Christianity and the Death Penalty

[Debora123]

Regarding JPII’s comment that it is cruel and inhumane, I have to doubt he said that inasmuch as he recognized the appropriateness off capital punishment in some (very limited) circumstances, whereas if it was really cruel it would be cruel in all cases and inapplicable in all cases … which was clearly not his position.

This thread is specific to capital punishment in THIS country, in THIS day and age. (Read the OP.) No one said that it should never have been used throughout history if it was truly necessary as a means of defense at some point.

You doubt JPII said it was cruel? I’ve posted this site for you many times:

usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty/holyfather.shtml

I guess you haven’t read it if you still doubt JPII said the DP was cruel.

 

[Corki]

Well then in that case I don’t see why people here are posting the Aquinas quote to defend their beliefs that the death penalty should still be used in this country.

I don’t look to Aquinas’ quotes on the DP because they no longer apply. We are not living in a society where the only way to keep others safe is by executing a man who is already imprisoned. Instead, look to JPII’s because it is applicable to our time and gives the opinion that the DP is no longer necessary, and performing it is cruel and inhumane.

I don’t see why that is such a problem or so “disturbing” for you.

The only thing disturbing is seeing people trying to pit one great Catholic leader’s writings against each other. The teaching of the Church is a whole. There are 2000 years of theology that has developed and that forms what the Church teaches today.

For me, I don’t look to the teachings of Aquinas to defend the use of the death penalty today. Rather, I look to Aquinas, JPII, Dulles and many others to answer the question that started this thread - Is the death penalty against Christian morality?

 

[Edward_H]

No Edward, he DID specifically say the death penalty should be abolished world wide.

Citation please.

 

[Edward_H]

This may have been true… or it may not have been true. Point being, it is no longer the case.

It could be the case one day ahead, for example in societies where complete breakdown of law and order occur.

Were the Church to forbid capital punishment (vs just say that “practically non-existent”, which is what it has said) it would create a logic problem, decoupling its guidance on just war from its guidance on civil order.

You might say it’s no longer the case (in a definitive sense), the Church won’t for good and better reasons. It’s far more precise in its use of language and thinking and guidance than you are.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

**Has it occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, a death penalty can also sometimes be an act of God? **

Of course that has occured to me.
We seem to be getting way off here, from what I was trying to say.
Some posters are asserting that Justice in obedience to God
“strictly” “requires” that a killer be put to death. Note “strictly” and “requires.”
I am merely pointing out that there are many OTHER capital crimes, even in the
New Testament (read Paul’s list of them in Romans). These things are still capital crimes even though we are not under the Mosaic law covenant. It would seem to me
that “strict” justice in obedience to God would “require” the death penalty be always applied for these, too, but nobody (except folks like the late R.J. Rushdoony) is calling for this. And even in Old Testament times, these penalties were not always carried out with respect to all individuals.
Of COURSE murder is a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance,
but it is not the only one that does, even if those specific words are not specifically used
in connection with those other capital offenses.

The Death Penalty is not a sin, and is not inherently sinful.
With all due respect to the good John Paul II, one gentle pope cannot overturn
2000 years of doctrinal tradition and teaching, especially when that teaching has been consistent. He CAN emphasize mercy over justice, but he CANNOT call something evil
that God has permitted and at times even commanded. John Paul II loathed the death penalty. I remember when he came to Saint Louis in 1999, he spoke out very forcefully demanding an end to the death penalty, period. It’s a good thing he didn’t try to declare this as something “ex cathedra,” because if he HAD, the sedevacantists would have a very good leg to stand on.

My point was never to say that the death penalty is always wrong. Not at all.
I was simply disagreeing with the position that it must always be applied in order
to satisfy Justice in obedience to God, or even more strongly, that to fail to apply it in
all cases is DISobedience to God.

