The Church and the Mass Incarceration

The involvement of the church in the criminal justice matter that is mass incarceration most rampant in the United States is debatable and controversial. Some misunderstandings, as well as contentious issues, have emanated from this step made by the churches in the United States of America (Rawls24). Notably, mass incarceration is a historical term to describe the increment in the number of the people being detained or imprisoned in American prisons. The involvement of the church in the matter has to disagreement on the consequences and cause of the current mass incarceration in the US. Some of the pretentious include that the incarceration is a way of controlling the African American for political alignment as others claim that low justifies imprisonment. Therefore, the church engagement in to the mass incarceration matter has erupted a number of arguments and the contentious issue discussed below.

Arguably, imprisonment is justifiable by law that every law breaker and offender are to be incarcerated as a way of punishment. Moreover, it is agreed with both the church and the state that criminals should be punished after arraignment and conviction in the court of law as a form of punishment and promotion of a crime free society. However, when the law takes its course of punishing the criminals and offenders, then complaints rises from the same people with different pretensions, saying that the whole process is a social injustice as well as ungodly. Therefore, this kind of condition makes the matter very contentious, debatable, and even stringent to deal with hence requires an in-depth discussion.   

General overview of the matter

Although there is a legal and scholarly justification of the ongoing mass incarceration in the United States of America where the majority of African American youths are sitting on the verge or threshold of mass imprisonment, the matter has faced a greater level of dejection as well as disagreement from the church and the people. The mass incarceration in the United States over the past few decades has raised social concern in the region. The process of mass imprisonment is not the only experience in America but also in other states such as Cuba, Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Nonetheless, the experience and the level of concern, which is perpetrated by the church, are high in the US (Garland 26).

The disagreement and arguments that emanate from the citizen, as well as the church in different parts of the world majorly, touch on the consequences that the detention brings and the causes or the aims of the mass detention. Some have articulated the mass arrest to anti-socialism, claiming that, because most of the detainees are African-American. Some have argued that the mass imprisonment may be a fourth institution to act as biopolitics or control the demographic fertility of the African American who entered the region as a result of trade called the Trans-Atlantic trade.

The mass detention is a number one promoter of social inequality. Recent studies conducted in the United States to determine the effects of the process to the individual who have been through the same process sometimes and their relatives indicates that their imprisonment has adverse effects on the community, family, and friends of the detainee. Owing to the fact that this process is unevenly distributed it has raised social concern among the citizens because of its various effect on the prisoner as well as the immediate relatives. On the same note, others have also alluded that the activity is some sort of political realignment with the process of changing for prospects for low-skilled men. Notably, this implies that there are management and control of the African population not to rise in power as always the case in any multi-ethical society.

As one could expect, it is natural that an increment in the crime rate in the country will automatically lead to an equal rate of imprisonment, since majority convicted and put in prison to serve their terms of punishments. Nonetheless, many pieces of evidence according to the many types of research that have been performed to address the issue confirms that even though the criminal and justice department has considered that massive increment of incarceration as a way of reducing crime rates in different countries in the world especially the United States of America makes the story different. The story remains ridicules because the opposite is true.

Despite the high rates of mass criminals’ detention in the prison of the past decades, the rate of crime rate has been gradually increasing instead of decreasing justifying the fact that mass incrimination has much less effect on the crime rates on doing in the different countries. Furthermore, the crime-fighting benefits experienced back then before the 1990s are no more as are no longer appropriate control strategy or a method of crime control (Alexander et al, 46).

The outstanding social inequality propagated and propelled by the mass incarceration process especially in the United States moved the church together with other humanitarian organization. The church has organized campaign and discussions hence the matter has a state religious subject what is referred to as public theology.

 

The viewpoint and the activities of the church

Similarly, the churches also sing the same song of the social injustices and ineffectiveness of the process as of the public only that theirs is ironical and debatable regarding the many contentious issues therein. This brings me to my viewpoint in the involvement into active politics. Nevertheless, in their case the church they used what were referred to as public theology to push their agenda.

Personally, I think that the church involvement in active politics is the inappropriate idea and it does not mean only disrespect of the religion by the state due to familiarity but also bring hatred between the two parties yet the church should a revered entity regardless of one status (Urbina and Alvarez 12). Suggestively, should focus on up lighting and raising the standard of righteousness of God as mosses lift the golden brown snake in the desert that whoever runs to the church for help will surely get it since this eradicates evil doing in the society that is resulting to none being imprisoned.

