the death penalty is wrong." So interestingly here, Alan disagrees with what Kant argues, but he's using some of Kant's methods, the idea of universal moral laws, to oppose the death penalty.

Warren, who's an atheist, is using utilitarianism to inform his views on the death penalty.

Warren says, "I support the death penalty from a utilitarian point of view, because it can deter serious crime and protect society, which increases overall happiness and reduces suffering.

I know others use utilitarianism to argue against it, saying the death penalty could cause more harm than good, especially if mistakes are made or it creates fear or injustice.

But in cases where it clearly protects lives and reduces serious crime, I believe it's justified." So which of the following best explains why utilitarian might reject the death penalty? Is it A, the principle of utility shows it causes more harm than good? B, it fails to respect the sanctity of life? C, it cannot be universalized if there's a risk of executing the innocent? Or D, it fails to deter crime in most countries? So take a moment, pause the video, have a think, and then come back when you're ready to check your answer.

Well, I don't know if you put A, the principle of utility shows it causes more harm than good.

This is the basis of utilitarian thinking.

It does mean, however, that some utilitarians might accept the death penalty as we saw in the case of Warren.

Alan, who is a humanist, is responding to some arguments for the death penalty with a counter-argument.

Argument for the death penalty provides justice by ensuring the punishment fits the seriousness of the crime.

Alan says, "Justice is about fairness and respect for human rights, not just about matching the severity of the crime." The second argument for many people believe the death penalty deters others from committing serious crimes.

Alan responds to this by saying, "Many studies show how the death penalty does not deter crime any more effectively than other punishments." Argument for the death penalty brings closure to victims' families.

Alan responds, "Not all families feel closure.

The death of the convicted person does not necessarily help with loss, and emotional responses should not determine legal punishment." Warren, who's an atheist, is responding to some arguments against the death penalty with a counter argument.

So he's arguing differently from Alan.

Argument against the death penalty denies the offender basic human dignity and reduces justice to killing.

Warren responds, "The death penalty recognises that offenders deserve to face the consequences of their actions through a proportionate punishment." Many people believe the death penalty does not effectively deter serious crime.

Warren replies, "Whilst evidence is debated, it cannot be proven that the death penalty doesn't deter crime.

It shows the most serious offences have the harshest consequences." Argument against life imprisonment protects society just as effectively without taking a life.

Warren says, "Life imprisonment still carries risks.

The offender could escape or act violently in prison.

The death penalty ensures public safety and achieves justice." Which of the following is an argument against the death penalty? A, it ensures justice by matching the seriousness of the crime.

B, it brings closure to victims' families.

C, life imprisonment can protect society without taking a life.

Or D, many people believe it deters serious crime.

Pause the video, have a think, come back when you're ready to check your answer.

Excellent work if you put life improvement can protect society without taking a life.

For our task for part A, Alan and Warren are discussing the statement, "The death penalty is a fair and effective form of justice." I'd like you to complete the table by filling in the missing arguments.

So Warren is arguing for the death penalty and Alan is arguing against.

Let's think about the first row of the table.

Alan is arguing against the statement.

He says, "Justice is about fairness, dignity, and protecting human rights, which the death penalty undermines." I'd like you to think about the kind of argument that Warren might pose that Alan might be responding to.

Secondly, Warren argues for the death penalty, saying, "The death penalty gives victims dignity and justice by ensuring offenders face consequences for their actions." Have a think about how Alan, arguing against the death penalty, might respond to that.

So pause the video, take your time, think really carefully about how arguments can balance or counteract each other.

Fill in those missing arguments.

Remember, these skills are really useful for GCSE evaluation questions.

Come back when you are ready to see what you could have written.

So Warren might have said, "The death penalty provides justice by ensuring the punishment fits the seriousness of the crime." And this is quite a clear argument for the death penalty.

And it might lead Alan to make that response that, actually, justice is about fairness, dignity, and human rights.

And the death penalty undermines that.

For Warren's point that the death penalty gives victims dignity and justice by ensuring offenders face consequences, Alan might respond, "The death penalty denies the offenders their dignity and it reduces justice to killing." So you may have used different arguments for me, but well done if you've managed to show how arguments might counter each other in a debate about the death penalty.

