When I was in prison...

Former blogger Peter Nixon writes of his experiences in prison ministry

Prisoners may be one of the closest analogues in our society to the lepers of Jesus’ time. As Jesus’ contemporaries feared disease, we fear the social pathologies that afflict many of those behind bars. Increasingly we seem to have given up on the possibility of rehabilitation and are content simply to keep offenders away from our communities for as long as possible.

But if we are to be followers of Christ, we need to challenge that worldview. Like Jesus, we must be willing to confront our fears, to seek out the lost and the exiled, and to offer them the possibility of forgiveness and reconciliation. And with more than 2 million Americans behind bars, we need a lot more workers for this harvest.

Comments

[Mark Kasper]

Nixon's reminder of Christian duty to prisoners is well-founded.

Unfortunately, he blames recidivism on illiteracy, learning disabilities and mental illness. Criminal behavior becomes a congenital disorder, rather than an action capable of moral control. His talk of 'rehabilitation' is unusual given the apparent belief that the criminal are genetically incapable and therefore not ultimately responsible for their actions.

We do have the onus "to offer them the possibility of forgiveness and reconciliation" and Nixon is correct on that score. However, when it comes to "rehabilitation," Christianity must put aside the tempting but commonly misused interpretation of genetic fatalism in posing criminality (or other immoral traits) as congential defects beyond intervention or control.

In the view of human dignity, the criminal are merely people, not a defective subclass of humanity. In view of that same dignity and free will, the ability of one person to rehabilitate another is doubtful - it takes the human exercise of self-will and self-control, not to mention the grace of God. Let us exercise humility, not hubris, with respect to our personal or collective ability to rehabilitate a person, let alone a population.

MKasper

[Paul N.]

As Ren said to Stimpy "You're talkin' crazy stuff, man".

He says we shouldn't "fear" their "pathologies" that "afflict" them? While I'm sure there are more than a few who qualify as pathological, I don't know that I'd be so quick as to absolve them of personal responsibility.

Rapists, for example. I suppose he'd let the rapists out; I suppose that if they could just obtain some basic skills they certainly wouldn't rape again, would they? Would he feel comfortable allowing them to live in his neighborhood?

Society must err, if it does, on the side of public safety. I suppose some with life sentences wouldn't re-offend, but should we take that chance? Should society say, regarding the rapist or murderer, "Well, he may or may not re-offend, but if he does, it's only one person he'll assault."? I don't think we can take that chance.

This is why we have parole boards. To make the judgment on whether or not this or that person still presents a risk to society.

Something else struck me in his article - he wondered about "race and class" differences. This reveals more about him than I think he intended. Not in the "race" part, but in the "class" part. Is he so high up in the Ivory Tower that he wondered how he could ever deign to even interact with the "unwashed"? These are the types who clamor for letting out the criminals because they themselves run in a world where they'd never come in daily contact with the "lower" classes anyway. Let the rest of society deal with them.

But really, what else would you expect to read in US Catholic?

[Phil]

Good piece, Peter. Many of us simply talk, others act. You are among the latter.

To acknowledge that there is unfairness and injustice in the US does not imply that one is excusing criminals. How can anyone disagree with Peter Nixon's following words?

"The fears that many of us have
about prisoners are not unreasonable.
Dorothy Day famously warned the
idealists who came to the Catholic
Worker houses against romanticizing
the poor, and her advice applies to
those who want to work with the
incarcerated. I have encountered
some dangerous men in prison, men
who have yet to fully exorcise
their personal demons and face the
hard truth about the pain they
have caused others.

But while working with prisoners
has strengthened my convictions
about the depth of human sinfulness
and our need for God’s grace, it
has also taught me that injustice
is a soil in which sin plants strong
roots. For every man who comes to
chapel with a Bible in hand, there
is another who can hardly read at
all. Many of these men suffer from
learning disabilities or mental
illnesses that have been inadequately
treated. State and county budget cuts
have left programs that help
ex-offenders reintegrate into their
communities woefully underfunded.
Small wonder that more than two
thirds of those released from prison
are ultimately re-arrested."

[Mark Kasper]

"How can anyone disagree with Peter Nixon's following words?"

Easy. I just did. Read the first post.

MKasper

[Jimmy Mac]

Mark: tell us about YOUR on-the-ground experience in prison ministries. I know what Peter's is; I'd like to know your source of experience-grounded knowledge.

[Rich Leonardi]

tell us about YOUR on-the-ground experience in prison ministries. I know what Peter's is; I'd like to know your source of experience-grounded knowledge.

I see. So unless one has walked the halls in our pentitentiary system you're unqualified to take a view of the criminal justice system. And unless you're black, Latino, or Italian ... well, you know how the rest goes.

You can admire Mr. Nixon's willingness to perform corporal works of mercy and still criticize the conclusions he draws from his experience.

[Tom]

I really don't know what to say to someone who scorns a man doing prison ministry for being too far up the Ivory Tower.

[Jason]

Years ago, when I was locked up, I was surprised to see who was open to God. There were a few Protestants who would come once a week and offer bible services, and it as surprising who went to the meeting. I was sleeping with another guy, and we got to talking about my religion and stuff, and soon after he said he was willing to go to confession the next time the priest comes around. He didn't get to go, as he left too soon, but I like to think he eventually went by himself.

The harvest is plenty, but....

[Bill H]

I do a Bible study class with juvenile offenders on a regular basis, and I can't find anything that I disagree with in Peter's article.

To acknowledge that there are certain conditions beyond the control of the offenders that affect their predisposition towards crime (in the case of a lot of the kids that I work with, being locked up seems to be something of a family tradition) does not mean excusing them for their actions. On the contrary, it means that I emphasize free will a lot in my work so that they begin to realize that no matter where they are, they can embrace God and begin to reform their lives.

