The Difficult Next Step, Can it be Done?

 

If we look at addressing the criminal system from the standpoint of moral influence, I believe we are called to challenge and address our broken system. By making this shift away from solely punishing the criminal and moving towards restoration and rehabilitation of the sinner as well as the harmed community, we then live out Jesus’ teachings of love for friend and foe alike. A culture of right versus wrong dictated by those who hold the power and authority – towards a culture that recognizes crime as something that must be addressed, but allows for healing and restoration on all sides is how I believe this atonement theology challenges us to act.

This shift in culture will be challenging for our nation because the impact it will have on the many beneficiaries of our present system; beneficiaries who wield more political power than those incarcerated could ever muster. Michelle Alexander points out in her book that the revenues generated from the expansion of our prison system would be adversely impacted by any reduction in prisons or juvenile detention centers. Furthermore, it would not only affect the economic benefits generated from the system, but also impact over 700,000 prison and jail guards, administrators, service workers, and other personnel who are employed as a result of this expansion[1] and the rural communities that benefit from the expanding prison system often becoming their largest the employer in their community.

But how do we move beyond the discussion of atonement theology and faithfully step towards relevancy tackling present-day issues of injustice such as the U. S. Criminal System? I would venture to say that we could come up with endless reasons why not to challenge ourselves and not move our theology of atonement towards lasting reconciliation, restoration, and redemption. It would be much easier to keep our blinders on rather than face the truth about the dismal state of our criminal justice system. If we did not try to address this issue in a tangible way – as the Body of Christ – theology atonement will only remain a theological discussion for scholars alone.

If we look at the death of Christ on the cross – redeeming us as individuals for our sins, why wouldn’t we apply that same redeeming action towards a disenfranchised group deeply impaired by our criminal system? Why would we not structure a criminal system that looks to liberate the criminal after time served, or seek to rehabilitate the juvenile, before habits are too established? It seems to me that stopping short of this would make Christ’s death appear to be in vain. Perhaps this is heretical, but I want to challenge us to look beyond the theory towards action.

Jens Soering, author and convicted felon for the murders of a Virginia couple – the parents of his then girlfriend, posed a provocative statement when he wrote, “When God chose to take on human flesh, he did not become a priest or a monk, a king or a general, a poet or a philosopher. Instead, he became a death row prisoner, a condemned criminal executed alongside two thieves.”[2] Soering, who is serving his time in the U. S. prison system, contends that Christ was being intentional when he placed himself as a criminal, alongside other common criminals. As Soering wrote, “he chose to let himself be executed as a criminal with the specific intent of revealing the root of all evil: the refusal to acknowledge that even your worst enemy is a child of God.” [3] Christ as the first criminal, instead of an angelic and unblemished figure, challenges how we may view the prisoners and the system that holds them. Time and time again in Jesus’ ministry he was on the margins, reaching out to the poor, the mentally unstable, the sick, the estranged, the prostitute. As Christians we should be doing the same. At the end of Soering’s book, The Convict Christ, he poses a haunting question, “So, are you a real Christian?”[4] This question and the examples of Christ’s love revealed in the Gerasene demoniac, the woman caught in adultery, the prodigal son and so many others, are examples of how we as Christians are called to identify with the criminal and call out the system’s injustices as injustices against all humanity not only the individual. What we should be continually hear ringing in our ears is what Christ said to his disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’ (Matthew 25: 40)

Is this even possible? Can the strong tide against the criminal be reversed? I don’t know, but I do know that we are not asked to answer that question. We are asked to live out what Jesus taught us on the cross. Time and time again scripture has shown this and it also has revealed how difficult it can be. It will undoubtedly be slow and tedious work, but if we approach this from a community level, not a state or federal governmental level, I believe there will be better and longer lasting results. Taking a lesson from our sisters and brothers in South Africa, who have suffered greatly at the hands of the Apartheid movement, their approach to crimes – even the atrocities of apartheid – is focused on the wholeness and restoration of the community, not solely on the criminal and his/her crime. The work that South Africa did with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission did not garner instantaneous results, but transformation did occur and it still continues.

I do not believe that change will come from the top down. Power and money are too entrenched within our governmental system, as shown through the War on Drugs campaign. Furthermore, its performance has been abysmal and it is hard to deny this when you look at the statistics regarding our U. S. criminal system that were cited earlier. I don’t believe that there was or is an interest by those holding the power to make the necessary changes to break the cycle of incarceration that is perpetuated by the current legal system. I believe it was their interest to maintain control of the power at the expense of their fellow human beings.

