| | Capital Punishment, pt. 4: Woman Caught in AdulteryThey went each to his own house, but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" This
they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring
against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But
when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older
ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." This
story is one of the most well-known stories of the New
Testament. It
is found in most bibles from John 7:53 to John 8:11. Many
have used this to show that Christ is against, or eliminating, capital
punishment.
Others, on the other hand, have argued that since the Jews had no
authority to exercise capital punishment under Roman law, and that the
charges were a sham, that Jesus was mitigating the punishment because
it was illegitimate.
Some
things to note: I said "most bibles" have it located in John.
While in modern translations it is always located in the same place for consistency, in the early manuscripts it appears in different locations in John, if at all, and sometimes the story
appears in Luke. While most agree it is early and probably
authentic,
the question of canonicity is difficult, and we should be careful not to
draw too much new doctrine from just this
passage. Indeed, it may even be more prudent not to address this at all when developing a biblical and systematic theology of capital punishment, but since it is often cited, I would be remiss to ignore it.
We
should note what is not important in this passage. In particular, if Jesus doesn't address the issue, it's probably not relevent to the discussion. For example, it doesn't
really matter that only the adulteress, and not the adulterer, was brought
before Jesus. Some have written that this shows that since only a woman was brought, the charges were contrived, and there was no adultery at all, and that the woman was being framed. In similar lines of reason, others have thought that adultery did occur, but that the adulterer was safely hidden away, and that to punish the adulteress without the adulterer would be a grave injustice. Neither of these was the reason that Jesus mitigates the punishment because Jesus never questions the actually charges. In fact, Jesus
acts in a way consistent with assuming guilt in this matter. Otherwise, the "He who is without sin" and "Go and sin no more" verses have no relevance in the immediate context (although they obviously have broader implications as well).
Also, it is pretty useless
to
speculate on what Jesus was
writing. No, what we should focus on is what
Jesus actually says, and then see how it applies to capital punishment,
if at all.
It is true that the Jewish
authorities did not have the authority to put the adulteress to death.
They would have to appeal to the Roman authority to execute her, as
they did in Jesus' trial. So the question they are putting to Jesus is
whether the Jews have authority to apply Mosaic law when their rulers, the Romans, prohibit them. So the question is: who's authority ultimately wins out?
Now, lets look at what Jesus says. First, he says, "Let
him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at
her." Now, does this mean that only sinless people are allowed to punish
people? If so, no
punishment would be able to be carried out at all! But this goes against what it clearly taught in Romans 13, so I don't
think this
is what Jesus is saying. I
think Jesus is affirming his own authority to punish. The statement "He who is
without
sin" is a reference to himself in contrast to the rest of humanity, and so only Jesus is in a position
to decide whether someone gets punished or goes free. Indeed, the crowd, anxious to stone the woman, leaves when Jesus permits only the sinless could do this. The only person left is Jesus, the sinless messiah. When he asks, "Has no one condemned you?" and states, "Neither do I," he is showing the contrast between the sinful, who cannot condemn the adulteress, and himself, who can.
Secondarily, as we saw in
Romans 13,
God gives authority to civil governments to exercise
punishment. This authority is delegated to them by God, which is how the government can punish without being sinless. (The
Pharisees clearly don't have that civil authority, but that's not
really important, because the fact remains that Jesus does have the
authority.) At
the end of the story, Jesus tells the woman, "Neither do I condemn you;
go, and from now on sin no more." Jesus is not saying that he
does not
condemn the woman hecause she is not guilty, because if that were the
case, "sin no more" would not make any sense. So we must
conclude that
the adulteress is guilty, and Jesus is mitigating that
punishment, rather than bringing an innocent woman to justice.
So we see that Jesus has the authority to exercise capital punishment on the woman caught in adultery, but he does not. So what does this mean as far as capital punishment? He is not saying authorities need to be sinless to execute punishment, for the civil authorities under the Mosaic law had this power, and Romans 13 seems to support that the civil government will continue to have this power. Jesus also doesn't seem to be saying anything particular to capital punishment, as if capital punishment should be overthrown but other forms of restraining evil are legitimate, because the "He who is without sin" argument can apply to punishment in general as well.
Ultimately, I think Jesus forgives the woman and mitigates her punishment to demonstrate his authority to forgive sins and remove judgment. This ultimately
points to his atoning work on the cross, in which he takes on capital punishment on behalf of his people.
|