Archbishop Chaput urges end to capital punishment

[Prodigal_Son1]

the thief says (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

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

A thief’s admission to guilt is not a teaching from Christ that supports capital punishment. It is not a teaching of Christ that the admission of guilt from the thief is a lesson in ‘proper motivation’ for man to use against another man. It lacks any instruction from Christ, one way or the other, on jailing people for life or sentencing the death penalty.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

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

you said,

Do not be afraid to give long jail terms, or to take decisive action against gangs, whether in the cities or in prisons.

we’re already assuming that these convicts are life w/o parole. and yes, everyone wants decisive action taken against narco gangs. actually what everyone wants is results. but while action is taken, its not been effective, obviously, as the problem is growing.

you can’t make a handwave argument an say that the problem will go away if we take decisive action. what is not being done that you want done may be the better way to put it. to the specific example of someone running a nacro ring from inside prison, you give only a generalized exhortation to try harder.

regardless, all I’m seeing from the anti-DP side is defiance of the CCC’s teaching that the DP is permissible in some circumstances by tortuous arguments explaining why its never permissible.

Westerby

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 22:36-38[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

A thief’s admission to guilt is not a teaching from Christ that supports capital punishment. …

I’m dropping this part of the discuss with you because you’re misrepresenting my point and making it a strawman.

I’ll be happy to discuss other issues, but not this.

Westerby

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I’m dropping this part of the discuss with you because you’re misrepresenting my point and making it a strawman.

I’ll be happy to discuss other issues, but not this.

Westerby

Then please show Christ’s teaching endorsing capital punishment. I have posted His teaching on ‘an eye for an eye’.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 22:36-38[/BIBLEDRB]

From the Great Biblical Commentary of Cornelius Lapide

Ver. 36.—But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip. A purse filled with money, a scrip with food, that they might have support in the impending persecution; for they will never find either, “because men will fly from Me, who am bound and accused, and consequently from My disciples as men wicked and condemned.”
And he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Christ, in these words, did not command them to take a purse and a scrip, and to sell their garment and buy a sword, for He soon after forbade Peter to draw his sword; but they were a warning of the fierce persecution which was about to fall upon Himself and the apostles, and which was so heavy to those that regarded the difficulty of the case with the eyes of mere human wisdom, that food and weapons would appear things absolutely necessary for the preservation of life. The meaning therefore is this, “Everything, so far, has happened to you, 0 my Apostles, well and prosperously; for when I sent you to preach the Gospel without purse, or scrip, or sword, you were kindly received by most, fed, and sheltered, and had no need of these things. But now so grievous a persecution is impending over you, and so great is the danger to your lives, that in human prudence it may seem necessary to each to think of the preservation of his life, and therefore to take a scrip and purse for provision, and a weapon for defence, and to sell his cloak, and buy a sword. But to Me, who weigh circumstances by the design and decree of God the Father, there is no need of such things; for I go voluntarily to the cross, and to death, and I offer Myself of My own free will, to those who will persecute Me and crucify Me, so that I may conform Myself to the will of My Father.” So S. Chrysostom (Hom. 85 on S. Matt.), and from him Theophylact on this passage, Jansen, Maldonatus, and others. S. Ambrose says well, “0 Lord, why commandest Thou me to buy a sword, and forbiddest me to strike, unless that I may be prepared for my defence, and that Thou mayest appear able to avenge though Thou wouldst not?”

Ver. 38.—And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. They did not understand the mind and words of Christ clearly. He did not mean that they should buy swords, but He wished to show them the impending danger. Christ did not explain His meaning to the Apostles, but concealed it, saying, “It is enough,” meaning that Peter and the other Apostles might carry these swords, and even cut off Malchus’ ear, which He Himself afterwards restored and healed, showing that He was not compelled by force, but was urged by love, willingly and freely to suffer and die. Some think that they were not military swords, but rather large butchers’ knives, which the apostles used for the slaughtering, sacrificing, and disjointing of the Paschal Lamb. So S. Chrysostom, from whom I have said more on Matt. xxvii.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

Then please show Christ’s teaching endorsing capital punishment.

I quoted the conditions under which the CCC permits executions. the CCC, as you know, expresses the Church’s teaching according to scripture and sacred tradition. if Christ taught that the death penalty was never permitted, the CCC wouldn’t state that it was. therefore, Christ taught this as well.

show why you think the CCC is in error.

Westerby

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

From the Great Biblical Commentary of Cornelius Lapide

for the record, I’m not responding substantively to your strawman.

