Archbishop Chaput urges end to capital punishment

[thomasf]

If a prisoner is killed before he repents that is an infinite loss. To kill him, when there is an option to keep him alive as long as possible and the chance to escape from hell, is what would probably please Jesus. Remember the dying thief who was forgiven? He accepted God at the last few minutes of His life and was saved.

This is a good post and I completely agree with this. I do not support capital punishment. If we are going to be pro-life, we should be pro-life on both ends and in between as well. Taking a life is wrong.

 

[Ender]

1. I think the final word on this is the CCC

The Church has discussed this issue for nearly 2000 years and it is not all summed up by that section of the catechism.

1. There is a theological issue here. By killing someone via death penalty we are taking away their chance at conversion. We are choosing to decide their salvation by not allowing God to work in His time.

This issue has been addressed and this is not the position the Church arrived at. The problem with arguments like this one is that they condemn the position the Church had unambiguously taken in the past (in recognizing the appropriateness of capital punishment) and it is in fact a serious mistake to assume that man can thwart God’s plans. If this is a theological concern it is one the Church resolved centuries ago by rejecting it.

Ender

 

[Ender]

Way to bait the hook Ender

I didn’t mean that to be insulting. I was trying to point out that there is a great lack of understanding surrounding this subject and an awful lot of bad assumptions are habitually made about all manner of issues including restitution, justice, forgiveness, mercy, and most significant of all - punishment.

Ender

 

[triumphguy]

I’m not sure who “we” are, but there’s no need for “you” to misrepresent my argument.

la eMe, also known as the mexican mafia, a prison gang, runs extortion, narcotics trafficking, contract killings, inside and outside prison. the FBI’s report discusses who they are, what they do and how they operate in detail. its not happy reading, but you seem to have a mistaken – one might say naive-- belief in who these people are.

people like that who have committed DP eligible crimes should be put to death because its a plain fact that the prison system cannot protect people’s safety.

this is an instance where the CCC would not and should not disallow the DP.

Westerby

OR… as a society we haven’t chosen to spend the money on the prison system, or rehabilitation, and more importantly prevention, education and appropriate social programs so people don’t end up in jail in the first place.

If a society deliberately ignores its social situations then it has no moral right to demand capital punishment.

I think someone holy who habitually dressed in white mentioned this too.

 

[triumphguy]

I didn’t mean that to be insulting. I was trying to point out that there is a great lack of understanding surrounding this subject and an awful lot of bad assumptions are habitually made about all manner of issues including restitution, justice, forgiveness, mercy, and most significant of all - punishment.

Ender

I defer to the Popes, Bishops and Cardinals (and yes I’m thinking specifically of Avery Dulles) in this matter.

I don’t need to prove how much I understand the situation.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

the good thief waited until his actual execution was well underway before he had his literal “come to Jesus” moment. he didn’t repent before there was the proper motivation.

Westerby

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

OR… as a society we haven’t chosen to spend the money on the prison system, or rehabilitation, and more importantly prevention, education and appropriate social programs so people don’t end up in jail in the first place.

If a society deliberately ignores its social situations then it has no moral right to demand capital punishment.

I think someone holy who habitually dressed in white mentioned this too.

Admiral Nimitz?

social programs for MS-13? Los Zetas? la eMe? really? claiming that any social program (food stamps? english classes? how to balance a checkbook?) will deter drug cartels and their street gang tools is a handwave argument of the most insubstantial kind.

I’m talking about the DP for a very limited subset of all currently DP eligible convicts – convicted murderers likely to keep on killing even when in prison. you’re bending over backwards to defy the CCC which unambiguously permits the death penalty in certain limited circumstances.

if the Church meant “never”, she would have said “never”. the Church doesn’t say things she doesn’t mean, so, the rule that the DP is permissible under some conditions must be taken literally.

Westerby

 

[triumphguy]

When successive Popes and Bishops say tackle the problem at the root, and stop with the executions then I would say we need to listen with open ears and attentive minds, no matter how tough the problem.

 

[Ender]

When successive Popes and Bishops say tackle the problem at the root, and stop with the executions then I would say we need to listen with open ears and attentive minds, no matter how tough the problem.

Successive popes have expressed opposition to the use of capital punishment in societies as they currently exist. They have not changed the Church’s millennia’s old position that capital punishment is just.

