Deserving Of Death Penalty?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='24 November 2009 - 04:50 AM' timestamp='1259063400' post='2008497']Now that we've got 'that' cleared up. What about acts deserving of the death penalty? At one time the Catholic Church taught that certain acts "earn" death. Adultry, blasphamy, murder, etc., require execution at human's hands. Back then, people were trusted to make life and death judgements.

. . .
[/quote]
The governing authorities are still entrusted with the power of the sword, which is why the death penalty is a perfectly legitimate form of punishment. But the infliction of capital punishment has been committed to the civil authorities, and not to private persons. The father should have turned his son over to the police for proper criminal prosecution and punishment.

[quote name='Anomaly' date='24 November 2009 - 04:50 AM' timestamp='1259063400' post='2008497']Now, with greater knowledge, we aren't capable of making the same judgement? [/quote]
Man has not changed, which is why I - as a Catholic - support the prudent use of the death penalty.

[quote name='Anomaly' date='24 November 2009 - 04:50 AM' timestamp='1259063400' post='2008497']Or, is the purpose of execution not an earned punishment but merely self-defense? [/quote]
As I said in an earlier post:

. . . there are three principles that must be taken into account by the civil authorities in maintaining justice:

(1) The rehabilitation of the criminal is to be sought [i]when this is possible[/i].
(2) Retributive justice, that is, the restoration of the social order by a punishment that is commensurate with the crime - [i]including in some cases the execution of the criminal[/i] - is to be enacted.
(3) The civil authorities are duty bound to defend the common good of society by rendering the criminal harmless, [i]and this principle also includes the possible execution of the malefactor[/i].

Moreover, Pope Puis XII held that the death penalty itself can be rehabilitative, because the criminal - confronted by his own mortality - may be moved to remorse and conversion of heart. Finally, when a given punishment (even punishment unto death) is voluntarily accepted by an offender, it takes on the value of expiation, which can help to bring about the criminal's eternal salvation.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Apotheoun

[rkwright]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='21 November 2009 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1258862209' post='2007168']
Granted he wrote quite a lot, and I have only read his anti-Pelagian writings, anti-Donatist writings, his treatise on free will, along with his treatise on nature and grace, his [i]Enarrationes in Psalmos[/i], and a smattering of his homilies, but I suppose he could have said what you are talking about in some obscure text.

Nevertheless, as I said in the second part of my previous post . . . [i]even if it were true it would concern only matters of prudence (i.e., the application of wisdom to a particular event), and could not be made a general rule of conduct[/i].

To put it another way, the application of the death penalty, which by its nature is case specific, falls into the realm of prudential judgments, and because each event is unique it follows that one cannot make a general rule out of the application of that punishment in a particular case, which can then be applied to all cases. Moreover, to think that this is even possible involves confusing theoretical wisdom with practical wisdom, and I hardly think that St. Augustine would support that kind of error.
[/quote]

Didn't want to leave you hanging...

Its mostly in his letters to Marcellinus, who I think was a Christian Roman Judge. I'll post the text from two of them. BTW I understand your comments about practical application, but my point was only that St. Augustine was not such a staunch supporter of the death penalty in its application.

To everyone else, this might be insightful into the one of the great doctor's of the Church personal thoughts on the application of the death penalty.

From Letter 133
[quote]1. I have learned that the Circumcelliones and clergy of the Donatist faction belonging to the district of Hippo, whom the guardians of public order had brought to trial for their deeds, have been examined by your Excellency, and that the most of them have confessed their share in the violent death which the presbyter Restitutus suffered at their hands, and in the beating of Innocentius, another Catholic presbyter, as well as in digging out the eye and cutting off the finger of the said Innocentius. This news has plunged me into the deepest anxiety, lest perchance your Excellency should judge them worthy, according to the laws, of punishment not less severe than suffering in their own persons the same injuries as they have inflicted on others. Wherefore I write this letter to implore you by your faith in Christ, and by the mercy of Christ the Lord Himself, by no means to do this or permit it to be done. For although we might silently pass over the execution of criminals who may be regarded as brought up for trial not upon an accusation of ours, but by an indictment presented by those to whose vigilance the preservation of the public peace is entrusted, we do not wish to have the sufferings of the servants of God avenged by the infliction of precisely similar injuries in the way of retaliation. Not, of course, that we object to the removal from these wicked men of the liberty to perpetrate further crimes; but our desire is rather that justice be satisfied without the taking of their lives or the maiming of their bodies in any part, and that, by such coercive measures as may be in accordance with the laws, they be turned from their insane frenzy to the quietness of men in their sound judgment, or compelled to give up mischievous violence and betake themselves to some useful labour. This is indeed called a penal sentence; but who does not see that when a restraint is put upon the boldness of savage violence, and the remedies fitted to produce repentance are not withdrawn, this discipline should be called a benefit rather than vindictive punishment?

