Goal of COPS : To help participants understand how relations between the community and law

enforcement can be strengthened through community policing strategies.

Objectives:

 Define community policing and its principles

 Describe the benefits and the importance of citizen involvement

 Identify strategies for effective communication

 Identify the six factors for improving police community relations

 Describe the benefits of Neighborhood Watch

Crime Prevention as a bridge:

 Crime Prevention efforts reduce polarization that sometimes exists between police and citizens.

 Community Policing, Neighborhood Watch, Orange Hat Patrols, Weed and Seed, and McGruff
programs build a bridge that enables residents and law enforcement to communicate,
collaborate, and work together to build safer, more caring communities.

Benefits of Improved Police Community Relations:

Improved Relations Allow Police Officers to

 Police more effectively

 Find their jobs safer and easier to do

 Face less litigation and gain longer careers

 Be treated with greater respect

 Have better morale

Improved Relations Allow Community Residents to

 Have more trust and less fear of police

 Have a safer community

 Have less tension and conflict

 Gain greater cooperation from police

 Gain increased safety for children and seniors

 Gain quicker resolution to crime

Nine Principles of Law Enforcement Accdng to Sir Robert Peel:

. The basic mission of the police is to prevent crime and disorder.

2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.

3. Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public.

4. The degree of cooperation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionally to the
necessity of the use of force.

5. Police seek and preserve public favor.

6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary.

7. Police at all times should maintain a relationship with the public.

8. Police should always direct their actions strictly toward their functions.

9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder.

What is Community Policing?

“Community policing is a philosophy that promotes and supports organizational strategies to address
the causes of crime, to reduce the fear of crime and social disorder through problem-solving tactics and
community-police partnerships.”

8 Ps of Policing :

A PHILOSOPHY of full service,

PERSONALIZED

POLICING, where the same officer

PATROLS and works in the same area on a

PERMANENT basis, from a decentralized

PLACE, working in

PARTNERSHIP with citizens to identify and solve

PROBLEMS

The community-policing philosophy rests on the belief that law-abiding citizens in the community have
a responsibility to participate in the police process. It also rests on the belief that solutions to today’s
contemporary community problems demand freeing both community residents and law enforcement to
explore creative ways to address neighborhood concerns beyond a narrow focus on individual crimes.

Normative Sponsorship Theory

 Most people are of good will.

 They will cooperate with others to facilitate

the building of consensus

  The more the various groups share common values, beliefs, and goals, the more likely it is that
they will agree on common goals.

Critical Social Theory

 Enlightenment

Give information

 Empowerment

Take action to improve conditions

 Emancipation

People can achieve through social action

Community Relationships Provide:

 Worth in social value

• A more informed citizenry

• Example to young people and others

 Added value
• Opportunity to learn about law enforcement while working
with law enforcement
• Learning about citizens’ concerns

 How Do People View the Police?

How Do People View the Police?


BPATS:

Strategies for Effective Communication:

Trust Building Model

GREATER SUCCESS !

GREATER FLEXIBILITY AND RANGE OF SOLUTIONS

RELATIONSHIP AND PARTNERSHIP BUILDING

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

TRUST
The Communication Process:

 Message cues

 Listener supplies meaning

 Content

 Relate to your audience; build rapport

 One-way or two-way communication

 Consider verbal and nonverbal cues

 Physical appearance

 Solicit student engagement and participation by using open-ended questions and feedback.

Nonverbal Communication Considerations:

 Facial expression

 Tone of voice

 Eye contact

 Touch
 Personal space
 Territoriality
 Time

Building Trust Through Effective Communication:

 Effective Listening

• Listen to learn and understand, not to challenge or persuade.

• Take turns and listen for facts and feelings. (Both are important.)

Why Is Community Involvement Important?

 When members of a community are involved with each other, they know

• Their neighbors

• The daily “goings-on” in the neighborhood

• When something is wrong

One great way to perpetuate community involvement is through the Neighborhood Watch program::
  Neighborhood Watch was established in 1970 to bring residents together to interact and
become the guardians for the police in their community.

Neighborhood Watch:::

 Crime prevention group organized around a block, defined neighborhood, or business district

 Serves as “eyes and ears” for law enforcement

 Helps establish or reclaim informal control of an area by observation, visibility, and increased
social interaction

 Donates time and resources

 Usually has no formal budget or funding source

 Success results in reduction in crime and improved quality of life for neighborhood residents

The Benefits of Neighborhood Watch:

 Unites the community and increases neighborhood cohesion

 Reduces fear of crime in the community

 Improves crime reporting by citizens

 Increases surveillance in the community

 Prevents and reduces crime

 Enhances homeland security

Studies show that Neighborhood Watch is effective because

 It unites neighbors around a common goal—safety and security.

 It provides all members basic skills on preventing crime and reporting suspicious activities or
crimes.

 It builds a base for correcting neighborhood problems.

 It works well with other civic activities.

In Conclusion::::

 Community policing is the responsibility of both law enforcement and community members.
Both have important roles in community policing.

 There are many ways to involve the community in crime-reduction and problem solving,
including community meetings and citizens’ police academies.

 Police and local citizens are all members of the community.

Tactics strategies: Policing strategies extend beyond traditional models of responding to calls for service
and often seek to increase crime prevention, intervention, and response effectiveness through
techniques such as community outreach, efficient resource distribution, crime mapping, crime data
collection, or suspect location.