Westerby

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I quoted the conditions under which the CCC permits executions. the CCC, as you know, expresses the Church’s teaching according to scripture and sacred tradition. if Christ taught that the death penalty was never permitted, the CCC wouldn’t state that it was. therefore, Christ taught this as well.

show why you think the CCC is in error.

Westerby

Please show where I have stated the CCC is in error. It is not an honest tactic in discussions to twist what others have posted.

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68

We cannot pick and choose from the CCC. We must take all of what it states to receive the proper context.

 

[Jerry_Westerby]

Please show where I have stated the CCC is in error. It is not an honest tactic in discussions to twist what others have posted.

We cannot pick and choose from the CCC. We must take all of what it states to receive the proper context.

I think I’m going to end this discussion. you asked me to show where Jesus taught that the death penalty was permitted and I quoted the CCC which shows that the sacred tradition of the Church allows it under limited circumstances. you apparently believe its never permitted.

that’s my last statement on this to you.

Westerby

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

for the record, I’m not responding substantively to your strawman.

Westerby

You’ve posted this twice now, so it has not gone unnoticed.

Here is a teaching from Christ:

Mat 5:38 You 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 not to resist evil: but if one strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other:
Mat 5:40 And if a man will contend with thee in judgment, and take away thy coat, let go thy cloak also unto him.
Mat 5:41 And whosoever will force thee one mile, go with him other two.
Mat 5:42 Give to him that asketh of thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not away.
Mat 5:43 You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:

Mat 6:14 For if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences.
Mat 6:15 But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I think I’m going to end this discussion. you asked me to show where Jesus taught that the death penalty was permitted and I quoted the CCC which shows that the sacred tradition of the Church allows it under limited circumstances. you apparently believe its never permitted.

that’s my last statement on this to you.

Westerby

I never said it was never permitted, according to the prudential opinions of men of the Church, according to the times they lived. Just as you said the teachings of the CCC are teachings of Christ, the teachings from the authoritative men of the Church today are teachings from Christ, including the statement ‘…the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68’.

Times have changed and man has a greater ability to prevent another opportunity for a murderer to kill again. Sure some may have minimal controls through the corrections system, but that is a problem of the corrections system that needs be addressed.

How many innocence people have died through errors of capital punishment?

 

[Ender]

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

We are free to disagree with all opinions but I am unaware of any others in the Catechism

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?

Many indeed are but that surely isn’t the point. There really is no other possibility for an assertion about the capabilities of modern penal systems than that it is an opinion. How would you go about substantiating it? Would you not look at data in say the Bureau of Justice Statistics rather the writings of St. Thomas or Sacred Tradition?

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?

How about the authority of one of those men of the Church speaking on the subject then?The Pope and the bishops, using their prudential judgment, have concluded that in contemporary society, at least in countries like our own, the death penalty ought not to be invoked, because, on balance, it does more harm than good. (Cardinal Dulles, 2001)
We don’t need others to tell us the obvious nor do we need permission to speak it. You can tell by the nature of the statement what is opinion and what is doctrine. You can accept it or reject it but you cannot change what it is.

Ender

 

[Ender]

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.

True enough, and in this context a punishment is just if it is of commensurate severity with the severity of the crime. Given that the Church has for 2000 years recognized that death is a just punishment for the crime of murder it isn’t my opinion but hers that we are discussing.

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.

Nowhere does she speak of “other options” and while the security of society is a valid objective of punishment it is only a secondary one. The primary objective is retributive justice and it is that objective that determines what punishment may be inflicted.

Before you propose its use, you have to ask the question - will this execution protect against any further harm better than a life sentence?

Before anything you have to ask “is the punishment just”? After that you can ask if it is useful. If it is not just you may not use it; if it is unhelpful you may decide not to. This is what the last two popes have done: they decided it was unhelpful. They said nothing about whether it was unjust.

The Church does not see punishment as a form of retribution, but as rehabilitation.

CCC 2266 identifies the primary objective of punishment as “redressing the disorder caused by the offense”. That is retribution, not rehabilitation.

the objective of punishment is to reform and rehabilitate the sinner into good standing with God.

*“The purposes of criminal punishment are rather unanimously delineated in the Catholic tradition. Punishment is held to have a variety of ends that may conveniently be reduced to the following four: rehabilitation, defense against the criminal, deterrence, and retribution.” *(Cardinal Dulles)

Ender

 

[Filii_Dei]

we’re already assuming that these convicts are life w/o parole. and yes, everyone wants decisive action taken against narco gangs. actually what everyone wants is results. but while action is taken, its not been effective, obviously, as the problem is growing.

you can’t make a handwave argument an say that the problem will go away if we take decisive action. what is not being done that you want done may be the better way to put it. to the specific example of someone running a nacro ring from inside prison, you give only a generalized exhortation to try harder.

