Capital Punishment: The Church, The State, and Deterrence March 21, 2012 Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux.

Capital Punishment: The Church, The State, and Deterrence

March 21, 2012Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux

A CONSISTENT ETHIC OF LIFE

SEVEN THEMES OF CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING:

Life and Dignity of the Human Person

Call to Family, Community, and Participation

Rights and Responsibilities

Option for the Poor and Vulnerable

The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers

Solidarity

Care for God’s Creation

A CONSISTENT ETHIC OF LIFE

From “womb to tomb”

Cardinal Joseph Bernadin at Fordham University, 1983:

“The spectrum of life cuts across the issues of genetics, abortion, capital punishment, modern warfare, and the care of the terminally ill”

TRUE understanding of “Pro-Life”

CATHOLIC TEACHINGScripture

Genesis 2:7, 21-23

“Every life is a precious gift from God”

Exodus 21:23-25, Leviticus 24:17, Deuteronomy 19:21

“Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth”

CATHOLIC TEACHINGThe Catechism of the Catholic Church

Article 5: The Fifth Commandment

“Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from it s beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.” 2258


I. Respect for Human Life

Legitimate Defense

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. 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. 2266



Legitimate Defense

Assuming that the guilty party’s indentify 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 life against the unjust aggressor.



Legitimate Defense

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.



Legitimate Defense

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” 2267


II. Respect for the Dignity of Persons

Respect for the souls of others: scandal

Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense. 2284

CATHOLIC TEACHINGThe Catechism of the Catholic ChurchII. Respect for the Dignity of Persons


Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.

Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to “social conditions that intentionally, or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible.” This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger, or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values. 2286


II. Respect for the Dignity of Persons


Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. “Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom them come!”2287

CATHOLIC TEACHINGThe Catechism of the Catholic ChurchIII. Safeguarding Peace

Peace

By recalling the commandment, “You shall not kill,” our Lord asked for peace of heart and denounced murderous anger and hatred as immoral.

Anger is a desire for revenge. “To desire vengeance in order to do evil to someone who should be punished is illicit,” but it is praiseworthy to impose restitution “to correct vices and maintain justice.” If anger reaches the point of a deliberate desire to kill or seriously wound a neighbor, it is gravely against charity; it is a mortal sin. The Lord says, “Everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment.” 2302

CATHOLIC TEACHINGThe Catechism of the Catholic ChurchIII. Safeguarding Peace

Peace

Respect for and development of human life requires peace. Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is “tranquility of order.” Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity.2304

CATHOLIC TEACHINGThe Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

#405. The Church sees as a sign of hope “a growing public opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as a kind of ‘legitimate defense’ on the part of society. Modern society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitively denying them the chance to reform.” 833 Whereas, presuming the full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the guilty party, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude the death penalty “when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.” 834 Bloodless methods of deterrence and punishment are preferred as “they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.” 835 The growing number of countries adopting provisions to abolish the death penalty or suspend its application is also proof of the fact that cases in which it is absolutely necessary to execute the offender “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”836 The growing aversion of public opinion towards the death penalty and the various provisions aimed at abolishing it or suspending its application constitute visible manifestations of a heightened moral awareness.

833 John Paul ii, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, 27: AAS 87 (1995), 432834 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2267835 ibid836 John Paul ii, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, 56: AAS 87 (1995), 464; cf. also John Paul II, Message for the 2001 World Day of Peace, 19” AAS 93 (2001), 244 where recourse to the death penalty is described as “unnecessary.”

CATHOLIC TEACHINGEvangelium VitaeBlessed Pope John Paul II, 1995

55. ... Moreover, "legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life, the common good of the family or of the state."44 Unfortunately, it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason.45

56. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing tendency, both in the church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offense."46 Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfills the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behavior and be rehabilitated.47

It is clear that for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: In other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare if not practically nonexistent.

In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person."48

44 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2265. (Referring to 2266 prior to the modifications of September, 1997). 45 Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Thelogiae, II-II, q. 64, a. 7; St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Theologia Moralis, 1, III,; tr. 4, c. 1, dub. 3. 46 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2266. 47 Cf. Ibid. 48 No. 2267

CATHOLIC TEACHINGPope Benedict XVIWednesday, November 30, 2011

“I greet the distinguished delegations from various countries taking part in the meeting promoted by the Community of Sant’Egidio on the theme: No Justice without Life. I express my hope that your deliberations will encourage the political and legislative initiatives being promoted in a growing number of countries to eliminate the death penalty and to continue the substantive progress made in conforming penal law both to the human dignity of prisoners and the effective maintenance of public order. “

CATHOLIC TEACHINGConference StatementsUSCCB:

A Good Friday Appeal to End the Death Penalty, 1999

A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death, 2005

Acknowledged that sentences such as “life in prison without parole” provide non-lethal alternatives and called for an end to the use of the death penalty in the United States, stating “it is time for our nation to abandon the illusion that we can protect life by taking life.”

CATHOLIC TEACHINGConference StatementsLCCB:

Violence in Our Society, Death is Not the Answer, 1994

Violence begets violence; death begets death.

Our problem is this: capital punishment plunges us farther into the culture of death. We are convinced that we must choose consistently for life.

We therefore oppose the death penalty in our present society because we believe in the sacredness and dignity of every human life, even the life of those among us who have committed terrible crimes.

We are keenly aware of the pain and suffering of the victims and those who have lost a loved one through the crime of murder and other crimes of violence. We need to deepen our commitment to persons who have suffered needless violence.