Let's move on to the second part of our lesson, Christian responses to the death penalty.

Christian attitudes to the death penalty are informed by different sources of authority, including the Bible, church teachings, the example of other Christians, Christian ethical theories such as natural law and situation ethics, their conscience and ability to reason.

They may interpret the sources differently or emphasise one more than another.

Christian views on the death penalty have developed over time.

In the first to third century, many early Christians opposed the death penalty influenced by Jesus' teachings on forgiveness and nonviolence.

For example, in John 8:1-11, the church was also often persecuted by the Roman state and resist supporting state executions.

In the fourth century, after Christianity became the Roman Empire's official religion under Constantine, some church fathers still emphasised mercy, but others began to accept the death penalty as a legitimate power of the state.

During the Middle Ages, the Catholic church generally supported the death penalty for serious crimes and heresy, seeing it as a way to society and uphold justice.

Thinkers like Thomas Aquinas argued it was justified if it served the common good.

Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin supported the death penalty as part of maintaining law and order, seeing it as a punishment for wrongdoing and a deterrence.

Influenced by ideas about human rights and concerns about wrongful convictions, growing numbers of Christians began to question the death penalty with the result that most no longer support it in the 20th century and onwards.

Biblical teachings can be used both to condemn and support the death penalty.

In support, we have Exodus 21:24.

"Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." So it's the principle of retribution.

It suggests the punishment should match the crime.

On the other hand, we have Matthew 5:38-39.

Jesus speaking, he 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." Jesus here is challenging that principle of retribution and encouraging his followers not to retaliate.

Today, most Christians use the Bible to condemn the death penalty.

"You shall not murder," Exodus 20:13.

So taking a life, even in punishment, could go against this command.

You have heard that it was said, "Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.

But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven." Jesus speaking, Matthew 5:43-45.

So here, he's promoting unconditional love, even for enemies, and teaching his followers that they should respond to wrongdoing with compassion.

Give one biblical teaching which could be used to suggest the death penalty is wrong.

Take a moment, pause the video if you need to, and then come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said any one of the following: "Do not resist an evil person," Matthew 5:39.

"Do not kill," Exodus 20:13.

"Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Matthew 5:44.

Most Christian denominations agree that the death penalty is unacceptable.

The Catholic church now teaches that the death penalty is wrong in all cases.

In 2018, the catechism was updated to say the death penalty is inadmissible because it's an attack on the inviolability and the dignity of the person, and the church works with determination for its abolition worldwide." And that's in paragraph 2,267.

Quakers have consistently opposed a death penalty based on their belief that every person has a divine inner light and the potential for change.

Quaker Concern for the Abolition of the Death Penalty has been active in campaigning against the death penalty worldwide.

The Southern Baptist Convention supports the death penalty as stated in its official statement of 2000.

However, Baptist churches are independent, and most of them disagree with this view.

The American Baptist Churches USA and the Baptist Union of Great Britain have called for the abolition of the death penalty.

So we can see this is very much a minority view.

Which Christian denomination has never supported the death penalty? Is it A, the Roman Catholic Church; B, the Quakers; or C, the Southern Baptist Convention? Take a moment, pause if you need to, and then come back when you're ready to check.

Well done if you put the Quakers.

They have never supported the death penalty.

Jun is talking to Fiona, who's an Anglican Christian.

Jun says, "Fiona, what do you believe about the death penalty and what has influenced your view?" Fiona responds, "I think the death penalty is wrong because every person is made in the image of God and God offers forgiveness to everyone.

Visiting people in prison has really shaped my view.

I've met offenders who deeply regret what they've done and are genuinely trying to turn their lives around." So what has influenced Fiona's view on the death penalty? If you're able to pause and turn and talk to someone nearby or you can talk to me, then please do, and come back when you're ready to move on.

You may have noticed that Fiona's influenced both by her Christian beliefs, but also by her experience of visiting people in prison.

Danielle is a Roman Catholic.

Along with using the Bible and church teaching, she also uses natural law when making moral decisions.

Danielle says, "We're meant to protect life and help people flourish.

Ending someone's life through the death penalty goes against that purpose.

