Pope Francis Calls for Abolition of Death Penalty

[TMC]

But which one? Haven’t past supreme pastors upheld the legitimate use of the death penalty? Are my beliefs supposed to change each time we get a new supreme pastor?

This is not a new teaching or unique to this Pope. At least the last three Popes have condemned the use of the death penalty.

 

[St_Francis]

This is not a new teaching or unique to this Pope. At least the last three Popes have condemned the use of the death penalty.

Yes, but that was a change on their part as well. An act could not have been morally permissible for 1950+ years and then become morally impermisible… it is either one or the other.

 

[LoveMercyGrace]

Amen.

 

[TMC]

Yes, but that was a change on their part as well. An act could not have been morally permissible for 1950+ years and then become morally impermisible… it is either one or the other.

If you keep going back in time you will find lots of things that past Popes approved of that are not considered morally acceptable today (and vice versa).

 

[St_Francis]

If you keep going back in time you will find lots of things that past Popes approved of that are not considered morally acceptable today (and vice versa).

If a pope approved of something without invoking infallibity, it was his opinion, just as it is now.

Clearly, if two popes contradict each other, at least one is wrong.

 

[eamonnroma]

The Catholic Church’s teaching on the death penalty is clear. The Church teaches that while it is theoretically licit to use the death penalty where no other means to protect society is available, that situation does not arise in today’s society. For that reason, the death penalty as it is used today is against the Church’s teaching. Pope Francis is emphasizing that teaching, but it is not new.

Yes exactly - The last 3 popes have condemned the death penalty.

I do not understand how any christian could cling to the belief that the deliberate ending of another human being’s life should be condoned. This surely flies in the face of everything that Christ taught.

The Church used to condone slavery, now it doesn’t, none of us would argue that we should enslave people.

The used to condone capital punishment - it is now clear that it no longer does so.

 

[eamonnroma]

I do not understand that as soon as there is a teaching that people are not comfortable with, they say it is not an infallible statement, and that they are free to reject it.

Most of our Church teaching does not come from infallible statements.

 

[pnewton]

If this convicted murderer would had been given the death penalty for his 1st murder, female guard Sgt. Barbara Easter would not have been stabbed to death by him.

There is a huge logical disconnect, besides the obvious attempt to know what would happen in an alternative timeline. When a person is sentence to death, they are not shot at sunrise. They go to prison, for years and years where they are watched over by, you guessed it, prison guards.

So maybe the Holy Father isn’t he naive idiot that he is portrayed as at times, but rather has a keened mind than most.

 

[pnewton]

The mere fact that you have to state “what the last three popes have been saying for the last forty years” should indicate part of the problem. Forty years is quite a short span when compared to nearly 2000 years. What prompted the change?

The technological advancements and level of information exchange between 1975 and the present is not the same as it was from, say 1050 AD ti 1090 AD. I am surprised that Catholics do not consider three popes in a row teaching in unison, along with pretty much every other bishop in the country, as “not enough”.

Is there the same objection to Humanae Vitae? That too is relatively new.

 

[pnewton]

But which one?

The current one, at least as far as doctrine is applied in a the present. The way the thinking here goes, Jesus did not even need apostolic succession, if authority was not to be exercised in the present. In fact, I would say Protestantism makes more sense to me. If we are going to look to the past, why not go back to the one person who was perfect? Interpreting the Bible for oneself makes far more sense than trying to interpret all of theology and history for oneself.

 

[pnewton]

Clearly, if two popes contradict each other, at least one is wrong.

No earlier pope ever said the death penalty was morally justified at this point in time, at least in the advanced nations. I know this seems a little silly, but no more than invoking popes from the past to comment on a contemporary issue. Only the principles remain unchanged.

Likewise, given a post-apocalyptic America, then tribes or gangs that range across the roadways may once again have moral recourse to death penalty.

 

[TMC]

If a pope approved of something without invoking infallibity, it was his opinion, just as it is now.

