ÀҾ˹éÒ˹ѧÊ×Í
PDF
ePub

The doctrine of determent regards punishment as a means of preventing crime. A crime always involves the infliction of pain; and the one thing which men try to prevent for its own sake is pain. The one thing which arouses resentment is likewise pain. There must consequently be a general coincidence between the acts which people resent and the acts which the law would punish if it were framed on the principle of determent. But the resemblance between the desire to deter and resentment is greater still. Resentment is not only aroused by pain, but is a hostile attitude towards its cause, and its intrinsic object is to remove this cause, that is, to prevent pain. An act of moral resentment is therefore apt to resemble a punishment inflicted with a view to deterring from crime, provided that the punishment is directed against the cause of crime-the criminal himself and is not unduly

severe.

The doctrine of reformation aims at the removal of a criminal disposition of mind by improving the offender. Moral resentment likewise aims at the removal of a volitional cause of pain, by bringing about repentance in the offender. That repentance ought to be followed by forgiveness, partial or total, is a widely recognised moral claim.

According to the Chinese Penal Code, whoever, having committed an injury which can be repaired by restitution or compensation, surrenders himself voluntarily, and acknowledges his guilt to a magistrate, before it is otherwise discovered, shall be freely pardoned, though all claims upon his property shall be duly liquidated.1 In Madagascar, according to a law made in 1828, "all the fines shall be reduced one-half, according to the nature of the fines, if the persons guilty accuse themselves.” 2 According to Zoroastrianism, one element of atonement consists in repentance, as manifested by avowal of the guilt and by the recital of a formula, the Patet. It is said in the Laws of Manu" In proportion as a man who has done wrong, himself

1 Ta Tsing Leu Lee, sec. xxv. p. 27 sq. 2 Ellis, History of Madagascar, i.

3 Darmesteter, in Sacred Books of the East, iv. p. lxxxvi.

confesses it, even so far he is freed from guilt, as a snake from its slough. . . . He who has committed a sin and has repented, is freed from that sin, but he is purified only by the resolution of ceasing to sin and thinking 'I will do so no more." "1 According to the Rig-Veda, Varuna inflicts terrible punishments on the hardened criminal, but is merciful to him who repents; to Varuna the cry of anguish from remorse ascends, and before him the sinner comes to discharge himself of the burden of his guilt by confession. So, also, Zeus pardons the repentant.3 The main doctrine of Judaism on the subject of atonement is comprised in the single word Repentance. No teachers, says Mr. Montefiore, "exalted the place and power of repentance more than the Rabbis. There was no sin for which in their eyes a true repentance could not obtain forgiveness from God." 4 According to the Talmud, a space of only two fingers' breadth lies between Hell and Heaven: the sinner has only to repent sincerely, and the gates to everlasting bliss will spring open.5 Jesus commanded his disciples to forgive injuries if followed by repentance :-" If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke. him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him."é

But repentance not only blunts the edge of moral indignation and recommends the offender to the mercy of men and gods: it is the sole ground on which pardon can be given by a scrupulous judge. When sufficiently guided by deliberation and left to itself, without being unduly checked by other emotions, the feeling of moral resentment is apt to last as long as its cause remains unaltered, that is, until the will of the offender has ceased to be offensive; and it ceases to be offensive only when he acknowledges his guilt and repents. It is true that the mere performance of certain ceremonies is frequently supposed to relieve the performer of his sins, and that the!

1 Laws of Manu, xi. 229, 231. Cf. ibid. x1. 228, 230.

2 Rig-Veda, i. 25. 1 sq.; ii. 28. 5 sqq.; v. 85. 7 sq.; vii. 87. 7, 88. 6 sq., 89. 1 sqq. Barth, Religions of India, P. 17.

3 Ilias, ix. 502 sqq.

4 Montefiore, op. cit. pp. 524, 335 n. Deutsch, Literary Remains, p. 53.

Cf. ibid. p. 56; Katz, Der wahre Talmudjude, p. 87 sq.; Kohler, Atonement,' in Jewish Encyclopedia, ii. 279; Moore, "Sacrifice' in Cheyne and Black, Encyclopedia Biblica, iv. 4224

sq.

6 St. Luke, xvii. 3 sq.

7 Supra, p. 53 sqq. Heriot, Travels through the Canadas, p. 378 (ancient

3

same end is thought to be attained by pleasing God in some way or other, by sacrifice, or alms-giving, or the like. Men even lay claim to divine forgiveness as a right belonging to them in virtue of some meritorious deeds of theirs, according to the doctrine of opera supererogativa-a doctrine which, in substance, is not restricted to Roman Catholicism, but is found, in a more or less developed form, in Judaism,' Muhammedanism,2 Brahmanism, and degenerated Buddhism. But all such ideas are objectionable to the moral consciousness of a higher type. They are based on the crude notion that sin is a material substance which may be removed by material means; or on the belief that an offender may compound with the deity for sinning against him, in the same way as he pacifies his injured neighbour, by bribery or flattery; or on the assumptions that by a good or meritorious deed a man has done more than his duty, that a good deed stands in the same relation to a bad deed as a claim to a debt, that the claim is made on the same person to whom the debt is due, namely, God-even though it be only by his mercy-and that the debt consequently may be compensated by the claim in the same way as the payment of a certain sum may compensate for a loss inflicted. This doctrine attaches badness and goodness to external acts rather than to mental facts. Reparation implies compensation for a loss. The loss may be compensated by the bestowal of a corresponding advantage; but no reparation can be given for badness. Badness can only be forgiven, and moral forgiveness can be granted only on condition that the agent's mind has undergone a radical alteration for the better, that the badness of the will has given way to repentance.

