He has every right – indeed, he has an obligation – to speak out on moral issues. And that’s what the deliberate taking of a human life is, a moral issue.I suspect he may be making a mistake – once again, getting the Church too closely mixed up in politics.
Did you see the letter from the CDF? That addresses the development.I would like to read a serious, in depth defense of this as to how it is actually a development and not a corruption.
Which, to be frank, and unfortunately I’m a bit cynical, will leave the question as to whether this is an exercise of the extraordinary magisterium open and, if the Pope chooses not to respond to dubia or other attempts to get elaboration, will leave that question open for continued debate.There is a letter that accompanies this change. For anyone who is struggling or confused by this, I would encourage you to read through this.
http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2018/08/02/180802b.html
I will say, quite apart from what the pope is saying, this is a rather unconventional way to go about it. Pope Francis didn’t publish a papal document about it. There is no new encyclical or apostolic constitution. Just a letter from the CDF and an edited paragraph of the Catechism.
I can’t see any way that defense of life is a “corruption.”I would like to read a serious, in depth defense of this as to how it is actually a development and not a corruption.
The state acts on Gods behalf in these matters, so they do have the authority to punish evil doers with death.Romans 13 1-5 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.>
The agent who executes the killing does not commit homicide; he is an instrument as is the sword with which he cuts. Therefore, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill’ to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of public authority to put criminals to death, according to the law, that is, the will of the most just reason.
The City of God, Book 1, chapter 21
But then this means that the Church positively taught and actively participated in corruption in the past. And God did as well, since He states in Genesis 9:6 that “whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.” Also, Pope Pius XII, who provided the most systematic and detailed treatment of the subject (not sure why he is totally ignored in all this), taught heresy.I can’t see any way that defense of life is a “corruption.”
Yes especially with what else is going on in the Church some might see this as a deflection. Obviously, well hopefully, this has been in the works for awhile. Some interesting aspects…will Catholic politicians, government leaders that support the death penalty be denied communion? We have not seen that with abortion supporters. Of course bible alone protestants will have something to say also.I will say, quite apart from what the pope is saying, this is a rather unconventional way to go about it. Pope Francis didn’t publish a papal document about it. There is no new encyclical or apostolic constitution. Just a letter from the CDF and an edited paragraph of the Catechism.
While the revisions to the Catechism mention the advancement of society, that doesn’t seem to be the principle justification for the change of policy.Doctrine develops overtime. The modern world has advanced to such an extent that taking human life is no longer necessary.