C
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A
Allegra
Guest
One alternative to consider is not commiting any crimes.
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
That is a good answer.
Simplistic and a tad self-righteous, but still a good answer.
All sin is crime, even if the crime is not punished as such by the State.
People whose sins are not punished as crimes formally by the State
should consider themselves lucky, that’s all.
For example, abortion is the crime of murder, even though the
State (in many countries) does not recognize it as such anymore.
Thus, even though the state does not recognize it,
there are tens of millions of women who are, in fact, in the eyes of God, now felons.
That goes for their doctors who performed the act, too.
Yet because the State now CONDONES this, these peope are
regarded, and regard themselves, as Law-Abiding Citizens.
The same goes for fornicators, adulters, sodomites, blasphemers, heretics, etc.
The question for the Bishops is whether these people can be rehabilitated and reintegrated into Society. Unless they are habitual and violent offenders,
yes of course they can, provided they repent and receive God’s grace.
To hear many Christians tell it,
you would think that Jesus’s atonement doesn’t pay for the sins of
those who have been convicted by the State of something. You would think
that Jesus only atoned for those who HAVEN’T broken any Laws.
Newsflash: all sin is the breaking of Law. Sin is Lawlessness. All sin is criminal behavior. “Venial” sin may be likened to the “misdemeanor,” while
mortal sins could be likened to what is called “felony,” or more serious infractions.
I don’t think that most Christians would want to be subject to prosecution
and imprisonment for their crimes against God that they have repented of.
They want OTHER people to pay, and pay very dearly, but not themselves it seems.
Interesting.
The Bishops are right in their call.
Simplistic and a tad self-righteous, but still a good answer.
All sin is crime, even if the crime is not punished as such by the State.
People whose sins are not punished as crimes formally by the State
should consider themselves lucky, that’s all.
For example, abortion is the crime of murder, even though the
State (in many countries) does not recognize it as such anymore.
Thus, even though the state does not recognize it,
there are tens of millions of women who are, in fact, in the eyes of God, now felons.
That goes for their doctors who performed the act, too.
Yet because the State now CONDONES this, these peope are
regarded, and regard themselves, as Law-Abiding Citizens.
The same goes for fornicators, adulters, sodomites, blasphemers, heretics, etc.
The question for the Bishops is whether these people can be rehabilitated and reintegrated into Society. Unless they are habitual and violent offenders,
yes of course they can, provided they repent and receive God’s grace.
To hear many Christians tell it,
you would think that Jesus’s atonement doesn’t pay for the sins of
those who have been convicted by the State of something. You would think
that Jesus only atoned for those who HAVEN’T broken any Laws.
Newsflash: all sin is the breaking of Law. Sin is Lawlessness. All sin is criminal behavior. “Venial” sin may be likened to the “misdemeanor,” while
mortal sins could be likened to what is called “felony,” or more serious infractions.
I don’t think that most Christians would want to be subject to prosecution
and imprisonment for their crimes against God that they have repented of.
They want OTHER people to pay, and pay very dearly, but not themselves it seems.
Interesting.
The Bishops are right in their call.
T
Tigg
Guest
I naively thought I had just about heard it all.
I sincerely hope that in building those “bridges” due consideration is given to justice and injustice, the protection of the innocent is upheld, and that the concept of true repentance and sorrow for sin is not lost in some vague mutterings entitled “social justice.”
I sincerely hope that in building those “bridges” due consideration is given to justice and injustice, the protection of the innocent is upheld, and that the concept of true repentance and sorrow for sin is not lost in some vague mutterings entitled “social justice.”
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
**I sincerely hope that in building those “bridges” due consideration is given to justice and injustice, the protection of the innocent is upheld, and that the concept of true repentance and sorrow for sin is not lost in some vague mutterings entitled “social justice.” **
I agree, esp with “the protection of the innocent is upheld.”
Society and decent people must be protected from violent predators and
from those who would rob blind the trusting and the helpless.
And those who do those things need to have it made clear to them
that they will have to repay every penny that they stole, as much as
four times over (compare tax-thief Zaccheus’s promise to Jesus upon his own repentance).
The Old Testament Law, which was more than just religious regulation, and from which our modern laws derive, this God-given law made no provisions for such violent and
depraved and laden-with-sexual-abuse and sexual malice- places as “prisons” as we use them. These places do not “punish and correct” the offender, no, they brutalize and
further corrupt the offender. The bible had no use for such places in ancient Israel.
