Let's first look at what it says in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
2266 The State's effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. The primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender (cf. Lk 23:40-43).
2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should 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.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent.'[John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]
According to the CCC, it is not whether capital punishment is morally right or wrong, but rather when capital punishment should or should not be used. When it "is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor", then capital punishment may be used. Pope John Paul II seemed pretty convinced that, in our modern era, capital punishment should generally cease altogether. His basis for this comes from the fact that we (at least in the West) are generally capable of finding other ways to deter those who could get a death sentence verdict. Our prison system is generally secure, and people escaping is rare (though it does happen in lesser security prisons... but at the same time one does not send a murderer to a minimum security prison).
My friend told me that if one is pro-capital punishment, then they are not to receive Holy Communion (just like someone that is pro-choice). This, too, is wrong. In Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion — General Principles then-Cardinal Ratzinger makes the point that "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... he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion... 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." (paragraph 3).
Again it is pointed out that, while capital punishment should be a hard decision or last resort, there is a fundamental difference between capital punishment and abortion/euthanasia.
And here's why:
Something like abortion is intrinsically evil. Something that is intrinsically evil is evil by its own nature, regardless of circumstance. As a result, something that is intrinsically evil can never be done (at least, if one follows the axiom of all morals: Do good and avoid evil). Extrinsically evil things become evil because of their circumstances and/or intent. They do not become evil because of the nature of the act itself. Therefore, these acts can be done in some circumstances (the ones in which they are not immoral), while they cannot be done in others (when circumstances and/or intent make them immoral). Abortion is intrinsically evil. Capital punishment is extrinsically evil (that is, in a case where the guilty party stole $5 it would be evil to use the death penalty, whereas a third world country that used the death penalty against a serial murderer that would escape prison would not be evil).
And one could just look at abortion and capital punishment and find the differences. In fact, I think it's a little reprehensible (if not slightly idiotic) to compare abortion and capital punishment as similar things. Sure, in both cases a life is taken. However, in the former case it is the life of a child, a defenseless human being who gets no choice in whether he or she lives or dies; furthermore, the child in abortion has done nothing that might constitute death. In the latter case, the case of capital punishment, someone that has committed a heinous crime is being put to death. It is a person that, more than likely, would simply commit the same crime again if given a chance. The person in the latter case has made a decision that has led to this particular moment (to murder, etc.). There are too many differences between the two to really draw the same principle. It's like comparing a child stealing a candy bar with that of a man robbing a bank at gun point.
All-in-all, I fall into rank behind Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI when it comes to capital punishment. I think that in developed countries, where life imprisonment is possible, capital punishment should be utilized sparingly. The great thing is that this is yet another subject in the Catholic Church where debate and discourse is welcomed and enjoyed.
What are your thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment