Catholic Church and the Death Penalty - Research Paper Example

Catholic Church and the Death Penalty Throughout its history, the attitude of the Catholic Church to the death penalty can be called ambiguous in terms of modern humanity. The Word of God used to enlighten the people who saw the death penalty as something obvious and considered it as a necessary mean of protection of the innocent. Special entertainment of executions of the Middle Ages was a reflection of the mentality of the time: the death penalty was considered a lesson, a public warning from committing crimes for everybody. Today we live in a completely different era, with different susceptibilities, however it is largely determined by centuries-old history of Christianity. The discussion about the acceptability of the death penalty was born in a Christian environment in fact. The XX century and the begging of the XXI century probably gave the most significant changes the world than any other age. In many areas of public life tremendous progress has been achieved. It covers the whole field of democratic reforms, including practices of human rights. However, yet in the XX century more people were executed than in any other era. It is not accidentally that worldwide problem of the death penalty has no boundaries of the growing public interest. The human rights movement addresses the issue of the death penalty in the first place in terms of the protection of fundamental human rights, for human rights - one of the main criteria for the democratization of society. The considered problem is inseparable from human rights and is incompatible with them, for always and everywhere penalty violates these rights, and above all - the right to life. From this vantage point the attitude of society to this barbaric punishment is an indication of its morale, humanization and civilization. The capital measure of punishment was actually the religious punishment for centuries. Accomplishing whether in the name of the king, God's viceroy on earth, by priests, or on behalf of the society, which was seen as a mystical body, at that time it did not violate human solidarity, but belonging guilty to the divine community, the only life giver. The victim’s life was taken away, but not the chance for correction. The final judgment has not yet been pronounced; it would sound only in the other world, after death. The religious values and, in particular, the belief for an afterlife, were the basis for higher sentence, because, according to their own logic, it could not be final and irrevocable. It was justified in that extent in which it was the highest measure. The Catholic Church, for example, has always recognized the need for the death penalty. It generously shared this conviction through different eras. To nowadays, it justifies the death penalty, and recognizes the right of the state to apply it. The Catholic faith is nourished not only with the personal teachings of Christ – that the exact observance of the moral precepts is incompatible with the murder. It is also supported by the Old Testament, the teachings of the Apostle Paul and the Church Fathers. The immortality of the soul and universal resurrection of bodies represent part of their tenets. The concept of death penalty, based on them, is considered as only temporal punishment for the believer, which must be followed with final judgment; it is considered as the action required only for maintaining of the temporal order, as administrative measure, which does not only reduces the latest scores with the convicted, but can facilitate his redemption. Saying this, I mean that the belief of the immortality of the soul allowed Catholicism to raise the question of the death penalty in very specific terms and to justify it. Death penalty in Catholicism had found support even in the earliest theologians. While the church was persecuted (especially in the first centuries of Christianity), the clergy was an ardent opponent of executions. Then, from the time of Theodosius IV, Catholic tradition prescribed the death penalty for religious offenses. Hundreds of thousands of heretics found a martyr's death at the stake of the Inquisition, and the clergy insisted that the death penalty does not conflict with religious laws. Thus, liberal King of Sweden Gustavus III asked the Parliament to abolish the death penalty for a number of crimes, but the clergy strongly opposed the abolition of this measure, pointing to its deterrent effect. The history has numerous amounts of such examples. The Roman Catechism adopted the doctrine that God gave the civil authorities the power to decide who is worthy for life and death. From 1929 till 1969 the death penalty was sanctioned by the Vatican as a punishment after an attempt on the Pope, although it has never resorted during that period. However, in an earlier time the Holy See was not averse to this penalty. In the XII century, at the insistence of Frederick Barbarossa a system of tracing and identification of religious crimes, was developed and introduced, which eventually led to the establishment of the Special Court of the Catholic Church under the name “Inquisition” in 1215. The most interesting fact is that the adherents of the Catholic Church attached great importance to a frank confession of their victims. Besides the usual interrogation according the laws of that time the torture of suspects was used. If the suspected person did not “suddenly” die during the investigation, but confessed in the committed crime, the materials were given to the Court. Inquisition was not allowed to “judge” out of the Court. Paradoxically, but in theory Inquisition did not apply the measure of the death penalty. Its task was to make every possible effort to return the heretic to the Church. If he persisted in his thoughts, it had nothing more to do with him. This person was claimed not to be Catholic, so he was not more the