Bishop Schneider to Pope Francis: For the Sake of Your Soul, Retract Approval of Same-Sex Civil Unions

  • Thread starter Thread starter sealabeag
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sealabeag said:
And do you believe that Pope Francis’ words on the death penalty fit into this category? Magisterial teaching that must be accepted? I don’t - I believe they are a prudential judgement, that is, the Holy Father believes that nowadays the death penalty is unnecessary. And that is something Catholics can disagree on. This is not a declaration on the morality of the death penalty itself, which the Church has always taught was a permissible form of punishment. I actually think the excerpt you posted above from Pope Francis’ words borders on saying that the death penalty itself is wrong, and was only tolerated in the past. But I wouldn’t suggest that the Holy Father has an opinion contrary to constant Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Such a teaching on death penalty as in the Catechism today is neither new nor exclusive to H.H. Pope Francis. See: Evangelium Vitae of Saint Pope John Paul II, 1995, Item 56:
The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is “to redress the disorder caused by the offence”. … It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
…
“If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person”.
Click to expand...
 
TMC said:
That is certainly my understanding. Do you believe the Pope lacks teaching authority?
Click to expand...
Why would something true need to be altered? What I understood from the Vatican clarification is that the pope supports civil unions in the context of two people where the sexual relationship is irrelevant. So that two blood sisters, for example, could contract such an arrangement for the sake of securing inheritence, etc. That "the families’ he was talking about was the family of origin of gay people and not in any way, families they form through gay relationships. The idea was that there was need to allow for legal protections for unions that were not sexual in nature and that this ought not to be compared to marriage at all. I still think it’s wrong and of course, just an opinion of the pope, far FAAAAR from an ex Cathedra statement and so one we can easily disagree with even while scandalized.

It is church teaching that same sex relations are wrong and no, the pope cannot change that for it is God’s own law.
 
Last edited:
Vico said:
“If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person”.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the quote. I have no idea why people defend the death penalty. “Vengeance is mine,” saith the Lord. If we can protect ourselves without killing, it means the killing is for vengeance. We should not perform killing as vengeance, for by that act we disown our own claimed regard for the sacredness of human life.
 
Last edited:
I withdrew the comment because what you said about using the death penalty for vengeance is correct. However the death penalty remains a just punishment within the rights of a government to administer. That’s what I meant by Church teaching and Aquinas. The Church has always taught that the death penalty is permissible. Morality cannot change. Circumstances can though, and that’s where the debate is, with Catholics free to disagree.
 
MarysLurker said:
48.png
sealabeag:
I just think its unfortunate that I would have to be in the position to have to disagree with the Holy Father. I don’t like it
Click to expand...
sealabeag said:
And I’m not the only one. But I believe I’m within my rights to disagree on this topic, whilst remaining in full communion with the Church.
Click to expand...
Indeed. This is exactly how I feel. There are others like us even though we may be a minority. But if the doomsayers are right and the Vatican’s function as guardian of sure teachings continues to decline, we may be the last ones standing.
Click to expand...
Lets keep perspective here. The majority of the Christian world has abolished the death penalty for ethical reasons. That little bastion of ‘last ones standing’ is specific to the US and is not indicative of a universal ‘bastion’.
 
Yes, but that’s not the issue here. Any government is free to abolish the death penalty, and I agree that it is, in most developed nations at least, generally, unnecessary. However when people begin to suggest, or seem to suggest, that the death penalty in itself is immoral, they are going against the constant teaching of the Church.
 
sealabeag said:
Yes, but that’s not the issue here. Any government is free to abolish the death penalty, and I agree that it is, in most developed nations at least, generally, unnecessary. However when people begin to suggest, or seem to suggest, that the death penalty in itself is immoral, they are going against the constant teaching of the Church.
Click to expand...
Outside of philosophy most people don’t obsess over degrees of evil. There’s nothing wrong about rejecting the use of the death penalty with strong objection. It’s natural. What the real problem at work here is the false proposition that the death penalty is good in itself and can never be immoral. That is not endorsed by Catholic teaching.
 
Last edited:
Motherwit said:
What the real problem at work here is the false proposition that the death penalty is good in itself and can never be immoral.
Click to expand...
I’m not arguing that. Of course the death penalty can be applied in an immoral way, like anything else. However for 2000 years the Church has taught that it was a just and permissible punishment within the rights of a government to administer. As our prisons become more secure and our justice systems more advanced, it is often no longer necessary, but it will never be in and of itself a moral evil.
Do you believe that the death penalty is in and of itself evil?
 
sealabeag said:
Do you believe that the death penalty is in and of itself evil?
Click to expand...
No, I just view it like any other punishment. If it serves the common good as it had done, it was just. If it no longer serves the common good as is the case to day, it has become an unjust sentence.
 
Last edited:
Motherwit said:
Lets keep perspective here. The majority of the Christian world has abolished the death penalty for ethical reasons. That little bastion of ‘last ones standing’ is specific to the US and is not indicative of a universal ‘bastion
Click to expand...
What Christian world?
 
Motherwit said:
If it no longer serves the common good as is the case to day, it has become an unjust sentence.
Click to expand...
This is something about which one can form a judgement. It’s not at all clear how one could determine this “definitively”.
 
Rau said:
48.png
Motherwit:
If it no longer serves the common good as is the case to day, it has become an unjust sentence.
Click to expand...
This is something about which one can form a judgement. It’s not at all clear how one could determine this “definitively”.
Click to expand...
However the Church is obliged to teach when it is manifestly evident that the death penalty has become cruel and unnecessary for our times but ideologies claiming to be Christian are hampering abolition efforts… which is what is happening.
 
MarysLurker said:
48.png
Motherwit:
Democracies that were built on biblical principles
Click to expand...
Can you provide any evidence that such countries were still operating on biblical principles at the time of abolition?
Click to expand...
sealabeag said:
Such as? Which countries are you thinking of?
Click to expand...
Vatican State for one. Poland, Germany, Norway, Spain, the UK, Australia, NZ. At no time did the Church object to abolition and in fact the Church were often advocates of abolition.
 
Motherwit said:
Vatican State for one.
Click to expand...
Not a democracy.

The other European countries on your list abolished in the 90s. By then all but Poland had legalized abortion. Likewise with the Oceania countries.

You will not be able to convince an objective person that a country with legal abortion is biblically moral.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
48.png
Motherwit:
Vatican State for one.
Click to expand...
Not a democracy.

The other European countries on your list abolished in the 90s. By then all but Poland had legalized abortion. Likewise with the Oceania countries.
Click to expand...
The Church in all those countries continues to speak out against abortion but have said nothing in favor of continued use of capital punishment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top