Violent, dangerous and murderous predators, were put to death.
Society cannot be expected to tolerate violent dangerous predators running loose.
On the other hand, a seventeen year old kid who forged a couple of checks should not be placed in a lockup with vicious predatory rapists and murderers and gangleaders who will likely rape, sodomize, beat and stab him. That is not right, either. It is not fitting punishment. He should be forced to perform labor for the victim for a period of time, just as in the Old Testament, to make up for his forgery/theft. After that he has fulfilled this censure and penance, his civil rights should be fully restored. If he offends again, he must again be punished, perhaps with more intensity or for a longer period. If he turns to violence and brutality, then he should be locked away until he learns his lesson, and even then he should not be locked up with violent predators.
Society has a right to ask lawbreakers to make up for their bad deeds.
But even society, comprised entirely of sinful lawbreakers itself, had better be merciful
and not vindictive. As Christ put it, to the people who were about to LAWFULLY execute the woman caught in the crime of Adultery, “let he among you who is without sin be the first to cast a stone at her.”
Strictly speaking,
Moses was a felon — he unlawfully murdered the Egyptian, and fled from justice.
David became a felon — he committed the crime of adultery, AND set up
his trusting friend Uriah to be killed, thus committing murder.
**King Manasseh **was
a felon: murdered thousands of innocent people, including his own
infant children.
Saul of Tarsus (Paul) had
been a felon: He participated in the vigilante murders of Christians
out of religious fanaticism.
Though all of these men committed very serious crimes, God did not write them off.
He not only forgave these men, but restored them to positions of GREAT influence.
So, yes, where possible, even those who had willfully broken the law
should be worked with to try and rehabilitate them and return them to full participation
in Society. IF they are willing to be repentant and try to contribute to the common good.
I agree, esp with “the protection of the innocent is upheld.”
Society and decent people must be protected from violent predators and
from those who would rob blind the trusting and the helpless.
And those who do those things need to have it made clear to them
that they will have to repay every penny that they stole, as much as
four times over (compare tax-thief Zaccheus’s promise to Jesus upon his own repentance).
The Old Testament Law, which was more than just religious regulation, and from which our modern laws derive, this God-given law made no provisions for such violent and
depraved and laden-with-sexual-abuse and sexual malice- places as “prisons” as we use them. These places do not “punish and correct” the offender, no, they brutalize and
further corrupt the offender. The bible had no use for such places in ancient Israel.
Violent, dangerous and murderous predators, were put to death.
Society cannot be expected to tolerate violent dangerous predators running loose.
On the other hand, a seventeen year old kid who forged a couple of checks should not be placed in a lockup with vicious predatory rapists and murderers and gangleaders who will likely rape, sodomize, beat and stab him. That is not right, either. It is not fitting punishment. He should be forced to perform labor for the victim for a period of time, just as in the Old Testament, to make up for his forgery/theft. After that he has fulfilled this censure and penance, his civil rights should be fully restored. If he offends again, he must again be punished, perhaps with more intensity or for a longer period. If he turns to violence and brutality, then he should be locked away until he learns his lesson, and even then he should not be locked up with violent predators.
Society has a right to ask lawbreakers to make up for their bad deeds.
But even society, comprised entirely of sinful lawbreakers itself, had better be merciful
and not vindictive. As Christ put it, to the people who were about to LAWFULLY execute the woman caught in the crime of Adultery, “let he among you who is without sin be the first to cast a stone at her.”
Strictly speaking,
Moses was a felon — he unlawfully murdered the Egyptian, and fled from justice.
David became a felon — he committed the crime of adultery, AND set up
his trusting friend Uriah to be killed, thus committing murder.
**King Manasseh **was
a felon: murdered thousands of innocent people, including his own
infant children.
Saul of Tarsus (Paul) had
been a felon: He participated in the vigilante murders of Christians
out of religious fanaticism.
Though all of these men committed very serious crimes, God did not write them off.
He not only forgave these men, but restored them to positions of GREAT influence.
So, yes, where possible, even those who had willfully broken the law
should be worked with to try and rehabilitate them and return them to full participation
in Society. IF they are willing to be repentant and try to contribute to the common good.
R
Rence
Guest
Crime is breaking civil law. Sin is breaking God’s law. The two are different. You sin, you answer to God. You break civil law, you answer to Caesar. Jesus said: Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. Give to God what belongs to God.That is a good answer.
Simplistic and a tad self-righteous, but still a good answer.
