Catholic Bishops Plan Drive Against Death Penalty

[Guest Eremite]

Cardinal Ratzinger did not address the text of Evangelium Vitae. As you cited before, he said:

[quote]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.[/quote]

The first part is obviously true, that it may be permissable to inflict capital punishment (in cases of defense). This we don't disagree on. The second part, however, can be taken in two ways. "Applying the death penalty" can refer either to the general application, even in cases that are not necessary for defense, or it can refer to the application in the modern world; ie, Catholics can disagree on whether cases of defense actually exist today. The way in which it is interpreted depends upon the Holy Father's intent in Evangelium Vitae, and thus adds another reason why a clarification is needed.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 11:55 AM'] If it is the universal tradition of the Church, why did St. Ambrose note that God did not want to punish a homicide with another homicide? [/quote]
"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in His own image." [Gen. 9:6]

The killing of an innocent man is homocide, but the execution of a criminal is an enactment of justice.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:01 PM'] Cardinal Ratzinger did not address the text of Evangelium Vitae. As you cited before, he said:
[quote]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.[/quote]
The first part is obviously true, that it may be permissable to inflict capital punishment (in cases of defense). This we don't disagree on. The second part, however, can be taken in two ways. "Applying the death penalty" can refer either to the general application, even in cases that are not necessary for defense, or it can refer to the application in the modern world; ie, Catholics can disagree on whether cases of defense actually exist today. The way in which it is interpreted depends upon the Holy Father's intent in Evangelium Vitae, and thus adds another reason why a clarification is needed. [/quote]
You are confusing a prudential judgment of the Pope with a dogma, and I refuse to follow you in that error.

Although Catholics may debate about whether or not the death penalty should be used in a particular case, they may not debate the fact that capital punishment is morally licit. The morally licit nature of the death penalty is a truth of sacred scripture and of the apostolic tradition, and has been proclaimed as acceptable by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

God bless,
Todd

[Guest Eremite]

[quote]One Father is not the universal Tradition of the Church, and so no matter how interesting Ambrose's opinion is, one need not abide by it.[/quote]

Tradition comes from the Latin "to hand on". Obviously, St. Ambrose was handed on a different tradition from what you propose. Thus, it is not universal.

[quote]The Church has constantly taught, in line with both sacred scripture and tradition, that the use of capital punishment is morally licit, and in some cases is necessary in order to redress the evil done, and restore the common good.[/quote]

The Church has never taught that capital punishment is morally necessary. It is morally licit, but not morally necessary.

[quote]"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in His own image."[/quote]

As I commented on a previous thread on this topic, the citation of the Old Testament is a red herring, unless you are willing to restore Old Testament practices in every regard, including the execution of blasphemers and sabbath violaters.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Eremite

[Ash Wednesday]

I suppose in a sense that is fine and dandy that they are doing this, but I don't view it as a particularly great feat.

Is it not more publicly "fashionable" to crusade against the death penalty than it is to, say, crusade against abortion?

[Guest Eremite]

[quote]You are confusing a prudential judgment of the Pope with a dogma, and I refuse to follow you in that error.[/quote]

Who said anything about dogma?

Furthermore, as I have already pointed out, whether Evangelium Vitae involved more than a prudential judgement or not is hardly an open or shut case. An official clarification is needed from the Holy See on the matter.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:06 PM'] Tradition comes from the Latin "to hand on". Obviously, St. Ambrose was handed on a different tradition from what you propose. Thus, it is not universal.
[/quote]
I'm sure you are already aware that it is the consensus of the Fathers that is binding.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:06 PM'] The Church has never taught that capital punishment is morally necessary. It is morally licit, but not morally necessary. [/quote]
On this issue we will have to agree to disagree. I will stick with the teaching of sacred scripture and the tradition of the Church, and you may follow the teaching of the Latin Rite bishops of the present day.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:08 PM'] Furthermore, as I have already pointed out, whether Evangelium Vitae involved more than a prudential judgement or not is hardly an open or shut case. An official clarification is needed from the Holy See on the matter. [/quote]
On this issue, once again, we disagree. The Pope's comments are not the proper subject matter for a doctrinal definition, nor can they be applied as an authentic act of the Magisterium. The teaching of the Magisterium must be understood diachronically, and the Pope's comments clearly do not conform to the universal Magisterium on this issue. Thus, the are a prudential judgment of his, and no one is required to accept his comments as binding.

[Guest Eremite]

Perhaps we can get to the heart of the issue.

Can you please cite a Magisterial document which teaches that capital punishment is not only allowed, but morally necessary, even if there is no threat to society?

And rather than decide for yourself whether the Holy Father was speaking doctrinally or not, why not just seek a clarification from the Holy See?

Edited March 21, 2005 by Eremite

[Guest Eremite]

Just in case we're talking past one another:

I'm not arguing that Capital Punishment is inherently wrong.

I'm not arguing that the Holy Father's opinion on the modern penal system is binding.

I AM arguing that the Church has never taught that the state has a DUTY to kill people, even when they are not a threat to society.

I AM arguing that the Holy Father's words in Evangelium Vitae may very well go beyond the pastoral, but address a development in docrinal principles. I am NOT arguing my opinion on the matter is right or wrong. I simply want a clarification from the Holy See, because it is up for question.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:16 PM'] Perhaps we can get to the heart of the issue.

Can you please cite a Magisterial document which teaches that capital punishment is not only allowed, but morally necessary, even if there is no threat to society?