Programs

What Works in Community Policing? A Best Practices Context for Measure Y Efforts November 2013 The
Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy University of California, Berkeley School of
Law The Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law & Social Policy at the UC Berkeley School of Law is a
research and policy center with the mission of bridging the gap between academia and practice. As part
of Berkeley Law, the Warren Institute leverages the intellectual capital of a world-class public university
to produce high-quality data, action-oriented research, and evidence-based policy recommendations on
many of society's most challenging issues. Resource Development Associates Resource Development
Associates is a mission driven consulting firm founded in 1984 to promote the welfare of our
communities by contributing to the effective functioning of public and non-profit health and human
service systems. To this end, we provide a suite of consulting services to community-based nonprofits
and local, state and federal agencies. Please take the time to visit our web pages to learn more about us
and the important services that we offer. www.resourcedevelopment.net Bright Research Group Bright
Research Group helps public, private and non-profit agencies measure the difference they are making,
maximize their ability to offer quality services, align their work to best practices and develop long-term
strategies to transform systems and communities. Authored by Sarah Lawrence and Bobby McCarthy of
the Warren Institute Contents Introduction
..................................................................................................................... 4 What is Community Policing?
................................................................................................ 5 What are the Key Components of
Community Policing? ............................................................... 5 Organizational Transformation
............................................................................................ 6 Community Partnership
................................................................................................... 7 Problem Solving
............................................................................................................. 9 Keys to Successful Community
Policing ................................................................................ 12 Common Challenges and Barriers to
Success ......................................................................... 12 Community Policing and Measure Y
....................................................................................... 12 In Alignment with Best Practices
........................................................................................ 13 Not in Alignment with Best Practices
................................................................................... 13 Oakland Police Department: A Department in
Flux ................................................................. 14 Measure Y as an Opportunity
................................................................................................ 15 References
...................................................................................................................... 16 Introduction In November
2004 Oakland voters passed the Violence Prevention and Public Safety Act, commonly referred to as
Measure Y.1 The stated, overarching goal of Measure Y is to improve public safety, with a particular
focus on reducing violence involving Oakland youth. Revenues from the 10-year parcel tax support three
components: violence prevention programs, community policing officers, and fire and paramedic
services. In addition, up to 3% of funding is set aside for an independent evaluation. This report, which is
part of that evaluation effort, looks at “community policing” from a national perspective in terms of the
generally agreed upon goals, principles, components, and strategies in the field of policing. It
summarizes what we know about community policing from a few decades of learning, research, and
implementation efforts. It then examines the community policing components of Measure Y and the
extent to which they are aligned with these best practices. In short, how do the community policing
elements, as articulated in the 2004 resolution, generally measure up to what we know are the most
effective components of community policing? The 10-year period for Measure Y sunsets in 2014 and City
leaders and Oakland voters will need to decide the future of this public safety investment. This report
aims to help provide a national context for those discussions and deliberations that is grounded in
research and best practices. The goal is to provide various stakeholders a framework for strengthening
community policing efforts in Oakland. Intended audiences include the Mayor, City Council members,
Oakland Police Department (OPD) leadership, members of the Violence Prevention and Public Safety
Oversight Committee, City residents, and community-based organizations, among others. This
assessment is based on a review of the social science research literature, including the seminal articles
that are generally considered to be the foundations for what we know about community policing and
the latest studies that have built upon that foundation. In addition, it draws from publications by key
organizations in the field of policing such as the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) Office, U.S. DOJ, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the Police Executive Research
Forum (PERF). It is worth noting that the City of Oakland is undergoing significant changes and reforms
on several fronts, some of which are supported by external monitors and national experts including
those related to the Negotiated Settlement Agreement and recommendations being put forward from
the Bratton Group and Strategic Policy Partnership. Those efforts are relatively more prescriptive in
nature. The purpose of this review is to provide a framework of the “bigger picture” principles and
components of community policing in light of the fact that leaders and residents will be revisiting this
significant public safety investment in the upcoming year. 1 Oakland City Council (2004). Resolution No.
78734 C.M.S., Revised 7-20-04. What is Community Policing? For the first half of the 20th century, police
departments in most jurisdictions in the United States operated under what is generally referred to as a
“professional” model of policing. Under this model, local police departments were organized around
strict hierarchical lines, utilized standardized operational protocols, and emphasized responding to
serious crimes when they occurred. As social disorder and crime rates began to rise during the second
half of the century, law enforcement and other municipal leaders began to re-examine the role of police
departments in public safety management and craft reform efforts that sought to reduce crime through
improved relationships and direct partnerships between citizens and police. These efforts eventually
coalesced around a new philosophy of law enforcement known as “community policing,” which stressed
more direct officer involvement with local citizens, was organized around less rigid hierarchies and
protocols, and attempted to address the root causes of neighborhood crime with the assistance of the
larger community.2 Adoption of the community policing philosophy by local police departments
occurred gradually throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s and by the early 1990’s, more and more cities
were beginning to adopt community policing approaches.3 After decades of adoption at the local level,
community policing was effectively endorsed by the federal government with the passage of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. This bill authorized an initial six-year expenditure of
$8.8 billion in federal aid to support community policing efforts, and created the Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS) to distribute and monitor this funding. Today, the COPS Office
continues to operate community policing initiatives nationwide and distribute grant funds to localities to
support those efforts.4 Increased funding and recognition of community policing success stories led to
an explosion of its implementation in the following years. In 1994, only 20% of surveyed police
departments nationally reported employing some elements of the community policing model, a figure
which rose to 58% in a subsequent 1997 survey, and 68% by 2003.5 Community policing remains the
dominant local law enforcement philosophy in the United States today, with 81% of the nation’s
population being served by law enforcement agencies that have adopted community policing
approaches.6 However, as will be discussed below, while community policing is generally considered the
“new norm” in local law enforcement, departments’ structures and practices still vary considerably
across jurisdictions and community policing still means different things to different people. What are the
Key Components of Community Policing? In general terms, community policing is not a program; it is not
a set of activities; it is not a personnel designation. Rather, community policing is a law enforcement
philosophy, a way of thinking about improving public safety. While there is a lack of standardization
regarding specific terminology and strategies of community policing across cities, community policing
efforts can generally be grouped into three broad 2 Diamond & Weiss (2009). Advancing Community
Policing Through Community Governance: A Framework Document. US Department of Justice. 3 Bureau
of Justice Assistance (1994). Understanding Community Policing: A Framework for Action. US
Department of Justice. 4 Community Oriented Policing Services (2013). COPS History: 1994 to the
Present. U.S. Department of Justice. 5 Connell et. al. (2008). ”Can a Community Policing Initiative Reduce
Serious Crime? A Local Evaluation.” Police Quarterly Vol. 11. 6 Community Oriented Policing Services
(2012). COPS FY 2013 Performance Budget. categories: organizational transformation, community
partnership, and problem solving. Each of these components is described in some detail below. By
definition, a comprehensive community policing model permeates almost every aspect of a police
department and the elements described below are best applied to a police department as a whole. Key
Components of Community Policing Organizational Transformation Community Partnership Problem
Solving Organizational Transformation The first component of successful community policing initiatives
involves transformational changes in the organizational structure and operation of a police department.
This transformation can involve management policies, organizational structure, personnel practices, and
information technology systems, among other aspects of how a department is structured and
operates.7 Arguably, the cornerstone of organizational transformation is that police departments are
organized around geographically-based assignments and allocations. One of the main arguments behind
this approach is that geographically-based assignments facilitate closer and more frequent contact
between the officers who are dedicated to those areas and the people who live and work in them. The
thinking is that with increased contact comes increased understanding of the priorities and concerns of
a neighborhood and better knowledge around local resources and assets that could be leveraged to
address those concerns. Another hallmark of community policing, that is related to but distinct from
geographically-based assignments, is decentralization. In this context, the decentralization of a police
department means a reduction in a reliance on top-down policy directives from department leadership,
devolution in decisionmaking, and a reporting structure that is less hierarchical. Decentralization gives
local officers and precinct leaders more authority and discretion and it enables them to find creative
solutions to specific, individual neighborhood problems without the restrictions of blanket, overly-rigid
policies. As part of their community policing efforts cities across the country have instituted regional
district models, with precinct leaders of different ranks exercising discretion and authority on the best
ways to address their unique crime issues.8,9 Police officers are given increased autonomy to craft
creative strategies to address the specific concerns of local residents. 7 Diamond and Weiss (2009). 8
Ibid. 9 Maguire and Wells (2009). Implementing Community Policing: Lessons From 12 Agencies.
Community-Oriented Policing Services, US Department of Justice. To be effective, organizational
transformation must occur at all levels of a police department and permeate a variety of systems and
practices. For example, performance evaluation systems may be designed to evaluate officers based on
their community policing efforts; the recruitment and hiring of new officers can favor individuals who
have a “service orientation” to policing; and training that emphasizes community policing can become
part of standard, in-service training. In this era of limited budgets in which police departments are
expected to do more with less, jurisdictions across the country are increasingly using civilian employees
as a source for human resources, as they are generally relatively inexpensive compared to sworn
officers. Indeed, civilians comprise as much as 30% to 50% of the staff of many departments.10 In this
process, commonly referred to as “civilianization,” non-sworn personnel are used to handle support
roles such as administration, dispatch, crime scene forensics, record keeping, and other administrative
duties.11 The infusion of civilian workers to handle these tasks has enabled many departments to free
up sworn personnel to focus on direct law enforcement duties and community policing efforts. Indeed
federal legislation, such as the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and community policing
grants through the COPS’ program Making Officer Redeployment Effective, has specifically required
agencies to hire and use civilian employees so that officers can be re-deployed to community policing
efforts.12 Although cost-savings are the most common motivation, a 2008 national review of
civilianization in U.S. police departments found that among 76 surveyed agencies, 59% cited “support of
community policing efforts” as a motivation to hire more civilian workers.13 Example from the Field:
Staffing Constraints To deal with sworn-personnel shortfalls, some cities have expanded the
civilianization of police services to include limited officer-level functions. For example, the City of San
Francisco, faced with a slew of retiring officers for whom there was little funding to replace, began in
2010 a program to train 16 “civilian investigators”. These paid, nonsworn employees are trained to
respond to service calls dealing with non-violent crimes such as car burglaries. They are tasked with
performing basic work such as taking victim information, collecting evidence, and creating a report
which is then referred to officers at the stations for further investigation.14 Community Partnership
Community partnerships are absolutely critical in order for community policing efforts to be effective.
The mantra of community involvement permeates almost every aspect of a department. In police
departments that have demonstrated a strong commitment to the philosophy of community policing,
police officers and community partners jointly prioritize and tackle public safety issues that are most
important to the community. Successful partnerships are more than just frequent contact or simply
sharing information. They involve on-going efforts to work together in meaningful ways to address
problems facing a neighborhood. 10 Maguire and Wells (2009). 11 Forst, B. (2000). The Privatization and
Civilianization of Policing: Boundary Changes in Criminal Justice Organizations. 12 Kostelac, Constance
Anne (2008). The Changing Face of Police Organizations: Trends in Civilianization. 13 Ibid. 14 Police
Executive Research Forum (2010). Is the Economic Downturn Fundamentally Changing How We Police?
The commitment and buy-in to community partnerships happens at all levels, from command staff to
supervisors to line officers. In addition to individual residents, the term “community partners”
encompasses a range of groups such as neighborhood associations, faith-based organizations, tenant
councils, business groups, local government agencies, social service providers, schools (including
elementary and secondary public and private schools, community colleges, vocational schools, and
universities), and local businesses. These entities typically enjoy a number of qualities that facilitate
effective partnerships, including well-developed organizational structures, physical meeting spaces,
social, political, and commercial networks, material and human resources, experienced leaders, and
existing community participation. This makes them natural vehicles through which the police can engage
with local constituents to address neighborhood concerns. Improving the accessibility of police and
community services can also be an effective catalyst for community engagement and a way to facilitate
community partnership. One example of improved accessibility is increasing the number of locations in
which police services are provided or co-locating them with other civic services. Successful cities have
also utilized information technology to improve citizen communication and make public safety
information more timely and accessible. In a 2009 COPS survey of 12 agencies implementing community
policing, nearly all of the evaluated agencies had department websites that provided information about
crime alerts and included email addresses of individual officers so that citizens could provide tips, give
feedback, and communicate concerns.15 Example from the Field: Police Accessibility In the City of
Naperville, IL, police had been dealing with an emerging gang and burglary problem that was centered
around a set of high density, multi-family housing complexes. The Naperville Police Department in 2002
opened a neighborhood service center in the area with extended evening hours and a mix of sworn and
civilian personnel. The center provided a number of basic civic and public safety services such as
obtaining crime prevention information, filing police reports, paying utility bills, and obtaining parking
permits. The center proved extremely popular, with hundreds of local residents utilizing a variety of
services within the first three months of its opening.16 In order for community partnerships to be
effective, some degree of trust and mutual respect between the police and the community is necessary,
and in cities across the country that trust and respect are often lacking. Many cities have experienced
long histories of high crime, racial profiling, and police misconduct, factors that contribute to low levels
of citizen trust in law enforcement. Rebuilding this trust is a critical precursor to the establishment of
effective and authentic partnerships between communities and police. 15 Maguire and Wells (2009). 16
Ibid. Problem Solving Perhaps the most transformative aspect of the community policing movement has
been the shift from the reactive crime-response model to a more proactive problem-solving or
“problem-oriented policing” (POP) model.17 This approach puts a heavy focus on efforts to prevent
crime before it happens by systematically identifying and addressing specific social issues associated
with criminal activity. Problem-oriented policing tends to encourage creative problem solving among
officers, analysts, and community members to identify the root causes of a problem and then figure out
how best to address them. A 2010 review of the research literature found that as a whole, problem-
oriented policing approaches had a statistically significant impact on improving public safety.18 Example
from the Field: Community Partnership and Problem Solving Joint task forces made up of the police and
one or more existing community groups were established to solve specific community problems. In the
mid 1990’s, the Anaheim Police Department successfully reduced blight and disorder in the
Leatrice/Wakefield neighborhood by working with landlords, tenants, and the Office of Neighborhood
Services to create a Neighborhood Advisory Committee tasked with removing problem tenants and
reducing unit overcrowding. In the following years, the neighborhood saw marked improvements in
building safety, vacancy rates, and reductions in incident reports.19 Police departments that are
grounded in a community policing philosophy train and assign officers to duties that are focused on
creative and active problem solving and prevention, rather than simply reacting to crime and disorder.
In order for officers to do this effectively, some degree of autonomy is required, which is also an
important aspect of organizational transformation described above. One of the most common
approaches to problem solving in police departments is the SARA Problem-Solving Model. SARA stands
for the fourstep process: Scanning, Analysis, Response, and Assessment. Evidence indicates that
problem-oriented policing strategies based on the SARA method can achieve significant reductions in
crime over traditional response models. A 2010 summary of the ten most rigorous studies on the
effectiveness of SARA-based problem-oriented policing between 1993 and 2006 concluded that these
efforts achieved statisticallysignificant reductions in crime and disorder in their affected cities.20 17
Goldstein, H (1987). “Toward Community-Oriented Policing: Potential, Basic Requirements, and
Threshold Questions.” Crime and Delinquency Vol. 33 No. 6. 18 Weisburd et al. (2010). “Is Problem-
Oriented Policing Effective in Reducing Crime and Disorder? Findings From a Campbell Systematic
Review.” Criminology & Public Policy Vol. 9 Issue 1. The American Society of Criminology. 19 City Policy
Associates (2000). Safer Neighborhoods Through Community Policing, Volume II: Three Case Studies. US
Conference of Mayors. 20 Ibid. The SARA Model The specifics of the implementation of the SARA
method vary by jurisdiction and situation, but typically individual beat officers or pairs of officers, in
partnership with the community, are given the authority and responsibility to identify the crime and
disorder issues that are most prominent in their beats, prioritize them, and develop solutions.21 Some
POP efforts can be as simple as an individual officer asking a store owner to improve the lighting of their
storefront, while others can be more complex, longer-term issues such as zoning changes to improve a
blighted neighborhood.22 Some of the more effective POP approaches have occurred in police
departments in which a formal set of clearly-articulated, standardized procedures are in place. A shared
understanding and clear guidance about the necessary steps of a POP approach increase the likelihood
that each of the critical steps in the process is taken in crafting and implementing effective responses to
identified problems. 21 Ibid. 22 Diamond and Weiss (2009). Example from the Field: SARA Application A
trial program conducted by the Jacksonville Sherriff’s Office (JSO) in 2010 assigned problem-oriented
policing officers working under a SARA-style problem-solving framework to 22 of the city’s most violent
criminal “hot spots” for a 90 day period, and compared crime rates with those of the other 61 hot spots
not subject to the program. Officers in the study group were directed to find creative, preventative ways
to address crimes in their areas based on the unique needs and characteristics of their neighborhoods.
Examples of the specific POP actions taken by members of the JSO included repairing damaged fences,
installing or improving street lighting, meeting with business and home owners to improve security
measures, graffiti removal, and park cleaning. At the end of the study period, problem-oriented policing
was associated with a 33% drop in the rate of street violence compared to traditional policing. 23
Effective POP approaches are grounded in high-quality information and, therefore, high-quality
information technology systems are essential. One of the better-known POP approaches is the
CompStat process, which was developed in New York City in the mid 1990’s and has since been adopted
by many other major cities throughout the United States. Under CompStat, police department
personnel are held accountable for crime levels in their geographic areas and required to regularly
present on the current conditions within their areas, as well as the strategies underway or in
development to address those conditions. CompStat has been cited as a useful tool in enhancing
community policing efforts by assisting officers in really understanding the nature of crime within their
areas, enabling them to shape appropriate responses.24 Example from the Field: SARA Method and
Training New officers in the Colorado Springs Police Department are required to undergo a formal,
SARA-based training program developed by the Police Executive Research Forum that includes
completing a portfolio evaluation of their beat neighborhood prior to beginning active duty. The Reno,
NV Police Department devotes specific courses in its academy to the instruction of the SARA model and
its application to problemoriented policing.25 23 Taylor, Koper, and Woods (2011). “A Randomized
Control Trial of Different Policing Strategies at Hot Spots of Violent Crime.” Journal of Experimental
Criminology, Vol 7, Issue 2. 24 Maguire and Wells (2009). 25 Diamond and Weiss (2009). Keys to
Successful Community Policing As OPD continues to implement significant reform efforts and as the City
revisits the renewal of Measure Y, it would be helpful to keep in mind what decades of experience from
numerous police departments across the country has taught us about successful community policing.
The following issues have been found to assist police departments engage in effective community
policing efforts:  Form community partnerships with a wide-range of partners, above and beyond
active resident groups  Increase the department’s accessibility to the residents it serves  Train
personnel at every level of the department in best practices in community policing  Work towards
increasing officer buy-in about the benefits of the community policing philosophy  Prioritize sustained
and meaningful commitment by the department’s leadership to the community policing philosophy 
Integrate community policing activities into performance evaluation systems  Continue to support
systematic and standardized problem solving approaches Common Challenges and Barriers to Success
Common challenges and barriers to the successful adoption of community policing can be summed up
by the following: It is hard work! The institutionalization of community policing through organizational
transformation necessitates sufficient resources and sustained commitment from department executive
staff and city leaders. Changing the culture of a department can be as difficult, if not more difficult, than
changing policies, procedures, and training. Establishing and maintaining meaningful community
partnerships require an education of all stakeholders, the inclusion of missing voices, and a shared
responsibility for the outcomes. Engaging in effective problem solving requires input from several
information sources, high-quality and reliable data, officer autonomy to craft and implement targeted
and creative solutions, and on-going communication. None of this is easy. Community Policing and
Measure Y The purpose of this report is provide what is known about the best practices in community
policing as context as the City of Oakland reassesses this investment in public safety strategies. The
challenge here is to apply community policing principles that are typically viewed from a department-
wide perspective to an individual resolution that directly impacts only a fraction of OPD’s police officers
and policies. That said, it is possible to examine the extent to which the community policing elements of
Measure Y support a community policing philosophy. This assessment is based on a review of the 2004
Measure Y resolution language, previous reports published as part of the Measure Y evaluation effort,
previous assessments by expert consultants, meeting minutes from Violence Prevention and Public
Safety Oversight Committee meetings, and selected media coverage.26 Some aspects of Measure Y’s
community policing elements are well-aligned with the principles and best practices outlined above.
However, other aspects of Measure Y’s community policing elements could be better aligned to best
practices. The core of Measure Y’s community policing effort is the provision of funding for 63 officers
assigned to various community policing objectives. The resolution establishes Neighborhood Beat
Officers in which “each community policing beat shall have at least one neighborhood officer assigned
solely to serve the residents of that beat to provide consistent contact and familiarity with the residents
and officers, continuity in problem solving, and basic availability of police response in each
neighborhood.” These officers work closely with Neighborhood Crime Prevention Councils (NCPCs),
responding to the concerns of neighborhood residents in their beats by attending local meetings and
working on issues that are identified as priorities by each NCPC. Oakland residents are currently served
by 57 NCPCs that historically have corresponded geographically to OPD police beats. At least six of the
63 officers are designated as Crime Reduction Team (CRT) officers who are tasked to “investigate and
respond to illegal narcotic transactions and commission of violent crimes in identified violence hot
spots.” 27 Additional community policing objectives as articulated in the resolution include school
safety, domestic violence and child abuse intervention, and officer training and equipment. In Alignment
with Best Practices The establishment of Neighborhood Beat Officers, more commonly referred to as
Problem Solving Officers (PSOs), are clearly in line with two of the key tenets of effective community
policing: community partnerships and solving problems. In addition, the assignment of officers to
specific beats is also in line with a key component of community policing: geographically-based police
officer assignments. As discussed above, SARA is one of the more effective and commonly-used problem
solving models. PSOs are expected to use the SARA method of problem solving and a web-based SARA
database, which was implemented in 2008 to track their performance in executing SARA-based problem
solving.28 Research has shown that systematic approaches with clearly articulated and consistently
employed steps to SARA produce better results. According to one COPS Office evaluation, “departments
that create[d] a more formal mechanism for recording problem solving endeavors” was a demonstration
of greater commitment to problem solving approach.29 OPD’s SARA database embodies these best
practices. Not in Alignment with Best Practices While resolution language can be a good starting point,
the actual implementation of community policing efforts and the quality of those efforts are what
matters most. The development of the SARA database does not necessarily mean that all officers are
engaging in the SARA method in a manner that is consistent and 26 Primary source documents are
included in the References section. 27 Oakland City Council (2004). 28 Resource Development
Associates (2012). City of Oakland: Community Policing Neighborhood Services Evaluation FY 2011-2012.
29 Maguire and Wells (2009). effective and questions about the use of the system have been raised.30
In addition, the SARA database is only one example of problem solving approaches and other elements
of Measure Y could be infused with a problem solving focus above and beyond the use of the database.
Similarly, the requirement that PSOs work with NCPCs and attend council meetings does not necessarily
mean that quality community policing partnerships are in place. To be sure, there are beats where
strong and effective community partnerships exist, but these types of partnerships should exist in all
beats.31 A previous assessment of OPD found that “in strictly allotting new police to specified
community policing roles the well intentioned Measure Y fundamentally undercuts how successful
community policing should work.”32 Said another way, the resolution language in some ways hinders
the implementation of community policing that is fully aligned with best practices. Assessing how
Measure Y measures up to another key component of community policing, organizational
transformation, is by definition not appropriate. Organizational transformation means that the
community policing philosophy permeates every aspect of a police department such as culture, systems,
training, and policies. The extent to which OPD employs those elements is an exercise beyond the scope
of the evaluation efforts of the Measure Y resolution. Oakland Police Department: A Department in Flux
It is important to acknowledge the greater context in which OPD is operating above and beyond
Measure Y. The Department is currently in a state of flux with several reform efforts underway,
oversight from external monitors in place, and recommendations from national experts being reviewed.
These include efforts related to the Negotiated Settlement Agreement33 and assessments by the
Bratton Group34 and Strategic Policy Partnership, LLC.35 These assessments are examining the issues of
geographically-based assignments and decentralization, among others, and providing concrete
recommendations that will move the Department closer to a department that is grounded in the
community policing philosophy. In addition, OPD is at present implementing a Neighborhood Policing
Plan that will change geographic assignments and reporting structures. Another challenge the
Department faces, which impacts the implementation of Measure Y, is sufficient staffing. OPD has
experienced significant cuts in the number of sworn officers in recent years and the City currently has an
active force of 649 sworn officers serving a population of nearly 400,000, or 1.6 officers per 1,000
residents.36 This level of sworn police officers per capita is well below the national average of 2.4, and
significantly lower than that of similarly-sized cities that also struggle with high crime rates, such as
Cleveland, OH (3.7 officers per 1,000 residents) and St. Louis, MO (4.3 officers per 1,000 residents).37 In
some ways, these on-going staffing challenges could limit the Department’s ability to fully embrace a
community policing philosophy. 30 Resource Development Associates (2012). 31 Ibid. 32 Harnett
Associates (2006). Crime Fighting in Oakland: An Assessment of the Oakland Police Department. 33
Matier and Ross (2013). “Oakland Pays Big For Police Compliance”. The San Francisco Chronicle. May
19th, 2013. 34 Bratton Group (2013). Oakland Crime Reduction Project: Bratton Group Findings and
Recommendations and District Based Investigations in Oakland. 35 Report forthcoming. 36 Duckworth,
A. “Oakland Graduates First Academy Class Since 2008”. CBS Bay Area. March 22nd, 2013. 37 FBI (2011).
Uniform Crime Reports: Full Time Law Enforcement Employees by State, by City. Measure Y as an
Opportunity The purpose of this report is to provide a national, best practices context of community
policing for Oakland stakeholders in light of the Measure Y resolution being revisited in the upcoming
year. As outlined above, some elements of Measure Y as articulated in the 2004 resolution are well-
aligned with what we know makes for effective community policing, while other elements are not. In
addition, the realities of implementation challenges of some aspects of Measure Y, which could be
viewed as understandable given the greater context of the Department, limit the positive impact of
Measure Y. A significant body of evidence from decades of experiences in police departments indicates
that the adoption of community policing as a department-wide philosophy that permeates almost every
aspect of a department can achieve measurable reductions in crime and disorder and can lead to
improvements in residents’ quality of life. However, this is very difficult to achieve and requires
significant time and support. In order for community policing to be truly successful it needs to become a
reality in practice, not just endorsed in principal. Moving forward, Measure Y should be viewed as an
opportunity. An opportunity to continue to employ some of the existing elements of the resolution that
are in line with best practices of community policing; an opportunity to work harder to ensure that other
elements of the resolution match the reality of things happening “on the ground;” and an opportunity to
further infuse best practices into this significant and well-intentioned investment in public safety in the
City of Oakland. References Braga, Anthony and Bond, Brenda (2008). “Policing Crime and Disorder Hot
Spots: a Randomized Controlled Trial.” Criminology Vol. 46 No. 3, August 2008.
http://www.smartpolicinginitiative.com/sites/all/files/Braga%20%20Bond%202008.pdf. Bratton Group,
LLC (2013). District-Based Investigations in Oakland: Rapid and Effective Response to Robberies,
Burglaries, and Shootings. Bratton Group, LLC (2013). Oakland Crime Reduction Project: Bratton Group
Findings and Recommendations. Bureau of Justice Assistance (1994). Understanding Community
Policing: A Framework for Action. US Department of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/commp.pdf.
City of Oakland, Violence Prevention and Public Safety Oversight Committee (2013). Meeting Agenda &
Minutes, May 20th 2013. http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/MYOC-Agenda-Packet-
5.20.13.pdf. City Policy Associates (2000). Safer Neighborhoods Through Community Policing, Volume II:
Three Case Studies. United States Conference of Mayors.
http://www.usmayors.org/bestpractices/community_policing_0401/safer_neighborhoods_2.pdf.
Community Oriented Policing Services (2012). COPS FY 2013 Performance Budget. US Department of
Justice. http://www.justice.gov/jmd/2013justification/pdf/fy13-cops-justification.pdf. Community
Oriented Policing Services (2013). COPS History: 1994 to the Present. US Department of Justice.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?item=44. Connell, Miggans, and McGloin (2008). “Can a
Community Policing Initiative Reduce Serious Crime? A Local Evaluation.” Police Quarterly Vol. 11 p.128.
May2008. Cordero, J. (2011). Reducing the Cost of Quality Policing: Making Community Safety Cost
Effective. Cochran, J. and Patricia W. (2011). “Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Differences in Perceptions of
the Police: the Salience of Officer Race Within the Context of Racial Profiling.” Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice , December 2011. http://ccj.sagepub.com/content/28/2/206.full.pdf+html. Cordner, G.
(2010). Reducing Fear of Crime: Strategies For Police. Community Oriented Policing Services. US
Department of Justice. http://www.popcenter.org/library/reading/pdfs/ReducingFearGuide.pdf.
Diamond, D. and Weiss, D. (2009). Advancing Community Policing Through Community Governance: a
Framework Document. Community-Oriented Policing Services, US Department of Justice. Duckworth, A.
“Oakland Graduates First Academy Class Since 2008”. CBS Bay Area. March 22nd, 2013.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/03/22/oakland-police-graduates-its-first-academy-class-since-
2008/. FBI (2011). Table 78: Uniform Crime Reports: Full Time Law Enforcement Employees by State, by
City 2011. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/police-
employee/cityagency. Forst, B. (2000). The Privatization and Civilianization of Policing. Boundary
Changes in Criminal Justice Organizations. https://www.ncjrs.gov/criminal_justice2000/vol_2/02c2.pdf.
Goldstein, H (1987). “Toward Community-Oriented Policing: Potential, Basic Requirements, and
Threshold Questions.” Crime and Delinquency Vol. 33 No. 6. Harnett Associates (2006). Crime Fighting in
Oakland: An Assessment of the Oakland Police Department. Kelling, G. and Moore, K. (1988). “The
Evolving Strategy of Policing.” Perspectives on Policing No.4. November 1988.
https://ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/114213.pdf. Kostelac, Constance Anne (2008). The Changing Face of
Police Organizations: Trends in Civilianization. Maguire, E. and Wells, W. (2009). Implementing
Community Policing: Lessons From 12 Agencies. Community-Oriented Policing Services, US Department
of Justice. Matier and Ross (2013). “Oakland Pays Big For Police Compliance”. The San Francisco
Chronicle. May 19th, 2013. http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Oakland-pays-big-
for-police-compliance-4528601.php. National Center for Justice Planning (2013). Scanning, Analysis,
Response, and Evaluation (SARA): A Problem Solving Model. http://ncjp.org/strategic-planning/justice-
applications/sara-problem-solving-model. Oakland City Council (2004). Text of Resolution No. 78734
C.M.S., Revised 7-20-04. http://oaklandunite.org/wpcontent/uploads/2011/05/PROPOSALJERSEY-
GLATT.pdf. Police Executive Research Forum (2010). Is the Economic Downturn Fundamentally Changing
How We Police? http://policeforum.org/library/critical-issues-in-policing-
series/Econdownturnaffectpolicing12.10.pdf. Rand Center on Quality Policing (2007). Community
Policing and Violence Prevention in Oakland: Measure Y in Action.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR546.html. Resource Development Associates (2012).
City of Oakland: Community Policing Neighborhood Services Evaluation FY 2011- 2012.
http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Evaluation-Community-Policing-FY2011-12.pdf.
Taylor, Koper, and Woods (2011). “A Randomized Control Trial of Different Policing Strategies at Hot
Spots of Violent Crime.” Journal of Experimental Criminology, Vol 7, Issue 2. Tillman, R. (2000). The
Effectiveness of Community Policing.
http://www.emich.edu/cerns/downloads/papers/PoliceStaff/Unsorted/Effectiveness%20of%20Commu
nity%20Po licing.pdf. Weisburd et al. (2010). “Is Problem-Oriented Policing Effective in Reducing Crime
and Disorder?: Findings From a Campbell Systematic Review.” Criminology & Public Policy Vol. 9 Issue 1.
The American Society of Criminology.
http://www.smartpolicinginitiative.com/sites/all/files/POP%20Weisburd_et_al.pdf.

