You Shall NOT Kill!

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Dear Br. David,

Please, please, please I beg you not to think this way. I am not trying to lay any trap. I just want to understand if what I understand in my heart is Truth or not. That is all!

Back to your question. I do not know. What is the difference if we are fallen or if we are falling, does God still love us?

We are always falling, failing, in the eyes of God. God is perfect Love, we are imperfect.

God is Love so how can He not Love us who are created in His image?

The ideal we are striving for is Him. We can not reach it in this life.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

As the church teaches is that if there is no other way to keep people safe then capital punishment is acceptable. I don’t really believe that is the case nowadays so capital punishment really isn’t neccessary.

This is the part that is open for discussion that leaves capital punishment an option at times.

 

[simple_soul]

We are always falling, failing, in the eyes of God. God is perfect Love, we are imperfect.

God is Love so how can He not Love us who are created in His image?

The ideal we are striving for is Him. We can not reach it in this life.

Dear Br. David,

Does this mean we just give up and don’t even try to have this same kind of love that He has shown us?

What I understand in my heart, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that we are to emulate this Great Love that God has for us back to Him and with each other.

Is this a correct understanding?

 

[prodigal-sun]

ByzCath:
This is the part that is open for discussion that leaves capital punishment an option at times.

I agree wholeheartedly with your statement here and with your entire take on this issue!

Peace!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Dear Br. David,

Does this mean we just give up and don’t even try to have this same kind of love that He has shown us?

What I understand in my heart, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that we are to emulate this Great Love that God has for us back to Him and with each other.

Is this a correct understanding?

Yes this is a correct understanding as long as you also understand that we live in a fallen world that goes along with our fallen nature and again, while the ideal is perfection, we can never hope to live up to this ideal.

You must also understand and accept that the Church can in no way Teach error and that to say an allowance for something such as the death penalty is in any way an error is wrong.

 

[CWBetts]

I’ll probably kick myself for asking but when is the death penalty applied to crimes which are not intrinsically evil?

Neither taking another’s life nor treason is intrinsically evil, which are the only capital crimes in the US. Kidnapping, torture, and rape are intrinsic evils, but do not carry the death penalty. It is inconsitencies such as this that demand reform of the death penalty.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Neither taking another’s life nor treason is intrinsically evil, which are the only capital crimes in the US. Kidnapping, torture, and rape are intrinsic evils, but do not carry the death penalty. It is inconsitencies such as this that demand reform of the death penalty.

Your argument makes no sense, Theft is intrinsically evil, so is not honoring your parents.

No where has the Church ever Taught that the death penalty should be used for every crime that is intrinsically evil.

You are attempting to set up a straw man.

 

[donsnow]

Well I’m not sure I can be that positive (I’m a pretty pessimistic person). Still, one good thing I can say about such experiences are the things I learn from stuff like that (though, I admit, I get a little resentful). It teaches me that I should be more vigilant.

I value the virtue of earning things honestly and cannot stand people who take things “the easy way” (a.k.a. stealing). Heck I wouldn’t care if you stole from a corrupt politician or a pimp drug dealer. Those people are thieves by themselves. However, if you steal from a person like me, who’s worked hard and honestly for his keep, you’re taking something that I have a right to for your own benefit and I don’t like that. It’s a painfully unfair thing you can do to a person.

So with that said (and I hope you don’t take things the wrong way ) but if someone ever tried to rob me at broken-bottle point, I hope I’d have enough martial arts experience by then to give him a taste of what real Tekken is like.

Then again, I’d be glad too if nobody tried to steal from me and I won’t have to traumatize anybody. >_>;; I wouldn’t wanna be the Delinquent Student for any martial arts master. <.<;;

It wasn’t easy, becoming that positive. I started out cynical and with some pessimism.

Let me see, if I steal from a pimp, or drug dealer or corrupt politician, you wouldn’t mind. But, if I stole from you or from a friend or family member of yours, then you’ll mind very much? Do I have that right?
Now, I’m not confused about theft as painfully unfair. I just think it’s equally painfully unfair to pimps, drug dealers, corrupt politicians and other theives, too. They’re sinners. You and me are sinners. That’s my point.

I’ve thought of martial arts. Never studied one, because students generally required to bow to a Buddha or other nation’s flag. Christ is my master and America’s flag I salute standing tall. Don’t have to bow to other than my master.

 

[Ender]

Who makes the laws that gives the State it’s rights and obligations?

I believe the Church’s position on this is based on Romans 13:1-4

*1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. *

• 2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.*

There are any number of places in the Catechism where the Church has specified what some of those rights and obligations are. Pertinent to this topic is:

2266: Legitimate public authority has the* right and duty** to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime*

Ender

 

[Ender]

On the other hand it would seem that an innocent life is not valued when the life of the perpetrator is not also demanded in retribution

This is a point that is usually totally missing from discussions on the death penalty. In Genesis we are told that* “whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed”* and the reason for this is because* “God made man in his own image.”* That is, it is precisely because of the intrinsic value of human life that the penalty for anyone who wantonly kills is death.

The Catechism of Trent said: *“Of these remedies {for the disease of murder} the most efficacious is to form a just conception of the wickedness of murder.” *How do we create a just conception of the wickedness of murder by focusing on the welfare of the murderer rather than the true nature of his crime? It is quite clear that we no longer believe what the Church taught for over 300 years:

The murderer is the worst enemy of his species, and consequently of nature. To the utmost of his power he destroys the universal work of God by the destruction of man, since God declares that He created all things for man’s sake. Nay, as it is forbidden in Genesis to take human life, because God created man to his own image and likeness, he who makes away with God’s image offers great injury to God, and almost seems to lay violent hands on God Himself! (Catechism of Trent)

Ender

 

[simple_soul]

Yes this is a correct understanding as long as you also understand that we live in a fallen world that goes along with our fallen nature and again, while the ideal is perfection, we can never hope to live up to this ideal.

