Pope Francis Changes Catechism to Declare Death Penalty ‘Inadmissible’

  • Thread starter Thread starter exnihilo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, you’re entitled to your opinion, but I think you’re being overly dismissive of Jesus’ teaching.
Also, you thinking it wrong doesn’t matter, as we don’t get to vote on it.

I cannot figure out why Catholics on here are so married to the idea of executing people. Seems vengeful and very Old Covenant to me.
 
DignumEtJustum said:
I suspect this is to take away attention from the sex scandals brewing.
Click to expand...
It’s possible that the timing of it’s release might be purposefully done in that regard. Putting up a smoke screen to draw attention away from it. But apparently, this is something that they have been working on for a while. I still believe that some of the things coming out of the Vatican lately, are testing the waters for making other changes that are probably going to be even more controversial. We shall see.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I cannot figure out why Catholics on here are so married to the idea of executing people. Seems vengeful and very Old Covenant to me.
Click to expand...
Seriously? So, do you really believe it’s never OK for the justice system to punish people that kill innocent people, indiscriminately? Even if it serves as protection to keep other innocent people from dying at their hands? What about if they murder other people while they’re in prison for committing murder, like prison guards? That actually happened in a US prison just recently.

I’m sorry if you disagree, but I believe there most certainly are times when capital punishment is necessary to protect innocent people from vicious killers. It has nothing to do with vengeance, but it has everything to do with justice. Justice for the victims, and for their grieving families.
 
Tis_Bearself . . .
I cannot figure out why Catholics on here are so married to the idea of executing people.
Click to expand...
Has there been ANYBODY here wanting to execute people?

Here is the problem with thinking there is a doctrinal change concerning de fide doctrine.

It would mean that the Church got it WRONG for 2000 years.

The next question would be . . . “Where ELSE is the Church WRONG on de fide doctrine”?

It could be interpreted as Jesus being WRONG when He said “the gates of hades would not prevail” against His Church.

That calls into question Jesus’ Divine nature.

That cannot be correct.

Furthermore. A de fide doctrinal “change” would foster confusion, and some people would leave for the “fullness” of truth (when the fullness of truth is found right here in the Catholic Church).

The implications of a CHANGE in doctrine would be cataclysmic. (There are no de fide doctrinal changes.)

OR . . .

. . . Someone else COULD just attempt to dismiss Pope Francis’ teachings by saying . . . . “Well. He didn’t teach this ex-cathedra, so I am going to reject it!”

All the while they would all have to ignore what the Vatican is teaching on it’s clarification document.

.

Now some will say that the fact that the Vatican even needs a clarification document suggests they KNEW this would be confusing.

So WHY put forth apparently vague, ambiguous teaching with regards to de fide doctrine?

But THAT is another discussion.
 
Last edited:
The USA executes so few people per year that it is neither deterring anything nor significantly protecting society.
As I have said before, the main effect these cases have is to make work for a bunch of lawyers due to the many appeals.
 
Last edited:
tomarin said:
I wonder, does the Philippines have the death penalty (I believe they probably do)?. If so will they have to abolish it now?
Click to expand...
Here in the Philippines the death penalty was abolished in 2006.
 
Lilac said:
I wonder if Pope Francis will have that scripture where Jesus says it would be better that a millstone be hung around the necks of people that harm children and cast into the sea removed from the Bible
Click to expand...
Nope. That is particularly relevant but figurative in the case of child sexual abuse.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Right, and neither is the change to the death penalty provision a change in the “doctrine”. Because Jesus taught that all human life had dignity and He forgave the guy who was getting capital punishment right alongside him.
Click to expand...
I think you are right in so far as there is no way the Pope could change doctrine. What it is is an unexplainable prudential judgment inserted into the Catechism.
Tis_Bearself said:
The USA executes so few people per year that it is neither deterring anything nor significantly protecting society.
As I have said before, the main effect these cases have is to make work for a bunch of lawyers due to the many appeals.
Click to expand...
The lawyers created the system that enriches them. But there is no reason why executions can’t be carried out much more swiftly.
 

The taser gives you two shots and you have to be close (15ft). If you miss or the robber is wearing extra clothing all you’ll do is tick him off.

Mace and pepper spray will stun someone, assuming you don’t miss; however, they can still draw their gun and shoot. See the above video 🔝

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
My advice, carry everything.
 
Last edited:
Lawyers don’t make money off death penalty cases. Many of them are working pro bono, and the ones paid by a state capital defender office or a nonprofit make low wages. Defendants generally have no money to pay.
The prosecutor probably gets paid decently, but his money comes out of our taxes.
 
Last edited:
And that’s my concern with this change to the CCC - it’s very hard to eliminate all possible scenarios where the DP may be the only choice a government has.
 
So not only do you reject Church teaching on the appropriateness of the death penalty- you believe execution need to be carried out with more haste.

Astounding.
 
I don’t think anyone is saying that you cannot use lethal force on an active threat. However, Once they’re neutralized and taken prisoner, now you’re stuck with them.
 
Cruciferi said:
Once they’re neutralized and taken prisoner,
Click to expand...
That’s the rub. Gangsters, etc. have a long reach. Just placing them in jail may not prevent them from continuing to direct the killings of others.

I’ve been around and around on this on several threads (my mistake). The bottom line is that the JP2-era wording set a high bar for legitimately executing a prisoner but allowed for unforeseen circumstances. This new ruling removes that flexibility, based on average current conditions, which places governments (and people) in a bind if their country does not have the means to adequately (and humanely) neutralize the person as a threat.
 
When dealing with the likes of El Chapo and the people who profit from drugs, war, and death, it’s better to Take No Prisoners.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top