Folks,
In the discussion over the recent execution of Troy Davis in Georgia, a person made the following comment in the post "A Few Topical Thoughts on Capital Punishment" at The American Catholic blogsite. From what little I know about this case, there seem to be too many unanswered questions over whether or not Troy Davis was actually guilty of murder. So yes, I would have preferred (and even advocated) for clemency or a commutation of sentence to life in prison. I regret and deplore his execution. Nevertheless, the reader's comment below is right on target. There is NO moral equivalency between the death penalty and abortion, and God did give the State the authority to execute criminals for capital crimes (Romans 13:1-7), but He never gave doctors the authority to fatally evacute an unborn baby from his first home, the womb.
You anti death penalty folks must think the Catholic Church began around 1980, when Pope J P 2 started to talk against the death penalty. You are wrong.
The early Christians evidently had nothing against the death penalty. They approve of the divine punishment meted out to Ananias and Sapphira when they are rebuked by Peter for their fraudulent action (Acts 5:1-11). The Letter to the Hebrews makes an argument from the fact that “a man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses” (10:28). Paul repeatedly refers to the connection between sin and death. He writes to the Romans, with an apparent reference to the death penalty, that the magistrate who holds authority “does not bear the sword in vain; for he is the servant of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:4). No passage in the New Testament disapproves of the death penalty.
Turning to Christian tradition, we may note that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church are virtually unanimous in their support for capital punishment, even though some of them such as St. Ambrose exhort members of the clergy not to pronounce capital sentences or serve as executioners. To answer the objection that the first commandment forbids killing, St. Augustine writes in The City of God:
The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being allows certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice.
In the Middle Ages a number of canonists teach that ecclesiastical courts should refrain from the death penalty and that civil courts should impose it only for major crimes. But leading canonists and theologians assert the right of civil courts to pronounce the death penalty for very grave offenses such as murder and treason. Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus invoke the authority of Scripture and patristic tradition, and give arguments from reason.
Giving magisterial authority to the death penalty, Pope Innocent III required disciples of Peter Waldo seeking reconciliation with the Church to accept the proposition: “The secular power can, without mortal sin, exercise judgment of blood, provided that it punishes with justice, not out of hatred, with prudence, not precipitation.” In the high Middle Ages and early modern times the Holy See authorized the Inquisition to turn over heretics to the secular arm for execution. In the Papal States the death penalty was imposed for a variety of offenses. The Roman Catechism, issued in 1566, three years after the end of the Council of Trent, taught that the power of life and death had been entrusted by God to civil authorities and that the use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to the fifth commandment.
In modern times Doctors of the Church such as Robert Bellarmine and Alphonsus Liguori held that certain criminals should be punished by death. Venerable authorities such as Francisco de Vitoria, Thomas More, and Francisco Suárez agreed. John Henry Newman, in a letter to a friend, maintained that the magistrate had the right to bear the sword, and that the Church should sanction its use, in the sense that Moses, Joshua, and Samuel used it against abominable crimes.
Throughout the first half of the twentieth century the consensus of Catholic theologians in favor of capital punishment in extreme cases remained solid, as may be seen from approved textbooks and encyclopedia articles of the day. The Vatican City State from 1929 until 1969 had a penal code that included the death penalty for anyone who might attempt to assassinate the pope. Pope Pius XII, in an important allocution to medical experts, declared that it was reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life in expiation of their crimes.
Summarizing the verdict of Scripture and tradition, we can glean some settled points of doctrine. It is agreed that crime deserves punishment in this life and not only in the next. In addition, it is agreed that the State has authority to administer appropriate punishment to those judged guilty of crimes and that this punishment may, in serious cases, include the sentence of death.
The current Pope, when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, stated in 2004:
"3. 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."
THAT'S A QUOTE! Here’s the site….READ IT!
http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm
Friday, September 30, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


Wonder what you make of this story (http://bit.ly/po9pNN) from the USCCB's news service, CNS? Seems to me that someone has an agenda. This whole article is based on a comment from a desk officer (whatever that is) at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. This seems to be used as a jumping off point to construct a story that purports to show a sea change in Church teaching on capital punishment.
ReplyDeleteDesk Officer Di Ruzza gets quite a bit of time, voicing his opinions which are somehow elevated to some sort of official pronouncement, using the words of a few Popes, taken out of context, to bolster the seeming importance of the opinion of a Vatican functionary.
Goebbels would be proud.
Goebbels would be proud, indeed, Catawissa!
ReplyDelete