Falibly Infallible

[Peace]

That is what we have civil authority for. God has ordained for civil authorities to rule over nations - authority over and above that of any one individual.

Nihil - my argument is based on a shameless appeal to authority and emotion, and I must say that your consistent attempt to employ logic and reason are becoming increasingly annoying.

But be that as it may, I had understood the crux of your argument to be "God did it so we can do it". Please correct me if I am wrong.

You then established that civil authorities have an authority over and above that of any one person.

But I do not think that leads to the conclusion that "God did it so a civil authority can do it." Are you suggesting that a civil authority has the same level of authority to act as God does?

It seems to me that a civil authority has more authority than an individual but less than God. I don't think that State Government of California gets to burn down San Francisco.

[Nihil Obstat]

Nihil - my argument is based on a shameless appeal to authority and emotion, and I must say that your consistent attempt to employ logic and reason are becoming increasingly annoying.

But be that as it may, I had understood the crux of your argument to be "God did it so we can do it". Please correct me if I am wrong.

You then established that civil authorities have an authority over and above that of any one person.

But I do not think that leads to the conclusion that "God did it so a civil authority can do it." Are you suggesting that a civil authority has the same level of authority to act as God does?

It seems to me that a civil authority has more authority than an individual but less than God. I don't think that State Government of California gets to burn down San Francisco.

"God did it so we can do it."

Not exactly. God did it, and gave us (through civil authority) to do likewise for specific reasons in specific circumstances. I do view the nature of civil authority as being actively willed by God, not simply passively allowed. Likewise I believe that their discretion to act in this case is something specifically ordained by God. Not to say we should use the death penalty recklessly. Simply that God allows us to do so, and IMO ordains through natural law and justice that we do use it at times.

[Peace]

"God did it so we can do it."

Not exactly. God did it, and gave us (through civil authority) to do likewise for specific reasons in specific circumstances. I do view the nature of civil authority as being actively willed by God, not simply passively allowed. Likewise I believe that their discretion to act in this case is something specifically ordained by God. Not to say we should use the death penalty recklessly. Simply that God allows us to do so, and IMO ordains through natural law and justice that we do use it at times.

OK. That is fair enough.

But weren't you the one who wants to make the Church the civil authority to which we are bound (or have the state recognize that its power is  subject to the ultimate authority of the Church)?

If that is the case, then doesn't it follow that when the state exercises the death penalty, it should exercise the standard set forth by the Church (the standard in the Catechism, for example)?

Edited September 17, 2015 by Peace

[Nihil Obstat]

OK. That is fair enough.

But weren't you the one who wants to make the Church the civil authority to which we are bound (or have the state recognize that its power is  subject to the ultimate authority of the Church)?

If that is the case, then doesn't it follow that when the state exercises the death penalty, it should exercise the standard set forth by the Church (the standard in the Catechism, for example)?

Not precisely. I would prefer a civil authority separate from the Church which nonetheless recognizes Her spiritual and temporal authority and cedes Her the rights She truly possesses.

But in general yes, I believe the state should follow the teachings of the Church. The point is that the Church also teaches that the death penalty is not inherently unjust. And has always done so.

[Peace]

By not inherently unjust I take it that you mean that it can be used under certain circumstances? If that is what you mean then I agree. But I agreed with that from the start. It can be used under the circumstances set forth in the Catechism.

Edited September 17, 2015 by Peace

[Nihil Obstat]

 

By not inherently unjust I take it that you mean that it can be used under certain circumstances? If that is what you mean then I agree. But I agreed with that from the start. It can be used under the circumstances set forth in the Catechism.

Well the Catechism is not the only source of these relevant teachings. Useful yes, but in terms of the death penalty it is really more of a very general bullet point.