Death penalty and purpose of punishment

[wheels10]

I will require mercy in that I will need mercy - I will not require mercy in that I demand mercy. Do you see how I mean that?

I’m glad to hear that you understand that you will need Mercy. One can never demand Mercy, there’s no such thing as demanding Mercy, but one can beg for Mercy.

James 2:13 There will be no mercy for those who have not shown mercy to others. But if you have been merciful, God will be merciful when he judges you.

Matthew 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

Matthew 5:43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 18:21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?” 22Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. 23“Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. 26“The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. 28“But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. 29“His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’ 30“But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened. 32“Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. 35“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

 

[Lycorth]

That is all true, wheels, but it doesn’t change my stance on capital punishment.

Christ spoke at a certain time and place to certain people for certain reasons. Imagine if Peter had been allowed to smite with the sword further, or if Christ hadn’t stepped in and healed the servant - the Romans would have stepped in instead and the first pope would have been dead. All Christians might have felt the weight of Rome come down on them in that case, all too dangerous for the fledgling Church.

That’s why Christ, infinitely wise, steps in in cases like this, or tells his disciples to turn the other cheek. If they do what is natural, and fight back to defend themselves, the superior Roman forces would not stand for an armed cult being belligerent in Roman territory and the young Church might very well have been exterminated.

However, Christ, infinitely wise, did not instruct the Church to teach against the death penalty when the Church was finally safe and established, knowing that a judicious and just application of it by the proper authorities is necessary for the righting of grave wrongs and the defense of society. Were it otherwise, Christ would have instructed the Church to officially oppose the death penalty without exception, regardless of its minister.

 

[iluvburpees]

I’m glad to hear that you understand that you will need Mercy. One can never demand Mercy, there’s no such thing as demanding Mercy, but one can beg for Mercy.

James 2:13 There will be no mercy for those who have not shown mercy to others. But if you have been merciful, God will be merciful when he judges you.

Matthew 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

Matthew 5:43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 18:21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?” 22Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. 23“Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. 26“The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. 28“But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. 29“His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’ 30“But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened. 32“Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. 35“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

My friend, I think you ought to be very careful about what you post from now on. You seem to be dismissing Church teaching, and then throwing out bible verses that you think support your argument. This is very Protestant in nature, no one, save the Church, is allowed to interpret scripture in his own way. Yet, you are putting forth verses that you want to believe make the death penalty wrong or unnecessary (that is what you think, right?), when the Church has already interpreted what the scriptures say centuries ago and decided that capital punishment is just. Why do you not accept this?

Again, be careful when quoting scripture. Be sure that the Church has officially interpreted it as a suppport for what you are arguing for.

Heck, Christ said numerous times that hell exists. But I could quote a bunch of “mercy” passages from the bible and conclude that there is no hell. See what this “pick and choose” can lead to?

 

[fkjuliano]

No need indeed.

CCC 2267 ends with "Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.

Indeed time for the “very rare” and “practically” parts to be removed and simply say cases for killing someone who is an obvious human being by virtue of birth, are simply non-existent.

Peace.

With all due respect, that’s your teaching, not the Church’s. I can easily think of several criminals who continued to do harm while confined in prison, or later by escaping, and I’m hardly an expert on topic. In the two countries I’m most familiar with, the US and Brazil, the criminal underworld is simply too large, rich and powerful to be completely contained by incarceration. The death penalty thus remains necessary, according to Church teaching. Unfortunately, the US applies it in an inconsistent way and Brazil not at all.

 

[Lycorth]

My friend, I think you ought to be very careful about what you post from now on. You seem to be dismissing Church teaching, and then throwing out bible verses that you think support your argument. This is very Protestant in nature, no one, save the Church, is allowed to interpret scripture in his own way. Yet, you are putting forth verses that you want to believe make the death penalty wrong or unnecessary (that is what you think, right?), when the Church has already interpreted what the scriptures say centuries ago and decided that capital punishment is just. Why do you not accept this?