All sin is crime, even if the crime is not punished as such by the State.
People whose sins are not punished as crimes formally by the State
should consider themselves lucky, that’s all.
…
Newsflash: all sin is the breaking of Law. Sin is Lawlessness. All sin is criminal behavior. “Venial” sin may be likened to the “misdemeanor,” while
mortal sins could be likened to what is called “felony,” or more serious infractions.
I don’t think that most Christians would want to be subject to prosecution
and imprisonment for their crimes against God that they have repented of.
They want OTHER people to pay, and pay very dearly, but not themselves it seems.
Interesting.
The Bishops are right in their call.
“Crimes against God” can depend on what religion one is. For example, it is against Jewish law to eat pork. I wouldn’t want to go to jail for that sin. It’s also considered “sinful” to not abstain from meat on Friday’s during Lent, though I would hardly call it a crime. Not going to Church on Sundays is a “sin”. However, it is not a crime.
All sin is NOT breaking the law. Not the Civil Law anyway. Thouth I am sure these bishops mean well, the Bishops who suggested criminals not go to jail, but live among free society, should set up cots for the criminals to live with them. I wouldn’t want a child molester or rapist or murder living among free society. So I have to disagree with the bishops. But like everyone else, they are entitled to their opinion. Hopefully the lawmakers will have the common sense to continue doing what is right for society.
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
Crime is breaking civil law. Sin is breaking God’s law. The two are different. You sin, you answer to God. You break civil law, you answer to Caesar. Jesus said: Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. Give to God what belongs to God.
Yes, technically speaking, crime is the breaking of civil statutes.
And yes, caesar or the magistrate does not “bear the sword in vain.”
And yes, Jesus said “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give
to God what belongs to God.”
I agree 100%
HOWEVER, Caesar HIMSELF is SUBJECT to GOD’S LAWS,
and that is so WHETHER CAESAR ACCEPTS THAT FACT OR NOT.
Therefore, even Caesar has NO RIGHT to enact or enforce ANY LAW
that is OUT OF HARMONY with the Laws of God.
Now, a great many of Caesar’s Laws happily co-incide with the Laws of God, it is true.
Murder is against civil law, and rightly so, because it is against God’s Law.
It is against the Natural Law, which is just as much GOD’S LAW as is the Mosaic Law.
Therefore, Caesar has the right to punish violations of the Natural Law.
However, NOT EVEN CAESAR has CARTE BLANCHE from God to
inflict ANY PUNISHMENT HE PLEASES.
And ALL TOO OFTEN, civil authorities FORGET THAT FACT.
THEY TOO, are subject to God’s requirements not only of Justice, but also subject
to JESUS’S teachings on MERCY as well. If CAESAR DISOBEYS God’s and Christ’s teachings, Caesar will burn in Hell just like any other flagrantly disobedient violator of God’s laws, and his Caesar-hood won’t help him in the least. Indeed, it will work against him, because HE TO WHOM MUCH HAS BEEN GIVEN, MUCH WILL BE REQUIRED FROM him.
How does Caesar enact grossly unfair laws or punishments?
Let’s look at the financial systems of this country. Laws have been enacted which greatly favor the wealthy and the financial elites. For example, if your mortgage company screws you over and robs you blind, very often they will not be prosecuted for that. And even if they ARE, they can afford the top-notch attorneys who will help them usually beat the charges, if any. Whereas, lets take you, a 40 hour a week worker who wants to buy a condo or a house. If you tell any falsehood on your mortgage application, then because you lied to a financial institution, you can face 30 years in prison, in a hellhole of violence, sodomy, blasphemy, rapes and stabbings, and your reputation ruined for life. Is lying wrong? Of course it is. Does it deserve to be punished? Should the offender make up for his misdeed? Of course he or she should. But a penalty such as named above is ridiculous and obscene and way beyond what is called for to redress the wrongdoing done. Not only that, but being subjected to such vile dehumanization will not correct the offender, it will turn him or her into a brutal and corrupt monster who has to harden their hearts and become violent and predatory just to survive.
That is why the nation of Israel, following the Mosaic statutes, made no provision for prisons for such sins/crimes, and yes, all sin is criminal. The state may choose not to punish it as such, but it is still criminal because it is lawbreaking.
Abortion remains the crime of murder, even though our society goes so far as
to condone and protect this heinous thing.
Yes, technically speaking, crime is the breaking of civil statutes.
