Can a Catholic Still Maintain the Death Penalty?

[Ender]

I didn’t realize (2) fell into the definition of justness. We must thus conclude that its Justness is to be judged and may vary with the times.

Yes, but if you believe it is does more harm than good, and I do not, it is not unjust of me to support it. It would be unjust to apply a punishment that is either too harsh or too lenient, although there is some judgment involved here as well.

It is quite legitimate to oppose capital punishment for practical reasons, and “doing more harm than good” is one of them. The problem with finding it immoral in all cases is that condemning it today condemns it equally for the 2000 years the church supported it rather more obviously.

Saying there is judgment involved in deciding on a “commensurate” punishment is true, but it is too late to claim that death is incommensurate (too harsh). That ship has sailed; that decision was rendered: it is not.

Do the moral evaluation.
Can you identify the good object, the circumstances, and the intent?

This really is not a difficult thing.

Clearly the object (execution) is not per se immoral. Equally clearly there are numerous people who think today like the church thought for two millennia that capital punishment is just and appropriate, so intent is not a problem. As for the circumstances, that is a case by case judgment, an opinion, and while either side may err in their judgment it would in fact be just an error, and not a sin.

 

[christianchannel]

only God is allowed to take the life of a person, not a human creature who doesnt even know what will happen the day of tomorrow

 

[SantaFe]

The pope and every bishop have affirmed that the Death Penalty is wrong in every case. One cannot truly be pro life if they support the death penalty. Period.

 

[jredden92]

It sounds like the only time the death penalty should be used is if the murderer can’t be restrained. Say he constantly tried stabbing prison guards in the neck with a fork. In a way police give people the death penalty when they can’t safely bring someone into custody when they are in shootouts.

 

[jredden92]

I think the only justified death penalty is when police need to kill someone to prevent them from killing someone else. If they are already in custody they can rot in a box if they need to and get a foretaste of hell. But executing them would be wrath and murder.

 

[Rau]

The pope and every bishop have affirmed that the Death Penalty is wrong in every case.

Really - in every case - past, present and future? When did they do that? When did they concede the Church taught error on this matter previously?

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

“In accordance with Holy Scripture and the constant tradition of the ordinary and universal
Magisterium, the Church did not err in teaching that the civil power may lawfully exercise
capital punishment on malefactors where this is truly necessary to preserve the existence or just
order of societies (see Gen 9:6; John 19:11; Rom 13:1-7; Innocent III, Professio fidei
Waldensibus praescripta; Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent, p. III, 5, n. 4; Pius XII,
Address to Catholic jurists on December 5, 1954).”
Paragraph 28, Declaration of Truths issued by Cardinal Raymond Burke, Bishop Athanasius Schneider et al.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13HrAs1ObxItPIa9TfPwmjnzVS9WPR3A-/view

One may oppose the death penalty for prudential reasons, i.e if one thinks it is not necessary, there is a substantial risk of it doing more harm than good (such as by execution of innocent people), but to say it is evil in and of itself contradicts two thousand years of Church teaching on the subject. The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith also affirmed that disagreeing with the Holy Father on the application of Capital Punishment will not make one unworthy to receive Holy Communion.
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/li...eceive-holy-communion-general-principles-2153

 

[goout]

goout:

Do the moral evaluation.
Can you identify the good object, the circumstances, and the intent?

This really is not a difficult thing.

Clearly the object (execution) is not per se immoral. Equally clearly there are numerous people who think today like the church thought for two millennia that capital punishment is just and appropriate, so intent is not a problem. As for the circumstances, that is a case by case judgment, an opinion, and while either side may err in their judgment it would in fact be just an error, and not a sin.

The execution itself is not the object.
As for intent, if you simply intend capital punishment, that intent would be evil.
And yes, the circumstances are what they are in every individual case. However, macro factors influence those cases.

You are not apprehending the sources of morality.

 

[Ender]

The execution itself is not the object.

The object of the executioner is pretty self explanatory.

As for intent, if you simply intend capital punishment, that intent would be evil.

The intent of the judge who imposes it is justice. The intent of the executioner is to execute the duties of his office.

You are not apprehending the sources of morality.

Feel free to explain.

 

[goout]

goout:

The execution itself is not the object.

The object of the executioner is pretty self explanatory.

As for intent, if you simply intend capital punishment, that intent would be evil.

