The Gospel of Life:
Catholic Social Teaching & the Death Penalty
By Michael Stone, Virginia Coordinator for the
National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty
December 13, 2012
St. Mark’s Catholic Church - Vienna, VA
I am tnuly pleased to be with you tonight. I often worked with people from the Diocese of
Arlington during the 25 years that I labored for Bishop Sullivan & Bishop DiLorenzo in the Diocese
of Richmond. But today is just the second time that I have been invited to speak before a Catholic
gathering in northem Virginia.
My task this evening is to describe Catholic teaching on capital punishment. This is nota fun
or easy thing to do, especially during this Advent season of hope!
There is a significant body of church teaching that is centuries old which relates our faith to
society. This moral tradition is known as Catholic Social Teaching.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Catholic Social Teaching grows out of
two complementary sources: Scripture and the lived experience of the church in history, or Tradition
with a capital T. So Catholic social teaching is authentic teaching of the church; it is real doctrine.
If Catholic moral teaching is rooted in God's revelation through Scripture, that seems to bea
good place to begin our examination of the death penalty.
The first mention of killing is at the beginning of the Hebrew Scriptures, or the Old
Testament. The story of Cain & Abel takes place in the fourth chapter of the first book of the Bible,
in the Book of Genesis:
Cain said to his brother Abel, “ Let us go out in the field.”. When they were in the field,
Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. Then the LORD asked Cain, Where is
your brother Abel? He answered, “I do not know. Am! my brother's keeper?”
God then said: What have you done? Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the
ground! Now you are banned from the ground that opened its mouth to receive your
brother's blood from your hand. If you till the ground, it shall no longer give you its
produce. You shall become a constant wanderer on the earth.
1
Cain said to the LORD: “My punishment is too great to bear. Look, you have now
banished me from the ground. | must avoid you and be a constant wanderer on the
earth. Anyone may kill me at sight.”
Not so! the LORD said to him. If anyone kills Cain, Cain shall be avenged seven times.
So the LORD put a mark on Cain, so that no one would kill him at sight.
Here we have a curious story. The first murder recorded in Scripture is not dealt with as
harshly as one might think. In fact, God strips Cain of his profession as a farmer and sends him into
exile. There is no death sentence or even a term of imprisonment. The Lord God goes so far as to
place a mark of protection upon Cain so that he will not be harmed in exile!
Further on in the Old Testament we find what is probably the most well known single line of
Scripture on the death penalty:
Whoever takes the life of any human being shall be put to death;
whoever takes the life of an animal shall make restitution of another animal. A life for a
life! Anyone who inflicts an injury on his neighbor shall receive the same in return.
Limb for limb, eye for eye, tooth for tooth! The same injury that a man gives another
shall be inflicted on him in return.
This passage from the 24th chapter of the Book of Leviticus is quoted not only by Christians,
but by many people in the secular world who support capital punishment.
But this is just the beginning of the Mosaic Law’s treatment of the death penalty. Here are
several other passages that are not as well known:
Ifa man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to his father or mother, and
will not obey them even though they chastise him, his father and mother shall have him
apprehended and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, ...
Then all his fellow citizens shall stone him to death. Thus shall you purge the evil from
your midst, and all Israel, on hearing of it, shall fear.
- Deuteronomy 21: 18-21
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. ...
Whoever curses his father or mother shall be put to death.
- Exodus 21: 15-17
Six days there are for doing work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of complete rest,
sacred to the LORD. Anyone who does work on the sabbath day shall be put to death.
- Exodus 31: 15
As you can see the Hebrew code of conduct was quite harsh, dealing out death not only to
killers but to unruly or obedient children and those who refused to attend synagogue on the sabbath.
There were a total of 36 separate offenses in the law of Moses that called for the death penalty.
I doubt that many of those who use an “eye for an eye” these days would advocate capital
punishment for these infractions! Y et if we are compelled to follow this one Scriptural command,
then why not the others as well?
Let’s move on to the New Testament. What does Jesus have to say about the death penalty?
While not addressing this issue directly, Jesus certainly makes it clear what he expects from his
followers:
You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on
(your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.
- Matthew 5: 38-39
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.
- Matthew 5: 43-44
Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and
the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
- Matthew 5: 43-44
Atanother point in the Gospels, Jesus is faced with a tense and angry mob. They present him
someone clearly guilty of an offense that, according to Mosaic Law, demanded the death penalty:
Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery
and made her stand in the middle.
They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing
adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you
say?”
They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him.
Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger.
But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one
among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he bent down
and wrote on the ground.
And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left
alone with the woman before him.