Regarding the assertion in the Catechism that modern societies have the capability of safeguarding the public by incarceration of dangerous felons, this is an opinion and we are all free to disagree with it. Those who believe that such a capability does not in fact exist are justified in reaching that conclusion. It is unfortunate that an opinion was inserted into the Catechism and that is regrettably not the only questionable part of that section.

Ender

 

[triumphguy]

Successive popes have expressed opposition to the use of capital punishment in societies as they currently exist.

True!

They have not changed the Church’s millennia’s old position that capital punishment is just.

In certain situations, that do not exist in western countries.

Regarding the assertion in the Catechism that modern societies have the capability of safeguarding the public by incarceration of dangerous felons, this is an opinion and we are all free to disagree with it. Those who believe that such a capability does not in fact exist are justified in reaching that conclusion. It is unfortunate that an opinion was inserted into the Catechism and that is regrettably not the only questionable part of that section.

Ender

The challenge is for us to make it possible to safeguard the public more effectively by some paradigm shifts in the way society thinks and acts.

And I don’t think it’s unfortunate etc etc… I think it was done with thought.

After all JPII is one of the reasons why Communism fell so quickly - perhaps he was on to something regarding western society and the way we treat each other too (culture of death anyone?).

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

the good thief waited until his actual execution was well underway before he had his literal “come to Jesus” moment. he didn’t repent before there was the proper motivation.

Westerby

Please give an example of Christ teaching man to use proper motivation, as you have suggested, to get people to repent. That suggestion seems to go against a more defined teaching from Christ.

Mat 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said: An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
Mat 5:39 But I say to you: Resist not evil; but if a person smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Mat 5:40 And if one is disposed to sue thee and get away thy coat, relinquish to him also thy cloak.
Mat 5:41 Whoever compelleth thee to go one mile, go with him two.
Mat 5:42 Whoever demandeth of thee, give to him: and whoever wisheth to borrow of thee, deny him not.
Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said: Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say to you: **Love your enemies; and bless him that curseth you; and do good to him that hateth you; and pray for them that lead you in bonds, and that persecute you: **
Mat 5:45 that ye may be the children of your Father that is in heaven, who causeth his sun to rise upon the good and upon the bad, and sendeth his rain upon the righteous and upon the unrighteous.

Proper motivation is forcing people to repent. God, who certainly could, does not force people; man was not taught to force people to repent. If it was the message being conveyed by Christ, why does it stop with only the sin of killing? Isn’t this a practice used by Muslims?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Successive popes have expressed opposition to the use of capital punishment in societies as they currently exist. They have not changed the Church’s millennia’s old position that capital punishment is just.

Regarding the assertion in the Catechism that modern societies have the capability of safeguarding the public by incarceration of dangerous felons, this is an opinion and we are all free to disagree with it. Those who believe that such a capability does not in fact exist are justified in reaching that conclusion. It is unfortunate that an opinion was inserted into the Catechism and that is regrettably not the only questionable part of that section.

Ender

So what other teachings in the Catechism are opinions we are all ‘free’ to disagree with?

The Church has evolved with the times; i.e. penances in public, indulgences, marrying partners outside the faith, etc. We have authoritative men of the Church teaching us today. Isn’t this Pope a Vicar of Christ, just as all the Popes were in the times they served?

There are no ex cathedra pronouncements referencing capital punishment. That’s true. How many other teachings have no such pronouncements yet are placed above opinion status?

With authoritative men of the Church in place, where do laity receive authority to say what is a matter of opinion as it pertains to current teachings, over duly appointed men of the Church? Aren’t they subject to a collective reasoning of all the men of the Church and not the laity?

**

Mat 18:19 Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 18:20 For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

**

 

[Filii_Dei]

You say capital punishment is ‘just’. What is ‘just’? Does that mean capital punishment can be used in all situations? Being ‘just’ has no meaning on its own. It requires a set of conditions within which justification can be seen.

It is true. The Church does not ban capital punishment completely. Instead, the Church teaches that capital punishment is permitted when all other options are exhausted, and when there is an imminent and actual threat to the safety of society. Those two conditions must be met before capital punishment can be used. Before you propose its use, you have to ask the question - will this execution protect against any further harm better than a life sentence?

In no way is it meant to be used for retribution. The Church does not see punishment as a form of retribution, but as rehabilitation. From the most solemn excommunication to the most minor penance, the objective of punishment is to reform and rehabilitate the sinner into good standing with God. Capital punishment is therefore a last-ditch resort to directly prevent further threat to life, where it is deemed more important than reforming the particular individual, like sniping a suicide bomber before he presses the trigger.