If communities of faith partner with other organizations within communities the opportunity for transformation – one individual at a time – may be possible. It is happening already throughout the country. For example, Centinela Youth Services in California works with juveniles who have a criminal record to “follow a model of behavior intervention and victim offender mediation,” in an effort to change the destructive behavior of the juvenile before negative patterns become too entrenched.[5] Through trained mediation the juvenile offender meets with the victim and is given the opportunity to ask for forgiveness and also hear some truth telling from the victim as to how their crime impacted them. In turn, the victim is given the opportunity to be heard, and to seek answers as to the reasons for the juvenile’s unlawful and harming behavior. The healing power of Christ’s love through the Holy Spirit can take place for both people and a young life is given a new chance and direction. The Reverend Becca Stevens and her campaign, “Love Heals” as shown through her inception of Thistle Farms and Magdalene, is another example of the work of Christ being lived out through the work of faithful individuals. Her program has successfully moved women out of prostitution and helping them to be free of drugs, continual incarceration, and a life on the streets. [6]

The Church is the Body of Christ out in the world. Receiving the free gift of redemption comes with responsibility. It is our Christian obligation and duty to speak for those who do not have a voice. By educating our congregations through a book study and discussion on Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, – as recommended by Resolution A011 – we can begin to recognize that justice is not only served when the criminal in punished, but justice is served when all parties involved are made whole. Furthermore, as faith communities take action towards transforming their small corner of the world, it will have a reverberating impact on the greater society. Restorative justice needs to be witnessed and experienced through relationships, rather than waiting for the powers that be to make legislative changes first. As the changes slowly transforms communities and the hearts of those in the community, it will be the impetus for a groundswell to rise up and demand reform. I am not naïve enough to think this is the fail proof answer or it is even the entire answer. In fact, there will be failures and we will have to have the resolve not to abandon our responsibilities at the first sign of failure. We must recognize that is often through failures that better ideas and program emerge.

When I began investigating the U. S. Criminal system, I had no idea what I would learn and how big and complex the issue truly was. I feel as if I have just begun to scratch the surface in my understanding this issue. It is much easier to remain ignorant believing our criminal justice system is too big to tackle. But I do not think that is what it means to be called a follower of Jesus. I don’t believe that Jesus taking on human form, walking with us, helping those who were with him to see and experience with their own eyes the power of Jesus’ transformative love was in vain. Instead I believe that his example and sacrifice is the common thread that weaves and connects each of us together, victim and criminal alike.

[1] Pg. 230, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, Michelle Alexander.

[2] Pg. 1 The Convict Christ, Jens Soering.

[3] pg. 125, The Convict Christ, Jens Soering.

[4] pg. 126, The Convict Christ, Jens Soering.

[5] http://www.bravenewfilms.org/restorativejustice

[6] http://thistlefarms.org/pages/our-model

 

The Disconnect Between Atonement and our U. S. Criminal System

World map showing number of prisoners per 100,000 citizens

 The United States has both the world’s largest prison population and the world’s highest per capita incarceration rate.^[1][2]

I often try to find a way to apply theology to real life situations. To put present day “meat” on what has been debated back and forth by theologians for centuries. This is why I gravitate towards the atonement theology of Moral Influence. I do not think it is the only theory of atonement, but what resonates with me is that it requires us to move beyond ourselves and use the actions and teachings of Christ as our model for how we should be in the world.

However, when we take a look at how we address those who commit crimes within our society today, I would suggest that Penal Substitution is the atonement theology that best applies to our criminal system. Penal Substitution focuses on retribution, ensuring that the criminal pays for the crime. With this theology, the focus is on the sin and the sinner paying for that sin. If the judicial system and the laws that uphold the system primarily focus on the criminal making retribution, what does that say to the victim and the criminal’s life beyond the prison sentence? As Benjamin L. Corey, author, blogger, and prominent figure within the Emerging Church Movement, wrote in his article titled, Justice Broken: How a Poor Theology of the Cross Created American’s Broken Justice System:

‘For 500 years [since Calvin introduced penal substitutionary atonement] we have focused our understanding of God and God’s justice as the need for punishment instead of the need for reconciliation, and this has led to a broken framework in our country in regard to justice. When we allow this broken framework to influence the application of justice (as we have) we see criminal acts in terms of “need to punish as justice” instead of “need to restore as justice.” Yes, there are many criminal acts that require a person to be removed from society for their protection and for ours, but this theological framework has caused us to view “justice served” when a person receives what we feel is an appropriate sentence instead of seeing “justice served” when both the offender and the offended (even if that’s just society in general) have had their lives reconciled (perhaps not with each other, but in a general sense).  Justice becomes punishment, not healing and restoration.’

