Plan B Forum

The death penalty is inadmissible

The clear and decisive words with which Pope Francis has repeatedly condemned the death penalty should also be reflected in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In his speech last October, for the 25th anniversary of its publication of the Catechism, the Pontiff explicitly addressed the issue by affirming that the subject ought to find in the Catechism “a more adequate and coherent treatment”. In continuity with the previous Magisterium, in particular with the statements of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the Pope wanted to emphasize the dignity of the person who in no way can be humiliated or ostracized: “It must be clearly stated that the death penalty is an inhumane measure that, regardless of how it is carried out, abases human dignity. It is per se contrary to the Gospel”.

With the new formulation of n. 2267 of the Catechism, therefore, the Church takes a decisive step in promoting the dignity of every person, whatever crime he or she may have committed, and explicitly condemns the death sentence. The formulation makes it possible to grasp some innovative amendments that pave the way for a more responsible commitment in the life of believers, especially in those numerous countries where the death penalty is still in force.

The text does not only refer to a “change in the awareness” that is increasingly manifested by the people, and in particular, by the young generations called to assume responsibility for a new culture in favour of human life. A careful reading allows us to verify how the Church in recent decades has made real progress in understanding the teaching on the dignity of the person and, consequently, in the reassessment of her thinking on the death penalty.

To note the change in the awareness of the Christian people is certainly positive. To stress that today States have at their disposal many defence systems to protect the population, and that forms of detention have been developed which exclude the danger and trauma of violence being done to innocent people is also a determining factor.

However, this is not enough. The new text of the Catechism states that in the light of the Gospel the Church teaches that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and the dignity of the person”. This move highlights that one is dealing with a true dogmatic progress with which a content of the faith is clarified, one that has steadily matured to the point of making one understand the unsustainability of the death penalty in our time.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s letter to bishops that introduces the new text of the Catechism, shows [the Congregation’s] concern to stress that the new content is in continuity with the previous Magisterium. One cannot but observe, however, that Pope Francis’ strong stance allows us to grasp the progress that is being made. On the other hand, in his speech last October, the Pontiff, making his own John XXIII’s words in the inaugural addresss to the Second Vatican Council, expounded his thoughts with two verbs: to guard and to pursue.

To guard the sacred deposit of faith does not mean to mummify it, but to conform it ever more to its own nature and allow the truth of faith to answer the questions of each generation. Tradition cannot be represented as a fly in amber, to use a colourful English expression. If that were the case, we would have destroyed it. Rather, the Church’s teaching of faith is a proclamation, a vital word that challenges everyone always, everywhere and to be free to take a stance to undertake the transformation of the world.

Restoring the issue of the death penalty to the perspective of the dignity of the person, Pope Francis takes, therefore, a decisive step in the interpretation of a long-established doctrine. It is a question of a development and progress in the understanding of the Gospel that opens horizons that have so far remained in the shade due to an interpretation that was not always consistent. The history of dogma does not proceed from discontinuity, but from continuity aimed at progress through harmonious development that dynamically brings forth a long-established truth.

The Church is well aware that there are always mixed feelings in the face of such violent and inhumane crimes that lead a legitimate authority to pass the death sentence. In defending the abolition of the death penalty, one does not forget the suffering of the victims involved, nor the injustice that has been perpetrated. Rather, it is expected that justice take its own decisive step, not taken out of rancour and vengeance, but from a sense of responsibility beyond the present moment. It is a perceptive glance that recognizes that conversion, repentance and the desire to start life afresh cannot be taken away from anyone, not even from those who have been guilty of very serious crimes. Voluntarily suppressing a human life is contrary to Christian revelation. The challenge of the New Evangelization calls the Church to focus on forgiveness and redemption.

Big RR wrote:I have to agree with the pope, but maybe this would go a lot further if they removed a symbol of capital punishment as the most recognizable symbol of their faith.

You gotta love the hypocrisy of Sean Hannity ...

Big RR wrote:BP--FWIW, I doubt there are many, if any, people who accept all the tenets/pronouncements of a religious body as part of their personal beliefs. There may have been a time in history where it was the case for uneducated people, but education will generally encourage people to think for themselves. So you have roman Catholics who use birth control and support abortion rights molest children, Anglicans who rape, Mormons who drink rob banks, etc. And it has been this way throughout history, from dissenting theologians to the reformation, etc. The term "cafeteria Christians" has a bit of a pejorative sound to it, I think it is more people who think and decide how they will approach god. Sure there are some who glibly toss aside ideas that make them uncomfortable or prevent them from doing what they want, but most are exercising their conscience--something recognized and encouraged by most religions

Big RR wrote:And your "fix" made it better because

The term "cafeteria Christians" has a bit of a pejorative sound to it, I think it is more people who think and decide how they will approach god.