Let Justice and Mercy Meet: Crime, Punishment and the Common Good in Light of Sacred Scripture and Catholic Teaching, 2002

II. Restorative Justice

Justice involves right order. Restorative justice involves the return to right order, effected through the acceptance of responsibility, the assignment of appropriate punishment and the return or restoration of as many as possible to the human community. The appropriate punishment redresses the harm done to the victims, their families and the wider society and both rehabilitates offenders and restores them to their families.

Victims need to know that offenders have come to grips with their responsibility and are willing to make amends. Offenders need to acknowledge their responsibility and be willing to be rehabilitated and to make amends to the victims, their families and the wider community. Society needs to experience that the right order, which had been violated, has been restored.


Let Justice and Mercy Meet: Crime, Punishment and the Common Good in Light of Sacred Scripture and Catholic Teaching, 2002

III. Restorative Justice and Capital Punishment

Restorative justice also calls on us to reject capital punishment as an effective and moral means of confronting crime. Death does not restore, heal, or make whole what was lost. Death only causes more death. When the state imposes death as a sentence, a further insensitivity to the loss of life is the result. The death penalty makes it easy to give up on others and neglect the underlying causes which yield violence and death. As a people of the Gospel of Life, we are called to build a civilization of life and love.

CATHOLIC TEACHINGInterpretation of Catholic Social Teaching

Social Sin

Social sin, of which we are all guilty, includes our ambivalence towards injustice, distorted consciousness, and collective actions and inactions that perpetuate social injustice and dehumanization. Roman Catholic social teaching recognizes that human persons are constituted by their social relationships and that persons tend to uncritically appropriate the prevailing values of a culture.

Diminishing All of Us: The Death Penalty in Louisiana, Jesuit Social Research Institute Loyola University of New Orleans, 2012

CATHOLIC TEACHINGInterpretation of Catholic Social Teaching

A Profound Forgetfulness of Eucharistic Remembering

From the earliest Christian communities, to believe is to remember Christ and to always keep Christ in mind. Knowing Christ is never simply knowing doctrine; rather our faith is about living and abiding with and loving all whom Christ loves—including the despised of society.

And given how contemporary society executes the death penalty, the way it involves a deliberate, ostensibly “rational” and “civilized” plan to destroy a member of the human community through lethal injection, “we the people” have become executioners of our own humanity.

Diminishing All of Us: The Death Penalty in Louisiana,

Jesuit Social Research Institute Loyola University of New

Orleans, 2012

IN GENERALMore than two-thirds (2/3) of the nations globally have abolished the death

penalty

In the U.S., executions dropped 12% in 2011 and death sentences remain near historic lows

Four states have abolished the death penalty in four successive years: New York (2007), New Jersey (2008), New Mexico (2009), and Illinois (2011)

The U.S. executed 46 people in 2010, trailing only North Korea (60+), Yemen (53+), Iran (252+), and China (over 1,000)

Diminishing All of Us: The Death Penalty inLouisiana,

Jesuit Social Research Institute Loyola University of New Orleans, 2012

IN GENERAL

SEE Death Penalty Information Fact Sheet

WITHIN LOUISIANA1722:

The first legal execution in the state of Louisiana is recorded

Summer of 1987:

State of Louisiana executed 8 people in 8 ½ weeks. At the same time, the murder rate in New Orleans rose 16.3%

Violence in Our Society: Death is Not the Answer, Louisiana Catholic Conference, 1994

WITHIN LOUISIANAIn Louisiana, four parishes (of a total of 64) are responsible for

86% of defendants on death row: Caddo Parish, East Baton Rouge Parish, Orleans Parish and Jefferson Parish

The two parishes with the greatest proclivity to utilize death sentences are Caddo, and East Baton Rouge

No white person has ever received the death penalty for killing a black person in Caddo Parish in the modern era of capital punishment

“Modern era” is meant to mean from 1976 to the present


WITHIN LOUISIANAIn the last twelve years there have been more men freed from

Louisiana’s death row because of their innocence than there were executions, five to three.

The death penalty system, which targets the poor and marginalized, creates the unacceptable risk that an innocent person will be executed.

In Louisiana, 64% of capital sentences were reversed by higher courts between 1976 and 1995. In the last ten years, 50% of capital cases have been sent back for a new trial from federal courts.


DETERRENCEThe nation’s police chiefs rank the death penalty last in their priorities

for effective crime reduction. Officers do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder, and they rate it as one of the most inefficient uses of taxpayer dollars in fighting crime.

82% of the world’s leading criminologists agree that the death penalty does not deter murders.

Justice Stevens in Blaze v. Rees (2008): “Despite 30 years of empirical research in the area, there remains no reliable statistical evidence that capital punishment in fact deters potential offenders.”


DETERRENCEThe murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower

than the rate in states with the death penalty, and the gap has grown since 1990.Difference by percentage:1990: 4%2010: 25%Percentages were in the 40s as recently as 2007 and 2008

In 2000, the New York Times reported that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. Ten of the twelve states without the death penalty, at that time, had homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty had homicide rates above.

During the last 20 years, the homicide rates in states with the death penalty were 48%-101% higher than in states without the death penalty.

Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates, Death Penalty Information Center, 2012

RESOURCESOld.usccb.org/deathpenaltyUnited States Conference of Catholic Bishops

www.laccb.orgLouisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops

www.catholicsmobilizing.orgCatholic Mobilizing Network

www.dpalternatives.orgLouisiana Coalition for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

www.iwanttoserve.orgI Want to Serve

www.deathpenaltyinfo.orgDeath Penalty Information Center

http://www.laccb.org/

http://www.catholicsmobilizing.org/

http://www.dpalternatives.org/

http://www.iwanttoserve.org/

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

Capital Punishment: The Church, The State, and Deterrence March 21, 2012 Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux.

Documents

Transcript of Capital Punishment: The Church, The State, and Deterrence March 21, 2012 Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux.