50+ Reasons I Support The Death Penalty
By C.P.S.
|
Summary: Reasons to support the death penalty/capital punishment
Keywords: Death Penalty, Capital Punishment, Execution,
Executions, Murder, Homicide, Killing, Necessity of Capital
Punishment, Duty to Execute Criminals, Pro-Death Penalty,
Pro-Capital Punishment, Reasons To Reject Abolition of Death
Penalty |
I support
the
death penalty for deserving crimes, as should
ALL faithful Catholics, for timeless reasons
unrelated to the security of jails & prisons.
Capital punishment is not revenge, but justice. Some
misguided persons in the Church at present are
trying to end the death penalty. Sadly this includes
some Bishops and even the present
Pope [Leo XIV]. Yet Bishops, Popes and others in
the Church have NO right whatsoever to try to change
Church teachings. They are, in fact, obligated to
pass on what they have received [see
here and
here].
If
misguided people were to succeed in this matter of
abolishing the death penalty they would, IMHO, have
blood on their hands, not to mention doing a great
disservice to the Church and to society. We CAN
freely debate about whether capital punishment
should be applied in any particular case, but NOT
about the permissibility of the death penalty in
principle. That capital punishment is sometimes
licit is an
infallible, indisputable fact.
When I
originally contemplated this article, it was going
to be something in the nature of 10-20 reasons I
support capital punishment. As my thoughts flowed,
however, it became 50+ reasons. I could have gone on
with more, but I settled on the ones that follow. I
realize certain reasons listed below may be a bit
duplicative, but still I felt it was necessary to
include them for emphasis or for some other purpose.
I apologize in advance for any repetition.
Thankfully, the Catholic authors
Edward Feser & Joseph M. Bessette have already taken
up this matter at length in their 2017 book, "By Man
Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of
Capital Punishment" [Amazon Associates link
here]. This book is worth reading, IMHO.
Even if I may not like or agree with every word in
the book (a rare occurrence to be sure), it makes a
compelling – as I see it a 'bulletproof' (no pun
intended) – case supporting capital punishment. I
have relied on it for certain points herein. If this
topic is of interest to you, I'd recommend getting
their book.
Without
further delay, here are my 50+ reasons for
supporting the death penalty... [Note: The
following, which are in no particular order,
naturally assume lawful executions conducted after a
fair trial and, as warranted, fair appeal(s).]
1. The death penalty is a deterrent, as admitted by
criminals. According to the
above referenced book,
studies show a deterrent effect – each execution
possibly saving the lives of multiple people
(estimates vary but a 'midrange estimate' claims
5-10 saved lives for EACH completed execution),
whereas moratoriums on executions have been shown to
result in additional homicides...
"A study
that compared murder rates in the fifty states
before and after changes in their death-penalty laws
between 1960 and 2000, published in Economic Inquiry
in 2006, found strong evidence of deterrence: 'The
results are boldly clear: Executions deter murders,
and murder rates increase substantially during
moratoriums. The results are consistent across
before-and-after comparisons and regressions
regardless of the data's aggregation level, the time
period, or the specific variable used to measure
executions.' The authors call this 'convincing
evidence for the deterrent effect'."
2. Justice demands the death penalty in sufficiently
serious matters.
3. Capital punishment protects society and promotes
the common good.
4.
Catholic doctrine CANNOT change – capital
punishment was legitimate before so it remains
legitimate now. The reasons supporting capital
punishment were NEVER dependent on technology or the
ability to keep criminals locked up.
5. To go against capital punishment in principle is
to go against traditional Church doctrine. I do not
wish to contradict/go against thousands of
years of Catholic teaching.
6. The death penalty prevents future crime and saves
innocent lives.
7. Many innocent people would be alive today if the
death penalty was used when it should have been.
8. All killings are NOT equal – killing the guilty
protects the innocent. Capital punishment is
pro-INNOCENT-life! It is wrong to equate execution
of guilty people with
abortion or
euthanasia in which innocent people are unjustly
killed (which is always wrong).
9. Capital punishment protects people from violent
offenders both because executed killers are no
longer able to harm others and because the threat of
execution deters future crime.
10. I have compassion for crime victims and their
families. I want them to receive justice.
11. I have concern for defenseless people who are no
match for criminals who may seek to do them harm.
