N
NoWhereMan
Guest
Even if they are protecting an outright criminal!
- Status
P
puzzleannie
Guest
which cannot even be determined since at this point the trial has not even taken place
please get some education on the justice system in this country before you comment and in any case this line is off topic.
What I am hearing on this thread is “I personally am uncomfortable or unwilling for private reasons to serve on a jury, leaving others to carry out my right and duty to do so, therefore I will invent a theology and ascribe it to Christianity so that I may justify my refusal to serve on moral grounds,” Please get a good civics book and read it, and pray to God you never get falsely accused or sued and have your case go badly because 12 citizens were not willing, on private grounds, to serve on your jury.
R
rpp
Guest
From my point of view, I believe serving on a jury, if called, is a moral imperative for a Catholic.
A good Catholic, who understands “hate the sin, love the sinner” would bea better person to judge the civil guilt or innocence of an accussed person. Remember, determining guilt or innocence for a crime is not the same as judging the state of the soul of a (fellow) sinner. There are few things more important to a stable society than having honest and well-meaning people serving on a jury.
I have been called, but not selected to serve, on a jury. I have had a couple of friends and co-workers serve on juries and grand juries. More than twenty-five years ago, my mother served on a jury for a man accused of rape. While she found te facts of the case disturbing, she took her duty seriously. (If I recall correctly, the trial was very public, lasted about a week and was a real sacrifice for my Mom to not read the newspaper or watch TV news.)
A good Catholic, who understands “hate the sin, love the sinner” would bea better person to judge the civil guilt or innocence of an accussed person. Remember, determining guilt or innocence for a crime is not the same as judging the state of the soul of a (fellow) sinner. There are few things more important to a stable society than having honest and well-meaning people serving on a jury.
I have been called, but not selected to serve, on a jury. I have had a couple of friends and co-workers serve on juries and grand juries. More than twenty-five years ago, my mother served on a jury for a man accused of rape. While she found te facts of the case disturbing, she took her duty seriously. (If I recall correctly, the trial was very public, lasted about a week and was a real sacrifice for my Mom to not read the newspaper or watch TV news.)
J
John_Pascendi
Guest
In some ways I also believe there should be professional jurors,those who know how to see thru the rhetoric and theatrics of the lawyers etc…its an imperfect system but its the best we have! Having served many times,I have stories to tell…once I was excused because I was a teacher at the time and informed the lawyers that I am not impressed with emotion,tears,drama etc for I get that from the students each semester when the grades come out…they smiled weakly…asked me to go outside with them…and informed me I was no longer needed! Our Jesus was put on trial and altho the judge declared Him innocent he allowed the execution to commence…Pilate was a coward and is the only one mentioned as such in the early Apostles creed!Before crossing the street I make a judgement each time so I am used to judging…bring the criminal out…all chained up ,he shuffles in ,looking sad and forlorn…and the victim…who cares…well some do…Pas
L
LilyM
Guest
‘Judge not lest you be judged’ is trotted out in all sorts of situations where it simply doesn’t apply. Absolutely we can and must distinguish good from evil.
Certainly we have the right and actually the duty, determine that certain actions, whether committed by ourselves or others, are morally OK or otherwise. We are told by our Lord to rebuke our brother if he sins - that duty necessarily involves forming the judgement that he HAS sinned. Of course one does so in all charity, seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit in order that one’s judgement may be correct and one’s rebuke have the desired effect, but certainly we can and sometimes must judge.
The only sort of judgement that we are not to indulge in is that which attacks the person as a person, attacks their general character, instead of merely confining itself to their specific actions.
Certainly we have the right and actually the duty, determine that certain actions, whether committed by ourselves or others, are morally OK or otherwise. We are told by our Lord to rebuke our brother if he sins - that duty necessarily involves forming the judgement that he HAS sinned. Of course one does so in all charity, seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit in order that one’s judgement may be correct and one’s rebuke have the desired effect, but certainly we can and sometimes must judge.
The only sort of judgement that we are not to indulge in is that which attacks the person as a person, attacks their general character, instead of merely confining itself to their specific actions.