However, at the same time, it would absurd for me to conclude that they wouldn't be better off if their families were more stable and they had better role models. To use the old Catholic cliche -- it's not either/or, it's both/and.

[Jason]

Bill,

How did you get involved with that prison apostolate? Does your diocese train you, or do you just have to seek the permission of the prison itself?

[Seamus]

"Rapists, for example. I suppose he'd let the rapists out"

I didn't see anything in Nixon's words that would justify attributing this position to him. He said that we have a Christian obligation to treat prisoners with humanity. How someone reads that as a wish to have dangerous criminals released is beyond me. In fact, as Phil pointed out, Nixon says in the full article: "Dorothy Day famously warned the idealists who came to the Catholic Worker houses against romanticizing the poor, and her advice applies to those who want to work with the incarcerated."

Unless people are working in prison ministry like Nixon, or have actually been in prison (or both, as in the case of people like Chuck Colson), it's hard for them to realize how much our prison system is like one of living entombment. And far too many people, if they think about it at all, think that if prisons are Hobbesian hellholes, well, that's probably just a condign punishment for the offenses committed by the inmates.

"These are the types who clamor for letting out the criminals because they themselves run in a world where they'd never come in daily contact with the 'lower' classes anyway."

It sounds like Nixon is coming into a lot more contact with them than most of us do.

[Bill H]

Jason,

In my case, there was a pre-existing program run from our parish that I joined up with. Once I did that, I went through a brief training session with diocese and had to get a security clearance from the county corrections deparment.

If you wanted to start your own apostolate, my recommendation would be to go to the diocese. If they're like San Jose, they will probably have a couple of people on staff responsible for prison ministries in the diocese. They should tell you what you need to do to get started.

[Mark Kasper]

"Mark: tell us about YOUR on-the-ground experience in prison ministries. I know what Peter's is; I'd like to know your source of experience-grounded knowledge."

Classic. Because I am not Peter Nixon, I am barred from saying anything about his ideas.

Jimmy Mac, the next time you feel inclined to cheer for a football team....SHADDAP! After all, when did you ever go head to head against Dick Butkus on the field. The next time you critique the President or a Senator...PIPE DOWN! When did you ever serve as President or Senator.

Pathetic.

[Whitcomb]

The prevailing sentiment here seems to be lock 'em up and throw away the key.
So what should modern-day Catholics think now of Father Edward Flanagan, founder of Boys Town, who famously observed:

"There is no such thing as a bad boy. There is only bad environment, bad training, bad example and bad thinking . . . Understanding and not punishment is the solution for what is commonly called 'juvenile delinquency'. This is not just a statement. It is verified by more than a quarter of a century of work with boys of all classes."

Flanagan also championed prison reform; he believed rather passionately that adult criminals could be rehabilitated.

Was he a fool?

[Rich Leonardi]

What can I do to get involved in a similar ministry? (I'm not kidding.) As New Year's resolutions go, I'd like to more of those works of mercy I mentioned above.

[Bill H]

Rich,

See my reply to Jason above.

[Rich Leonardi]

Thanks, Bill. I wrote too soon. Though given my diocese, I'd prefer an apostolate. I'll make the chancery my first stop in any event.

[Paul N.]

Kudos to his Works of Mercy. I'm not criticizing him in that regard. Just the idea that all of these guys are simply "victims" of their circumstances. There are plenty of people who live in poverty that are good people and don't commit crimes. I know a few of them, to tell you the truth.

There are people who can't read that don't commit crimes either.

Just as there are plenty of rich kids/people out there who are criminals too.

It's not all environment, yet neither does environment have no effect.

Sure, adult criminals can be rehabilitated - SOME of them. Here again, that's for parole boards to decide, if a sentence hasn't been fully served.

[Seamus]

"Was he a fool?"

Well, yes he was, if he believed literally that "there is no such thing as a bad boy." That certainly doesn't mean he was wrong to push for prison reform, or to believe that many boys living a criminal life could be turned around. I rather hope he was speaking hyperbolically, for effect.

Something that makes me sick is our society's increasing penchant for dealing with crime by locking people (even minors) up and thowing away the key (see, e.g., http://www.dfw.com/mld/belleville/7875910.htm, http://www.courttv.com/trials/wrestling/background.html) If there are crimes that are truly so heinous and criminals so beyond redemption that they deserve life imprisonment without possibility of parole, then we ought to simply put them to death. If we don't inflict the death penalty in those cases, it can only be because we prefer to assuage our consciences by pretending that by sentencing the offender to a living entombment we have somehow been more humane and respectful of the criminal's dignity that if we'd simply had the stones to send him to the gallows.

[Sydney Carton]

"Was he a fool?"

No, but he sure was wrong. I know nothing other than what you posted, but as moderation is a virtue, it would be bad to counsel extremism in the treatment of deliquents. Punishment certainly has a place for juveniles, who need to understand the consequences of their actions.

It is in no small measure that crime rates have gone down as recivisist offenders have been locked up. Dumb reporters at the NYT and other papers seem astonished by it, and occasionally you'll see headlines reading: "Despite increase in inmates, crime going down." It should better read: "BECAUSE of increase in incarcerations, crime going down."

That doesn't mean that the prision system itself should be unnecessarily cruel or a dangerous place. But there are circumstances in which should certain people should never be allowed to walk again in civilized society. Jails can go a long way towards reforming things so that inmates are not cruelly treated.

