1984 Roman Catechism on Death Penalty

[Aurelio]

Hello, everyone!

Recently I was re-reading parts of that excellent book, THE ROMAN CATECHISM: Translated and Annotated in Accord with Vatican Council II and Post-Conciliar Documents and the New Code of Canon Law by Robert I. Bradley, S.J. and Eugene Kevane. Boston, Massachusetts: St. Paul Editions 1984.

On pages 410 and 411 dealing with the subject of the Fifth Commandment “You shall not kill,” I noticed how in section number 4. called “Another Exception: Capital Punishment,” how different things sounded i 1984 from how they sound now in 2007.

In 1984 it was:

"…The power of life and death is permitted to certain civil magistrates because theirs is the responsibility under law to punish the guilty and protect the innocent.

"Far from being guilty of breaking this commandment, such an execution of justice is precisely an act of obedience to it.

"For the purpose of the law is to protect and foster human life.

"This purpose is fulfilled when the legitimate authority of the state is exercised by taking the guilty lives of those who have taken innocent life.

“In the Psalms we find a vindication of this right: ‘Morning by morning I will destroy all the wicked in the land, cutting off all the evildoers from the city of the Lord.’”(Ps 101:8)

Yet, even today when I clicked on www.therealpresence.org ,
the late Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.'s archives listed on the portal still have his excellent summary of the history behind this Roman Catechism, and the good things both Pope John XXIII and Pope John Paul II had to say about it.

Kinda makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Is the death penalty REALLY such an “intrinsic evil” as so many are telling us it is?

“Keep the Faith!”

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I think that the Pope John Paul II and the death penalty is an excellent example of papal infallibility. He was really opposed to the penalty, but the Spirit strictly limited him to expressing personal opinion and prudential judgement, never a definative teaching.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Is the death penalty REALLY such an “intrinsic evil” as so many are telling us it is?

Goodness, if someone claims the death penalty is an “intrinsic evil”, you don’t have to go to the Roman Catechism to refute them. What do these “so many people” say when you show them the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993, 1997):

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.

tee

 

[Iowa_Mike]

This is a much debated topic within our family. For my part I think the courts are are unacceptably lenient with those that kill. A life sentence no longer really means life in prison so many people convicted of murder are released back into society after serving only a portion of their sentence. Others receive rediculously low sentences to begin with and are back on the streets in just a few years. The recidivism rate for these criminals is very, very high.

I recently took a look at the records of the 10 people presently on Nebraska’s death row. These people have committed some of the most heinous murders you can imagine. For example, one death row inmate murdered a 38 year old mother of eight (execution style) after robbing a convenience store and since he’s been in prison he has murdered two inmates. Others on death row are worse. These people must never be permitted to return to society.

Some in my family argue that life in prison provides the person time to repent and make peace with God. Not a bad argument but not valid in my opinion. Because of our appeal process the average death row inmate spends something like 14 years on death row, plenty of time repent and make their peace with God. I pray that they do repent and find their way to heaven…but I don’t want them living next door to me in this life.

Iowa Mike

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . .
Some in my family argue that life in prison provides the person time to repent and make peace with God. Not a bad argument but not valid in my opinion. Because of our appeal process the average death row inmate spends something like 14 years on death row, plenty of time repent and make their peace with God. I pray that they do repent and find their way to heaven…but I don’t want them living next door to me in this life.

Iowa Mike

C. S. Lewis once pointed out that repentance is more probable when one is in the death cell the night before execution and has full possession of ones senses, than in the geriatric ward many years later when one is half gone with dementia.

 

[Aurelio]

Hello, Tee, and everyone!

Sure, you can “show” 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to anyone online you like, but just try it in “real off-line life!”

But what just might well happen should you do so in a typical diocesan classroom setting is that you just might discover something really, really interesting:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, along with Pope Benedict’s more recent writings such as the *Seer of Patmos * dealing with St. John, may be simply rejected out of hand. Period.

Quietly but forcefully.

The why may be answered by this quote from The Voegelinian Revolution, by LSU’s Ellis Sandoz, page 28:

“Marx, like Comte, does not permit a rational discussion of his principles – you have to be a Marxist or shut up. We see again confirmed the correlation between spiritual impotence and antirationalism; one cannot deny God and retain reason.”

On page 114, he goes even further in describing how the Gnostic Elite strut their stuff:

"Dream and reality are identified as a matter of principle, and anyone who challenges official truth in the name of reason and truth meets vituperation or worse. Rational debate is impossible.

Then, Sandoz quotes Voegelin directly, as Voegelin was telling us in 1952:

“The intellectual and moral corruption which expresses itself in the aggregate of such magic operations may pervade a society [or a fair-sized chunk of today’s American Catholic Church] with the weird, ghostly atmosphere of a lunatic asylum, as we experience it in our time [1952] in the Western crisis.”

