You Shall NOT Kill!

[Ender]

I can’t remember if the prophet was Isaiah, Jeremiah or Ezekiel, but it goes, “Say unto them, ‘Thus says the Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, rather that he would repent and turn from his wicked way, and live.’”

*God does not delight in punishments for their own sake; but He does delight in the order of His justice, which requires them. *(Aquinas ST I/II 87, 3 ad 3)

Ender

 

[donsnow]

God does not delight in punishments for their own sake; but He does delight in the order of His justice, which requires them. (Aquinas ST I/II 87, 3 ad 3)

Ender

Thanks, Ender -

For bringing up that second point.

 

[CWBetts]

Taking a life is not intrinsically evil but murder is and it is murder alone that is specifically condemned by God and for which he has specified the punishment. As to the penalties for other crimes, that is for the State to decide. There can hardly be an inconsistency in the State determining the penalties in areas where the Church has been silent but if you think the State is being inconsistent that is something to take up with your elected representatives. The application of the death penalty may in fact need reforming but the discussion here is about the morality of the death penalty itself, not whether a specific society applies it appropriately.

Ender

OK, morally speaking, how can a form of punishment that is racist in its application be acceptable? To deny the racist application of the death penalty in the United States is nothing short of refusal to accept facts.

 

[Ender]

OK, morally speaking, how can a form of punishment that is racist in its application be acceptable? To deny the racist application of the death penalty in the United States is nothing short of refusal to accept facts.

I do deny that it is racist, but for the purposes of this discussion that “fact” is irrelevant. The issue here is what the Church teaches about capital punishment, not about how the US applies it. If you want to concede the argument about what the Church teaches we can move on to the point you raised but having that discussion now would simply sidetrack the debate about Church doctrine.

Ender

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

OK, morally speaking, how can a form of punishment that is racist in its application be acceptable? To deny the racist application of the death penalty in the United States is nothing short of refusal to accept facts.

I do deny that it is racist, but for the purposes of this discussion that “fact” is irrelevant. The issue here is what the Church teaches about capital punishment, not about how the US applies it. If you want to concede the argument about what the Church teaches we can move on to the point you raised but having that discussion now would simply sidetrack the debate about Church doctrine.

Ender

Its just yet another strawman.

 

[simple_soul]

Some peoples, in democracies, get to govern themselves; others have the laws forced on them. In both cases the laws are created by human beings. I’m not sure where you’re going with this; what point are you trying to make?

For, since the force of law consists in the imposing of obligations and the granting of rights, authority is the one and only foundation of all law - the power, that is, of fixing duties and defining rights, as also of assigning the necessary sanctions of reward and chastisement to each and all of its commands. (Leo XIII)

Ender

Dear Ender,

I am not sure that I am even trying to make a point. I am just trying to understand these thoughts that go through my head and make me stop and think for a minute.

Since we both “seem” to understand that State Laws are man made. Either by dictatorship or democracy. Would it stand to reason that when mankind’s conscience starts to grasp how great God’s unconditional love and endless Mercy is. A love and Mercy which knows no bounds. Would not mankind naturally want to share and emulate this Great Love for all mankind by writing it’s laws to reflect and live by to the best of it’s ability?

 

[chaunceygardner]

Dear Ender,

I am not sure that I am even trying to make a point. I am just trying to understand these thoughts that go through my head and make me stop and think for a minute.

Since we both “seem” to understand that State Laws are man made. Either by dictatorship or democracy. Would it stand to reason that when mankind’s conscience starts to grasp how great God’s unconditional love and endless Mercy is. A love and Mercy which knows no bounds. Would not mankind naturally want to share and emulate this Great Love for all mankind by writing it’s laws to reflect and live by to the best of it’s ability?

I know this question was directed to Ender, but I can’t resist. The obvious response is: “yes, it does”, and amazingly, yes, mankind is writing laws and changing laws to reflect a higher, more mature and more developed Christian and human rights ethic. The one big exception in the civilized world is the U.S.A.

The discussion seems to have descended to one focused on capital punishment, rather than the overall application of the 5th Commandment and the teaching of Jesus. The OP question was about us as individuals, not about societies or countries. However, the laws and behaviors of a society or a country certainly reflect the eithics and morals of its members.