This discussion reminds me of the last jail scene in The Shawshank Redemption: "Rehabilitated? Well now, let me see. You know, I don't have any idea what that means...I know what you think it means. To me, it's just a made-up word, a politician's word so that young fellas like yourself can wear a suit and a tie and have a job. What do you really want to know? Am I sorry for what I did?...There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. And not because I'm in here or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then. A young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I want to talk to him. I want to try and talk some sense to him. Tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone. This old man is all that's left. I gotta live with that. 'Rehabilitated?' That's just a bulls--t word. So you go on and stamp your forms, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a s--t."

[Leo]

There are plenty of people who live in poverty that are good people and don't commit crimes. I know a few of them, to tell you the truth.

There are people who can't read that don't commit crimes either.

Just as there are plenty of rich kids/people out there who are criminals too.

Yes indeed.

However, the prisons are overwhelmingly, and in a way totally out of proportion to the larger society, populated by the mentally ill, the retarded, and those from the lower economic classes. Given that there is also some - not as much as everyone likes to claim - "white collar crime", still, I just don't believe that a whole lot of burglars from upper class backgrounds are either in the prisons or roaming the streets.

Is it your position, Mark, that there are just plain more morally bad people who happen to be born into poor families or afflicted by mental illness, by some strange chance, while those born healthy and into wealthy families turn out to be morally better too, by their own efforts?

[Sydney Carton]

Leo,

I'm not sure what your point is. The middle class will always have more resources than the poor to protect themselves from incarceration. They can afford to hire better lawyers, their lifestyle allows them to avoid the stresses that poverty usually brings, they might have better connections to sweep their crimes under the rug, and in general their economic satisfactions might bring more contentment which means better parenting and a more stable home environment.

It will ALWAYS be that way. So what's your point?

[Todd]

Matthew 25:43c

I think Mark K's comments are troubling from a Catholic view. Many criminals are bound by their addictions. Did they make the initial choice to drink and drive, to do drugs, etc.? Of course they did. No serious person doing prison ministry advocates a mass leniency.

But that doesn't let society at large off the hook for its role, either. If you preach that kids are adversely affected by the parents of their peers (the in-vogue moral issue du jour) you can certainly hold that opportunities are quashed by public policy, poverty, lack of education, lack of addiction treatment, and even -- gasp -- Christian apathy.

For people like Mark, my suggestion: get thee to a prison, encounter the real presence. Jesus was pretty specific in his teaching about finding him in the least of our brothers and sisters. Unless your Bible is torn out past Matthew 24, I don't see how you can avoid it.

Peter's piece is excellent, and the people who squirm over it probably have their consciences getting poked.

[carolyn]

As Morgan Freeman's character suggests, the solution may be to lock 'em up long enough for them to age out of the most crime prone cohort-teens and twenty-somethings-which I believe is more or less being done now. An improvement would be to cull out the salvageable from the psychopaths and segregate them. Maybe ship the latter off-yeah that;s it!- to a penal colony on some Aleutian island. Airlift supplies periodically and let them formulate their own rules or go to hell in a handbasket. Who cares either way? And who knows? Maybe they'll surprise us.

[TomM]

It is realistic to acknowledge the effects of the pathologies Peter Nixon mentions. The incidence of serious mental disorders in an imprisoned population is at least 10%. Effective mental health treatment in prisons would be humane and reduce recidivism.

In most jails and prisons in this country the current standards for evaluation and treatment of mental disorders appear to be woefully inadequate.

[Rich Leonardi]

FWIW, Russell Ford is a convict who converted to Catholicism while imprisoned in Alabama (he's still there, I think). He authored "The Missionary's Catechism", a book he's used to bring some 200 convicts into the Church. It'd be interesting to know whether any prison ministries distribute/use his book.

[TomM]

Here's a quote worth considering:

In the words of Stuart Grassian, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist who has served as an expert witness in many prison mental health cases, "I've seen people who are horribly ill, eating their own feces, eating parts of their body, howling day and night and it's ignored, like 'who cares?' You think it belongs to some other century, but you go into the prison and you think you're back in some medieval torture chamber. The prison has become this place that's hidden and secret and it's really awful."

[Mark Kasper]

"For people like Mark, my suggestion: get thee to a prison, encounter the real presence. Jesus was pretty specific in his teaching about finding him in the least of our brothers and sisters."

I totally concur - but why stop at prisons? Why not nursing homes, homeless shelters, state hospitals for the developmentally disabled? Is it just that prisons are somehow politically favorable cudgels?

The whole point of my first post was to challenge Christians to stop treating the criminal as a subclass of humanity, genetically lacking in self-control and free will.

The attempts by Catholics (yes, unbelievably, Catholics) to eliminate the doctrine of Original Sin is astounding, but such is the misdirected power of Darwinism and genetics.

People will remain a slave to sin, evil and crime even longer when we continue to trumpet the notion that it was foisted on them by genetics, the environment, society - anybody but themselves. Why bother with repentance if I'm not the one doing something wrong?

[Regina]

It's fascinating how an article like this can serve as a sort of Rorschach test. It felt like Mark and Paul read a totally different article than I did. Peter doesn't make any social policy arguments about how to treat criminals; he challenges us as Catholics to obey Jesus' command to visit those as prison. Not metaphorically, not just in prayer, but with actual human contact.

The social policy questions are fascinating, and important, but they can be a cop-out too. As long as it's a social issue it's not a personal challenge to me. The real question for me is how do I see Christ in the faces of these men (and women) in prison? And what do I do about it?

What will I say when Christ asks "When did you visit me in prison?"

