FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Pope changes teaching on death penalty
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Apparently Pope Francis approved a change to the Catechism last October, and it was just published.

From USA Today:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl...887495002/

Quote:Pope changes Catholic Church teaching on death penalty, declares it 'inadmissible'

Pope Francis changed the Catholic Church's stance on the death penalty in a new policy published Thursday, saying that it is “inadmissible” because it “attacks” the inherent dignity of all humans.

The Vatican said the pontiff approved a change to the Catechism – the compilation of official Catholic Church teaching. Previously, the catechism said the church didn’t exclude recourse to capital punishment “if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.”

Francis announced his intention to change church teaching on capital punishment in October. The new text was approved in May and published Thursday.

The new text, contained in Catechism No. 2267, says the previous policy is outdated and that there are other ways to protect the common good.

It says: "Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.



"Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.

"Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide."


The text is taken from Francis’s address to a meeting organized by the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization that took place on October 11 last year, the Catholic Herald reports.

In an accompanying letter explaining the change, the head of the Vatican’s doctrine office said the development of Catholic doctrine on capital punishment didn’t contradict prior teaching, but rather was an evolution of it.

“If, in fact the political and social situation of the past made the death penalty an acceptable means for the protection of the common good, today the increasing understanding that the dignity of a person is not lost even after committing the most serious crimes,” said Cardinal Luis Ladaria, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Francis has long railed against the death penalty, insisting it can never be justified, no matter how heinous the crime. He has also long made prison ministry a mainstay of his vocation. On nearly every foreign trip, Francis has visited with inmates to offer words of solidarity and hope, and he still stays in touch with a group of Argentine inmates he ministered to during his years as archbishop of Buenos Aires.
(08-02-2018, 08:22 AM)Jeeter Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently Pope Francis approved a change to the Catechism last October, and it was just published.

From USA Today:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl...887495002/

Quote:Pope changes Catholic Church teaching on death penalty, declares it 'inadmissible'

Pope Francis changed the Catholic Church's stance on the death penalty in a new policy published Thursday, saying that it is “inadmissible” because it “attacks” the inherent dignity of all humans.

...

Francis has long railed against the death penalty, insisting it can never be justified, no matter how heinous the crime. He has also long made prison ministry a mainstay of his vocation. On nearly every foreign trip, Francis has visited with inmates to offer words of solidarity and hope, and he still stays in touch with a group of Argentine inmates he ministered to during his years as archbishop of Buenos Aires.
I was never for or against the death penalty.  I thought that George Bush, when he was governor of Texas, executed some marginal cases, including the mentally disabled, and improvements in forensic sciences have shown that some have been wrongfully sent to death row by bad prosecutors and cops who rushed to judgement.  The death penalty seems to be more about revenge than justice for much of society. 

I see life in prison as almost more punative than the death penalty.  Time on death row forces the convicted to contemplate the finality of their life as a result of their actions (if they so choose), and the impact on their eternal soul.  They have hope  in the mercy of God if they have true contrition for their sins, and can receive the sacraments at the hour of death.  The Commandant of Aushwitz is said to have made a good confession, received extreme unction and  viaticum prior to his execution by Jesuit Priest, Wladyslaw Lohn, who was once actually interred at Aushwitz. Was Rudolf Hess any better off for having not been executed and spending his life is Spandau?
(08-02-2018, 09:09 AM)The Tax Collector Wrote: [ -> ]I was never for or against the death penalty.  I thought that George Bush, when he was governor of Texas, executed some marginal cases, including the mentally disabled, and improvements in forensic sciences have shown that some have been wrongfully sent to death row by bad prosecutors and cops who rushed to judgement.  The death penalty seems to be more about revenge than justice for much of society. 

I see life in prison as almost more punative than the death penalty.  Time on death row forces the convicted to contemplate the finality of their life as a result of their actions (if they so choose), and the impact on their eternal soul.  They have hope  in the mercy of God if they have true contrition for their sins, and can receive the sacraments at the hour of death.  The Commandant of Aushwitz is said to have made a good confession, received extreme unction and  viaticum prior to his execution by Jesuit Priest, Wladyslaw Lohn, who was once actually interred at Aushwitz. Was Rudolf Hess any better off for having not been executed and spending his life is Spandau?

