Death penalty is it wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Supersam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Supersam

Guest
What are people’s views on the death penalty? I’m from Scotland we don’t have it here but I know in the US in some states they do? Do you believe if someone is a murder they should be sentenced to death? A life for a life? I always thought god is the one person who gives life and takes life. What about the persons involved, for example the executioner or the one who finally admits the drugs in lethal injections are they to be judged by god when the time comes? Just curious to know what you all think
 
Yeah the UK doesn’t use it at all I always wondered if that’s something they would ever bring here. Crazy though because I bet there’s been hundreds of innocent people who have died as well by the death penalty.
 
The UK did once have it of course until not that long ago.

I don’t suppose hundreds of innocent people have been executed but in the UK I think the main reason for discontinuing it was that there was always the chance of someone being wrongly executed and that that was enough to stop doing it.
 
It’s not intrinsically wrong, but as the Catechism revision reads, first world countries should have no use for it and shouldn’t exercise it.
 
Supersam said:
I always thought God is the one person who gives life and takes life.
Click to expand...
He is, but He has given this authority to temporal rulers as part of their mission to serve the common good (redressing injustice and protecting innocent life serves the common good).

As Scripture says, the temporal ruler “does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.” (Rom. 13:4).

That being said, there can be circumstances where the common good might be better served using other means of punishment or protection. I think most bishops, including the Pope, are of the opinion that this is generally the case under the current circumstances we find ourselves in.
 
Last edited:
No. The death penalty, whe administered accordingly, is not wrong. It is just.
 
I am not for the death penalty because life in prison is possible and some murderers may repent before the end of their lives.
 
Supersam said:
Do you believe if someone is a murder they should be sentenced to death? A life for a life?
Click to expand...
And as for “All that take the sword shall perish with the sword,” these words cannot be rightly understood except in this sense: Everyone who commits an unjust murder ought in turn to be condemned to death by the magistrate. (St. Bellarmine, De Laicis, ch 13)
I always thought god is the one person who gives life and takes life.
Click to expand...
And thus that which is lawful to God is lawful for His ministers when they act by His mandate. It is evident that God who is the Author of laws, has every right to inflict death on account of sin. For "the wages of sin is death. Neither does His minister sin in inflicting that punishment. The sense, therefore, of “Thou shalt not kill” is that one shall not kill by one’s own authority. (Catechism of St. Thomas)
What about the persons involved, for example the executioner or the one who finally admits the drugs in lethal injections are they to be judged by god when the time comes?
Click to expand...
…he to whom authority is delegated, and who is but the sword in the hand of him who uses it, is not himself responsible for the death he deals. And, accordingly, they who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” (St. Augustine, City of God Bk I, ch 21)

‘…the Church in her theory and practice has maintained retributive as well as medicinal penalties’ and that ‘this is more in conformity with what the sources of revelation and traditional doctrine teach regarding the coercive power of legitimate human authority. (Pius XII)
Back before the Catechism change, I viewed the death penalty as something to be used only to keep others safe, such as if there was a serial killer who kept escaping from prison and killing more people.
Click to expand...
The primary function of punishment is not protection; it is retribution.

A word must be said on the full meaning of penalty. Most of the modern theories of penal law explain penalty and justify it in the final analysis as a means of protection, that is, defense of the community against criminal undertakings, and at the same time an attempt to bring the offender to observance of the law. In those theories, the penalty can include sanctions such as the diminution of some goods guaranteed by law, so as to teach the guilty to live honestly, but those theories fail to consider the expiation of the crime committed, which penalizes the violation of the law as the prime function of penalty (Pius XII)
 
Lee1 said:
The UK did once have it of course until not that long ago.
Click to expand...
Last executions. England and in the United Kingdom: on 13 August 1964, Peter Anthony Allen, at Walton Prison in Liverpool, and Gwynne Owen Evans, at Strangeways Prison in Manchester, were executed for the murder of John Alan West on 7 April that year.
 
I can’t ‘like’ that but thanks, not that long ago really. It’s surprises some people.
 
There are any number of instances where the saints have argued against the use of capital punishment where it is not absolutely necessary, but none of them argued that it was of itself unjust. As for mercy, I don’t think this is quite the argument it is made out to be.

First, if we accept that it is merciful to punish someone with less than he deserves we must first accept that the punishment he is threatened with is what he in fact deserves. That is, before you can claim that LWOP is the merciful punishment you have to admit that death is the just punishment. I’ve not seen a lot of people willing to make that concession.

Second, if the argument is made that mercy should be granted to all people guilty of a capital crime, what is the argument that mercy is not equally proper for everyone guilty of any crime? It should be evident that if we do that we have jettisoned the very concept of justice and in fact fail to meet the obligation of the state which has a “duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime.” (CCC 2266)

Third, it seems this approach is a distortion of true mercy, which has never been applied without exception. It would seem at a minimum would be the requirement for the criminal to repent of his sin before mercy was granted.

God created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us. To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults. (CCC 1847)
On the other hand a life sentence gives a person the opportunity to repent and give their life over to God.
Click to expand...
What is more, according to the Apostle Paul, God knows his own (2 Timothy 2.19), and it is impossible for any of them to perish by the whirlwinds and floods of any error, scandal, schism, persecution, heresy, tribulation, adversity or temptation, for he has foreseen from eternity and unchangeably the number of his elect and the extent of their merits in such a way that everything good and bad, what is theirs and not theirs, prosperity and adversity, all work together for them for good, except indeed that they appear even more glorious and commendable in adversity. (St. Albertus Magnus)
 
I am open to prudential objections to the use of capital punishment, but not to the assertion that its use today is immoral.
 
True enough, but He has also seen all the adversities they will face, as well as those who will perish because of adversity. All eternity is before God’s eyes, and nothing that was, is, or will be can be hidden from Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top