Again, be careful when quoting scripture. Be sure that the Church has officially interpreted it as a suppport for what you are arguing for.

Heck, Christ said numerous times that hell exists. But I could quote a bunch of “mercy” passages from the bible and conclude that there is no hell. See what this “pick and choose” can lead to?

Well-said! Scripture is not subject to private interpretation.

*“For those are slothful who, having it in their power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. And those have a craving for glory who voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the divine tradition by human teachings, in order to establish the heresy.” *Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 7:16 (post A.D. 202). **

 

[MarieaGrace]

Physically harming someone with your own hands is not the only way a person may be a danger to society. People in prison can order hits, run an organized crime outfit like the mafia or a gang, conduct illegal activity, write books, have websites, have fan clubs, give interviews, inspire movies, sire children in 6 states, harm and influence other inmates, harass state legislators, call people on their cell phone, post on message boards from their phone, etc, etc. They are hardly out of society.

Hello, are you sure of this? Can they have the Internet?Can they pretend to be other people and make you think they are your friend and they are really criminally insane?I know they have gangs in jail i seen it on TV but they can write a book also? where do they get the money to publish it? How can you tell if they are in prison? Thank You! Are you in jail if you have 3 strikes?

 

[Thoughtfulone]

It is not just to take a human life in exchange for another life because there is no way to compare the damage done by one person’s death vs. that of another.

So many here are assuming that the damage done is solely to the victim (the murdered) and then subsequently, to the murderer at his execution, making it a one-to-one comparison. The problem is, none of this can occur in a vacuum. Let us say that a man killed another man and was executed for his crimes. The murderer has a family, so what of them? Is it just that they should suffer for the rest of their lives, that a mother’s son a sister’s brother, a daughter’s father should be tormented by the death of their loved one forever when they are completely innocent? Of course not.

The best chance for justice here is for this person to be imprisoned where he can no longer harm anyone and where he has a lifetime to consider his wrongs and possibly repent of them.

Executing the killer only harms more innocent people and encourages revenge and brutality in our society.

 

[Australis]

This makes sense, but it gets odd in the next paragraph. He says:

"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."

So, instead of the death penalty being a suitable punishment because it is a just punishment commensurate to the crime, it is a suitable punishment and should be used only when it is necessary to defend society. Thus, in this case of the death penalty, JPII replaces the primary purpose of punishment (justice) with a secondary purpose (defense of society).

So, how can one reconcile these conflicting ideas?

Well punishment has to outweigh the benefits of the crime and some offenders are considered beyond rehabilitation. It’s also **general deterrent ** to other would-be’s in the community.
It’s a sentencing objective with an intent to reduce that type of crime by the population by making an example of the offender.

 

[wheels10]

That is all true, wheels, but it doesn’t change my stance on capital punishment.

Christ spoke at a certain time and place to certain people for certain reasons. Imagine if Peter had been allowed to smite with the sword further, or if Christ hadn’t stepped in and healed the servant - the Romans would have stepped in instead and the first pope would have been dead. All Christians might have felt the weight of Rome come down on them in that case, all too dangerous for the fledgling Church.

That’s why Christ, infinitely wise, steps in in cases like this, or tells his disciples to turn the other cheek. If they do what is natural, and fight back to defend themselves, the superior Roman forces would not stand for an armed cult being belligerent in Roman territory and the young Church might very well have been exterminated.

Matthew 26:47While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. 48Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him.” 49Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed him. 50Jesus replied, “Friend, do what you came for.” Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”

Jesus said that “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword". For me, this verse says that if I kill, I can expect to be killed. For others, it may mean that if someone kills, then that person must be killed. But then where does it end? In all cases, the person doing the killing should be killed. The only way I see it can have any chance of ending is if the killing is stopped.

