The Vatican and the death penalty

[garysibio]

Rationalize this all you want…ending a life is to say that we are God and God is not.

Not at all. The Old Testament specified cases in which the death penalty was mandated, not optional. Even though we are no longer bound by these laws, if using the death penalty today is self-deification, then it must also have been so then. Since God would not tell us to do anything that would amount to self-deification, capital punishment cannot reasonably be said to be deifying oneself.

 

[frommi]

Not at all. The Old Testament specified cases in which the death penalty was mandated, not optional. Even though we are no longer bound by these laws, if using the death penalty today is self-deification, then it must also have been so then. Since God would not tell us to do anything that would amount to self-deification, capital punishment cannot reasonably be said to be deifying oneself.

Again…you can’t be pro-death penalty and pro-life and the same time.

Is this where we go back to pointing out some of the other things God told us to do in the old testament?

 

[garysibio]

I’m saying that “lock 'em up” is not a satisfactory solution. The proof is the number of people murdered annually in this country – many of them by people who would have been executed in an earlier day.

I have to disagree with you here. In the vast majority of cases a life sentence with no chance of parole would be an equally effective means of self-defense as the death penalty. If someone seems to be so violent that they may hurt other prisoners, put them in isolation. The death penalty must be reserved for those cases in which the the criminal’s continued life presents an insurmountable risk to innocent third parties.

 

[frommi]

Please don’t make my arguments for me – I’m capable of making them myself.

I’m saying that “lock 'em up” is not a satisfactory solution. The proof is the number of people murdered annually in this country – many of them by people who would have been executed in an earlier day.

And we must therefore uphold the right of self-defense, both individualy and collectively.

The Catholic church can’t be about vengenance which is exactly what the so-called ‘self defense’ you describe is.

Self-defense says that something immediate is about to happen to you…how do you argue self defense if the defense action happens years later?

People who are murdered could be murdered by someone who’s only prior offense was running a traffic light? Should we execute everyone because we think they might kill somebody someday?

The Pope, in union with the bishops has begun speaking rather forcefully on respecting life. JPII made public pleas on many of his papal visits.

Our shepherds don’t see the need for this ‘self defense’ that you speak of…except in very specific cases…why do you?

 

[frommi]

I understand the differences between the abortion issue and the death penalty issue. AFAIAC, abortion is worse. It seems to me that, if you are going to put the amount of effort into opposing the death penalty as some bishops do, they should at least forbid their priests from giving the Eucharist to politicians who vote pro-abortion. I’m not mixing concepts, I’m saying first things first.

OK…let’s say you get your wish and politicans who are not in line with abortion teachings don’t get communion.

Then those same churches should (at a minimum) not invite speakers who would proclaim belief in the death penalty in a way that is not in accord with church teaching.

 

[garysibio]

Again…you can’t be pro-death penalty and pro-life and the same time.

Is this where we go back to pointing out some of the other things God told us to do in the old testament?

Since, as I have stated in the past, that the only reason for using the death penalty is to preserve the life of innocent third parties, I will continue to consider myself pro-life with or without your permission.

Since I’ve already stated that we are no longer under that law, rehashing the details is unnecessary. However, since God ordained the use of the death penalty in the OT, it cannot amount to self-deification. That was my only point for referring to Leviticus. I am not suggesting we make Leviticus the law of the land.

 

[garysibio]

OK…let’s say you get your wish and politicans who are not in line with abortion teachings don’t get communion.

Then those same churches should (at a minimum) not invite speakers who would proclaim belief in the death penalty in a way that is not in accord with church teaching.

If you mean the the Church’s real position on the death penalty as proclaimed in the CCC and not the distorted view of the Church’s teachings which says that the death penalty can never be considered moral, then I would agree.

However, we also need to keep in mind what Benedict XVI said - while still cardinal - that we are free to differ from the pope on the matter of the application of the Church’s teachings on capital punishment and the just war doctrine but not when it comes to abortion and euthanasia.

 

[garysibio]

The Catholic church can’t be about vengenance which is exactly what the so-called ‘self defense’ you describe is.

Self-defense says that something immediate is about to happen to you…how do you argue self defense if the defense action happens years later?

People who are murdered could be murdered by someone who’s only prior offense was running a traffic light? Should we execute everyone because we think they might kill somebody someday?

I find it interesting that you say that proponents of the death penalty engage in self-deification when you have no trouble proclaiming what is going on in their hearts, something best left to God who knows our hearts.

Unless the driver was drunk, running a traffic light would be manslaughter, not murder (at least under US law).

 

[frommi]

I find it interesting that you say that proponents of the death penalty engage in self-deification when you have no trouble proclaiming what is going on in their hearts, something best left to God who knows our hearts.