Catholics striving for Holiness

November 2 at 9:22pm ·

LOOKING FOR THE BIBLICAL BASIS OF PURGATORY? Here are some 25 Biblical Passages.

I have encountered some skeptical non-Catholic Christian brethren challenging me to provide some
Biblical basis on Purgatory or outrightly proclaiming the Purgatory is not Biblical and therefore does
not exist.

To satisfy their curiosity, remove them from their errancy, and convince them from their incredulity
(with the help of God’s grace and their willing correspondence), I am providing here a long but
excellent academic study, excerpt from DAVE ARMSTRONG’S BESTSELLING BOOK, A BIBLICAL DEFENSE
OF CATHOLICISM, PP. 123-145 (footnotes removed for brevity’s sake: if interested, kindly consult
original source link below. Capitalized Scriptural texts mine).

Hope this would help our other Christian brethren. Have a nice day and God bless!

SOURCE: http://www.patheos.com/…/25-bible-passages-on-purgatory.html
PHOTO SOURCE: Azulejos de Las Benditas Almas del Purgatorio in Iglesia de San Pedro (Seville, Spain).
+++
From my bestselling 1996 book, A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, pp. 123-145. The introductory
material of the chapter (definitions) is omitted; also a few quotations. Footnoting numbers are from
my original manuscript and differ from the present Sophia edition. All Bible passages are from RSV.

+++
1) Psalm 66:12. THOU DIDST LET MEN RIDE OVER OUR HEADS; WE WENT THROUGH FIRE AND
THROUGH WATER; YET THOU HAST BROUGHT US FORTH TO A SPACIOUS PLACE.
• This verse was considered a proof of purgatory by Origen [4] and St. Ambrose, [5] who posits the
water of baptism and the fire of purgatory.

2) Ecclesiastes 12:14. FOR GOD WILL BRING EVERY DEED INTO JUDGMENT, WITH EVERY SECRET
THING, WHETHER GOOD OR EVIL.