However, Christ, infinitely wise, did not instruct the Church to teach against the death penalty when the Church was finally safe and established, knowing that a judicious and just application of it by the proper authorities is necessary for the righting of grave wrongs and the defense of society. Were it otherwise, Christ would have instructed the Church to officially oppose the death penalty without exception, regardless of its minister.

Execution for murder is justice. I do not question that at all. The Church cannot oppose justice can it? My understanding is that this justice will be administered in Heaven to those that have administered this justice on earth and this is Good. If all you are interested in is justice without Mercy then supporting the death penalty makes complete sense.

 

[wheels10]

My friend, I think you ought to be very careful about what you post from now on. You seem to be dismissing Church teaching, and then throwing out bible verses that you think support your argument. This is very Protestant in nature, no one, save the Church, is allowed to interpret scripture in his own way. Yet, you are putting forth verses that you want to believe make the death penalty wrong or unnecessary (that is what you think, right?), when the Church has already interpreted what the scriptures say centuries ago and decided that capital punishment is just. Why do you not accept this?

I agree that the death penalty for murder is justice and this is Good. I have already stated this many times.

Heck, Christ said numerous times that hell exists. But I could quote a bunch of “mercy” passages from the bible and conclude that there is no hell. See what this “pick and choose” can lead to?

I am quite confident that hell exists. Too many of us do not choose Mercy.

 

[MarieaGrace]

I think most people are in jail for petty things and they should be rehabilitated and put outside in public and made to work and keep an account of their daily activities. They should be taught to have bank accounts and to fend for themselves without stealing and hurting anyone. They need guidance allot of them never got from their parents that were druggies etc.These people are to much in jail and not helped enough. But the rapist and people that torture woman or children should be put into max and rehabilitated, but kept in secure places with ankle bracelets etc. they should also have work detail and pay for their stay in jail until they are old. That way the tax payers are not having to support them forever. Just when they get older. The biggies, murderers, hard core offenders, (notice there are no second offenders they are in jail) just the ones who take a life should be put to death, let God judge him or her when they get there. If they were innocent they will have a good pace in heaven with the creator if they are not God will dispose of them himself, in his way.But they are not safe for public.They are not safe in jail most of the time. Anyone who starts a gang in jail should be put in max security in the hole, and never be among others to start a system of gangs in prisons.This is a big order but it can be done if the right people get together and correct an already faulty system that we have now where offenders get out and are allowed to rape and murder the second time. These kids cannot be replaced they are gone forever think of their parents not the jailbirds parents. think of the feeling of Xmas without your child and birthdays and graduation ad all the grandchildren they missed out on. While the murder has Xmas ans BD’s and people visiting him or her in prison but the one they killed is 6 feet under and the parents and love ones are at their grave at Xmas etc.

 

[dudleysharp]

I think most people are in jail for petty things and they should be rehabilitated and put outside in public and made to work and keep an account of their daily activities. But the rapist and people that torture woman or children should be put into max and rehabilitated, but kept in secure places with ankle bracelets etc. they should also have work detail and pay for their stay in jail until they are old. The biggies, murderers, hard core offenders, (notice there are no second offenders they are in jail) just the ones who take a life should be put to death

Most folks are not in jail for petty things. We couldn’t afford it. We give petty crime criminals multiple opportunitities to avoid incarceration. There is no doubt that we can and must produce a much more efficient and responsible prison system.

 

[MarieaGrace]

Most folks are not in jail for petty things. We couldn’t afford it. We give petty crime criminals multiple opportunitities to avoid incarceration. There is no doubt that we can and must produce a much more efficient and responsible prison system.