- John 8: 3-9
Of course, none of these instances involved Jesus personally. Some say that these are just
nice sayings given by Jesus. So let’s consider what He had to say when “the rubber meets the road”:
When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him and the criminals there,
one on his right, the other on his left.
Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.”
= Luke 23: 33-34
Just as was the case with the first murder recorded in Scripture, that of Abel by his brother
Cain, God showed mercy to those who were guilty of killing the Holy One who was truly innocent.
This time the words of mercy were uttered by God’s only Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
There is another reference to the death penalty in the New Testament. This is often the one to
which many Christians who support capital punishment point, especially Evangelicals. The
following is part of the 13th chapter of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans:
Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except
from God, and those that exist have been established by God.
Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who
oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. 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; itis the
servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
- Romans 13: 1-4
Both St. Augustine and St. Thomas A quinas wrote in support of capital punishment, using
language that is very close to that used by St. Paul in this particular passage. They argued that God
established civil authority to protect and defend the public order, and that the death penalty could
lawfully be used to execute judgment on offenders. This is “the sword” to which St. Paul refers.
I personally find it curious that so many point to Romans 13 in support of capital punishment
and ignore what was written immediately before this section in the 12th chapter of Romans:
Bless those who persecute (you), bless and do not curse them. ... Do not repay anyone
evil for evil; be concerned for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, on your part,
live at peace with all.
Beloved, do not look for revenge ... for it is written, “ Vengeance is mine, I will repay,
says the Lord.” Rather, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him
something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.” Do
not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good.
= Romans 12: 14-21
The one who wrote this passage, St. Paul, has a most unusual personal story. As a young
man St. Paul was a witness to the stoning of the first Christian martyr, St. Stephen. In the 22nd
chapter of the Acts of the Apostles describes his role in the stoning:
... when the blood of your witness Stephen was being shed, I myself stood by giving my
approval and keeping guard over the cloaks of his murderers.
- Acts 22: 20
At the very least Saul, as he was known then, was an accessory to what he himself called
murder. But this was only the beginning of his hostility toward the early Christian community. Later
in the Acts of the Apostles St. Paul describes his actions in greater detail:
I myself once thought that I had to do many things against the name of J esus the
Nazorean, and I did so in Jerusalem. I imprisoned many of the holy ones with the
authorization I received from the chief priests, and when they were to be put to death I
cast my vote against them. Many times, in synagogue after synagogue, I punished them
in an attempt to force them to blaspheme; I was so enraged against them that I pursued
them even to foreign cities.
= Acts 26: 9-11
So what happened to Saul, the persecutor of Christians?
Now Saul, still breathing murderous threats against the disciples of the Lord, went to the
high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, that, if he should
find any men or women who belonged to the Way, he might bring them back to
Jerusalem in chains.
On his journey, as he was nearing Damascus, a light from the sky suddenly flashed
around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why
are you persecuting me?”
He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
Now get up and go into the city and you will be told what you must do.”
6
The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could
see no one. Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see
nothing; so they led him by the hand and brought him to Damascus. For three days he
was unable to see, and he neither ate nor drank.
There was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias, and the Lord said to him in a vision,
“Ananias.” He answered, “Here I am, Lord.”
The Lord said to him, “Get up and go to the street called Straight and ask at the house of
Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul. He is there praying, and [in a vision] he has
seen a man named Ananias come in and lay [his] hands on him, that he may regain his
sight.”
But Ananias replied, “Lord, I have heard from many sources about this man, what evil
things he has done to your holy ones in Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the
chief priests to imprison all who call upon your name.”
But the Lord said to him, “Go, for this man is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my
name before Gentiles, kings, and Israelites, and I will show him what he will have to
suffer for my name.”
So Ananias went and entered the house; laying his hands on him, he said, “Saul, my
brother, the Lord has sent me, Jesus who appeared to you on the way by which you
came, that you may regain your sight and be filled with the holy Spirit.”
Immediately things like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. He got up and
was baptized, and when he had eaten, he recovered his strength.
= Acts 9:1-19
Put yourself into the role of Ananias. God asks him to go to this man who has been
empowered to arrest all Christians in the city. There is littke wonder that Ananias and the other
believers in Damascus would be terrified of Saul - the one who participated in the murder of St.
Stephen and the mass incarceration and persecution of the early church.
But what is God’s verdict toward this killer of Christians? Does God demand vengeance and
ajust death?
Like the cases of Abel and Jesus, God shows extraordinary mercy toward Saul. God does not
only forgive him for his crimes against the church, but anoints him for the tasks of preaching the
Good News to the Gentiles. Saul becomes St. Paul, the man most responsible for spreading
Christianity to every comer of the Roman Empire.