subject under the jurisdiction of the Church, which he rejected from, and the Church was forced to declare him a heretic. Initially, the sentence was just a simple condemnation for heresy and was accompanied by excommunication or announcement that the offender is no longer considered the jurisdiction of the court of the Church (Catholicism & Capital Punishment). Over time, the sentences have become more extensive; we can often meet a remark in literature, explaining that the Church can not do anything to live down the sins of the guilty person, and his transferring to the secular power was accompanied by the following momentous words: debita animadversione puniendum (lat.). Hypocritical statement of the Inquisition, who implored the secular authorities to spare the life and body of the heretic, was not found in the old convictions and has never been formulated precisely. As an important historical figure in this question, I can name Thomas Aquinas, whose works such as "Summa Theologica" and "Truth of the Catholic faith against the Errors ", were written in order to reconcile the faith with knowledge. The Church used his works with enthusiasm to combat heresy. The logic of his arguments clearly established that secular power could not, but betray heretics to death and that only because of the boundless love the Church could handle twice the heretics with the words of persuasion before send them to the authorities of secular power in order to punish. It is interesting that the inquisitors themselves did not hide it and constantly taught that the person, convicted in heresy should be put to death. It can be shown by the fact that they abstain to pronounce the verdict on him within the church fence, which could pollute the condemnation of the death penalty, and pronounced it on the square, where the last action happened - auto-da-fe. The 19th and early 20th centuries brought another point of view to the paradox of the Fifth Commandment, which claims not to kill, and executions of the state and the Church, during the fight with heresy. The Catholic Church changed it belief about the use of death penalty since the papacy of Pope John Paul II. He made few changes to the new Catholic Catechism and he asked for clemency for convicted persons in the United States. (“Statements on the Death Penalty by the Holy Father” web). It is enough to show that he did not agree with the need of death penalty. Nowadays the prisons give opportunity for life imprisonment, so Catholics think about the unnecessary and rigidity of extreme measures of previous centuries. The Catechism is saying the following way nowadays, that “the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor” (2267). One more example of the social and political time relationships, I can give the words of Pope Benedict XVI who claimed that "the church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the state. Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice” (Deus Caritas Est, web). So, during the XX century there were several appeals for abolishment of the death penalty, one of them marked the 1999 year and was followed in the next year by the document "Responsibility, Rehabilitation and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice”. This latter statement concludes by "renewing our call to end the death penalty”. (A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death, web). Orthodox and Catholic churches express the similar views about this issue. Thus, in almost all cases the death penalty is not thought as punishment for crimes. However, the Catechism allows this method in certain cases, which are based on the two premises: the first is the right for self-defense and the second claims all nations have the right to war for justice. In the Middle Ages people were united by morality, which was dictated by church, now it represented with the policy, defined by the nation. These two branches of power hardly intersect today. Summing up, it should be noted that, in reality, due to the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime without resorting to deprive the criminal of opportunity to redeem himself, the cases in which the destruction of the offender is absolutely necessary are happening very rare, it can be said they are already almost completely absent. It is undeniable that in the past the death penalty was considered acceptable from the Church`s point of view, but slavery was also faced with such an attitude. The New Testament contains the evidence of this mentioning slavery as an existing fact. During the historical progress the understanding of the dignity of life and worth of the human person were developing, in a large extent it happened due to Christianity. So, today the idea of understanding of criminal punishment according to his reformation and rehabilitation, including in the community is spreading. Thus, the church thinking the crime is sinful in its nature, agrees not on radical solutions, but on the idea to creating laws judges, which would be fair to reach a verdict for criminals who committed serious crimes as, perhaps, lifelong sentences, that, to some extent, is more humane. The death penalty, according to the modern Catholic dogmas is not an absolute right of the state. So, it asks not to forget about the inherent dignity of each individual and the way conversion and forgiveness. Works Cited Avery Cardinal Dulles, Catholicism & Capital Punishment, www.firstthings.com. 2001. Web. Pope Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est, 28. Web. U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, "A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death: The Catholic Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty”, 2005. Web. U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Department of Justice, Peace and Human Development, "Statements on the Death Penalty by the Holy Father," 2008. Web. Read More