Nonetheless, many churches have gotten involved in the matter and coma up with a different philosophy to fight the ongoing mass incarceration. Some of the churches such as the God is still speaking, united church of Christ has accused the government with disparate and lengthy sentences claiming that there are some element of disparity in the mass incarceration as well as sentences and conviction conducted in courts (Garland 28).

The church in what thy refer to as ban box posits that mass detention is a direct link to poverty and claim that the only way to do away with this or the problem is to ban the box. To support their claim, they continue to say that, most so job prospects or descriptions requires that the employees to check a box this is to verify whether or not the applicant have some criminal history or history or conviction or arrest. Following the fact that many have undergone imprisonment due to the mass detention ongoing in the country especially, the element has become a common barrier for them to secure a job. With this respect, the Church posits that the question, which is found in almost all forms, is unlawful if the intention of its inclusion is to screen out people with imprisonment record, composing mostly of the African American young men.

On the same note, any historical background attaching the person to jail reduces the chances of that person being hired. Furthermore, if the individual is employed and able to secure a job, then the wedges are made much lower compared to whether the individual has no such records. Therefore, the church as considered this negative and they have indeed condemned it from one town to another (Urbina and Alvarez 12).

The God is still speaking, and other churches in the United States who are liberal minded have teamed up to fight what they term social inequalities civil right violation. The churches not only term the mass incarceration as a form of civil right violation and social inequality but also as anti-doctrine or against their doctrine and beliefs (Garland, 26). Therefore, a commission of Christian action filed a report to General Synod 2015; they did this to educate their members in order to support and engage in advocacy against the mass imprisonment.

In the report, maybe to highlight a few points, the Commission highlighted some social injustices the church learns from the scriptures. They highlighted that the suffering and despair emanating from the criminal systems and even went further to explain that the pain and despair are not only for the people who are inside but also the to the families and community on a biased conviction. In their statement, they included Romans 8:22-23, which explains the labor pains and the suffering that the people who have the first fruit of the spirit encounter.

In addition, commission sharpened the wits of their members on the fact that out of the psalmist teaching they also learn the many and grievous social harms that the mass incarceration brings not only to the believers and the members of the churches but also to the nation at large. Moreover, the Commission highlighted most of the children all over the country had become orphans and fatherless, with many mother remaining in the houses of windows lamentation 5:3.

The commission also added that and wanted to enlighten their listeners and followers on the historical injustices articulated to this act of mass imprisonment. They also developed and conducted lessons on the crimes that remain unaddressed and unnoticed. In their teaching, the priests inculcated and highlighted mass detention as a severe form of injustice that has failed to be addressed and even noticed. They added in their teachings that the current mass imprisonment is not a kind of punishment as inscribed in the law to fight crime but a plot of the ill motive of some individuals to accomplish their hidden agenda and selfish ambitions (Forrester,. 38).

Additionally, the commission of priesthood also asserted that overuse of something is dangerous and not proper since it now seizes to be a good thing to disastrous. They eluded the fact that the overuse of incarceration, which always serves as a form of punishments to criminals who are convicted by a court of law and this mass imprisonment has changed its mandate from being a penalty to a kind of retaliation or revenge. They supported this with Isaiah: 10; 1-2 that addresses oppression to the destitute in the society such as the orphans and denying them justice by making them the orphans and the widows a prey or object of ridicule.

Following the fact that the mass imprisonment has some of the sorts of racism and social inequalities the commission of the priesthood has taken upon themselves to teach their members on the underlying evil of racism as well as the harms the process bring to victims. The commission lamented the grievous victim that has engrossed the society and systems of power most especially the whole system of criminal justice in our time. They also lamented on the disparity and high sense of discrimination that has befallen the criminal judicial systems in their time along with the social injustices being propagated into the community by the so-called mass imprisonment to curb the high crime rates. In their statement, they quoted the book of Galatians 3; 28 and James 2:9 that address the act of putting others to slavery yet all are equal before Christ.

