Acknowledging Cardinal Ratzinger's (the future Pope Benedict XVI's) statement that "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" one author recently questioned Pope John Paul II's novel approach to the death penalty as expressed in his quotation of the late Pontiff:
"The death penalty is cruel and unnecessary and this is true even for someone who has done something very wrong"
Obviously, traditional Church teachings never expressed this view, nor is such an approach supported by Scripture or the Early Church Fathers.
Frankly, this opinion (not dogma) seems to put supposed "mercy" ahead of justice. We know that Almighty God Himself - for which "mercy and anger alike are with him" (Sirach 5:7) - both gave the fifth commandment "You shall not kill" (Ex. 20:13) and commanded the death penalty be executed in the case of certain crimes. Surely, there is a difference between the unlawful killing of an innocent person and lawfully killing a guilty person.
Of course the death penalty is not a desirable thing, but it should not be entirely ruled out either. Today's often-held view that the death penalty is "cruel" seems to overlook the fact that death penalty may (1) satisfy the demands of justice, (2) deter future crime, (3) give the guilty party an opportunity to repent (unlike his victims, if he is a murderer), (4) give the guilty party the opportunity to make due satisfaction to God for his crime, and (5) on a purely material level, spare hard-working people the heavy financial burden of constant surveillance and care for murderers & other serious criminals (some of whom would admit they'd continue to commit crimes if given the opportunity). And, of course, the death penalty protects society from the danger that a criminal may escape confinement and repeat his crime. It also makes it more concrete that serious consequences will result for serious crimes - a good lesson in light of the fact that there are serious eternal consequences for serious unrepented sin. In sum, the death penalty may help both society and the criminal.
And, although it's certainly not a direct comparison, it is true that since the Fall every single person alive is naturally subject to the penalty of death due to the crime of sin - our "human dignity" was not enough for God to spare us from this punishment. We also see in the New Testament that a "divinely conducted death penalty" against the faithful occurred two times directly in front of St. Peter (Acts 5:1-11) - there was no talk of such a penalty being "cruel" or about the guilty persons' "human dignity". The New Testament also says "But if thou do that which is evil, fear: for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God's minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil." (St. Paul, Rom. 13:4) Again, no talk of our "human dignity" sparing us from the lawful use of the sword.
And finally, how can it be said that the death penalty - conducted by proper authorities, most likely with meticulous care to avoid horrendous suffering & possibly executed only after numerous appeals, even with benefit of the last sacraments, if desired - inflicted on a guilty party is "cruel"? One wonders if holders of such opinions might also consider hell "cruel". Or would they agree with the Just Judge that an eternal punishment of torment was actually merited by those who died guilty of (and unrepentant for) a serious crime. Let us hope they wouldn’t question the infinitely wise, loving & merciful God - who created hell.
[8/15]
Posts