Remember that if you don't deter crime using the
death penalty, you invite more crime – which puts
defenseless people at even greater risk.
12. Popes have authorized at least hundreds of
executions in the Papal States – they wouldn't have
done this if it was inherently wrong.
13. The Church has always supported proper use of
capital punishment prior to the revolutionary,
modernist
Second Vatican Council of the 1960's. The recent push
to provide 'mercy' even to the worst criminals
aligns with the Council's ill-conceived, novel
'medicine of mercy' policy – an approach which has
clearly produced disastrous results [try
here for examples]. Ironically, arguing against
the death penalty isn't actually merciful either to
victims or to society – or even to criminals themselves (see
below).
14. Pre-Vatican II
Popes,
Councils,
Saints, Theologians... supported proper use of
capital punishment. I am in good company with them
in supporting the death penalty.
15.
Jesus did not condemn the death penalty, neither
did St. Paul. We can even see two 'divinely
sanctioned death penalty events' (so to speak)
unfolding right before St. Peter in Acts Chapter 5,
verses 1-11.
16. The possibility of licit use of the death
penalty would be part of the
infallible teaching of the Church and not
subject to change – the Church CANNOT change her
doctrine.
17. The Church cannot rightly contradict herself and
I won't be a party to some of her members trying to
have her do so.
18. To go against constant Church teaching is to
call the Church's credibility into question.
19. One modern Catechism even states that public
authorities have not only the "right" but also the
"duty" to "inflict punishment proportionate to the
gravity of the offense"...
"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 the duty to inflict
punishment proportionate to the gravity of the
offense." (CCC #2266, 1994)
20. In various cases, execution is the ONLY
punishment proportionate to the crime.
21. As St. Thomas Aquinas says, executions return
'good for evil'...
"For we
are forbidden to return evil for evil when it is
inspired by hatred or envy, so that we take pleasure
in another's evil. But if in return for the evil of
guilt which someone commits a judge pronounces an
evil of punishment in a just way to compensate for
malice, he does, indeed, return evil materially, but
formally and in itself he returns a good. Hence,
when a judge hangs a criminal for murder, he does
not return evil for evil but good for evil."
22. Properly conducted, executions are
cost-effective (e.g. reusable rope, relatively
inexpensive bullets).
23. The death penalty is a deterrent – it protects
others. Note that many people who serve time for
homicide & are later released are re-arrested for
additional homicide(s). Obviously this would be
impossible if they had been executed for their prior
crimes. The threat of the death penalty also deters
other individuals from committing their 'first'
homicide. By contrast, the absence of the death
penalty would result in undeterred – and therefore
MORE – crime.
24. Not executing criminals puts society in danger
24/7. It is NOT true that prisoners never escape
from maximum security jails (for example, consider
the 2016 escapes in Orange County, CA). It is simply
not true that 'effective systems of detention have
been developed' that offer zero risk. As a
12/30/2025 article noted...
"From
deadly medical transport ambushes to large-scale
jail breakouts, inmate escapes dominated headlines
this year and triggered investigations, manhunts and
policy responses across the country."
At the time of this writing, a list of 'historically
infamous prison escapes' in bullet point format on
Wikipedia was quite lengthy. In fact, skimming the
bullet point items from just 1950-to present
required using the 'page down' key a dozen times.
And after that, there was a long list of 'People who
escaped multiple times'. Clearly society is NOT safe
from prison breaks, even if some popes think
otherwise. Besides, even if it ever were to be true
that we could always keep prisoners locked up
and never experience a single security
failure, it wouldn't change the fact that the death
penalty is sometimes necessary to serve justice.
25. Execution 'ends the nightmare' for victims'
families (or at least makes a degree of closure
easier).
26. There MUST be serious consequences for serious
crimes – criminals have to be held accountable for
the
evil they commit.
27. We should not take better care of criminals than
their victims – we clothe criminals, feed them,
shelter them, give them medical care, all at no cost
to them and at full cost to the taxpayer. By
contrast, any victims still living, and their
families, are mostly 'left on their own' to deal
with their suffering & financial costs.
28. We can – and should – forgive others, but
punishment is still required. In fact, it may be
easier to forgive horrific murderers when they have
paid for their crime by their own life (so
punishment of the criminal therefore may be good for
the souls of the victim's families).