[carolyn]

I wonder if mentally ill inmates were in that condition going in, or did they become so under the stress of incarceration? Solitary confinement understandably drives even healthy people around the bend but maybe the company of so many depraved characters and the lack of family and emotional support is the last straw for many who would be OK outside. Does anyone know?

[Regina]

It's fascinating how articles like this serve as a kind of Rorshach test. It felt like Mark and Paul read a totally different article than I did. Peter didn't make any social policy arguments about how to deal with criminals; he challenged us as Catholics to visit those in prison.

The social policy questions are important, and interesting, but they can be a cop-out too. As long as it's a "social" issue, I'm off the hook. The question for me is: how do I see Christ in the faces of these men (and women) in prison? And what do I do about it?

What will I say when Christ asks "When did you visit me in prison?"

[carolyn]

And in either case, why aren't they medicated? If only to make the staff's jobs easier if not for the sake of the suffering inmate.

[Mark Kasper]

"The social policy questions are fascinating, and important, but they can be a cop-out too. As long as it's a social issue it's not a personal challenge to me. The real question for me is how do I see Christ in the faces of these men (and women) in prison? And what do I do about it?

What will I say when Christ asks "When did you visit me in prison?"

>>I agree with Regina's excellent comments. The causation questions of crime and sin are indeed a cop-out, for both the sinner and for those of us called to the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy. I am grateful that Regina brought the personal and individual responsibilities of both the sinner and the minister to the fore.

[Regina]

Oops -- sorry for the double post above. TypePad said it couldn't post the original comment . . . .

"Why stop at prisons?" I don't think Peter argues that we should stop at prisons; prisoners are just one of the groups Christ enjoins us to care for. But visiting in prisons has some unique challenges.

My parish helps support the Kairos prison ministry. I was describing the ministry to my cousin, a "good Catholic" who attends Mass weekly. He was shocked that we would waste our resources and peoplepower on murderers and rapists. This "let them rot" attitude is not uncommon, as if they weren't worthy of our attention or God's love.

Christ overturns such distinctions. So too must we. Does God love the worst murderer any less than He loves Mother Teresa?

[Neil]

When speaking about recidivism and reintegration, it might be valuable to examine the sociological evidence. Facts are stubborn things, after all, and here they do seem to back Peter's claim that we should recognize, without romanticizing prisoners, that "injustice is a soil in which sin plants strong roots." The following excerpts are from Christy Vister and Jeremy Travis' "Transitions from Prison to Community: Understanding Individual Pathways," Annual Review of Sociology 29 (2003):

"In the largest study of its kind, the Bureau of Justice Statistics examined criminal recidivism among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994. Overall, 67.5% of the prisoners were arrested for a new offense within 3 years and 51.8% were back in prison, serving time either for a new offense or for a technical violation of their release. Men were more likely to be returned to prison (53%) than women (39.4%), blacks (54.2%) more likely than whites (49.9%), non-Hispanics (57.3%) more likely than Hispanics (51.9%), younger prisoners more likely than older ones, and prisoners with longer prior histories of criminal behavior were more likely to be returned to prison than those with shorter records.

"A range of individual circumstances prior to prison also predict recidivism. More importantly for our purposes, these circumstances may also affect transitions from prison to community. In particular, substance abuse history, job skills and work history, mental and physical health, and intensity of conventional ties and behavior predict recidivism and are also likely to be important influences on postprison reintegration. For example, in a 1997 study of inmates, 52% of prisoners reported that they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time they committed the offense that sent them to prison. Many studies have linked substance abuse problems to reoffending. Studies of released prisoners report that their success or failure to confront their substance abuse problem often emerges as a primary factor in their postprison adjustment.

"Although slightly more than half of inmates report being employed full-time prior to incarceration, the poor employment histories and job skills of returning prisoners create diminished prospects for stable employment and decent wages upon release. However, former prisoners who are able to rejoin the labor market, through previous employers or contacts from family or friends, are more likely to have successful outcomes after release. The reverse is also true: Former prisoners who were deeply embedded in a criminal lifestyle for many years prior to incarceration may be at highest risk of poor outcomes after release. This research shows that it is important to examine an individual's preprison stakes in conformity and ties to conventional activities, through legitimate work and other behavior, to fully understand individual transitions from prison to the community and eventual reintegration. Returning prisoners who can draw on preprison conventional roles and relationships, as opposed to those who burned all bridges prior to incarceration, may have more successful postprison outcomes.

"... Not surprisingly, long periods of confinement reduce an individual's ties to family and friends and diminish job skills and decrease postrelease employment prospects. Recent reviews of the impact of correctional programming on postrelease outcomes generally conclude that a variety of programs, including those focused on individual improvement in education, job skills, cognitive skills, and substance abuse reduce recidivism. However, a meta-analysis of 50 studies analyzing the effect of prison sentences on recidivism found that longer prison sentences were associated with higher recidivism for both high- and low-risk offenders. Other research indicates that lengthy exposure to the harsh, impersonal conditions of prison life and the institutionalization that results from living in such an enviroment may have short- and/or long-term effects on an individual's ability to readjust to life outside of prison. Undoubtedly, ex-prisoners are changed in some way by their time in prison. ...

"The growth in imprisonement has been well-documented. Less attention has been paid to the influence of state policy on prisoners' preparation for release and the pathways of reintegration following release. During the 1990's, a decade when the state prison population increased by over 70%, programming in prisons did not keep pace. Comparing 1991 to 1997, the level of participation (among those prisoners to be released in the next 12 months) in educational programs dropped from 43% to 35%, in vocational programs from 31% to 27%, and in drug treatment programs from 25% to 10%. These decreases are steeper than they appear, precisely because of the prison growth. The result of these two forces is that significantly larger numbers of prisoners are being released without educational, vocational, or treatment preparations that are desgined to facilitate successful reintegration. The evaluation literature on such programs has recently moved toward a new consensus that stands in stark contrast to the famed 1974 Martinson review of rehabilitation programs that declared 'nothing works.' Several reviews and meta-analyses have reached similar bottom-line conclusions: Prison-based programs, particularly when combined with postrelease services, can indeed reduce recidivism. ..."

