Catholic Arguments For and Against the Death Penalty

[Ender]

It’s not a valid disagreement. You say there are flaws and errors in the Church teaching of the faithful regarding her position on the civil use of the death penalty in human justice.

I am not responsible for your irrational interpretations of my comments. Unless you cite the exact statement you disagree with I have nothing to say. I don’t feel compelled to defend positions I haven’t taken.

The Church continues to stress and stress that the death penalty is morally licit when it is used justly…

Well, gee, I’m sure the church opposes the unjust use of anything. That usually goes without saying.

…but when the people of the world and the culture of society is resisting and trying to expel the practice from their midst out of a sense of the injustice… that it is no longer morally licit.

That which is morally licit is never determined by what the world’s cultures prefer.

Some people have mistaken the death penalty as a divine command that is an exception to the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’. It was never an exception to the commandment.

You make all of these assertions without having the slightest idea whether they are correct or not. This is nothing more than your personal opinion, and it is poorly formed.“The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being allows certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, Thou shalt not kill” to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice.” (Augustine, City of God, Bk 1, ch 21)

The very first Catechisms dealt with it within the context of ‘Thou shalt not kill’. *That *commandment obliges every man, woman and child at all times and in every way.

Let’s check the “first catechisms” and see if you are correct. I can provide citations from the following; I’ll let you choose which ones you want to see, and I’m quite happy for you to provide your own citations if you can find one.

Catechism of St Thomas …c 1260
Catechism of Trent …1566
Douay Catechism … 1649
Baltimore Catechism … 1891
Catechism of Pius X … 1905

The death penalty is being applied illicitly under these conditions and must be abolished. That is the position of the Catholic Church in keeping with the Tradition and the Gospels.

No, it is not. It is a prudential judgment, nothing more.

Ender

 

[Ender]

As I’ve said it’s fine for someone to hold that opinion, even share it when asked. But if Catholic Answers existed for the purposes of trying to abolish the death penalty and they discredited, popes, bishops and church councils to do so I would say they should be abolished.

You have distorted my actions. Disagreement with a prudential judgment is not at all the same as discrediting the person who advances it. Most of what I have done is rebut what I see are invalid arguments, let’s not presume this has anything to do with what has been said by popes and bishops. As for church councils, by which I’m sure you mean Vatican II, since it didn’t address the issue I can hardly be discrediting it even by your definition.

The church is making it very clear to the faithful what to do.

Clarity is conspicuously missing from this topic.*The discussion of the death penalty in the Catechism of the Catholic Church is so difficult to interpret that conscientious members of the faithful scarcely know what their Church obliges them to believe. *(R. Michael Dunnigan, J.D. J.C.L.)
If a canon lawyer is in doubt about what to believe then it seems your assertion of clarity is misplaced.

Ender

 

[LokisMom]

Do you have any facts to support this assertion, because it doesn’t seem accurate to me? Lifetime imprisonment has existed for centuries and I see no reason to believe that even our supermax prisons were as effective at completely cutting off all connection with the outside as the dungeons, mines, and galleys of old. The Romans seemed quite adept at managing huge numbers of prisoners and slaves for lifetimes.

Ender

I think there were civilizations that could have done it, but not nearly as many as there are now. I don’t have “facts” just common sense, and the CCC seems to agree with the assertion:

"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 non-existent.”

 

[esieffe]

Capital punishment is more expensive because opponents have made it more expensive, which, in turn, is used as an argument to abolish it.

From my perspective, investing lots and lots and lots of money to keep a convicted killer alive devalues the innocent life of his victim.

Until:

1. That person finds God, Christ, and becomes repentant for his actions, as unlikely as that might be.
2. That the person is found innocent of the charges and released from death row as has been the case 148 times since 1973.

Another question, how many people have been actually executed who were innocent?

Here are 8 people who were executed and innocent.

