Catholic View on Pacificsm?

[mexilad]

He also taught justice. Or are you forgetting. We can get into this if you wish. Id love it.

Wasn’t it Jesus who took names and kicked dragon when he chased the money changers out of the temple? I could swear I read that somewhere. Jesus was not a bully and he was not a wimp. He was assertive. He was respectful of others, but he had no problem getting in somebody’s grill when the need arose. I remember reading some strong terms he used. he called people vipers and hypocrites and stuff.

Pray for peace, but you need not be anyone’s victim.

 

[mexilad]

thanks for the posts concerning my question! I think this is just a case of some one starting out with a good idea (no violence) and then taking it a little too far. I don’t know if I would call my friend a coward… maybe just misguided? I’ve been looking for a time to talk to him about what the church says on this issue, but its so hard because he is so passionate about the issue! I think its so weird so I literally have no idea to approach him on the subject (we have a funny friendship, he thinks its absolutely insane I pray infront of the abortion clinic down the road three days a week).

Guess I’ll just have to keep educating myself on the issue and pray God can use me, is thats His will at all.

If your friend says he would not use force to defend his wife from rape, he is mis guided. If he actually does it then he is a coward.

 

[Ponyguy]

Unfortunately, for you the prisons in this country can in fact hold murderers without a chance of them going on another rampage.

Okay, would YOU like to pay to keep these worthless scraps of “humanity” incarcerated for the rest of their lives?

Our present laws demand that we feed, clothe, and shelter these criminals, and also provide medical and dental care second to none for them. Prisoners are not required to perform any sort of work or other effort to defray the cost of their incarceration, either. Prisons have been required to provide prisoners with air conditioning, library services, remedial schooling, High School and College classes, radios, televisions, computers and internet access as well, or risk be charged with “cruel and unusual punishment.” Any work forced upon them can (and has been) refused as being “disparaging and demeaning.”

If our society could imprison a condemned killer for life without possibility of parole, and force his family (or someone other than the tax-paying public) to pay for the cost of such imprisonment, perhaps that would be an acceptable alternative to capital punishment in my opinion; however, I believe that we have many more worthy causes on which to spend the moneys extorted from the public by taxation than supporting condemned murderers… as a matter of fact, just about any cause you can possibly name.

 

[hxcCatholic413]

Okay, would YOU like to pay to keep these worthless scraps of “humanity” incarcerated for the rest of their lives?

Our present laws demand that we feed, clothe, and shelter these criminals, and also provide medical and dental care second to none for them. Prisoners are not required to perform any sort of work or other effort to defray the cost of their incarceration, either. Prisons have been required to provide prisoners with air conditioning, library services, remedial schooling, High School and College classes, radios, televisions, computers and internet access as well, or risk be charged with “cruel and unusual punishment.” Any work forced upon them can (and has been) refused as being “disparaging and demeaning.”

If our society could imprison a condemned killer for life without possibility of parole, and force his family (or someone other than the tax-paying public) to pay for the cost of such imprisonment, perhaps that would be an acceptable alternative to capital punishment in my opinion; however, I believe that we have many more worthy causes on which to spend the moneys extorted from the public by taxation than supporting condemned murderers… as a matter of fact, just about any cause you can possibly name.

hmmm so money is more important than a human being…Ahh yes Jesus said that too…o wait a second umm? I’ve seen what you wrote above mentioned in the Satanic Bible though

hmm humans are “worthless scraps of humanity”…it’s obvious at this point that you have a very caring and loving side about others , but not to jab at you too much most of these prisoners were abused, beaten, raped by their family members…several were severely poor, uneducated…and most of all…NOT LOVED

It’s your mindset that will continue to foster** HATE** in the mind and in the heart. If money is worth more than humans…then abortionists are justified

God Bless!

 

[hxcCatholic413]

Genesis 9:6 clearly references the death penalty, don’t believe me then look at the Catechisms usage of the verse. It’s punishment for murder pure and simple.

You also have to contend with nearly 1,800 years or so with the content of the Church in using Capital Punishment. The Church saw it as okay, unless it erred then we have a problem with the Church.

God Bless,

Chris.

Christ came to fulfill the old laws and make them whole. Therefore saying that Genesis 9:6 is proof that God is for the Death Penalty is ludicrous. Perhaps you would be interested in speaking with a Rabbi in the future and asking them what their take on the death penalty is?

The Church has no dogma on the usage of death penalty…is this the same Church that paid for the Holy Wars in the Crusades? Sorry, but the Church is far from perfect…its individual members that have sin that makes this so. Christ was against the death penalty if he wasn’t then he’d be a hypocrite…and the son of God wasn’t a hypocrite. God Bless!