Thank you very much.

Neil

[Todd]

Mark, now your questions are more reasonable.

"I totally concur - but why stop at prisons?"

Matthew 25 would suggest we not stop there.

"Why not nursing homes, homeless shelters, state hospitals for the developmentally disabled?"

I vaguely remember US Catholic doing something on nursing homes. Knowing what I know about Peter Nixon, I would highly doubt he would advocate prison ministry just to rub it in.

"Is it just that prisons are somehow politically favorable cudgels?"

It might be that prison ministry advocates have touched a nerve in the American conscience. No doubt, it's the toughest of the charitable works.

As far as your other points are concerned, I fail to see their relevancy. No one denies people are responsible for their own actions. But there is a dimension of social sin that dogs collective human efforts. We know for certain there are insufficient drug/alcohol abuse counselling opportunities for those in prisons who want it. That, by itself, is an indictment on society. To trot out favorite neocon straw men in reponse to this post just strikes me as using a bomb to pound in a nail: just a little bit overboard.

[Paul N.]

"Does God love the worst murderer any less than He loves Mother Teresa?"

Well, of course not, but He doesn't LIKE them as much as He likes Mother Teresa, either. Sure God loves every person out there. But that shouldn't be seen as "God likes me the way I am", as so many of a certain persuasion like to claim.

"Let them rot" is one extreme - "It's not their fault" is another.

But can we accept, for just a moment, that some people are simply bad? Without claiming that they have a mental illness, or they grew up poor, or they can't read? Can we at least admit that?

It *is* interesting how we all read the same thing yet have different "takes" on it. Probably has something to do with our upbringing. :O)

[Mark Shea]

The Blogosphere: Illustrating once again that no good deed goes unpunished. Visit prisoners and write a piece about it and you can be sure that your work of mercy will receive tepid attention, while some secondary remarks about how prisoners do tend to come from the ends of several statistical bell curves will earn you all the real energy of the respondents as they pour out scathing blasts of contempt for your Ivory Tower disconnection from reality. And should you make the mistake of publishing it in US Catholic, well then: you are ritually defiled even if you *had* had something to say!

Yessirree, people who actually go to jails and face the misery and failure there are Ivory Tower dunces. People who sit at keyboards finding fault with them are working right down in the nitty-gritty of Real Life, chock full o' moral responsibility.

Me, I say "Nixon: Now More Than Ever!" I applaud you, Peter! Thank you for your invaluable service to the least of these.

[Mark Kasper]

"Neocon straw men"? You must be joking. Not knowing much about neocons, aside from that I've heard Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Bill Kristol are such beasts, I'm surprised to find myself in their company. Although I may be uninformed, I don't think these neocon thinkers really have put forth positions on the ultimate causation of sin.

In fact, I think my position (that people are individually, personally, and solely responsible for sin) is so generally unaccepted that Donald Rumsfeld might bomb your home for attributing such notions to him and his truly neocon brethren.

I do reject most of the idea of social sin pushed by Niebuhr and his disciples. His influence has reached into the Catholic Church and has been a regrettable development. Attributing sin to forces, to history, to society, to entities that are not human beings has truly hurt the mission of the Church - bringing individual souls to salvation.

The psychological explanations of sin will hopefully one day be discarded on the refuse pile along with alchemy, augury and phrenology.

[Paul N.]

Aw come on Mark, gimmie a break. The discussion turned on his assertions regarding the nature of criminality, not on his Ivory Tower status, although I think he's definitely an IT guy. When I run into someone living on Hard Luck avenue, I certainly don't condescend to wondering whether I can even speak to the guy about something.

And, looking around, I don't see any "defiling" going on. You know as well as anybody else about the "catholicity" of US Catholic. I've read it a few times myself, and choked on the "fluffiness" of it all.

I only noticed the IT status - the rest of him goes uncriticized.

[Mark Kasper]

Trust Mr. Shea to wade in without bothering to read the string of messages. He starts to act a bit like Todd - shoot from the hip first, and...yes, shoot from the hip second.

Finally, to Mr. Nixon:
Despite the attempts at character assassination by Mr. Shea and Todd, I do salute your service to prisoners. It is unfortunate that my Christian concern about how prisoners are actually viewed - as human beings with dignity or as congenitally defective subhumans - was somehow portrayed as "Peter Nixon-hating."

If my comments offended you, Mr. Nixon, then I apologize.

On the other hand, to Todd and Mark Shea, I recommend dropping the "over-sensitive as a rabid porcupine" tendencies.

[Mark Shea]

Paul:

I thought the passage cited by Phil way up above was about as clear as it could be that Nixon was not idealizing or absolving prisoners of personal responsibility. But since he committed the grave sin of saying that crime and various social pathologies do tend to go hand in hand, the conversation instantly fell into a Talk Radio rut of ranting about Bleeding Heart Liberals.

It's dispiriting to see a member of the Body of Christ receive, not support, but mainly brickbats, for his attempts to live out Matthew 25. Somehow his good work, and his appeal to pity get morphed into a charge of denial of original sin from the Legion of Catholic Moral Responsibility, while his plain English statements that prisoners are not to be romanticized or excused for their wicked choices is overlooked in the competetive rush to sound most like a Michael Savage monologue.