Cited from: 8 People Who Were Executed and Later Found Innocent - NakedLaw by Avvo.com nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html#ixzz3DRDBgASe

Cameron Todd Willingham—In 1992
Ruben Cantu
Larry Griffin
Carlos DeLuna—In 1989
David Wayne Spence—Spence was put to death in 1997
Jesse Tafero—In 1976
Thomas Griffin
Meeks Griffin

How many more are there? The false DP conviction rate is about 4%

 

[LokisMom]

We know that prisoners sentenced to life terms have escaped and killed again, killed someone within prison, and arranged others on the outside to kill for them. Given that, what level of killing would it take before you would admit that society is not safe even from prisoners sentenced to LWOP?

Again, if you cannot define what constitutes the adequate protection of society then you cannot claim that prisons can achieve it.

Ender

We also know that innocent people have been found guilty of murder and put to death. And that is worse, because the blood is entirely on our hands.

I think it’s rare for murders in solitary confinement serving LWOP to find a way to kill again. I’d say society is safe with these guys locked up, and would continue to say that so long as this happened less than a couple times a year. If it happened more than that, I would need to see what the problem is so that I could form an opinion on what I think should be done to prevent it. I highly doubt my conclusion would ever be the DP though.

 

[LokisMom]

Until:

1. That person finds God, Christ, and becomes repentant for his actions, as unlikely as that might be.
2. That the person is found innocent of the charges and released from death row as has been the case 148 times since 1973.

Another question, how many people have been actually executed who were innocent?

Here are 8 people who were executed and innocent.

Cited from: 8 People Who Were Executed and Later Found Innocent - NakedLaw by Avvo.com nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html#ixzz3DRDBgASe

Cameron Todd Willingham—In 1992
Ruben Cantu
Larry Griffin
Carlos DeLuna—In 1989
David Wayne Spence—Spence was put to death in 1997
Jesse Tafero—In 1976
Thomas Griffin
Meeks Griffin

How many more are there? The false DP conviction rate is about 4%

Thanks for the post, but this is so depressing.

 

[Ender]

I’m finally caught up and can address these questions.

My question was how do you reconcile it?

The “it” here is the apparent discrepancy between what JPII, BXVI, and Francis have said about capital punishment and what has been said about it by all the popes, councils, saints, Doctors, and Fathers before them.

If it was assumed that the comments of JPII et al were doctrinal then it would be a repudiation of what the church taught for nearly her entire existence. If, however, their comments are understood as prudential then the doctrines remain unchanged as they have been developed through church history and there is no contradiction.

How do you say it is moral to do something “cruel and unnecessary”.

Capital punishment may be cruelly used but it is not inherently cruel. If JPII thought it was by nature a cruel act he would never have permitted its use under any circumstance, but he specified (very restricted) situations where it could be used, therefore capital punishment cannot be said to be generically cruel. It may be argued that its use in a particular circumstance is cruel but that is an entirely different argument.

Ender

 

[esieffe]

I think there were civilizations that could have done it, but not nearly as many as there are now. I don’t have “facts” just common sense, and the CCC seems to agree with the assertion:

“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 non-existent.”

There is just no getting around the truth and validity of this statement. The fact that innocents have been executed alone is enough to stop this barbaric practice, which has been abandoned by all first world countries except the United States. Like it or not, the death penalty has it’s place in the culture of death. Since 1972 almost 200 people have languished on death row who were later found innocent, some with a set execution date. How anyone can support this practice with this in mind just escapes me.

Ender, what should we say to those innocents who were unjustly executed? What would you say to their families? What do you say to those people who spent an average of ten years of their lives, locked in a box only to be found innocent later? Sorry your just collateral damage? I don’t mean to be rude, but I think that is a fair question about a very serious issue.

 

[Ender]

I think there were civilizations that could have done it, but not nearly as many as there are now. I don’t have “facts” just common sense, and the CCC seems to agree with the assertion:

"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 non-existent.”

