Catholic Bishops Plan Drive Against Death Penalty

[DonCamillo]

[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52089-2005Mar20.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Mar20.html[/url]

[quote][b]Catholic Bishops Plan Drive Against Death Penalty[/b]
[i]Leaders Shift Priorities, Sensing Public Opinion Has Changed on Capital Punishment[/i]

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 21, 2005

In the week before Easter, as Christians reflect on the execution of Jesus, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is launching a campaign to end the use of the death penalty in the United States.

Although the campaign reflects the consistent teaching of Pope John Paul II, it marks something of a shift in priorities for the nation's Roman Catholic bishops, who last issued a major statement against capital punishment 25 years ago.

During the 2004 presidential race, the bishops spoke forcefully against same-sex marriage and abortion, warning in a declaration on "Catholics in Political Life" that politicians who support abortion rights are "cooperating in evil." They gave far less prominence to the church's position that the death penalty is rarely, if ever, justified in modern societies.

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, who played a leading role in developing the new campaign, said the bishops sense that public opinion is shifting against capital punishment, partly because genetic testing has proved that scores of death-row inmates were wrongfully convicted.

"I think the DNA evidence has really shaken up people," McCarrick said. "I think this is a moment, a very special moment, where we can talk about this and people are ready to listen."

The campaign will be formally announced today in Washington and then will move to the state and local level, using all the tools of persuasion at the church's disposal, said John Carr, a staff member of the bishops' conference who will play a coordinating role.

"We'll be filing briefs in court cases, talking with the people who publish textbooks in Catholic schools, using church bulletins, encouraging homilies and addressing legislation through state Catholic conferences," he said. "The death penalty will end in this country in several ways -- legislation, judges' decisions and decisions by individual prosecutors and jurors -- and we'll be seeking all of those."

Experts on the role of religion in politics said the campaign will please many Catholics who see a consistent ethic of life in the church's positions against contraception, abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research and the death penalty.

But they said it may be viewed as a distraction by some antiabortion groups and could lead to tensions with evangelical Protestants, who have made common cause with Catholics against abortion but who overwhelmingly support capital punishment, according to polls.

"Evangelicals are the religious group in the United States that are the most pro-death penalty," said James L. Guth, a political scientist at Furman University in Greenville, S.C., who studies conservative Protestantism. "But as long as both groups place a higher priority on other social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, I think their cooperation will continue unimpeded."

The campaign also could run into opposition from socially conservative Catholics who stress that the church does not flatly ban capital punishment, as it does abortion, contraception and euthanasia. Historically, the Catholic Church itself executed heretics, and it has always recognized that capital punishment is justified in certain cases, said Scott Hahn, a professor of theology and scripture at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio.

"I think a campaign to stop capital punishment is comparable to a campaign to stop war," Hahn said. "I think we have to clarify that one set of issues, such as abortion and the ban on contraception, does not admit of exceptions. And the other set of issues, such as just war and capital punishment, not only admits of exceptions, but that's where Catholic lay people ought to be granted a certain degree of liberty to formulate their own prudential judgments."

McCarrick, like Hahn, noted that Article 2267 of the Catholic catechism, an authoritative compendium of church teaching, says the church "does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives" against a criminal. But the catechism also quotes John Paul II as saying that today, cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."

Because of the nuance in the church's teaching, McCarrick said, the bishops will not argue that capital punishment is inherently immoral. "Our job is to try to persuade our Catholic people and everybody of good will that the death penalty in America at this time is not necessary, it's not useful and it's not good," he said. [/quote]


I think that this is great!

Edited March 21, 2005 by DonCamillo

[Paphnutius]

Deo gratias ago!

[DonCamillo]

One of the person compaigning against death penalty is sister Helen Prejean.
She wrote the book "Dead man walking" which became a movie and an opera.
(Sean Penn does an excellent job in the movie.)

To me she is the "salt of the earth", a great disciple of Christ.
God bless her.

Here is a quick interview she did recently for TIME magazine.