And the world is moving toward the abolition of the death penalty. Here is what Amnesty International said in their report for 2008:

Europe and Central Asia is now virtually a death penalty free zone following the abolition of the death penalty in Uzbekistan for all crimes. There is just one country left – Belarus – that still carries out executions.

In the Americas, **only one state – the United States of America **(USA) - consistently executes. However, even the USA moved away from the death penalty in 2008. This year, the smallest number of executions since 1995 was reported in the USA.

What this means is that the U.S. is the only advanced, mostly Christian country that allows the death penalty or still executes people. Not the U.K., not France, not Germany, not Spain, not the Nordic countries. In North and South America, only one execution was carried out in any country besides the U.S. in 2008.

To look at it another way, here are some of the countries we keep company with, none of which are stellar examples of the application of the Christian Gospel: China, Laos, Vietnam, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Algeria, Oman, Somalia.

Many countries banned the death penalty 30, 40, 50 years ago, and a few over 100 years ago. Of course, some countries still have capital punishment on their books, but don’t use it, according to Amnesty International:

The majority of countries now refrain from using the death penalty. Furthermore, in 2008 Amnesty International recorded only 25 out of 59 countries that retain the death penalty actually carried out executions. The practice of states indicates that there is increasing consolidation of majority international consensus that the death penalty cannot be reconciled with respect for human rights.

“Respect for human rights”, gaining growing acceptance around the world, equates with the Christian teaching that all human life is precious. And the U.S. is the only country that claims to hold a Christian based ethic and claims to respect human rights that still executes people.

Oh yes, one other “country” should be mentioned. The Vatican, a recognized political state, banned capital punishment 40 years ago. I think the Vatican, as Catholic a state as can exist, is setting an example and standard that is consistent with the Church’s teaching, and one that we would all be wise to follow (or more accurately, try to catch up with).

 

[simple_soul]

No worries Chauncey,

Any help in understanding these thoughts is most appreciated.

 

[Ender]

Since we both “seem” to understand that State Laws are man made. Either by dictatorship or democracy. Would it stand to reason that when mankind’s conscience starts to grasp how great God’s unconditional love and endless Mercy is. A love and Mercy which knows no bounds. Would not mankind naturally want to share and emulate this Great Love for all mankind by writing it’s laws to reflect and live by to the best of it’s ability?

This would suggest that the Church misunderstood Christ’s teaching on capital punishment - as well as God’s unconditional love and endless mercy - until 40 years ago. Are you really prepared to accept that? Morality does not change with place and time. If capital punishment is wrong now then it has been wrong for the entire 1969 years prior to its abolition by the Vatican that year.

More to the point, however, I think your suggestion lacks an understanding of the nature of punishment. I’m sure you recognize the necessity that the guilty be punished. What we disagree on is whether or not that punishment should extend to execution. I have said before that, in large measure because of the focus of 2267 on protection, we have lost sight of the primary purpose of punishment and we have completely lost sight of the concept of expiation.

*“A penalty is the reaction required by law and justice in response to a fault: penalty and fault are action and reaction. Order violated by a culpable act demands the reintegration and re-establishment of the disturbed equilibrium . . . . A word must be said on the full meaning of penalty. Most of the modern theories of penal law explain penalty and justify it in the final analysis as a means of protection, that is, defense of the community against criminal undertakings, and at the same time an attempt to bring the offender to observance of the law. In those theories, the penalty can include sanctions such as the diminution of some goods guaranteed by law, so as to teach the guilty to live honestly, but those theories fail to consider the expiation of the crime committed, which penalizes the violation of the law as the prime function of penalty" *(Pius XII)

It is a mistake to assume that vicious acts deserve compassionate lenience rather than severe punishment; that is not a Catholic belief. Yes, we are to forgive, yes, we are to punish with a spirit of compassion, but we cannot overlook that the sinner has incurred a debt that can only be paid by a punishment commensurate with the severity of his crime. And the laws of a just society should recognize that fact.

Ender

 

[simple_soul]

Dear Ender,

These thoughts that I am trying to understand I only have the littlest grasp of so I do not know that I can adequetly address your points here but I will try to do my best and pray that the Holy Spirit will help us to come to a deeper overall undertanding of the Church’s teachings.

