Federal Executions Pit The Trump Administration Against The Catholic Church

[Anesti33]

It doesn’t seem to hard for me to understand.

For the death penalty to be permitted certain criteria are necessary. Those criteria no longer exist, the death penalty is no longer permitted.

The Pope has authority to declare this.

Like what? What criteria? Can you identify them? Name them? List them? Point to a source that does so? Please, I’m eagerly attentive to this.

 

[Ender]

However its application varies and can demand refelction

Absolutely it can. This has always been my argument: it is a question of prudential judgment about which reasonable people can reasonably disagree. It is not a question of moral vs immoral.

What is the common principle you understand the Church is referring to in this case?
Since you brought up natural law, I am asking you.

Punishment is required as a matter of justice, and beyond that, the severity of the punishment must be commensurate with the severity of the crime (absent extenuating circumstances). But the citation I provided was to address the assertion that morality can change with time and place. That is incorrect.

 

[Ender]

Now another question which doesn’t square with what you are saying imo…about that being attentive doesn’t mean one must agree.(I would say one must /should assent…)

“Be attentive to” means to give something due consideration, and not dismiss it out of hand, but it absolutely does not mean that we must accept it. That isn’t what the words mean.

Why then would C. Dulles say “ ought not to be invoked( DP)?

Dulles agreed with the prudential judgment that capital punishment was harmful to society. He in no way believed it was per se immoral; he simply believed it was unwise.

 

[Ender]

The Pope has authority to declare this.

Throughout the discussions on this topic I have frequently mentioned that there are some arguments that are not just wrong but harmful to the church as they give a false understanding of who she is and what she teaches. This is such an argument.

If we believe morality is nothing more than the personal claims of whoever happens to be pope we have abandoned all reasons to believe that morality even exists. The “keys to the kingdom” do not include license to set right and wrong by fiat. Rather, morality is disclosed through the Natural Law and revelation, and while we believe the church can authentically interpret God’s law, interpreting the law and making the law could hardly be more different.

 

[OneSheep]

“Offense” used in context there, is a breach of law. Yes, sin is a breach of law, but sin does not change our human dignity.

You are again quoting a pope from the past as an argument against the Magisterium’s decision today. This use of his words begins with the premise that he would approve of this. What evidence do you have that he does not take offense to you usage of his words in this way?

It looks like you are going to completely ignore my points about Jesus and the Church both growing in wisdom.

It wasn’t this way. The circumstances in past wording made it admissible in extreme, essentially non-existent cases. I asked in my last post, are you a theologian?

Yes, my position is that the Spirit has guided modern society in matters of the death penalty, just as the Spirit guided humanity against its use for blasphemy and adultery. The Spirit obviously has not guided society in the other issues you brought up. If you have an inside track of knowledge such that you know that the Spirit has not guided society in stopping the death penalty, please explain how you know this.

 

[OneSheep]

They still have a relevance in terms that they certainly applied for his time.

No, their words will always be relevant. If nothing else, they give us guidance on how to listen to the Spirit and to see how the Spirit is involved with unfolding revelation over time.

CCC 119"It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."

But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.

So, as long as the Church has the task of exegesis, there will be manifest better understandings and explanations, and from these come better practices. These “better understandings” and the manifested practical applications come in time, as history progresses.

I am not in the position to say that the Church has ever been wrong about doctrine. I cannot judge those who approve of such things, rather we are called to understand and forgive those who act or speak in ways we may hold against someone. Do you endorse this concerning people who do the worst of sins, to understand and forgive them from the heart? This does not preclude administration of punitive action (for the purpose of redressing the disorder in the sinner).

 

[OneSheep]

Perhaps not, but Pope Saint JPII did:

In 1995, however, in his encyclical “Evangelium Vitae,” St. John Paul II tightened the restrictions, saying that the times that the state needed to use capital punishment to protect other citizens were “very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

Pope Francis closes the door on the death penalty in ‘Fratelli Tutti’ | America Magazine

I still believe, though, that circumstances (history) has opened our eyes to more about human dignity. It is an unfolding revelation.

Does this imply that the Magisterium does not have your level of reason, common sense, and understanding?

 

[OneSheep]

Source?

Okay, good. If you do not disagree with the Magisterium, then you do not disagree with the change in the CCC:

Along with the revised text for the Catechism, the Vatican also released a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the Catholic bishops of the world which explains and emphasizes at some length that the newly formulated teaching is “an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium.” It states that “this development centers principally on the clearer awareness of the church for the respect due to every human life” and recalls that St. John Paul II declared that “not even a murderer loses his personal dignity, and God himself pledges to guarantee this.”

Pope Francis revises Catechism, teaches that death penalty is ‘inadmissible’ | America Magazine

It sounds like we are done.

 

[TMC]

Right, which is why will still have public confession, and slavery is acceptable but paying interest is not.

