FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For More Information Contact

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For More Information Contact:

Thursday July 14, 2005 Laura E. Everett, 617-523-2771 x 14

“UNNECESSARY, UNJUST, AND INTOLERABLE”

CHURCH LEADERS VOICE UNANIMOUS OPPOSITION TO REINSTATING THE DEATH PENALTY

Boston, MA – Testifying before the Massachusetts Legislature’s Joint Committee on the Judiciary, the Rev. Dr. Diane C. Kessler, executive director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches said, “While religious communities use varied moral reasoning to express their opposition to the capital punishment, the church leaders in Massachusetts are unified in opposing the death penalty as unnecessary, unjust and intolerable.”

While the Judiciary Committee heard testimony both from supporters and opponents the death penalty, the religious leaders consistently said that the death penalty is “contradiction of both the values of our Christian traditions and the principles of humane government.”

Church leaders from varied traditions throughout the state spoke, including, Rev. Dr. Stephen Sterner, Interim Conference Minister and President, United Church of Christ, Massachusetts Conference; Bishop Peter D. Weaver, United Methodist Church, New England Conference; and Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, President of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Boston on behalf of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference. Representatives also spoke on behalf of the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston, the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston, the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, the New England Yearly Meeting, Religious Society of Friends (Quaker), and the Unitarian Universalist Association. The church leaders also attended a rally and vigil in front of the State House.

Countering claims that the death penalty can be fool-proof, Rev. Dr. Stephen Sterner said, “Though safeguards might be put in place, we know that human institutions are not perfect, nor are they fail safe. To think otherwise is to assume the prerogatives of God.” Rev. Canon Edward Rodman quoted a statement of the Bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, saying, “ the death penalty principally responds to a desire for revenge against perpetrators of violent crime. We believe that revenge is never a valid motive for personal or state action.”

From one of the historic ‘peace churches,’ Jonathan Vogel-Borne, Field Secretary for the New England Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) said, “a legal execution requires each of us to participate in another person’s death as citizens and representatives of the government that sanctions this type of punishment. We wish to state emphatically that we do not want our public servants to kill in our name or our taxes to be used in this way.”

Many of the church leaders, including Rev. Hurmon Hamilton on behalf of the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston, echoed concerns that the death penalty has been imposed with racially biased sentencing and oppose reinstating the death penalty for this reason.

Protestant, Orthodox and Roman Catholic voices have been united in their opposition. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops began a new campaign to end the death penalty in March 2005. In the 1999 Good Friday Appeal to End the Death Penalty, the USCCB stated, “we oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes but for what it does to all of us as a society. Increasing reliance on the death penalty diminishes all of us and is a sign of growing disrespect for human life.”

Included below is a list of those who testified with written statements issued from the church leaders.

# # # # #

Testifying before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary against the death penalty on July 14, 2005:

· Rev. Dr. Diane C. Kessler, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches

· Rev. Dr. Stephen Sterner, Interim Conference Minister and President, United Church of Christ, Massachusetts Conference

· Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, President of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Boston on behalf of the four Roman Catholic Diocese in Massachusetts

· Rev. Hurmon Eugene Hamilton, Pastor of Roxbury Presbyterian, on behalf of the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston

· Rev. Fr. John Maheras, Pastor of Nativity of Virgin Mary Church, Cohasset, on behalf of the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston

· Rev. Canon Edward Rodman, professor at Episcopal Divinity School, on behalf of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts

· Jonathan Vogel-Borne, Field Secretary for the New England Yearly Meeting, Religious Society of Friends (Quaker)

· Rev. Dr. Thomas Wintle, Senior Minister at First Parish Church in Weston, on behalf of the Unitarian Universalist Association

Among the bonds that unite us as Christians is the common affirmation that the God we know in Christ creates and seeks to redeem all human beings as outpourings of perfect love. We are called to imitate God's love as fully as possible in all of the dilemmas and ambiguities of human relationships. We hold all human life in reverence, and believe it is the responsibility of churches and governments to cherish and defend this sacred gift. On these assumptions, we regard the death penalty as a contradiction of both the values of our Christian traditions and the principles of humane government.

It is certainly the God-given duty of government to protect its citizens and prevent crimes against them. We live in a flawed world where malice and violence demand restraint. Capital punishment, however, is unnecessary, unjust, and intolerable in any society which has any lesser alternatives.

