My question was not “will God”, but was, “will you”. Only God, not you, knows the heart of this man. You are not qualified to judge him for God.
The determination of “necessity” here appears based solely on the consideration of physical protection, but is the good of society limited just to protecting ourselves? Pius XII rejected this perception. *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… 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.
Is the church just now recognizing the inherent dignity of life? Have they been wrong on this for 2000 years? In fact, there is no development of doctrine here.*It is manifestly impossible for Catholic doctrine on the death penalty to “develop” from an approbation based on revealed truth to a condemnation based on the teaching of the last Pope. And, if we are not discussing the immorality of capital punishment in itself, when all is said and done it is not a question of “development” of doctrine, but only the debatable application of a morally legitimate penalty. *(Christopher Ferrera)
Even today the church allows capital punishment is certain extreme circumstances. If Pope Francis’ comment is true then it would be an exception to the rule that we cannot do evil that good may come of it. Surely if something was “an offense against the inviolability of life and the dignity of the human person” it should be forbidden…but we know it isn’t in this case.
This is surely the strangest objection of them all. Of course a penalty is applied for a past act; that is the nature of punishment. What is the primary objective of all punishment? The primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. (CCC 2266)
Do you understand this case is indicative of Indiana and the proposal of national acceptance of Article 5? You cannot impose Catholic teaching on the states, its discrimination. What you can do is address the Constitution to acknowledge the “Divinity of Christ” otherwise we are talking Indiana and who has the right to interpret scripture which isn’t for the court to decide but for the people state to state. Just as with gay rights.
Whoa…who said anything about imposing Catholic teaching on the state…the point of discussion here is not the state, but how Catholics in good faith can so easily justify capital punishment…especially as we prepare for Divine Mercy Sunday, is all I’m saying.Do you understand this case is indicative of Indiana and the proposal of national acceptance of Article 5? You cannot impose Catholic teaching on the states, its discrimination. What you can do is address the Constitution to acknowledge the “Divinity of Christ” otherwise we are talking Indiana and who has the right to interpret scripture which isn’t for the court to decide but for the people state to state. Just as with gay rights.
Its a fact we should respect the rights of Catholics as it would be discrimination. You are discriminating by imposing your belief on others. Its irrelevant that I’m Catholic and don’t believe in the death penalty anyway.
I was talking about the state law if thats OK, an the application of it and the defendants “conscious”,in which your question is about what I personally believe as a Catholic, sorry about any confusion, so we have two ideals, whats needed is the consensus of Catholics in comprehension of teaching. And then consensus of Christians in majority to change the law into a collective understanding by state. This needs to happen I think to be mutually exclusive to what the Court thinks. Its both, moral and legal and I was speaking legal and you were speaking a Catholic perspective in which what I am saying addressed that point and legally.
It is not up to me to forgive this man. He has committed a crime against society, but he has not sinned against me personally. So your last statement is so non-applicable to this situation as to appear ridiculous.
Genesis chapter 9, Romans chapter 13.
“just” punishment, is the eternal punishment which can be carried out only by God. Man, while he can impose punishment, is never “just”.
Not according to Catholic teaching that would be reading sola scripture into explicit Catholic teaching to which I would refer you to Ender who has followed this point perhaps eternally.
At least to the point he has me convinced as I read it the same way. 
Genesis 9:6: Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.
That is a good argument.
I honestly don’t know which I think is right here - execution or life in prison. I don’t feel 100% that the death penalty will accomplish anything. But I still think that if the state did decide for the death penalty I would respect the decision as lawful and just.
It’s much more satisfying to be politically correct in your social justice, isn’t it?That is a terrible argument.