Bush Approves Execution Of Army Private

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' post='1612120' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:44 PM']But what's the point of retributive justice? It seems counterintuitive to suppose that retributive justice can be applied simply for the sake of punishing another person. It has to serve a purpose (to discourage others from committing a crime, to protect society from a criminal, to encourage repentance, etc.) Otherwise it's just us trying to play God by acting like we know what other people "deserve."[/quote]
The primary end of retributive justice is the restoration of order to society by the just punishment of a malefactor.

The things that you have mentioned are secondary and even tertiary ends.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' post='1612120' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:44 PM']We all deserve a horrible fate, due to our sins. But even in a temporal sense, the only way we can know what another person deserves would be to read that person's soul. No matter how overwhelming the evidence, we can never presume to know how much another person's soul is weighed down by sin.[/quote]
This sounds to Calvinist for my taste, because it promotes the false notion that no one is ever innocent. Sins are personal actions, and so they cannot be inherent to human nature, which is and remains good even after the ancestral sin of Adam. To say otherwise involves falling into various Christological heresies.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1612116' date='Jul 29 2008, 08:42 PM']If a murderer did not "forfeit" his right to life by his heinous crime the application of the death penalty would be impossible, and that proposition is contrary to Catholic doctrine.[/quote]

but now you fail to take into account circumstance. What you outline would not be impossible because of the circumstances of some countries that in no way will be able to cut off from society these heinous criminals. [b]These societies could still very well acknowledge his/her right to life but still justly take that life because they do not have the ability to contain such a person.[/b]

Edited July 30, 2008 by Didymus

[Didymus]

KoC, am I to assume your argument for the Saints and the Church so weak that you cannot back it up with quotes from authoritative documents in the very least?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' post='1612120' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:44 PM']I think I am in line with Catholic teaching when I say this. But please forgive me; I am unfamiliar with the term "retributive justice." So please correct me if I'm wrong.[/quote]
It is a traditional term used in Catholic moral theology.

Some years ago I posted a portion of an article by Pope Pius XII in which he used the term and explained the reasons for the Church's support for the continued use of death penalty.

[Didymus]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1612035' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:27 PM']God has given the nations the Right to carry out the death penalty on major unjust criminals. [u]The Church and Her Saints have taught this since Her birth[/u].[/quote]

show. me. where.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612125' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:52 PM']but now you fail to take into account circumstance. What you outline would not be impossible because of the circumstances of some countries that in no way will be able to cut off from society these heinous criminals. [b]These societies could still very well acknowledge his/her right to life but still justly take that life because they do not have the ability to contain such a person.[/b][/quote]
It is untenable as a philosophical principle, because the logical outcome would be the abolition of the death penalty, and that is contrary to the teaching of sacred scripture.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612130' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:55 PM']KoC, am I to assume your argument for the Saints and the Church so weak that you cannot back it up with quotes from authoritative documents in the very least?[/quote]

Your assumption is incorrect. Having this argument for the 1,000,000,000,000,000 time it seems more and more pointless to posts the words of the Church and the Saints when it changes nothing.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612125' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:52 PM'][b]These societies could still very well acknowledge his/her right to life but still justly take that life because they do not have the ability to contain such a person.[/b][/quote]
You are confusing the application of the death penalty in particular cases with the immutable moral precept that gives the power to execute a criminal to the State.

As far as application of the death penalty is concerned, Catholics are fee to disagree with each other on a case-by-case basis, but the same cannot be said about the moral precept that gives the State the power of the sword, because that precept is an immutable truth of divine revelation.

[KnightofChrist]

St. Thomas Aquinas: "The fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so stubborn that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from evil, it is possible to make a highly probable judgement that they would never come away from evil to the right use of their powers." Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, 146.

Saints Thomas Aquinas and Augustine. In addition to the required punishment for murder and the deterrence standards, both Saints find that executing murderers is also an act of charity and mercy. Saint Augustine confirms that " . . . inflicting capital punishment . . . protects those who are undergoing capital punishment from the harm they may suffer . . . through increased sinning which might continue if their life went on." (On the Lord's Sermon, 1.20.63-64.) Saint Thomas Aquinas finds that " . . . the death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted, unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus deprived of the power to sin anymore." (Summa Theologica, II-II, 25, 6 ad 2.)

Pope Pius XII: "When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live." 9/14/52.

Cardinal Avery Dulles, SJ, 10/7/2000, "At no point, however, does Jesus deny that the State has authority to exact capital punishment. In his debates with the Pharisees, Jesus cites with approval the apparently harsh commandment, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die (Mt 15:4; Mk 7:10, referring to Ex 21:17; cf. Lev 20:9). When Pilate calls attention to his authority to crucify him, Jesus points out that Pilate's power comes to him from above-that is to say, from God (Jn 19:1 l).Jesus commends the good thief on the cross next to him, who has admitted that he and his fellow thief are receiving the due reward of their deeds (Lk 23:41). "

"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 (Rom 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."