Unless the driver was drunk, running a traffic light would be manslaughter, not murder (at least under US law).

So only those who commit murder should be put to death?

How does that defend everyone’s right to life if an innocent person is run down by someone?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I understand the differences between the abortion issue and the death penalty issue. AFAIAC, abortion is worse. It seems to me that, if you are going to put the amount of effort into opposing the death penalty as some bishops do, they should at least forbid their priests from giving the Eucharist to politicians who vote pro-abortion. I’m not mixing concepts, I’m saying first things first.

There is an old saying about the difference between conservatives and liberals. You’re drowning 100 feet off shore. A conservative throws a 50-foot rope and says, “I’ll meet you half way.”

A liberal throws a 200-foot rope, then lets go of his end and runs off to help someone else.

The bishops have let go of their end of the rope.

 

[frommi]

There is an old saying about the difference between conservatives and liberals. You’re drowning 100 feet off shore. A conservative throws a 50-foot rope and says, “I’ll meet you half way.”

A liberal throws a 200-foot rope, then lets go of his end and runs off to help someone else.

The bishops have let go of their end of the rope.

So you’re dissenting from the teaching of the bishops…I thought dissent wasn’t allowed around here…

 

[vern_humphrey]

So you’re dissenting from the teaching of the bishops…I thought dissent wasn’t allowed around here…

What dissent?

No less an authority than Cardinal Ratzinger has said that it is permissible to differ with the Holy Father on the issues of the Death Penalty and war, but not on abortion.

I would like the bishops to put more effort into ending those those things where we are not allowed to differ.

 

[frommi]

What dissent?

No less an authority than Cardinal Ratzinger has said that it is permissible to differ with the Holy Father on the issues of the Death Penalty and war, but not on abortion.

I would like the bishops to put more effort into ending those those things where we are not allowed to differ.

Just because you say it isn’t dissent doesn’t make it so.

You are clearly diverging from the view of the wider church in this day and age regarding the use of the death penalty.

You aren’t pro-life with that kind of viewpoint. You can’t be.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Just because you say it isn’t dissent doesn’t make it so.

Just because you say it is dissent doesn’t make it so.

You are clearly diverging from the view of the wider church in this day and age regarding the use of the death penalty.

You are clearly diverging from the catechism regarding the death penalty

You aren’t pro-life with that kind of viewpoint. You can’t be.

You deny the right to self defense, which is inherent in the right to life. You aren’t pro-life with that kind of viewpoint. You can’t be.

 

[BillP]

I guess Ill have to post it again:

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."

I oppose the Death Pnatly, you oppose the death penalty, Benedict 16 opposes the death penalty.The Church does not.

Welcome to the “Cafeteria” Bob!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Welcome to the “Cafeteria” Bob!

This is not a cafeteria issue. Cardinal Ratzinger specifically stated that the death penalty is a case where one may form one’s own opinion. That virtually echoes the Catechism – and Ratzinger headed the group that wrote the Catechism.

The Catholic position on the death penalty is quite properly presented as an if-than statement. The Kharisma of Infallibility does not extend to penology – so while we are obliged to minimize the death penalty to only those necessary cases, we are not obliged to believe all cases are unnecessary.

 

[pnewton]

Just because you say it isn’t dissent doesn’t make it so.

You are clearly diverging from the view of the wider church in this day and age regarding the use of the death penalty.

You aren’t pro-life with that kind of viewpoint. You can’t be.

But since the Catechsim says it is possible to have an application of the death penalty, that makes it possible to disagree without dissent.

By the way that is twice that you have labeled those who disagree with you as not being pro-life. I regret that all opinions don’t fit in you cubby-hole of ideas, but one can be pro-life and support the death penalty, unless you are redefining the term in order to insult people.

 

[frommi]

But since the Catechsim says it is possible to have an application of the death penalty, that makes it possible to disagree without dissent.

By the way that is twice that you have labeled those who disagree with you as not being pro-life. I regret that all opinions don’t fit in you cubby-hole of ideas, but one can be pro-life and support the death penalty, unless you are redefining the term in order to insult people.

OK then…those who would be pro-death penalty are practicing a form of partial-pro-life

 

[vern_humphrey]

OK then…those who would be pro-death penalty are practicing a form of partial-pro-life

May I ask you to stop these insults and attempts to attack the motives of those who disagree with you? It’s against the rules, you know.

 

[frommi]

May I ask you to stop these insults and attempts to attack the motives of those who disagree with you? It’s against the rules, you know.

I’m offering an opinion on the general use of the term ‘pro life’ when someone is also ‘pro death penalty’…thats not an attack.