Bottom line: the *first* and *main* thing Peter should receive from his fellow members of the Body of Christ for this Christ-like work is support, gratitude, love, and admiration. What he got here was basically, "Yeah. Prisoners. That's nice" followed by reams of stuff about what a Bleeding Heart Heretic and fool he is. Probably wants to let all the rapists out. Denies original sin. Ivory Tower Idiot!

The next time you try to do something good for the Kingdom and spur other on to do the same, remember this thread if somebody kicks you in teeth rather than honoring it. It hurts. But perhaps it will serve as a reminder not to do it to others.

[Faith]

Although I can't follow this thread, apparently a misunderstanding occurred- perhaps you were saying the same thing in different ways? Just wondering...

[Mark Shea]

Mark:

I read the thread. You give a slight *one line* acknowledgement to Peter's work, than started into the "You deny personal responsibility" (culminating with absurd claims that this was part of a pattern of denial of Original Sin) rant that consumed the rest of your comments. That's not character assassination. It's what you chose to write.

Then Paul chimed in by helpfully accusing Peter of wanting to empty the jails of rapists because of his Ivory Tower idiocy about Moral Responsibility.

Fascinating that criticisms of this knee-jerk Michael Savage rantery is called character assassination, but not the assertion that Nixon's real wish is to "let the rapists out". That's just civilized discourse toward a brother in Christ.

[Paul N.]

I never called him a bleeding heart or a liberal or a heretic. He's probably a liberal, but so be it. Ivory Tower? Absolutely. Idiot? Nope.

Living in an Ivory Tower doesn't make one an idiot any more than living in a shanty makes one an idiot.

You're reading too much into what we've posted, Mark.

The wail of "Can't we just rehabilitate them all" is a common refrain among those with a polly-anna view of the world. I tend to think his opinions on criminals - and only his view on criminals - is a bit polly-annish.

That said, he'll definitely be ahead of me in the line to Heaven.

Mark, you're not even joining in the discussion about criminals and cause/effect and all that sort of thing. You're sitting at your keyboard, the same as the rest of us, and attacking not our opinions, but the fact that we've expressed them. Disagree all you want, but lighten up on the defense offensive!

[Peter Nixon]

Wow, serves me right for being out all day at a site visit! Apparently I missed a real party. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that this article would be so controversial. I got into a conversation one day with the folks at US Catholic about my work in prison ministry, and they asked me to write about it. So I did.

Maybe I didn't make my position in the article clear enough. I do believe that folks are responsible for playing the hand they're dealt and should be held accountable for how they play it. But some folks get a lousy opening hand, and I think we need to acknowledge the truth of that. I don't pretend to know what all the solutions are, but as for myself I plan to keep on doing what I'm doing.

Take care,

Peter

[Faith]

Many thanks for the food for thought- God Bless you and your work.

[Victor Morton]

Peter:

OK. But what follows from "acknowledg[ing] the truth that ... some folks get a lousy opening hand." I mean, surely nobody with two good eyes denies this, as a plain empirical fact. (I certainly don't.) The answer I would give to "what follows from that" is "not much," *because* "we are responsible for playing the hand they're dealt and should be held accountable for how they play it."

[Joseph R. Wilson]

"But can we accept, for just a moment, that some people are simply bad? Without claiming that they have a mental illness, or they grew up poor, or they can't read? Can we at least admit that?"--Paul N.

Paul, having had extensive experience working with prisoners, I agree that these are important questions. However, real people in prison are complex, and don't come labeled "bad", "mad", "sad", etc.. So, believing in redemption, we treat them all as children of God, worthy of at least our reasonable charitable efforts to provide for their physical and spiritual welfare. You would agree that these efforts at ministering to prisoners are not only worthy, but also noble, wouldn't you? Simply following in the way (like the sheep) by giving prisoners the benefit of the doubt on a personal level is likely to keep us from ending up with the goats, no?

It seems to me that much of the controversy above stems from a failure to differentiate: our personal obligations to prisoners, on the one hand; from those duties assumed by lawmakers and judges to provide a balance between individual liberty and the common good on the other.

[Steve]

Nice Article by Peter Nixon. The first time I went in to the prisons was with the Cursillio/Kairos community. After that first experience,I ran away for ~5 years, (some things happened for which I was not prepared). God has called me back, slowly, surely, insistantly, inexorably. I have been back for nearly two years and kick myself for the lost time. In a very non-catholic area, we have to fight much prejudice to perservere. We are a group formed from The Legion of Mary, Cursillio and Kairos.

These folks are in for a variety of crimes but we have refused to find out why. It is easier to meet them where they are and see them as our brothers and sisters in Christ. Most are actually converts in prison thru RCIA. Our Pastor visits 4 separate prison groups for Mass at least once a month, with communion services the rest of the time. We tell them that they are members of our Parish. To pray and worship the Lord with them in prison is the most humbling experience I have had. I wish that many of our parishioners had the reverence for the Mass and the Eucharist that they show. We pray for them and they pray for us. We do what is allowed. I can not really speak to the comments by the other Blog posters -- for those who have been there, we will each have similarities and differences of our experiences, however I have seen only one person who did not know (admit to) the reality of their situation or take full responsability for their actions..... No rationalizations or pretenses. IS this ministry for everyone? In some fashion ...yes !

[Victor Morton]

The sanest words yet, from Joseph:

"It seems to me that much of the controversy above stems from a failure to differentiate: our personal obligations to prisoners, on the one hand; from those duties assumed by lawmakers and judges to provide a balance between individual liberty and the common good on the other."

EXACTAMENTE.

