Last month I spoke about the difference between essential points of the faith and those areas where Catholics in good standing could disagree on the morality of an issue.
One of those areas which is often a source of argument among Christians is whether capital punishment (aka the death penalty) is permissible.
What the Bible says
On the one hand we have the commandment, “You shall not kill.” On the other hand we have the principle of just punishment for sin. The Old Testament is full of rules and regulations which specify the death penalty for various crimes. For instance, Genesis 9:6:
Anyone who sheds the blood of a human being, by a human being shall that one’s blood be shed; For in the image of God have human beings been made.
On the other hand are passage like Luke 17:3-4:
If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he wrongs you seven times in one day and returns to you seven times saying, ‘I am sorry,’ you should forgive him.
Some would say that we are no longer bound by the Old Covenant laws since we have the New Covenant. Not being under a law that demands capital punishment is different from forbidding capital punishment.
Does the New Testament condemn capital punishment? In Romans 13:3-4 St. Paul tells us:
For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
One argument used by people opposed to the death penalty is the example of the woman found in adultery in John 8:3-11. But note that Jesus does not say that the stoning is not just, merely that nobody is accusing her and therefore she cannot be punished under the law.
There is also the argument (admittedly from silence) about her lover. Leviticus 20:10 says “If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.” Deuteronomy 22:22 says “If a man is discovered lying with a woman who is married to another, they both shall die, the man who was lying with the woman as well as the woman.” Was the (presumably unrepentant) man stoned?
What the Catechism says
The Catechism says in paragraphs 2263-2267:
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people’s rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people’s safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, 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.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means. These means are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.” These methods render the one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself.
Many Catholics read that last paragraph and presume that it definitively forbids the death penalty in countries like America. After all, we can keep people locked up for life. That’s the position I took until recently when I gave the matter some serious thought.
The key is the topic of the entire section, legitimate defense, as explained in 2265,
“The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm.”
Although we can lock up an individual for life, does that always render him from being able to cause harm?
Sadly this is not always the case. Consider the terrorist or mob boss who can, from prison, order the murder of innocents. In cases where we are incapable of preventing the criminal from continuing to cause harm to others, I think that capital punishment is a legitimate defense.
One could argue that such a person could be kept in solitary confinement, but doing so for the rest of that person’s life is problematic. Also, there is still the possibility of getting messages out as long as the criminal has any contact with another human, which is impossible to prevent (and would be exceptionally cruel if it could be accomplished). I would argue that for the legitimate defense of society in such cases capital punishment is the least objectionable solution.
What do YOU think?
Copyright © 2013, Michael Lindner
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.