3) Isaiah 4:4. WHEN THE LORD SHALL HAVE WASHED AWAY THE FILTH OF THE DAUGHTERS OF ZION
AND CLEANSED THE BLOODSTAINS OF JERUSALEM FROM ITS MIDST BY A SPIRIT OF JUDGMENT AND
BY A SPIRIT OF BURNING. (see also Isaiah 1:25-26)
• St. Francis de Sales, the great Catholic apologist of the 16th century, commented on this verse as
follows: This purgation made in the spirit of judgment and of burning is understood of Purgatory by
St. Augustine, in the 20th Book of the City of God, chapter 25. And in fact this interpretation is
favoured by the words preceding, in which mention is made of the salvation of men, and also by the
end of the chapter, where the repose of the blessed is spoken of; wherefore that which is said — “the
Lord shall wash away the filth” — is to be understood of the purgation necessary for this salvation.
And since it is said that this purgation is to be made in the spirit of heat and of burning, it cannot well
be understood save of Purgatory and its fire. [6].

4) Isaiah 6:5-7. AND I SAID: “WOE IS ME! FOR I AM LOST; FOR I AM A MAN OF UNCLEAN LIPS, AND I
DWELL IN THE MIDST OF A PEOPLE OF UNCLEAN LIPS; FOR MY EYES HAVE SEEN THE KING, THE LORD
OF HOSTS.” THEN FLEW ONE OF THE SERAPHIM TO ME, HAVING IN HIS HAND A BURNING COAL
WHICH HE HAD TAKEN WITH TONGS FROM THE ALTAR. AND HE TOUCHED MY MOUTH, AND SAID:
“BEHOLD, THIS HAS TOUCHED YOUR LIPS; YOUR GUILT IS TAKEN AWAY, AND YOUR SIN FORGIVEN.”
• This passage is a noteworthy example of what happens when men experience God’s presence
directly. An immediate recognition of one’s own unholiness occurs, along with the corresponding
feeling of inadequacy. Like Isaiah, we must all undergo a self-conscious and voluntary purging upon
approaching God more closely than in this present life.
• Few doctrines are clearer in Scripture than the necessity of absolute holiness in order to enter
heaven. On this, Protestants and Catholics are in total agreement. Therefore, the fundamental
disagreement on this subject is: how long does this purification upon death take? Certainly, it cannot
be logically denied as a possibility that this purging might involve duration.

5) Micah 7:8-9. REJOICE NOT OVER ME, O MINE ENEMY; WHEN I FALL, I SHALL RISE; WHEN I SIT IN
DARKNESS, THE LORD WILL BE A LIGHT TO ME. I WILL BEAR THE INDIGNATION OF THE LORD BECAUSE
I HAVE SINNED AGAINST HIM, UNTIL HE PLEADS MY CAUSE AND EXECUTES JUDGMENT FOR ME. HE
WILL BRING ME FORTH TO THE LIGHT; I SHALL BEHOLD HIS DELIVERANCE. (see also Leviticus 26:41,43,
Job 40:4-5, Lamentations 3:39)
• St. Jerome (d.420) considered this a clear proof of purgatory. [7]
6) Malachi 3:2-4. BUT WHO CAN ENDURE THE DAY OF HIS COMING, AND WHO CAN STAND WHEN HE
APPEARS? FOR HE IS LIKE A REFINER’S FIRE, AND LIKE FULLERS’ SOAP; HE WILL SIT AS A REFINER AND
PURIFIER OF SILVER, AND HE WILL PURIFY THE SONS OF LEVI, AND REFINE THEM LIKE GOLD AND
SILVER, TILL THEY PRESENT RIGHT OFFERINGS TO THE LORD. THEN THE OFFERING OF JUDAH AND
JERUSALEM WILL BE PLEASING TO THE LORD AS IN THE DAYS OF OLD AND AS IN FORMER YEARS.
St. Francis de Sales recounts the patristic views on this passage:
• This place is expounded of a purifying punishment by Origen (Hom. 6 on Exodus), St. Ambrose (On
Ps 36), St. Augustine (City of God, Bk. 20, ch. 25), and St. Jerome (on this place). We are quite aware
that they understand it of a purgation which will be at the end of the world by the general fire and
conflagration, in which will be purged away the remains of the sins of those who will be found alive;
but we still are able to draw from this a good argument for our Purgatory. For if persons at that time
have need of purgation before receiving the effects of the benediction of the supreme Judge, why
shall not those also have need of it who die before that time, since some of these may be found at
death to have remains of their imperfections . . . St. Irenaeus in this connection, in chapter 29 of Book
V, says that because the militant Church is then to mount up to the heavenly palace of the Spouse,
and will no longer have time for purgation, her faults and stains will there and then be purged away
by this fire which will precede the judgment. [9]

7) 2 Maccabees 12:39-42, 44-45 . . . JUDAS AND HIS MEN WENT TO TAKE UP THE BODIES OF THE
FALLEN . . . THEN UNDER THE TUNIC OF EVERY ONE OF THE DEAD THEY FOUND SACRED TOKENS OF
THE IDOLS OF JAMNIA, WHICH THE LAW FORBIDS THE JEWS TO WEAR . . . SO THEY ALL . . . TURNED TO
PRAYER, BESEECHING THAT THE SIN WHICH HAD BEEN COMMITTED MIGHT BE WHOLLY BLOTTED OUT
. . . FOR IF HE WERE NOT EXPECTING THAT THOSE WHO HAD FALLEN WOULD RISE AGAIN, IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN SUPERFLUOUS AND FOOLISH TO PRAY FOR THE DEAD. BUT IF HE WAS LOOKING TO THE
SPLENDID REWARD THAT IS LAID UP FOR THOSE WHO FALL ASLEEP IN GODLINESS, IT WAS A HOLY
AND PIOUS THOUGHT. THEREFORE HE MADE ATONEMENT FOR THE DEAD, THAT THEY MIGHT BE
DELIVERED FROM THEIR SIN.
• The Jews offered atonement and prayer for their deceased brethren, who had clearly violated
Mosaic Law. Such a practice presupposes purgatory, since those in heaven wouldn’t need any help,
and those in hell are beyond it. The Jewish people, therefore, believed in prayer for the dead
(whether or not this book is scriptural — Protestants deny that it is). Jesus Christ did not correct this
belief, as He surely would have done if it were erroneous (see Matthew 5:22,25-26, 12:32, Luke 12:58-
59, 16:9,19-31 below). When our Lord and Savior talks about the afterlife, He never denies the fact
that there is a third state, and the overall evidence of His utterances in this regard strongly indicates
that He accepted the existence of purgatory.
8) Matthew 5:22 BUT I SAY TO YOU THAT EVERY ONE WHO IS ANGRY WITH HIS BROTHER SHALL BE
LIABLE TO JUDGMENT; WHOEVER INSULTS HIS BROTHER SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE COUNCIL, AND
WHOEVER SAYS, “YOU FOOL!” SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE HELL OF FIRE.
• St. Francis de Sales elucidates the implications of this statement of Christ: It is only the third sort of
offence which is punished with hell; therefore in the judgment of God after this life there are other
pains which are not eternal or infernal, — these are the pains of Purgatory. One may say that the
pains will be suffered in this world; but St. Augustine and the other Fathers understand them for the
other world. And again may it not be that a man should die on the first or second offence which is
spoken here? And when will such a one pay the penalty due to his offence? . . . Do then as the ancient
Fathers did, and say that there is a place where they will be purified, and then they will go to heaven
above. [10]

9) Matthew 5:25-26. MAKE FRIENDS QUICKLY WITH YOUR ACCUSER, WHILE YOU ARE GOING WITH
HIM TO COURT, LEST YOUR ACCUSER HAND YOU OVER TO THE JUDGE, AND THE JUDGE TO THE
GUARD, AND YOU BE PUT IN PRISON; TRULY, I SAY TO YOU, YOU WILL NEVER GET OUT TILL YOU HAVE
PAID THE LAST PENNY. (see also Luke 12:58-59)
• St. Francis de Sales: Origen, St. Cyprian, St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine say
that the way which is meant in the whilst thou art in the way [while you are going with him to court]
is no other than the passage of the present life: the adversary [accuser] will be our own conscience, . .
. as St. Ambrose expounds, and Bede, St. Augustine, St. Gregory [the Great], and St. Bernard. Lastly,
the judge is without doubt Our Lord . . . The prison, again, is . . . the place of punishment in the other
world, in which, as in a large jail, there are many buildings; one for those who are damned, which is as
it were for criminals, the other for those in Purgatory, which is as it were for debt. The farthing,
[penny] . . . are little sins and infirmities, as the farthing is the smallest money one can owe.
• Now let us consider a little where this repayment . . . is to be made. And we find from most ancient
Fathers that it is in Purgatory: Tertullian, [11] Cyprian, [12] Origen, [13] . . . St. Ambrose, [14] St.
Jerome [15] . . . Who sees not that in St. Luke the comparison is drawn, not from a murderer or some
criminal, who can have no hope of escape, but from a debtor who is thrown into prison till payment,
and when this is made is at once let out? This then is the meaning of Our Lord, that whilst we are in
this world we should try by penitence and its fruits to pay, according to the power which we have by
the blood of the Redeemer, the penalty to which our sins have subjected us; since if we wait till death
we shall not have such good terms in Purgatory, when we shall be treated with severity of justice. [16]

10) Matthew 12:32. AND WHOEVER SAYS A WORD AGAINST THE SON OF MAN WILL BE FORGIVEN;
BUT WHOEVER SPEAKS AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL NOT BE FORGIVEN, EITHER IN THIS AGE OR IN
THE AGE TO COME.
• If sins can be pardoned in the “age to come” (the afterlife), again, in the nature of things, this must
be in purgatory. We would laugh at a man who said that he would not marry in this world or the next
(as if he could in the next — see Mark 12:25). If this sin cannot be forgiven after death, it follows that
there are others which can be. Accordingly, this interpretation was held by St. Augustine, [17] St.
Gregory the Great, [18] Bede, [19] and St. Bernard, [20] among others.

11) Luke 16:9. AND I TELL YOU, MAKE FRIENDS FOR YOURSELVES BY MEANS OF UNRIGHTEOUS
MAMMON, SO THAT WHEN IT FAILS THEY MAY RECEIVE YOU INTO THE ETERNAL HABITATIONS. (read
Luke 16:1-13 for the context)
• St. Francis de Sales: To fail, – what is it but to die? — and the friends, – who are they but the Saints?
The interpreters all understand it so; whence two things follow, — that the Saints can help men
departed, and that the departed can be helped by the Saints . . . Thus is this passage expounded by St.
Ambrose, and by St. Augustine. [21] But the parable Our Lord is using is too clear to allow us any
doubt of this interpretation; for the similitude is taken from a steward who, being dismissed from his
office and reduced to poverty [16:2], begged help from his friends, and Our Lord likens the dismissal
unto death, and the help begged from friends unto the help one receives after death from those to
whom one has given alms. This help cannot be received by those who are in Paradise or in hell; it is
then by those who are in Purgatory. [22]
12) Luke 16:19-31. THERE WAS A RICH MAN WHO WAS CLOTHED IN PURPLE AND FINE LINEN AND
WHO FEASTED SUMPTUOUSLY EVERY DAY. AND AT HIS GATE LAY A POOR MAN NAMED LAZARUS,
FULL OF SORES, WHO DESIRED TO BE FED WITH WHAT FELL FROM THE RICH MAN’S TABLE; . . . THE
POOR MAN DIED AND WAS CARRIED BY THE ANGELS TO ABRAHAM’S BOSOM. THE RICH MAN ALSO
DIED AND WAS BURIED; AND IN HADES, BEING IN TORMENT, HE LIFTED UP HIS EYES, AND SAW
ABRAHAM FAR OFF AND LAZARUS IN HIS BOSOM. AND HE CALLED OUT, “FATHER ABRAHAM, HAVE
MERCY UPON ME, AND SEND LAZARUS TO DIP THE END OF HIS FINGER IN WATER AND COOL MY
TONGUE; FOR I AM IN ANGUISH IN THIS FLAME.” BUT ABRAHAM SAID, “SON, REMEMBER THAT YOU
IN YOUR LIFETIME RECEIVED YOUR GOOD THINGS, AND LAZARUS IN LIKE MANNER EVIL THINGS, BUT
NOW HE IS COMFORTED HERE, AND YOU ARE IN ANGUISH. AND BESIDES ALL THIS, BETWEEN US AND
YOU A GREAT CHASM HAS BEEN FIXED, IN ORDER THAT THOSE WHO WOULD PASS FROM HERE TO
YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE, AND NONE MAY CROSS FROM THERE TO US.” AND HE SAID, “THEN I BEG
YOU, FATHER, TO SEND HIM TO MY FATHER’S HOUSE, FOR I HAVE FIVE BROTHERS, SO THAT HE MAY
WARN THEM, LEST THEY ALSO COME INTO THIS PLACE OF TORMENT.” BUT ABRAHAM SAID, “THEY
HAVE MOSES AND THE PROPHETS; LET THEM HEAR THEM.” AND HE SAID, “NO, FATHER ABRAHAM;
BUT IF SOME ONE GOES TO THEM FROM THE DEAD, THEY WILL REPENT.” HE SAID TO HIM, “IF THEY
DO NOT HEAR MOSES AND THE PROPHETS, NEITHER WILL THEY BE CONVINCED IF SOME ONE SHOULD
RISE FROM THE DEAD.”
13) Zechariah 9:11. AS FOR YOU ALSO, BECAUSE OF THE BLOOD OF MY COVENANT WITH YOU, I WILL
SET YOUR CAPTIVES FREE FROM THE WATERLESS PIT.

14) Ephesians 4:8-10. . . “WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH HE LED A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE
GIFTS TO MEN.”
• (In saying, “he ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of
the earth? He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all
things.)