This is a hard to reverse, particularly in our western culture. It is easier to focus on the criminal and not grapple with the responsibility of restoring the lives of both victim and criminal. Just as Jesus asked one of the invalids by the side of the pool called Bethzatha, whose illnesses were often explained away by the belief that they were receiving punishment for sins committed, ‘Do you want to be made well?’ (John 5:6) – what would be our cultures response if we looked at addressing the crime and criminal – with the same question? What if we asked it of the victim, the victim’s family, or society-at-large that has been victimized? I would suggest that Penal Substitution is easier to implement and places no responsibility on our society to grapple with the systemic problems of our justice system. Where has this form of atonement theology gotten us in regards to becoming a more loving society? As Christians how have we lived out our baptismal covenant if we only focus on the criminal as needing to pay for their crime?

The startling statistics surrounding our U. S. prison system should cause us to demand answers in the very least and action at best. Our criminal justice system has increased exponentially over the last forty yeas. For approximately fifty years until 1972 the rate of incarcerations had been holding steady with approximately 161 people imprisoned to every 100, 000 citizens. By 2012 the incarceration rates were four times higher than that of 1972. By 2012 there were 707 individuals imprisoned per 100, 000 citizens.[1] These are astounding statistics and they do not reflect a system that is doing well by its citizens, particularly those people of color who have been impacted greatly since the political parties launched the War of Drugs campaign.

With the changes brought about by the Civil Rights Laws, no longer could the Jim Crow Laws perpetuate the racial and economic prejudices of our society. Things needed to be shifted away from the racist language and laws that kept black Americans as second class citizens. Instead something else had to be constructed that still held down black America, but was disguised by more politically correct language. The War of Drugs was the new message that took hold in both political parties and reinforced through a willing media. For example, George Wallace and Richard Nixon, both Presidential candidates for the Republican Party had a campaign of “Law and Order”. This message played out in campaign speeches and graphic television commercials which highlighted violent protests depicting minorities as the instigators as the norm and playing into the fears of the average citizen. The press was only too happy to engage in this campaign. By 1968, Gallop Poll indicated that 81% of those responding to their poll believed that “law and order was broken down in this county,” and the majority of those polled blamed, “Negroes who start riots” and “Communists.” [2]

This started what would become a campaign that continues to this day and was perpetuated by both political parties. It reconfigured our criminal justice system by incarcerating criminals for non-violent crimes at alarming rates and perpetuating a revolving prison door for those who did not have the economic and societal means to break out of the prison system cycle – these people being predominately young men of color.

The “War on Drugs” campaign fueled a new business. The government poured large amounts of cash grants into the state penal systems that focused their law enforcement on the “War on Drugs.”[3] Harsher laws were established and police abused their authority by stopping drivers for minor violations and requesting their cars to be searched. Even though no one is able to search one’s private property without a search warrant, most of those who were pulled over complied immediately out of fear and wanting to obey someone who clearly held the power in the situation. This practice, known as Pipeline Tactics, was a training program put forward by the Drug Enforcement Agency in 1984. Police officers were trained on how to exploit a routine traffic stop by turning it into an opportunity to search for illegal drugs even though there was not just cause. The police would target groups, particularly minority groups using intimidation tactics to search cars and property without a search warrant.[4]

This is a very complicated and convoluted issue, but it is clear through the work of Michelle Alexander and others that our U. S. Criminal System is not creating a safer country  and I would argue that we are a nation that is becoming more disenfranchised.

As I move the focus back to atonement, it seems clear that the Penal Substitution theory is not making our society safer, nor unifying communities, or our citizens as a whole. Perhaps our focus should not be on retributive justice for the criminal, but we should look at our penal system from a completely different angle; an angle that looks at restoration and rehabilitation for the offender and reconciliation for the victim and larger community.

If we look at addressing the criminal system from the standpoint of Moral Influence, I believe we are called to challenge and address our broken system. By making this shift away from solely punishing the criminal and moving towards restoration and rehabilitation of the sinner as well as the harmed community, we then live out Jesus’ teachings of love for friend and foe alike. A culture of right versus wrong dictated by those who hold the power and authority – to a culture that recognizes crime as something that must be addressed, but allows for healing and restoration on all sides is how I believe  atonement theology challenges us to act.