At the same time, some of you might have your priorities the wrong way round. You cannot rely upon capital punishments as a tool for controlling crime. Many countries have low crime rates not because they use capital punishment, but because they tackle crime at its source. Strong and efficient law enforcement and effective socioeconomic policies are necessary. Do not be afraid to give long jail terms, or to take decisive action against gangs, whether in the cities or in prisons.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

Please give an example of Christ teaching man to use proper motivation, as you have suggested, to get people to repent. That suggestion seems to go against a more defined teaching from Christ.

Proper motivation is forcing people to repent. God, who certainly could, does not force people; man was not taught to force people to repent. If it was the message being conveyed by Christ, why does it stop with only the sin of killing? Isn’t this a practice used by Muslims?

the good thief is a counterexample for a anti-DP argument that executing someone (for example, a gang leader convicted of multiple murders and continuing to run a narcotics distribution network, including ordering other murders while serving a life sentence) denies him or her a chance to repent.

1. said thief acknowledged that his death sentence was just (Luke 23:41)
2. he doesn’t repent while in jail, he repents while he’s being executed. let me be so outrageous as to suggest there’s a causal connection between facing imminent death and repentance in certain situations.

Westerby

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

So what other teachings in the Catechism are opinions we are all ‘free’ to disagree with?

The Church has evolved with the times; i.e. penances in public, indulgences, marrying partners outside the faith, etc. We have authoritative men of the Church teaching us today. Isn’t this Pope a Vicar of Christ, just as all the Popes were in the times they served? …]

if authoritative men of the Church are teaching on matters of criminal justice, they should be able to address specific factual issues of public concern. right?

what part of the FBI’s report on the mexican mafia’s activities (linked above) does the Archbishop disagree with? specifically, with respect to how incarcerated gang leadership can effectively operate inside prison. that the numbers of murders, prostitution, extortion, money laundering, contract killings, turf wars, racketeering, kidnapping aren’t happening? are de minimis? aren’t growing?

Westerby

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

the good thief is a counterexample for a anti-DP argument that executing someone (for example, a gang leader convicted of multiple murders and continuing to run a narcotics distribution network, including ordering other murders while serving a life sentence) denies him or her a chance to repent.

1. said thief acknowledged that his death sentence was just (Luke 23:41)
2. he doesn’t repent while in jail, he repents while he’s being executed. let me be so outrageous as to suggest there’s a causal connection between facing imminent death and repentance in certain situations.

Westerby

The thing lacking in your response is Christ’s teaching to man to utilize ‘proper motivation’.

The thief’s acknowledgment that he was justly receiving according to his deeds was an admission of Christ’s innocence. An admission showing faith and Christ giving reward for that faith. It in no way shows Christ teaching an acceptance of capital punishment, according to man’s law.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

You say capital punishment is ‘just’. What is ‘just’? Does that mean capital punishment can be used in all situations? Being ‘just’ has no meaning on its own. It requires a set of conditions within which justification can be seen.

It is true. The Church does not ban capital punishment completely. Instead, the Church teaches that capital punishment is permitted when all other options are exhausted, and when there is an imminent and actual threat to the safety of society. Those two conditions must be met before capital punishment can be used. Before you propose its use, you have to ask the question - will this execution protect against any further harm better than a life sentence?

In no way is it meant to be used for retribution. The Church does not see punishment as a form of retribution, but as rehabilitation. From the most solemn excommunication to the most minor penance, the objective of punishment is to reform and rehabilitate the sinner into good standing with God. Capital punishment is therefore a last-ditch resort to directly prevent further threat to life, where it is deemed more important than reforming the particular individual, like sniping a suicide bomber before he presses the trigger.

At the same time, some of you might have your priorities the wrong way round. You cannot rely upon capital punishments as a tool for controlling crime. Many countries have low crime rates not because they use capital punishment, but because they tackle crime at its source. Strong and efficient law enforcement and effective socioeconomic policies are necessary. Do not be afraid to give long jail terms, or to take decisive action against gangs, whether in the cities or in prisons.

read my last two posts that point out the fact that with regards to certain kinds of convicts, options are exhausted and the danger is imminent.

and, if you’re addressing me, don’t misrepresent my position as arguing for execution in every case where the convict is DP eligible, or that its being used as retribution.