Just the opposit:

California Criminal Lawyer - Theft
CALIFORNIA THEFT CRIMES. Grand Theft • Petty Theft • Shoplifting … Most people presume that theft charges are a fairly simple misdemeanor matter that can be handled in court without an attorney … As a general rule, first-time offenders can avoid jail completely. … Some of the things we can do to help include: …

california-criminal-lawyer.com/theft.html - 38k - Cached - Similar pages
California Petty Theft Law Under Penal Code 484 & 488 PC
This is the most typical form of petty theft, usually seen in a … Violating this law increases your possible county jail sentence from a … Many people get wrongly arrested for California shoplifting and other petty theft offenses. … App.2d 674 ("It was only necessary to show that the things which were taken …

shouselaw.com/petty-theft.html - 45k - Cached - Similar pages
Breitbart.tv » California Man Faces Life in Prison for Stealing …
Two words for you jackasses who want to throw this guy under the jail: … Yes California does sucks and more petty criminals on the street will not help. … If things were done more logically and fairly, people would understand. …

breitbart.tv/california-man-faces-life-in-prison-for-stealing-50-pack-of-donuts/ - 166k - Cached - Similar pages
California Shoplifting Laws - CA Theft Penalties - California …
Theft and shoplifting are the most commonly prosecuted property crimes … needs it can push you to do things you normally wouldn’t even consider. … Ref: California Petty Theft & Shoplifting Laws - California Penal Code Section 490 … Grand theft is punishable by fines and up to one year in jail or state prison. …

mycaliforniadefenselawyer.com/criminal-charges/theft-shoplifting/ - 34k - Cached - Similar

 

[Betterave]

Please review:

“Death Penalty Cost Studies: Saving Costs over LWOP”
homicidesurvivors.com/2010/03/21/death-penalty-cost-studies-saving-costs-over-lwop.aspx

Thanks. I’m not surprised to learn that statistics are being misused in this debate. I suppose it happens on both sides? I read about death penalty costs being higher in Dead Man Walking (one of your favorite books I’m guessing?) and there are certainly some red flags in that book when it comes to the (lack of) balance and fairness in Helen Prejean’s views.

 

[Betterave]

Read 2266 again. “Redressing the disorder” is clearly not referring to retribution. How can you say this?

Actually, in the context that is exactly what it does. It is the only thing which can, as hard to undertand as that might be.

Actually, I know what context is and I specifically referred to the relevant context… so this isn’t much of a reply to my comment.

 

[Betterave]

Genesis 9:5-6 are some of the most significant passages in the Bible and one would expect that they would be “true for all time.” We are all familiar with the statement that “….man is made in the image of God” (the second part of 9:6) but what most people overlook is the first part: “Whoever sheds the blood of man by man shall his blood be shed, because…” It is because of man’s sacred nature - that he is made in the image of God - that the penalty for murder is so severe. This point is explicitly made in the Catechism of Trent and there is no reason whatever to believe that this is not the meaning in the new Catechism as well.

That’s nice that you find them particularly significant and that you have certain expectations - but that’s not an argument.

2260 quotes Gen 9:5-6, passages that have been consistently cited not just at Trent but today as well, including BXVI (Address to the Brazilian Bishops, 2009), JPII (Regina Caeli, Evangelium Vitae, Veritatis Splendor), the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Cardinal Dulles, … These are not random passages I’ve chosen from a bloody minded Old Testament who’s meaning has been eviscerated by the Christ of love in the New Testament. That passage is central to what the Church teaches: man’s dignity comes from the fact that he is made in the image of God. And - according to God himself - whoever murders a man, his life is forfeit specifically *because *he is God’s image.

The phrase “his life is forfeit” need not imply a *requirement *of execution. That is a point that is being consistently ignored.

If they are opinion *then *they are not doctrine. Would you agree with that? Nor am I talking generically about “the Catechism” or “Evangelium Vitae”. My comments apply solely to 2267 and part of EV 56.

Ender

Not all doctrine has the same doctrinal weight. When an opinion is offered in a universal catechism and/or a papal encyclical addressed to the universal church it is still a kind of doctrine (teaching), which Catholics are not free to simply dismiss as error and contradiction, even if there is much opinion in the tradition of the Church against it.