2. Fulfil, Christian judge, the duty of an affectionate father; let your indignation against their crimes be tempered by considerations of humanity; be not provoked by the atrocity of their sinful deeds to gratify the passion of revenge, but rather be moved by the wounds which these deeds have inflicted on their own souls to exercise a desire to heal them. Do not lose now that fatherly care which you maintained when prosecuting the examination, in doing which you extracted the confession of such horrid crimes, not by stretching them on the rack, not by furrowing their flesh with iron claws, not by scorching them with flames, but by beating them with rods, a mode of correction used by schoolmasters, and by parents themselves in chastising children, and often also by bishops in the sentences awarded by them. Do not, therefore, now punish with extreme severity the crimes which you searched out with lenity. The necessity for harshness is greater in the investigation than in the infliction of punishment; for even the gentlest men use diligence and stringency in searching out a hidden crime, that they may find to whom they may show mercy. Wherefore it is generally necessary to use more rigour in making inquisition, so that when the crime has been brought to light, there may be scope for displaying clemency. For all good works love to be set in the light, not in order to obtain glory from men, but, as the Lord says, that they seeing your good works may glorify your Father who is in heaven. Matthew 5:16 And, for the same reason, the apostle was not satisfied with merely exhorting us to practise moderation, but also commands us to make it known: Let your moderation, he says, be known unto all men; Philippians 4:5 and in another place, Showing all meekness unto all men. Titus 3:2 Hence, also, that most signal forbearance of the holy David, when he mercifully spared his enemy when delivered into his hand, 1 Samuel 24:7 would not have been so conspicuous had not his power to act otherwise been manifest. Therefore let not the power of executing vengeance inspire you with harshness, seeing that the necessity of examining the criminals did not make you lay aside your clemency. Do not call for the executioner now when the crime has been found out, after having forborne from calling in the tormentor when you were finding it out.[/quote]

From Letter 139
[quote]2. As to the punishment of these men, I beseech you to make it something less severe than sentence of death, although they have, by their own confession, been guilty of such grievous crimes. I ask this out of a regard both for our own consciences and for the testimony thereby given to Catholic clemency. For this is the special advantage secured to us by their confession, that the Catholic Church has found an opportunity of maintaining and exhibiting forbearance towards her most violent enemies; since in a case where such cruelty was practised, any punishment short of death will be seen by all men to proceed from great leniency. And although such treatment appears to some of our communion, whose minds are agitated by these atrocities, to be less than the crimes deserve, and to have somewhat the aspect of weakness and dereliction of duty, nevertheless, when the feelings, which are wont to be immoderately excited while such events are recent, have subsided after a time, the kindness shown to the guilty will shine with most conspicuous brightness, and men will take much more pleasure in reading these Acts and showing them to others, my lord justly distinguished, and son very much beloved and longed for.[/quote]