Yes, I believe that God punishes people in THIS LIFE for their sins, also.
I am not a murderer, thank the Lord, but I do believe that I am currently being temporally
punished for my past sins against God. I deserve the punishment, but those I love DO NOT DESERVE IT, and they are being affected by it. So I am begging God for mercy and to let me suffer in Purgatory, if necessary, my deserved temporal afflictions.
And since I am begging for that mercy for myself,
how dare I NOT ask God for that same mercy, even upon the very WORST offenders?
That doesn’t mean that I condone brutality, violence, murder, rape, armed robbery, terrorism, kidnapping, or anything of the sort. Those are horrific things.
But I think we fail to note that just because OUR sins may not be violent sins,
that doesn’t mean that our sins are not extremely serious in the eyes of God.
And “no man is an island” is not true only with regard to murderers and other violent offenders. Our own sins DO affect those around us and in society. Maybe not as immediately as pulling out a gun and shooting someone, but they most definitely DO.
I never realized that until recently, and it is something sickening and horrifying to realize.
It is something heartbreaking to realize.
Lord, have mercy.

 

[Ender]

This thread is specific to capital punishment in THIS country, in THIS day and age. (Read the OP.) No one said that it should never have been used throughout history if it was truly necessary as a means of defense at some point.

Morality does not change with time or place. If capital punishment was justified 1000 years ago it is justifiable today and if the arguments used in the past were valid then they are just as valid today.

You doubt JPII said it was cruel? I’ve posted this site for you many times:

I guess you haven’t read it if you still doubt JPII said the DP was cruel.

Yes, the link you posted has him calling the death penalty cruel. That really is disappointing to see as the comment doesn’t fit … he is calling a penalty cruel and yet recognizes that may still be appropriate. That really does sound a bit like saying we can do a bad thing for a good end. I understand he was forcefully opposed to capital punishment, unfortunately his position on it wasn’t as coherent as it should have been.

Ender

 

[Edward_H]

usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty/holyfather.shtml

Statements on the Death Penalty By the Holy Father

The new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary. (Pope John Paul II, St. Louis, MO, January 1999) Punishment cannot be reduced to mere retribution, much less take the form of social retaliation or a sort of institutional vengeance. Punishment and imprisonment have meaning if they serve the rehabilitation of the individual by offering those who have made a mistake an opportunity to reflect and to change their lives in order to be fully reintegrated into society. (Pope John Paul II, Jubilee Homily to Prisoners, Rome, July 2002)

The Holy Father calls recourse to the death penalty “unnecessary” and painfully reminds us that our “model of society bears the stamp of the culture of death, and is therefore in opposition to the Gospel message.” (Pope John Paul II, World Day of the Sick, Washington, DC, February 2003)

May the proclamation of Christmas be a source of encouragement to all those who work to bring relief to the tormented situation in the Middle East by respecting international commitments. May Christmas help to strengthen and renew, throughout the world, the consensus concerning the need for urgent and adequate measures to halt the production and sale of arms, to defend human life, to end the death penalty, to free children and adolescents from all forms of exploitation, to restrain the bloodied hand of those responsible for genocide and crimes of war, to give environmental issues, especially after the recent natural catastrophes, the indispensable attention which they deserve for the protection of creation and of human dignity! (Pope John Paul II, Christmas Day Message, 1998)

Nowadays, in America as elsewhere in the world, a model of society appears to be emerging in which the powerful predominate, setting aside and even eliminating the powerless: I am thinking here of unborn children, helpless victims of abortion; the elderly and incurably ill, subjected at times to euthanasia; and the many other people relegated to the margins of society by consumerism and materialism. Nor can I fail to mention the unnecessary recourse to the death penalty when other “bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons. Today, given the means at the State’s disposal to deal with crime and control those who commit it, without abandoning all hope of their redemption, the cases where it is absolutely necessary to do away with an offender ‘are now very rare, even non-existent practically’”. (Pope John Paul II, Ecclesia in America January 1999)

The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is “to redress the disorder caused by the offense.” Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfills the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people’s safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behavior and be rehabilitated.