The Church teaches that revelation has ended, but our growth in understanding revelation has not.

 

[Anesti33]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[OneSheep]

I’ll have you refer back to the words “clearer awareness” in my last post. If you do not like the words “unfolding revelation”, I can use “clearer awareness” instead. And if you do not like thinking about such “clearer awareness” as a “change in circumstances”, I can also avoid using that phrase.

Again, since you are not in disagreement with the Magisterium, then it sounds like we are done.

It’s been a bit scattered, but I’m thinking that we have reached a resolution, and that is good.

 

[vz71]

The Pope has authority to declare this.

You sure the qualifying criteria determination is a matter of faith and morals?

Seems to me it would be a product of the knowledge of the justice system, knowledge of the prison system, and a rather intimate knowledge of the danger an individual poses to the public.

I doubt that qualifies as a matter the pope can have infallible jurisdiction over.
Can he claim it…yes. But it is not a claim he has any authority in.

 

[OneSheep]

Well, I did not read enough of Pope Francis’ writings to comment on him, but I did post some of what came from the Magisterium, which used the “clearer awareness” wording.

We really only touched the surface of the issue. What really is important are individual images of God and humanity, our view of forgiveness and what that means, and our sense of the purpose of punishment, among other things. In my view, the Catholic Church has made some very clear statements about the DP subject, but the arms of the Church still embrace those of differing opinions. Change is not easy; the taking of life as a punishment for murder has its natural attraction, and that is what is discussed in a deeper conversation.

Jesus invites us to the supernatural.

Thank you, you also, and have a wonderful Advent and Christmas!

 

[pnewton]

This term is was used by Cardinal Newman to explain how the Church grows. No one has said the Holy Ghost has contradicted Himself on matters of principle. That is the real straw man.

Your accusation of blasphemy is absurd and quite un-Christlike. Disagreement should not involve getting down in the gutter, especially since you misrepresent what everyone who is disagreeing with you is saying.

Yes, public revelation has ended, but that did not end the need the Church has for authoritative (as in, the Pope) teaching, without which we would also no have our Marian doctrines, the nature of God, and the nature of Christ, all of which was developed after the last apostle died.

 

[pnewton]

Also from the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum:

This tradition which comes from the Apostles develop in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. (5) For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, (8) has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.

 

[signit]

In the news, a number of members of Congress are calling on Biden to end the federal death penalty, on his first day in office, and to prioritize ending the death penalty in all jurisdictions:

article

 

[Anesti33]

I am still eagerly awaiting your answer to this!

Like what? What criteria? Can you identify them? Name them? List them? Point to a source that does so? Please, I’m eagerly attentive to this.

 

[graciew]

And so then if despite being harmful one proceeds and puts a person to death isn’t that a morally illicit act?
It isn’t good per se either.
Wise or unwise sounds more like we are washing our hands…but then that may be my perception.Causing harm is inmoral in this case then. We have been warned…
We have a very high bar, in the person of Jesus…
I really don’t want to involve Cardinal Dulles in this one and speculate. I tend to think of the unity in the voice of the Church. She speaks as One.
And the hierarchy under the Bishop of Rome .
I don’t think punishment is being disputed here in general but the DP as punishment
Thanks for answering

 

[Ender]

Well, I did not read enough of Pope Francis’ writings to comment on him, but I did post some of what came from the Magisterium, which used the “clearer awareness” wording.

I think you are using the term magisterium/magisterial rather loosely. I don’t believe anything said by Francis or the CDF is magisterial. The magisterium consists of the Pope and bishops, not the Pope alone, and certainly not the CDF.

The ordinary magisterium, one must see, takes a long, long time, to develop; it requires repetition and consistency over many generations, this, not simply on the part of popes but also by the bishops around the world, and even incorporates, to some extent, the lived acceptance of teachings by Catholic pastors, academics, and rank-and-file faithful through time. (Edward Peters)

The judgments of popes are important, but they are not magisterial.

But the Church’s ordinary magisterium is not the domain of an individual pope’s preferences for a certain position; rather, its province is the protection and promotion of the deposit of Faith entrusted to the Church by Christ.

 

[Ender]

And so then if despite being harmful one proceeds and puts a person to death isn’t that a morally illicit act?

No, not necessarily. If you believe it would be harmful, and I believe otherwise then no matter what actually proceeds from the act neither of us has acted immorally. One of us will be wrong, but there is no issue of morality regarding the error.

It isn’t good per se either.

Nothing is per se good so that’s never been a question.

I tend to think of the unity in the voice of the Church. She speaks as One.
And the hierarchy under the Bishop of Rome .

There has been no unity on this one. The US bishops as a group even said they don’t know what Francis means (“inadmissible” is “an elegant ambiguity”). Francis has spoken; the church has not.