The intent of the judge who imposes it is justice. The intent of the executioner is to execute the duties of his office.

You are not apprehending the sources of morality.

Feel free to explain.

How can I explain this to you.

You don’t know what the sources of morality are to evaluate these situations, how are you competent to evaluate the Pope;s exhortation on the matter?

Go to the CCC and study the good that the Church’s teaching on human life and dignity point to.
Cold justice is not it. Justice is never in a vacuum as an object or an intent. It serves an even higher good.

If it doesn’t, you’ve printed your own ticket to hell. And I’m sure that is not admissible in your own moral paradigm.

 

[Ender]

How can I explain this to you.

Start by giving your own explanations of the object and intent. “You’re wrong” is really not much of an argument.

 

[goout]

goout:

How can I explain this to you.

Start by giving your own explanations of the object and intent. “You’re wrong” is really not much of an argument.

I just did, in the post above.
You have an unhealthy view of this matter.
All I’m gonna say.

 

[Ender]

I just did, in the post above.
You have an unhealthy view of this matter.
All I’m gonna say.

No, I gave my view on them, you simply rejected my answers, recommended I study more, and suggested I may have printed my own ticket to hell. If you believe that wouldn’t it be your responsibility to save me by helping me understand? All I’m asking is that you tell us what you believe are the object and intent involved in imposing capital punishment. This is for your own good as well.

When I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ and you do not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their evil ways in order to save their life, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. (Ez 3:18)

 

[graciew]

And so what happens if we realize today after much prayer and thought that what was acceptable/ admissible say when we were young is no longer admissible, acceptable today?
Wouldn’t that be considered growth ?
What was so scary about realizing that a slave is a human being ,a person equal in dignity , dignity anchored in that we are made in the image of God,to each and everyone of us and quite frankly it has and had always been so?
I kind of don’t understand your reaction.

 

[Rau]

And so what happens if we realize today after much prayer and thought that what was acceptable/ admissible say when we were young is no longer admissible, acceptable today?
Wouldn’t that be considered growth ?
What was so scary about realizing that a slave is a human being ,a person equal in dignity , dignity anchored in that we are made in the image of God,to each and everyone of us and quite frankly it has and had always been so?
I kind of don’t understand your reaction.

What is inherently evil does not change. Certainly maturity of judgement, or changing factors, may see us come to a different view about the appropriateness of CP. We may well weigh the pros and cons and come to different viewpoints in different eras. But that is entirely distinct from saying CP is not intrinsically evil for a millennia, then deciding it is. Of course, the church has not done that, despite the misunderstandings of some.

 

[christofirst]

America magazine is reporting that the Holy Father’s newly released encyclical definitively “closes the door on the death penalty.” I haven’t read the article or the new encyclical yet, but I hope to do so soon.

 

[avemariagratiaplena]

I hope he clarifies what kind of teaching this is (if one can just disagree for instance) because in reading this thread and about it online I have come out more confused on what anything means with the authority of it. I have the strong sense that people are making things up to support their pre-conceived notions rather than actually illuminating the topic (which is the title of this thread)

 

[Rau]

I have the strong sense that people are making things up to support their pre-conceived notions rather than actually illuminating the topic

Your remark here lacks illumination too. Why not point out which posts appear to you to be “making things up”?

 

[avemariagratiaplena]

a) people are report happy b) it would be a waste of time to dig up old postings and debate them c) I also meant in a more general sense (not only postings on this thread and other threads but whole articles and blogposts and theologian takes elsewhere online). Either way ultimately I think in addition to the new document the Pope put out (has long section on the death penalty) it is clear people can decide for themselves (whether or not to agree), as he founds his analysis on several assumptions that are debateable (if you disagree politically which is allowed then nothing he says would follow) and that is the solution.

 

[Ender]

America magazine is reporting that the Holy Father’s newly released encyclical definitively “closes the door on the death penalty.” I haven’t read the article or the new encyclical yet, but I hope to do so soon.

The only way to definitively close the door on capital punishment is to declare it intrinsically evil; that is, it is immoral in all circumstances. Otherwise, by the definition of the term, there will be circumstances where the death penalty is appropriate, and hence not definitively closed. That, however, is not something one should hope to see.

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil. Both Scripture and long Christian tradition acknowledge the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The Church cannot repudiate that without repudiating her own identity. (Archbishop Chaput, 2005)