Posted on 03/22/2005 1:18:49 PM PST by TChris
In the week before Easter, as Christians reflect on the execution of Jesus, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is launching a campaign to end the use of the death penalty in the United States.
Although the campaign reflects the consistent teaching of Pope John Paul II, it marks something of a shift in priorities for the nation's Roman Catholic bishops, who last issued a major statement against capital punishment 25 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Where are the nuns and priests who are willing to chain themselves to fences at nuke facilities? Where are the nuns and priests who hold vigil when some vermin is about to be executed? Where are the nuns and priests who stand up for "human rights"? Why are they not chaining themselves to Terri Schiavo's hospice doors? Why are they not holding vigils for her? Why are they not standing up for INNOCENT human life?
The Vatican has it right in this case. Where are the American Bishops? Church heirarchy in the United States has forfeited its moral authority and any credibility it ever had. They should be ashamed.
I have made this clear in letters to my Bishop and Parish Priest.
I strongly suggest the rest of you do the same.
Couldn't agree more. Already done here, and hope that others follow suit.
I saw the Nun who was protrayed in Dead Man Walking on TV the other day hawking a book. She is anti-death penalty. She was asked about Teri and she hemmmed hawed around and said she felt the Congress had more important things to do like take care of the 42 million people without health care etc.. Sometimes I worry about the Catholic leadership they seem to be falling futher left all the time.
The attitudes of many who identify themselves as Catholic seem to change on a daily basis. However, the Traditional Magisterial Teaching on the death penalty is that it is not only acceptable but just. All other attitudes are merely private opinions, even if expressed by bishops and carry no authority to bind the faithful.
From The Catechism of Trent:
Execution Of Criminals
"Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord."
There seems to me to be a logical disconnect between the "err on the side of life" position forcefully voiced in support of Terri Schaivo, and forceful support for the death penalty often voiced here - most recently in opposition to the recent Supreme Court decision banning execution of juveniles.
It seems to me that if one takes a position that human life is sacred in situations like Terri's or where abortion is concerned, one must logically also take the position that even a murderer's life is sacred, since even a murderer can find salvation (so long as still alive, anyway). On a more pragmatic level, given the fairly large number of erroneous convictions being found through advanced DNA techniques, shouldn't the "err on the side of life" position be applied in capital cases, in the form of opposition to the death penalty?
"I saw the Nun who was protrayed in Dead Man Walking on TV the other day hawking a book. She is anti-death penalty. She was asked about Teri and she hemmmed hawed around and said she felt the Congress had more important things to do like take care of the 42 million people without health care etc.. Sometimes I worry about the Catholic leadership they seem to be falling futher left all the time."
The American Catholic Church has been polluted with the worst elements of the liberal left for far too long. From the Seminary graduates to the Jesuit Colleges to the lay leaders, the Catholic community has far too damn many Democrats! If it wasn't for the Vatican, I would have written off the Catholic Church ages ago. But the American Bishops are indicative of the same kind of degeneracy that permeates the American Anglican Church. The US seems to breed these kind of perverts, cowards, and moral idiots.
"It seems to me that if one takes a position that human life is sacred in situations like Terri's or where abortion is concerned, one must logically also take the position that even a murderer's life is sacred, since even a murderer can find salvation (so long as still alive, anyway)."
Bulls**t! The Catholic Church's traditional support of capital punishment and opposition to abortion is completely and eminently sensible, not contradictory, if you open your eyes to the validity of the concept of human free will and personal responsibility. Murderers are guilty of intentionally heinous acts; the unborn, or physically and mentally infirm are innocent of any intentional crimes. Every Catholic used to know this. The fact that they don't today is another example of the abject failure of the American Catholic Church to perform its primary teaching function of the Magisterium. They don't teach traditional doctrine any more because it runs counter to the Marxist fetishism of the liberal elites, which are the only circles that today's Bishops really aim to please.
I am not a Catholic and my question was not raised in the context of Catholic dogma. Logically, if this is a question determined by free will, does not execution deprive the true criminal of any chance of exercise of free will by repenting and being saved? What about the prisoner convicted in error - is it not better to "err on the side of life" for these cases?
"Logically, if this is a question determined by free will, does not execution deprive the true criminal of any chance of exercise of free will by repenting and being saved?"
According to traditional Catholic doctrine, the purpose of execution is expiation (murder being an affront to God), not conversion. If the guilty party repents before he is excuted, then so much the better. He may yet save his soul THEN.
"What about the prisoner convicted in error - is it not better to "err on the side of life" for these cases?"
In a word, NO. What you mean is that the occasional incidence of error (statistically small) should be used as an excuse to absolve all proveably guilty persons for answering for their crimes. This would be an even greater injustice to the many more innocent victims of violent murder in the community.
What the h*** are you... a liberal Democrat?
Actually this is the way the reasoning works: The supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls, not preserving all life (even the guilty) at all cost, not ending all suffering. The sentence of death to a convicted unrepentant criminal forces that person to contemplate the Four Last Things, death, judgment, heaven, hell. Being forced to contemplate these thing may bring about repentance and at least imperfect contrition. Then, in accepting their fate, they can offer up any suffering in union with Our Lord's as reparation for the damage they have caused by their sin.
In the mind of the church there is a worse fate than being put to death, and that is going to going to hell. That a sentence of death can bring about repentance and penance is a good and just thing. It is purely humanistic thinking, that places this life as the supreme good, and this is the thinking behind those opposed to the death penalty in all cases. That is not Catholic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.