Reflections: Analysis 4

Now that we have discussed the moral implications of the death penalty according to the Old and New Testaments, we must consider how to incorporate our modern context into the equation. Is it possible that Jews and Christians in Biblical times interpreted the Bible in light of their cultural situation in the Ancient Near East? Absolutely. Is modern society, along with its accompanying culture, significantly different from Biblical times? Absolutely. This is where critical traditioning comes in.

Critical traditioning, coined by theologian Ellen Davis, “denotes the willingness to engage in radical rethinking of a formerly accepted theological position” (Davis 170). In this way, it is vital to interpret the Bible through the lens of historical and contemporary social, political, and cultural factors. In other words, there is a dynamic relationship between culture and religion. As time goes on, the hermeneutical gap widens, prompting us to reinterpret the Bible to align with our evolving cultural context.

When considering critical traditioning, I immediately think of the story of Cain and Abel. Instead of sentencing Cain to death for murdering his brother, God curses the ground and makes Cain a “fugitive and a wanderer on the earth” (Genesis 4:3-12). Why? Likely, God did sentence Cain to death because He wanted him to a) feel the weight of his sins through a guilty conscience, b) partake in unfulfilling work for the rest of his life, and c) reproduce to populate the earth. It is important to consider the third point’s cultural context. For instance, God had just created humanity and felt that Cain had a duty to help populate the earth. This is clearly not an issue in today’s world, as the global population has recently reached a whopping 8 billion people. However, if we use this line of reasoning, it becomes clear that from the beginning of time, culture has influenced divine living. Because modern society holds different cultural practices and ideals than those in Biblical times, perhaps it would be permissible to interpret the Bible through a modern-day cultural lens. With this in mind, join me as I analyze Camus’ use of critical traditioning. For context, the guillotine was still being used until 1981, almost two centuries after the French Revolution. During this period, over 10,000 decapitations occurred for political reasons. With this modern context in mind, Camus uses critical traditioning to challenge a longstanding practice (i.e. the death penalty) in response to the French government’s misuse of it. While the death penalty was permitted in the Old Testament for a handful of crimes, Camus proposes in Reflections on the Guillotine that it should be abolished altogether in light of this cultural context.

Additionally, theologian Richard B. Hays interprets Christ’s teachings on non-retaliation and non-violence through critical traditioning. Hays underlines the problem surrounding Christ and culture perfectly, claiming that the New Testament seems to suggest that violence should never be employed in the defense of justice, but “human experience presents us over and over again with situations that appear to require violent action to oppose evil” (Hays 317-318). Hays points to Matthew 5, which states that Christians should “not resist an evildoer” (Matthew 5:39). Hays interprets this statement in a literal sense, extending Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount to every situation, even when physical harm is likely. While Camus would say that Hays’ pacifism is too extreme for the modern context, he would agree that society should abolish capital punishment under the principles of non-violence and non-retaliation. Camus highlights how revenge is a “punishment that penalizes without forestalling,” which is essentially the “law of retaliation” (Camus 20). The law of retaliation is based on the ‘eye for an eye’ principle, and capital punishment extends this rule to be ‘death for death’ to avenge the murderer’s victim. This principle itself goes against Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, according to Hays’ line of reasoning. It is important to note that both of these authors observe and apply their cultural contexts when interpreting the Bible, demonstrating how critical traditioning can lead to different perspectives. 

Thus, it becomes clear that Christ and culture are intertwined and cannot be absolutely separated. Critical traditioning is a vital aspect of living as a Christian in the present world and must be applied to various cultural and social issues, such as capital punishment, abortion, and homosexuality. While analyzing Camus’ Reflections on the Guillotine has been an exciting adventure, our journey must come to a close. Thank you for joining me!

–Courtney Bain

Here is an article about the history of the guillotine in France: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-guillotine-falls-silent