Itis truly difficult to wrap one’s mind around this story. The only modem analogy I can think
of would be this. Imagine someone like Osama bin laden having had a dramatic conversion &
campaigning in every nation of the Middle Easter for westem democracy or for Christianity.
So it is clear from the Biblical record that mercy and forgiveness are comerstones of our
faith. Y et there are also grounds as well for supporting the use of the death penalty. And that was
the official position of the Catholic Church for centuries - qualified support for capital punishment.
For this next section of my presentation I will summarize what Archbishop Wilton Gregory
wrote in 2008. He gave a superb talk at the Emory Law School in Atlanta that described the
evolution of church teaching on the death penalty.
After the Roman Emperor Constantine adopted Christianity, church authorities adopted a
near unanimous support for capital punishment in limited circumstances. St. Augustine, for
example, asserted that participation in war or in the legal execution of criminals did not violate the
commandment “Thou shalt not kill”. But A ugustine also insisted on purity of motive when carrying
out a death sentence. A judge or executioner needed to display genuine remorse for his actions.
Centuries later, Pope Innocent III approved capital punishment so long as it was carried out
“with justice, and not out of hatred; with prudence, and not with precipitation.” Soon afterwards the
church's Fourth Lateran Council declared that “no cleric may decree or pronounce a sentence
involving the shedding of blood, or carry out a punishment involving the same, or be present when
such punishment is carried out.”
Still later St. Thomas A quinas argued that ecclesiastical courts and the state should refrain
from using the death penalty except for very grave offenses such as murder and treason.
Now let’s fast forward to the twentieth century, a time of dramatic change in the way that the
Catholic Church came to understand capital punishment.
In 1972 the Catholic Bishops of Florida declared their opposition to the death penalty. Two
years later the U.S. Catholic Conference, the collective voice of the American bishops, declared its
opposition to capital punishment. And in 1976 the Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace
expressed its opposition to the death penalty.
Four years later, in 1980 the U.S. Bishops adopted a Statement on Capital Punishment that
reviewed the three traditional justifications for the death penalty: retribution, deterrence and reform.
In this 1980 statement the Bishops argued that the goal of reforming the offender is hindered by
capital punishment because the opportunity for a prisoner to reform is cut short.
In their consideration of the deterrence rationale, the Bishops noted that the death penalty
certainly protects society by permanently removing the offender from society through his death.
However, the Bishops expressed serious doubt as to the deterrent value of executions in relation to
those who might commit heinous crimes in the future.
Recently the Bishops’ judgment on this point was reaffirmed by an exhaustive study by the
National A cademy of Sciences. The study concluded that the existing research on the topic just can't
tell us one way or the other whether the death penalty has any deterrent effect. But the study did
clearly state that executions are not the driving force behind fluctuations in the U.S. homicide rate.
Instead homicide rates tend to rise and fall roughly in unison across states, even as some -- such as
Texas -- ramp up executions while other states have none.
Finally, in their 1980 Statement on Capital Punishment, the U.S. Bishops examined the third
moral argument that the death penalty fulfills the societal and individual need for retribution. The
Bishops rejected this argument as utterly unconvincing: They stated that:
Forms of punishment must be determined with a view to the protection of society and its
members and to the reformation of the criminal and his reintegration into society. ...
We believe that in the conditions of contemporary American society, the legitimate
purposes of punishment do not justify the imposition of the death penalty.
Furthermore, we believe that there are serious considerations which should prompt
Christians and all Americans to support the abolition of capital punishment. Some of
these reasons have to do with evils that are present in the practice of capital punishment
itself, while others involve important values that would be promoted by abolition of this
practice.
And so we come to the pontificate of Pope John Paul II. In March 1995 he issued his
encyclical letter, Evangelium Vitae, or The Gospel of Life. For the first time the Holy Father
addressed Respect Life issues at length for the first time in a Vatican document.
In this landmark document, Pope John Paul II focuses on three major threats to human life &
dignity - abortion, euthanasia, & capital punishment. Interestingly enough, the Pope started with a
discussion of the death penalty. The Holy Father firmly rejected any notion of vengeance in
application of capital punishment. Instead, he argued, the punishment should defend the public
order, ensure the safety of people, and offer the offender help & incentive to be rehabilitated.
The Pontiff says that the death penalty ought not to be applied except in cases of absolute
necessity, when there is no other way to defend society. He concludes by observing that such
instances today are very rare, if not non-existent.