29. To not execute those deserving of capital
punishment is – for society in general and more
specifically for the government parties involved
(e.g. lawmakers, courts) – to not do one's duty and
to deny justice. [Note: Executions must, of
course, ONLY be conducted by those legitimately
tasked with carrying out such sentences, and not by
private citizens. However, private citizens who
prevent capital punishment – e.g. by voting against
it – may indirectly bear some responsibility for the
injustice that results.]
30. Some criminals – especially those committing the
most brutal crimes – DESERVE to be executed. Sorry
for the graphic language, but brutal murderers may
rape, dismember, torture, behead, and do other
unspeakable things to their victims – victims who
may be
men,
women, elderly, handicapped/vulnerable, young
children, entire families, and even infants –
accounts of which are so evil and hideous that
simply learning about them can draw tears. Keeping
such brutal killers alive after a fair trial (and
fair appeal, as warranted) does not serve society.
Rather, society deserves justice and to be protected
from such persons.
31. Even if the murders are not especially brutal,
the intentional killing of an innocent person,
requires sufficient punishment. Execution is the
only proportionate punishment for such a crime.
32. I do not wish to contradict/go against
Holy Scripture. According to Holy Scripture
those tasked by law with executing guilty parties
act as 'servants of
God'...
Rom. 13:4:
"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."
Other 'servants of God' –
angels – likewise conduct 'executions' (for
example, Apoc./Rv. 9:15 says four angels will 'kill
a third of the human race'). And if someone is a
'servant of God', they would obviously be acting in
accordance with the will of God.
33. The
Holy Spirit, that is GOD, likewise says in Holy
Scripture that the death penalty "shall" be
applied...
Gen. 9:6:
"If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his
blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been
made."
Note the term 'shall' denotes a REQUIREMENT. And
note also that the reason for capital punishment
decreed by God has nothing whatsoever to do with the
ability to keep murderers secure in jail/prison.
Given this fact, the death penalty can never be
intrinsically forbidden...because God Himself says
the death penalty is required in applicable cases.
How dare mere mortals – even the Pope! – go against
what God has said by rejecting/condemning capital
punishment in principle!
34. The death penalty may
ultimately be good for criminals' souls. The
prospect of the offender's upcoming
death might be what spurs his/her repentance,
which, in charity, we should all desire. Capital
punishment therefore may lead to the salvation of
the criminal's soul and help him/her pay his/her
debt of justice to God. What could be more
charitable towards criminals than the incentive and
opportunity to repent? Spurring the criminal to
repent by his/her impending execution and offering
him/her the opportunity to receive the last
sacraments is probably a lot more than what was
afforded to their victim(s) before they died. In any
case, executions definitively & permanently prevent
criminals from committing further evils (another
plus for society and for criminals' souls).
35. To be anti-capital punishment in general is to
go against Holy Scripture, Church Fathers, Catholic
History, Saints, Popes (at least those before the
revolutionary V2 Council), Catechisms...
36. Scripture and tradition sanction the death
penalty and it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to
reverse such teachings or to have been wrong for two
millennia.
37. It is acceptable – even good – to want
justice (not revenge). In fact, wanting justice is a
virtue when not done out of hatred. As the following
beatitude from Holy Scripture is traditionally
worded...
Mt. 5:6:
"Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after
justice: for they shall have their fill."
Note that Jesus says people who want justice are
'blessed'.
38. While being executed, the 'good thief' who was
crucified next to Jesus said he and the other
criminal had been condemned to death 'justly' for
their crimes and that their sentences 'corresponded
to' their crimes...
Lk.
23:40-41: "[The 'good thief'] said in reply, "Have
you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same
condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned
justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to
our crimes"
And note that Jesus did NOT correct him on either
point (i.e. being condemned justly, their death
sentence corresponding to their crimes). Therefore
the death penalty can not rightly be said to go
against the Gospel.
39. Unless there is some truly worthy reason, it's
an injustice to innocent victims to not execute
their killers.
40. If murderers are not executed, they may kill
again. Note that even serial killers have had their
sentences commuted! According to the
above referenced book,
many murderers are eligible for release after
serving only a fraction of their sentences. It
indicates that they are released back into society
after barely 15 years or less...
