When or is the death penalty alright?

[fish90]

Please explain.

I find that Ender understands that capital punishment is a morally acceptable practice. When the Church declares that something is morally acceptable, that something forms what is part of the natural law just like abortion, contraception and euthanasia are always immoral.

I cannot find any reason that would change the Church’s teaching that capital punishment is morally acceptable so long as the guilt is proved, the crime is grave, and the state decides whether capital punishment is a practical punishment.

I cannot as a Catholic accept that capital punishment is immoral and should be abolished, since the Church has accepted its morality.

As always, if I am wrong, please correct me.

 

[Shin]

The U.S. Catechism was revised and corrected recently, because of a grave error.

Perhaps this one will be updated too.

It is what it is now, that is true.

But we cannot take the weight of the past and one catechism and not have to think a bit on the various factors involved in the two.

 

[CWBetts]

Please explain.

I find that Ender understands that capital punishment is a morally acceptable practice. When the Church declares that something is morally acceptable, that something forms what is part of the natural law just like abortion, contraception and euthanasia are always immoral.

I cannot find any reason that would change the Church’s teaching that capital punishment is morally acceptable so long as the guilt is proved, the crime is grave, and the state decides whether capital punishment is a practical punishment.

I cannot as a Catholic accept that capital punishment is immoral and should be abolished, since the Church has accepted its morality.

As always, if I am wrong, please correct me.

It is quite simple. There are certain facts that must be established:

1. God is Pure Being, and as such is the Good.
2. All of creation is good, even in its fallen nature
3. If all of creation is good, even in its fallen nature, then that meant the most evil of humanity is good by the virtue of the fact that human beings were created by God
4. It is objectively immoral to destroy that which is good, therefore, it is immoral to take another human beings life, as per the 5th commandment. To say otherwise is to deny the humanity of the victim of capital punishment.

 

[Shin]

It is quite simple. There are certain facts that must be established:

1. God is Pure Being, and as such is the Good.
2. All of creation is good, even in its fallen nature
3. If all of creation is good, even in its fallen nature, then that meant the most evil of humanity is good by the virtue of the fact that human beings were created by God
4. It is objectively immoral to destroy that which is good, therefore, it is immoral to take another human beings life, as per the 5th commandment. To say otherwise is to deny the humanity of the victim of capital punishment.

Actually, that’s false logic that the Commandment disagrees with. Moses certainly disagrees with your interpretation – He did not follow it. Neither did the Popes… Neither does God, who sentences all human beings to die someday.

And actually, St. Thomas More, martyr… Was prosecutor, and sentenced several heretics to death.

And so we see the problem rearing its ugly head again, of people claiming that the death penalty is always immoral and judging the consciences and morality of others and the Church in that regard.

And Peter said to her: Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? And she said: Yea, for so much. And Peter said unto her: Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out. Immediately she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost.

Acts 5:8-10

 

[CWBetts]

Actually, that’s false logic that the Commandment disagrees with. Moses certainly disagrees with your interpretation – He did not follow it. Neither did the Popes… Neither does God, who sentences all human beings to die someday.

And actually, St. Thomas More, martyr… Was prosecutor, and sentenced several heretics to death.

And so we see the problem rearing its ugly head again, of people claiming that the death penalty is always immoral and judging the consciences and morality of others and the Church in that regard.

And Peter said to her: Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? And she said: Yea, for so much. And Peter said unto her: Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out. Immediately she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost.

Acts 5:8-10

Which of my statements is wrong. To kill is an objective evil, as it denies the humanity of the victim. The Catechism is clear. The death penalty should only happen in the gravest circumstances to protect society. I do not have time at present to explain the seeming harshness of the Mosaic covenant as presented in the Pentateuch (that is the collective name given to the first five books of the Old Testament). The death penalty is implicitly condemned in the Scriptures. Open your Bible and read it…it will be quite enlightening for you.

