The Catholic Church and the Death Penalty
This was a really fun conversation.
About 5 years ago, Thomas Lackey studied his way into the Catholic Church. One of the topics he studied extensively was the death penalty. In this interview, we ask some questions both for and against the death penalty.
Here’s a couple of resources we mention in the discussion:
By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment – by Edward Feser
It is lawful to put a man to death by public authority: it is even a duty of princes and of judges to condemn to death criminals who deserve it; and it is the duty of the officers of justice to execute the sentence ; God himself wishes malefactors to be punished. – St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Instructions on the Commandments and the Sacraments
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. – Catechism from the Council of Trent, The Fifth Commandment
The death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted, unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus deprived of the power to sin anymore. – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Secunda Secundae, Q.25 A.6
If the judge were to remit punishment inordinately, he would inflict an injury on the community, for whose good it behooves ill-deeds to be punished, in order that. men may avoid sin. Hence the text, after appointing the punishment of the seducer, adds (Deuteronomy [13:11]): “That all Israel hearing may fear, and may do no more anything like this.” He would also inflict harm on the injured person; who is compensated by having his honor restored in the punishment of the man who has injured him. – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Secunda Secundae, Q.67 A.4
It is in no way contrary to the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” … for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice. – St. Augustine, The City of God, Book 1, chapter 21
Concerning secular power we declare that without mortal sin it is possible to exercise a judgment of blood as long as one proceeds to bring punishment not in hatred but in judgment, not incautiously but advisedly. – Pope Innocent III, Profession of Faith Prescribed for Durand of Osca and His Waldensian Companions
Some have held that the killing of man is prohibited altogether. They believe that judges in the civil courts are murderers, who condemn men to death according to the laws. Against this St. Augustine says that God by this Commandment does not take away from Himself the right to kill. Thus, we read: “I will kill and I will make to live.” It is, therefore, lawful for a judge to kill according to a mandate from God, since in this God operates, and every law is a command of God…” – St. Thomas Aquinas, Catechism of St. Thomas, The Ten Commandments, Article 7
They also allege that so long as a man is existing in this world he can be changed for the better. So, he should not be removed from the world by execution, but kept for punishment. Now, these arguments are frivolous. Indeed, in the law which says “You shall not kill” there is the later statement: “You shall not allow wrongdoers to live” (Exod. 22: 18). From this we are given to understand that the unjust execution of men is prohibited…. Finally, the fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life* is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at the critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they 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. – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, Part II, Q.146-8
To punish murderers, those who violate the divine law, and poisoners [by death] is not the effusion of blood, but is the ministry of law… it is not only licit to scourge evil-doers but also to kill them. – Gratian, Decretum, Q.5, Chapter 48, Causa XXIII
Card. Newman An Essay on the Development of Doctrine
Section 6. Sixth Note—Conservative Action upon Its Past
As developments which are preceded by definite indications have a fair presumption in their favour, so those which do but contradict and reverse the course of doctrine which has been developed before them, and out of which they spring, are certainly corrupt; for a corruption is a development in that very stage in which it ceases to illustrate, and begins to disturb, the acquisitions gained in its previous history.
…
A true development, then, may be described as one which is conservative of the course of antecedent developments being really those antecedents and something besides them: it is an addition which illustrates, not obscures, corroborates, not corrects, the body of thought from which it proceeds; and this is its characteristic as contrasted with a corruption.
…
Such too is the theory of the Fathers as regards the doctrines fixed by Councils, as is instanced in the language of St. Leo. “To be seeking for what has been disclosed, to reconsider what has been finished, to tear up what has been laid down, what is this but to he unthankful for what is gained?” [Note 11] Vincentius of Lerins, in like manner, speaks of the development of Christian doctrine, as profectus fidei non permutatio [Note 12]. And so as regards the Jewish Law, our Lord said that He came “not to destroy, but to fulfil.”
…
Mahomet is accused of contradicting his earlier revelations by his later, “which is a thing so well known to those of his sect that they all acknowledge it; and therefore when the contradictions are such as they cannot solve them, then they will have one of the contradictory places to be revoked. And they reckon in the whole Alcoran about a hundred and fifty verses which are thus revoked.” [Note 13]
—————–
Section 1. First Note of a Genuine Development—Preservation of Type
Section 2. Second Note—Continuity of Principles
Section 3. Third Note—Power of Assimilation
Section 4. Fourth Note—Logical Sequence
Section 5. Fifth Note—Anticipation of Its Future
Section 6. Sixth Note—Conservative Action upon Its Past
Section 7. Seventh Note—Chronic Vigour
The reversal of a doctrine as well established as the legitimacy of capital punishment would raise serious problems regarding the credibility of the magisterium. Consistency with scripture and long-standing Catholic tradition is important for the grounding of many current teachings of the Catholic Church; for example, those regarding abortion, contraception, the permanence of marriage, and the ineligibility of women for priestly ordination. If the tradition on capital punishment had been reversed, serious questions would be raised regarding other doctrines… — Cardinal Dulles, First Things, April 2001
We also note that the Church in theory and in practice has kept the two forms of capital punishment (medicinal and vindictive) and that this is more in line with what the sources of revelation and traditional doctrine teach about the coercive power of legitimate human authority. One does not give a sufficient answer to this assertion, noting that the above-mentioned sources contain only thoughts that correspond to historical circumstances and the culture of the time, and that therefore one cannot attribute to them a general and always durable value. – Pope Pius XII, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 47 (1955) 81-82.
The Vatican City State from 1929 until 1969 had a penal code that included the death penalty for anyone who might attempt to assassinate the pope. Pope Pius XII, in an important allocution to medical experts, declared that it was reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life in expiation of their crimes. Summarizing the verdict of Scripture and tradition, we can glean some settled points of doctrine. It is agreed that crime deserves punishment in this life and not only in the next. In addition, it is agreed that the State has authority to administer appropriate punishment to those judged guilty of crimes and that this punishment may, in serious cases, include the sentence of death. – Cardinal Dulles, Catholicism & Capital Punishment
Retribution by the State can only be a symbolic anticipation of God’s perfect justice. For the symbolism to be authentic, the society must believe in the existence of a transcendent order of justice, which the State has an obligation to protect. This has been true in the past, but in our day the State is generally viewed simply as an instrument of the will of the governed. In this modern perspective, the death penalty expresses not the divine judgment on objective evil but rather the collective anger of the group. The retributive goal of punishment is misconstrued as a self-assertive act of vengeance. – Cardinal Dulles, Catholicism & Capital Punishment
About the author, Adam
Adam is the Director of Communications for the Diocese of Tulsa and Eastern Oklahoma, CEO of St. Michael Catholic Radio, Co-host of TCMS, Author from Ascension Press, Husband and Father of 5 children.