"The mean
for all those released for murder was 14 years and 3
months; the median–or middle value–was 13 years and
7 months."
And when released in little over a decade, they may
kill again. It is a known fact that
recidivation rates are quite high. According to the
United States Sentencing Commission website...
"Violent
offenders recidivated at a higher rate than
non-violent offenders. Over 60 percent (63.8%) of
violent offenders recidivated by being rearrested
for a new crime or for a violation of supervision
conditions."
"Violent
offenders recidivated more quickly than non-violent
offenders."
"Violent
offenders recidivated for more serious crimes than
non-violent offenders."
41. When murders are not executed, they may continue
to terrorize their communities. This may occur after
their release or even from INSIDE a jail!
42. It's a fact that innocent people would be alive
today if the death penalty was used when it should
have been. And if murdered persons were young at the
time of their death, they might also have had
children & grandchildren which will now never exist
because their lives (meaning the parents' lives)
were taken by murderers.
43. Those opposing the death penalty may –
indirectly speaking – have innocent blood on their
hands.
44. Those attempting to change Church doctrine by
condemning the death penalty – especially Popes –
are making the Church 'look bad'. First of all,
capital punishment – besides being
authorized/supported by Holy Scripture, Saints &
Theologians – was perfectly acceptable to
pre-Vatican II Popes. Second, Popes have ABSOLUTELY
NO RIGHT to attempt to change Church doctrine – to
do so would be an abuse of their authority and
definitely NOT infallible. In Bishop Athanasius
Schneider's book, Credo: Compendium of the Catholic
Faith [Amazon Associates link
here], he noted Pope Francis' errors
concerning in the death penalty as a rare occurrence
in
Church history...
"Have
there been cases in history of popes teaching or
promoting doctrinal errors? Yes. Although such cases
have been very rare, they include: Honorius I
(+638), who wrote letters with erroneous statements
about the two wills of Jesus Christ, and was
posthumously condemned as a heretic by the Council
of Constantinople III. John XXII (+1334), who taught
that the Beatific Vision of God is granted to saints
only after the Last Judgement, and was widely
condemned by theologians outside the papal court
before recanting on his deathbed; his position was
corrected posthumously by his successor, Benedict
XII. In our own time,
Pope Francis has publicly signed a document [wrongly]
affirming: 'The pluralism and the diversity of
religions, color, sex, race, and language are willed
by God in His wisdom, through which He created human
beings,' and [incorrectly] taught that the death penalty 'is per
se contrary to the Gospel.'"
Regrettably, Pope Leo XIV recently seems to be
acting somewhat like 'Pope Francis II' in his
erroneous opinion against the death penalty. The
fallacy of papal objections to capital punishment
have been well illustrated on social media (someone
even going so far as to publish a picture of past
Papal executioners' garments (the robe and axe of
"the official executioner of the Papal States", who
allegedly "carried out 514 executions during his 68
year career") to contrast with Pope Leo's misguided
remarks against the death penalty). Again, it makes
the Church 'look bad' and undermines her authority
and credibility. As Cardinal Dulles had stated on
this topic a while back...
"The
reversal of a doctrine as well established as the
legitimacy of capital punishment would raise serious
problems regarding the credibility of the
magisterium...[If] the previous teaching had been
discarded, doubt would be cast on the current
teaching as well."
The Church's true teaching on this matter – which we
must continue to hold – is well-summed up by the
Catechism of the Council of Trent...
"Another
kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil
authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and
death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which
they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The
just use of this power, far from involving the crime
of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this
Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the
Commandment is the preservation and security of
human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the
civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of
crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give
security to life by repressing outrage and violence.
Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to
death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut
off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the
Lord."
The same catechism also states...
"Furthermore, there are on record instances of
carnage executed by the special command of God. The
sons of Levi, who put to death so many thousands in
one day, were guilty of no sin; when the slaughter
had ceased, they were addressed by Moses in these
words: You have consecrated your hands this day to
the Lord."
Pope Leo XIV's predecessor, another Pope Leo [X]
likewise issued a document condemning errors of the
heresiarch Martin Luther which included a
condemnation of the error that certain killings were
"against the will of the Spirit" [see
here].
The 1908 Catechism of Saint Pius X clearly states...