And rather than decide for yourself whether the Holy Father was speaking doctrinally or not, why not just seek a clarification from the Holy See? [/quote]
I see, and it is sad that you don't accept the teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, which of course teaches doctrine through non-defining acts.

Now, have you ever read any of the manuals of theology issued prior to Vatican II, or any of the various books on moral theology issued prior to that time, or even the original edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church issued in 1992, because the Church has always held that certain grave and heinous offenses require the death penalty; offences like, mass murder, the murder of one parents, etc. This is also taught in sacred scripture, but I suppose that isn't important to many people today either. Clearly, over the past 30 years in the Latin Church there has been a general collapse of the understanding of the Church's pre-conciliar tradition. Now, I say this because there cannot be any improvement in the life of the Church until there is a recovery of the Church's theological tradition.

That being said, please show me documents -- homilies of popes, bishops, etc., and not necessarily issued by the Roman Curia, because you shouldn't be limited in that way -- from before Vatican II that teach that the death penalty should not be applied in capital cases, and that will suffice to show that your modernist views are correct.

As far as seeking a clarification is concerned, there is no need for one, because the moral teaching of the Church in relation to the use of the death penalty is a part of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

God bless,
Todd

[Guest Eremite]

[quote]and it is sad that you don't accept the teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, which of course teaches doctrine through non-defining acts. [/quote]

This is all I'm asking for. Please reference ONE document from the Magisterium which teaches that the State MUST kill people even if they are not a threat to society. It doesn't have to be a dogmatic declaration.

The theology manuals have no bearing on this discussion. They are not Magisterial teachings. All I'm asking for is one Magisterial document.

And now my views are "modernist"? Can you be more dramatic? You need to take a step back. Seriously.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Eremite

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:24 PM'] Just in case we're talking past one another:

I'm not arguing that Capital Punishment is inherently wrong.

I'm not arguing that the Holy Father's opinion on the modern penal system is binding.

I AM arguing that the Church has never taught that the state has a DUTY to kill people, even when they are not a threat to society.

I AM arguing that the Holy Father's words in Evangelium Vitae may very well go beyond the pastoral, but address a development in docrinal principles. I am NOT arguing my opinion on the matter is right or wrong. I simply want a clarification from the Holy See, because it is up for question. [/quote]
It has been revealed by God in sacred scripture, and has already been taught as a part of the Ordinary Magisterium, that capital punishment is licit. Any change which would say the opposite of this, would not be a development of doctrine, but a corruption.

That is why there is no need for a clarification from the Holy See on this issue, and that is also why Cardinal Ratzinger said what he did in his letter to the U.S. bishops.

As a faithful Catholic I will not participate in any activity which attempts to undermine the moral law and the tradition of the Church. That is why I will not participate in the USCCB's drive to make the death penalty illegal.

God bless,
Todd

[Guest Eremite]

[quote]It has been revealed by God in sacred scripture, and has already been taught as a part of the Ordinary Magisterium, that capital punishment is licit. Any change which would say the opposite of this, would not be a development of doctrine, but a corruption.[/quote]

As I already said, this is not in dispute. I've already indicated that Capital Punishment is LICIT. What I am challenging is your assertion that it is MORALLY NECESSARY even when there is not threat to society. You keep saying this is some foundation of the ordinary Magisterium, but haven't provided a single document to that end.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:29 PM']
This is all I'm asking for. Please reference ONE document from the Magisterium which teaches that the State MUST kill people even if they are not a threat to society. It doesn't have to be a dogmatic declaration.

The theology manuals have no bearing on this discussion. They are not Magisterial teachings. All I'm asking for is one Magisterial document.

And now my views are "modernist"? Can you be more dramatic? You need to take a step back. Seriously. [/quote]
From the Roman Catechism (1566):

[quote name='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. [i]The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of [b]paramount obedience[/b] to this Commandment which prohibits murder[/i]. 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.[/quote]

[Apotheoun]

Eremite,

Now, please provide Magisterial documents, from prior to the Second Vatican Council, that support your contention.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:36 PM'] As I already said, this is not in dispute. I've already indicated that Capital Punishment is LICIT. What I am challenging is your assertion that it is MORALLY NECESSARY even when there is not threat to society. You keep saying this is some foundation of the ordinary Magisterium, but haven't provided a single document to that end. [/quote]
I have no problem in saying that a man who kills his parents must be executed for his crime.

[Guest Eremite]

First of all, a Catechism if not a Magisterial document. But I will address it anyway.

The Roman Catechism says nothing of Capital Punishment being NECESSARY even when there is no threat to life. In fact, it indicates that "The end of the Commandment­ is the preservation and security of human life." Because Capital Punishment is OBEDIENT to that commandment, and because the end of that commandment is PROTECTION OF LIFE (not redress of disorder), then capital punishment is obedient insofar as it protects life.

Nowhere in the Roman Catechism do we see anything saying that the civil authorities MUST inflict death no matter what.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 12:42 PM'] First of all, a Catechism if not a Magisterial document. But I will address it anyway.

The Roman Catechism says nothing of Capital Punishment being NECESSARY even when there is no threat to life. In fact, it indicates that "The end of the Commandment­ is the preservation and security of human life." Because Capital Punishment is OBEDIENT to that commandment, and because the end of that commandment is PROTECTION OF LIFE (not redress of disorder), then capital punishment is obedient insofar as it protects life.

Nowhere in the Roman Catechism do we see anything saying that the civil authorities MUST inflict death no matter what. [/quote]
Actually, it says that it is of paramount obedience to the fifth commandment to execute a criminal.