[1] http://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/5

[2] pg. 46, The New Jim Crow.

[3] pg. 73, The New Jim Crow.

[4] pg.70, The New Jim Crow.

Now for a bit of atonement theory…

 

Atonement, the reconciliation that occurs among God, humanity, and creation through the work of Christ has several theories that have developed over the centuries. In order to enter into this conversation it might be helpful to have a general understanding of the main theories of atonement that have formed over the centuries – they are: Ransom/Christus Victor, Satisfaction, Moral Influence, and Penal Substitution. I will provide you a basic overview, but also direct you to a video that outlines the theories. If you want to delve a bit deeper into this subject – have at it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D72WUeHlRM8

Ransom Theory: Origen (d. 254 AD) first conceptualized this theory and it was the primary theory for over 1000 years. The premise behind this theory is following the fall of Adam and Eve, God abandoned us to the devil and in order to take us back God needed to pay a ransom and that ransom was the death of his Son, Jesus. Therefore the death of Jesus was the ransom paid for the sins of humankind. Christus victor is also grouped with the ransom theory. Developed by Gusaf Aulen (1879 – 1977) Christ’s death was seen as a victory over Satan. Not only did he overcome Satan, but Jesus also overcame death by  resurrection.

Satisfaction Theory: Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) put forth a theory that humanity owed God a debt for all its sins and Christ offered himself to satisfy that debt, allowing humanity to reconcile its sins before God.

Penal Satisfaction Theory: Emerging during the Reformation period, it was developed by Martin Luther and John Calvin – among others –during a period in history where there was a need to bring the greater society under the law. Similar to satisfaction theory, God forgave humanity for all its sins, by accepting Jesus as the one to pay the penalty for all of humanity.

As I mentioned previously, I have identified the moral influence as the theology of atonement that I believe can best address the U. S. Prison System and move us toward restorative justice so those who are incarcerated pay their debt are able to re-enter their community as contributing members. Furthermore, it can put a mirror up to the present system that clearly places obstacles in the path of those of lower economic status recycling them back into the prison system over and over again. These laws that clearly impact specifically young men of color are what Michelle Alexander refers to as the new Jim Crow.

The Moral Influence Theory recognizes that Christ’s death on the cross was a loving sacrifice and revealed the supreme love that God had for humankind. Unlike other theories that connect Jesus’ death to triumph over evil (Christus victor), to satisfy God’s honor (satisfaction) or to restore God’s honor (penal substitution), the moral influence theory understands the sacrifice Jesus made with his death on the cross as the compelling reason for us to change our sinful ways, to be and live more as Jesus. In other words, to demonstrate the same compassion and love for our fellow human being as Jesus showed for the marginalized, the poor, and the meek. As early as the writings of Clement of Alexandria (150 – 215) it was recognized that Jesus’ death was the enduring love that God had for us by bringing Jesus into our human world as a living example of an exemplary life. Consequently the moral influence theory is more subjective than the other theories, particularly the satisfaction theory brought forth by Anselm.

It was Peter Abelard (1079 -1142), known as an outstanding theologian, philosopher, and scholar of his time, who was primarily credited for the development of this theory. He wrote, “the purpose and cause of the incarnation was that Christ might illuminate the world by his wisdom, and excite it to love of himself.”[1]

Unlike the ransom theory, the moral theory is not a payment to Satan, or the restoration of God’s honor as in the satisfaction theory. Instead, God’s expansive love is what is important, not compensation or victory. The responsibility of the atonement is on the Christian who desires a fuller life in Christ and is being led by the example of the life and death of Jesus. His sacrifice for us should draw from us the desire to live out a life that Jesus’ pure life showed us. His death is seen as a result of his actions and is within a larger context of his life, death, and resurrection.