But this capability has existed for probably thousands of years; this is not some new development. If we know this capability has existed at least since the 1500’s what are we to make of the last 500 years of church teaching that didn’t include this restriction?

Ender

 

[esieffe]

But this capability has existed for probably thousands of years; this is not some new development. If we know this capability has existed at least since the 1500’s what are we to make of the last 500 years of church teaching that didn’t include this restriction?

Ender

They did not have DNA evidence back then did they? They did not know that they were killing innocents along with the guilty.

 

[Ender]

Here are 8 people who were executed and innocent.

Cited from: 8 People Who Were Executed and Later Found Innocent - NakedLaw by Avvo.com

The fact that some group asserts that this is true doesn’t make it so. None of these people have actually been declared innocent; the best that can be said is that a reasonably strong case has been made in their behalf.

But let’s accept those numbers because they represent pretty much the worst case scenario. What they are saying is that since 1973 (when capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court) eight innocent people have been wrongfully executed. That represents one person every five years. Let’s now ask: how many innocent people have been murdered over that same period of time by murderers already in prison or others serving LWOP? I won’t even include the rather staggering number of murders committed by killers who have been paroled. How big would that number have to be in order for you to admit that imprisonment alone provides insufficient protection for society?

Ender

 

[LokisMom]

But this capability has existed for probably thousands of years; this is not some new development. If we know this capability has existed at least since the 1500’s what are we to make of the last 500 years of church teaching that didn’t include this restriction?

Ender

Call me crazy, but when I read the CCC, I read the one that is available to me at this present time. I don’t scour through old ones to try to find loopholes on issues I don’t want to change my views on.

What “restriction” are you referring to anyway?

 

[LokisMom]

The fact that some group asserts that this is true doesn’t make it so. None of these people have actually been declared innocent; the best that can be said is that a reasonably strong case has been made in their behalf.

But let’s accept those numbers because they represent pretty much the worst case scenario. What they are saying is that since 1973 (when capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court) eight innocent people have been wrongfully executed. That represents one person every five years. Let’s now ask: how many innocent people have been murdered over that same period of time by murderers already in prison or others serving LWOP? I won’t even include the rather staggering number of murders committed by killers who have been paroled. How big would that number have to be in order for you to admit that imprisonment alone provides insufficient protection for society?

Ender

The point is that its 8 people that they know of. And 200 people who were found innocent while on death row. These are just the people they actually found. Obviously there are more.

If an innocent person is serving life, there is still the chance that they will be found innocent and be vindicated until their natural death.

 

[Ender]

I think it’s rare for murders in solitary confinement serving LWOP to find a way to kill again. I’d say society is safe with these guys locked up, and would continue to say that so long as this happened less than a couple times a year.

Let me commend you for being the first person to actually try to quantify what the “effective repression of crime” actually means, but let me clarify that LWOP does not include solitary confinement or even supermax conditions.

I’ll also point out, if we assume that the post esieffe just made is accurate and eight innocent people have been executed in the last 40 years, that you would find the murders of 5 to 10 times as many people preferable. This is a hard calculus, I admit that. I just want it to be clear what the real choices are and that neither choice is without its down side.

Ender

 

[esieffe]

The fact that some group asserts that this is true doesn’t make it so. None of these people have actually been declared innocent; the best that can be said is that a reasonably strong case has been made in their behalf.

But let’s accept those numbers because they represent pretty much the worst case scenario. What they are saying is that since 1973 (when capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court) eight innocent people have been wrongfully executed. That represents one person every five years. Let’s now ask: how many innocent people have been murdered over that same period of time by murderers already in prison or others serving LWOP? I won’t even include the rather staggering number of murders committed by killers who have been paroled. How big would that number have to be in order for you to admit that imprisonment alone provides insufficient protection for society?

Ender

If a state’s laws are such that it would be impossible, and I mean impossible, for a malice murderer to be kept behind bars for the rest of his natural life then and only then would I even consider the DP. I think most states have closed that sentencing loophole, but I can’t be sure of it.

