202 bishops and priests elected to parliament became less inclined to discuss the question. But towards the end of the 19th century many of the leading representatives of the Free Churches who had seats in parliament came to make their opinion heard. Gustaf Ill’s proposition for the alteration of capital punishment in 1778— 1779’ Parliament really consisted of its abolition for certain crimes. Some of these propositions were passed by the Four Estates while others were rejected. The most important proposition however concerned infanticide, where the use of capital punishment was certainly circumscribed but not abolished. After the parliament an edict was published by which execution for infanticide was hindered by protecting unmarried mothers from affront and giving them economic help. Gustaf III made another effort to abolish capital punishment for infanticide at the Parliament of 1786. At the same time he met with opposition from the clergy concerning the infanticide edict. No changes were made. The debate between progressives and reactionaries concerning estimations, priorities and strategies towards the end of the 1700’s were very sharp in the matter of infanticide. In the more important conflict the progressives considered infanticide as a major crime which ought to be combatted even if punishment for immorality was made lighter. Those who considered fornication as undermining both marriage and society in general, and that concerned even concealed fornication, if it were not eradicated as an intolerable evil, even if it prevented other evils were inclined towards a stricter legislation. The former, among them Gustaf III, thought that they could combat infanticide by removing the causes, i. e. the shame surrounding a bastard and the unmarried mother’s difficult social position. This could all be prevented by passing laws preventing the prosecution of the mother, and/or subjecting her to contumely. The law would also provide her with some economical support. Those who opposed this already established politic, mainly the clergy, were inclined towards early marriage and put more effort into tracing the child’s father and making himtake his part of the responsibility. It is surprising how much the interpretation of the execution as a form of reconciliation with God was dismissed by almost all those who took part in the debates from1778 until 1921. It also shows the recurring dismissal of the very thought’s strong position. It was rooted in the theological tradition and expressed often in sermons concerning condemned prisoners and executions. The prison system’s triumph had its counterpart in the debate about amelioration’s strong situation. The confrontation between a partly theologically inspired amelioration and one emanating fromGod’s demands or induced ideas of revenge can be related to the current idea of God. If the laws of punishment proceed fromGod’s justice, or his righteousness, it is not moved at all by Christ’s conciliation and also not of any thoughts worth mentioning concerning reform or improvement. Grace and law are strictly separate. On the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=