 

[Shin]

Which of my statements is wrong. To kill is an objective evil, as it denies the humanity of the victim. The Catechism is clear. The death penalty should only happen in the gravest circumstances to protect society. I do not have time at present to explain the seeming harshness of the Mosaic covenant as presented in the Pentateuch (that is the collective name given to the first five books of the Old Testament). The death penalty is implicitly condemned in the Scriptures. Open your Bible and read it…it will be quite enlightening for you.

I’ve read it… I just quoted it… did you miss it?

You illogically confuse natural ‘evils’ with moral ‘evils’, among other illogical leaps.

'It is true that highwaymen, grave-robbers, and sorcerers have their sides torn to pieces; it is also true that the martyrs undergo this same suffering. What is done is the same, but the purpose and reason why it is done is different. And so it is that there is a great difference between the criminals and martyrs.

In these cases we not only consider the torture but we first look for the intention and the reasons why the torture is inflicted. And this is why we love the martyrs - not because they are tortured but because they are tortured for the sake of Christ. But we turn our backs on the robbers - not because they are being punished but because they are being punished for their wickedness.

So, too, in the matter of fasting, you must pass a judgment. If you see people fasting for the sake of God, approve what they do; if you see that they do this against God’s will, turn your back on them and hate them more than you do those who drink, revel, and carouse. And in the case of this fasting we must inquire not only into the reason for fasting but we must consider also the place and the time.’

St. John Chrysostom, Bishop, Father, & Doctor of the Church

 

[fish90]

Which of my statements is wrong. To kill is an objective evil, as it denies the humanity of the victim. The Catechism is clear. The death penalty should only happen in the gravest circumstances to protect society. I do not have time at present to explain the seeming harshness of the Mosaic covenant as presented in the Pentateuch (that is the collective name given to the first five books of the Old Testament). The death penalty is implicitly condemned in the Scriptures. Open your Bible and read it…it will be quite enlightening for you.

Fellow poster, look at what you wrote and understand the philosophy behind it. Why would the Catechism ever endorse an evil act?

Killing is morally justifiable for three reasons (that I know of).
1.) in a Just War
2.) to protect your own life or others (self defense)
3.) capital punishment

Capital punishment is morally acceptable because it is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church as saying so. There is good that comes from it, justice for the gravity of taking a life, and the reality of the last chance to repent is another. Capital punishment highlights the dignity of humanity for some and forces those unwilling to repent to have the chance to do so.

As always, correct me if I am wrong.

 

[CWBetts]

I’ve read it… I just quoted it… did you miss it?

You illogically confuse natural ‘evils’ with moral ‘evils’, among other illogical leaps.

'It is true that highwaymen, grave-robbers, and sorcerers have their sides torn to pieces; it is also true that the martyrs undergo this same suffering. What is done is the same, but the purpose and reason why it is done is different. And so it is that there is a great difference between the criminals and martyrs.

In these cases we not only consider the torture but we first look for the intention and the reasons why the torture is inflicted. And this is why we love the martyrs - not because they are tortured but because they are tortured for the sake of Christ. But we turn our backs on the robbers - not because they are being punished but because they are being punished for their wickedness.

So, too, in the matter of fasting, you must pass a judgment. If you see people fasting for the sake of God, approve what they do; if you see that they do this against God’s will, turn your back on them and hate them more than you do those who drink, revel, and carouse. And in the case of this fasting we must inquire not only into the reason for fasting but we must consider also the place and the time.’

St. John Chrysostom, Bishop, Father, & Doctor of the Church

By this, you must then also think that all felons should be executed…after all your pet saint supports it. Specifically refute my statements point by point. Cease with your selective quoting one saint and ignoring the body of teaching on the whole. By your bloodthirsty insistence on the death penalty, you ignore multiple passages in both Old and New Testaments, and edit the Catechism to make it your Catechism. What else do you ignore because you disagree with the Church?

 

[Shin]

By this, you must then also think that all felons should be executed…after all your pet saint supports it. Specifically refute my statements point by point. Cease with your selective quoting one saint and ignoring the body of teaching on the whole. By your bloodthirsty insistence on the death penalty, you ignore multiple passages in both Old and New Testaments, and edit the Catechism to make it your Catechism. What else do you ignore because you disagree with the Church?