 

[StTommyMore]

Christ came to fulfill the old laws and make them whole. Therefore saying that Genesis 9:6 is proof that God is for the Death Penalty is ludicrous. Perhaps you would be interested in speaking with a Rabbi in the future and asking them what their take on the death penalty is?

The Church has no dogma on the usage of death penalty…is this the same Church that paid for the Holy Wars in the Crusades? Sorry, but the Church is far from perfect…its individual members that have sin that makes this so. Christ was against the death penalty if he wasn’t then he’d be a hypocrite…and the son of God wasn’t a hypocrite. God Bless!

Do you have any Magisterial documents to back up your opinion that the death penalty is intrinsically evil?

 

[Warrior1979]

an “eye for an eye” ideology is counter to everything Christ said and did…death penalty is unjust and you do realize that people can change right?

What did Christ do with the merchants in the Temple?

 

[benidict]

Wasn’t it Jesus who took names and kicked dragon when he chased the money changers out of the temple? I could swear I read that somewhere. Jesus was not a bully and he was not a wimp. He was assertive. He was respectful of others, but he had no problem getting in somebody’s grill when the need arose. I remember reading some strong terms he used. he called people vipers and hypocrites and stuff.

Pray for peace, but you need not be anyone’s victim.

Exactly. Paul was not always a bundle of Joy either. and he had no problems using very strong language when it came to Judaizers, and such. such as when he wished those that taught circumcision was nesseccary to be saved, go all the way and castrate themselves. He was certainly no pushover. peace

 

[benidict]

sorry, but it seems that you have still held your Baptist position regarding this issue
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2267.htm

Catechism of Catholic Church: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 are 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 non-existent."

Unfortunately, for you the prisons in this country can in fact hold murderers without a chance of them going on another rampage.

By the way the “sword” in scripture is the most misquoted verse in the whole Bible…he meant that we should have spiritual swords to fight their faith in the future (metaphorically)…not ACTUAL swords…this has been discussed multiple times on this board. Type: “Gun Control” in the search bar and you’ll see it mentioned tons of times.

I don’t see it as sick…I just like to stay pro-life in all times…I don’t pick and choose.

God Bless!

If the Church in ages past held your view, then you very well be Muslim right now, and speaking Arabic. The difference between you and I, is that I am prolife on the part of potential victims. You are prolife on the part of sick demented perps, who gave up their rights, when they raped, murdered, robbed, or molested. I think the side I take, is more in keeping with the Church to protect Innocent life, And society, from those that would by their Evil behavior, cause disorder and chaos.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Pacifism is only allowed in free countries. Thus, pacifism will always act against free countries.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

According to the law of Mosses, the adulteress deserved to die. But when it came to stoning the adulteress, Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone and they all walked away.

I wonder if there is anyone today without sin, who could act as executioner for a rapist?

Blessings

Eric

 

[benidict]

According to the law of Mosses, the adulteress deserved to die. But when it came to stoning the adulteress, Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone and they all walked away.

I wonder if there is anyone today without sin, who could act as executioner for a rapist?

Blessings

Eric

Im not without sin, but I could flip the switch. And I would sleep well that night, knowing I had done a wonderful thing. How can you compare the woman caught in adultery, with a rapist? Also, where was the man with whom she was commiting adultery? Christ teaching here, was not Against the death penalty. I think you are mis interpereting His intent in this passage. Nice try though.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Greetings and peace be with you benidict;

How can you compare the woman caught in adultery, with a rapist?

I can’t compare the two, but the law of Mosses was very clear, the penalty for adultery was death. I struggle to compare a rapist to Adam, whose sin was to eat from the tree of knowledge. But in the eyes of God we are all condemned to death on this Earth for that one sin.

Do we judge sin in the same way God will judge sin?

Blessings

Eric

 

[benidict]

Greetings and peace be with you benidict;

I can’t compare the two, but the law of Mosses was very clear, the penalty for adultery was death. I struggle to compare a rapist to Adam, whose sin was to eat from the tree of knowledge. But in the eyes of God we are all condemned to death on this Earth for that one sin.

Do we judge sin in the same way God will judge sin?

Blessings

Eric

So where was the man caught in adultery with the woman? He should have been presented to Jesus also. According to the Law of Moses.

 

[CGDouglas]

Christ came to fulfill the old laws and make them whole.

Correct.

hxcCatholic413:

Therefore saying that Genesis 9:6 is proof that God is for the Death Penalty is ludicrous.

Incorrect. Genesis 9:6 is proof that God is for the Death Penalty pure and simple. You have not demonstrated any New Testament scriptural condemnation of the Death Penalty, and you still have to comment on the Catechism’s usage of Genesis 9:6 in her explanation on a Catholic’s attitude to the death penalty.

hxcCatholic413:

Perhaps you would be interested in speaking with a Rabbi in the future and asking them what their take on the death penalty is?