Nobody objects to prison ministries or is critical of those who man them. Where people start to object and resort to "Ivory Tower" image and whatnot is when they smell an expectation that lawmakers and judges should think like ministers. Which is about as bad an idea as having ministers who think like lawmakers and judges. (I should clarify that when I said "nothing much," I was thinking ain the latter terms, as a citizen.)

[Lynn]

There is a Kairos ministry in our diocese (which has several prisons, including death row).

"The mission of the Kairos Prison Ministry is to bring Christ's love and forgiveness to all incarcerated individuals, their families and those who work with them, and to assist in the transition of becoming a productive citizen."

[Claude Muncey]

I come (late perhaps) to this discussion with a couple of connections. I know Peter, at least a little, and I also work as a Catholic prison ministry volunteer. My wife and I have worked in several different facilities, both state and federal, minimum to maximum security.

I go inside for the simplest of reasons -- to find Jesus waiting for me there. I go because of the new depths it has brought to my own spiritual life, when in or outside the walls. I keep going inside because for some of these inmates, we volunteers can be the only Church they see, for years at a time. (If you think there is a shortage of parish priests, consider what the supply of ordained prison chaplains is like . . .)

We as Catholic Christians encounter God in many ways -- in prayer, through the Sacraments, in the Word. But I would encourage you to come along and meet Him just where he told you He would be waiting, in hospitals or nursing homes, on the street with the poor, the hungry and the stranger, or in jails and prisons. Many parishes have detention ministry teams, or you can contact your diocese to see what programs are available. There is important work to be done just visiting inmates who have nobody to visit them -- many prisons and jails have programs to match volunteers and inmates along with some training.

We can put off discussing public policy to some other day. But we are all called to the works of mercy, in some form, today.

[Donald R. McClarey]

The Gospel should be preached to all people but in regard to prisoners a word of caution is in order. Over the years I have represented hundreds of people accused of felonies. A substantial minority were individuals who had just made one serious mistake. The majority, however, consisted of individuals who had engaged in serious crime virtually their entire adult life and some of these people were highly dangerous. Anyone wishing to get involved in prison ministry needs to have some training and should approach this with no illusions about the type of people they will likely be encountering. This is really not an area for amateur evangelizing, but a very specialized field. Contributing monetarily to groups doing prison ministry might be a good place to start and obtaining literature from them about how they conduct their ministries.

[Rich Leonardi]

We can put off discussing public policy to some other day. But we are all called to the works of mercy, in some form, today.

Bravo, Mr. Muncey.

[Rich Leonardi]

Contributing monetarily to groups doing prison ministry might be a good place to start and obtaining literature from them about how they conduct their ministries.

That is precisely the course recommended by Russell Ford, the imprisoned author of "The Missionary's Catechism" referenced in my post above.

[Paul N.]

"""So, believing in redemption, we treat them all as children of God, worthy of at least our reasonable charitable efforts to provide for their physical and spiritual welfare. You would agree that these efforts at ministering to prisoners are not only worthy, but also noble, wouldn't you? """

Yes. Absolutely. No question, no argument. We diverted more down the public policy road I suppose.

I guess my link was one between an individual approach to mercy and/or forgiveness, and how effective that is in deciding who stays in jail and who gets out.

[Phil]

Donald R. McClarey wrote:

"Anyone wishing to get involved in prison
ministry needs to have some training and
should approach this with no illusions about
the type of people they will likely be
encountering."

That's also what Peter Nixon clearly stated in his article. I'm glad this thread, thanks to Peter's level headed and gracious comment, became much saner.

[Mark Kasper]

Maybe this will explain where I get my steroid-influenced attitude from - my mother was 7/8ths Irish and 1/8 Scotch. Mix that in with my father's German war-mongering ancestry (Kasper in Old German translates roughly as either "There is no head we wouldn't like to see on a spit" or "There is no land that we wouldn't like scorched and in ashes"), and it could explain the volatility - like TNT marinated in gasoline.

That I so vigorously flamed the genetic rationale in my previous posts, I guess it would be hypocritical for me to now resort to this reasoning. My hot-headed tendencies are my own, my very own - my precious - and I don't think it likely that I will be able to completely part with it short of death. Death may not guarantee virtue, but it takes the rough edges away pronto. I hope that you don't find my latter trait so unbearable that you pray for the former to be visited upon me, at least just yet.

[Mark Kasper]

Here is the proper link for the steroid induced attitude.

[Paul N.]

Mark,

I happen to be one of those too. Scottish-Irish with some straight English mixed in just for fun.

Family gatherings were (God rest most of their souls) rip-roaring round table debates on anything that happened to come up. Good fun.

[Poppi]

Hats off to Peter Nixon for his prison ministry work. The world needs more people willing to do the same.

Peter says: "Prisoners may be one of the closest analogues in our society to the lepers of Jesus’ time. As Jesus’ contemporaries feared disease, we fear the social pathologies that afflict many of those behind bars".

Despite Peter's good work, I don't think that's a good analogy. Generally speaking, there are fundamental differences in how one becomes a leper versus a prisoner. To say that society's aversion to lepers and prisoners stems from the same fear misses an important point. Mercy cannot be separated from justice.

[Jimmy Mac]

It's a little late for this comment, but ...

Mark K: my question way back when to you was simply an attempt to understand YOUR experience with prison ministries. Peter outlined his. He has a basis for his comments. What's yours? Or, are you just one of those habitues of the blogworld who loves to shoot down any and everything?

I've never been inside a prison. I suspect, however, that if I spent time in prison ministry some of my pre-conceived ideas about prisoners (no matter how "well-founded" they might be) would probably be tempered by the reality of what I would see, hear and come to understand.