[quote][b]10 Questions For Helen Prejean[/b]
Feb. 21, 2005

Sister Helen Prejean's 1993 book against the death penalty, Dead Man Walking, became a movie and even an opera. At 65, she's only getting angrier. In The Death of Innocents, she escorts two men to their executions--and this time she's sure they are not guilty. Prejean spoke, barely pausing for breath, with TIME's Amanda Ripley about the Pope, politics and hypocrisy.

HOW MANY EXECUTIONS HAVE YOU WITNESSED?
Six. The man I visit now on death row in Louisiana, Manuel Ortiz--I believe in his total and absolute innocence. So that would be the seventh, and three have ended up being people I believe were innocent.

IN HIS STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH, PRESIDENT BUSH PRAISED DNA EXONERATIONS AND CALLED FOR MONEY TO TRAIN DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IN CAPITAL CASES. DO YOU FEEL REASSURED?
Hardly. See how many people in Texas can get access to DNA evidence even today. And in Texas, attorneys are appointed by judges. You can look at the pattern of judges appointing over and over again the same attorneys [whose clients] almost always get the death penalty. Honestly, it's hard to look at [Bush's] face on television because everything he says is so untruthful.

LIKE WHAT?
He claimed Karla Faye Tucker's execution was a crushing weight on him and said, "God bless Karla Faye Tucker," and then, after she was executed, he mimicked her. I hate the way he uses religion. It's a sacrilege to me. As Governor, he had the power to save a woman who had completely changed her life.

THERE WERE 59 EXECUTIONS LAST YEAR--THE LOWEST NUMBER SINCE 1996. IS THAT HOPEFUL?
Yes, very. Over the last five years, death sentences have declined by 50%. The turning point was 2000 when [Illinois] Governor Ryan had the courage to do a moratorium. In North Carolina, they are close to a moratorium. In New Mexico, they are close to repealing it. I can see the difference on the road tour.

HOW SO?
With Dead Man Walking I had to put my trowel in the ground and go through rock, shale and stone to make every argument. Now the bookstores are packed, and they're sold out.

SOME BISHOPS HAVE SAID PRO-ABORTION POLITICIANS SHOULD NOT RECEIVE COMMUNION. BUT THEY DIDN'T EXTEND THAT CALL TO DEATH-PENALTY PROPONENTS. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS LOGIC?
If you look at the history of the church on moral issues, there's always been great emphasis on anything to do with sex. But it's gotten easier; the Pope has taken leadership on the death penalty and put it up there with other pro-life issues. And well, you know, the bishops try to be obedient to the Pope, so that's a real calling card.

YOU MUST GET HUNDREDS OF LETTERS FROM DEATH ROW. HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHICH TO ANSWER?
It's not a highly logical procedure. I promise to pray for them. I try to hook them up with a group in their state that helps people. But it's impossible. I could spend all my time doing it. Some of the saddest letters are from mothers.

THE BOOK INCLUDES A SECTION ON ABU GHRAIB. WHAT'S THE CONNECTION?
I've seen the death penalty up close, and I know it's the practice of torture. Anybody who is led to an execution chamber has shackles on their hands and feet. They've been kept in a room shorter than cells in Abu Ghraib, and for 15, 25 years.

YOU ALSO WRITE THAT WE EXECUTE INNOCENT PEOPLE "ALL THE TIME." Who says that? I BELIEVE YOU DO. Nuh-uh. I'M ON PAGE 10. Oh yeah, I do say it. Well, everything points to it. I mean, the 118 death- row exonerees. ARE YOU OVERSTATING IT, THOUGH? I might be. But conversely, can someone say with assurance that we have not executed an innocent person? Especially when you see how they're saved by flukes. It's hit or miss.

IF WE COULD TELL FOR SURE WHO WAS GUILTY, WOULD IT BE O.K.?
It isn't and never will be because of what it does to us. There's a death of innocence in all of us. Look what happens to Supreme Court Justices who do these nuanced constitutional arguments and send people to their deaths and never touch the human cheek, the suffering. So I say, for our own sake as a society, let's take death off the table. We can't handle it. [/quote]

[StPiusVPrayForUs]

Someone send them the section regarding the death penalty from the Catechism of Trent.