To address your first point:

This would suggest that the Church misunderstood Christ’s teaching on capital punishment - as well as God’s unconditional love and endless mercy - until 40 years ago. Are you really prepared to accept that? Morality does not change with place and time. If capital punishment is wrong now then it has been wrong for the entire 1969 years prior to its abolition by the Vatican that year

I do not believe it sudgets anything of the sort.
For starters it has been my understanding that th Church has always taught it to be a “Grave Duty/Responcibility.” Why?
The next reason is how does believing in the following quotes from the Evangelium vitea Ioannes Paulus PP

 

[simple_soul]

Dear Ender,

These thoughts that make me stop and think are thoughts that I can barely grasp.
I do not know that I can adequately address your points here but I will do my best.

To address your first point:

This would suggest that the Church misunderstood Christ’s teaching on capital punishment - as well as God’s unconditional love and endless mercy - until 40 years ago. Are you really prepared to accept that? Morality does not change with place and time. If capital punishment is wrong now then it has been wrong for the entire 1969 years prior to its abolition by the Vatican that year.

I do not believe it suggests anything of the sort.
For starters it has been my understanding that the Church has always taught it to be a “Grave Duty/Responsibility.” Why?
And how does believing this from the Evagelium vitae Ioannes Paulus, PP II:

1. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God’s plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is “to redress the disorder caused by the offence”.46 Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfils the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people’s safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated. 47

It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: “If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person”.48

ever say or even imply that what the Church understood to be a “Grave Duty/Responsibility” was any different than what it is now?
Believing in the Church’s current actions and teachings does not abolish the death penalty. State Laws can be rewritten. If at some point in the future we loose our ability to keep all live’s safe. I am sure the death penalty can and will be reinstated and it will still not go against Church teaching.

I believe that it is not that we have lost sight of the purpose of punishment or the concept of expiation. I believe we have lost sight of just how sacred All life is.

I was wondering if you could supply the source or full document of Pope Pius XII. I would be interested in reading it further. From just this quote that you have posted here I do not see how believing in the sacredness of all life or finding other means to keep society safe, besides the death penalty, will disturbe the equilibrium. If anything,from my limited knowledge and education, I believe it would put it more in balance. I believe that it is in keeping the balance between a punishment that fits the crime and the sacredness of all life that helps to keep the equilibrium in balance. This is what I believe the Church has always tried to teach us.

I believe that to understand how to keep equilibrium in one’s life, one has to remember what caused creation to loose it’s equilibrium in the first place and what but the balance back into the equilibrium and to follow the example to the end to the best of our ability. If the conscience of mankind starts to grasp this then yes I believe our laws will reflect this balance.
This is something I am still pondering so I pray that what I wrote here makes some sense.
I leave the rest in God’s hands untill He provides me with a deeper understand of His Truth.

 

[Ender]

For starters it has been my understanding that the Church has always taught **it **to be a “Grave Duty/Responsibility.”

What does “it” refer to here? The Church’s teaching on punishment, capital punishment, mercy…?

I believe that it is not that we have lost sight of the purpose of punishment or the concept of expiation. I believe we have lost sight of just how sacred All life is.

I certainly agree with your second statement, and I think the reason is that when someone is murdered the attention focuses on the murderer and not the victim; what we have lost is an understanding of magnitude of the crime.

Of these remedies {for the disease of murder}* the most efficacious is to form a just conception of the wickedness of murder. *(Trent)

I was wondering if you could supply the source or full document of Pope Pius XII. I would be interested in reading it further.

I wish I could but I have not been able to find a translation of this document. If you read Italian you could probably find the entire document. The quote is from his Address to Italian Catholic jurists on May 12, 1954.

From just this quote that you have posted here I do not see how believing in the sacredness of all life or finding other means to keep society safe, besides the death penalty, will disturbe the equilibrium.

Forget protection; that is a secondary objective of punishment. It is the primary objective that must be satisfied for any punishment to be just.

I believe that it is in keeping the balance between a punishment that fits the crime and the sacredness of all life that helps to keep the equilibrium in balance. This is what I believe the Church has always tried to teach us.

The state has a duty to impose a punishment that fits the crime (2266) and it is because of the sacredness of life that the penalty for wrongfully taking one is so severe. At least, that is what God said in Gen 9:6.

I believe that to understand how to keep equilibrium in one’s life, one has to remember what caused creation to loose it’s equilibrium in the first place and what but the balance back into the equilibrium and to follow the example to the end to the best of our ability. If the conscience of mankind starts to grasp this then yes I believe our laws will reflect this balance.