15) 1 Peter 3:19-20 . . . HE WENT AND PREACHED TO THE SPIRITS IN PRISON, WHO FORMERLY DID
NOT OBEY, WHEN GOD’S PATIENCE WAITED IN THE DAYS OF NOAH, DURING THE BUILDING OF THE
ARK, IN WHICH A FEW, THAT IS, EIGHT PERSONS, WERE SAVED THROUGH WATER. (see also 4:6)
• Catholic commentator George Leo Haydock states: Abraham’s bosom — The place of rest, where the
souls of the saints resided, till Christ had opened heaven by his death . . . The bosom of Abraham (the
common Father of all the faithful) was the place where the souls of the saints, and departed
patriarchs, waited the arrival of their Deliverer. It was thither that Jesus went after his death; as it is
said in the Creed, he descended into hell, to deliver those who were detained there, and who might at
Christ’s ascension enter into heaven (see 1 Peter 3:19, Matthew 8:11) . . .
• [on 1 Peter 3:19-20]: These spirits in prison, to whom Christ went to preach after his death, were not
in heaven, nor yet in the hell of the damned; because heaven is no prison, and Christ did not go to
preach to the damned . . . In this prison souls would not be detained unless they were indebted to
divine justice, nor would salvation be preached to them unless they were in a state that was capable
of receiving salvation. [23]
• At the very least, these passages prove that there can and does exist a third (and intermediate) state
after death besides heaven and hell. Thus, purgatory is not a priori unthinkable from a biblical
perspective (as many Protestants casually assume). True, the Hebrew Sheol (Greek Hades –
netherworld) is not absolutely identical to purgatory (both righteous and unrighteous go there), but it
is nevertheless strikingly similar. Sheol is referred to frequently throughout the Old Testament
(Deuteronomy 32:22, 2 Samuel 22:6, Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 55:15, 86:13, 116:3, 139:8, Proverbs 9:18,
23:14, Isaiah 5:14, 14:9,15, Ezekiel 31:16-17, 32:21,27). In Jewish apocalyptic literature (in the few
hundred years before Christ), the notion of divisions in Sheol is found (for instance, in Enoch 22:1-14).
• The Christian hell is equivalent to the New Testament Gehenna or “Lake of Fire”. Gehenna was
literally the burning ash-heap outside Jerusalem, and was used as the name for hell by Christ
(Matthew 5:22,29-30, 10:28, 18:9, 23:15,33, Mark 9:43,45,47, Luke 12:5 — cf. James 3:6). “Lake of fire”
occurs only in Revelation as a chilling description of the horrors of hell into which the damned would
be thrown (Revelation 19:20, 20:10,14-15, 21:8).
• We know from Scripture that a few Old Testament saints went to heaven before Christ went to
Sheol and led (presumably) the majority of the pre-Christian righteous there (Ephesians 4:8-10 and 1
Peter 3:19-20). Elijah went straight to heaven by a whirlwind, as we are informed in 2 Kings 2:11. It is
also generally thought by all sides that Enoch went directly to heaven as well (Genesis 5:24). Moses
came with Elijah to the Mount of Transfiguration to talk with Jesus (Matthew 17:1-3, Mark 9:4, Luke
9:30-31). By implication, then, it could be held that he, too, had been in heaven, and by further logical
inference, other Old Testament saintly figures.
• It follows that, even before Christ, there was a “two-tiered” afterlife for the righteous: some, such as
Elijah, Enoch and likely Moses and others, went to heaven, whereas a second, larger group went
temporarily to Sheol. Likewise, now the elect of God can go straight to heaven if sufficiently holy, or
to purgatory as a necessary stopping-point in order to attain to the proper sanctity becoming of
inhabitants of heavenly glory. Therefore, it is neither true that all righteous dead before Christ went
solely to Sheol, nor that all after His Resurrection went, and go, to heaven. On the other hand, the
reprobate dead in Sheol (or Hades) eventually are sentenced to hell (Revelation 20:13-15).
• John Henry Cardinal Newman comments: Our Saviour, as we suppose, did not go to the abyss
assigned to the fallen Angels, but to those mysterious mansions where the souls of all men await the
judgment. That He went to the abode of blessed spirits is evident, from His words addressed to the
robber on the cross, when He also called it Paradise; that He went to some other place besides
Paradise may be conjectured from St. Peter’s saying, He went and preached to the spirits in prison,
who had once been disobedient (1 Peter 3:19-20). The circumstances then that these two abodes of
disembodied good and bad, are called by one name, Hades, . . . seems clearly to show that Paradise is
not the same as Heaven, but a resting-place at the foot of it. Let it be further remarked, that Samuel,
when brought from the dead, in the witch’s cavern, said Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me
up? (1 Samuel 28:15), words which would seem quite inconsistent with his being then already in
Heaven. [24]
16) 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 FOR NO OTHER FOUNDATION CAN ANYONE LAY THAN THAT WHICH IS LAID,
WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST. NOW IF ANY ONE BUILDS ON THE FOUNDATION WITH GOLD, SILVER,
PRECIOUS STONES, WOOD, HAY, STUBBLE – EACH MAN’S WORK WILL BECOME MANIFEST; FOR THE
DAY WILL DISCLOSE IT, BECAUSE IT WILL BE REVEALED WITH FIRE, AND THE FIRE WILL TEST WHAT
SORT OF WORK EACH ONE HAS DONE. IF THE WORK WHICH ANY MAN HAS BUILT ON THE
FOUNDATION SURVIVES, HE WILL RECEIVE A REWARD. IF ANY MAN’S WORK IS BURNED UP, HE WILL
SUFFER LOSS, THOUGH HE HIMSELF WILL BE SAVED, BUT ONLY AS THROUGH FIRE.
• This is a clear and obvious allusion to purgatory, or at least, even for the most skeptical person,
something exceedingly similar to it. Thus thought the Fathers, such as St. Cyprian, [25] St.
Ambrose,[26] St. Jerome, [27] St. Gregory the Great, [28] Origen, [29] and St. Augustine:
• Lord, rebuke me not in Your indignation, nor correct me in Your anger [Psalm 38:1]. . . . In this life
may You cleanse me and make me such that I have no need of the corrective fire, which is for those
who are saved, but as if by fire . . . For it is said: He shall be saved, but as if by fire [1 Corinthians 3:15].
And because it is said that he shall be saved, little is thought of that fire. Yet plainly, though we be
saved by fire, that fire will be more severe than anything a man can suffer in this life. [30]
• St. Francis de Sales observes: The Apostle uses two similitudes. The first is of an architect who with
solid materials builds a valuable house on a rock: the second is of one who on the same foundation
erects a house of boards, reeds, straw. Let us now imagine that a fire breaks out in both the houses.
That which is of solid material will be out of danger, and the other will be burnt to ashes. And if the
architect be in the first he will be whole and safe; if he be in the second, he must, if he would escape,
rush through fire and flame, and shall be saved yet so that he will bear the marks of having been in
fire . . . The fire by which the architect is saved can only be understood of the fire of Purgatory . . . . . .
• When he . . . speaks of him who has built on the foundation, wood, straw, stubble, he shows that he
is not speaking of the fire which will precede the day of judgment, since by this will pass not only
those who have built with these light materials, but also those who shall have built in gold, silver, etc.
All this interpretation, besides that it agrees very well with the text, is also most authentic, as having
been followed with common consent by the ancient Fathers. [31]

17) 1 Corinthians 15:29. OTHERWISE, WHAT DO PEOPLE MEAN BY BEING BAPTIZED ON BEHALF OF THE
DEAD? IF THE DEAD ARE NOT RAISED AT ALL, WHY ARE PEOPLE BAPTIZED ON THEIR BEHALF?
• St. Francis de Sales: This passage properly understood evidently shows that it was the custom of the
primitive Church to watch, pray, fast, for the souls of the departed. For, firstly, in the Scriptures to be
baptized is often taken for afflictions and penances; as in Luke 12:50 . . . and in St. Mark 10:38-9 . . . —
in which places Our Lord calls pains and afflictions baptism [cf. Matthew 3:11, 20:22-3, Luke 3:16].
• This then is the sense of that Scripture: if the dead rise not again, what is the use of mortifying and
afflicting oneself, of praying and fasting for the dead? And indeed this sentence of St. Paul resembles
that of 2 Maccabees 12:44 [cited above]: It is superfluous and vain to pray for the dead if the dead rise
not again. . . . Now it was not for those in Paradise [heaven], who had no need of it, nor for those in
hell, who could get no benefit from it; it was, then, for those in Purgatory. Thus did St. Ephraim
[d.373] expound it. [32]
• The “penance” interpretation is supported contextually by the next three verses, where the Apostle
speaks of being in peril every hour, and dying every day. St. Paul certainly doesn’t condemn the
practice, whatever it is (his question being merely rhetorical). Given these facts, and the striking
resemblance to 2 Maccabees 12:44, the traditional Catholic interpretation seems the most plausible.
• In any event, Protestants are at almost a complete loss in coherently explaining this verse — one of
the most difficult in the New Testament for them to interpret. It simply does not comport with their
theology, which utterly disallows any penitential or prayerful efforts on behalf of the deceased.

18) 2 Corinthians 5:10 FOR WE MUST ALL APPEAR BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST, SO THAT
EACH ONE MAY RECEIVE GOOD OR EVIL, ACCORDING TO WHAT HE HAS DONE IN THE BODY.
• Our sins are judged here rather than forgiven, and this takes place in the next life. The standard
Protestant theology of the judgment seat of Christ is not dissimilar to the notion of the chastising
purifications of purgatory. There is a direct relation between judgment and the purging of sin. We are
punished, in some fashion — or so St. Paul tells us in this verse — for evil deeds done. The pains of
purgatory are roughly identical, or else highly akin, to this punishment, since they are the taking away
of those sinful habits, tendencies, and affinities to which we have become attached. Conversely, we
are rewarded for good deeds. As there are differential rewards for righteousness, so there are
differential sufferings in purgatory for unrighteousness, so that a certain parallelism exists between
the two concepts.
• This passage is a sort of liaison between the theological categories justification and purgatory (and
penance) — the former being the “positive” establishment of sanctity, and the latter being the
“negative” removal of unholiness. This congruity between reward and punishment is even more
clearly seen in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 above, where St. Paul freely intermingles rewards and
punishments, in the context of purgatorial fire. Given the obvious affinity of that passage with this
one, each can be legitimately interpreted in light of the other. In doing so, the Catholic interpretation,
with its distinctive understanding of faith and works, penance and purgatory, is more satisfactory
exegetically than the usual Protestant interpretations, which are uncomfortable, by and large, with
differential rewards and punishments (seeing these as somewhat incompatible with faith alone).

19) 2 Corinthians 7:1. . . LET US CLEANSE OURSELVES FROM EVERY DEFILEMENT OF BODY AND SPIRIT,
AND MAKE HOLINESS PERFECT IN THE FEAR OF GOD.(see also 1 Thessalonians 3:13, 4:7)
• Here is a description of that analogous process of sanctification in this life which will be greatly
intensified and made completely efficacious in the next, in purgatory.

20) Philippians 2:10-11. THAT AT THE NAME OF JESUS EVERY KNEE SHOULD BOW, IN HEAVEN AND ON
EARTH AND UNDER THE EARTH, AND EVERY TONGUE CONFESS THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, TO THE
GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER.

21) Revelation 5:3,13. AND NO ONE IN HEAVEN OR ON EARTH OR UNDER THE EARTH WAS ABLE TO
OPEN THE SCROLL OR TO LOOK INTO IT. . . .AND I HEARD EVERY CREATURE IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH
AND UNDER THE EARTH AND IN THE SEA, AND ALL THEREIN, SAYING, “TO HIM WHO SITS UPON THE
THRONE AND TO THE LAMB BE BLESSING AND HONOUR AND GLORY AND MIGHT FOR EVER AND
EVER!”
• If God refuses to receive prayer, praise and worship from the unrepentant sinner (Psalm 66:18,
Proverbs 1:28-30, Isaiah 1:15, 59:2, Jeremiah 6:20, Amos 5:21-24, Micah 3:4, Malachi 1:10, John 9:31,
Hebrews 10:38), why would He permit the damned to undertake this practice?
• Furthermore, if God does not compel human beings to follow Him and to enjoy His presence for
eternity contrary to their free will, then it seems that He would not — as far as we can tell from
Scripture — compel them to praise Him, as this would be meaningless, if not repulsive.
• Therefore, “under the earth” must refer to purgatory. Revelation 5:13 especially makes sense under
this interpretation, as the praise spoken there does not in any way appear forced, but rather, heartfelt
and seemingly spontaneous (which would not be at all expected of persons eternally consigned to hell
— see Matthew 8:29, Luke 4:34, 8:28, James 2:19).
• Some Protestant commentators readily admit that “under the earth” is a reference to those in Sheol
or Hades. Granting this interpretation for the sake of argument, most Protestants would presumably
regard Hades in this instance (after Christ’s death — see Revelation 5:12) as simply the “holding tank”
for those ultimately destined for hell (the elect having been taken to heaven by Christ). But this leads
straight back to the exegetical problem of God neither desiring nor accepting such praise from even
the obstinate sinner, let alone the damned.
• The acceptance of a third, intermediate state in the afterlife for the righteous as well as the
reprobate, even after Christ’s Resurrection, is a seriously troublesome position if one holds to the
tenets of mainstream Reformational eschatological theology. For — given the Protestant view on
justification — why would (or should) there be any second state for the “saved” once the road to
heaven was paved by Christ? This state of affairs leads inexorably to considerations of differential
merit and reward, such that a whole class is relegated to continued separation from Christ in some
partial sense, and by implication, punishment, since these children of God have not yet attained to full
union with God in eternal happiness and bliss.
• Once it is conceded that (dead) righteous men praise God from “under the earth,”the standard
Protestant position of all the saved “going straight to heaven at death” crumbles, for the simple
reason that this group is contrasted with those in heaven. Furthermore, a position that “under the
earth” refers metaphorically to merely all dead righteous (who, according to Protestantism are in
heaven), makes the phraseology of Philippians 2:10 and Revelation 5:3,13 absurdly redundant, since
St. Paul and St. John would be saying, “Those in heaven, and on earth, and in heaven . . . .”
• Again, the only reasonable alternate interpretation, given all the above data, is to posit the
existence of purgatory, from which praise to God emanates — it being that portion of the Church
stationed for a time in the portico of heaven, so to speak.