Uhh… I have no reply to this complete flip of reality but to say… read the Catechism again… it does NOT say what even you think it says.

You seem to have the religion of anti-deathpenaltyism rather than Catholicism.

LOL.

 

[CWBetts]

Uhh… I have no reply to this complete flip of reality but to say… read the Catechism again… it does NOT say what even you think it says.

You seem to have the religion of anti-deathpenaltyism rather than Catholicism.

LOL.

The Catechism says that the death penalty is an option of last resort, ans is rarely if ever needed in modern industrialized nations. That is pretty close to word for word. There is no need for execution in the United States. Simply put, no one has the right to destroy God’s creation, as God prefers repentance to destruction of the wicked.

 

[Ender]

The Catechism says that the death penalty is an option of last resort, ans is rarely if ever needed in modern industrialized nations. That is pretty close to word for word. There is no need for execution in the United States. Simply put, no one has the right to destroy God’s creation, as God prefers repentance to destruction of the wicked.

I can understand someone arguing against all killing based on his personal interpretation of Scripture but it is incomprehensible that someone could argue that this is what the Catholic Church teaches.

To kill is an objective evil

The Church does not now nor has she ever taught this. If all killing was objectively (intrinsically) evil then there could be no exceptions, but we know the Church teaches that exceptions exist, therefore killing cannot be intrinsically evil.

Given that Vatican City allowed the death penalty for the murder of a pope for most of the 20th century until 1969 it is not possible to argue that the Church sees all killing - or even capital punishment - as intrinsically evil.

Ender

 

[CWBetts]

I can understand someone arguing against all killing based on his personal interpretation of Scripture but it is incomprehensible that someone could argue that this is what the Catholic Church teaches.
The Church does not now nor has she ever taught this. If all killing was objectively (intrinsically) evil then there could be no exceptions, but we know the Church teaches that exceptions exist, therefore killing cannot be intrinsically evil.

Given that Vatican City allowed the death penalty for the murder of a pope for most of the 20th century until 1969 it is not possible to argue that the Church sees all killing - or even capital punishment - as intrinsically evil.

Ender

Read the Catechism. Just because you don’t like the teaching does not mean you can ignore it. The Church teaches that the death penalty is unnecessary in industrialized nations, so therefore submit to the teachings of the Church. If you disagree with the Church it is your responsibility as a faithful Catholic to confrom with the teaching, not make claims that the Church is wrong. If you are going to do that, then you might as well be a Protestant.

 

[fish90]

The Catechism says that the death penalty is an option of last resort, ans is rarely if ever needed in modern industrialized nations. That is pretty close to word for word. There is no need for execution in the United States. Simply put, no one has the right to destroy God’s creation, as God prefers repentance to destruction of the wicked.

That is true, however when the Church says something is acceptable at one point in history with regard to morality, then it is acceptable throughout history. Killing is not an intrinsic evil, yet murder is.

Once again, the valid reasons for killing are:
1.) Self-defense of oneself or the protection of others
2.) Just War
3.) Capital Punishment

The belief that all are good is perfectly correct. Every person in the world has the graces to become a Saint with one’s choice of free will and the help of God, yet humans demand justice.

Good can come out of the death penalty.
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17927

Please remember compassion without justice is stupid.

Capital Punishment is acceptable under these main reasons:
1.) Guilt is confirmed
2.) Crime is grave
3.) Lawful authority deems it necessary.

Would you agree that the prison system is in need of large reform with the return rate of previous criminals to be so high? The U.S. has a failing prison system in terms of reforming individuals and needs to be fixed.

 

[CWBetts]

That is true, however when the Church says something is acceptable at one point in history with regard to morality, then it is acceptable throughout history. Killing is not an intrinsic evil, yet murder is.

Once again, the valid reasons for killing are:
1.) Self-defense of oneself or the protection of others
2.) Just War
3.) Capital Punishment

The belief that all are good is perfectly correct. Every person in the world has the graces to become a Saint with one’s choice of free will and the help of God, yet humans demand justice.

