14 MAY 1948, Page 16

THE LORDS AND HANGING

SIR,—Mr. Strang writes to disparage, in terms of supercilious arrogance, the debate in the House of Lords upon capital punishment. Not many, I feel, will agree with his strictures. Upon myself, who for many years has opposed, in principle, the hanging of criminals, the effect of that debate, characterised as it was by dignity and restraint, wisdom and tolerance, and impressive understanding born of wide and varied experi- ence, was to convince me that. I must think again. Your correspondent in his letter singles out two bishops for his particular aspersions because their attitude towards this question is not his. He should reflect that among thoughtful people the problem of Christian action is widely regarded as being much more difficult than that of Christian belief.

Mr. Strang stresses the " sacredness of each individual life" as a sufficient justification for abolishing the death penalty. But in doing so he begs the question as to whether in a society which forbids this penalty the sacredness he supposes is thereby enhanced, safeguarded or imperilled. Some words of the Gospel are instructive here: " Be not afraid of them that kill the body . . . . But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear. Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell." I do not cite this as constituting an argument for retaining the death penalty, but the words do suggest that in the thought of Christ the sacredness of each individual is, at any rate, not unconditional. In The Ring and the Book we read that Pope Innocent condemned Count Guido to death, confident that in so doing he was obeying God, but sustained by the Christian hope that in " that sad, obscure, sequestered state, where God unmakes but to remake the soul," the victim would see the truth and in the mercy of God find salvation.—Yours very truly,