From Letter 100 to Donatus
[quote]2. We beg you, therefore, when you are pronouncing judgment in cases affecting the Church, how wicked soever the injuries may be which you shall ascertain to have been attempted or inflicted on the Church, to forget that you have the power of capital punishment, and not to forget our request. Nor let it appear to you an unimportant matter and beneath your notice, my most beloved and honoured son, that we ask you to spare the lives of the men on whose behalf we ask God to grant them repentance. For even granting that we ought never to deviate from a fixed purpose of overcoming evil with good, let your own wisdom take this also into consideration, that no person beyond those who belong to the Church is at pains to bring before you cases pertaining to her interests. If, therefore, your opinion be, that death must be the punishment of men convicted of these crimes, you will deter us from endeavouring to bring anything of this kind before your tribunal; and this being discovered, they will proceed with more unrestrained boldness to accomplish speedily our destruction, when upon us is imposed and enjoined the necessity of choosing rather to suffer death at their hands, than to bring them to death by accusing them at your bar. Disdain not, I beseech you, to accept this suggestion, petition, and entreaty from me. For I do not think that you are unmindful that I might have great boldness in addressing you, even were I not a bishop, and even though your rank were much above what you now hold. Meanwhile, let the Donatist heretics learn at once through the edict of your Excellency that the laws passed against their error, which they suppose and boastfully declare to be repealed, are still in force, although even when they know this they may not be able to refrain in the least degree from injuring us. You will, however, most effectively help us to secure the fruit of our labours and dangers, if you take care that the imperial laws for the restraining of their sect, which is full of conceit and of impious pride, be so used that they may not appear either to themselves or to others to be suffering hardship in any form for the sake of truth and righteousness; but suffer them, when this is requested at your hands, to be convinced and instructed by incontrovertible proofs of things which are most certain, in public proceedings in the presence of your Excellency or of inferior judges, in order that those who are arrested by your command may themselves incline their stubborn will to the better part, and may read these things profitably to others of their party. For the pains bestowed are burdensome rather than really useful, when men are only compelled, not persuaded by instruction, to forsake a great evil and lay hold upon a great benefit.[/quote]

Finally, there is this quote floating around but I cannot actually source it.
[quote]“Man” and “Sinner” are two different things. God made man; man made himself sinner. So, destroy what man made, but save what God made. Thus, do not go so far as to kill the criminal, for in wishing to punish the sin, you are destroying the man. Do not take away his life; leave him the possibility of repentance.
Saint Augustine, cited in James J Megivern, The Death Penalty: An Historical and Theological Survey (New York: Paulist Press, 1997), 38.[/quote]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 12:37 PM' timestamp='1259091471' post='2008608']
Didn't want to leave you hanging...

Its mostly in his letters to Marcellinus, who I think was a Christian Roman Judge. I'll post the text from two of them. BTW I understand your comments about practical application, but my point was only that St. Augustine was not such a staunch supporter of the death penalty in its application.
[/quote]
Yet, my point stands, which is simply that the application of the death penalty - by its very nature - is case specific, and so St. Augustine's presumed reluctance in applying that penalty in particular cases is irrelevant, just as the previous pope's views on its application have no doctrinal importance, because they were of the prudential order.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 12:37 PM' timestamp='1259091471' post='2008608']
From Letter 100 to Donatus
[quote]We beg you, therefore, when you are pronouncing judgment [b]in cases affecting the Church[/b], how wicked soever the injuries may be which you shall ascertain to have been attempted or inflicted on the Church, to forget that you have the power of capital punishment, and not to forget our request.[/quote][/quote]
These letters concern cases affecting the Church (i.e., they concern cases of heresy and schism), which were by and large connected with the Donatist schism, and so it would be wrong to interpret these letters as a general request for clemency in the case of all capital crimes.

St. Augustine, while believing that the state could execute a man for heresy, was uneasy about this issue, and suffered much anxiety in connection with his attempts to end the Donatist schism, but it would be wrong to apply his personal anxiety on this particular issue across the board, and say that St. Augustine opposed the application of the death penalty in connection with every type of capital crime.

That said, the point I reaffirmed in my previous post remains unaffected by matters related to the prudential order, and so St. Augustine's opinion on the application of the death penalty against the Donatists, while historically interesting, has no real impact on my stated position.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 12:37 PM' timestamp='1259091471' post='2008608']
Finally, there is this quote floating around but I cannot actually source it.
[quote]“Man” and “Sinner” are two different things. God made man; man made himself sinner. So, destroy what man made, but save what God made. Thus, do not go so far as to kill the criminal, for in wishing to punish the sin, you are destroying the man. Do not take away his life; leave him the possibility of repentance.
Saint Augustine, cited in James J Megivern, The Death Penalty: An Historical and Theological Survey (New York: Paulist Press, 1997), 38.[/quote]
[/quote]
As I pointed out in an earlier post: the death penalty itself - according to the Church's traditional doctrine - can be salvific, because a man who is "confronted by his own mortality," and the fact that he will soon meet his maker, may be brought to repentance and in the process achieve eternal salvation.

Finally, I will conclude this post by paraphrasing something said by Prof. Heinrich Rommen: [i]only a society that has fallen into atheism and materialism would deny the idea that the death penalty can be salvific[/i].

Edited November 24, 2009 by Apotheoun

[rkwright]

I understand your point. My point was only that when it came to actually implementing the death penalty Augustine advocated against it's use. I'll put my lot with Augustine and john Paul II. In the absence of a more prudental opinion I submit my will and intellect to the current CCCs position on the matter.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 03:20 PM' timestamp='1259101247' post='2008723']
I understand your point. My point was only that when it came to actually implementing the death penalty Augustine advocated against its use.[/quote]
He spoke about showing clemency in relation to the Donatist heretics, but it would be imprudent to try and turn his comments in connection with the Donatist schism into some kind of common or general rule.

[KnightofChrist]

I put my hope in Sacred Tradition, and Holy Mother Church until the ages of ages. Like all of her teachings, her teachings on Capital Punishment are universal. The same principles for all places and all times. Her truths and teachings never change.

Even if the Church wanted to forbid capital punishment she could not. She has no right to forbid a right given to the State by God Almighty.

Edited November 24, 2009 by KnightofChrist

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 03:20 PM' timestamp='1259101247' post='2008723']
In the absence of a more prudental opinion I submit my will and intellect to the current CCCs position on the matter.
[/quote]
This comment makes no sense. Prudence is the application of wisdom in a particular situation, and so a prudential judgment, even one issued by the Pope, cannot be made into a general rule of conduct. In other words, you cannot say how you would act in judging a particular criminal case until you know the particulars of that case.

Moreover, according to Roman Catholic doctrine the prudential judgments of the pope can be in error, and this fact was exemplified in a case involving Pope Honorius, who failed to speak out forcefully against the Monothelite heresy after being asked to give his judgment on the matter, and this prudential error later led to his condemnation by the Sixth Ecumenical Council.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='24 November 2009 - 03:39 PM' timestamp='1259102352' post='2008733']
Even if the Church wanted to forbid capital punishment she could not. She has no right to forbid a right given to the State by God Almighty.
[/quote]
You are correct.

[Nihil Obstat]

It would be nice to be able to say "killing is never allowed, ever" because it's simple, strong, and doesn't require giving any thought to subtleties.
Unfortunately to say so would be irresponsible and condemnable.

That's what it means to follow Christ. We don't get the easy issues.

[rkwright]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='24 November 2009 - 05:40 PM' timestamp='1259102436' post='2008735']
This comment makes no sense. Prudence is the application of wisdom in a particular situation, and so a prudential judgment, even one issued by the Pope, cannot be made into a general rule of conduct. In other words, you cannot say how you would act in judging a particular criminal case until you know the particulars of that case.

Moreover, according to Roman Catholic doctrine the prudential judgments of the pope can be in error, and this fact was exemplified in a case involving Pope Honorius, who failed to speak out forcefully against the Monothelite heresy after being asked to give his judgment on the matter, and this prudential error later led to his condemnation by the Sixth Ecumenical Council.
[/quote]

I agree with Cam42 and his position (and for that matter the CCC) in this earlier thread.
http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=36477&hl=death%20penalty&st=40

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='24 November 2009 - 08:45 PM' timestamp='1259120712' post='2009001']
I agree with Cam42 and his position (and for that matter the CCC) in this earlier thread.
http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=36477&hl=death%20penalty&st=40
[/quote]
That much is clear. Nevertheless, I agree with the constant teaching of the Church as it has been expresses diachronically in the teachings of the Fathers, Councils, and Bishops.

Edited November 25, 2009 by Apotheoun

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='24 November 2009 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1259095393' post='2008648']
As I pointed out in an earlier post: the death penalty itself - according to the Church's traditional doctrine - can be salvific, because a man who is "confronted by his own mortality," and the fact that he will soon meet his maker, may be brought to repentance and in the process achieve eternal salvation.

Finally, I will conclude this post by paraphrasing something said by Prof. Heinrich Rommen: [i]only a society that has fallen into atheism and materialism would deny the idea that the death penalty can be salvific[/i].
[/quote]
That is a good point about confronting mortality. I watched a show about John Wayne Gacy last night, and they interviewed his sister about their last conversation, and she said the first thing she asked him is if he had gotten himself right with God.