G
godisgood77
Guest
I think this is all there is to say.
- Status
G
gracepoole
Guest
You’re right in noting that the US is part of a minority in the western world in still allowing for the death penalty in various states. We’re virtual freaks in this respect when compared with Europe. But other countries have also been struggling with terrorism for far, far longer than the US – it only seems to be here that we’re comfortable justifying something like the death penalty (or torture…) based on our responses to our limited experiences with terrorism.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Seems pretty clear to me.
E
eamonnroma
Guest
It almost seems that following this argument. When a Pope says something we like, we laud him. However if he says something we do not like, we start quoting all and everything we can find.
E
eamonnroma
Guest
I have seen here many people quoting Scripture, Tradition, Councils and so on. What did Christ say about people who justified everything by quoting endless rules and texts?
It is a simple fact that killing another human being must be abhorrent to any civilized person, let alone Christian.
It is interesting to note that there is only one ‘western’ state that allows capital punishment. One sign of being a civilized country to be able to enter the European Union is that the country cannot have capital punishment on its statute books. Turkey when it applied to join, had to stop capital punishment.
For me, forgetting about rules, laws, tradition, Christianity and whatever else, there is one simple fact that must outlaw capital punishment. As somebody here has already stated. There is the possibility of making a mistake, and executing an innocent person. That has happened in the past I believe.
Our Pope is telling us that we must have a social conscience. Praying and obeying the rules is not enough. He has said that capital punishment is not an acceptable option. Let us humbly accept our supreme pastor’s wishes.
It is a simple fact that killing another human being must be abhorrent to any civilized person, let alone Christian.
It is interesting to note that there is only one ‘western’ state that allows capital punishment. One sign of being a civilized country to be able to enter the European Union is that the country cannot have capital punishment on its statute books. Turkey when it applied to join, had to stop capital punishment.
For me, forgetting about rules, laws, tradition, Christianity and whatever else, there is one simple fact that must outlaw capital punishment. As somebody here has already stated. There is the possibility of making a mistake, and executing an innocent person. That has happened in the past I believe.
Our Pope is telling us that we must have a social conscience. Praying and obeying the rules is not enough. He has said that capital punishment is not an acceptable option. Let us humbly accept our supreme pastor’s wishes.
Scripture = the inerrant Word of God.
Tradition = the other part of Divine Revelation.
Councils = one of the highest expressions of the Magisterium, the teaching office of the Church, left by Jesus Christ himself.
vs.
Pharisaism = man-made traditions that are a burden not supported by Scripture.
Sorry, there is a world of difference. The Pharisees invented stuff. Those who quote Scripture, Tradition, Councils are doing nothing but relying on the authority left by God Almighty himself with the Catholic Church. Christ condemned the Pharisees, not his own baptized people who have nothing to lean on but his Church.
If the Church is infallible, she can never change any moral teaching, including the death penalty. That’s why the current Catechism does not exclude it. That’s also why the Church still holds that even in certain limited cases, killing a criminal is still just and moral.
A wholesale condemnation of the death penalty as a matter of moral principle is not only contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, but also, if the Catholic Church were to actually use its magisterial authority to reverse itself on this or any moral matter, then it’s not infallible and not worth a hoot of our time or attention.
If you want capital punishment abolished for a host of practical reasons, that’s fine. If one wants to err on the side of life and mitigate the risk of a terrible miscarriage of justice, that’s fine. But condemn it as “capital punishment is inherently immoral” is NOT fine. It’s against the teaching of the Church, and therefore heretical.
No one should ever, ever be afraid to quote authority. God left us that authority to lean on.That does not make us Pharisees. That makes us submissive to the Church. Not even a Pope can change Church teaching.
A
adawgj
Guest
Sorry for replying late, but I still can’t agree with you saying the death penalty being incompatible with abortion and euthanasia.
I’d recommend watching this video by Father Gregory J. O’Meara, S.J. who is a law professor at Marquette University Law School. youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=uS0Oqvm15i0#t=0
How is the death penalty compatible or incompatible with abortion and euthanasia? These three do not work together so there is no question of compatibility.
What I said was that the death penalty is not an instrinsic evil, and therefore cannot be lumped alongside abortion and euthanasia, both of which are.
- Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia. – Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
A
adawgj
Guest
Thanks for the great wisdom of our Emeritus Holy Father Benedict XVI.
But now I’m confused with what the OP question or share was?
S
seaton2005
Guest
That was in the past. We no longer support the DP. It is part of the pro-life culture.
S
seaton2005
Guest
You are right on point. That’s exactly what my diocese teaches - that the death penalty is against Catholic teaching.