22) 2 Timothy 1:16-18. MAY THE LORD GRANT MERCY TO THE HOUSEHOLD OF ONESIPHORUS, FOR HE
OFTEN REFRESHED ME; HE WAS NOT ASHAMED OF MY CHAINS, BUT WHEN HE ARRIVED IN ROME HE
SEARCHED FOR ME EAGERLY AND FOUND ME — MAY THE LORD GRANT HIM TO FIND MERCY FROM
THE LORD ON THAT DAY — AND YOU WELL KNOW ALL THE SERVICE HE RENDERED AT EPHESUS.
• Onesiphorus appears to be dead at the time St. Paul writes this letter to Timothy. If that is true, then
Paul is praying for the dead. One well-known Protestant commentary [33] admits that Onesiphorus is
likely dead, citing the cross-reference of 2 Timothy 4:19, yet takes the remarkably incoherent position
that St. Paul is praying for his conduct in life and reward at the Judgment. Thus, the admitted prayer
(1:18), since it supposedly refers to the earthly life of the intended recipient, somehow thereby ceases
to be a prayer for the dead even though it is pleading for mercy on the Day of Judgment for one who
has indeed departed!
• Now, of course, St. Paul could also pray for a living person to be recompensed justly by God, but this
is missing the point, and is an example of the classic logical fallacy of proposing a “distinction without
a difference.” For what distinguishes prayers for a living or a dead man, where the final Judgment is
concerned?
• Protestants say that it is impermissible to pray for the dead on this score since their fate is already
sealed and it will be to no avail. The error here lies in the fact that the person’s fate had always been
known (God being omniscient and out of time, foreordaining in a mysterious way the beginning and
end of all things). In both cases our knowledge is paltry and altogether insufficient as to the person’s
destiny.
• We pray out of charity (or, “desire,” as it were), and because we are commanded to, having been
assured by the inspired biblical revelation that it has an effect.
• The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary, another respected evangelical reference, takes a
different position: “His household would hardly retain his name after the master was dead . . .
Nowhere has Paul prayers for the dead, which is fatal to the theory . . . that he was dead.” [34]
• But Word Pictures in the New Testament, a six-volume linguistic commentary by the great Greek
scholar A.T. Robertson, states: “Apparently Onesiphorus is now dead as is implied by the wish in
1:18.” [35]
• On the face of it, why couldn’t St. Paul be referring to the house of Onesiphorus in the same sense in
which we speak of a deceased person’s “surviving wife and children?” His statement in 1:18 is similar
to our spontaneous utterances at funerals, such as “May God rest his soul,” etc. (sometimes spoken or
thought despite theologies to the contrary). And if Paul is “wishing” for benefits for the soul of a dead
man, as Robertson holds, how is this essentially any different from praying for the dead?
• To conclude, of the three prominent evangelical Protestant commentaries surveyed, two hold that
St. Paul is “praying,” and one that he is “wishing.” Two conclude that Onesiphorus is probably dead,
with a third denying this. It might be supposed with good reason that if reputable, scholarly
Protestant commentators are more or less forced into (for them) uncomfortable positions due to the
inescapable clarity of a text, perhaps the Catholic interpretation is the best one, as it requires no
unnatural straining. All that is necessary is the willingness to accept the practice of prayers for the
dead, for which there is ample scriptural warrant, Jewish precedent, and abundant support in the
early Christian Church, as will be demonstrated subsequently.

23) Hebrews 12:14. STRIVE FOR PEACE WITH ALL MEN, AND FOR THE HOLINESS WITHOUT WHICH NO
ONE WILL SEE THE LORD. (see also 12:1,5-11,15,23, Ephesians 5:5, 1 Thessalonians 4:3 1 John 3:2-3)
• John Henry Cardinal Newman writes: The truth itself is declared in one form or another in every part
of Scripture. It is told us again and again, that to make sinful creatures holy was the great end which
our Lord had in view in taking upon Him our nature, and thus none but the holy will be accepted for
His sake at the last day. The whole history of redemption, the covenant of mercy in all its parts and
provisions, attests the necessity of holiness in order to salvation; as indeed even our natural
conscience bears witness also . . .
• Even supposing a man of unholy life were suffered to enter heaven, he would not be happy there; so
that it would be no mercy to permit him to enter . . . We conclude that any man, whatever his habits,
tastes, or manner of life, if once admitted into heaven, would be happy there . . . [But] here every
man can do his own pleasure, but there he must do God’s pleasure . . . . . Let us alone! What have we
to do with thee? is the sole thought and desire of unclean souls, even while they acknowledge His
majesty. None but the holy can look upon the Holy One; without holiness no man can endure to see
the Lord . . .
• Heaven is not heaven, is not a place of happiness except to the holy . . . There is a moral malady
which disorders the inward sight and taste; and no man labouring under it is in a condition to enjoy
what Scripture calls the fulness of joy in God’s presence, and pleasures at His right hand forevermore.
[36]
• Newman explains (in effect) why purgatory (which he accepts elsewhere, even before his conversion
to Catholicism in 1845) is a necessary and indeed, ultimately desirable process for all of us imperfect
sinners to undergo, in order to properly approach God in His unfathomable majesty and holiness.

24) Hebrews 12:29 . . . OUR GOD IS A CONSUMING FIRE.

(see also Exodus 3:2-6, 19:18, 24:17, Numbers 31:23, Deuteronomy 4:24, 9:3, Psalm 66:10-12, Malachi
3:2, 4:1, Hebrews 10:27, 31)

25) Revelation 21:27. BUT NOTHING UNCLEAN SHALL ENTER IT, NOR ANY ONE WHO PRACTISES
ABOMINATION OR FALSEHOOD, BUT ONLY THOSE WHO ARE WRITTEN IN THE LAMB’S BOOK OF LIFE.
The relevance of this biblical data in terms of its analogy to the idea of purgatory is clear. The
abundance of such scriptural evidence for purgatory led to a consensus among the Church Fathers as
well. Protestant church historian Philip Schaff, who can definitely be considered a “hostile witness” as
pertains this topic, summarized the belief of the early Christian Church:
These views of the middle state in connection with prayers for the dead show a strong tendency to
the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory . . . there are traces of the purgatorial idea of suffering the
temporal consequences of sin, and a painful struggle after holiness . . . The common people and most
of the fathers understood it of a material fire; but this is not a matter of faith . . . A material fire would
be very harmless without a material body. [37]
Despite all this, Protestantism rejected the beliefs in purgatory and prayers for the dead, with the
exception of Anglicans, many of whom have retained some form of these. Popular Christian apologist
C. S. Lewis was one of these traditional Anglicans. In one of his last books, Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly
on Prayer,[38] he stated that he prayed for the dead, among whom were many of his loved ones, and
that he believed in purgatory, comparing it to an intense rinsing of the mouth at the dentist’s office.
He thought no one would want to enter heaven unclean, as this would be downright embarrassing.

LikeShow more reactions

CommentShare

Top Comments
Catholics striving for Holiness

18 hrs ·

THE HOLY SOULS IN PURGATORY (1): On Sin And Temporal Punishment

The Holy Souls in Purgatory (from the verb “to purge”, that is, to get rid of something, to remove, to
clear one’s guilt) are those who DIED “IN GOD’S FRIENDSHIP [in state of grace i.e. without mortal sin],
assured of their eternal salvation, but WHO STILL HAVE NEED OF PURIFICATION to enter into the
happiness of heaven (Compendium of the Catholic Church, n.210).”

WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO PURIFY THEMSELVES OF IF THEY HAD ALREADY DIED IN GOD’S FRIENDSHIP,
WITHOUT MORTAL SINS?

1. Even if they died without mortal sins, and thus in God’s friendship, they may have had VENIAL SINS at
the moment of their death which still need to be purified.

2. Moreover, they have to purify themselves of the TEMPORAL PUNISHMENTS which were left in the
soul by the mortal and venial sins they had committed and had already been forgiven in the Sacrament
of Confession.

Although mortal and venial sins had already been absolved and forgiven in the Sacrament of confession,
the so-called TEMPORAL PUNISHMENTS caused by them still remain in the soul. These need to be
PURIFIED and PURGED during ONE’S LIFETIME HERE ON EARTH or in the NEXT (as in the case of the souls
in purgatory).

I have always employed a simple analogy to young and old alike to understand this better:

- Imagine yourself hammering a nail on the wall. The ACT OF HAMMERING is your DELIBERATE DECISION
TO COMMIT A SIN (whether mortal or venial); the NAIL represents the SIN; and the WALL, your SOUL.

- But you repented doing so and decided to remove the nail (sin) from the wall (soul). The ACT OF
REMOVING THE NAIL represent your contrition, the confession of your sins and being forgiven from
them in the SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: now you are in God’s friendship with your mortal and venial sins
forgiven.

- But what remains on the wall (soul)? The HOLE (REMNANTS OF SIN = TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT). The
hole needs to be “covered”, “get rid of” or “repaired”: hence, purification or purgation. How? Through
the various acts below.

HOW CAN WE PURIFY OURSELVES FROM THE REMNANTS OF SIN (“HOLES” = TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT)
IN OUR SOUL?
THROUGH THE MERITS OF THE PASSION AND DEATH OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, we can purify
ourselves here on earth through PRAYER, in the HOLY MASS, ALMS-GIVING, SACRIFICES, GOOD WORKS,
and gaining INDULGENCES (whether plenary or partial), whether for ourselves or for the Holy Souls in
Purgatory (see post on November 2).

Through the Communion of Saints, the same means enumerated above can be APPLIED to the Holy
Souls in Purgatory. By doing so, WE RELIEVE THEM OF THEIR SUFFERINGS AND “EXPEDITE” THEIR
ENTRANCE INTO GOD’S GLORY. (Cfr. Catechism of the Catholic Church nos. 1030-1031; Compendium of
the Catechism, nos. 210-211)

OUR SINS, ASIDE FROM OFFENDING GOD AND OTHERS, HARM US AS WELL: they leave remnants or
“holes” (= temporal punishment) in our soul. Hence, LET US NOT FORGET TO JOYFULLY PURIFY
OURSELVES FROM OUR SINS AND THEIR CORRESPONDING REMNANTS in our soul while we are still alive
and let us HELP OUR FRIENDS IN PURGATORY –ALL OF THEM- so that they may be relieved from their
sufferings and enter heaven as soon as possible.

-Fr. Rolly Arjonillo, priest of Opus Dei, CATHOLICS STRIVING FOR HOLINESS.
-Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/CatholicsstrivingforHoliness/

-website: http://www.catholicsstrivingforholiness.com

-YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcDJHftL07idfLDs9vK6LcA

-Blogger: https://catholicsstrivingforholiness.blogspot.com/

-Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/catholicsstrivingforholiness/

-Twitter: https://twitter.com/Father_Rolly

-Google+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/11179451505478564061

Hope you like our FB page or subscribe to our website or YouTube channel in order to help more people
in their Catholic faith.

God bless you and your loved ones!

