Massachusetts bishops speak out against death penalty for alleged Boston Marathon bomber

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TMC said:
I think you are correct that there is little room for a just war if the death penalty is never just. But, little room is not no room. I believe that a truly just war is the rarest of rare birds.
Click to expand...
Now think about how little need we have state by state. All the ones I read where emotional revenge basically, without the forgiveness it could be nothing other, so ironically you won’t forgive them or give them a chance to repent. Not very NT if you ask me. Which is why even with such a rare bird, this should still be a “reluctance”. We could eliminate 99.9 imo, and certainly the same with abortion. 🙂
 
LongingSoul said:
I believe the Church is grooming us to oppose it as being against the dignity of the human being in a similar way to how punishments like ‘stripes’, exile and slavery are no longer tolerable to the moral sensibilities of man. Some things take time to evolve and be fully illuminated and the Church has identified the growing opposition as a movement away from the culture of death.

A Catholic would have to have some theological and sociological expertise to stand in opposition to the Churchs ever strengthening position of it.
Click to expand...
“Grooming us”? If it a Catholic is morally required to oppose the death penalty they should say so as to not put our immortal souls in danger. They should also tell us what other of their teaching they are changing. I mean if they have been wring about the death penalty for 2,000 years one must wonder if we can trust them on the claim Jesus is God and rose from the dead.
 
estesbob said:
“Grooming us”? If it a Catholic is morally required to oppose the death penalty they should say so as to not put our immortal souls in danger. They should also tell us what other of their teaching they are changing. I mean if they have been wring about the death penalty for 2,000 years one must wonder if we can trust them on the claim Jesus is God and rose from the dead.
Click to expand...
This is where I genuinely don’t get the worry. Changing something doesn’t mean ‘changing 2000 years of Catholic teaching’. The Church has changed her tune on things like corporal punishment of children also. It is her duty and mission to guide us within the context of the society she ministers too.

“*the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. Thus, in language intelligible to each generation, she can respond to the perennial questions which men ask about this present life and the life to come, and about the relationship of the one to the other. We must therefore recognize and understand the world in which we live, its explanations, its longings, and its often dramatic characteristics.” *Gaudium et spes
 
LongingSoul said:
This is where I genuinely don’t get the worry. Changing something doesn’t mean ‘changing 2000 years of Catholic teaching’. The Church has changed her tune on things like corporal punishment of children also. It is her duty and mission to guide us within the context of the society she ministers too.
“*the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. Thus, in language intelligible to each generation, she can respond to the perennial questions which men ask about this present life and the life to come, and about the relationship of the one to the other. We must therefore recognize and understand the world in which we live, its explanations, its longings, and its often dramatic characteristics.” *Gaudium et spes
Click to expand...
So there is no guarantee they haven’t been wrong about Homosexual , abortion or the Ascension? You cant claim to be infallible and jettison 2,000 years of teachings because the culture demands it.
 
estesbob said:
So there is no guarantee they haven’t been wrong about Homosexual , abortion or the Ascension? You cant claim to be infallible and jettison 2,000 years of teachings because the culture demands it.
Click to expand...
If the general rule of thumb is that nothing can ever change or else everything can change, we wouldn’t even need the Church. That’s why we assent to teachings and have faith in her moral guidance. She has that special supernatural gift to guide the faithful so that we don’t have to make life a personal guessing game.
 
Life in prison may as well be torture for people like this. He’d probably have to spend the rest of his life in solitary just to avoid being killed/beaten/maimed/etc by other inmates.
 
LongingSoul said:
If the general rule of thumb is that nothing can ever change or else everything can change, we wouldn’t even need the Church. That’s why we assent to teachings and have faith in her moral guidance. She has that special supernatural gift to guide the faithful so that we don’t have to make life a personal guessing game.
Click to expand...
Not much of a gift if truth changes
 
How can I say this?

Man evolves socially. We are not in the Dark Ages, we are not at a point when the Spaniards brought Christianity to the New World.

Clearly, in an ideal world, we would like to not ever have the death penalty.
 
Path_Finder said:
How can I say this?

Man evolves socially. We are not in the Dark Ages, we are not at a point when the Spaniards brought Christianity to the New World.

Clearly, in an ideal world, we would like to not ever have the death penalty.
Click to expand...
So the Truth is fungible?
 
estesbob said:
So the Truth is fungible?
Click to expand...
Someone can surely, explain this concept more eloquently:

Jesus and probably Paul too, followed Hebrew law and the Old Testament, in ways, we may also do so. But the New Convenant was formed as well and with that, some changes in the law.