Again and again, no it isn’t. The Church prudentially determines limits as to when it may be applied, but the death penalty itself is not against Catholic teaching. It cannot, otherwise, the Catholic Church can throw out all its claims on being infallible on matters of morals. If it once held that the death penalty was moral, then it still holds the same thing today. The Catholic Church cannot change ANY teaching on faith or morals.
Look at the quote I lifted from Cardinal Ratzinger above. Supporting the death penalty does NOT render one unworthy to receive Communion. The Catechism itself states that it does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, while in the same breath, sets strict limits as to its application. If the death penalty were against Catholic teaching, the Catechism WOULD exclude recourse to it, but it doesn’t.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Some claim that there have been changes in the teachings on slavery, on torture, on ecumenism and on the filioque.
S
seaton2005
Guest
I am sorry. We as Catholics don’t believe in the death penalty. It against pro life teachings. The church has come out against it over and over again.
B
Bill1940
Guest
I think you perhaps take it too far. Do I express Catholic teaching when saying the following: If we are threatened by a criminal, we may defend ourselves with deadly force, unless a clearly safe option is present. If our country is threatened by an aggressor, the same principle applies. If we apply the same principle to capital punishment, it will be rare but there.
Why don’t you read Cardinal Ratzinger’s statement again, as well as the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states that for serious reason, states may have recourse to the death penalty, subject to limits. If the death penalty were inherently immoral, the Church could under no circumstances permit states to have even limited recourse to the death penalty, but she does. We have to conclude that the death penalty is not in itself a moral evil, but its application must be tempered and limited. This is a far cry from “Catholics don’t believe in the death penalty.” We do, and allow it, if absolutely necessary. This is the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church.
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, **the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
**
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68
C
Corki
Guest
I would caution against taking a personal position that is more strict than the Church’s own position and then attributing it to the Church as a whole. To say that you do no “believe in the death penalty” is fine. It is also fine to say that Church leaders, including Pope Francis, do not believe that in our modern world there is any current situation for which the death penalty would be appropriate. But it is not ok to say that “Catholics don’t believe” in something that the Church has taught for centuries.
This is a very balances presentation of the teaching of the Church.
E
eamonnroma
Guest
There is no doubt that the Church has said, in the past, that CP can be justified. Indeed it still says so in the catechism.
However, and in light of the opinions of recent Popes, DP is now seen as being reprehensible.
The Church’s position has in fact shifted in the past, sometimes reflecting changes in society. Slavery, in some circumstances, for example. St Paul did not condemn it - this is because it was acceptable in society at that time to have slaves. It was outside of their comprehension in those times that slavery could be immoral. The moral teaching then was on the just treatment of slaves.
One thing cannot be doubted - the death penalty goes against the spirit of Christianity. It seems facile, but I would say, if Christ were here, what would he say about it? Would he advocate killing a human being?
Also Doctrine has changed and developed. For example the Assumption, was a widely held belief (and in which I believe 100%) for centuries. It did not become dogma until 1950. Up until then Catholics would have had the right also not to accept the belief.
The Catholic Church added the filioque. (I do not wish to start a filioque discussion). In doing this it changed doctrine. Pope Benedict obviously recognized this when he recited the Creed with Patriarch Bartholomew I, and omitted the filioque. It was also a great moment. The patriarchs of the East and West professing the same creed.
My point is that the Church’s emphasis on social teaching can, should and is changing. We need to accept this.
We need to humbly accept, that something we might passionately believe in, has now become unacceptable in any civilized nation. The Pope has said so.
However, and in light of the opinions of recent Popes, DP is now seen as being reprehensible.
The Church’s position has in fact shifted in the past, sometimes reflecting changes in society. Slavery, in some circumstances, for example. St Paul did not condemn it - this is because it was acceptable in society at that time to have slaves. It was outside of their comprehension in those times that slavery could be immoral. The moral teaching then was on the just treatment of slaves.
One thing cannot be doubted - the death penalty goes against the spirit of Christianity. It seems facile, but I would say, if Christ were here, what would he say about it? Would he advocate killing a human being?
Also Doctrine has changed and developed. For example the Assumption, was a widely held belief (and in which I believe 100%) for centuries. It did not become dogma until 1950. Up until then Catholics would have had the right also not to accept the belief.
The Catholic Church added the filioque. (I do not wish to start a filioque discussion). In doing this it changed doctrine. Pope Benedict obviously recognized this when he recited the Creed with Patriarch Bartholomew I, and omitted the filioque. It was also a great moment. The patriarchs of the East and West professing the same creed.
My point is that the Church’s emphasis on social teaching can, should and is changing. We need to accept this.
We need to humbly accept, that something we might passionately believe in, has now become unacceptable in any civilized nation. The Pope has said so.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Seems about right to me.
E
eamonnroma
Guest
Here is yet another reason why the DP can never be acceptable.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32178121
There is always the chance of a mistake being made.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32178121
There is always the chance of a mistake being made.
- Status