"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. "

"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 Catholic magisterium does not, and never has, advocated unqualified abolition of the death penalty. I know of no official statement from popes or bishops, whether in the past or in the present, that denies the right of the State to execute offenders at least in certain extreme cases. The United States bishops, in their majority statement on capital punishment, conceded that Catholic teaching has accepted the principle that the state has the right to take the life of a person guilty of an extremely serious crime. Cardinal Bernardin, in his famous speech on the Consistent Ethic of Life here at Fordham in 1983, stated his concurrence with the classical position that the State has the right to inflict capital punishment.

[url="http://www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx"]SOURCE[/url]

Edited July 30, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Didymus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1612135' date='Jul 29 2008, 08:57 PM']It is untenable as a philosophical principle, because the logical outcome would be the abolition of the death penalty, and that is contrary to the teaching of sacred scripture.[/quote]

How is that the logical outcome? Obviously capital punishment wouldn't disappear from the face of the earth, as it would still be absolutely necessary for some cultures.

btw, are we looking at Sacred Scripture alone on this? Why can't you give me something from the Church? We can personally interpret Scripture different ways. Let's be Catholic here. Please give me something more than your own 'logic.'

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1612145' date='Jul 29 2008, 08:02 PM']You are confusing the application of the death penalty in particular cases with the immutable moral precept that gives the power to execute a criminal to the State.

As far as application of the death penalty is concerned, Catholics are fee to disagree with each other on a case-by-case basis, but the same cannot be said about the moral precept that gives the State the power of the sword, because that precept is an immutable truth of divine revelation.[/quote]


If the state is given the power of the sword by the immutable truth of divine revelation, then why did we have war crimes trials after WWII. If Germany had the right given to them by God to do as they wish, then we had no right to go to war against them, let alone prosecute their leaders after the fact.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1612145' date='Jul 29 2008, 09:02 PM']that precept is an immutable truth of divine revelation.[/quote]

and we know this because _____ told us so..

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612155' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:05 PM']How is that the logical outcome? Obviously capital punishment wouldn't disappear from the face of the earth, as it would still be absolutely necessary for some cultures.[/quote]
If the murderer has not forfeited his right to life, it follows that his life cannot be taken. This principle is connected to the distinction made in scripture and tradition between "murder," which is inherently immoral, and "killing," which is justified in certain cases.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612159' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:07 PM']and we know this because _____ told us so.. [/quote]
I apologize, I referenced the text of Romans (Romans 13:1-4) some time ago in this thread. I assumed that you had read that post.

In addition to the text from Romans, you can do a search of the Torah, and the other parts of the Old Testament, to confirm the fact that God gave the power to execute criminals to the State.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1612157' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:06 PM']If the state is given the power of the sword by the immutable truth of divine revelation, then why did we have war crimes trials after WWII. If Germany had the right given to them by God to do as they wish, then we had no right to go to war against them, let alone prosecute their leaders after the fact.[/quote]
It is simply an application of the same principle at the international level, where the individuals in charge of the State in question (i.e., Nazi Germany) abused its power. I have nowhere said that the State cannot be misused by those in positions of authority.

That said, I do not see any abuse of authority in the case highlighted in the present thread. President Bush has simply refused to grant clemency.

Edited July 30, 2008 by Apotheoun

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1612157' date='Jul 29 2008, 08:06 PM']If the state is given the power of the sword by the immutable truth of divine revelation, then why did we have war crimes trials after WWII. If Germany had the right given to them by God to do as they wish, then we had no right to go to war against them, let alone prosecute their leaders after the fact.[/quote]

Nazi Leaders who unjustly murdered their people where not prosecuted by the Allied Armies. The state only has a right to use the death penalty in just causes like that of a murder of serial rapist. Not because someone is of a certain race of faith. Also I am pretty sure the Conquering State has the right to see justice brought against an unjustified conquered army.

[Didymus]

thank you KoC, I will read through and respond asap

Apo, Romans 13:1-4 does not address those rulers who may actually be a terror to good conduct rather than bad. e.g. does this passage defend unjust rulers?

we need an infallible authority to interpret scripture.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612179' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:15 PM']thank you KoC, I will read through and respond asap

Apo, Romans 13:1-4 does not address those rulers who may actually be a terror to good conduct rather than bad. e.g. does this passage defend unjust rulers?

we need an infallible authority to interpret scripture.[/quote]
The Magisterium is not above scripture, but is at its service. The Pope himself cannot alter the immutable natural moral law or divine revelation, and so there is no power on earth that can declare the use of the death penalty illicit.

The abuse of a power, does not invalidate the power in question. If a ruler misuses the power of the sword, he himself is subject to judgment, can be overthrown, and once arrested, he can be executed if during his rule he committed a capital offense (or many such offenses).

Edited July 30, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Didymus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1612170' date='Jul 29 2008, 09:12 PM']That said, I do not see any abuse of authority in the case highlighted in the present thread. President Bush has simply refused to grant clemency.[/quote]

so you see it, but the fact that we don't makes us wrong??

he did not simply refuse to grant clemency. This was discussed earlier as well. The Commander in Chief is the one who gives the order for executions within the military.