Fry the suckers!

[Apotheoun]

As Cardinal Ratzinger recently wrote:

[quote name='Letter to the U.S. Bishops' date=' no.3']Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.  For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion.  While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment.  There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.[/quote]

[Aloysius]

yeah I am very much for the death penalty... but they can do what they want... I just wish more Catholics were still for the use of the death penalty

[Brother Adam]

We are, within the guidelines of Church teaching.

[Brother Adam]

I think everyone needs to take a course on the Philosophy of the Human Person.

[Apotheoun]

I support the judicious use of the death penalty.

[DonCamillo]

Todays article from reuters

[quote]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Catholic bishops on Monday launched a campaign against the death penalty and presented new data suggesting support for capital punishment among American Catholics had fallen sharply in recent years to below 50 percent.

Washington Archbishop Theodore McCarrick told a news conference the campaign would bring renewed urgency and energy to efforts to end capital punishment.

"The use of the death penalty ought to be abandoned because we have other alternative ways to protect society," he said.

Use of the death penalty has been falling in recent years. In 2004, 69 people were executed, the lowest number since 1997. So far this year, 12 people have been executed, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

The number of people sentenced to death has also fallen from a 1996 high of 320 to 136 in 2004. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has outlawed executions imposed on juveniles and the mentally retarded.

Pollster John Zogby presented results of a survey taken last November showing that support for capital punishment among Catholics was down to 48 percent, with 47 percent now opposed. In 2001, 68 percent of Catholics support the death penalty while 27 percent were opposed.

"Frequent attendees of Mass as well as young Catholics are less likely to support the death penalty. And those who attended Catholic colleges also are more opposed," Zogby said.

A follow-up survey this month also revealed that 29 percent of Catholics had once favored the death penalty but had changed their minds.

Among the population at large, other polls have found support for the death penalty running at around 60 percent. However, when respondents are offered a choice between execution or life imprisonment without parole, support drops below 45 percent.

As part of their campaign, the bishops will increase education efforts in parishes, schools and universities and step up advocacy in Congress and state legislatures. They will also continue to submit legal briefs in death penalty cases.

McCarrick said the Catholic campaign fit into the church's general ideology of respect for life. "We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing," he said. "This campaign brings together our social justice and pro-life efforts."

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. [/quote]

Edited March 21, 2005 by DonCamillo

[DonCamillo]

The catholics bishops Web Site:

[url="http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty/index.shtml"]http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty/index.shtml[/url]

[Apotheoun]

As Scripture says, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in His own image." [Gen. 9:6] The power of the sword has been given to the State in order protect the innocent by executing criminals, and this is clear from what St. Paul said while he was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience." [Romans 13:1-5]

[Guest Eremite]

A few thoughts:

1) As others have pointed out, there is room for discussion on the role of capital punishment in the modern world.

2) While Capital Punishment is most certainly licit in theory, there is no necessity of applying it, except when it is a necessary measure for the defense of society. St. Paul's principle of "everything is allowed to me, but not everything is good for me" could apply here.

3) It is unclear whether, in Evangelium Vitae, the Holy Father intended to establish DOCTRINAL boundaries on capital punishment, limiting it to cases of defense, or if he was expressing his desire that the State not make use of its right except in cases of defense. A clarification from the Holy See is certainly needed on this matter.

4) I cannot support a crusade for a total ban of capital punishment, because it is not only allowed, but necessary, for cases of defense. If the US Bishops would amend their cause for an abolition of capital punishment in non-defensive cases, I would support it. Cardinal McCarrick does not address, for example, those inmates who kill other inmates. The prison society demands protection as much as the general society.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Eremite

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Eremite' date='Mar 21 2005, 11:14 AM'] A few thoughts:

1) As others have pointed out, there is room for discussion on the role of capital punishment in the modern world.