And how is capital punishment the solution to these problems?

Likewise, you can’t make a handwave argument and dismiss every option as exhausted and we should just start executing criminals. Are you absolutely sure about that? Have you eliminated the ghettos? Do you have a strong police presence? Have you brought crime education to the children? As for current criminals, have you put them through a rehabilitation programme?

I don’t want to discuss into too great detail about law enforcement policies, but I can tell you that many countries have been able to rein in gangs without needing to resort to executions. Mind, even the safest countries don’t use capital punishment for most crimes, yet they can control those too. There’s more to controlling crime than executions.

I did not ever respond to your example, so please don’t misconstrue my argument as a straw man. The thrust of your example is ambiguous. Are you saying said prisoner should have been executed instead of being sent to prison? Or are you saying that capital punishment should be used as he is continuing to commit crime while already imprisoned?

If it is the former, then we have to presuppose that said criminal committed a crime serious enough to contemplate capital punishment as an option. In that case, I have to ask, why is such a dangerous criminal not being monitored? Why is he not being isolated from other gangs? Why are his acquaintances not being tracked? If his initial offense was not serious enough to deserve capital punishment alone, then capital punishment should not be an option at all. You cannot execute somebody on the assumption that he might continue to run said drug ring in prison. You need the proof of it. Nobody executes on a hunch.

If it is the latter, the same still applies. For you to want to execute him, I have to presume that you have found evidence that he is continuing to commit crime while imprisoned. Why, then, are you not prosecuting him for it? Why is he not being isolated? Why are his external accomplices not being pursued?

There are so many problems that permit crime to thrive. It is naive to think capital punishment can solve it

regardless, all I’m seeing from the anti-DP side is defiance of the CCC’s teaching that the DP is permissible in some circumstances by tortuous arguments explaining why its never permissible.

Did I ever say I was anti-DP? I merely wished to point out the fact that the CCC teaches that capital punishment is permissible. but also within limits. I’m all for having it as a legal option of last resort, but I posted here merely to caution against thinking that it can solve pervasive and multi-factoral problems like gang crime. It is the last resort, not the first line.

 

[Ender]

Then please show Christ’s teaching endorsing capital punishment.

The Church has for centuries endorsed capital punishment. If you take the position that Christ never did then you have to accept that the Church has been wrong on this point for 2000 years.

I have posted His teaching on ‘an eye for an eye’.

And you have misunderstood it. It applies to individuals, not States. Theirs is a different obligation than yours and mine.

Ender

 

[Ender]

Here is a teaching from Christ…:

And here’s another you might have missed (Mat 15:4) * For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’*

I don’t think Christ was as anti-death penalty as you believe him to be.

Ender

 

[Corki]

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.

I think you may be confusing justice and justification. One of the best essays on Capital Punishment I have read is that by Avery Cardinal Dulles. One of his important points is the value retribution in the overall administration of justice.

catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0461.html

If we *moderns" have secure prisons, killing them is not proportional to the threat that they pose to the community. In almost all cases the death penalty is not needed.

We are close but not quite there yet. Convicted killers escape all too frequently and commit more violence. Even more often the convicts commit violence against their guards or other prisoners. We really have not developed a reliable system that mitigates the continued threats of violence and even further murder.

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.

While I don’t disagree, there are also many who have repented while on death row only because they were facing death. The looming reality of the results of their action can be a powerful motivator to try to get right with God.

And since you mention the dying thief, one of the things that convinced him was that his own death was earned punishment while Jesus’ was not.

 

[triumphguy]

And here’s another you might have missed (Mat 15:4) * For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’*

I don’t think Christ was as anti-death penalty as you believe him to be.

Ender

So we should have the death penalty for grumpy teenagers then.

 

[Ender]

So we should have the death penalty for grumpy teenagers then.

No, I consider the question of whether Jesus spoke directly about capital punishment to be irrelevant. If the only thing that matters is what the Gospels record Jesus as having said then of what use is anything but those four books of the Bible? The Church does not rely solely on Jesus’ words in forming her doctrines and neither should we. Scripture, Sacred tradition, and the teaching authority of the Magisterium form the basis for Church teaching and all three of them have recognized the moral justification for capital punishment.

Ender