 

[Betterave]

Not that the entire Catechism is vague, just that the entry on the death penalty is - and yes there is a contradiction in JPII’s opinion at the end of that entry and prior Church teaching.

But I agree that a clear and flawless amendment is needed, at the least.

And what would you suggest? I’ve appreciated your comments, Lycorth. You have tended to avoid the excesses of Dudley. But the issue in question inevitably calls for a prudential judgment, does it not? Or do you now want to claim that Catholics who oppose the death penalty are simply in error as to the true teaching of the Church? Do you fully support Dudley’s comments about the author of EV’s ignorance of the facts, as if John Paul II had no experience of the horror of murder, and no grounds for his views on just responses to it but ignorance!? (I suspect that there is no grounds for such condescending claims but arrogance and ignorance.)

 

[dudleysharp]

MarieaGrace:

Did you read the links you sent?

Try this: In California “PRISON IS ONLY AN OPTION FOR FELONIES”

Overwhelmingly California does not and cannot incarcerate for minor crimes.

Read this:

california-criminal-law.com/property-crimes/index.html

Although California has traditionally distinguished between grand theft and petty theft based on the value of the goods, with $400 being the dividing line, there is a recent proposal to increase that line of demarcation to $2,500. Thus the definition of felony versus misdemeanor could be significantly altered if this proposal becomes law.

It would also have a significant impact on the number of people sent to state prison, as prison is only an option for felonies.

 

[dudleysharp]

I read about death penalty costs being higher in Dead Man Walking (one of your favorite books I’m guessing?) and there are certainly some red flags in that book when it comes to the (lack of) balance and fairness in Helen Prejean’s views.

There is no doubt it is often more expensive and there is no doubt a lot of the data is being misrepresented.

Good guess:

Dead Man Walking" & Sr. Helen Prejean: A Critical Review
From Dudley Sharp

" . . .makes you realize the Dead Man Walking truly belongs on the shelf in the library in the Fiction category."

“Being devout Catholics, ‘the norm’ would be to look to the church for support and healing. Again, this need for spiritual stability was stolen by Sister Prejean.”

The Bourques, Victim Survivors, Dead Family Walking

“Sister Helen Prejean & the death penalty: A Critical Review”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/04/sister-helen-prejean–the-death-penalty-a-critical-review.aspx

Other, related links

“Death Penalty Support: Christian & Secular Scholars”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html

“The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/20/the-death-penalty-neither-hatred-nor-revenge.aspx

“The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx

“The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innocent-executed-deception–death-penalty-opponents–draft.aspx

“Killing equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/02/01/murder-and-execution–very-distinct-moral-differences–new-mexico.aspx

“The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation”
homicidesurvivors.com/2006/03/20/the-death-penalty-not-a-human-rights-violation.aspx

“Physicians & The State Execution of Murderers: No Ethical/Medical Dilemma”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/10/physicians-state-execution-of-murderers.html

“Pope John Paul II: Prudential Judgement and the death penalty”
homicidesurvivors.com/2007/07/23/pope-john-paul-ii-his-death-penalty-errors.aspx

“At the Death House Door” Can Rev. Carroll Pickett be trusted?"
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/01/30/fact-checking-is-very-welcome.aspx

More topics upon request.

 

[dudleysharp]

Betterave:

I am not sure what you are questioning.

Redressing the disorder in an intergral component of retributive justice. They are inseperable.

We must first recognize the guilt/sin/crime of the aggressor and hold them accountable for that crime/sin/disorder by way of penalty, meaning the penalty should be just and appropriate for the sin/crime/disorder and should represent justice, retributive justice, just deserts and their like which “redress the disorder caused by the offence” or to correct an imbalance, as defined within the example “If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”

To “redress the disorder” has various relevant meanings – to make amends, to correct the balance, to set right, to remedy or to rectify, even reform, all of which may be used in the context of justice, just retribution or just deserts (and similar concepts), all of which have relevance in the context of the religious.