2) While Capital Punishment is most certainly licit in theory, there is no necessity of applying it, except when it is a necessary measure for the defense of society. St. Paul's principle of "everything is allowed to me, but not everything is good for me" could apply here.

3) It is unclear whether, in Evangelium Vitae, the Holy Father intended to establish DOCTRINAL boundaries on capital punishment, limiting it to cases of defense, or if he was expressing his desire that the State not make use of its right except in cases of defense. A clarification from the Holy See is certainly needed on this matter.

4) I cannot support a crusade for a total ban of capital punishment, because it is not only allowed, but necessary, for cases of defense. If the US Bishops would amend their cause for an abolition of capital punishment in non-defensive cases, I would support it. Cardinal McCarrick does not address, for example, those inmates who kill other inmates. The prison society demands protection as much as the general society. [/quote]
I agree with point (1).

I disagree with point (2), because the moral law requires that the State defend and promote the common good, and in addition that the State bring about the restoration of justice within society, and this requires a punishment commensurate with the crime committed, including but not limited to the death penalty. Capital punishment is not simply about protecting society from further harm, but also concerns the restoration of the moral order damaged by the offense.

As far as point (3) is concerned, the Pope's prudential judgment about the healthy state of penal systems around the world is simply not the proper subject matter for a dogmatic or doctrinal definition, and so no Catholic is bound to accept the Pope's prudential judgment as binding in conscience.

I agree at least in part with point (4), but I would emphasize the fact that the State has a duty to execute a criminal in order to redress the grave harm done by him, and by the punishment inflicted the State defends and promotes the common good of society. Moreover, the willing acceptance of a punishment commensurate with the gravity of the offense committed, has an expiatory value, that is, the punishment, if offered to God in Christ Jesus, actually atones for the evil act performed by the criminal, and may lead to his salvation.

[Guest Eremite]

[quote]Capital punishment is not simply about protecting society from further harm, but also concerns the restoration of the moral order damaged by the offense.[/quote]

There is no moral necessity to administer Justice with death. St. Ambrose notes this, cited by the Holy Father in "Evangelium Vitae":

[quote]"Once the crime is admitted at the very inception of this sinful act of parricide, then the divine law of God's mercy should be immediately extended. If punishment is forthwith inflicted on the accused, then men in the exercise of justice would in no way observe patience and moderation, but would straightaway condemn the defendant to punishment. ... God drove Cain out of his presence and sent him into exile far away from his native land, so that he passed from a life of human kindness to one which was more akin to the rude existence of a wild beast. God, who preferred the correction rather than the death of a sinner, did not desire that a homicide be punished by the exaction of another act of homicide."[/quote]

The punishment of death is fitting, but not morally necessary. The Lord noted this in his actions among the Israelites, who were to inflict death upon various grievous sins, such as blasphemy. But there is no MORAL necessity to punish blasphemers with death anymore than there is a MORAL necessity to punish murderers with death. As I said, the punishment is fitting, but not necessary.

[quote]the Pope's prudential judgment about the healthy state of penal systems around the world is simply not the proper subject matter for a dogmatic or doctrinal definition and no Catholic is bound to accept the Pope's prudential judgment as binding in conscience.[/quote]

His words went beyond the comment on the state of the penal system throughout the world:

[quote]In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person".[/quote]

He notes that public authorities "must" limit themselves, and bases this on the dignity of the human person, and not just the "common good". While his words don't necessarily involve doctrinal boundaries, they very well may, and as I said, I hope for a clarification on the matter.

[quote]I would emphasize the fact that the State has a duty to execute a criminal in order to redress the grave harm done by him, and by the punishment inflicted the State defends and promotes the common good of society.[/quote]

See above. Murder is far from the worst harm that can be inflicted on society by a criminal. Blasphemy, for example, is a greater sin than murder, and the sin is exacerbated if it leads others to blaspheme. I don't, however, think blasphemers should be executed, even if they have led others into sin.

Edited March 21, 2005 by Eremite