Clearly, if two popes contradict each other, at least one is wrong.

You seem to suggest there are two kinds of Church teachings - infallible and optional. That is not true. There are very, very few infallible teachings. The other teachings are not mere opinions. They are authoritative teachings, and the teaching on the death penalty is authoritative.

As for Popes contradicting one another, to the extent there is a conflict the current teaching is what is authoritative. What else could possibly be the case?

I personally have no issue with Catholics disagreeing with the Church on this or that. I certainly don’t agree with the Church on everything. But to pretend that the Church does not “really” teach something is simply intellectually dishonest. The Church teaches against the death penalty and calls for its abolition. That is simply undeniable. One can dissent from that teaching, I suppose, but one should not pretend that a particular teaching is optional to avoid admitting that dissent.

 

[estesbob]

This is recently from Pope Francis

theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/21/pope-francis-appeals-for-global-end-to-capital-punishment

Once again a Vicar of Christ condems the death penalty. But there are still catholics who insist on defending it.

Maybe we should listen to our supreme pastor?

I oppose the death penalty in all cases but the Church does now and always has allowed it. A Catholic can in good conscience support it:

*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.
*

Pope Benedict XVI

 

[Wesrock]

Yes, but that was a change on their part as well. An act could not have been morally permissible for 1950+ years and then become morally impermisible… it is either one or the other.

The death penalty is just only as a society’s collective self-defense. In a society as rich as ours, it hardly seems necessary for self-defense anymore.

 

[ringil]

Yes, but that was a change on their part as well. An act could not have been morally permissible for 1950+ years and then become morally impermisible… it is either one or the other.

So if you do believe they are different teachings do you trust the CURRENT teaching or the PAST teaching.

Personally, I live in the present so. . . . . . .

 

[estesbob]

So if you do believe they are different teachings do you trust the CURRENT teaching or the PAST teaching.

Personally, I live in the present so. . . . . . .

Since the teaching hasn’t changed it doesn’t matter.

 

[St_Francis]

No earlier pope ever said the death penalty

I was responding to the post I quoted, in which the poster suggested that there had been “lots” of areas of disagreement between popes, without specifying a one!

was morally justified at this point in time, at least in the advanced nations.
Now, how is a pope who lives and dies before this time to pronounce on something related to this time?

A pope who discussed this shortly before this point in time, Pope Pius XII (1876–1958), said this: “In the case of the death penalty the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. Rather public authority limits itself to depriving the offender of the good of life in expiation for his guilt, after he, through his crime, deprived himself of his own right to life.”

I know this seems a little silly, but no more than invoking popes from the past to comment on a contemporary issue. **Only the principles remain unchanged. **

Precisely.

Likewise, given a post-apocalyptic America, then tribes or gangs that range across the roadways may once again have moral recourse to death penalty.

I am not gung-ho about executing people. I would not mind if no one were ever executed; I am simply against 1. *eliminating *the DP; and 2. talking about eliminating the DP *everywhere, *considering that the justification for abolition rests on the advanced nature of modern penal systems, and not all nations have that capacity. This latter point implies that the DP is indeed wrong, since the Pope is suddenly saying that the DP should be abolished everywhere, thus offering mercy to all and sundry including those who have committed heinous crimes and show no contrition whatsoever. This dilutes other acts of mercy by uncoupling them from contrition.

 

[irenaeus1]

The death penalty is just only as a society’s collective self-defense. In a society as rich as ours, it hardly seems necessary for self-defense anymore.

The pope has never stated that only rich countries are to abolish the death penalty.

 

[irenaeus1]

If you keep going back in time you will find lots of things that past Popes approved of that are not considered morally acceptable today (and vice versa).

Please provide a case in point. Thanks.

 

[Corki]

You have made perfectly clear over the years that this is your position. It is not that of the Church.

But neither is the idea that capital punishment is an objective moral evil. The “position of the Church” is not just what is popular in the current day, it’s the consistent teaching over the centuries.