"Q. Are
there cases in which it is lawful to kill? A. It is
lawful to kill when fighting in a just war; when
carrying out by order of the Supreme Authority a
sentence of death in punishment of a crime; and,
finally, in cases of necessary and lawful defence of
one's own life against an unjust aggressor."
Similarly, the
Baltimore Catechism states...
"Q. 1276.
Under what circumstances may human life be lawfully
taken? A. Human life may be lawfully taken (1) In
self-defense, when we are unjustly attacked and have
no other means of saving our own lives; (2) in a
just war, when the safety or rights of the nation
require it; (3) by the lawful execution of a
criminal, fairly tried and found guilty of a crime
punishable by death when the preservation of law and
order and the good of the community require such
execution."
Obviously, therefore, not all killing is
condemnable. Some killing is even necessary,
according to God Himself. Even Popes don't have
the power to change this doctrine. Again, attempts
to do so are an abuse of their authority.
45. It is incorrect to reject licit use of the death
penalty on the grounds of the 5th
Commandment (Thou shalt not kill) or because all
life is sacred. The fifth commandment forbids
voluntary, unjust killing, NOT to all killing in
general. Applying the 5th commandment to lawful use
of the death penalty, to proper self-defense, or to
killing in a just war, for example, would be to
misapply the commandment. And while it is true that
all life is sacred, this does not mean that guilty
persons should not undergo the 'ultimate
punishment.' In fact, we are all under a death
sentence pronounced by God due to
the actions of Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden
– by God Himself. It is likewise not 'contrary to
our dignity' to be punished for our own crimes.
46. As Bishop
Athanasius Schneider stated, society has the right to inflict the death
penalty...
"When does
society have the right to inflict the death penalty?
The lawfully constituted public authority may put
proven criminals to death for the most serious
crimes when this is necessary to maintain social
order in repairing injustice, protecting the
innocent, deterring further crime, and summoning the
criminal to true repentance and atonement."
I would argue that society also has the DUTY to
inflict the death penalty in certain cases. My
contention is supported by the quotes above.
47. Some mistakenly object to the death penalty on
the grounds of 'human dignity'. Yet, "there is the
dignity of the victim and the dignity of the
offender. The victim's dignity needs to be
reaffirmed through justice, whereas the offender who
chose to act contrary to his dignity of a person
made in the image of God needs to suffer punishment.
That is precisely what happened in the Garden of Eden
when God imposed the death penalty on humankind."
The death penalty is NOT contrary to human dignity.
As noted above we are all, in fact, under the death
penalty since the fall of Adam & Eve. We all die.
Death is natural to humans since the Fall and
therefore obviously it cannot be contrary to 'human
dignity'. Capital punishment merely speeds up the
death penalty for someone who acted seriously
against the dignity of a person made in the image of
God, such as someone willingly taking the life of an
innocent person. There simply MUST be serious
consequences for heinous actions. To do otherwise,
is to invite even more horrific actions.
48. The death penalty is not 'inhumane' or else God
would never have required it and the Church never
would have sanctioned it for thousands of years.
49. Contrary to some claims, the common good CANNOT
be safeguarded and the requirements of justice
CANNOT be met without recourse to capital
punishment. In some cases, capital punishment is the
absolute ONLY way to support the common good and
justice.
50. Despite any assertions to the contrary, the
death penalty does not completely deprive those who
are guilty of the possibility of repentance &
redemption. Quite the opposite actually, as stated
in the above
referenced book...
"[Saint
Thomas Aquinas] not only insisted that the death
penalty was good for repentance but held that 'if
[offenders] are so stubborn that even at the point
of death their heart does not draw back from evil,
it is possible to make a highly probable judgment
that they would never come away from evil to the
right use of their powers'. Samuel Johnson quipped
that the prospect of execution 'concentrates...
[the] mind wonderfully'. The a priori case for the
value of capital punishment in fostering repentance
is strongly supported by the wealth of empirical
evidence we presented...showing how common it is for
death row inmates to repent and seek forgiveness
from God. Moreover, as we argued...repentance and
reformation require that the wrongdoer appreciate
and acknowledge the gravity of his crime. He is more
likely to do so if [he] knows that what he has done is
worthy of death, and he is more likely to believe
this if the state punishes murder with death."