K
kanrok
Guest
Not for nothing, John, but did you ever consider that she had an old pair of shoes on?
After all, no need to buy new shoes if you have no use for them.
I hate to think that’s the only reason you sent her packing.
P
PeterMuz
Guest
Its not that I think Christians should participate, but I don’t see any reason not to participate. We cannot judge ones heart, but we can judge their actions.
J
John_Pascendi
Guest
Yes,just as what we are witnessing today at all levels of gov…they are smarter then we are and we just cant make a perfect choice or decision so I will remain silent and let someone else do it for me…when that ship of displaced German Jews were refused admittance into cuba and then parked outside of Miami in 1939…they sent a pleading letter to bothe the sainted FDR and his lovely wife Eleanor…not a peep…not a sound,the silence was deafining and so the ship with some 947 souls aboard was shipped back to Germany and the death chambers…let others to the work for us we are just commoners anyway…one who has served and with prayer cast a vote for or against…Pas
J
John_Pascendi
Guest
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I have no problem serving Jury Duty. I have been called twice and actually served on a jury once.
Juries do not judge the individual, they judge the actions of the individual though the evidence offered and the law as applied as the judge informs them though the Jury instructions given just before deliberations begin.
This does not go against the scriptural admonition against judging others which is what I believe the OP is trying to get at.
Juries do not judge the individual, they judge the actions of the individual though the evidence offered and the law as applied as the judge informs them though the Jury instructions given just before deliberations begin.
This does not go against the scriptural admonition against judging others which is what I believe the OP is trying to get at.
E
Ender
Guest
If you’re referring to the citations from Aquinas then, yes, I believe this is what the Church teaches. If you’re still unconvinced, here is another one:
CCC 1807: You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.
Serving on a jury is nothing more than a judgment of fact: did the accused commit the crime and can his state of mind be reasonably determined? Catholics have no moral basis on which to reject the duty to serve if called.
Ender
P
Pacra
Guest
“…One case in point…the plaintiff claimed she was a cripple since this elevator closed on her too soon etc…I noticed after she was wheeled in that the bottom of her shoes were scuffed…worn…she either had someone elses shoes on or she was lying…I chose lying and voted against her!..Pas”
Even a person who uses a wheelchair is going to have to exit it at times, so having shoes, on her feet, that are scuffed or otherwise worn is not at all relevant to whether an individual is lying. Now if she was a double amputee with shoes the bottoms of which were scuffed and well-worn, then I might be a little bit suspicious…
Even a person who uses a wheelchair is going to have to exit it at times, so having shoes, on her feet, that are scuffed or otherwise worn is not at all relevant to whether an individual is lying. Now if she was a double amputee with shoes the bottoms of which were scuffed and well-worn, then I might be a little bit suspicious…
W
WatchfulPilgrim
Guest
Hey - sorry I didn’t see all these replies. For some reason I didn’t get a notification email…
Anyway, thanks for all your replies. I never though of it quite like that; that I’m judging the deed and not the person. I was also concerned about the punishment - like if the person got the death penalty or something - but HOW he/she gets punished is not for me to determine and whatever sentence is given I am not responsible for. Or at least, that’s my impression. Hmmm… okay, that’s hard to say. I’m not sure where I sit with that one. Like, I wouldn’t give a homeless person $10 if I knew they were always spending their charity money on booze. If I knew the punishment was going to be death I don’t think I’d be willing to serve on the jury.
Well I may not have the whole thing settled, but at least I got somewhere from this discussion!
Anyway, thanks for all your replies. I never though of it quite like that; that I’m judging the deed and not the person. I was also concerned about the punishment - like if the person got the death penalty or something - but HOW he/she gets punished is not for me to determine and whatever sentence is given I am not responsible for. Or at least, that’s my impression. Hmmm… okay, that’s hard to say. I’m not sure where I sit with that one. Like, I wouldn’t give a homeless person $10 if I knew they were always spending their charity money on booze. If I knew the punishment was going to be death I don’t think I’d be willing to serve on the jury.
Well I may not have the whole thing settled, but at least I got somewhere from this discussion!
- Status