When or is the death penalty alright?

[CWBetts]

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.

Who is to say when it is not. You grant too much to the state. What if the state declares Catholicism a capital crime (like it was in England). The lawful authorities would have made it so. It is not up to the sate who lives and dies.

 

[fish90]

Christians are bound to obey lawful authority unless they are forcing Christians to be immoral. This is why those martyrs back from the Roman times have become Saints.

 

[CWBetts]

Christians are bound to obey lawful authority unless they are forcing Christians to be immoral. This is why those martyrs back from the Roman times have become Saints.

I would say that you have a disordered attraction to your own ideas of justice.

 

[Shin]

Who is to say when it is not. You grant too much to the state. What if the state declares Catholicism a capital crime (like it was in England). The lawful authorities would have made it so. It is not up to the sate who lives and dies.

The Church does not give the state carte blanche, but the Church does not take away and cannot in fact, take away what God has given it.

The Temporal sphere has its own God given powers.

Romans 13:

1 Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God.
2
Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves.
3
For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it,
4
for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
5
Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience.

---

Please note that at the time St. Paul is writing, he is under the power of PAGAN Rome, notorious in her emperors, nevertheless he says this. That the state is the servant of God, established by God’s providence.

In fact, the timing is that he was writing it… under Emperor NERO.

 

[centurionguard]

Christians are bound to obey lawful authority unless they are forcing Christians to be immoral. This is why those martyrs back from the Roman times have become Saints.

Interesting point. Obviously abortion is just one of many immoral federal laws enacted by many countries around the world. I wonder how many other immoral laws enacted by hypocrite governments who say they embrace Christian\Jewish moral values and turn around and do the opposite. I do not support the Death Penalty. Does that incur sin upon me because some others in this thread say that the Catholic Church supports it?

What a bloody irony. Something morally is not right in the support of putting a human life do death as a moral right on behalf of primitive human justice.

Life & Death belongs to God alone, not ANY Church, not ANY Society.

 

[Shin]

Life & Death belongs to God alone, not ANY Church, not ANY Society.

God delegates.

I can see you have some fundamental and foundational approaches on how you understand how the Church works, to work on. I pray you consider this possibility.

 

[CWBetts]

The Church does not give the state carte blanche, but the Church does not take away and cannot in fact, take away what God has given it.

The Temporal sphere has its own God given powers.

Romans 13:

1 Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God.
2
Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves.
3
For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it,
4
for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
5
Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience.

---

Please note that at the time St. Paul is writing, he is under the power of PAGAN Rome, notorious in her emperors, nevertheless he says this. That the state is the servant of God, established by God’s providence.

In fact, the timing is that he was writing it… under Emperor NERO.

This is not to say that the state can do as it wishes. I am not saying that we are to take up arms against the state. I am saying that as a good citizen, I am OBLIGATED to point out when the state is not right. We are not to accept those things that are wrong if we have the means to change them. To follow your logic, the Pro-Life movement should pack up and go home. The state has absolute authority to do as it wishes. Your attitudes come dangerously close to worshiping the state, and not He who created the state to begin with. If the state perpetrates a moral wrong (such as the death penalty when other options exist) we are bound to raise our voices in dissent. Its called faithful citizenship.

 

[4elise]

Interesting point. Obviously abortion is just one of many immoral federal laws enacted by many countries around the world. I wonder how many other immoral laws enacted by hypocrite governments who say they embrace Christian\Jewish moral values and turn around and do the opposite. I do not support the Death Penalty. Does that incur sin upon me because some others in this thread say that the Catholic Church supports it?

What a bloody irony. Something morally is not right in the support of putting a human life do death as a moral right on behalf of primitive human justice.

Life & Death belongs to God alone, not ANY Church, not ANY Society.

 

[4elise]

This is not to say that the state can do as it wishes. I am not saying that we are to take up arms against the state. I am saying that as a good citizen, I am OBLIGATED to point out when the state is not right. We are not to accept those things that are wrong if we have the means to change them. To follow your logic, the Pro-Life movement should pack up and go home. The state has absolute authority to do as it wishes. Your attitudes come dangerously close to worshiping the state, and not He who created the state to begin with. If the state perpetrates a moral wrong (such as the death penalty when other options exist) we are bound to raise our voices in dissent. Its called faithful citizenship.

And again

 

[d97c]

And again

You cannot find anywhere in Catholic teaching that says that the death penalty is “immoral.” Certainly the Catechism doesnt say that:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

and in fact Pope Benedict says that Catholics can urge the death penalty. He couldnt do that if it were “immoral.” YOU may think its “immoral,” but you need to know that YOU only say that.

1. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, 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…

No where is the Pope saying that the death penalty is “immoral.”

 

[fish90]

I would say that you have a disordered attraction to your own ideas of justice.

What’s wrong with that post now?

I just repeated basic teaching on the duty of a Catholic to the state.

