A Gospel Way That Is Neither Liberal Nor Conservative
Okay, so I'm home on my day off supposedly finishing a fence project that I started last summer. The wife and kids are gone to the zoo to give me peace and space. I look forward to their return even as I enjoy work in peace. As I work I'm listening to the radio and what I'm listening to is hacking me off.
At present I'm listening to Michael Medved. He's talking about this story which I agree is horrific. But the way he's talking about it reveals the paucity of his conservative Jewish worldview.
How does liberal politics deal with sex offenders? Here's in a nutshell (the fence awaits my attention after all!) what a liberal view says: criminals are not bad people, yes they've done some bad things, but if they get a better view on life via rehabilitation (like education only later in life after you've screwed up), they can reenter society.
How does conservative politics deal with sex offenders? Here's the summary: criminals are bad people, that's why they've done bad things, they may be convinced that the spoils of crime don't add up to the benefits of right living, if so they can be released but if not keep them locked up and never let them back in society. This last phrase is what Medved is saying about the recently arrested man who kept the sex slave for 19 years.
Here's my hasty analysis... the liberal gets it wrong because they don't see people as really broken and sinful. The conservative gets it wrong because although they see people as truly broken they don't believe true internal transformation is possible.
The gospel way to think about this (and apologies in advance if this offends you, but if it offends you, you've got more of the gospel to understand my friend) would follow these lines: we're all broken and sinful including sexually, we express our brokenness in different ways, some people are more careful with their sexual perversion than others, but all people - NO MATTER WHAT kind of sexual perversion they have (and we all have them, including the writer and the reader!) - can be freed from the power of that perversion by conversion under the gospel and kept from that perversion by the power of the Holy Spirit.
This perspective is lacking in Medved. Sadly it's also lacking in other conservative talking heads who espouse Christianity or a form of it. We can't leave "perverts" hopeless or we leave ourselves hopeless. Either the gospel applied by the Holy Spirit CAN transform the "very worst" of sinners or its simply something to help us "lesser sinners" get along in life. Which is it?
posted by Matthew Bohling @ 4:11 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
While I believe in the power of the gospel to convert the perversions of sex offenders, in the case of those convicted of crimes against innocent victims, like child molestors, I think it is a terrible risk to release back into society for the sake of testing the power of the gospel.
I do not think they should be trusted no matter what they claim about the gospel (not that I think the judicial system cares what inmates claim about their conversions).
Mike,
I was not trying to develop a full penology related to sex offenders. I purposefully didn't express an opinion (and I'm not sure what it would be!) on that. I'm more concerned about the hopelessness particularly conservatives have in the real change possible given a new heart.
That is sad that some Christians regard certain sex offenders as hopeless cases. When they do this they take a dim view of the gospel, I suppose. You do include penology in your blog, so it's open game for commenting, IMO. So, as someone who thinks any sexual pervert can be converted, I STILL don't think society should ever allow them access to victims ever again. It's just too big a risk to take, even if the intent were to test the gospel, and especially not to trade the offender's rights for the victims' security.
We might be addressing two different points, but I would hate to see more accurate views of the gospel result in more lenient treatment of offenders. I'm saying that's what you're getting at anyway (and I'm not sure what you ARE getting at).
So again, I can agree that is sucks that some conservatives take a hopeless view of offenders.
Mike,
I think we actually agree. I'm not for "early release" for sex offenders. If they are released ever they should be heavily monitored, registered, and kept tabs on, ideally by a gospel community as well as law enforcement. However, if they aren't released, they should view their "release" from slavery to sexual sin by Christ as an opportunity to spread that within prison. My greatest concern is that conservatives - without the gospel - don't think "these people" can ever be changed. That's sad because the Holy Spirit is bigger than any idolatry. I think we agree on that and that was the main point I wanted to make in the post even if I didn't do that very well.
Yes, I would say we very closely agree. In addition to the safeguards you listed, I am also a proponent of heavier penalties for child abusers, which you might oppose. I wouldn't say that you didn't make your point well, unless you meant for this blog entry to be a shut-down statement. Isn't the point of the comment feature on this blog to facilitate discourse? If that is the case, then you did well, because you have caused discourse and thought.
Oh, and "I'm saying" above should have read "I'm not saying".
Mike,
Haven't thought about penalties for child abusers. I'm funny in that I guess. I tend to think about "structural issues" more than particulars of any individual case. It much more pains me that the law - in the pagan West - doesn't help people any more see the depravity of their own heart but rather seeks to excuse sin. So the law has lost the teeth God designed it to have in the Romans 2:4 sense of a painful kindness that ought to lead you to repentance. I suppose penalties have also been reduced in the same movement and are another way that enforcement of the law in the form of sanctions is also less painful to offenders.
Post a Comment
<< Home