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 nonexistent. (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, 1995)

Careful and painstaking reading often clears up the ‘drive by’ synopses by some posters.

The recurring focus of the Holy Father’s statements is clearly the unnecessari-ness of capital punishment today. Not the fact that it is and remains one means of legitimate punishment.
While he includes many life issues, he certainly doesn’t in his language equate abortion and capital punishment.

And perhaps in another time and place (we seem to pre-suppose we will always, everywhere have civil authorities, failing to take a look at Somalia, for instance) we may need recourse to this means of punishment. I’ve been to some of these lands where chaos reigns and the strictures of a criminal justice system are not in place. Where defense of the innocent can occur with few options and only seconds to respond.

The Holy Father has been to even more of these lands than I have been and certainly understands more than the armchair, chin pulling, head nodders do from their comfy homes in suburbia.

 

[Debora123]

Citation please.

Most certainly:

“May the death penalty, an unworthy punishment still used in some countries, be abolished throughout the world.”

Pope John Paul II said this in a prayer at the Papal Mass at Regina Coeli Prison in Rome, July 9, 2000.

You can look it up if you’d like.

 

[Edward_H]

Most certainly:

Pope John Paul II said this in a prayer at the Papal Mass at Regina Coeli Prison in Rome, July 9, 2000.

You can look it up if you’d like.

Look above for fuller quotes and emphasis…this goes beyond “drive by” paraphrasing and thinking.

 

[Debora123]

For me, I don’t look to the teachings of Aquinas to defend the use of the death penalty today.

Good, I don’t either. That’s why I was saying that I go by what JPII said, not by what Aquinas said. Because JPII was a pope of “today” and he indeed said it was wrong “today.”

Rather, I look to Aquinas, JPII, Dulles and many others to answer the question that started this thread - Is the death penalty against Christian morality?

Today? JPII has said it is.

 

[Corki]

Today? JPII has said it is.

JPII was clearly against the death penalty and thought it should be abolished. However, he never said it was against Christian moral teaching. In fact, as was quoted above, he said (bolding mine):

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 nonexistent. (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, 1995)

If it was an act against Christian morals, it would never be acceptable. But JPII actually said that it “ought not” to include death “except in cases of absoute necessity”. That is a strong statement against the death penalty but still far from “never”.

 

[Edward_H]

JPII was clearly against the death penalty and thought it should be abolished. However, he never said it was against Christian moral teaching. In fact, as was quoted above, he said (bolding mine):

If it was an act against Christian morals, it would never be acceptable. But JPII actually said that it “ought not” to include death “except in cases of absoute necessity”. That is a strong statement against the death penalty but still far from “never”.

 

[Ender]

The recurring focus of the Holy Father’s statements is clearly the unnecessari-ness of capital punishment today. Not the fact that it is and remains one means of legitimate punishment.

His comment was that it is unnecessary to secure safety for society. That may (or may not) be true but it doesn’t address the principle question of whether it is necessary for securing justice. He simply ignored the aspect of justice in regard to punishment.

And perhaps in another time and place (we seem to pre-suppose we will always, everywhere have civil authorities, failing to take a look at Somalia, for instance) we may need recourse to this means of punishment.

Can we say that capital punishment is just if it provides safety? No, not at all; it is just only if it is the punishment merited by the crime committed. We may never use an unjust punishment, but we may often employ punishments that do not provide security.

Ender

 

[Debora123]

Look above for fuller quotes and emphasis…this goes beyond “drive by” paraphrasing and thinking.

Edward, what in heaven’s name are you talking about?

And why are you rolling your eyes at me?? You asked me to quote exactly where the pope explicitly says he believes the death penalty should be abolished, and I have done just that. What is your problem now?

Here’s another source, are you going to roll your eyes at me for that too??