And yes, caesar or the magistrate does not “bear the sword in vain.”
And yes, Jesus said “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give
to God what belongs to God.”
I agree 100%
HOWEVER, Caesar HIMSELF is SUBJECT to GOD’S LAWS,
and that is so WHETHER CAESAR ACCEPTS THAT FACT OR NOT.
Therefore, even Caesar has NO RIGHT to enact or enforce ANY LAW
that is OUT OF HARMONY with the Laws of God.
Now, a great many of Caesar’s Laws happily co-incide with the Laws of God, it is true.
Murder is against civil law, and rightly so, because it is against God’s Law.
It is against the Natural Law, which is just as much GOD’S LAW as is the Mosaic Law.
Therefore, Caesar has the right to punish violations of the Natural Law.
However, NOT EVEN CAESAR has CARTE BLANCHE from God to
inflict ANY PUNISHMENT HE PLEASES.
And ALL TOO OFTEN, civil authorities FORGET THAT FACT.
THEY TOO, are subject to God’s requirements not only of Justice, but also subject
to JESUS’S teachings on MERCY as well. If CAESAR DISOBEYS God’s and Christ’s teachings, Caesar will burn in Hell just like any other flagrantly disobedient violator of God’s laws, and his Caesar-hood won’t help him in the least. Indeed, it will work against him, because HE TO WHOM MUCH HAS BEEN GIVEN, MUCH WILL BE REQUIRED FROM him.
How does Caesar enact grossly unfair laws or punishments?
Let’s look at the financial systems of this country. Laws have been enacted which greatly favor the wealthy and the financial elites. For example, if your mortgage company screws you over and robs you blind, very often they will not be prosecuted for that. And even if they ARE, they can afford the top-notch attorneys who will help them usually beat the charges, if any. Whereas, lets take you, a 40 hour a week worker who wants to buy a condo or a house. If you tell any falsehood on your mortgage application, then because you lied to a financial institution, you can face 30 years in prison, in a hellhole of violence, sodomy, blasphemy, rapes and stabbings, and your reputation ruined for life. Is lying wrong? Of course it is. Does it deserve to be punished? Should the offender make up for his misdeed? Of course he or she should. But a penalty such as named above is ridiculous and obscene and way beyond what is called for to redress the wrongdoing done. Not only that, but being subjected to such vile dehumanization will not correct the offender, it will turn him or her into a brutal and corrupt monster who has to harden their hearts and become violent and predatory just to survive.
That is why the nation of Israel, following the Mosaic statutes, made no provision for prisons for such sins/crimes, and yes, all sin is criminal. The state may choose not to punish it as such, but it is still criminal because it is lawbreaking.
Abortion remains the crime of murder, even though our society goes so far as
to condone and protect this heinous thing.
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
to continue,
I did not see anything where the bishops advocated letting
rapists, child molesters and murders run around freely in society???
But even some of these people can repent and be restored, if they are sincere
and bear good fruit. King David did. He was a murderer.
King Manasseh did. He was a mass-murderer and a child killer of his own children.
Did they deserve to be able to repent and be forgiven and restored?
No one “deserves” it.
And they were forgiven and restored, even though their
dead victims could NOT repent, since they were dead, having been murdered by them.
Doesn’t seem very fair, does it? But God did it.
Fornication, adultery, sodomy, blasphemy, are all crimes against God’s Law, and
these sins USED to be punished as serious crimes RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, too.
If you have ever been guilty of these, are you willing to surrender to the authorities and
ask to be prosecuted and incarcerated? Most Christians would NOT be so willing.
Christ warned us, very seriously, that by the standard by which we Judge, we ourselves WILL be judged. Thus, if we wish the harshest possible penalties on offenders, then Jesus will inflict the harshest possible penalties on US for OUR OWN sins, even IF, in OUR eyes, our sins aren’t all that serious. We can pat ourselves on the back and pretend that we aren’t committing the sin of vindictiveness, by claiming we are advocating that the State administer Justice, but we are self-deluding. If we get any thrill out of seeing somebody “sent up the river,” we are being vindictive, no matter what we tell ourselves.
The Woman caught in Adultery had committed a Death-Penalty offense.
Jesus KNEW that. He, as God, had GIVEN that statute to Moses back at Sinai.
Yet Jesus forgave her and told her to go and sin no more.
He did not say, I forgive you, you will not go to Hell, and you will be in my heavenly kingdom. However, strict justice must still be applied, and so, GENTLEMEN, you may now stone this woman to death so she may pay temporally for her violations of the Law.