51. Capital punishment supports the common good by
putting a definitive end to the evil that certain
people would continue to do. Proper use of the death
penalty may be considered 'virtually demanded' by
traditional Catholic teaching to promote the common
good. As stated in the
above referenced book...
"In our
view, if capital punishment for murder does indeed
promote the common good in these ways, then
traditional Catholic doctrine virtually demands that
it be used. Otherwise, we send the message that the
lives of the innocent must be sacrificed to save the
lives of those who richly deserve to lose their own
and that letting evil men live out their days in
relative comfort is of greater value than
encouraging their repentance, upholding a sense of
justice in society at large, and reassuring the
loved ones of victims that the most evil acts will
be punished with a truly proportionate penalty. Such
a position cannot be squared with two millennia of
Catholic moral teaching."
52. Without the death penalty, society would certainly
become even more lawless. That would not be good for
bodies or souls!
53. Execution is sometimes the only possible way to
deliver justice to victims and their families. To be
honest, it doesn't even provide complete justice
(loved ones are still gone, living ones still suffer
pain, future offspring will never exist), but it is
probably about the best we can do here on earth to
redress the evil.
54. On the practical side, proper use of the death
penalty would save the taxpayer incredible amounts
of money. Although it may be distasteful to bring
money into the argument, it must be considered that
housing criminals costs tremendous amounts each year – funds which are involuntarily taken from innocent
taxpayers. Money that could be used for taxpayers'
own needs and their children's needs. It costs a
fortune to build detention facilities (I read it may
possibly cost over a billion dollars!), plus it
costs a fortune to house inmates year after year
after year – in fact, it may cost tens of thousands
of taxpayer dollars EACH year to house EACH inmate.
I don't think innocent taxpayers should have to
continue paying for jail time (including housing,
clothing, food, medical care) for those who should
be executed. Sorry to be crass, but what value do
you get for keeping monsters alive in a cage for
decades vs. sending them speedily (after a fair
trial & fair appeal, if warranted) to God for
judgment? What is the point? So they can live on
sinning in jail for decades? So they can kill/rape
other prisoners? Threaten victims from inside the
jail? Order hits on innocent people? Join gangs?
Convert to a jihad-religion? Does this help the
taxpayer? Does this help the criminals' own souls?
Do we imagine that most such criminals suddenly live
virtuous lives from inside the jail surrounded by
other criminals? Or might they be more likely to add
sin upon sin? Wouldn't it be better to execute
quickly after a fair trial & honest appeal(s) and
put at least some of the savings of not having to
house them towards a victims' compensation fund?
Still better, use the savings to reduce taxes for
all of us so we could have more resources to
voluntarily help innocent victims using our own
personal charity rather than having funds taken from
us involuntarily. Is it not better to tend to the
victims rather than the criminals, who are
housed/fed, given medical care, etc. on the backs of
taxpayers?
55. Besides the incredible cost savings from quick
executions (of course after a fair trial and any
worthy appeal), capital punishment could help solve
the prison overcrowding problem. If executed persons
are no longer living, there is no longer a need for
their jail space, which frees up the room for other
prisoners. Note that when prisons are overcrowded,
prison conditions may be rather 'unfair' to other
lesser criminals (e.g. those jailed for 'small'
offenses). Plus, when prisons are overcrowded, there
is a tendency to release criminals – which further
endangers society.
56. I can imagine a community in which all those
deserving had been executed. It would be a much
safer place and people would recognize that actions
have consequences. It might even help people believe
in
hell! Being too weak to punish with the death
penalty leads to more crime and doesn't foster
belief in the eternal punishment of hell...which may
lead people to hell! Be honest with yourself, would
you prefer to live in a society where there were
quick executions of brutal killers after a fair
legal process or live in a community that opposes
the death penalty where the most violent offenders
may escape or be released in the future (e.g. due to
commutations, over-crowding, or completion of their
sentence). Would you really rather live in a world
where criminals and potential criminals don't need
to fear the death penalty?
57. Abolition of the death penalty may be a
leftist/liberal or
modernist cause. It is hard to take
leftists/liberals seriously about the 'dignity of
life' for brutal murderers when they also support
the
killing of innocent babies in the womb. Let me
paraphrase one comment I saw online, 'the typical
leftists are more concerned with the pain killer the
criminal receives at their execution than they are
about his/her victims, or unborn children being
killed in the womb.' Given these facts, I think
leftist arguments should not be taken too seriously.