Westerby

 

[Filii_Dei]

read my last two posts that point out the fact that with regards to certain kinds of convicts, options are exhausted and the danger is imminent.

Read my last paragraph with regard to what options you have yet to exhaust.

I fear you may be giving up too easily. As much as people like to point out our use of capital punishment, my country did not break up triads and gangs by executing them. You get rid of the conditions that nourishes them, and you also break them up ruthlessly. You can spare many souls the pain of execution if you catch them before they descend into an endless spiral of deadlier and deadlier crime.

and, if you’re addressing me, don’t misrepresent my position as arguing for execution in every case where the convict is DP eligible, or that its being used as retribution.

I apologise if I phrased it poorly, but I did nothing of the sort. It was a rhetorical statement to point out the fact that justification is not justification unless there are specific circumstances where said justification is needed. I am under no impression that a fellow Catholic would wish to send every criminal to the gallows.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

if authoritative men of the Church are teaching on matters of criminal justice, they should be able to address specific factual issues of public concern. right?

what part of the FBI’s report on the mexican mafia’s activities (linked above) does the Archbishop disagree with? specifically, with respect to how incarcerated gang leadership can effectively operate inside prison. that the numbers of murders, prostitution, extortion, money laundering, contract killings, turf wars, racketeering, kidnapping aren’t happening? are de minimis? aren’t growing?

Westerby

The authoritative men of the Church are teaching on a right to life, from conception to natural death.
[
INTERVENTION BY THE HOLY SEE
AT THE 62nd SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
OF THE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

ADDRESS OF H.E. MSGR. DOMINIQUE MAMBERTI](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/s...uments/rc_seg-st_20071001_mamberti-un_en.html)

The most important part of our work in this context is to ensure that the inherent right to life is respected everywhere. This fundamental right must be protected from conception until natural death. Therefore, we must work to stop and reverse the culture of death embraced by some social and legal structures that try to make the suppression of life acceptable by disguising it as a medical or social service.** In this sense, the abolition of the death penalty should also be seen as a consequence of full respect for the right to life**.

[SYNODUS EPISCOPORUM
BULLETIN

II ORDINARY SPECIAL ASSEMBLY FOR AFRICA
OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS
4-25 OCTOBER 2009](http://www.vatican.va/news_services...i_speciale-africa-2009/02_inglese/b33_02.html)

“The Church sees as a sign of hope a growing public opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as an expression of justice and a kind of legitimate defense on the part of society. Modern society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitely denying them the chance to reform” (“The Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church”, 405).
The dignity of the person requires that his or her fundamental rights be respected even when one does not respect the rights of others. The death penalty frustrates such an aim. At times, the death penalty is used to eliminate political opponents. Moreover, poor people, who cannot defend themselves, are more easily subjected to this final un-appealable punishment.
This Synod calls for the total and universal abolition of the death penalty.

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI
TO HIS EXCELLENCY
Mr. HÉCTOR FEDERICO LING ALTAMIRANO,
NEW AMBASSADOR OF MEXICO
TO THE HOLY SEE

One can never sufficiently insist that the right to life must be recognized in its full breadth. In fact every person deserves respect and solidarity from the moment of his conception to his natural death. This noble cause, in which many men and women are courageously involved, must also be supported by the civil authorities in the promotion of just laws and effective public policies that take into account the very great value that every human being possesses at every moment of his life. In this regard, I would like to acknowledge joyfully the initiative of Mexico which, in 2005, eliminated capital punishment from its legislation, as well as the recent measures that some of its States have adopted to protect human life from its origins. These measures regarding such a fundamental issue must be an emblem of your country, of which you must feel justifiably proud since upon the recognition of right to life “every human community and the political community itself are founded” (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, n. 2).

The FBI is concerned with man’s law. The authoritative men of the Church are concerned with teaching God’s law.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

The thing lacking in your response is Christ’s teaching to man to utilize ‘proper motivation’.

The thief’s acknowledgment that he was justly receiving according to his deeds was an admission of Christ’s innocence. An admission showing faith and Christ giving reward for that faith. It in no way shows Christ teaching an acceptance of capital punishment, according to man’s law.

the thief says (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this man hath done no evil.

its not a general biblical argument for the DP, as I’ve said a couple of times, its a specific argument against jailing people for life with some expectation that they’re repent at leisure.

Westerby