You must also understand and accept that the Church can in no way Teach error and that to say an allowance for something such as the death penalty is in any way an error is wrong.

Dear Br. David,

I will have to reread my earlier posts to see where I went wrong… I thought I was saying what you are saying here.

The only question I still have from what you say here is why can we have no hope?
I thought it was taught by the Church that through God all things are possible and when we say the Our Father we say “Thy Kingdom come Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven”. Is this not praying that we do live up to this ideal?

 

[simple_soul]

I believe the Church’s position on this is based on Romans 13:1-4

*1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. *

• 2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.*

There are any number of places in the Catechism where the Church has specified what some of those rights and obligations are. Pertinent to this topic is:

2266: Legitimate public authority has the* right and duty*** to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime

Ender

Dear Edner,

I am begining to think I am talking a different language with you. Please bear with me while I try to ask this question again. Who makes the laws that gives the State it’s rights and obligations. In other words how does a State establish it’s laws? Who is in charge of making the laws?..

 

[Ender]

I am begining to think I am talking a different language with you. Please bear with me while I try to ask this question again. Who makes the laws that gives the State it’s rights and obligations. In other words how does a State establish it’s laws? Who is in charge of making the laws?..

The establishment of laws differs from State to State. In the US the people elect representatives to make their laws; in Russia under Stalin the law was whatever Stalin said it was. The argument is sometimes made that, since countries often make unjust laws, surely God does not authorize that therefore a State is not empowered by God, but just as the individual is given rights and duties, which he may abuse, the same is true of States. God grants the authority; he does not necessarily sanction everything that is done with it.

Ender

 

[CWBetts]

Your argument makes no sense, Theft is intrinsically evil, so is not honoring your parents.

No where has the Church ever Taught that the death penalty should be used for every crime that is intrinsically evil.

You are attempting to set up a straw man.

Theft is not intrinsically evil. If you are starving you may steal food.
Curding your parents carried the death penalty in the Old Testament, and Old Testament Law is really where you are making your argument from. My objection is valid

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Theft is not intrinsically evil. If you are starving you may steal food.
Curding your parents carried the death penalty in the Old Testament, and Old Testament Law is really where you are making your argument from. My objection is valid

Wrong, theft is an evil though the severity of the sin may be mitigated by circumstances it is still a sin.

As for your argument being valid, you are wrong, you are not the authority to make these decisions, the Church is.

 

[Cosmian]

Neither taking another’s life nor treason is intrinsically evil, which are the only capital crimes in the US. Kidnapping, torture, and rape are intrinsic evils, but do not carry the death penalty. It is inconsitencies such as this that demand reform of the death penalty.

Theft is not intrinsically evil. If you are starving you may steal food.
Curding your parents carried the death penalty in the Old Testament, and Old Testament Law is really where you are making your argument from. My objection is valid

Maybe I haven’t spent enough time pondering what is intrinsically evil and what is not. I’ve always thought that murder was one of the biggies. I’m not really crazy about treason either but I can understand why the death penalty needn’t apply.

Are you unhappy that kidnapping, torture, and rape don’t carry the death penalty? Seems like jail time would be a fair punishment for kidnapping. Jail time under the most heinous conditions is befitting torture and rape.

If it’s not intrinsically evil to take a life then why all the hoopla over the death penalty?

Shouldn’t starving people beg for food? The grocer won’t be happy if you steal food from him, starving or not. What if you were to steal food from someone who was also starving?

The only definitions I could find for curding had to do with cheese and and growing cauliflower. mmmmmmmmmmmm…food.

 

[Ender]

Neither taking another’s life nor treason is intrinsically evil, which are the only capital crimes in the US. Kidnapping, torture, and rape are intrinsic evils, but do not carry the death penalty. It is inconsitencies such as this that demand reform of the death penalty.

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

 

[simple_soul]

The establishment of laws differs from State to State. In the US the people elect representatives to make their laws; in Russia under Stalin the law was whatever Stalin said it was. The argument is sometimes made that, since countries often make unjust laws, surely God does not authorize that therefore a State is not empowered by God, but just as the individual is given rights and duties, which he may abuse, the same is true of States. God grants the authority; he does not necessarily sanction everything that is done with it.

Ender

Dear Ender,

I have never heard of the argument that you say is sometimes made so I do not understand were that is leading.

As for the rest, if I am understanding you correctly you are saying that mankind establishes the laws to govern themselves or others with and this then becomes the State? Is this correct?

 

[donsnow]

OK, we’re discussing the morality of capital punishment.

Yesterday, I took half and hour, while having trouble staying connected to CAF (was I the only one having that trouble?), and about 1,000 words in a post, to lose it all to disconnection. Arrrggh.

OK, I’ll begin today, where I left off, in the lost post. 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.’”.

I submit, that this quote highlights our God’s view on capital punishment. And, that we should shape our morals on capital punishment in the light of this quote. I further comment, that in my mind, the Church’s teaching on this subject in the CCC, does just that shaping, in that light.

That’s my two cents worth.

FYI having trouble staying connected again and checked SOHO webpage for solar conditions. We’re in the middle of a rise in X-Ray flux, from the sun. I guess that’s causing the problem to stay connected.

 

[Ender]

As for the rest, if I am understanding you correctly you are saying that mankind establishes the laws to govern themselves or others with and this then becomes the State? Is this correct?

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