USCCB: Join with Pope Francis, Bishop Dewane and Catholics across the country! Pledge to end the death penalty

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomas_Ruin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don_Ruggero said:
Given how many times the matter has been explained to you, as a simple search of your posting history indicates? No.
Click to expand...
Can you please give a simple response without the insults? That’s not really asking very much. So, here is the question I asked:*Are you saying that what was immoral yesterday may become moral today, or that what is immoral here may be moral somewhere else?
*If we assume this is what you answered by saying “No”, then this would affirm my original assertion that “what is moral today is what was moral before”…except that was what you claimed I was wrong about. So even though you suggest you have answered this question “many times” it also appears you have given contradictory answers. Let me try again:

Does objectively true morality change with time or place or is it irrevocably fixed?

Ender
 
Don_Ruggero said:
Really? You find it irrelevant? How very sad
Click to expand...
Father:

The topic at hand is about the death penalty, not slavery. So far, on this thread, I see Ender has been on point, and has been civil and respectful in his/her responses. This is consistent with his/her behavior on other threads in this forum. Father, if you want to inject slavery into the discussion to make your point, it is fine. But you should explain your rationale and its relevance–rather than resorting to immediate insults and condescensions. Repeatedly, you have been complaining about, and have in fact reported posters to the forum administrator, for, in your eyes, lack of civility and lack respect for the clergy.

Father, with respect, civility and respect go both ways. It would be advisable that you look at yourself in the mirror for some introspection.
 
Sorry no.

If burning at the stake for heretics
Was good enough for the church for
Centuries, cp is good enuf now.
 
Tbrightson said:
Sorry no.

If burning at the stake for heretics
Was good enough for the church for
Centuries, cp is good enuf now.
Click to expand...
Even if I agreed that the Church endorsed burning at the stake for heretics for centuries (which I don’t, I think at the very least that’s very much exaggerated and misrepresented) I would simply reply that two wrongs don’t make a right.

So an argument that goes “But he was worse” even if true is not an argument in favor of what’s being proposed.

So to make the argument, it would have to be why you think the death penalty should be practiced.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country

So according to Wikipedia the US is the only western country that still has the death penalty…it looks like most…if not all Catholic countries have either done away with it…have not used it in years…or have severely restricted its use…of course we could argue that the US isn’t a Catholic country…but neither is England but they done away with it decades ago…so what is the reason there is so much opposition here in the US…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate

The US has the most people incarcerated than any other country…and the new AG has said just the other day he is paving the way for more prosecuting of non violent drug offenders and tougher sentencing…now…having said all this I’m still in two minds about capital punishment…when it comes (mainly) to terrorism…the US was founded by Protestant puritans who went by the OT …an eye for an eye…maybe this thinking is still part of the American psyche
 
josh987654321 said:
Even if I agreed that the Church endorsed burning at the stake for heretics for centuries (which I don’t, I think at the very least that’s very much exaggerated and misrepresented) I would simply reply that two wrongs don’t make a right.

So an argument that goes “But he was worse” even if true is not an argument in favor of what’s being proposed.

So to make the argument, it would have to be why you think the death penalty should be practiced.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
Click to expand...
The church would find someone a heretic and turned that person over to the state for a good torching. Thus the church had no problem with capital punishment. It was moral then and if i am not mistaken the church has the the final say on faith and morals. So if it was ok then its ok now.
 
Peebo said:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country

So according to Wikipedia the US is the only western country that still has the death penalty…it looks like most…if not all Catholic countries have either done away with it…have not used it in years…or have severely restricted its use…of course we could argue that the US isn’t a Catholic country…but neither is England but they done away with it decades ago…so what is the reason there is so much opposition here in the US…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate

The US has the most people incarcerated than any other country…and the new AG has said just the other day he is paving the way for more prosecuting of non violent drug offenders and tougher sentencing…now…having said all this I’m still in two minds about capital punishment…when it comes (mainly) to terrorism…the US was founded by Protestant puritans who went by the OT …an eye for an eye…maybe this thinking is still part of the American psyche
Click to expand...
The church had no problem putting protestants to death.
 