The commission in their statements highlighted that the mass incarceration is a profit-making industry to a group of people with ill motives and that the process has an evil agenda to accomplish in future. Thy also pointed clearly that the ongoing mass imprisonment is trailing as a result of fear of the community to literally come out and influence decision-making process to end the crime. Therefore, they argued people to sober up and stop the ongoing menace in the society. In addition, the commission refused the fact that the criminal justice department is resorting to the accused as evil people since innocent individuals in the Bible was also accused but innocent. After the serving, their full term in prison the commission say that the freed citizens suffer a lot of emotional issues such as stigmatization, difficulty in securing a job and a house recidivism, marginalization, and poverty.

Personal argument

The above discussion on the statements from the church supported by biblical verses is a clear prove that the church fraternity is against and opposes the mass incarceration. Explicitly, they have apparently made it known through their complaints and allegations that as a church they are against the mass imprisonment due to the effect the process has to both the members of their churches as well as the members of the society.

On the other side, despite the stiff opposition the church have concerning the matter of mass incarceration, with the concrete evidence and doctrinal support, the issue still seems stringent on the side of the state governance. It is true that the episode portrays some sort of social inequality and issues of job prospects because the majority of the victim comes from one side of the community even as the evidence and studies assert. The fact that this process has some detrimental effects on the freed citizens who have undergone the same such as stigmatization, marginalization, languishing in poverty and difficulty in securing a job is also true.

However, the same process that has been so much condemned by the church and the people, as a den of evil is legal and was passed into law by the opposers themselves. Furthermore, the Supreme legislation of the land and even the Christian doctrine that offenders and criminals or law breakers should be arraigned before a court of justice, persecuted and if found guilty imprisoned as a form of punishment allows it (Knepper 22). Therefore, it is difficult for the criminal justice systems to abscond their duty since it is justice to punish the criminal. Insofar as the church fraternity, they forgot that the law is against some malpractices such as stealing and murderer, which in the religious context they are referred to as sin. Furthermore, it is proper is the eyes in the face of religion to punish the wrong doers. Meaning when one commits a crime the individual should face the music by serving his or her full term in prison depending on the gravity of evil or offense he or she committed. Therefore, the complaint that victims of prisons plus their close relative is suffering is ironical in my view.

Additionally, the claim by the Church that and the citizens that there are social inequalities in the mass incarceration is also controversial. The law provides that a suspect is prosecuted and if found guilty be put to jail regardless of the ethnic background. Therefore, the question becomes, if the majority of the culprits are coming from a particular ethnic group naturally, should the criminal system imprison the other ethnic groups to tally the number. Isn’t that now the real social injustice? Hence, the Cray of the church as members of an individual ethnic community accusing the state of social injustices and inequalities may be vague (Knepper 28).

Since it is the obligation of the government through the judicial department to persecute and send to prison the wrong doers, it will be improper to stop the government from carrying out the duty mandated by the law, because without which there cannot be a peaceful coexistence, I think the amicable solution is to take the side of the government. Nonetheless, the process should be carried out genuinely; in that way only shall the whole nation receive peace.

In conclusion, the issue of mass imprisonment is controversial and debatable in the sense that is it the mandate of the government to maintain peace and order in a country regardless of the ethical background of a citizen. On the other side, the church is accusing the government of social injustices and inequalities and the suffering of the victims who are serving their term due to the offenses themselves committed. Nonetheless, the fact is that criminal who convicted must be punished to eliminate crime from the society.  

 

 

 

 

 

Work cited

Dzur, Albert W, Ian Loader, and Richard Sparks. Democratic Theory and Mass Incarceration. , 2016. Print.

Forrester, Duncan B. “Punishment and Prisons.” Christian Justice and Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997, pp. 63–85. Cambridge Studies in Ideology and Religion

Garland, David. Mass Imprisonment: Social Causes and Consequences. London [u.a.: Sage Publ, 2001. Print

Rawls, John. The University Of Chicago Law Review. 1st ed. University of Chicago, 1997. Print.

Urbina, Martin G, and Alvarez S. Espinoza. Ethnicity and Criminal Justice in the Era of Mass Incarceration: A Critical Reader on the Latino Experience. , 2017. Print.

Simon, Jonathan. Mass Incarceration on Trial: A Remarkable Court Decision and the Future of Prisons in America. , 2014. Internet resource.

Knepper, Paul, and Anja Johansen.  The Oxford Handbook of the History of Crime and Criminal Justice. , 2016. Print.