What is professionalism in policing specifically, and campus policing generally? Police professionalism is
the increasing formalization of police work and the accompanying rise in public acceptance of the police.
Certain fundamentals are essential in various professions in order to achieve “true professionalism.”
According to Maister (1997, 6) “…true professionalism means the pursuit of excellence, not just
competence….” It is a balancing act between the client, the firm, and oneself. Balance is not only
important but necessary – in becoming competent professionals, seeking superior quality in work,
providing the best possible service to clients, adhering to established standards, all in the name of
service – in doing the “right” thing. In policing, the firm is the institution and agency one represents; the
community and the public one serves can be viewed as the client. Hagan (1975) states that on the basis
of occupational knowledge and service dimensions, occupations may claim to be “professional” in
nature. At the heart of the issue is what does, and what does not, constitute a profession. Greenwood
(1966) researched the differences between “professional” and “non-professional” occupations and
noted that the distinctions were more quantitative than qualitative in nature. Occupations cannot be
classified merely in terms of black-and-white categories, but rather along a continuum of “degrees.”
How many attributes of professionalism are present in the occupation which would qualify it as a
designated professional organization? The pursuit of police professionalism has two meanings (Burack,
2006). First, it has meaning in the traditional sense of integrity, honesty, and adherence to a code of
ethics and 24 established standards; and second, in these more complex times, a more sophisticated
version of professionalism is necessary in responding to community, or institutional needs, in being
respectful of human rights, in becoming more effective in policing, i.e., achieving a professional model of
policing. The professional model of policing seeks to make police work a “true profession,” similar to the
professions of medicine, law, and education. In these other professions, practitioners possess a broad
range of discretion in their respective occupations: doctors rely on training, experience, and knowledge
to treat patients; lawyers rely on training, education, and experience to pass professional judgment
regarding case law or legal questions. Advocates of the professional model of policing argue that police
officers are experts in their professional realm, through training, education, and experience, and thus
also should be viewed as professionals. But how does one achieve true professionalism in policing? I(IN
PURSUIT OF POLICE PROFESSIONALISM: THE DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF A CONCEPTUAL
MODEL OF PROFESSIONALISM IN LAW ENFORCEMENT by Jeffrey A. Schneider B.A., Gannon University,
1978 M.S., Mercyhurst College, 1987)

Professionalism within the Police Service incorporates not but one characteristic, but rather numerous
characteristics and “involves the adoption of a set of values and attitudes” which aim to forge the
respect and conduct worthy of a profession. Such things impartiality, accountability, specialised
knowledge and ethical standards are all fundamental characteristics that ensure that professionalism
continues to become an integral part of the New South Wales Police Service. Subsequently the New
South Wales Police Service has noted the importance of professionalism as a quality important to the
policing occupation, and consequently recognised it within such documents as the New South Wales
Police Services Code of Conduct and Ethics.

what does it mean for an officer to act professionally?

Teacher
A professional holds knowledge that is not known by the general public. They are stewards of that
knowledge, but in humility. They don’t disparage others for not knowing what they know. Professionals
don’t shake their heads that the secrets of the law and human behavior are still a mystery to the public
we serve. They calmly help educate and explain to the lay person things beyond their experience.
A profession engenders trust. Our fellow citizens will necessarily judge us by the way we look, walk,
speak, and conduct ourselves. It isn’t always fair that they do so, but that’s the way humans work. Their
ideal template of a professional peace officer is one who is fit, stands tall regardless of their stature, and
gives them due attention.

Being a professional sometimes creates distance from others. Blood pressure goes up in the doctor’s
office, people stumble over their words talking to a professor of English, and some try to show how
much they know by telling about their experience or using our jargon. A professional puts others at
ease, and does not compete for the title of who is the smartest person in the room.

Leader
A professional engenders confidence that everything is under control. Of all the skills they possess, the
skill of appearing to know what’s going on is paramount.

• Not fearless, but courageous

• Not pondering, but thoughtful
• Not cocky, but confident

Others look to the police officer in times of chaos and we must not fail them in those moments. A
professional is always a leader, even at the lowest rank in the organization.

A professional is a person that others aspire to be. They are a model of what one can accomplish with
dedication, hard work, and mental fortitude. They are not perfect, but make perfection a goal in their
craft, their conduct, and their relationships. For some, being a role model is thrust upon them. For
others, it is happenstance. For the police officer, it is an occupational imperative.

A professional does excellent work all the time. We don’t want a physician taking shortcuts, a
pharmacist doing guesswork, or a lawyer hoping nobody notices what she left out the contract. A
professional meets the standards every time, exceeds the standards frequently, and takes pride in her
work.

A professional knows the demands of their occupation well enough to know their own weaknesses and
strengths. They know when to seek help and when to help others. They are self-aware and, though
driven, do not ignore their need for balance in their lives in order to be at their best.

A professional knows that very few others know what it feels like to do the kind of work they do. They
know that critics are many. They know that mistakes can cost in lives and lawsuits. Professionals are
typically rewarded well by the satisfaction of their high calling, their respect in the community, and
excellent compensation. In the law officer’s case, it may be only one of those and seldom all of them.

Learner
A professional never stops learning. He or she is open to new methods and new knowledge. They learn
from their colleagues and share information. They take self-improvement as a discipline and don’t rely
on being coerced to attend training, even if it is a review of the most basic skills.

Only one person can look directly in a mirror and meet their own eyes. The professional may see fatigue
and frustration in those eyes, but takes comfort in knowing that the people who depended on him that
day saw a true professional at work.
← Political Law Part XI: Article XI – Accountability of Public Officers

Constitutional Law Chapter II – Due Process →

Constitutional Law Chapter I – Fundamental Powers of the State (Police Power)

MAY 10

Posted by Magz

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

CHAPTER I – FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE

(Police Power)

1. Define:

police power—is the power vested in the legislature by the Constitution to make, ordain, establish all
manner of wholesome and reasonable laws for the good and welfare of the State and its people.
(ERMITA MALATE HOTEL VS. CITY MAYOR, July 31, 1967)

The basic purposes of police power are:

a. to promote the general welfare, comfort and convenience of the people;(ASSOCIATION OF

SMALL LANDOWNERS VS. SECRETARY, 175 SCRA 343; US VS. TORIBIO, 15 Phil. 85

b. to promote and preserve public health; (VILLANUEVA VS. CASTANEDA, September 21, 1987;
DECS VS. SAN DIEGO, 180 SCRA 533 [NMAT]; LORENZO VS. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH, 50 Phil. 595—
apprehend and confine lepers in a leprosarium)

Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Crime and Criminal
Law » Police: Community Policing - Definition Of Community Policing, Origins And Evolution Of
Community Policing, The Theory And Practice Of Community Policing

Police: Community Policing - Definition Of Community Policing

Tweet

officerssolvingcrimecitizens
Since community policing is a difficult concept to define, a helpful way to understand exactly what it
encompasses is to identify its key philosophical, tactical, and organizational characteristics.

Philosophical characteristics of community policing. At its core, community policing fundamentally

challenges the underlying assumptions that have shaped American policing for most of the twentieth
century. Since the 1930s, the traditional law-enforcement approach to policing has emphasized the
independence of police agencies from the communities they serve, the importance of an individual
officer's professional and dispassionate treatment of all citizens, and the close association between
police work and fighting crime. In contrast, community policing significantly broadens the traditional
role and function of the police. It takes the view that the police and citizens are co-producers of police
services, jointly responsible for reducing crime and improving the quality of life in local neighborhoods.

According to the philosophy of community policing, local police should provide citizens with formal
access to the department's decision-and policy-making process. Neighborhood residents are encouraged
to voice their concerns to the police, and it is the responsibility of the police to thoughtfully address
these concerns (Cordner). While police professionalism remains important, this quality is no longer
equated with officers' being detached and aloof from local citizens. Under community policing, police
officers are expected to initiate frequent personal contacts with community members on their beats,
and to interact in an attentive, friendly, and compassionate manner. Enforcing the law and fighting
crime remain important elements of policing, but community policing recognizes that, in reality, most
police work is oriented toward nonenforcement tasks such as maintaining order and providing social
services (Eck and Rosenbaum). Consequently, reducing community disorder, helping to mitigate
residents' fears about crime, solving problems, and caring for individual victims, are all regarded as
equally important to making arrests and solving crimes.

Tactical characteristics of community policing. Community policing demands that police departments
reform their relationship with local communities, and that police officers change their attitudes and
behaviors toward citizens and police work. The following interrelated programs and activities are
oriented toward fostering a closer rapport between the community and the local police department,
increasing the quantity and quality of police-citizen interactions, and enhancing the capacity of the
police to engage in problem-solving partnerships.

Relationship between the police department and the community. In order to foster police-community
cooperation in tackling community problems, police agencies must first elicit community input. This can
be achieved via a variety of methods, including door-to-door visits conducted by police officers, mail-out
surveys, and residential block meetings. The gathering of this information helps the police identify and
prioritize community concerns. In their attempts to reduce crime and disorder, the police can enlist the
help of community members by encouraging citizens to report illegal or suspicious behavior. In return,
the police can educate citizens on how to avoid becoming victims of crime through crime prevention
programs such as Neighborhood Watch. More importantly, continued cooperation between the police
and community requires the establishment of trust.

Even though most of the decision-making authority is reserved by the police, a long-term relationship
between the police and local residents can be created if police departments are responsive to
community needs and accountable to the community for any actions they take (Gold-stein, 1987). Police
departments might demonstrate this commitment and accountability by evaluating how well they have
satisfied public concerns, and by providing community members with frequent updates on a particular
case. Police departments could use follow-up surveys mailed to residences, neighborhood meetings, or
telephone interviews with community members, to gauge "customer satisfaction" with the quality of
police service delivered (Skogan and Hartnett). Feedback might be provided through newspaper reports,
flyers, or community announcements.

Quantity and quality of police-citizen interactions. One of the cornerstones of community policing is
the attempt to improve the frequency and the quality of interactions between individual police officers
and members of the public. Assigning police officers to foot or bicycle patrols in specific geographical
areas facilitates more frequent and personal contacts between the police and citizens than motorized
patrol (the hallmark of traditional policing).

Police-community cooperation is cultivated by police officers getting to know residents on their beat. In
addition, the removal of officers from their patrol cars gives them greater opportunity to engage in
order maintenance and social service tasks. The visible presence of officers, who are easily accessible
and caring in their encounters with residents, may help reduce citizens' fears of crime, and the improved
rapport between the police and local citizens can improve officer morale and job satisfaction. Finally, an
officer's assignment to a permanent beat helps create an officer's sense of responsibility toward the
overall improvement of community life.

Problem-solving partnerships. The notion that the police and the public should collaborate in solving
neighborhood problems helps move community policing past the criticism that it is just an exercise in
improving community relations. In fact, as Goldstein makes clear, the creation of problem-solving
partnerships between the police and the communities they serve is a radical departure from traditional
policing (Goldstein, 1990). Rather than reacting to specific incidents and resorting primarily to law
enforcement as a means of controlling crime, the police are encouraged to let communities identify
local problems and to work with the community to find the most effective solution.

What it is so innovative about this approach is that the onus is on police officers to discover and
carefully analyze the underlying cause(s) of concern. It is then their responsibility to focus all their
efforts on a solution specifically tailored toward solving the problem at hand. Law enforcement is still
recognized as one of the means available, but effective problem-solving demands that police officers
should search for alternative methods of social control, and be guided by community preferences
(Mastrofski et al., 1995). This might require that the officer draw upon resources beyond the confines of
the police department, such as coordinating between citizens and other local government and
community organizations. In sum, problem solving does not only rely upon greater familiarity between
the police and the community, but on the ability of the police to recognize patterns or relationships
between incidents, and on the willingness of the police to choose long-term, judicious, and highly
selective solutions over short-term, cumbersome, and universal responses.

Organizational characteristics of community policing. Given its shift away from reactive patrol and
incident-based responses (the principal tactics of traditional policing), it is clear that the effective
implementation of community policing requires significant organizational change. Under the traditional
model of policing, U.S. police departments were highly centralized and bureaucratized. The paramilitary
structure of the police department was organized hierarchically, with key operational decisions being
made by those at the upper levels in the organization. These decisions were then transmitted down the
organization in the form of rules and orders, and enforced via a rigid chain of command. Since
supervisors were directly responsible for the decisions made by line officers, decision-making authority
at the street level was, in theory, subject to their direct control. However, given that a great deal of
police work takes place outside of any form of direct supervision, it is not surprising that line officers
continued to exercise a great deal of discretion.

In contrast to the traditional model, community policing recognizes that the knowledge and experience
of line officers is of critical importance to the police organization. In order to be responsive to
community problems and engage in problem solving, the rank and file must have greater autonomy in
making decisions (Sparrow). The independence and freedom of line officers to respond to local
community problems is encouraged by the decentralization of the police structure, and the formal
recognition that police work is, by its very nature, highly discretionary. The creation of community
substations in local neighborhoods and the organization's attempt to provide line officers with
continuous access to resources, increases organizational flexibility and the capacity of the police officer
for solving problems (Goldstein, 1987). Less emphasis is placed upon written rules as a means of
managing officers, and a higher premium is attached to developing an organizational culture that values
mentorship and guidance, and which encourages line officers to be innovative in their attempts to find
solutions to problems of neighborhood crime and disorder (Cordner). Finally, those departments
committed to a community-policing model must develop alternative measures of police effectiveness
and accountability. The number of department arrests, or citations, can no longer be regarded as the
sine qua non of a police organization that considers order maintenance and social service as of equal
importance to crime control.

In addition to crime rates, measures that focus on the quality of police service and the effectiveness of
problem-solving strategies are useful indicators of how well the police are performing, and to what
extent the police are accountable to the community. Are citizens less fearful of neighborhood crime?
Are the police responsive to community problems? When interacting with neighborhood residents, are
the police courteous and helpful? Have problem-solving strategies been effective?

Without changes in the structure of the organization, its management style, and its measures of
effectiveness and accountability, community policing cannot be implemented successfully.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3403000182.html

The Role of Police-Community Relationships in the Achievement of Affordable Personal Safety

The relationship between the police and the public determines to a significant degree just how effective
policing will be in the protection of social order.

There are several levels at which this can be examined. The first and most fundamental is based on the
role and nature of policing itself.

The Nature of Policing

The police do not exist in isolation and cannot operate on their own. Police in a democratic society are
delegated their authority by the state on behalf of the people and are, in the final analysis, supposed to
be accountable to the people they serve.

There are two key features of policing which arise from the definition of the role of the police.
  The coercive power of the police. The police are the only agency in society which is granted the
legal authority to use force (violence) in the exercise of their duties. At the same time the police
are able to deprive individuals of the very rights and freedoms which democratic societies
regard as so important.

