The most severe penalty known to humans is the death penalty. Recently the wife and I were watching a show on Netflix that takes place in California called The Closer, in which a person said he would confess, but wanted the death penalty off the table. The series stars a female deputy police chief in LA. I am not sure what season, much less episode we are in, but the series seems to have started over twenty years ago in 2005. I knew it was dated by the vehicles used in the episodes. The series predates the 2019 executive order of Governor Gavin Newsom in which he placed a moratorium on the death penalty for California.
On April 24, the Department of Justice announced it will allow firing squads as a method of execution. In a situation of reality is stranger than fiction, on that same day Pope Leo XIV appeared via video to a Chicago conference which was regarding the 25th anniversary of Illinois ending its death penalty; legislation was signed by then Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, on March 9, 2011.
 |
| Pope Leo Video appearance at DePaul Univ ABC 7 |
As with the "Just War" theory in the prior blog post, the Pope was not creating new church teaching but was reiterating teaching in the Catholic Catechism. The Catechism was amended by Pope Francis in August 2018 to put church teaching firmly against the use of the death penalty. Hence, now the Catechism reads:
The death penalty
2267. Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.
Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.
Previously, the Catechism had left a small window open where the 1992 edition allowed it in rare circumstances, but noted such “cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.” St. John Paul II while under his pontificate crafted the above language which left a bit if wiggle room, he personally spoke against the death penalty and often pleaded to the proper authority for clemency of those sentenced to death. In a 1995 encyclical he argued that punishment should be focused on rehabilitation and not on revenge. The more traditional-oriented Benedict often preached the same message. Hence, Francis' movement was consistent with the recent magisterial teachings of the church.
With Pope Leo's comments upholding the Church's current thought, I was amazed to see varied far right Catholic websites popping on my Facebook page (probably since I had read a few articles on this conference and the algorithm provided them to me) quoting the 1992 edition of the Catechism and saying Pope Leo did not know what he was talking about. We today have a new set of Cafeteria Catholics, who may be against abortion, but do not favor the church teaching on the death penalty being inadmissible. Many years ago, in the 1980's, Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago promoted what he called the Seamless Garment Theory. This is a holistic and moral approach for all aspects of life from conception to natural death. The theory, first noted by Eileen Egan in 1971, but further developed and popularized by Bernardin, is inspired by the fourth Gospel, John 19:23, where Jesus' tunic was woven in one piece and not torn, which symbolized a unified approach to life. Both ends of the political spectrum tend to run counter to the Seamless Garment theory. Some conservatives support the death penalty and question the just war theory, and some liberals support euthanasia and abortion. Hence, there exist cafeteria Catholics on both ends of the US political spectrum.
I think the far right Catholics purposefully failed to quote the revised Catechism, not because they did not know about the change, but that they do not believe Francis was a legitimate heir to the throne of Peter. One can see it in other writings were they go to pains not to name him, almost as if he is Tom Marvolo Riddle, also known as "He who should not be named", or Lord Voldemort of the Harry Potter series. Hence, they can no longer complain about liberal cafeteria Catholics as they now are part of the salad/pasta/potato bar crowd too. In fact, they may be worse, as in not recognizing Pope Francis they are essentially modern day sedevacantists.
The reason for the Church positions from abortion to natural death relates to the dignity of the human person, and that even the most heinous act cannot take away the dignity of a human. The death penalty also cuts short the ability of a person to convert and repent, in other words to ask forgiveness and mercy. Further, current penal systems are such that the common good is not put at risk. There are also other practical considerations, such as wrongful convictions.
At least the US is not in competition, yet, with China on this matter. A couple years ago Amnesty International reported that China executes more individuals a year than all other 54 countries combined. This includes Iran where the executions were in the hundreds, although today may be higher.
In my mind, Cardinal Bernardin had it correct in promoting the seamless garment theory. We see it in our society today, from both the right and the left, where personal beliefs are voiced and supported above the common good. Putting a person to death is the most severe penalty, and is one whose time has come to completely end.
No comments:
Post a Comment