I did not see anything where the bishops advocated letting
rapists, child molesters and murders run around freely in society???
But even some of these people can repent and be restored, if they are sincere
and bear good fruit. King David did. He was a murderer.
King Manasseh did. He was a mass-murderer and a child killer of his own children.
Did they deserve to be able to repent and be forgiven and restored?
No one “deserves” it.
And they were forgiven and restored, even though their
dead victims could NOT repent, since they were dead, having been murdered by them.
Doesn’t seem very fair, does it? But God did it.
Fornication, adultery, sodomy, blasphemy, are all crimes against God’s Law, and
these sins USED to be punished as serious crimes RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, too.
If you have ever been guilty of these, are you willing to surrender to the authorities and
ask to be prosecuted and incarcerated? Most Christians would NOT be so willing.
Christ warned us, very seriously, that by the standard by which we Judge, we ourselves WILL be judged. Thus, if we wish the harshest possible penalties on offenders, then Jesus will inflict the harshest possible penalties on US for OUR OWN sins, even IF, in OUR eyes, our sins aren’t all that serious. We can pat ourselves on the back and pretend that we aren’t committing the sin of vindictiveness, by claiming we are advocating that the State administer Justice, but we are self-deluding. If we get any thrill out of seeing somebody “sent up the river,” we are being vindictive, no matter what we tell ourselves.
The Woman caught in Adultery had committed a Death-Penalty offense.
Jesus KNEW that. He, as God, had GIVEN that statute to Moses back at Sinai.
Yet Jesus forgave her and told her to go and sin no more.
He did not say, I forgive you, you will not go to Hell, and you will be in my heavenly kingdom. However, strict justice must still be applied, and so, GENTLEMEN, you may now stone this woman to death so she may pay temporally for her violations of the Law.
R
Rence
Guest
Really? is that why Thomas More was canonized a saint despite killing “heretics” by having them burned at the stake?Fornication, adultery, sodomy, blasphemy, are all crimes against God’s Law, and
these sins USED to be punished as serious crimes RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, too.
If you have ever been guilty of these, are you willing to surrender to the authorities and
ask to be prosecuted and incarcerated? Most Christians would NOT be so willing.
Christ warned us, very seriously, that by the standard by which we Judge, we ourselves WILL be judged. Thus, if we wish the harshest possible penalties on offenders, then Jesus will inflict the harshest possible penalties on US for OUR OWN sins,
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
I am not prepared to pass an adverse judgment on St. Thomas More, especially
after the hell-on-earth he went through standing up for the rights of the
Successor of Saint Peter.
Still, your choice of words was interesting.
He was canonized a Saint in SPITE of his having had heretics burned.
Heretics aren’t always mild-mannered evangelical bible students,
as is so often the case today. In earlier times they could be brutal
and very violent troublemakers. The Albigensian heretics killed many priests,
for example, and were well known for their violence.
I would have to know the specifics of Saint Thomas More’s battles with particular
heretics to form an objective opinion of his actions one way or another.
In general, I do NOT condone the killing of heretics.
Excommunication, YES. Killing, NO.
after the hell-on-earth he went through standing up for the rights of the
Successor of Saint Peter.
Still, your choice of words was interesting.
He was canonized a Saint in SPITE of his having had heretics burned.
Heretics aren’t always mild-mannered evangelical bible students,
as is so often the case today. In earlier times they could be brutal
and very violent troublemakers. The Albigensian heretics killed many priests,
for example, and were well known for their violence.
I would have to know the specifics of Saint Thomas More’s battles with particular
heretics to form an objective opinion of his actions one way or another.
In general, I do NOT condone the killing of heretics.
Excommunication, YES. Killing, NO.
T
Tigg
Guest
This poorly written article does not give us enough information to really know, and I suspect, things have either been taken out of context, or a large portion of the interview is missing.I did not see anything where the bishops advocated letting
rapists, child molesters and murders run around freely in society???
The AB is quoted as saying, “fundamental to the Christian life is our shared responsibility to feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick and visit the prisoner.” Well yes, but what does that have to do with crime and the subsequent punishment by incarceration (if the offense merits it?) Did he forget to mention what the catechism says about the legitimacy and duty of the state to defend the innocent and maintain public order?
(If you will hit the “Quote” button on the bottom right hand of the post, when directly responding to a poster, it will make it easier for us to follow the dialog.)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.