I have met Peter and know a little about his experience in his ministry. I trust his observations a lot more than those of someone who hasn't seen and done what he has seen and done.

[Mark Kasper]

No, I have never been in a prison.

I have marched outside a state penitenary protesting against the execution of a murderer, but I did not enter the prison.

Probably the biggest reason for my never entering a prison was my experience with friends who had a family member (serving time under Protective Custody) that was tortured to death in the September 22, 1991 prison riot at Deer Lodge, Montana. Being with those friends in the days after the riot, and having to stand by and listen while they endured the detailed descriptions of what was done to their imprisoned loved one was more than I could bear, and it wasn't even my relative.

On September 22, 1991, a riot occurred at the Montana State Prison (MSP). Maximum security inmates broke through the cyclone fencing with their bare hands, shattered the plate glass glazing of the officers' cage, set mattresses and trash and clothes on fire to melt a hole in the Lexan shield, and gained access to every cell in the unit. Scores of maximum security inmates were freed from their cells and access was gained to inmates housed in the Max in "protective custody" for the purpose of safeguarding them from perceived risks of harm from other inmates. Five protective custody inmates were killed and attempts were made to kill eight others, some of whom received serious injuries. Four hours later, the Prison's Disturbance Control Team entered a maze of fire and fumes they described as hell. They meant it literally. Sprinklers worked, but the smoke evacuation system didn't. Electrical wiring fell into standing water. Any misstep here might mean death by electrocution. One Protective Custody inmate, anticipating the riot, had mixed a bucket of blood-red paint to splatter himself. While fellow prisoners beat him with their fists and prodded him with a broken mop handle, he held his breath and lay motionless. He was one of the lucky ones. In five other cells, the blood on the walls and floors and ceilings was real. Citations here and here.

Perhaps it is cowardice and speaks ill of me, but after only hearing what happened that day, I am not made of such stern stuff.

[Jimmy Mac]

Mark: Peter is not positing that each and every person in prison is a true saint in disguise. It would be foolhardy to do so; murders, rapists, et al are there for a very good reason.

Not all people in prison fall into that category. Here in California, the "3 strikes" rule has resulted in many folks being there, overcrowding the system, and straining it to the breaking point.

As a Catholic Christian I truly believe that we all are capable of repentence. Different life events cause change in all of us. Some of us are lucky enough to not have committed crimes, either before or because of this metanoia. Others aren't so fortunate and have to experience societal punishment for their crimes against other humans.

What you experienced is an extreme example of what can to wrong under certain circumstances. A few bad apples can incite heinous actions in a prison environment. Today's gang culture that is rampant in many prisons is a good example. If found the TV program "Oz" to be very telling.

But I still believe in the possibility of conversion and redemption ... even in the case of a few that I have experienced posting on Amy's blogsite.

And, no, I'm NOT referring to you, Mark.

[Mark Kasper]

Jimmy Mac,

Fair enough and thanks for your nice post. I utterly agree with you on the conversion and redemption of sinners (some of who are prisoners).

My post on the prison riot was not my arguing that prisoners are beyond redemption, not at all. It was just my own personal reason why I don't think I, Mark Kasper, can go into a prison. Not saying that Peter Nixon or anyone else shouldn't go, just that I don't think I can bring myself to do it.

Maybe I should try harder and not associate the Deer Lodge riot with all prisons, but I don't think I can.

[Kevin Clarke]

I don't want to trouble folks with my opinion about prison ministry or our strategies for saving poor Peter from that dreadful Ivory Tower. (Maybe he could let down his hair?)

But I would like to express my Ulster Irish (in interest of full disclosure), steroid-soaked umbrage at much of the ill-informed cheap shots against the insufferable fluffernuttier of U.S. Catholic. I think all such cheap shots ought to be fully informed. To that end, call 1-800-328-6515 and plop down the $12. Then you can come back here and have at it;)

God bless all here!

[Peter Nixon]

Too late, Kevin, I cut my hair short after college...;-)

[Joseph R. Wilson]

"Some of us are lucky enough to not have committed crimes, either before or because of this metanoia. Others aren't so fortunate and have to experience societal punishment for their crimes against other humans."

Jimmy Mac, at the risk of opening up another series of emotional posts, I think that it is important to call the question of whether crime, or other sin is a matter of the bad luck of the transgressor. In fairness, it seems likely that you posted this in haste.

[John Thomson]

I was just browsing around, looking for a blog that dealt with prisons and found this blog. An interesting topic to say the least.

I know a couple in Missouri who have been volunteering at the local prison for some 35 years. The gentleman, we'll call him Abe, has been writing a journal/e-mail to his closest friends (100 or so) for the past 3 or 4 years sometimes detailing his reflections on those he and his wife meet on the three occasions a week that they visit the prison.

When I first saw them coming into prison along with the many others, in my mind I saw them as coming inside to shine their halos on our tarnished lives. I boiled inside, angry at what I attributed to be their holier than thou attitude toward those of us, especially us who had lived virtually our entire adult lives in prison. I didn't know their hearts.

When the prison school teacher told me that God could change my life, coiled like an angry snake, I attacked her very beliefs and said: "I've been in prison all my life, I'm probably going to be in prison the rest of my life and even die in prison. I don't need God to help me do that. I didn't know her heart.

And when in the still dark night of my soul I cried out "if what she says is true, that you can change my life. Then I accept your son, as my Saviour. I have very little hope and I can't give you no help, You will have to do it. I didn't know His heart.

And He did. And 8 years later I married her. (25 years and counting) Until we know a persons heart I don't think we should freely judge them.

...john