This is a matter of much discussion. Perhaps I can revisit this concept later on.
 
Path_Finder said:
Someone can surely, explain this concept more eloquently:

Jesus and probably Paul too, followed Hebrew law and the Old Testament, in ways, we may also do so. But the New Convenant was formed as well and with that, some changes in the law.

This is a matter of much discussion. Perhaps I can revisit this concept later on.
Click to expand...
And for over 2,000 years since the New Covenant was founded the Church has allowed for the death penalty. If the Truth changes according to the mores of the current culture then there is NOTHING the Church teaches we can trust.
 
estesbob said:
And for over 2,000 years since the New Covenant was founded the Church has allowed for the death penalty. If the Truth changes according to the mores of the current culture then there is NOTHING the Church teaches we can trust.
Click to expand...
But you surely agree that the Holy Spirit GUIDES the Church. If every teaching remained the same always, Vatican II, perhaps the Guidance from one-third of the Trinity would not be needed or would not often be needed.

Yes, I would be weary about some changes if they came to be.

However, I’ve read Ender’s post again and again. It does not seem to be that there have been authoritative changes made by the Vatican as of yet on Capital Punishment.
 
Path_Finder said:
But you surely agree that the Holy Spirit GUIDES the Church. If every teaching remained the same always, Vatican II, perhaps the Guidance from one-third of the Trinity would not be needed or would not often be needed.

Yes, I would be weary about some changes if they came to be.

However, I’ve read Ender’s post again and again. It does not seem to be that there have been authoritative changes made by the Vatican as of yet on Capital Punishment.
Click to expand...
I do not believe there have been any changes. I do not believe there can be any changes. I was commenting to those who believe Catholics are required to oppose the death penalty.
 
I don’t think we are required to be against the death penalty in any absolute way but I think we should oppose it in our current society. The way I understand the current teaching is that the death penalty must in some way be a defense of socieity. That is keeping with the other teachings on taking a life; it can only be done in defense of self or another person and must be proportionate to the threat.

We don’t live in a world of abstractions, we must make decisions based on our current circumstances, not some future hypothetical.

I think this article spells it out clearly:

catholicmoraltheology.com/the-death-penalty-is-abhorrent-a-response-to-critics-of-capital-punishment-must-end/
 
For me, it can’t be about revenge. I am taking this from the argument for a “just war.” There has to be some sort of higher justice served. Can you argue that with the death penalty? Fascinating question. I think it is easier to argue for no, than yes. But, as with just wars, I do believe there are exceptions to every rule. As I have stated before, I am darn glad I am not making the call here against Tsarnaev. Knowing me, I would probably argue against if most on the jury were going for and vice versa. I don’t know if I could actually have a yes decision on my conscience. I mean, actually being part of the official ruling to put him to death. You never know 'til you’re in the situation…
 
J_Peterson said:
I don’t think we are required to be against the death penalty in any absolute way but I think we should oppose it in our current society. The way I understand the current teaching is that the death penalty must in some way be a defense of socieity. That is keeping with the other teachings on taking a life; it can only be done in defense of self or another person and must be proportionate to the threat.

We don’t live in a world of abstractions, we must make decisions based on our current circumstances, not some future hypothetical.

I think this article spells it out clearly:

catholicmoraltheology.com/the-death-penalty-is-abhorrent-a-response-to-critics-of-capital-punishment-must-end/
Click to expand...
I oppose the death penalty in all cases. I believe, however, that it is a misstatement of Church teaching to say the Church opposes the Death Penalty. I believe that such an assertion does great harm to the Church as it implies that the Churches. teachings are changeable
 
estesbob said:
So there is no guarantee they haven’t been wrong about Homosexual , abortion or the Ascension? You cant claim to be infallible and jettison 2,000 years of teachings because the culture demands it.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is no guarantee that the Church has not made mistakes over the years. The Church is obligated to continue to seek Truth, and adjust her teaching accordingly. That is what has been happening since the beginning.
 
estesbob said:
I oppose the death penalty in all cases. I believe, however, that it is a misstatement of Church teaching to say the Church opposes the Death Penalty. I believe that such an assertion does great harm to the Church as it implies that the Churches. teachings are changeable
Click to expand...
Then how do you explain the past changes to Church teachings? Jesus told us that we would grow in understanding under the guidance of the Spirit. Is that not what is happening, and has happened many times in the past?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top