You assert that it is unnecessary without providing any argument. I believe it is necessary as a matter of justice that has nothing whatever to do with the protection of society. You then characterize it as mere revenge without, I suspect, understanding the nature of punishment. Essentially your claim is that it is immoral because you have defined it that way.I think it can become immoral even if it’s not intrinsically evil, precisely because it is unnecessary. It just becomes killing for the sake of revenge. An eye for an eye is not always the right thing in every context.
Amen. Which renders the main reason that has been given as a justification for the amendment to the catechism (i.e. that we now have better detention systems) completely invalid. It is simply a false justification. How skilled we are at keeping people locked up has no bearing on whether we should have the option of the death penalty or not.I believe it is necessary as a matter of justice that has nothing whatever to do with the protection of society.
And this is the point: protection is only a secondary objective of punishment, and by itself can never determine what punishment ought to be applied. Nor, therefore, does it suffice to say that because the death penalty is unnecessary for protection its use is immoral. It is the nature of the crime that determines the extent of the punishment, not the need for protection.Amen. Which renders the main reason that has been given as a justification for the amendment to the catechism (i.e. that we now have better detention systems) completely invalid. It is simply a false justification. How skilled we are at keeping people locked up has no bearing on whether we should have the option of the death penalty or not.
how do you know this with certainty?At this moment It is not necessary to execute people
Nobody here is talking about overturning Catholic Dogma, so i don’t know what you mean by enemies of the Church. Are you suggesting that the current Pope is the enemy of the church just because he recognizes the God given dignity of those on death-row? The hard-nose approach for capital punishment on this thread is insulting.What is more is that in history of the Church, it has always been the enemies of the Church that have sought to abolish the death penalty. Nothing has changed.
God did not discard them. By dying in a state of mortal sin they chose feely to discard God and send themselves to Hell.God is eternal love. God loves the damned. If you think people in hell are just discarded rubbish, you are mistaken. God wants to save everyone.
I didn’t say he did. It’s the complete opposite in fact. God wants all sinners to turn away from sin and join him in heaven; not because we deserve it, but because God commands it. Like you said, it is we who rejects God’s gift to us.God did not discard them.
So whats all the moaning about? Did the Pope ever say that the death penalty is intrinsically evil?Pope Francis is within his rights (as did Pope St Nicholas, Pope St John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI before him) to teach prudentially that the circumstances that would justify use of the death penalty are not present in our society (which is where the term “inadmissible” comes from).
“The mounting opposition to the death penalty in Europe since the Enlightenment has gone hand in hand with a decline of faith in eternal life. In the nineteenth century the most consistent supporters of capital punishment were the Christian churches, and its most consistent opponents were groups hostile to the churches.” (Cardinal Dulles)Nobody here is talking about overturning Catholic Dogma, so i don’t know what you mean by enemies of the Church.
Does this mean that the current pope is the first person to recognize this? Are you suggesting that all the Fathers and Doctors of the church as well as every pope preceding Francis failed to understand this?Are you suggesting that the current Pope is the enemy of the church just because he recognizes the God given dignity of those on death-row?
Yes, the government should be compassionate and merciful, but it should also be just. Why is this obligation so often ignored?And when a Catholic wants to stop capital punisment in america, people like my self are simply asking the government to be compassionate and merciful.
Cardinal Dulles is not commenting on the actions of the Holy Father, being deceased and all, and this being the Twenty-first Century, not the Nineteenth. I might point to the historical context of Jesus being on the record as opposing one case of capital punishment, supporting zero, and being a victim of a third.“The mounting opposition to the death penalty in Europe since the Enlightenment has gone hand in hand with a decline of faith in eternal life. In the nineteenth century the most consistent supporters of capital punishment were the Christian churches, and its most consistent opponents were groups hostile to the churches.” (Cardinal Dulles)
History is so neat. In the “history of the Church”, the enemies of the Church used the death penalty to kill Christians for their faith. This is not the Renaissance or the Age of Enlightenment, so unless you are declaring Pope Francis and enemy of the Church, this is historical context is not relevant. For Catholics, the papacy represents that which is present, not past, which is why we even have the papacy.What is more is that in history of the Church, it has always been the enemies of the Church that have sought to abolish the death penalty