On a practical note, you may want to reconsider signing up if you haven’t done so. I agree with the idea in principle, so I signed up. Since, I have receive all sort of emails asking for money. This may be as much spam as political action.
 
Peebo said:
That’s the sort of intelligent anti Catholic response you’d expect from a 3rd grader…🤷
Click to expand...
Far from a third grader. And very Catholic. Fact is, the Church had no problem with the death penalty and used it quite liberally. If it had no problem with it then, then I have no problem with it now.
 
Pope Pius XII
When it is a question of the execution of a condemned man, the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. In this case it is reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned person of the enjoyment of life in expiation of his crime when,
by his crime,he has already disposed himself of his right to live

Cardinal Ratzinger
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.
 
Tbrightson said:
Fact is, the Church had no problem with the death penalty and used it quite liberally. If it had no problem with it then, then I have no problem with it now.
Click to expand...
That the church not only recognized the validity of capital punishment but employed it herself is historically true. It is also true that, as what is objectively moral does not change with time or place, if its use was moral then it is moral today. Whether its use today is prudentially wise is an entirely different question.

That said, it is important to understand why it was acceptable. The argument is made that capital punishment is only valid when necessary for the protection of society, and that modern penal facilities can safeguard the public without the need for executions. Even if that was true, and as it is a practical judgment it is certainly open to debate, that reason was not historically given as the justification for the death penalty. The primary justification for capital punishment is that it is the just penalty for (at least) the crime of murder.

That is, it is not protection that permits it, but justice that demands it.

Ender
 
Don_Ruggero said:
Thankfully that is not where the Successors of the Apostles, as the College of Bishops, are today as the Church’s Magisterium…nor where they have been for some generations, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

This illustrates quite well, however, how and why there were many good reasons that the Bishops of the Catholic world, gathered in synod, petitioned the Vicar of Christ to grant the Church a new universal catechism, seeing as the Roman Catechism was over 400 years old and was in urgent need of updating…including among many points the morality of employing the death penalty in a contemporary context, well articulated as the confrontation between the Gospel of Life and a culture of death.

The catechism’s expression that touches upon the Church, society and capital punishment – for which the Church has had to beg forgiveness relative to the past – is well placed side by side to the issue of morality and slavery, as it was in the 16th century and expressed in Trent’s catechism.
*The unjust possession and use of what belongs to another are expressed by different names, according to the diversity of the objects taken without the consent and knowledge of the owners. To take any private property from a private individual is called theft; from the public, peculation. **To enslave a freeman, or appropriate the slave of another is called man-stealing *** /…/

It goes without saying that the very institution of slavery is immoral and those who traffic in human beings or are the victims of human trafficking are to be rightly and instantly emancipated from being a hostage.

Or the place of women in society, which was particularly lamentable in the era of Trent.
*…to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband’s consent.

Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience*
Which gives us great reason to thank God for The Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
the passage from the Catechism of Trent isnt talking about Just servitude (in the past called Just Slavery for example being made to work as a punishhment for a crime) but slavery (unjust slavery) right?

Thanks

God Bless
 
Ender said:
The primary justification for capital punishment is that it is the just penalty for (at least) the crime of murder.

That is, it is not protection that permits it, but justice that demands it.

Ender
Click to expand...
I am interested in your use of “at least”. What other crimes do you feel may warrant imposition of the death penalty?
 
ringil said:
I am interested in your use of “at least”. What other crimes do you feel may warrant imposition of the death penalty?
Click to expand...
I try to avoid that conversation; I see it as a distraction. If the point cannot be made that capital punishment is valid for murder then it is obviously invalid for lesser crimes, and the discussion is moot. If it is valid for murder, though, then the point about the morality of the punishment is proved and the discussion is over. An argument about which lesser crimes deserve the death penalty really makes no sense unless and until it is determined that the punishment is ever deserved.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top