Church Teaching on Death Penalty

[Ender]

The death penalty does not correct the one who does wrong.

This is the final sentence of section 2266:

Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.67

If you look up that reference (67) you will see it is Lk 23:40-43. That’s where Christ tells the good thief “today you will be with me in paradise.”

After saying punishments should contribute to the correction of the offender the church uses an example of capital punishment doing just that.

He is entitled to his opinion, but what you quoted does not change what I said: All those “Fathers and Doctors” of the Church were not aware of centuries of unfolding revelation. It appears that the same can be said of Steven Long, who does not speak for the Catholic Church today.

What the church (allegedly) professes today cannot change what the Fathers and Doctors believed in the past, and as for that, what they professed then does control what can be professed now.

…in matters of faith and morals, appertaining to the building up of Christian doctrine, that is to be held as the true sense of Holy Scripture which our Holy Mother Church has held and holds, to whom it belongs to judge the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scripture; and therefore that it is permitted to no one to interpret the Sacred Scripture contrary to this sense, nor, likewise, contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. (1st Vatican Council)

The opposite would be a worse assumption, especially since all modern popes have been against the death penalty.

Right and wrong are no more determined by the opinions of popes than by yours or mine, or indeed of Adam and Eve.

The true sense of this teaching authority of the Pope consists in his being the advocate of the Christian memory. The Pope does not impose from without. Rather, he elucidates the Christian memory and defends it (Cardinal Ratzinger)

 

[OneSheep]

After saying punishments should contribute to the correction of the offender the church uses an example of capital punishment doing just that.

That’s your reading of it, but the reference makes no sense except for the line “getting what we deserve”, which is the typical response of a person who is self-condemning. “Getting what we deserve” appears to be an internal contradiction in the CCC unless the line is meant to only contrast the “crime” of Jesus with their own crimes, where Jesus was being punished for something He did not do, while they were being punished for something they did do.

As it stands, neither of us knows the purpose of the reference. Torture is sinful. I hope you are not suggesting that God’s love involves torturing people because they “deserve it”.

In the mean time, the reference does not address my statement, which was “the death penalty does not correct the one who does wrong”.

What the church (allegedly) professes today cannot change what the Fathers and Doctors believed in the past

Yes, that is true. I repeat: what they said in the past applied to the past, it was appropriate for the time.

It is no longer.

that it is permitted to no one to interpret the Sacred Scripture contrary to this sense

The Church hierarchy statements against the death penalty, including that of all recent popes, is not “one”.

The “Fathers” were unanimous in that the Spirit is alive in the Church. The Church Fathers were unanimous in the call to treat people mercifully. The death penalty is not merciful, and never was. It was, when not sinful, an extreme case of having no alternative.

The true sense of this teaching authority of the Pope consists in his being the advocate of the Christian memory. The Pope does not impose from without . Rather, he elucidates the Christian memory and defends it (Cardinal Ratzinger)

And the way that Cardinal Ratzinger “elucidated” and defended Christian memory was to be against the death penalty.

Pope Benedict: End the Death Penalty| National Catholic Register

What does the death penalty have to do with love of the Father for the person being executed?

 

[Ender]

As it stands, neither of us knows the purpose of the reference.

Yeah, I think we do. The statement is that punishment should contribute to correcting the offender, and has an end note which references a criminal…being corrected by his punishment.

In the mean time, the reference does not address my statement, which was “the death penalty does not correct the one who does wrong”.

Capital punishment is expiatory; is that not the ultimate correction?

I repeat: what they said in the past applied to the past, it was appropriate for the time.

It is no longer.

These are the arguments that are harmful to the entire church. This suggests that whatever the church taught before is utterly irrelevant; it can be changed - reversed - at any time. Do you really not appreciate the importance of sacred tradition? Is truth such a relative thing that it can change with the times?

The Church hierarchy statements against the death penalty, including that of all recent popes, is not “one”.

The meaning of the statement that no one may change what the Fathers unanimously believed is that the teaching cannot be reversed. In your desire to end capital punishment you are willing to disregard sacred scripture, sacred tradition, and essentially everything the church has ever said that might be an obstacle to achieving that goal. Your “arguments” would suffice to reverse every doctrine the church has ever taught.

 

[OneSheep]

Capital punishment is expiatory; is that not the ultimate correction?

Back to the foundation: What does executing a prisoner have to do with the love of God for that person?

These are the arguments that are harmful to the entire church. This suggests that whatever the church taught before is utterly irrelevant; it can be changed - reversed - at any time. Do you really not appreciate the importance of sacred tradition? Is truth such a relative thing that it can change with the times?

I have no idea how you came up with that “suggestion”. I say the opposite in my posts. It would not have been relevant for the church to say something about in-vitro fertilization a thousand years ago, and the Spirit continues to develop the collective conscience of humanity. Everything said in the past was appropriate for its time.

no one may change

Even the Holy Spirit, speaking through the Church today? Is God not allowed?

Revelation continues to unfold on many issues: slavery, indulgences, the nature of humanity (dignity), the role of priests and deacons, deeper meanings of grace, and many other items that are developing whether they are written or not.

Your “arguments” would suffice to reverse every doctrine the church has ever taught.

If God finds it necessary to reverse every doctrine ever taught, that’s up to Him, but this change in the CCC is not a reversal, it is a manifestation of a developing awareness.

As Catholics, we believe in the Holy Spirit, that the Spirit guides the Church. Readers in this thread can choose between recent Popes and the vast majority of Bishops, or you and a few other outliers.

What does executing someone have to do with the love of God for that person?