 While the law provides the basis upon which police operate, this and the various police
regulations do not in general determine precisely what police should do.4 This means that
policing is essentially a discretionary activity.5

The enormous powers of the police combined with the discretionary nature of policing, mean that
actions of the police are easily seen as threatening and unjustified,6 when people do not perceive them
to be fair and in the interests of the community.

This difficult nature of policing means that one of the "most important regulating factors is that the
police must secure public approval for their actions" (Pike 1986:23).

Community Relations Services Toolkit for Policing  Importance of Police-Community Relationships and
Resources for Further Reading CRS is neither affiliated with, nor endorses, the authors of any of the
sources or recommended readings in this toolkit. The sources and recommended readings are provided
solely for informational purposes. Why Police-Community Relationships Are Important Strong
relationships of mutual trust between police agencies and the communities they serve are critical to
maintaining public safety and effective policing. Police officials rely on the cooperation of community
members to provide information about crime in their neighborhoods, and to work with the police to
devise solutions to crime and disorder problems. Similarly community members’ willingness to trust the
police depends on whether they believe that police actions reflect community values and incorporate
the principles of procedural justice and legitimacy. In the wake of recent incidents involving police use of
force and other issues, the legitimacy of the police has been questioned in many communities. Many
cities in the United States experienced largescale demonstrations and protest marches in 2014 and
2015, and in some cases, there have been riots over perceptions of police misconduct and excessive use
of force. It is imperative that police agencies make improving relationships with their local communities
a top priority. On July 10, 2015, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) hosted a national meeting
of police and community leaders, from around the nation, for a day-long discussion of strategies for
building trust between the police and community. These community leaders offered guidance about
several ways in which police can demonstrate an understanding of issues so as to build trust. Following
are some key issues and recommendations that were identified during the meeting, along with other
promising practices, that can be used to help police departments and their communities to develop
collaborative strategies for moving forward. Recommendations for Police-Community Relationship
Building 1. Acknowledge and discuss with your communities the challenges you are facing. Controversial
uses of force and other incidents can damage relationships between police and their communities. In
some cases, a perceived egregious act of misconduct by a single officer in one city not only damages
police-community relationships locally; it can gain nationwide attention and reduce trust of the police
generally. Community Relations Services Toolkit for Policing • Importance of Police-Community
Relationships and Resources for Further Reading page 2 Police should acknowledge the history of racial
minorities and others who have faced injustice at the hands of the police. And police should never
discount the negative experiences of individuals with the police. African-Americans in particular have a
history of being marginalized and mistreated by the police, leading to a lack of trust and resentment.
This history is reflected in many people’s feelings about the police.1 For instance, there are many people
alive today who have their own memories of the Jim Crow era, when a number of police departments
were agents of enforcement of laws that institutionalized racial discrimination. Civil rights leaders at the
PERF meeting in 2015 said that while it is true that many police officers were not even born then and
thus cannot be held responsible for enforcing Jim Crow laws, all police officers should be aware of this
history and should be responsible to it, meaning that police must understand that this history is
legitimately a part of some people’s feelings about the police. And looking at more recent history, police
must understand that the mistrust of police by some community members is also rooted in issues such
as racial disparities resulting from laws that require sharply greater penalties for crack cocaine violations
as opposed to powder cocaine. Finally, a variety of current-day police strategies and tactics have
contributed to mistrust of police in minority communities, such as the inappropriate use of “stop and
frisk” policies in some departments. These tactics raise issues of racial bias that permeate the
controversies about police use of force. Police should consider establishing “duty to intervene” policies
and other strategies for ensuring that if one officer engages in misconduct, other officers will step and
stop it. Ideally, such interventions will occur immediately, in view of community members, the
community leaders said, because people may not trust police agencies’ internal affairs of complaint
investigation systems, but they will trust their own eyes when they see – either in person, or on a
YouTube video – officers not hesitating to stop wrongdoing by a fellow officer. 2. Be transparent and
accountable. Transparency is essential to positive police-community relationships. When a critical
incident occurs, agencies should try to release as much information about it as possible, as soon as
possible, so the community will not feel that information is being purposefully withheld from them. At
the same time, it is also important to stress that the first information to emerge following a critical
incident is preliminary and may change as more information becomes available. Police leaders should let
the news media and the public know that early information may not be correct, and should correct any
misinformation quickly. On a day-to-day level, police departments should post information on their
websites detailing policies on use of force, community member complaints, and other issues. This
information should be easily accessible to the community. The President’s Task Force on 21st Century
Policing recommended that “to embrace a culture of transparency, law enforcement agencies should
make all department policies available for public review and regularly post on the department’s website
information about stops, summonses, arrests, reported crime, and other law enforcement data,
aggregated by demographics.” 2 Agencies may also consider seeking accreditation by the Commission
on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies or similar agencies as a method of demonstrating their
commitment to excellence in law enforcement. Agencies can also demonstrate transparency and
accountability by 1. Mentel, Zoe. (2012). Racial Reconciliation, Truth-Telling, and Police Legitimacy. U.S.
Department of Justice: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 2. Final Report of the President’s
Task Force on 21st Century Policing, May 2015. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services. Action Item 1.3.1, Page 13.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf Community Relations Services
Toolkit for Policing • Importance of Police-Community Relationships and Resources for Further Reading
page 3 adopting mechanisms for external oversight, such as independent auditors or external review
boards for internal affairs investigations. The Department of Justice Civil Rights Division’s past
investigations of local police departments also provide a wealth of information about best practices to
ensure constitutional policing. Numerous documents from these investigations are available on the Civil
Rights Division’s website. 3 The consent decrees, case summaries, findings letters, and other documents
detail reforms in policies, training, and practices in areas including police use of force, Early Intervention
Systems to detect potential problems with officers’ behavior, management and supervision of officers,
bias in policing, police interactions with persons with mental illness, and other areas that most often
result in DOJ investigations.4 3. Take steps to reduce bias and improve cultural competency. Many civil
rights leaders and police executives also recommend that officers at all levels receive training on
diversity, implicit bias, and cultural competency. Many cities and towns have communities with a variety
of racial and ethnic backgrounds and cultures, and it is important for officers to be able to communicate
effectively with, and understand the cultural norms of, these different groups. This need was also
underscored by the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, which recommended that police
agencies provide recruit training and in-service training on implicit bias and cultural responsiveness.5
Research shows that individuals who are made aware of their implicit biases are motivated to
implement unbiased behaviors.6 4. Maintain focus on the importance of collaboration, and be visible in
the community. It is important for the police to be visible in their communities and know their residents.
Many people do not interact with the police outside of enforcement contexts. This can result in people
developing negative associations with the police – for example, if the only contact they have ever had
with police consisted of receiving a traffic citation or calling the police to report being the victim of a
crime. Finding opportunities to interact with community members in a non-enforcement context helps
to reduce bias on the part of community members and police officers. Getting to know community
residents helps both groups to break down personal barriers and overcome stereotypes, and allows
officers to learn which residents of a neighborhood are law-abiding and which ones are not. Police
executives often report that law-abiding residents of high-crime neighborhoods resent it when police
seem suspicious of everyone in the neighborhood, and, for example, make pedestrian stops of young
men who are on their way to work or to school. Personal interactions between police officers and
community members build mutual trust, which is essential to addressing neighborhood problems and
reducing crime. Programs and initiatives to foster these interactions include: 3. See the Civil Rights
Division website, section on “Cases and Matters, Special Litigation Section, Law Enforcement Agencies.”
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/findsettle.php 4. In 2012, PERF conducted a comprehensive
review of these DOJ investigations of local police departments and hosted a meeting of police
executives, civil rights leaders, and other local and federal officials from around the nation to discuss the
findings. For more information, see Police Executive Research Forum. Civil Rights Investigations of Local
Police: Lessons Learned. 2013. http://www.policeforum.org/ assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Series/civil
rights investigations of local police - lessons learned 2013.pdf 5. Final Report of the President’s Task
Force on 21st Century Policing, May 2015. http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/
TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf Recommendation 5.9, page 58. 6. Kristin A. Lane, Jerry Kang, and Mahzarin R.
Banaji, “Implicit Social Cognition and Law,” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 3 (December 2007);
and Irene V. Blair, “The Malleability of Automatic Stereotypes and Prejudice,” Personality and Social
Psychology Review 6, no. 3 (2002): 242–261. Community Relations Services Toolkit for Policing •
Importance of Police-Community Relationships and Resources for Further Reading page 4  Adult and
youth police academies,  Sports teams or “Police Athletic Leagues,”  Ride-alongs with officers,  Police
involvement in local school activities, and  Police participation in (or police-led) community events.7
Police officials should see themselves as a part of the community they serve, and local government
officials, police leaders, and community members should encourage the active involvement of officers
as participants to help maintain the peace. For example, police officials may be invited to participate in
peace marches, to attend local sporting events, or to attend neighborhood barbeques or outdoor
community “movie nights” for kids. 5. Promote internal diversity and ensure professional growth
opportunities. Police agencies need to present policing as a profession. Departments should work to
recruit people who want to become officers based on a realistic understanding that the large majority of
police officers’ time is spent addressing community requests and that actual “law enforcement” is a
much smaller percentage of the time. Police agencies also should step up efforts in recruiting and
promotional processes to increase overall diversity in their departments by race and many other
demographics. Agencies should provide regular opportunities for career growth and professional
development training. The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing calls for the federal
government as well as state and local agencies to “incentivize” higher education for police officers
through student loan programs.8 Internal processes of a department regarding recruiting, promotions,
and other matters should be transparent and fair. When an agency creates an environment that
promotes internal fairness and respect, officers are more likely to demonstrate these qualities in their
daily interactions with the community.9 Resources for Further Reading: 1. President’s Task Force on 21st
Century Policing, 2015. “Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.” Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services, Washington D.C.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf 2. “Biased-Based Policing”
(collection of documents). Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Washington D.C.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=2274 3. Gove, Tracey G. “Implicit Bias and Law
Enforcement,” The Police Chief. October 2011: (78)44–56.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=2499&
issue_id=102011 - 37 4. Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement Agencies: Organizational Change
through the Integration of Procedural Justice Core Principles into Decision Making and Policies. 2012.
University of Illinois Center for Public Safety and Justice. http://cops.igpa.uillinois.edu/procedural-
justice-resources 7. Many of these activities were recommended by the President’s Task Force on 21st
Century Policing. 8. Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, May 2015.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/ TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf. Recommendation 5.11, page 59.
9. Ibid., see esp. Recommendation 1.1., pp. 11–12. Community Relations Services Toolkit for Policing •
Importance of Police-Community Relationships and Resources for Further Reading page 5 5. Shusta,
Robert M. et al. 2005. Multicultural Law Enforcement: Strategies for Peacekeeping in a Diverse Society.
http://wps.pearsoncustom.com/wps/media/objects/4173/4273671/Ch01.pdf 6. Police Executive
Research Forum, 2013. “Civil Rights Investigations of Local Police: Lessons Learned.” Office of
Community Oriented Policing, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington D.C.
http://www.policeforum.org/ assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Series/civil rights investigations of local police
- lessons learned 2013.pdf 7. Mentel, Zoe. (2012). Racial Reconciliation, Truth-Telling, and Police
Legitimacy. U.S. Department of Justice: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services: http://ric-zai-
inc.com/Publications/copsp241-pub.pdf 8. Resource library. Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy,
Department of Criminology, Law, and Society, George Mason University: http://cebcp.org/evidence-
based-policing/what-works-inpolicing/resource-library/ 9. Walker, Samuel, and Carol Archbold. The New
World of Police Accountability. Second edition. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2014. (See additional work by Samuel
Walker at http://www.samuelwalker.net.) 10.Police Executive Research Forum, 2007. “‘Good to Great’
Policing: Application of Business Management Principles in the Public Sector.” Office of Community
Oriented Policing, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington D.C.
http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Free_Online_Documents/Leadership/good to great policing -
application of business management principles in the public sector 2007.pdf

QUAD POLicing

Quad bikes and motorcycles

Engagement with quad bikes and motorcycles presents additional challenges to those involved in
pursuit management. The acceleration and manoeuvrability of these vehicles make it difficult for
officers to engage with the subject vehicle for sufficient time to develop and implement tactics.
Furthermore, given the lack of physical protection provided by the vehicle, the vulnerability of the rider
is a serious consideration. Motorcycle and quad bike pursuits clearly present higher risks for suspects
than conventional vehicle pursuit. Only trained and authorised staff should engage in motorcycle and
quad bike pursuits and tactics.

Where possible, it is preferable to use pre-emptive tactics to prevent motorcycle and quad bike pursuits.
The use of tactics given in the tactics directory, including tyre deflation devices may be proportionate
and necessary to mitigate risk to the public, officers and subjects. It is accepted that the pre-emptive use
of tactics carries some risk to rider(s), however, this risk is likely to be significantly lower than allowing
the vehicle to be driven at speeds to avoid capture, regardless of the intention of the police to engage in
a pursuit.

There may be a public interest in engaging motorcycles and quads in pursuits. Where such vehicles are
used to facilitate serious crime or used repeatedly as the mode of transport for organised crime groups
then, to minimise risk to the public from criminality and to secure public confidence in policing, a pursuit
may be justified. Careful consideration must be given to the risks involved and the NDM must be applied
in the decision making process. A plan must be developed to resolve the pursuit using tactics set out in
the tactics directory.