It is difficult to understand why it is not intrinsically evil, but perhaps essentially evil, to burn a person alive at the stake. It seems like it would be a form of horrible, excruciating torture and therefore an attack on the dignity of the person. I don’t see why torture is not intrinsically evil.
One could certainly debate the morality of the choice of how to kill: burning, hanging, electrocution all seem savage. Inflicting extensive pain is not inherent to CP, so it would certainly seem harsh. I have no idea how or why these methods were chosen.
But torture was allowed by the Church at one time but now torture is taught to be intrinsically evil, No? Would this not be an example of a change in the moral acceptability of what is intrinsically evil, or taught to be intrinsically evil during a certain time period?
I’m not aware of what has been taught in respect of torture.
No. Intrinsically evil acts are always wrong. No purpose or circumstance changes that.
If something is intrinsically evil then it is always wrong to choose.
I am not aware of what the church has taught over time on the subject of torture.
I think the principle that was taught (and still is) is that sin deserves punishment and that the State has the right to carry it out. There was no teaching on the morality of how it was carried out at that time other than if it was unjust because the person was innocent. There was development of understanding over time as to just methods as humanity gained more understanding about the dignity of the human person and about more humane methods of CP and punishment in general. That doesn’t constitute a change in teaching. It’s a development in understanding.
I think you will find in the development of moral doctrines over time that the teachings have increased the binding but not the loosening authority given to her by the Lord. That the Church did not proscribe torture does not mean that she endorsed it.
not necessarily. You might this worth the read:
You ever consider writing a book on Catholicism for the layperson? You do a great job of getting to the heart of the matter for those who can’t understand/be bothered to look deeper. Sort of a Catechism for Dummies! You write out the answers much more succinctly than I ever could.
Pope Innocent IV’s papal bull Ad extirpanda of 1252, is often quoted as authorizing the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics. It did give certain limits and how far you could go with the torture. At least that is what i read in the New Catholic Encyclopedia (green books).
Torture is intrinsically wrong. And yet it was allowed during the inquisition and is not burning someone alive in boiling oil a form of torture, which was allowed in the papal states on one occasion? Burning someone alive at the stake is also a form of torture which was allowed in several cases.
Dare I say, this is rather un-Christian. I can’t image Christ ever condoning the Church using such means. It is actually disgusting. I don’t really care if it was the Middle Ages, the idea that torture is okay by any ecclesial body is anathema.
Ok, and?goout:
According to what I read it appears that there are many Catholics who think that the teaching on artificial birth control needs to be changed as it has been changed in other religions.