So, you bet! Tee: be my guess and Catechism in hand wander into the nearest lion’s den located in your diocesan headquarters and … well … “Godd luck and so nice to have met you,” and all that!

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[tee_eff_em]

Hello, Tee, and everyone!

Sure, you can “show” 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to anyone online you like, but just try it in “real off-line life!”

Aurelio:thumbsup:

I’m having a little trouble following your point. I guess my primary question is: Who are the “so many” people who are telling you that the death penalty is an “intrinsic evil”? (I certainly cannot think of anyone who has been telling me that?)


tee

 

[Aurelio]

Hello, again, Tee!

Say, Tee, do you really want the BIg Guys to pull this thread? Because if you do, all I need to do to guarantee it is to cite you specific examples, name, rank and specific Church, Cathedral, etc. and pow!

ME, not you get suspended. O.K.? OK!

Now, then, having said all that, I’ll at least try to answer your question:

Here is some vague, unfocused, non-thread-threatening examples: Two(2) bishops in two(2) Western States.

The Pastor of a Very Large Church here locally, and from the pulpit, nuns imbued with the Spirit who rise up at daily Mass to remind us (in case we’ve forgotton,) that “all human life is sacred and what is done by putting condemned prisoners is just as unjust and unequal as that which was done to Jesus Christ Himself.”

If THAT isn’t saying that the Death Penalty is Intrinsically Evil, what would? And so on and so forth…

Plus, there’s any number of “Diocesan Palace Guard” members: Senior instructors in Diocesan-mandated “Little Rock Bible Studies Program,” security chiefs in the local Diocesan security apparatus, Catholic schools teachers and administrators, you name it.

All of whom, naurally! Know their continued employment is literally at stake.

Plus a host of what we call in Spanish “funcionarios politicos” – “political funcionaries” - that means bureaucrats, some at least former revolutionary cadre from the 1960s, who still serve in such roles as what you might know from your political science courses in college as “commissars ,” “political-control officers,” “thought police” etc.serving still to protect against the “dissident and subversive elements” within the system.

As I believe I’ve mentioned previously, some popes and saints are “invisible” except when the priestts belive themselves compelled to mention them during the Mass itself.

Other than that?

Pope benedict XV?. Forget it, and anything he says or writes.

Saint Josemaria Escriba and his Opus Dei?

“Never heard of them!”

Hope this helps!

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[tee_eff_em]

Hope this helps!

Aurelio:thumbsup:

All winks and smilies aside, it does, in a way.

It is not my intention for any member of this forum to be suspended nor banned. Nor have I any desire to go round about casting vague aspersions, tempting someone to gossip and detraction. So I am helped, by abandoning this thread, and I’ll try to remember to not go after the bait so quickly in future.

It may be then that I should just count my blessings at being not subject to either of two bishops of two western states.

Pax et Bonum,
tee

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Arello,

Hey, maybe I’m missing something. I’ve experienced no difficulty in discussing the death penalty with numerous members of the clergy including, teachers, family, etc. Do we all agree, absolutely not. People I discuss this with have strong opinions about the death penalty but are respectful in discussion. To date I’ve not had a single person that believes the death penalty is intrinsically evil. The official position of the Chruch (CCC) does not condemn the death penalty. So what’s what?

Iowa Mike

 

[Aurelio]

Yo, Iowa Mike!

Hey, listen, you all, it’s hard to explain to another person just what life is like when you are an individual bred and born in a sort of Kwa-Zulu Landia, “where the borders of two national governments and three state governments collide and nobody seems to really know (or for that matter to really care) who’s in real control.”

For us bi-lingual, bi-cultural peope this is especially true.

So, Mike, I’m going to try, so here’s a couple of examples:

All over “my planet” thousands of square miles of largely empty desert, almost any and every Mass you attend has Communion under both Species.

So a friend of mine goes off to Boston to see her grand kids, flies back and casually announces: “Up there Commmunion is under one kind, only.”

Wow! I thought everybody received under Holy Communion under both Sacred Species! Why? Because here in Kwa-Zulu Landia that’s the rule.

I’m reading an alumni magazine published by Notre Dame U.

A recent alumni is in a rage because he’s just moved to Chicago, and “discovered” that almost everywhere he goes, people shake hands after the Our Father.

So, as a good university graduate should, he does a study.

Wow! Nearly one half of all Catholic Churches up in that area do it.

For me it’s like

Because in my “planet” of Kwa-Zulu Landia, everybody does it!

Everywhere!

Yes, Mike: here in Kwa-Zulu Landia, we too, can have close personal friends and even family, with whom we can discuss the pros and cons of the death penalty.