 

[4elise]

You cannot find anywhere in Catholic teaching that says that the death penalty is “immoral.” Certainly the Catechism doesnt say that:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

and in fact Pope Benedict says that Catholics can urge the death penalty. He couldnt do that if it were “immoral.” YOU may think its “immoral,” but you need to know that YOU only say that.

1. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, 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…

No where is the Pope saying that the death penalty is “immoral.”

Originally Posted by CWBetts — if the state perpetrates a moral wrong (such as the death penalty when other options exist) we are bound to raise our voices in dissent. Its called faithful citizenship.

(bold my emphasis)

 

[CWBetts]

What’s wrong with that post now?

I just repeated basic teaching on the duty of a Catholic to the state.

You implied that if the state is continuing in a moral wrong we should simply obey and remain silent, if we are not directly involved in the wrong. That may not be a sin per se, but it surely does not exemplify the virtue of fortitude very well.

 

[d97c]

Its unfortunate that you fail to see the difference between what is a Catholic teaching that one may not disagree with, (like abortion) and something about which Catholics may disagree. Its called “prudential judgment.” It is a prudential judgment to agree or disagree with whether to accept the limits put on that the death penalty that it can be used only “when other options exist.” Read Pope Benedict and what he says about whether a Catholic can disagree with, lets say, YOUR limitations, or whether he can urge the traditional theory of capitol punishment, which has NO “other means” qualifications. Now, read it, because you really are off base here. Read papagraph 3…OK?

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

:banghead:

 

[centurionguard]

God delegates.

I can see you have some fundamental and foundational approaches on how you understand how the Church works, to work on. I pray you consider this possibility.

I would say that your personal offering of advice should be shared by both of us equally.

What the Church has to say in any appreciable support of the Death Penalty is by no means infallible nor is it a binding Dogma. Catholics of good conscious a free to speak against the Death Penalty without incurring betrayal of the Church even though it does support it in extreme instances.

 

[CWBetts]

Its unfortunate that you fail to see the difference between what is a Catholic teaching that one may not disagree with, (like abortion) and something about which Catholics may disagree. Its called “prudential judgment.” It is a prudential judgment to agree or disagree with whether to accept the limits put on that the death penalty that it can be used only “when other options exist.” Read Pope Benedict and what he says about whether a Catholic can disagree with, lets say, YOUR limitations, or whether he can urge the traditional theory of capitol punishment, which has NO “other means” qualifications. Now, read it, because you really are off base here. Read papagraph 3…OK?

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

:banghead:

I am familiar is often used by the bloodthirsty to make excuse for the dehumanization of prisoners.

 

[Shin]

I would say that your personal offering of advice should be shared by both of us equally.

What the Church has to say in any appreciable support of the Death Penalty is by no means infallible nor is it a binding Dogma. Catholics of good conscious a free to speak against the Death Penalty without incurring betrayal of the Church even though it does support it in extreme instances.

You can speak out against it, in the sense that you do not think it should be done because of certain circumstances, such as the times, etc. but in and of itself you cannot say it is always, everywhere immoral.

That would in fact be speaking against something of dogmatic weight, because it has always, everywhere been taught by Popes and the Church that it is moral and just for the state to at times sentence people to death.

 

[CWBetts]

You can speak out against it, in the sense that you do not think it should be done because of certain circumstances, such as the times, etc. but in and of itself you cannot say it is always, everywhere immoral.

That would in fact be speaking against something of dogmatic weight, because it has always, everywhere been taught by Popes and the Church that it is moral and just for the state to at times sentence people to death.

I guess when Jesus said “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy,” He was just joking then. He really didn’t mean that part.

 

[fish90]

You implied that if the state is continuing in a moral wrong we should simply obey and remain silent, if we are not directly involved in the wrong. That may not be a sin per se, but it surely does not exemplify the virtue of fortitude very well.

I do not mean to imply anything of the sort.

I wrote:
Christians are bound to obey lawful authority unless they are forcing Christians to be immoral. This is why those martyrs back from the Roman times have become Saints.

I have to obey the tax code, however I have the permission to break immoral laws such as being forced to not go to Church without sinning in any way.

Martyrs died for their beliefs and their beliefs were against the state law in some instances. How can these martyrs have become Saints by sinning by disobeying the state law?

You find that capital punishment should be abolished and you have every right to believe that, yet I am in the same position with regard to my position on capital punishment.

Here is a link regarding positions on capital punishment from Catholic.com.
catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040302.asp

 

[diggerdomer]

No no … that’s not accurate. I do not disagree with Catholic teaching; I disagree with JPII’s prudential opinion, which is what 2267 is. Yes, I disagree with 2267 but it is 2267 that is not in accord with what the Church teaches, not me.

Ender

So at least some of the universal Catechism, promulgated authoritatively by Pope John Paul II, is not in accord with what the Catholic Church teaches?

You are right, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is wrong? Just want to make sure I’m clear on that. Thanks.