Why? We’re Catholic, we don’t need to see a Rabbi on what the Church teaches.

hxcCatholic413:

The Church has no dogma on the usage of death penalty…is this the same Church that paid for the Holy Wars in the Crusades?

See the Catechism, also see the history of the Church in usage of the Death Penalty. As to your pointing of the Crusades, the Church rightfully called the Crusades in reaction to an expanding Islamic religion which expanded by the sword.

hxcCatholic413:

Sorry, but the Church is far from perfect…its individual members that have sin that makes this so.

The Church is perfect, only man can err not the Church. The problem then comes that you are asserting yourself against what the Church taught.

hxcCatholic413:

Christ was against the death penalty if he wasn’t then he’d be a hypocrite…and the son of God wasn’t a hypocrite. God Bless!

Christ indeed wasn’t a hypocrite, yet you are still yet to demonstrate where Christ directly condemned the death penalty.

God Bless,

Chris.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Greetings and peace be with you Chris,

Christ indeed wasn’t a hypocrite, yet you are still yet to demonstrate where Christ directly condemned the death penalty.

According to the law of Mosses, the adulteress deserved to die. But when it came to stoning the adulteress, Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone and they all walked away.

I wonder if there is anyone today without sin, who could act as executioner for a rapist?

Blessings

Eric

 

[CGDouglas]

Greetings and peace be with you Chris,

According to the law of Mosses, the adulteress deserved to die. But when it came to stoning the adulteress, Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone and they all walked away.

I wonder if there is anyone today without sin, who could act as executioner for a rapist?

I’m merely arguing on the sake of murder.

As to rape and adultery, they are non-comparable. One was by will and one was against will. The adulteress, of her own will committed a transgression against God. The rapist on the other hand, falls under the category of assault.

As to who could act as an executioner? Anyone who applies and has gained the office. Confusion should be avoided on one’s role and one who points and condemns. The executioner was ordered by law, not by personal justification. St. Thomas More himself apparently said to the executioner that he was doing no harm in his job.

As to whether we can apply capital punishment to a rapist is debatable. Given the Church’s stance (See St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas
(Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, Q. 64, A. 2), and St. Alphonsus Liguori and Pope Pius XI’s Casti Connubii), society can inflict punishments upon its members for the necessity of the common good: 1) To vindicate the moral order and expiate the crime, 2) To defend itself, 3) To deter other would-be offenders and to reform or deter future crime.

Punishment is obviously in order for the rapist (a punishment by law, not by an individual), whether the death penalty can be applicable is questionable.

As to the main question at hand, he is by right to aid in defense.

God Bless,

Chris.

 

[ndeparis88]

thanks for the posts concerning my question! I think this is just a case of some one starting out with a good idea (no violence) and then taking it a little too far. I don’t know if I would call my friend a coward… maybe just misguided? I’ve been looking for a time to talk to him about what the church says on this issue, but its so hard because he is so passionate about the issue! I think its so weird so I literally have no idea to approach him on the subject (we have a funny friendship, he thinks its absolutely insane I pray infront of the abortion clinic down the road three days a week).

Guess I’ll just have to keep educating myself on the issue and pray God can use me, is thats His will at all.

I do think people generally like the idea of being able to be nonviolent, but I think the world we live in today really doesn’t leave room to be a die hard pacifist. Friends I have to say that Jesus was a pacifist and that just isn’t true. When he came into the temple and threw the merchant men there he didn’t do it right away, he actually went away and came back the next day and then ruin the place. So this shows he though about it and had the time to do so. It shows he was human to and he dished out some form of a temper. Also if he was a pacifist why does he stand firm and not hear another point of view pacifistic can’t real shun people away because that denotes a defensive position and that’s really contrary to being a pacifist.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Greetings and peace be with you ndeparis88;

but I think the world we live in today really doesn’t leave room to be a die hard pacifist.

I believe to earn the title of pacifist, you need to be in places of conflict, read the Rachael Corrie story……

electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml
On 16 March 2003 in Rafah, occupied Gaza, 23-year-old American peace activist Rachel Corrie from Olympia, Washington, was murdered by an Israeli bulldozer driver. Rachel was in Gaza opposing the bulldozing of a Palestinian home as a volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement.

Rachel and seven other ISM activists were in the Hi Es Salam area of Rafah, Gaza, trying to prevent the razing of Palestinian land and property. Present were two Israeli occupation army bulldozers and a tank. For a period of two hours, the activists played ‘cat and mouse’, attempting to prevent the illegal demolitions by physically blocking the passage of the two bulldozers.

Blessings

Eric

 

[BlueSapphire]

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/indianadeathpenalty.htm