Besides, their arguments against the death penalty
seem mostly feelings-driven and not well thought
out.
58. If someone condemns the death penalty in all
cases, they condemn about 2,000 years of Church
teaching. Personally, I value my Catholic faith –
which is necessary for salvation – and I am
therefore NOT willing to contradict 2,000 years of
Church teaching. Are you?
59. If a Catholic rejects the licitness of the death
penalty, it seems to me they are behaving as a
heretic. As I read online, "opposing the death
penalty is a heretical position for a Catholic to
hold." I agree. According to the Catechism of Pope
St. Pius X (1908)...
"Heresy is
a culpable error of the intellect by which some
truth of faith is obstinately denied."
Heresy has been considered a sin against the faith.
Even a Pope has no power to change what is in Holy
Scripture and what has been held from Apostolic
times (and even before). We are all bound to hold to
the perennial Catholic faith, not newly invented
doctrines.
There are
a couple worthy objections concerning the death
penalty that deserve a closer look. One involves the
supposed 'racist' nature of capital punishment. The
other concerns the potential for putting innocent
people to death. The
above referenced book covers both objections (at
least with respect to the United States) in more
detail. Here are a couple notes from the book...
Death
penalty/has not been racist: "[B]lacks arrested for
murder are considerably less likely to be
sentenced to death (13.7 per 1,000 arrests) than are
whites (21.1 per 1,000 arrests). Put another way,
whites arrested for murders in the United States are
54% more likely to be sentenced to death than are
blacks arrested for murders."
Death
penalty/has not been inflicted on the innocent:
"Paul Cassell in 2000: 'The authors of a critical
study of the death penalty] were unable to find a
single case in which an innocent person was
executed. Thus, the most important error rate–the
rate of mistaken executions–is zero.' And in 2008:
'Abolitionists have been unable to demonstrate that
even a single innocent person has been executed in
error.' • Joshua Marquis in 2005: 'The
well-organized and even better-funded abolitionists
cannot point to a single case of a demonstrably
innocent person executed in the modern era of
American capital punishment.' • Justice Antonin
Scalia in 2006: 'The dissent does not discuss a
single case–not one–in which it is clear that a
person was executed for a crime he did not commit.'"
In
summary, proper use of capital punishment...
* is necessary/demanded by justice
* protects society
* saves innocent lives
* serves the common good
* is supported by Scripture and infallible Catholic
teaching
* gives justice to victims and their families
* makes better use of taxpayer funds
* may be good for criminals' souls (e.g. impending
death bringing them to repentance, plus the death
penalty may be the ONLY way for the sinner/criminal
to atone for his/her sin while still on earth)
To oppose
capital punishment in all cases...
* is to undermine public safety
* is to undermine the credibility of the Church
* may result in vigilantism
* may result in more murders
* may contribute to prison overcrowding
* may make opponents complicit in others' crimes
It is an
injustice to allow killers to live – rent free, with
3 no-cost meals a day, television, recreation, free
medical care (victims don't get such treatment!) –
and possibly get out in the future and go on to
murder other innocent people. This may explain why
capital punishment enjoys 'widespread public
support'. And it is perfectly lawful and appropriate for
Catholics to advocate in favor of the death
penalty, unlike
abortion &
euthanasia, which can NEVER be permitted. As
Cardinal Ratzinger, then prefect of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith & future Pope Benedict
XVI, stated...
"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."
If a
person rejects capital punishment in principle, they
may indirectly contribute to future killing of
innocent people. This is a serious matter with
dire consequences. Already there are many
innocent people in their graves because of criminals
who didn't value their lives. And the pain of
victims and their families is very real as well.
People who oppose the death penalty in all cases may
essentially (although indirectly) be complicit in
future crimes, serving almost like 'accomplices'
(defined as "someone who helps another person commit
a crime") in that future crimes would have been
impossible if deserving criminals were executed –
and they will have to answer to God for this. We
already know that God said...
Gen. 9:6:
"If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his
blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been
made."
God did
NOT say...
"If anyone
sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood
not be shed if there is sufficient technology for
housing criminals."
Two
totally different things. Recall that we are also
told in the
New Testament...