I did think of you this morning when I woke, fretting about a theft that happened, knowing that the perpetrator would never be caught. For a moment, I felt angry about this person getting away with their sin, not being punished, that it wasn’t fair that he or she would not “get what they deserved”.

It does no good to hang onto these feelings of anger and resentment. There is a time to grieve, to forgive, to let go when we get tired of being angry and resentful. Have you ever wanted someone to “pay” with their life? Have you felt better when it (the execution) happened? Is this the holiness we are called to? If you had held something against the person, had you found a time to forgive?

 

[Ender]

What does executing a prisoner have to do with the love of God for that person?

God wishes everyone to be saved. As capital punishment is expiatory, if the prisoner accepts his punishment that establishes his salvation.

Everything said in the past was appropriate for its time.

Truth does not change with the times.

…the words of the sources and of the living teaching power do not refer to the specific content of individual juridical prescriptions or rules of action (cf. particularly Romans 13:4), but rather to the essential foundation itself of penal power and of its immanent finality. This, in turn, is as little determined by the conditions of time and culture as the nature of man and the human society decreed by nature itself’ (Pius XII)

no one may change

Even the Holy Spirit, speaking through the Church today? Is God not allowed?

1958 The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;

If God finds it necessary to reverse every doctrine ever taught, that’s up to Him, but this change in the CCC is not a reversal, it is a manifestation of a developing awareness.

Well, here’s what the church taught:

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude… recourse to the death penalty, when… (1997 catechism)

So if the teaching has not has not been reversed then this must still be true.

As Catholics, we believe in the Holy Spirit, that the Spirit guides the Church. Readers in this thread can choose between recent Popes and the vast majority of Bishops, or you and a few other outliers.

This requires us to believe the Holy Spirit had abandoned the church on this issue for 2000 years for her to have been wrong for so long, and what you refer to as “outliers” would include virtually all of the Fathers, all of the Doctors, all of the councils, and in fact all of the popes prior to Francis. I feel like I’m in good company.

 

[eamonnroma]

As far as I am concerned, you have to follow the Pope. Your Faith is not a supermarket where you choose what is nice for you. Either you accept it in its entirety or you go elsewhere. Picking and choosing is not an option.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

As far as I am concerned, you have to follow the Pope. Your Faith is not a supermarket where you choose what is nice for you. Either you accept it in its entirety or you go elsewhere. Picking and choosing is not an option.

Not even the Pope has the power to change what has been infallibly taught by the Church for 2000 years. And, given the fact that death penalty is in the Mosaic law and has always been considered a legitimate form of punishment in itself by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church, it’s impossible to teach now that it’s intrinsically wrong. That would mean that not only the Church has erred in a matter of morals for 2000 years, but that also God Himself did.
Now, I know that Pope Francis has not declared the death penalty intrinsically wrong. He only made the prudential judgment that it is now inadmissible (that is, there are no more actual situations that would justify its recourse ). As it’s a prudential judgment, it’s not infallible in itself and Catholics may legitimately disagree about it, even thought such a disagreement should be justified.

 

[Maximus1]

The Prudential nature of the new Catechism changes everything except a naked and no longer applicable former circumstance of application of Capital punishment.
You cannot say Capital punishment is moral TODAY.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

You cannot say Capital punishment is moral TODAY.

The capital punishment in itself can’t be immoral. It has never been, and will never be. It’s only its application that would be immoral today, given the current circumstances.

 

[peragrinatur]

I wonder what Jesus thinks of the death penalty. I’m guessing he’s not a supporter.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

I wonder what Jesus thinks of the death penalty. I’m guessing he’s not a supporter.

Jesus is God. God accepted (and even commanded in some occasions ) the death penalty. Period.

 

[Maximus1]

There is no Capital punishment in and of itself. ( Outside of a philosophy classroom). With no worldly application, it can no longer be thought of as moral in terms of actual human application.
It is much like CAPITAL punishment involving another Commandment. Adultery.
Jesus did not alter the law calling for stoning. He never mentioned it. It remained intact.
He simply eliminated potential stone throwers. Effectively ending the practice.

 

[Maximus1]

We do know he is a forgiving victim of Capital punishment.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

We do know he is a forgiving victim of Capital punishment.

Of an UNJUST capital punishment

 

[Maximus1]

The question involved Jesus.

 

[Maximus1]

Unjust capital punishment is one of Pope Francis stated reasons for the new Catechism.
Thomas Aquinas , if I recall, assumed just decisions. Today, modern methods and science show us there are many unjust executions. Undercutting the rational of just.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

Unjust capital punishment is one of Pope Francis stated reasons for the new Catechism.
Thomas Aquinas , if I recall, assumed just decisions. Today, modern methods and science show us there are many unjust executions. Undercutting the rational of just.

The problem is that the same logic can be applied to any kind of punishment.

 

[Maximus1]

I disagree. The distinction with Capital punishment is finality. And this hits on another of Pope Francis points. His rational in terms of Church mission is the potentiality of salvation. Saving a soul. Which is lost with execution.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

I disagree. The distinction with Capital punishment is finality. And this hits on another of Pope Francis points. His rational in terms of Church mission is the potentiality of salvation. Saving a soul. Which is lost with execution.

Punishment can also have an expiatory value. If the criminal repents and accepts the punishment, such a fact would expiate his sin, leading to his salvation.

 

[Maximus1]

That claim seems dubious to me.
Now if you said there is an observation of expedited repentance( in some cases) I might accept that observation. I would not necessarily accept punishment to be the agent of cause. More likely a shortened timeline is a bigger factor.
You suggest a link between punishment as causative of repentance.Why would punishment be a direct cause to repent? Besides shortened timeline.