It does not respect the dignity of the person or allow for repentance and growth.

There are better ways to uphold justice without taking away the chance for change or damaging the soul." So how is Danielle using natural law to support her view? Take a moment to reread her answer.

Pause if you need to and come back when you're ready to move on.

Danielle says that we should protect life and help it flourish, which is a key aim of natural law.

Fergus is a liberal Anglican.

Along with using the Bible and looking for guidance from his church, he also uses situation ethics when making moral decisions.

Fergus says, "I try to follow the example of Jesus by choosing the most loving action in each situation.

I believe justice and accountability matter, but taking someone's life is not a living way to respond to wrongdoing.

There are always better ways to help a person change and protect society." So what does Fergus say which shows he's using situation ethics to help inform his decision on the death penalty? Pause if you need to, reread what he said, and come back when you're ready to move on.

Fergus says he's trying to do the most loving thing in each situation.

Which of the following best reflects most Christian views on the death penalty today? Is is A, it's acceptable because some crimes deserve death.

B, it should be used to show God's judgement.

C, it's wrong because every person should have the chance to change and be forgiven, or D, it's the best way to protect society from dangerous criminals.

If you need to pause, please do.

Come back when you're ready to check your answer.

So for task B, part one, I'd like to explain from either two religions or two religious traditions, beliefs about the death penalty.

To complete this, you need to make two points, need to develop each point, you need to name a source of authority relevant to the point, and you need to explain the importance of this source of authority.

You could use sentence starters such as "Most Christians." For example, "Quakers believe the death penalty is wrong because a very small minority of Christians, such as those in the Southern Baptist Convention, believe the death penalty can be allowed for serious crimes like murder because.

However, there are other options for what you could say.

So take your time, pause the video, come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

Let's have a look at what you could have said.

"Most Christians, for example Quakers, believe the death penalty is wrong because all life is sacred and every person has the potential to change." In Matthew 5:43-45, Jesus teaches, "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven." This challenges revenge and calls Christians to show compassion even to those who've done serious wrong.

A very small minority of Christians such as those in the Southern Baptist Convention believe the death penalty can be allowed for serious crimes like murder, 'cause it is a proportionate punishment.

The teaching "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot," Exodus 21:24, encourages them to think it can deliver justice and supports the idea punishment should match the crime.

So excellent work if you've managed to make two points and to link both in with a source of authority.

And remember that second point is only a very small minority of Christians.

It's a very uncommon view.

So you might well at this point have decided instead to talk about another reason why Christians generally oppose the death penalty.

For part two of our task, here are two arguments one might make against the statement, "The death penalty can never be justified." I'd like you to think about how most Christians would respond to the arguments and explain what they might say.

So the first argument, "Some, including a minority of Christians like the Southern Baptist Convention, would argue that the offender has forfeited their right to live and that the death penalty is a fair and just response." So you're going to think about how most Christians would respond to that.

And for the second point, "Some people would say that allowing a dangerous criminal to live in the hope they might change ignores the seriousness of their actions and the pain caused to their victims." And again, think about how most Christians would respond to that, remembering that overall, Christians are against the death penalty.

So pause the video, take your time, come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said for the first point, "A Christian might respond that the death penalty is wrong 'cause all life is sacred and every person is made in the image of God." There were lots of things you could have said there, but something about how the offender's life has worth is what you should have said.

And for the second point, "A Christian might respond that the death penalty is wrong because no one is beyond forgiveness.

Executing someone deprives them of their chance to change." There are other ways you could have responded, but if you've made a different point about why Christians are against the death penalty, then well done.

Today, we've learned that the death penalty is the execution of a criminal which is sanctioned by the state.

It's banned in the UK but still used in countries like China, Iran, and parts of the U.

S.

Non-religious views are divided, some arguing it deters crime and others that it violates human dignity.

Most Christians oppose it as the Bible teaches "do not kill," Exodus 20:13.

And Jesus taught forgiveness and mercy.

A very small minority of Christians such as those in the Islam Baptist Convention support it using "eye for eye," Exodus 21:24.

Thank you for working with me on today's lesson.

I really appreciate all of your efforts.