Yes.
The statement you refer to was mine, not Joe’s, and the question of capital punishment has nothing to do with the use of violence to resolve difficulties. BXVI’s comment is not applicable here.
No, I don’t think he will as he understands that the responsibility for making that determination lies primarily with the governments of the states involved. That does not mean every state gets to do whatever it wants and call it justifiable but it does mean that prudential decisions get to be made by the people responsible for the consequences of those decisions. If the nature of a war is obvious I would expect the pope to declare it, otherwise Pope Benedict XVI fully understands that the right to define the justness of all wars is not his.
Your paranoia has nothing to do with the death penalty (or lack thereof). Death penalty states have a higher, not lower murder rate. The death penalty does nothing to deter crime. Further it robs the perpetrator of the chance of repentance. You are entitled to your opinion, but I find it fundamentally flawed, and fueled by fear, and not reason.
This argument may be true but by making it you move away from the primary reason to support capital punishment, which is justice. Making your argument is to accept the premise of CCC 2267 that the protection of society is the primary objective, and that simply is not true.
Justice is not the mother of all virtues. To suggest his is not consistent with anything I have ever heard. St. Thomas Aquinas described Charity as the virtue from which all others flow. Justice, or giving someone what they are owed, is impossible to be recognized without charity. Lest you forget, St. Paul, in his First Letter to the Corinthians, described charity as the greatest of the theological virtues. Your emphasis on justice is very reminiscent of the fundamentalist sect I used to belong to. It is a very protestant approach, as you are changing God from a loving Father to a Severe Judge, and Jesus becomes our Lawyer instead of Eldest Brother.
(14) "The impartial and unchangeable justice of God metes out reward for good deeds and punishment for sin. … The law, nevertheless, is clear that for public prosperity it is to the interest of all that virtue - and justice especially, which is the mother of all virtues - should be practiced" (Leo XIII, Exeunte Iam Anno, 1888)
“If we speak of legal justice, it is evident that it stands foremost among all the moral virtues, for as much as the common good transcends the individual good of one person.” (Aquinas ST II/II 58,12)
"Nevertheless the judge puts this into effect, not out of hatred for the sinners, but out of the love of charity, by reason of which he prefers the public good to the life of the individual. Moreover the death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted, unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner* is thus deprived of the power to sin any more.*" (Id. 25)
Now you only have to prove that disregarding the the value of God’s creation is actually just
ok. :d
How can you possibly know this, given that most of what Popes taught and said has not been preserved?
If by this you mean I have to prove that capital punishment is just, that should be simple: the Church has allowed it in the past and does so today, albeit with significant restrictions. Given that the Church allows such a punishment to be applied she must believe the punishment is just.
OK, that’s true so let me rephrase my comment: I have seen no statement from any major Church source prior to JPII implying that the death penalty should not be used. I do, however, have statements from popes Pius XII, Pius X, Leo XIII, Innocent III, and Innocent I, from the Catechism of Pius X, the Baltimore Catechism, and the Catechism of Trent, as well as from Aquinas and Augustine (the two most notable theologians the Church has ever produced) recognizing the propriety of the death penalty. As I have said before, I’m not giving you my personal opinion; I am quoting the positions expressed by the Church.
Thanks.
We first must agree that the application of the death penalty is not intrinsically evil. I have never said otherwise. What you seem to be missing is the fact that life without parole sufficiently redresses the crime. The prisoner is separated from society (which serves the purpose of protecting society). The prisoner has along time to reflect on his evil (which serves to allow for true repentance). The prisoner no longer has control over his own destiny, not even being able to control what he eats; for all intents and purposes, he becomes property of the state (which is a severe punishment; if it were not, it would not be reserved for the most severe of crimes). Why do you fail to see this. I will concede that the death penalty is actually needed in some (very rare) cases. Can you not concede that in most cases, the death penalty is inappropriate? Before you counter with Genesis 9:6, as you are wont to do, a problem must be identified with your interpretation of that verse. If you take it absolutely literally as you do, the death penalty must be enforced on every single person who takes the life of another. This would include crimes of passion, manslaughter, traffic accidents and so on. Your interpretation demands out courts become slaughterhouses.
I don’t know how you can say that you accept all of the comments when what JPII said is so at odds with what everyone else said. I can square all of these statements only by accepting that JPII’s were his prudential opinion and have not changed the teaching of the Church. You say that you accept them all but your position is that JPII’s comments rule.
The position laid out in 2267 does not accord with the position consistently taught by the Church for 2000 years. Naturally I believe the Church has been right for 2000 years and is right today; I do not, however, believe that JPII’s comments were helpful, but since they represent only his opinion it does not change the traditional teaching of the Church.
Except the Bible doesn’t teach that. It says “thou shalt not murder.” Killing in self defense does not go against the commandment.
First of all, I’ll thank you not to cast aspersions on me nor read into my remarks that which is not there.
I neglected to mention simple justice in my previous post, and it is important. Grave crimes deserve grave punishment, whether or not the individual criminal repents.
I realize you have never made such a claim. I will point out, however, that if capital punishment was never just it would be intrinsically evil, but because it is not it must be a just punishment for some crimes.
This is a claim you make without any supporting evidence. What Church source can you cite that supports your contention? I disagree with you on this point precisely because of what the Church has said, especially as laid out by the Council of Trent.
Your first statement isn’t specific enough for me to comment on, but I haven’t given you my interpretation of that verse; I have simply cited those places where the Church references that verse.
This is a caricature of what I believe. Genesis, as the Church understands it, applies only to murder. Beyond that there are mitigating circumstances to be considered as well as mercy, appropriately applied.