Good can come out of the death penalty.
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17927

Please remember compassion without justice is stupid.

Capital Punishment is acceptable under these main reasons:
1.) Guilt is confirmed
2.) Crime is grave
3.) Lawful authority deems it necessary.

Would you agree that the prison system is in need of large reform with the return rate of previous criminals to be so high? The U.S. has a failing prison system in terms of reforming individuals and needs to be fixed.

All I will concede is your refusal to accept the teachings of the Church. Capital punishment os not needed in the United States.

 

[Ender]

All I will concede is your refusal to accept the teachings of the Church. Capital punishment os not needed in the United States.

We do not reject the teaching of the Church because 2267 is the prudential opinion of JPII; it is not doctrine.Otherwise I doubt that Cardinal Ratzinger would have said:* “There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty”*.

And if any more proof was needed to answer the question of the morality of capital punishment there is this from Archbishop Chaput in 2005:

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil. Both Scripture and long Christian tradition acknowledge the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The Church cannot repudiate that without repudiating her own identity.

The right to life of the convicted murderer must be balanced against society’s right to justice and security.

I argue for its use based on the obligation of justice.

Ender

 

[CWBetts]

We do not reject the teaching of the Church because 2267 is the prudential opinion of JPII; it is not doctrine.Otherwise I doubt that Cardinal Ratzinger would have said:* “There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty”*.

And if any more proof was needed to answer the question of the morality of capital punishment there is this from Archbishop Chaput in 2005:

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil. Both Scripture and long Christian tradition acknowledge the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The Church cannot repudiate that without repudiating her own identity.

The right to life of the convicted murderer must be balanced against society’s right to justice and security.

I argue for its use based on the obligation of justice.

Ender

I argue against its used based on the virtue of Charity

 

[centurionguard]

We do not reject the teaching of the Church because 2267 is the prudential opinion of JPII; it is not doctrine.Otherwise I doubt that Cardinal Ratzinger would have said:* “There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty”*.

And if any more proof was needed to answer the question of the morality of capital punishment there is this from Archbishop Chaput in 2005:

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil. Both Scripture and long Christian tradition acknowledge the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The Church cannot repudiate that without repudiating her own identity.

The right to life of the convicted murderer must be balanced against society’s right to justice and security.

I argue for its use based on the obligation of justice.

Ender

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil.

By who’s opinion would YOU base such a statement?
You make it (“seem”) by your supportive argument using non-dogmatic quotes that such a moral cause where the rule of an (“Eye For An Eye”) is still intrinsically an acceptable means of justice in a primitive society that still hasn’t grown out of it’s petty selfish infancy and pride. How can anyone say unequivocally that the Death Penalty is duly supported by God? The death penalty is mans law of dealing with justice, not God’s Justice.

 

[4elise]

I argue against its used based on the virtue of Charity

Well said. :clapping:

 

[Shin]

By who’s opinion would YOU base such a statement?
You make it (“seem”) by your supportive argument using non-dogmatic quotes that such a moral cause where the rule of an (“Eye For An Eye”) is still intrinsically an acceptable means of justice in a primitive society that still hasn’t grown out of it’s petty selfish infancy and pride. How can anyone say unequivocally that the Death Penalty is duly supported by God? The death penalty is mans law of dealing with justice, not God’s Justice.

Because He has decreed the death penalty so many times in scripture I cannot count, and this through man, as God’s ministers?

And that Catholic theology describes the authorities of the state who enact it, as ministers of God?

There is no mercy without justice… if you do away with all justice and make all ‘mercy’ that is no mercy or charity at all.

Charity is love of God.

Sometimes it is good to have mercy and suspend a death penalty, sometimes it is not.

 

[fish90]

All I will concede is your refusal to accept the teachings of the Church. Capital punishment os not needed in the United States.

I completely understand your opinion on this matter and I should be more merciful however the death penalty is morally acceptable because the Church has said it is. Please notice that I am in no danger of excommunication nor am sinning with my conditional support of the death penalty. Please read: catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040302.asp.

I do appreciate your concern on this matter.

Have a great weekend.