Ohio Catholic bishops seek to end death penalty

[Rich_Olszewski]

Vocabulary corrected.

I am not arguing that it violates a person’s dignity, it may not. I am simply stating that it is no longer necessary except in very narrow instances.

2267 may be wrong. How does that affect imposition of the death penalty or the current refusal of Church leaders to promote it?

I fail to see why a demonstration is necessary.

Under narrow circumstances it is appropriate. The murderer who is already doing life and kills in prison might be a good example of the need for it.

It was and is still barbaric even if a clergyman pulled the handle to drop the trap on the miscreant. The death penalty at the Vatican wasn’t infallible doctrine else it could not have been dropped from the books then.

 

[Ender]

I am not arguing that it violates a person’s dignity, it may not. I am simply stating that it is no longer necessary except in very narrow instances.

It would help if you stayed closer to the point being discussed, which was the assertion by Dale_M that executions violated a person’s dignity.

2267 may be wrong. The Catholic Church may alsoo be wrong about a lot of things, but how does that affect imposition of the death penalty or the current refusal of Church leaders to cheerlead for it?

If 2267 is wrong then anyone who refers to that passage is basing his opposition to the death penalty on a false understanding of what the Church teaches.

I fail to see why a demonstration is necessary.

Because this is a debate and if you want to usefully discuss something then it is necessary to present arguments to defend a position.

It was and is still barbaric even if a priest or bishop pulled the handle to drop the trap on the miscreant. The death penalty at the Vatican wasn’t infallible doctrine else it could not have been dropped from the books then.

So is it your position that the Church has and does now support the right of States to inflict barbaric punishment on criminals?

Ender

 

[Dale_M]

The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. (CCC 27)

Nothing about executing a person changes his relationship with God, so in what way can it be considered a violation of his dignity?

The dignity of man is grounded in his relationship in God, but it is not restricted to it. Human nature is above that of animals. Human dignity is inherent to our nature. Our lives always have value because we are always capable of love, both for God and for our fellow humans. We never lose that capacity to love, and are called to live it more fully than we may currently do or have done.

Does anyone believe that being executed somehow diminished the dignity of the martyrs? Don’t we rather consider their dignity enhanced by the way they endured their martyrdom?

We value martyrdom because of the element of self-sacrifice, given in love to God. Perhaps some executed prisoners could be considered martyrs, giving up their lives freely. But I suspect that isn’t true in most cases. At any rate, the virtue of martyrs does not justify the act of martyring them.

The strongest argument against your position, however, is that the Church always has supported the right of the State to apply capital punishment. Either such punishment is not a violation of human dignity or the Church supported the violation of human dignity for nearly two millennia.

Not necessarily. In centuries past, prisons were much less secure and the possibility of escape much more real than today - at least in the developed nations of the world. In earlier times, and perhaps in the less developed nations of the world today, the death penalty could be justified in terms of self defense and protecting the common good. However, those conditions have changed in much of the world and the Catholic Church’s understanding of those changes reflects that.

Actually, this is exactly the position of the Catholic Church. I’m travelling for the next few days and don’t have access to all my notes, but Pius XII said something like this (paraphrasing) “by his action he has forfeited his right to live.”

This sounds very important, as well as very interesting. I understand you are traveling (the Lord protect you) and look forward to reading what the Pope said in more detail when you return.

The problem with this argument is that rehabilitation is, along with protection and deterrence, a secondary objective of punishment

I’m not sure that is true. Would you be willing to explain your reasoning?

You simply assert that capital punishment is dehumanizing without trying to explain what makes it so. I’ll ask again: given this - (CCC 357) *Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person - *how does his being executed affect a person’s dignity given that it is based on his being made in the image of God, which man cannot alter? It is the sinner who wounds his own dignity, not the State which imposes a just punishment.

A murderer has wounded himself, but no one is beyond redemption. Depriving an imprisoned murderer, who is no longer a threat to society, deprives him of the opportunity of repentance and atonement. The death penalty is not just if serves no purpose other than retribution.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Because this is a debate and if you want to usefully discuss something then it is necessary to present arguments to defend a position.

You see this as a debate where one side wins and the other side loses. I see it instead as an expression of two different positions with no need to present “arguments.” When all is said and done, you will still hold on to your beliefs and those of us who find capital punishment a relic of the past will retain ours.

So is it your position that the Church has and does now support the right of States to inflict barbaric punishment on criminals?

It no longer does so as you ought to know. In the past it deferred to the civil authorities who, depending on the country, very often used barbaric methods to execute condemned criminals.

 

[Ender]

Rich Olszewski:

It [capital punishment] was and is still barbaric

If, as you claim, the death penalty is a barbaric relic then you have to admit that the Church still allows the application of barbaric punishments. It’s either that or the death penalty is not barbaric; there really isn’t another option.

Ender

 

[Tighty_Whitey]

Ender,

In your campaign to defend the death penalty you completely ignore the ridiculous state of the death penalty in the U.S. It is and will continue to be an abomination.

As a lawyer that has had experience, albeit limited, with the Innocence Project, I know the notion that we have a system in place that does not permit the killing of the innocent is wrong, and that fact alone should quash the desire for the death penalty.

I am no bleeding heart liberal, I just have to acknowledge that the death penalty in the U.S. is seriously flawed and not functioning. Earlier this week a man was put to death after 19 years on death row, how does that fulfill your ardent desire to have “Retribution”?

I am grateful for the Bishops’ statement and the guidance of the Church on this most serious topic.

Peace, g.

 

[Ender]

you completely ignore the ridiculous state of the death penalty in the U.S. It is and will continue to be an abomination.

You could very well be right, but the state of the death penalty in the U.S., ridiculous or not, is irrelevant to all of my arguments. I am making a moral argument for the use of capital punishment based on Church teaching, and any specifics of U.S. penology are irrelevant to those arguments.

Earlier this week a man was put to death after 19 years on death row, how does that fulfill your ardent desire to have “Retribution”?

Why do you put “retribution” in quotes? Retribution - retributive justice - is the primary objective of all punishment and is something we should all desire. You cannot be indifferent to retribution without being indifferent to justice.

I am grateful for the Bishops’ statement and the guidance of the Church on this most serious topic.

And I am sorely disappointed that the “guidance” the bishops have given is so misguided.

Ender

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

If, as you claim, the death penalty is a barbaric relic then you have to admit that the Church still allows the application of barbaric punishments.

Yes, sadly, especially when the method of killing is barbaric.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

You could very well be right, but the state of the death penalty in the U.S., ridiculous or not, is irrelevant to all of my arguments. I am making a moral argument for the use of capital punishment based on Church teaching, and any specifics of U.S. penology are irrelevant to those arguments.

They are not only relevant, but they are controlling, regardless of how many Catholics might be howling to see people put to death. We are a nation of secular laws, not a Inquisition-styled theocracy. Besides, the Church no longer finds the death penalty appropriate in this age.

And I am sorely disappointed that the “guidance” the bishops have given is so misguided.

Nice to rely on the Catechism when it supports your idée fixe, and to condemn the bishops’s guidance when it doesn’t.