Mexicans). Adair, History of the
American Indians, p. 150. Krashenin-
nikoff, History of Kamschatka, p. 178.
Williams and Calvert, Fiji, p. 24.

1 Montefiore, op. cit. p. 525 sqq.
2 Koran, xi. 116. Sell, Faith of
Islám, p. 220 sq. According to Mu-
hammedanism, however, it is only

Hence the Reformation

"little sins" that are forgiven if some good actions are done, whereas "great sins" can only be forgiven after due repentance (ibid. p. 214).

3 Wheeler, History of India, ii. 475. 4 Indo-Chinese Gleaner, iii. 150, 161, 164. Davis, China, ii. 48.

5 This point was certainly not over

proscribed offerings for the redemption of sins, together with the trade in indulgences; and we meet with an analogous movement in other comparatively advanced forms of religion. In reformed Brahmanism, repentance is declared to be the only means of redeeming trespasses.1 The idea expressed in the Psalms, that God delights not in burnt offerings, but that the sacrifices of God are a broken and a contrite heart, became the prevailing opinion among the Rabbis, most of whom regarded repentance as the conditio sine quá non of expiation and the forgiveness of sins. Let us also remember that he who commanded his followers to forgive a brother for his sin, at the same time pronounced the qualification: "if he repent.

"4

That moral indignation is appeased by repentance, and that repentance is the only proper ground for forgiveness, is thus due, not to the specifically moral character of such indignation, but to its being a form of resentment. This is confirmed by the fact that an angry and revengeful man 1 is apt to be in a similar way influenced by the sincere apologies of the offender. As Aristotle said, men are 、 placable in regard to those who acknowledge and repent their guilt: "there is proof of this in the case of chastising servants; for we chastise more violently those who contradict us, and deny their guilt; but towards such as acknowledge themselves to be justly punished, we cease from our wrath."5 To take an instance from the savage world. The Caroline Islander, according to Mr. Christian, "is inclined to be revengeful, and will bide his time patiently until his opportunity comes. Yet he is not implacable, and counts reconciliation a noble and a princely thing. There is a form of etiquette to be observed on

looked by the Catholic moralists, but even the most ardent apology cannot explain away the idea of reparation in the Catholic doctrine of the justification of man (f. Manzoni, Osservazioni sulla Morale Cattolica, p. 100). Penance consists of contrition, confession, and satisfaction, and contrition itself is chiefly "a willingness to compensate"

(Catechism of the Council of Trent, ii. 5. 22).

1 Goblet d'Alviella, Hibbert Lectures on the Origin and Growth of the Conception of God, p. 263.

2 Psalms, li. 16 sq.

3 Moore, loc. cit. col. 4225.

Cf. Martineau, Types of Ethical Theory, ii. 203.

5 Aristotle, Rhetorica, ii. 3. 5.

these occasions-a present (katom) is made, an apology offered a piece of sugar-cane accepted by the aggrieved party-honour is satisfied and the matter ends." 1 In the case of revenge, external satisfaction or material compensation is often allowed to take the place of genuine repentance, and the humiliation of the adversary may be sufficient to quiet the angry passion. But the revenge felt by a reflecting mind is not so readily satisfied. It wants to remove the cause which aroused it. The object which resentment is chiefly intent upon, Adam Smith observes, "is not so much to make our enemy feel pain in his turn, as to make him conscious that he feels it upon account of his past conduct, to make him repent of that conduct, and to make him sensible, that the person whom he injured did not deserve to be treated in that manner."" The delight of revenge, says Bacon, "seemeth to be not so much in doing the hurt, as in making the party repent.'

"3

We can now see the origin of the idea that the true end of punishment is the reformation of the criminal. This idea merely emphasises the most humane element in resentment, the demand that the offender's will shall cease to be offensive. The principle of reformation has thus itself a retributive origin. This explains the fact, otherwise inexplicable, that the amendment which it has in view is to be effected by the infliction of pain. It also accounts for the inconsistent attitude of the reformationist towards incorrigible offenders, already commented upon. Resentment gives way to forgiveness only in the case of repentance, not in the case of incorrigibility. Hence, not even the reformationist regards incorrigibility as a legitimate ground for exempting a person from punishment, although this flatly contradicts his theory about the true aim of all punishment.

Thus the theories both of determent and of reformation are ultimately offspring of the same emotion that first

1 Christian, Caroline Islands, p. 72. 2 Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments, p. 138 sq.

Bacon, 'Essay IV. Of Revenge,' in Essays, p. 45. Cf. Montaigne, Essais, ii. 27 (Oeuvres, p. 384).

« ¡è͹˹éÒ´Óà¹Ô¹¡ÒõèÍ
 »