Well said. Ağca was a trained assassin and the Pope's forgiveness led to his conversion to Catholicism although accounts are unclear as to when/how. Hegseth’s execution of Nidal Malik Hasan under the UCMJ is problematic on many levels not to mention that filming it would be macabre, even if some consider the execution justified by the depravity of Hasan’s actions—in addition to his many victims he also killed a pregnant woman who was pleading for the life of her unborn child. President Obama deepened the misery of the victims’ families by describing the rampage as “workplace violence” rather than as a terrorist attack. I admit that I struggle with the question of capital punishment. The current Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2267 sees it as inadmissible but this is a change from prior teachings which said execution could be justified only when it was the sole practicable way to defend human lives, a situation considered “very rare, if not practically non-existent.” The earlier version makes sense to me and the latter makes me wonder how the Church will respond to societal breakdown and widespread anarchy (like Plato predicts is the result of democracy devolving into...) St. Thomas Aquinas explicitly defended the death penalty in principle, arguing that, in some cases, legitimate public authority may execute a dangerous criminal to protect the common good. He compared this to removing a diseased limb to save the body, while maintaining that such action could be justified only when necessary for society’s protection. In my view, although I accept the Church’s teaching against the culture of death, I do not see capital punishment in certain cases as contributing to that culture; rather, I see it as a means of protecting society in those exceptional cases where necessary which do not exist in our time but may in a later time. In other words, I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that, whereas abortion is intrinsically evil, capital punishment is not, even if it is now inadmissible. So, my tortured comment reflects my obedience to the teaching and my doubts--perhaps lack of hope--that it is sustainable in the future.
Thanks for having a much more nuanced approach to the topic. I understand the challenge that people have with the doctrine, but it seems like a healthy development of doctrine. It also seems curious to me how much effort people put into confronting recent Magisterial statements with Thomas Aquinas on the death penalty. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection.
In part, I agree that this was a healthy doctrinal development in addressing capital punishment. On the other hand, it seemed unbalanced to me because Pope Francis sharply criticized life sentences, calling them a “hidden death penalty,” on the grounds that they take away the possibility of a person’s moral and existential redemption. That is the part I don’t understand. Why should moral reform be tied to release from prison? Why not encourage prisoners to accept their punishment in this life as just and proper penance, and to place their hope in salvation? I quoted St. Thomas Aquinas only because his statements seem to fit best with the wording of the older Catechism, which allowed the death penalty only when it was the sole practicable means of defending human lives, while judging such cases “very rare, if not practically non-existent.” Thus, the word “inadmissible” seems to me to fit more closely. Also, I could not find a clearly stated position on capital punishment from the Scotist, Molinist, or Suárezian schools which tend to think much differently than STA.
I was admiring your balance - and contrasting it to others who try to write a defense of capital punishment from a Christian viewpoint. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection on the topic.
I did not take your comments as a challenge or criticism. I thought it might be helpful to explain my reason for citing STA in the interest of understanding. I am glad you raised this capital punishment topic given the recent horrifically botched execution in Tennessee and the upcoming execution December 3rd (during Advent of all times). Pax
Just a quick response to your comment. I agree with you that capital punishment is not an intrinsic evil. The Church's wording around "intrinsic evil" like abortion is different than it's wording around capital punishment for good reason. "Inadmissible," from what I understand, means no longer justifiable as a form of punishment from the state. If the reasons for its inadmissibility change and we are no longer able to protect lives in other ways, I think we will go back to the "very rare, if not practically non-existent" situation that was recognized by the Church. Today there does not seem to truly exist a condition in which the death penalty is necessary. I think that is the difference. If the conditions change, there might be a reason to allow the possibility once again.
It shocks and surprises me how people are reacting in social media comments to the case of Christa Pike and how there is this immense desire to see criminals die. For Catholics, I think it is critical we remember the story of Saint Maria Goretti and Alessandro Serenelli.
Conditions in Prisons are awful, many prisoners have horrific crimes committed against their person and commit horrific crimes against others, *within* the prison. Have the Bishops carefully weighed allowing all of this sin to be perpetuated in prison (and de-facto *encouraged* by secular culture--see "prison rape" as a "joke") against the idea of returning a soul to God?
The "Prison System" as a solution when it generates and perpetuates a massive amount of sin among the inmates feels short sighted. I accept the teaching as something carefully thought out, but am concerned about the language as it makes prison seem "good", and the way it has been taught has been very heavy handed--"You Aren't Allowed to Believe in the Death Penalty Anymore Shut Up" is the attitude from many.