Man’s nature cannot change. We as individuals are responsible for our actions and no matter how good some become there will always be some who commit evil acts, acts that require punishment; this is not something we can change.

Ender

 

[chaunceygardner]

SIMPLE SOUL:

I believe that it is not that we have lost sight of the purpose of punishment or the concept of expiation. I believe we have lost sight of just how sacred All life is.

Bravo! I applaud your resolve in not backing down when attacked for holding to high Christian moral values. I applaud you for sticking to your position on the sanctity of all human life, which is in agreement with what Jesus and the Church teaches. I applaud you for understanding that the Church is exhorting us to embrace the higher Christian morality found in the Gospel of Jesus, rather than the baser morality found in the laws of man.

Ender said:

Morality does not change with place and time.

Perhaps not the fundamental moral laws, but certainly our concept of morality and the application of moral law has changed over time and can vary by place.

Up until two or three hundred years ago, many societies accepted the idea and practice of slavery. The Church accepted it as well. Few if any societies advocate slavery today, and if a country or society did, the Church would likely be among the first to condemn them. Our ideas of the rights and roles of women in society has changed. The same with racial and ethnic minorities. Much of that has happened in recent decades, and many of us have been witnesses to this elevation in moral understanding and its applications, both in secular and religious situations. In the area of social justice, the Church has embraced a higher morality and taken the lead in advocating for the less fortunate and oppressed more than at any time since the earliest days of Christianity. In this they are way ahead of many of their own members.

And what about Jesus? Jesus clearly changed the expectations in regards to individual morality, and taught a more mature and nuanced moral law than was given centuries before. He gave us a “new teaching with authority.” He told us which laws were the keys to everything else (the first two commandments) and raised the bar on living up to some of the others. For example, talking about the 5th commandment in Matthew 5, He said forget “an eye for an eye” and then expanded the requirements for this commandment beyond taking a life to how we treat others. He gave us, through His parables, deeds and teaching, concrete examples of what His “new morality” meant to any who wanted to follow in His path. For if we wish to be His disciples, we are bound by the New Covenant and higher morality that comes to us through Jesus.

For this particular issue, it comes down to whether accepting that something (capital punishment) should only occur rarely can be translated into advocating for its use. The Church today clearly (and rightly) tells us NO.

**Simple Soul **said:

I do not see how believing in the sacredness of all life or finding other means to keep society safe, besides the death penalty, will disturb the equilibrium. If anything, from my limited knowledge and education, I believe it would put it more in balance.

It will certainly put it more in balance with God’s commands and expectations. And when we harden our hearts against His teaching, we harden our hearts against Him.

I leave the rest in God’s hands until He provides me with a deeper understand of His Truth.

Based on what you have said here and in earlier posts, I think He has already blessed you with that deeper understanding.

 

[donsnow]

Hi, Simple soul and chaunceygardner -

 

[Ender]

And what about Jesus? Jesus clearly changed the expectations in regards to individual morality, and taught a more mature and nuanced moral law than was given centuries before.

I have pointed out before that the obligations and rights of individuals are different from those of the state. The individual may not punish the guilty; the state is obligated to do so.

He gave us a “new teaching with authority.” He told us which laws were the keys to everything else (the first two commandments) and raised the bar on living up to some of the others.

And is the Church just discovering this now after nearly two millennia of getting it wrong? Were all popes prior to Paul VI wrong; all the councils, catechisms, and Doctors of the Church wrong? Did they simply fail to see Christ’s new teaching authority?

For this particular issue, it comes down to whether accepting that something (capital punishment) should only occur rarely can be translated into advocating for its use. The Church today clearly (and rightly) tells us NO.

What is the Church telling us in 2260?

Ender

 

[sidbrown]

I was thinking that even after Jesus Christ showed us how great His Love for us is by willingly spilling His Blood for us. After all the martyrs spilled their blood for this Great Love that they understood and after all of the great examples and writings of so many Saints to help us understand this Great Love that God has for us. Why is it that we seem to have lost it somewhere along the road ( to where we are now), we still DON’T seem to GET IT! What is it about the commandment of “Thou Shall Not Kill” that we just do not seem to get. If it is one of God’s commandments why do we try to “justify” it.

Any thoughts on this are welcome,

Always praying and pondering

It seems like after WWII, it was seen that killing civilians, women and children was OK, for example, to drop an atomic bomb on them, in order to attain some goal like ending a war.