[1] (pg. 332, McGrath)

Do Atonement and the U. S. Prison System Intersect?

prisoner

One of my assignments for my ethics class last semester was to review one of the moral resolutions that was adopted at 78^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church and reflect on it from an ethical standpoint. I took an interest in the A011 that was titled, “Recommit to Criminal Justice Reform, Study, and Advocacy.” It was a weighty title for an equally weighty and complicated issue regarding the condition of the United States Criminal Justice System. To be honest, I was ignorant of how our justice system targets vulnerable constituencies, creating a system that keeps particularly young men of color recycling through the prison system without the benefit nor the hope of reconciliation and rehabilitation.  I began to wonder how does the theology of atonement and our prison system intersect – or don’t they? Often we speak of our sins and the reconciliation of our sins through Jesus Christ as individuals. In other words, atonement is not about our responsibility to ensure reconciliation for the greater good, but mainly for ourselves and our own walk with Christ. But that is not what we are called to do as followers of Jesus Christ. So much of what Jesus taught those in the first century and us today is the importance of and responsibility to the greater community. In our Baptismal Covenant we willingly confirm, with God’s help, “to strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.”[1] So how are we helping others to be healed through God’s reconciling love and forgiveness? How are we fully living out our Baptismal Covenant? These questions and others will be explored on this blog. It is my belief that of all the theories of atonement the moral influence theory is the one that best addresses the full meaning of atonement – not just for ourselves as individuals, but also for our work with others.

I didn’t know anyone who is or was incarcerated, and as I delved into the harsh statistics of our criminal system, I realized that the system did not impact me, a white, privileged woman as much as it did my sisters and brothers of color who were not born into the advantages I inherited through birth. I had heard about the “War on Drugs” campaign but I wasn’t aware of the impact the campaign had on people of color and those who live on the economic margins of society. When I began to delve into the issue, what immediately stood out to me was the fact that, “proportionately, the United States has the most jailed individuals in the world. With less than 5 percent of the global population, the United States holds almost 25 percent of the world’s prisoners.” [2] In a country that takes pride in being number one in many things, I do not believe that this number one ranking gives us bragging rights. I began to read with interest about the background and reasoning behind bringing Resolution A011 to the attention of the 78^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church. With this resolution it was the intent of the Episcopal Church to renew its commitment to criminal justice reform and to “develop an educational toolkit and advocacy measures for church members and church policy.”[3]

The New York Times Bestseller, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, by Michelle Alexander, was a book that did the detailed and honest research that exposed a new racial caste system. Jim Crow laws were local and state laws that enforced racial segregation beginning with the reconstruction following the Civil War through the civil rights era of the nineteen sixties. What was evident through Alexander’s research and subsequent book was that Jim Crow was not dead, it had just been reimagined. Even author Alexander herself was a reluctant believer of this reality until she began to delve into how the “War on Drugs” campaign reconfigured our prison system. As she wrote, “never did I seriously consider the possibility that a new racial caste system was operating in this country. The new system had been developed and implemented swiftly and it was largely invisible, even to people, like me, who spent most of their waking hours fighting for justice.”[4]

Ironically, before the War on Drugs became a household phrase, many criminologists in the mid-1970’s were beginning to believe that prison systems would become obsolete. The 1973 recommendation put forward by the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals was to place a moratorium on the building of new prisons and support the closure of all juvenile centers. This was based on the fact that the prisons and juvenile centers did not prevent crime, but in fact created more crime.[5] However, regardless of this recommendation, the war on drugs, first uttered by President Richard Nixon, was catapulted into the American mainstream by President Ronald Reagan when he launched the official announcement of the War on Drugs in 1982. While most of us – including myself – believed that the War on Drugs was in response to the escalating usage and concern of crack cocaine, the campaign was launched before crack cocaine was a crisis within our inner city neighborhoods that were predominately poor and black.[6] What followed was a well publicized and media driven campaign that catapulted this issue into the American mainstream that would provide the foundation on which the federal government built a new caste system.

What do the harsh realities of our U. S. Criminal System have to do with the theology of atonement – one might ask. Quite a lot, one might respond! As Christians we believe that we are forgiven for our sins through the death of Jesus Christ. It is through his sacrifice that all of humanity is reconciled to God. Much has been written about the various theologies of atonement and there are great debates as to which one is “the” correct theology of atonement. But in my studies and reflections I have come to believe what Adam J. Johnson wrote in his book, Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, “we ought to witness to the fittingness of the atonement: to demonstrate how the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ brings together a wide array of benefits for the sake of the reconciliation of all things to God, that we might have as full an understanding as possible of the work God accomplished in Christ.[7]

– Thanks for joining me, more reflections to come….

[1] Pg. 3015, Book of Common Prayer.

[2] Religion and Politics article, “The New Jim Crow: Churches respond to Mass Incarceration,” by Alfredo Garcia, August 13, 2013.

[3] A011, Recommit to Criminal Justice Reform Study and Advocacy, http://www.generalconvention.org/gc/2015-resolutions/A011/original_english_text

[4] Pg. 3, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness, Michelle Alexander. 