Rom. 13:4:
"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."
God has
spoken on the matter. It is our job to accept what
He says, not oppose it. The consequences of
rejecting capital punishment are perilous for society
and public safety. Future crimes may put blood on
the hands of people who oppose the death penalty –
yes, IMHO, they may be seen as indirectly complicit
in some future crimes. And again, they will have to
answer to God for it, as we all will have to answer
for our actions.
Keep in
mind, any opponents of the death penalty, that the
next person to be viciously killed by someone who
should have previously received the death penalty
might be YOU or YOUR loved ones. Should that be the
case, I imagine you would have wished the death
penalty had been applied when it should have been.
In my
opinion, the death penalty should be used MORE often
and MORE swiftly than it has been in recent times –
of course, this assumes the judicial proceedings are
conducted lawfully & fairly against those guilty of
grievous crimes. If executions don't happen promptly
after the applicable legal processes are complete,
"the deterrent affect is diluted." There is not much
point in having a death penalty when those to be
executed generally die beforehand of old age.
If we had
faith as a society, we'd see that death isn't the
greatest evil,
sin is – and then
hell.
Mt. 10:28:
"[Jesus said,] And fear ye not them that kill the
body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather
fear him that can destroy both soul and body in
hell."
It's a
great gift for criminals to know when, precisely,
they will
die so that they can get the last
sacraments and be properly prepared to meet God,
and hopefully avoid hell. Don't you wish you knew in
advance when your life was to end so you could
best prepare for this, the 'single most important moment of your
life' on which your entire eternity depends?
I will
close with 3 relevant quotes from an article
concerning Pope Leo XIV's recent ill-conceived,
harmful tweet against capital punishment that
contradicts perennial Church teaching... [Source:
"The Pope's tweet and the quiet suicide of order" by
Kyle McClay, American Thinker, 10/19/26]
"[I]n
cities that have effectively abandoned capital
punishment and aggressive policing, the body count
among the innocent continues. The people who pay the
price are not the theologians writing about dignity
from a safe distance. They are the soldiers at Fort
Hood, the shopkeepers in high-crime neighborhoods,
and the children who grow up learning that the state
will protect the rights of the predator more
carefully than it will protect them. The claim that
'effective systems of detention' can replace the
death penalty for the worst offenders is an
empirical assertion that has been tested. It fails.
Determined killers continue to kill inside prisons.
They order hits, radicalize others, and consume
enormous resources."
"For most
of human history this was not a complicated
question. Public execution was not a carnival of
blood for its own sake. It was a deliberate
spectacle of order. The condemned was brought before
the community that he had injured. The sentence was
read. The act was carried out in daylight. Citizens
saw, with their own eyes, that the law was not a
suggestion and that the victims had not been
forgotten. Children learned the difference between
the protected and the outlawed. Potential killers
calculated the odds and often chose differently. The
point was not sadism. The point was clarity."
"Read the
words [of Leo's tweet] again. The Pope is not
arguing that [the mass-murdering] Hasan is innocent,
that the military court erred, or that the evidence
was thin. He is arguing that the state should
permanently warehouse a man who opened fire on
unarmed troops in the name of jihad, and that this
warehouse arrangement is somehow more consistent
with human dignity than a public, final reckoning.
That is not a theological refinement. It is a
leadership failure with civilizational
consequences."
 Signature:
C.P.S.
Click Link Below To View:
Submit a Comment About this Article ('add post')
Read Comments Regarding this Article (if applicable)
Read Other
User-Submitted Articles
Submit Your Own
Article
More About User-Submitted Articles
Read User-Submitted Posts
Submit Your
Own Post
For Information Related To This Topic Try:
Death Penalty (Topic Page)
Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished? Is It Wrong To Support Capital
Punishment? ('Quick Help' Page)
Current Issues (Topic Page)
More Information / Resources:
Click Here For Help =>
10,000+ Topics!
Click Here
For Thousands of Quotations From Popes, Saints, Scripture, Etc.
Categorized By Section
Looking For a Great
Catholic Home Page? Try the MCS Daily Digest™ (click here)
Didn't find what you were looking for?
Try Here
We make no guarantees regarding any item herein. By using
this site you indicate agreement to all terms. For terms information,
see "Important Notice" above and click
here.
|
