The Catholic Church on Death Penalty - Case Study Example

The Catholic Church on Death Penalty Introduction The Catholic Church is one of the forces that vehemently resist the implementation of death penalty. Although there is a clear separation of the church and the state, catholic churches around the world defy the killing of convicted criminals through masses, press releases and publication. In several countries, death penalty has had a short life as a way of administering justice. It is because of this strong opposition led by majority by the Catholic Church and a greater number of individuals who renounce it. Still, however, some countries do not listen to the clamor of ending death penalty and not a few people have tasted death through either the lethal injection or electric chair. Through the passage of time and with a firm decision of some governments to administer death sentence, it is notable to look at the history of how the Catholic Church has stood its ground. Are there instances when the Catholic Church has played soft on this opposition? What are the recent press releases done by the Catholic Church to support its stand? Main Body “Capital punishment has been practiced in virtually every society, and thus can be considered to be a cultural universal or close to it, excluding those with state religious proscriptions against it. It is a matter of active controversy in various countries and states, and positions can vary within a single political ideology or cultural region…Today, most countries are considered by Amnesty International as abolitionists, which allowed a vote on a nonbinding resolution to the UN to promote the abolition of the death penalty. But more than 60% of the worldwide population live in countries where executions take place insofar as the four most populous countries in the world (the Peoples Republic of China, India, United States and Indonesia) apply the death penalty and are unlikely to abolish it at any time soon” (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). A memo from Pope Benedict XVI (then known as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) to the US in 2004 says: ‘Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. 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.’ (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). The Catholic Church has traditionally submitted to the state’s decision of capital punishment as per theology of Thomas Aquinas, who accepted capital punishment as “a necessary deterrent and prevention method, but not a means of vengeance” (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). The Theology of Thomas Aquinas on Death Penalty Polls consistently show that a majority of U.S. citizens, about 70 percent, approve of capital punishment. What grounds are there for such a widespread conviction? Generally people point to two reasons: retribution and deterrence. Some people judge that some crimes are so horrible that the only appropriate punishment is death. Some are convinced that the threat of the death penalty will prevent people from committing crime. People who oppose the death penalty challenge both reasons. They claim that capital punishment is much closer to revenge than retribution. There are other means, they hold, of balancing the scales of justice than more killing. Similarly, death-penalty opponents point out that most studies indicate that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent. Decreasing rates of violent crime are found in countries that have eliminated the death penalty. Thomas Aquinas is one of the pillars of the Catholic Church. And his influence on the church is so great so that it adapted his beliefs on death penalty. His book Summa Contra Gentiles reveals that he is a supporter of death penalty and “this was based on the theory (found in natural moral law), that the state has not only the right, but the duty to protect its citizens from enemies, both from within, and without” (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). Below is a short summary from his book Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3 Chapter 146: “For those who have been appropriately appointed, there is no sin in administering punishment. For those who refuse to obey Gods laws, it is correct for society to rebuke them with civil and criminal sanctions. No one sins working for justice, within the law. Actions that are necessary to preserve the good of society are not inherently evil. The common good of the whole society is greater and better than the good of any particular person. ‘The life of certain pestiferous men is an impediment to the common good which is the concord of human society. Therefore, certain men must be removed by death from the society of men.’ This is likened to the physician who must amputate a diseased limb, or a cancer, for the good of the whole person” (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). In an attempt to explain, it was found that Thomas Aquinas “based this on 1 Corinthians 5, 6: ‘You know that a little leaven corrupts the whole lump of dough?" and 1 Corinthians 5, 13: "Put away the evil one from among yourselves"; Romans 13,4: "[it is said of earthly power that] he bears not the sword in vain: for he is Gods minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that does evil’; 1 Peter 2, 13-14: ‘Be subjected therefore to every human creature for Gods sake: whether to be on the king as excelling, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of good.’ He believed these passages superseded the text of Exodus 20,13: ‘Thou shall not kill.’ This is mentioned again in Matthew 5,21. Also, it is argued that Matthew 13, 30: ‘Suffer both the weeds and the wheat to grow until the harvest.’ The harvest was interpreted as meaning the end of the world. This is explained by Matthew 13,38-40. Aquinas acknowledged these passages could also be interpreted as meaning there should be no use of the death penalty if there was a chance of injuring the innocent. The prohibition ‘Thou shall not kill’, was superseded by Exodus 22,18: ‘Wrongdoers you shall not suffer to live.’ The argument that evildoers should be allowed to live in the hope that they might be redeemed was rejected by Aquinas as frivolous. If they would not repent in the face of death, it was unreasonable to assume they would ever repent. ‘How many people are we to allow to be murdered while waiting for the repentance of the wrongdoer?’, he asked, rhetorically. Using the death penalty for revenge, or retribution is a violation of natural moral law. (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.). Thus the Catholic Church has the history of being in favor of death penalty. It was however the leadership of one modern Pope that changed this stand. The Modern Stand of the Catholic Church on Death Penalty In the USA, 38 states have death-penalty statutes. In 1994 the U.S. government enacted a law that intended to limit the number of crimes but has in fact increased the number of crimes subject to the federal death penalty from two to more than sixty (Kenneth R. Overberg). “Globally, the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights opposes capital punishment. More than 100 countries have abandoned capital punishment in law or practice. The United States stands in contrast to all these countries, but stands with such countries as China, Iran and Libya” (Kenneth R. Overberg). The Catholic Church’s stand on death penalty has changed several times. “The early Church generally found taking human life to be incompatible with the life and teachings of Jesus. Later, after Christianity became the religion of the Roman Empire, opposition to the death penalty declined. Augustine recognized the death penalty as a means of deterring the wicked and protecting the innocent. In the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas reaffirmed this position. There can be no doubt that for a long period the Christian tradition supported the death penalty. In recent years, however, there has been another change. The new Catechism of the Catholic Church expressed the long tradition, stating that the death penalty is possible in cases of extreme gravity. The Catechism added that means other than killing should be preferred when these would be sufficient to protect public order (#2267)” (Kenneth R. Overberg). It was until Pope John Paul II took the throne of papacy that there was a strong opposition against death penalty from the Catholic side. “Pope John Paul II expressed a stronger position against the death penalty in his encyclical The Gospel of Life. He stressed that situations where its use is necessary to protect society have become ‘very rare, if not practically nonexistent’. When visiting the United States in 1999, Pope John Paul called the death penalty ‘cruel and unnecessary’ and affirmed that the ‘dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil’ “(Kenneth R. Overberg). It was at this time that the bishops were encouraged to make a strong stand agaisnt death penalty. Concerning the debate on our wider society, it is now necessary to move beyond the discussion of deterrence and retribution. There are particularly four values that the American Catholic Bishops highlighted in promotion of the abolition of death penalty (Kenneth R. Overberg). First, "abolition sends a message that we can break the cycle of violence, that we need not take life for life, that we can envisage more humane and more hopeful and effective responses to the growth of violent crime." The bishops recognize that crime is rooted in the complex reality of contemporary society, including those "social conditions of poverty and injustice which often provide the breeding grounds for serious crime." More attention should go to correcting the root causes of crime than to enlarging death row. Second, "abolition of capital punishment is also a manifestation of our belief in the unique worth and dignity of each person from the moment of conception, a creature made in the image and likeness of God." This belief, rooted in Scripture and consistently expressed in the social teachings of the Church, applies to all people, including those who have taken life. Third, "abolition of the death penalty is further testimony to our conviction, a conviction which we share with the Judaic and Islamic traditions, that God is indeed the Lord of life." And so human life in all its stages is sacred, and human beings are called to care for life, that is, to exercise good stewardship and not absolute control. The bishops recognize that abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty are not the same issue, but they each point to the same fundamental value: safeguarding the sanctity of life. Fourth, "we believe that abolition of the death penalty is most consonant with the example of Jesus." In many ways this final point summarizes the other three: the God revealed in the life of Jesus is a God of forgiveness and redemption, of love and compassion—in a word, a God of life. The heart of the bishops position on the death penalty, then, is found in the gospel. Source: (Kenneth R. Overberg) This stand by the Catholic Church was made strong by a recent study which negates the relationship between death penalty and abatement of crime. The report particualrly states that “New research released June 16 concludes criminology experts do not believe the death penalty effectively deters criminals from committing murder. In a report from Northwestern University School of Laws Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, researchers argued data show the death penalty does not deter homicide more than long-term imprisonment” (Abrams). This study has strengthened the Catholic’s stand against death penalty. “Emphasizing the importance of protecting human life, Pope Benedict XVI congratulated the government of Mexico for its decision in 2005 to eliminate the death penalty” (Wooden). The Pope particularly said, “Governments must enact laws and public policies that "take into account the high value that a human being has at every moment of existence," (Wooden).   He added, "In this regard, I welcome with joy the initiative of Mexico, which in 2005 eliminated its capital punishment legislation, as well as the recent actions some states have taken to protect human life from its beginning," (Wooden). “The pope said he prayed that Mexico would be able to face its current problems with courage and determination so the nation would ‘continue on the path of freedom, solidarity and social progress’” (Wooden). In addition to this, “Pope Benedict also called on the Mexican government to promote policies that assist families, both because they are a central value of the Mexican people and because strong families are essential for a strong nation” (Wooden). Conclusion Indeed the Catholics’ view of death penalty has changed over time. From the highest regard to the state view by St. Thomas Aquinas, which allows the state to carry out the punishment of death to protect the, the Catholic Church through the influence of the late Pope John Paul II realized the value of grace as highlighted by the bible. Indeed, the death of a criminal will never be enough to avenge the loss of someone’s life or property. The understanding that capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime, not enough to bring justice and also not enough to provide for the safety of the larger society has made the church realize that it is not an answer after all. Most importantly, it is incongruent to the teachings of Jesus, the values that every Christian church should uphold. The Authors Jessi Abrams, Cynthia Wooden and Kenneth R. Overberg are all Catholic News Authors. They are all connected with the Catholic News Service, is a news agency specializing in reporting religion since 1920. It “is the primary source of national and world news that appears in the U.S. Catholic press” (Catholic News Service). Works Cited Abrams, Jessie. http://www.americancatholic.org. 23 June 2009. 2 August 2009 . Catholic News Service. http://www.catholicnews.com. 2 August 2009 . Kenneth R. Overberg, S.J. http://www.americancatholic.org. 1 August 2009 . Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. http://en.wikipedia.org. 31 July 2009. 1 August 2009 . Wooden, Cindy. http://www.americancatholic.org. 13 July 2009. 2 August 2009 . Read More