Punishment by death in the United States, which has alternatives, neither adds essential protections for our citizens, nor does it permit the restoration of offenders--two fundamental purposes of a criminal justice system. Capital punishment is the needless slaying of a human being who is in custody and no longer poses a threat to public safety. It is always subject to gruesome errors by fallible judges and juries. It is not a demonstrated deterrent to violent crimes. It may, in fact, be a counter-productive incitement to violence; the society which sanctions and practices official vengeance may be setting an example of the brutal devaluation of life which it wants to deter. Moreover, it is an historical, well-documented fact that those who suffer the death penalty are chosen not only by the nature of their crimes, but also by the color of their skins, the size of their bank accounts to purchase legal services, and the skills of their legal counsels. This discrimination against ethnic minorities and the poor is another reason for eliminating this extreme penalty.

Opposition to the death penalty must be accompanied by compassionate support for the families and other loved ones of murdered victims. We mourn the loss of human lives, and we feel the agony and anger of the survivors. Though nothing can compensate for the loss of a loved one, it is the role of our religious communities to offer the balm of God's healing, and it is the responsibility of everyone, including state government, to provide the financial and other means to alleviate a family's distress. We share the public concern about violent crime. We all are potential victims, and we all want effective policies of crime prevention. Yet, political attempts to reinstate the death penalty serve only to mislead the public about the real causes of crime and meaningful deterrents to criminal activity. Revenge is not the solution. It does not overcome grief; it expands human anguish. There are no easy remedies, but we believe that workable policies of crime prevention include the following: 1) humane alternatives to the prison conditions which do more to "criminalize" than to reform many offenders; 2) rigid controls on the sale, purchase, and ownership of handguns; and 3) transformation of the social conditions--especially poverty and racism--which breed crime. Social injustice is a major contributor to crime, and social reform, not retribution, will be a major deterrent to violent crimes.

We therefore, earnestly implore our Governor, our legislators, and our fellow citizens to prevent the restoration of the death penalty in any form in this Commonwealth. We plead for other ways of social protection which do not add death to death, which do not return evil for evil, but ways which humanize us all by bringing love to fuller fruition.

The United Church of Christ has voted consistently to oppose the imposition of the death penalty. General Synods, the biannual national gathering of delegates from the United Church of Christ voted for the repeal or for opposition to the reinstatement of the death penalty in Synod actions in 1969, 1973, 1977, 1979, and 1999. The Massachusetts Conference of the United Church of Christ, comprised of 410 churches and 91,000 members throughout the Commonwealth has approved resolutions against the death penalty or its reinstatement at the 162^nd, 163^rd, 182^nd, 191^st, 192^nd, and 199^th annual meetings of the Conference.

Each of these votes has been based on the clear conviction that the weight of Biblical insight prohibits the taking of any human life. We believe that the death penalty is not a punitive or restorative act. It is rather an act bordering on vengeance. There is little doubt that the civilized world is under attack by a variety of forces of violence. We affirm the right of societies to provide safety and security for their citizens. However, we believe that resorting to violence to end violence is inconsistent with the vision of God’s world called for in the Prophets and embodied in the life and teachings of Jesus.

Where the death penalty has been in use there is documented evidence to suggest that it has been applied more often to the poor, racial and ethnic minorities, and those who have not been able to secure competent legal counsel. Additionally, there have been at least 23 confirmed cases where an innocent person has been executed. In recent years we have witnessed several prisoners condemned to death be proven innocent through DNA testing. We affirm that the taking of life is not only a criminal act, it is an act against God. Though safeguards might be put in place, we know that human institutions are not perfect, nor are they fail safe. To think otherwise is to assume the prerogatives of God.

In a world that seems increasingly to be resorting to violent acts to promote particular world views, it seems doubtful that legally sanctioned violence in the form of the death penalty will contribute significant peace or safety to our society. There is no clear evidence that the death penalty acts as a deterrent.

Common to many religious traditions is something akin to the Golden Rule, “do not unto others.” We believe that a society built upon and embodying those principles is reflective of the kind of restorative and redemptive justice evidenced in the Holy Scriptures. Our call as a society is not to mirror the actions of our age, but rather to image the new age of God’s re-creation.

Bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts reaffirm moral opposition to the death penalty

The Bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts stand in unity with the Episcopal Church, U.S.A in our strong opposition to the sentence of death as a legal option. Our denomination has voiced its opposition consistently, passing resolutions in three General Convention gatherings and in this Diocese.

