Scholars raise concerns over Pope Francis remarks on how doctrine develops

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wandile
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please don’t be ridiculous! Love your enemies simply means to love them truly. Of course, you do not let murderers go on killing, but that you let God determine their life once you have them locked up to where they cannot do anybody any more harm. Nowhere does Christ endorse capital punishment. You cannot fight evil with evil, and all unnecessary killing is evil. Being pro-life means just that.

What good can possibly come from capital punishment?
 
Last edited:
If Christ is God and God guided the people of Israel through to his coming as Christ, then certain principles follow. God allowed the capital punishment of capital crimes to be carried out in the Old Testament. That means that capital punishment cannot be in principle wrong, otherwise it would have been as wrong then as you claim it to be now.

What you need to demonstrate is that something relevant changed and that change is sufficient to make capital punishment no longer ever admissible, in practice.

Capital punishment could not be inherently wrong if God permitted it in the OT. So “inherently wrong” is off the table and cannot be used as the justification for why it shouldn’t be used today.

Perhaps it is now inadmissible, in practice, but you need to lay out the case as to why that is so. Neither you nor Pope Francis can merely make the claim that it is wrong, PERIOD. That is not an argument.
 
Robert_Sock said:
What good can possibly come from capital punishment?
Click to expand...
Well, for one, someone prone to killing others and taking away their lives indiscriminately is prevented from ever doing that again. That would be an obviously “pro-life” reason.
 
Do not repay anyone evil for evil; be concerned for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, on your part, live at peace with all. Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” Rather, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.” Do not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good.
-Romans 12: 17-21
Click to expand...
 
We can no longer be hypocritical and say that any unnecessary killing of a human being is OK.
 
Neither is Divorce or Polygamy is inherently wrong otherwise not even God could tolerate it.

So what if CP isnt inherently wrong?
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
Neither is Divorce or Polygamy is inherently wrong otherwise not even God could tolerate it.
Click to expand...
Could something not good be “tolerated” by God? What do we mean by “tolerate”? In the OT, the process of drawing a people, of establishing his law is all in progress a WIP…
 
so you dismiss official catholic teaching on this point which is based on scripture and doctors of our church has spoken about?
 
perhaps I misread your comment - do you agree or disagree that capital punishment is God’s will in cases where there is no doubt to the guilt of a person and that they have committed a mortal sin, have been given the chance for repentance and refused it?
 
In the case you just posted?

No, I do not believe that people should be executed for committing mortal sins.

People should never be executed just because they watched porn.
 
we are not talking about porn but the deliberate taking of innocent life and the refusal of that person to repent.
 
It depends on the situation.

The Church says if the person can be safely neutralized and have there life taken by means besides executing them then most likely they should not be executed.
 
You are certainly entitled to your position.
But the issue is “inherent evil”.
I fail to see how God could ever the practise of an inherent evil.
If at any time it was acceptable to Him, and the above were, then by definition they are not inherent evils.
If they were inherent evils then the expression has been so diluted as to be a meaningless argument in the OPs original argument re CP also.
 
sir, you are introducing situation ethics - it has been condemned by our church. More than one Pope has spoken out against it. I know we would all like to believe much of what our Pope is teaching us because it sounds merciful - but we need to love, understand, and respect God as He is. We need to focus on basics - in this case scripture which catholic belief says is appropriate for those I have described above. It is a difficult thing to believe and accept teachings that don’t sit well with us - but we all have done so - example being our belief in purgatory. Our job is to call and profess the truth of God to the world. This is where our confidence, peace, and security is. It is a difficult calling but with Christ helping us it not only is possible but we find joy in doing so.
 
I believe what the Church teaches.

CCC 2266 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

That is official Church teaching and what I believe.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Do not repay anyone evil for evil; be concerned for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, on your part, live at peace with all. Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” Rather, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.” Do not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good.
-Romans 12: 17-21
Click to expand...
Repaying evil for evil is essentially what vengeance is. To apply this to capital punishment you have to presume that the only reason why a state would execute someone is to wreck vengeance on them. Then, I suppose, it would follow from this presumption that the only reason a state would sentence individuals found guilty of any offense whatsoever to punishment is because the state only seeks vengeance and the repaying of evil with evil. That sounds to be a bit of an odd claim.

Or are you claiming that the only reason anyone would argue for capital punishment is from a desire to “repay evil for evil?” That would mean you have dismissed all other arguments for capital punishment as irrelevant or unconvincing and have found that this “vengeance” argument is the only one which you think to be at all persuasive and the only one necessary to refute.

Unfortunately for you there are far better arguments for capital punishment, and vengeance, as far as I know, has never been seriously offered by any serious debater.

Nice try, though.
Click to expand...
 
I believe it all comes down whether or not unnecessary killing is an evil or not an evil! Let us be consistent and agree that society must not ever repay evil with evil based on the verses from Romans which I quoted! I contend that the Bible must be the ultimate authority, if possible, on all complex social issues such as capital punishment.

I do also believe that many who endorse capital punishment are satisfying an underlying urge, either consciously unconsciously, for vengeance and that all other explanations are based on rationalization, which is simply a defense mechanism from a psychological viewpoint.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top