The new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform.** I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty**, which is both cruel and unnecessary. (Pope John Paul II, St. Louis, MO, January 1999) Punishment cannot be reduced to mere retribution, much less take the form of social retaliation or a sort of institutional vengeance. Punishment and imprisonment have meaning if they serve the rehabilitation of the individual by offering those who have made a mistake an opportunity to reflect and to change their lives in order to be fully reintegrated into society. (Pope John Paul II, Jubilee Homily to Prisoners, Rome, July 2002)

 

[Debora123]

JPII was clearly against the death penalty and thought it should be abolished. However, he never said it was against Christian moral teaching. In fact, as was quoted above, he said (bolding mine):

If it was an act against Christian morals, it would never be acceptable. But JPII actually said that it “ought not” to include death “except in cases of absoute necessity”. That is a strong statement against the death penalty but still far from “never”.

That is the point, Corki.

It ISNT an absolute necessity anymore, and he says this. THAT is why, if done in this day and age in this country, it IS cruel and unchristian (And yes, he does say it is cruel). No one here is arguing that it has never ever ever been necessary, and I’ve pointed that out many times myself. Do you guys just not understand exactly what my views are or something? Have I not made myself clear? Or do you just particularly like arguing with everything I say? I’ve noticed a certain trend forming here amongst a certain group of people who I don’t think like me very much.

 

[Debora123]

Yes, the link you posted has him calling the death penalty cruel. That really is disappointing to see as the comment doesn’t fit … he is calling a penalty cruel and yet recognizes that may still be appropriate. That really does sound a bit like saying we can do a bad thing for a good end. I understand he was forcefully opposed to capital punishment, unfortunately his position on it wasn’t as coherent as it should have been.

Ender

No, he DOESN’T think it is appropriate anymore. He thinks it should be abolished. Done away with. He thinks the world has progressed beyond needing the death penalty and that now it is nothing but “cruel and unnecessary.” I really don’t see why you have such a hard time understanding that concept. But I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree if you can’t quite grasp the logic.

 

[Edward_H]

Edward, what in heaven’s name are you talking about?

The Holy Father’s statements above do not support the view that capital punishment is wrong or flawed in principle, just that it’s hard to conceive of a case today where it’s necessary.

This is a key distinction.

 

[Debora123]

The Holy Father’s statements above do not support the view that capital punishment is wrong or flawed in principle, **just that it’s hard to conceive of a case today where it’s necessary.
**
This is a key distinction.

Um, yeah, this IS the key distinction but this is also the key distinction in this whole thread!

Read the OP again, this is supposed to be specifically applicable to the here and now.

You asked me to cite where JPII says the death penalty should be abolished, and so I did. And in response you rolled your eyes, so I cited another source where he says the same thing.

Honestly Edward, besides trying to argue with anything and everything I say (no matter what it is), I really don’t know what you’re trying to do here.

Oh, and also, he DOES think it is “wrong and flawed in principle” if applicable to THE HERE AND NOW. (unless of course, you don’t think the definition of the word “cruel” has anything to do with something being “wrong and flawed in principle”)

 

[Edward_H]

Also, he DOES think it is wrong and flawed in principle if applicable to THE HERE AND NOW. (which once again, is what this thread is about)

• Your statement is confused, if not meaningless.
• A principle is either morally acceptable or not.
• The principle of using capital punishment is morally permissible.
• The practice of the principle is another matter, given our circumstances today.

The Pope was only referring to the practice today, not the principle itself.

This may seem an unnecessary point, but it’s critical to understand the issue.

In some countries today, capital punishment may still be the only way available to protect society.

 

[Corki]

• Your statement is confused, if not meaningless.
• A principle is either morally acceptable or not.
• The principle of using capital punishment is morally permissible.
• The practice of the principle is another matter.

The Pope was only referring to the practice today, not the principle itself.

This may seem an unnecessary point, but it’s critical to understand the issue.

Also, by looking at the Epistles which have been referenced in this thread, the writings of Aquinas and of Blessed Pope John Paul II as well as Cardinal Dulles, it is clear that the principle has endured for 2000 years while the application changes with the times.