Well said. Ağca was a trained assassin and the Pope's forgiveness led to his conversion to Catholicism although accounts are unclear as to when/how. Hegseth’s execution of Nidal Malik Hasan under the UCMJ is problematic on many levels not to mention that filming it would be macabre, even if some consider the execution justified by the depravity of Hasan’s actions—in addition to his many victims he also killed a pregnant woman who was pleading for the life of her unborn child. President Obama deepened the misery of the victims’ families by describing the rampage as “workplace violence” rather than as a terrorist attack. I admit that I struggle with the question of capital punishment. The current Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2267 sees it as inadmissible but this is a change from prior teachings which said execution could be justified only when it was the sole practicable way to defend human lives, a situation considered “very rare, if not practically non-existent.” The earlier version makes sense to me and the latter makes me wonder how the Church will respond to societal breakdown and widespread anarchy (like Plato predicts is the result of democracy devolving into...) St. Thomas Aquinas explicitly defended the death penalty in principle, arguing that, in some cases, legitimate public authority may execute a dangerous criminal to protect the common good. He compared this to removing a diseased limb to save the body, while maintaining that such action could be justified only when necessary for society’s protection. In my view, although I accept the Church’s teaching against the culture of death, I do not see capital punishment in certain cases as contributing to that culture; rather, I see it as a means of protecting society in those exceptional cases where necessary which do not exist in our time but may in a later time. In other words, I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that, whereas abortion is intrinsically evil, capital punishment is not, even if it is now inadmissible. So, my tortured comment reflects my obedience to the teaching and my doubts--perhaps lack of hope--that it is sustainable in the future.
Thanks for having a much more nuanced approach to the topic. I understand the challenge that people have with the doctrine, but it seems like a healthy development of doctrine. It also seems curious to me how much effort people put into confronting recent Magisterial statements with Thomas Aquinas on the death penalty. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection.
In part, I agree that this was a healthy doctrinal development in addressing capital punishment. On the other hand, it seemed unbalanced to me because Pope Francis sharply criticized life sentences, calling them a “hidden death penalty,” on the grounds that they take away the possibility of a person’s moral and existential redemption. That is the part I don’t understand. Why should moral reform be tied to release from prison? Why not encourage prisoners to accept their punishment in this life as just and proper penance, and to place their hope in salvation? I quoted St. Thomas Aquinas only because his statements seem to fit best with the wording of the older Catechism, which allowed the death penalty only when it was the sole practicable means of defending human lives, while judging such cases “very rare, if not practically non-existent.” Thus, the word “inadmissible” seems to me to fit more closely. Also, I could not find a clearly stated position on capital punishment from the Scotist, Molinist, or Suárezian schools which tend to think much differently than STA.
I was admiring your balance - and contrasting it to others who try to write a defense of capital punishment from a Christian viewpoint. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection on the topic.
I did not take your comments as a challenge or criticism. I thought it might be helpful to explain my reason for citing STA in the interest of understanding. I am glad you raised this capital punishment topic given the recent horrifically botched execution in Tennessee and the upcoming execution December 3rd (during Advent of all times). Pax
Just a quick response to your comment. I agree with you that capital punishment is not an intrinsic evil. The Church's wording around "intrinsic evil" like abortion is different than it's wording around capital punishment for good reason. "Inadmissible," from what I understand, means no longer justifiable as a form of punishment from the state. If the reasons for its inadmissibility change and we are no longer able to protect lives in other ways, I think we will go back to the "very rare, if not practically non-existent" situation that was recognized by the Church. Today there does not seem to truly exist a condition in which the death penalty is necessary. I think that is the difference. If the conditions change, there might be a reason to allow the possibility once again.
It shocks and surprises me how people are reacting in social media comments to the case of Christa Pike and how there is this immense desire to see criminals die. For Catholics, I think it is critical we remember the story of Saint Maria Goretti and Alessandro Serenelli.
Conditions in Prisons are awful, many prisoners have horrific crimes committed against their person and commit horrific crimes against others, *within* the prison. Have the Bishops carefully weighed allowing all of this sin to be perpetuated in prison (and de-facto *encouraged* by secular culture--see "prison rape" as a "joke") against the idea of returning a soul to God?
The "Prison System" as a solution when it generates and perpetuates a massive amount of sin among the inmates feels short sighted. I accept the teaching as something carefully thought out, but am concerned about the language as it makes prison seem "good", and the way it has been taught has been very heavy handed--"You Aren't Allowed to Believe in the Death Penalty Anymore Shut Up" is the attitude from many.