As a sidebar, I think execution is in some ways a cop out. Personally I would rather be executed then to rot in a 9x11 cement box at a supermax.

 

[LokisMom]

Let me commend you for being the first person to actually try to quantify what the “effective repression of crime” actually means, but let me clarify that LWOP does not include solitary confinement or even supermax conditions.

I’ll also point out, if we assume that the post esieffe just made is accurate and eight innocent people have been executed in the last 40 years, that you would find the murders of 5 to 10 times as many people preferable. This is a hard calculus, I admit that. I just want it to be clear what the real choices are and that neither choice is without its down side.

Ender

If murderers serving LWOP were still killing people in any sort of substantial number, my opinion would be that solitary confinement would be the next step. No where near the DP.

Also, as I mentioned before, I think it’s worse for an innocent person to be put to death in our own hands than for a convicted murder to find a way to kill someone else. I don’t think I would be doing anything wrong by putting someone in prison for life, even if they found a way to kill someone else. But I DO think I’d be doing something wrong if I played a role (even if its just by support) in the execution of an innocent person.

 

[Ender]

Since 1972 almost 200 people have languished on death row who were later found innocent…

I suspect this is not accurate. There may well be that many who have had their sentences commuted but that is not at all the same as saying they were exonerated and found innocent.

Ender, what should we say to those innocents who were unjustly executed? What would you say to their families?

What shall we say to the families of those innocents who were murdered by those already sentenced to LWOP? Is there anything helpful to say in either case? I acknowledge the tragedy of the cases you cite, but I also find the murders of innocents by repeat killers equally tragic, and I believe they are far more numerous.

What do you say to those people who spent an average of ten years of their lives, locked in a box only to be found innocent later? Sorry your just collateral damage?

This comment would apply to anyone wrongfully imprisoned for any crime; it is not specific to those on death row.

I don’t mean to be rude, but I think that is a fair question about a very serious issue.

I don’t find your question rude, but I would challenge you to examine some of the assumptions you make about what I’m saying and why I’m saying it. I try to make my comments very narrow and focused on specific points. You cannot normally make generalized conclusions from what I’ve said if the topic is narrow.

Ender

 

[Ender]

They did not have DNA evidence back then did they? They did not know that they were killing innocents along with the guilty.

True, they did not, but the question was not whether they were executing more innocent people in the past than today but whether they could more securely imprison people today than in the past. This seems like an assertion without any data to support it.

Ender

 

[Ender]

Call me crazy, but when I read the CCC, I read the one that is available to me at this present time. I don’t scour through old ones to try to find loopholes on issues I don’t want to change my views on.

This is an ungenerous characterization. I have spent a considerable amount of time researching church teaching on this point and so far I am unable to come up with a single source opposing capital punishment (other those noted below). There were among the Fathers some who opposed its use in particular cases, or personally preferred it not be used, but only Lactantius and Tertullian actually came out against it doctrinally.

How is it that searching through 2000 years of church teaching is dismissed as “try[ing] to find loopholes”? When did the teaching of past Doctors, Fathers, popes, councils, and catechisms become irrelevant? If you can provide sources to support your position, provide them and I will respond to the points being made. The fact that nothing in her history supports most of the comments being made about capital punishment should be a fairly strong indicator that there may be something amiss with those interpretations.

I don’t need to cherry pick statements or take them out of context. The church has had a consistent and well documented position on capital punishment and I have gone to some pains to discover it. You might want to consider the implications of disagreeing with the church taught in the past, especially as morality does not change with time or place.

What “restriction” are you referring to anyway?

The section below in bold.The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty,* when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.***
Ender

 

[esieffe]

You cannot normally make generalized conclusions from what I’ve said if the topic is narrow.

Ender

I don’t quite agree. That sounds more like a parliamentary procedure then anything.

In any case, I have exhausted all my favorite anti- DP points. Pax vobis.