I tend to think along those lines. I see the logic and justification behind executing someone for certain crimes, but that can also deprive them of a chance to repent, convert, and confess. Plus I find cases where the person was exonerated by DNA to be disturbing.

(08-02-2018, 09:07 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.amazon.com/Man-Shall-His-Blo...1621641260

The problem I see is that the author isn't pope. Which raises the question: how binding is the Catechism? If I can ignore it and execute someone/assist somewhere in the execution process because I disagree, and can reference the basis for said disagreement, can one ignore other parts and use contraceptives or eat meat on Fridays? Not saying I would do those things, just tossing out examples.
What a bizarre act (not even considering the substantive content).  This is going to generate a lot of ink, dubia, division, etc. I have a feeling.  After reading the CDF note that accompanied this, it seems they are trying to take capital punishment down the same route slavery went.  According to the CE article below, slavery (properly defined) could be justified under the natural law and was common in Christian civilization, but human dignity considerations, and the experience of the commonness of unjust instances and various attendant evils led to its utter reproval, with the just form left to the theoretical (the modern CCC is actually appropriately narrow in its entry on slavery).  

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14039a.htm

In this case, if they had paid a few words of lip service to the fact that this penalty is not unjust or contrary to the natural law or revelation strictly as a matter of retribution and expiation (the Catechism still speaks of this as the primary aim of punishment just a few words before), I don't think I would have any problem with the rest and leaving it in the realm of the theoretical with just slavery.
This is absolutely genius by Pope Francis and his money changers. Pope Francis is counting on the lack of intestinal fortitude by the Bishops to buck him on this. He sees that in the light of the McCarrick scandal that the bishops are unwilling to stand up against sin and unwilling to stand up for church teaching. He is using this is a canary in the coal mines to see what else he can get away with. He knows that the sentiment is on his side regarding this topic especially amongst the liberal progressive left, he knows that the left owns the media. So any Bishop that does stand up against him regarding this will meet the full onslaught of the media against them. He knows that hardly any Bishops will be able to stand against that.

What he doesnt understand is the bonfire thats been lit under the laity regarding the McCarrick scandal. And as ArchBishop Fulton Sheen stated, the church will not be saved by the clergy, but by the laity. Just think, our Heavenly Father placed you and I in this time in history. This is our fight and we have been made for it.
It just creates more excuses for Catholic identifying liberals to say they can vote for pro-abortion candidates over pro-life candidates, because the pro-life candidate also supports capital punishment.
I tend to view it as a neutral topic. You can argue for and against it. However, to move completely to "inadmissible" is nonsense. Although, considering we're talking about secular governments it may be a better way to go. A Catholic society would make sure every person has access to a priest before being put to their death. I'd imagine in our society only those who ask for one are granted it.
How this is not heresy, or something close to it? And how could God prescribe the death penalty ('by man shall his blood be shed') if it violates the dignity of man? God has authority over life, but He's delegating that to man - which, of course, is the proper understanding of the state ('thou wouldst have no power over me unless it were given to thee from above').

And I suppose St Dismas was wrong about being executed justly.
(08-02-2018, 10:44 AM)Paul Wrote: [ -> ]How this is not heresy, or something close to it? And how could God prescribe the death penalty ('by man shall his blood be shed') if it violates the dignity of man? God has authority over life, but He's delegating that to man - which, of course, is the proper understanding of the state ('thou wouldst have no power over me unless it were given to thee from above').

And I suppose St Dismas was wrong about being executed justly.

I don't think capital punishment is something that's ever been defined as being good or bad by the Church and it's certainly not an issue of doctrine so heresy charges would be impossible. Certain Saints have certainly supported it. The Pope's change certainly flies in the face of the likes of St. Thomas Aquinas who said that it is just. If such a change is made, one would at least expect an explanation. I could see an explanation which contrasts prior times to today, Catholic governments vs. secular governments, or something of that nature. However, a blind liberal-type change with no reasoning besides emotion is plain nonsense.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20