We believe that the death penalty serves no legitimate function in our society. The death penalty will not improve the safety of our commonwealth. The state already has the power to imprison for life those individuals who have committed egregious crimes and pose a serious threat to others. Nor will the death penalty restore to families and communities the loved ones and safety that they cherished prior to a violent crime or terrorist attack.

The death penalty principally responds to a desire for revenge against the perpetrators of violent crime. We believe that revenge is never a valid motive for personal or state action.

As Christians, we seek to follow the example of Jesus Christ, who heals and gives life to others in a world suffering from violence. We regret all needless killing and hold the families of murder victims in our hearts and prayers. We condemn violence in all its forms and ask our lawmakers to reject any proposal to establish a death penalty in Massachusetts.

Jonathan Vogel-Borne, Field Secretary
New England Yearly Meeting
901 Pleasant St.
Worcester, MA 01602-1908
fieldsec@neym.org
508/754-6760 (Tuesdays)
617/354-3808 (Home Office)

The New England Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) has watched with concern as our various governments have considered reinstituting or expanding the application of capital punishment. After much reflection we collectively and individually wish to reaffirm our long-standing opposition to the death penalty.

We share a deep reverence for human life and understand that the most basic foundations of Christian belief deny us the right to take another life, either in murder or as punishment.

We are aware of both the truly horrendous and the routine acts of violence committed in our society. We share the horror and pain of others at these crimes. Yet we feel that capital punishment is not justice but vengeance. It is certainly not cheaper than life imprisonment—nor has it been shown to reduce the murder rate. The murder by the state, or one by an individual, has a debasing effect on the community. It tends to produce the very brutality it seeks to prevent.

A legal execution requires each of us to participate in another person’s death as citizens and representatives of the government that sanctions this type of punishment. We wish to state emphatically that we do not want our public servants to kill in our name, or our taxes to be used in this way. We will continue to stand in opposition to such efforts.

Reflecting the Friends’ peace-seeking traditions, we wish to encourage emphasis on prevention of criminal acts and a focus on restorative justice and healing, rather than punishment. When punishment is called for, all persons ought to be given an opportunity to feel remorse and to reform. We believe that there is that of God in everyone and that all persons have the potential to respond to some degree to God’s light.

Submitted by Rev. Dr. Thomas D. Wintle, Senior Minister of The First Parish Church in Weston, Massachusetts, on behalf of the Unitarian Universalist Association.

The Unitarian Universalist Association of churches, which includes 141 congregations and 33,000 parishioners in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, has consistently opposed capital punishment.

At the time of the merger of the Unitarians and the Universalist Church in 1961, and on three subsequent occasions, our national General Assemblies have resolved that the death penalty should not be allowed, for the following five reasons:

First, respect for the value of every human life must be incorporated into our laws if it is to be observed by our people; but the death penalty by government sets an example of violence. In the words of UUA President William Sinkford: "We do not steal from the thief, rape the rapist, or torture the torturer. We ought not kill the killer" (GA 05).

Second, modern justice should concern itself with rehabilitation, not retribution. I find it hard to believe that retribution, killing a killer, will bring comfort to grieving families. Linda White, whose 26-year-old pregnant daughter was murdered by two 15yo boys, said last month: "I don't think that the death penalty is victim-friendly," said White, citing three reasons. First, she said that it gives false hope to the families of victims that they will find healing and closure when their loved one's killer is killed. "It doesn't work," she said. "You must set your own timetable for healing." Secondly, White pointed out that the death penalty puts the attention on the perpetrator instead of on the victim. No one remembers the names of those killed in Oklahoma City, but everyone knows the names of their killers. White's third reason is that the death penalty soaks up much-needed funds that could be better spent on sorely-needed victim services.*

Third, it has not been proved that fear of capital punishment is a deterrent to crime;

Fourth, human judgments are not infallible, and no penalty should be used which cannot be revoked in case of error;

And finally, capital punishment has not always been used impartially among all economic and racial groups in America.

As pastor of the largest religious community in Newton, I wish to urge the panel to recommend against the reinstatement of the death penalty in Massachusetts. In my parish of over 10,000 people we have a very active social justice group that has been working tirelessly to oppose any return of the death penalty in our state and, indeed, in New England. Some of my parishioners went recently to the execution in Connecticut simply to witness in silence to the needless killing of another human being. My parish has printed an excellent brochure which we use in educating our parishioners against the death penalty. We join with the bishops of the United States in committing ourselves to eliminate this form of punishment from our country. We invoke the memory of the late Holy Father, John Paul II. May his efforts to end the death penalty come to fruition!