[5] pg. 8 The new Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness, Michelle Alexander.

[6] pg. 5, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness, Michelle Alexander. 

[7] p. 5,  Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, Adam J. Johnson.

Do You Want to be Made Well?

It was Monday morning after spring break and I walked into the Chapel of the Good Shepherd for morning worship. As with every Monday morning service, it is a service that brings diversity and exploration to our worship. Seminarians organize and lead this service, bringing the worshipping community different formats of worship to experience. Today was a healing service. I don’t know about you, but I find healing services to be very powerful. I often enter into a sacred space thinking I don’t need specific healing, but in reality, we all need healing. Healing prayers for me is like receiving balm for the soul.

Not only was I washed up in the beauty of the liturgy, prayers, and music, but also the question posed during the homily caused me to wonder. The question, “Do you want to be made well?” was based on the Gospel reading John 5: 1b-9 (the healing of the lame man on the Sabbath). This question struck me because in my class on the Theology of Atonement I am exploring the United States Judicial System and more specifically the startling disparity of incarceration rates between white prisoners and those of color. I wonder if this question – Do you want to be made well – was posed to the accused, the accuser, or the greater society, what would be their answers. How would we respond if a known criminal replied with a resounding YES! How would society, or the justice system, or those who the criminal hurt respond? I don’t pose these questions to hear firm answers. I pose these questions to others and myself as I begin to explore how we as a society are contributing to a system that appears to be a revolving door for those who commit crimes and sometimes the only door for young men of color and with little economic means.

As we approach this topic, I have no doubt it will conjure up many questions for all of us. Whenever society speaks about sin, doing right from wrong, hurting another person, committing a crime – questions rise up more than answers, questions such as:

• What does it mean to atone for one’s sins?
• Didn’t Christ die on the cross so that we could be forgiven of our sins and have eternal life with God?
• By forgiving someone, does that get them “off the hook” for what they did?
• What about the Bible passages that speak of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,[1] isn’t that very clear?
• Why are we concerned for the criminal, shouldn’t our focus be on the innocent and ensuring a safe society?
• What does our Baptismal Covenant say about how we are to treat others?

All these questions and many more spin around us. As I enter into this topic about the U.S. Justice System I will explore the strategies of Christian theology of atonement and whether or not the penal system is successful in creating reconciliation, understanding, and redemption for the criminal and the society as a whole. In other words, do WE want to be made well?

 

[1] Exodus 21:24 and Matthew 5:38

Who writes a blog on Atonement??

Blogs are started for many reasons. Some people love to write and it is a good outlet to share ideas and thoughts. Others have a product or advice to share that can be helpful to the millions of people who surf the Internet for “how to” ideas. And if we are honest, there are those who just like to focus on themselves and their blogs – while entertaining – are just for self-interest. And then there are those of us who start a blog because it is a class assignment.

In the class I am taking, A Theology of Atonement, we are examining how “reconciliation occurs among God, humanity, and creation through the work of Christ.” In an effort to make this theological discussion and study applicable to the 21^st century, we will also “implement a practical project that accentuates the relevance of atonement” in today’s society. The combination of the theoretical with the practical – this is where you come in.

I will be examining the US Criminal Justice System – and its dubious honor of incarcerating 25 percent of the world’s prisoners, with the majority of them being people of color. [i] Through this blog I will post some of my thoughts and discoveries on the various theologies of atonement and how they play out regarding this issue. Clearly the US Justice System and its disparities in treatment of those incarcerated based on color, gender, and economic status needs to be addressed.

Our Baptismal Covenant requires of us that with God’s help, we will “strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.” I wonder if we as a body of Christ are truly addressing the injustices of our judicial system or are we electing to remain silent and impassive, so those with less of a voice continue to be marginalized.

Join me for this exploration. I am not sure what I will find and how I will articulate it to the greater audience, but I will do my best. Feel free to follow along, pose questions, and challenge my thoughts. This is not a contest of winners vs. losers, but an open dialog about a penal system that needs to be reexamined – in the very least, or completely overhauled. I believe God is in the midst of all of this, and perhaps we can begin to examine this issue from a perspective of restoration and reconciliation and how we as human beings can be a part of the dialog and solution.

Thanks for joining me…

[i] Religion & Politics article, “The New Jim Crow: Churches Respond to Mass Incarceration,” by Alfredo Garcia, August 13, 2013