Just like you and Tee can in “America.”

But in public, around the official members in their scores, of the Palace Guard, we are privileged to do one thing and one thing only: to keep our mouths shut and go along to get along. Period.

Oh, yeah! We can try, and may even be privileged if we, too, are with the incrowd (as I’ve been) to receive a quiet, preliminary warning in either English or Spanish, coupled with a cut-off signal at the throat saying in effect, “back off!”

If we fail to see it in time, then the gloves come off, and the vituperation begins.

Oh, yeah, Iowa Mike, my own dad was born in Mt. Pleasant, believe it or not!

Small world…

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Aurelio,

Greetings brother. Thanks for the reply, I have lived and have family members living in places where there is no constitution or Bill of Rights. So care must be taken as I’m sure you know. However, within the circle of people of faith discussion about the faith is normally not a problem. Keep in mind in places like Saudi Arabia alcohol is forbidden under severe penalty, but I can tell you that alcohol is plentiful there. So some things must be done with greater discretion than others but they are done none the less.

With respect to variations in practices or liturgy around the world, there are differences. For example when I lived in Holland the practice of intinction (dipping the host into the precious blood) is common. Intinction is not allowed in the U.S. and many other places but it does not invalidate the mass or the real presence. So there can be liturgical differences that seem odd but are not by themselves sinful. From everything you said I didn’t see mention of any practice that would violate Church doctrine. Another examples, before Vatican II only the host was offered at communion. There are certain times in my own parish when for certain and valid reasons only the host offered at communion. It is rare when this happens but it does happen. By itself it is not sinful and does not invalidate the mass or communion in any way. Also, when taking communion to the sick only the host is offered.

Keep the faith…

Best,

Iowa Mike

 

[Aurelio]

Thanks abunch, Mike!

No you’re right: I recall my mother, a convert, telling all of us about how much she enjoyed going to Mass at the old Italian Legation in Tiensin (sp?) China, from 1928-1930.

There would always be a squad of Italian Colonial Army soldiers present so that at the Consecration they’d let fly with their carbines: Bang, Bang, Bang!

She was particulary reminded of this when our whole family attended Midnight Latin Mass at a Vietnamese Church, Christmas 1978.

At the Consecration, it sounded like WW III had started.

Yet, we’re all believers in Jesus Chirst and His Holy Church.

Me, I can’t personally receive the Prescious Blood because two critical fingers of my right hand are subject to pneurapathy - or at least I think that’s what it’s called!

See ya…

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[tee_eff_em]

[Apparently, tee is still paying attention, at least for the moment]

Intinction is not allowed in the U.S. and many other places but it does not invalidate the mass or the real presence.

Who told you that intinction is not allowed in the US? Whoever it was was quite mistaken.

tee
who knows of no place where intinction is prohibited, but supposes it could be possible

 

[Spirithound]

Who told you that intinction is not allowed in the US? Whoever it was was quite mistaken.

I believe what is forbidden is self-intinction, which, if someone has to tell Iowa Mike not to do it, that is what he was thinking of.
GIRM 246 specifically says that the priest is to dip the Host into the Sacred Blood.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I believe what is forbidden is self-intinction

Yes, self-intinction (== self-communication) is forbidden to non-presbyters everywhere, not just in the US.

But I would rather Iowa Mike explain if that is what he had meant, rather than jump to any conclusion.

tee

 

[Spirithound]

But I would rather Iowa Mike explain if that is what he had meant, rather than jump to any conclusion.

tee

Mea culpa

 

[Aurelio]

Hi, everyone!

Say, it’s nothing to do with me personally, and I’m not sure what it’s called, but based on a certain amount of life experience I’ve noticed that the Orthodox (with a capital O) do dip the Host into the Blood of Christ at Communion, as do:

**A) The Lebanese Arab Maronites [Up to the 1990s in San Antonio, Texas]

B) And, up to 1981, the Ukrainians** [At least in Denver, Colorado]

Both A & B are in full relations with Rome.

However, I DON’T know zip about what the current rules are regarding this custom here in our Mainstream American Catholic Church.

“For whatever it’s worth.”

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Aurelio,

Hey, I don’t know if Lebanese or Ukranians asked and received permission from their Bishop. This would be a good question for an appologist. As far as I know the practice is not in wide use in the U.S.

Best,

Iowa Mike

 

[tee_eff_em]

Intinction is not allowed in the U.S. and many other places but it does not invalidate the mass or the real presence.

As far as I know the practice is not in wide use in the U.S

*Not-widely-practiced *is quite different from not-allowed. Thank you for clarification.

tee
Who has never received Eucharist in the Divine Liturgy *except *by intinction