 

[simple_soul]

Dear Ender,

I will not be able to responde to all of your replies. Some of them are redundant in there nature and I believe have already been answered. I would like to just leave this thread with a few thoughts on some of what you said and pray that you may see were I am coming from.

I certainly agree with your second statement, and I think the reason is that when someone is murdered the attention focuses on the murderer and not the victim; what we have lost is an understanding of magnitude of the crime

.

I would believe that the reason for this focus is because the one has already met their maker, the other has not. Look at the story of St. Maria Gorrettie and what happened to her murderer.

Man’s nature cannot change. We as individuals are responsible for our actions and no matter how good some become there will always be some who commit evil acts, acts that require punishment; this is not something we can change.

Man can not change his nature but I do not believe that this should be an excuse for us to not even try. We are taught by the Church to pick up our cross and follow Jesus Christ even if it means death. Through God all things are possible and so if we do happen to achieve any of His perfection it is only through Him that we achieve it. But we have to make the effort. And yes, we will be held accountable for all our actions by how much of an effort we made before Him.

And the rest I will leave in His hands as I believe I have said all I can say on this matter because if I understand something incorrectly I am sure He will lead me to understand it correctly. Because I believe “A closed heart is the worst kind of prison.”- Pope John Paul II

 

[Fox]

In the manner of self preservation or defense or in the defense of others, in some circumstances the taking of life is justified. You have an obligation and right to protect yourself since God has given the gift of life and a body to you. You are your body’s steward.

 

[chaunceygardner]

I have pointed out before that the obligations and rights of individuals are different from those of the state. The individual may not punish the guilty; the state is obligated to do so.

Who is the State? It is us. And the state should punish as a means of maintaining order and protecting its citizens, but to what extent? Using what means? Should not the morality of our country reflect our individual morality? And if the U.S.A. is the only civilized, mostly Christian country in the World that still regularly executes criminals, doesn’t this imply that our moral standards are lower and our application of the Gospel in our society is poorer than in others? And not up to the standards expected by the Church?

If EVERY individual in a state (meaning country) were to oppose the use of the death penalty, then WHO would impose that punishment, and WHO would carry it out? Would such a law exist, or be valid if it did?

And is the Church just discovering this now after nearly two millennia of getting it wrong? Were all popes prior to Paul VI wrong; all the councils, catechisms, and Doctors of the Church wrong? Did they simply fail to see Christ’s new teaching authority?

Not wrong, just getting it better. You failed to note what I said in that part. If one accepts the fact that how humans apply the teachings and commandments of Jesus can change (which they have), and that the Holy Spirit is constantly at work in showing us the correct path, then what we should say is that the Church and its people have grown in their understanding and the application of that understanding.

I will give another example of the many changes that have occurred. Has the teaching of the Church regarding Judaism and the relationship between Catholics and Jews (and our mutual God) changed over the past 50, 100, or 500 years? Of course it has, and like some of the those mentioned in my previous post, during my lifetime!

What is the Church telling us in 2260? Ender

Based on recent history, I would hope that the Church will be teaching an even more refined and higher understanding of the Gospel. There is a lot we do not know or understand completely. More attuned to the guidance and revelation that God provides through the Holy Spirit acting in our lives, the Church and its people will draw closer to the ideal that Jesus taught us and showed us. Less hatred, fear, prejudice, pride and worldliness; more love, acceptance, humility and spirituality.

Perhaps the best way to get a glimpse of what the world and the Church could be like in 2260 would be through examples of those who have already reached that level. Some of the Saints we honor and the saintly who have touched our lives so deeply (like Mother Teresa) show us what the Church, Catholics, and all Christians could be if we reached their heights.

I will close my posts on this thread with a wish to ALL for a blessed Christmas and leave you with this prayer:

*Like Mary…
We carry God’s promise within us;

Like Joseph…
We journey in faith at His bidding;

Like the Shepherds…
We give glory to God for His presence among us;

Like the Magi…
We follow the signs that compel us to seek Him.

As Christmas approaches,
And as we hope, anticipate,
And prepare for His arrival…

May our journey always be one of hope and faith,
May we find God in those we meet on the way,
May we give thanks for His presence in our lives,
And may we forever keep His promise in our hearts *

 

[donsnow]

Thanks, Chauncey, for your blessing.

I add my wishes for all to have a blessed and peaceful Christmas.