Given the great care that the church insists be given to the life & dignity of criminals, the
Pope affirmed that the commandment 'You shall not kill' has absolute value when it refers to
innocent persons. The deliberate decision to deprive an innocent human being of his or her life is
always morally evil and can never be justified as an end in itself. Nor can killing an innocent person
ever be a means to a good end.
Pope John Paul II went on in Evangelium Vitae to examine and condemn abortion,
infanticide, experimentation on living embryos, euthanasia, and assisted suicide. The Holy Father
clearly saw links between capital punishment and these other pro-life issues.
He declared that violence in any form is antithetical to the Gospel of Life. With joy and
gratitude for the life that God has given, John Paul II called all of us to proclaim the good news of the
Gospel of Life: namely, that each & every human life is sacred and inviolable. The Gospel of Life is
both a great gift from God and an exacting task for humanity. In giving life to humanity, God
demands that we love, respect, & promote life.
The Pope challenges us to transform our culture and to imbue it with a profound honor and
respect for each person. He calls on all people of good will to become unconditionally pro-life:
10
Where life is involved, the service of charity must be profoundly consistent. It cannot
tolerate bias and discrimination, for human life is sacred and inviolable at every stage
and in every situation; it is an indivisible good. We need then to “show care” for all
life and for the life of everyone.
John Paul II urged us to use the legislative process in defense of human life & dignity. Itis
not enough, he told us in Evangelium Vitae, to mitigate or eliminate unjust laws. Society must
work to promote the common good. Not only must we refashion society, but ourselves.
John Paul II made it clear that no single person or group is alone responsible for the defense
and promotion of human life & dignity. These are everyone's task and responsibility.
Later in his Pontificate John Paul II repeatedly and forcefully articulated the church’s
opposition to the death penalty. In 1997 then-Cardinal Ratzinger had to order a revision to the
Catechism of the Catholic Church published only five years before to reflect this new more forceful
teaching.
According to Archbishop Wilton Gregory, in his 2008 address at Emory Law School, the
1992 edition of the Catechism presented the three traditional moral rationales for the death penalty --
retribution, deterrence, and reform. In contrast, the second 1997 edition removed the argument that
capital punishment restored public order that had been disrupted by the crime. In addition, the
second edition removed the notion that the death penalty acted as a deterrent.
All that remained of the older teaching was the defense of society. In Evangelium Vitae
John Paul II clearly expressed his view that modem society had non-lethal means to protect innocent
life from a dangerous offender:
On this matter [the death penalty] 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 offence”. Public authority must redress the violation of personal and
social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a
11
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.
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 non-existent.
Here is how the 1997 version of the Catechism of the Catholic C hurch presented church
teaching on the death penalty:
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, 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.
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.” [John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]
Over the last 30 years, Catholic Bishops around the world have worked to limit, restrain or
end the use of society's ultimate punishment. Here in the United States virtually every Bishop, State
Catholic Conference, and U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops forcefully opposes the death penalty.
12
The Bishops of the following states have issued joint statements calling for an end to capital
punishment in their jurisdictions - Califomia, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New Y ork, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin.
In our own state Bishop Loverde, Bishop DiLorenzo, & the Virginia Catholic Conference are
very active in the General Assembly opposing expansion of capital punishment and urging clemency
for those on death row (that is, reducing their sentence to life in prison without parole).
Since 1999, when Pope John Paul II called for an end to the death penalty in a visit to the
United States, the annual number of executions in the U.S. has dropped by more than half, the
number of new death sentences has fallen by more than 60%, and five of the most Catholic states in
the nation - Connecticut, New Mexico, Illinois, New Y ork, and New Jersey - have joined the
growing list of states that have ended the death penalty altogether.
In closing, let me quote Pope John Paul II one more time. In his apostolic exhortation The
Church in America (or Ecclesia in America) the Holy Father wrote about “the culture of death” in
the Americas:
Nowadays, in America as elsewhere in the world, a model of society appears to be
emerging in which the powerful predominate, setting aside and even eliminating the
powerless: I am thinking here of unborn children, helpless victims of abortion; the
elderly and incurably ill, subjected at times to euthanasia; and the many other people
relegated to the margins of society by consumerism and materialism. Nor can I fail to
mention the unnecessary recourse to the death penalty when other bloodless means are
sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and
the safety of persons. Today, given the means at the State's disposal to deal with crime
and control those who commit it, without abandoning all hope of their redemption, the
cases where it is absolutely necessary to do away with an offender are now very rare,
even non-existent practically. This model of society bears the stamp of the culture of
death, and is therefore in opposition to the Gospel message. Faced with this distressing
reality, the Church community intends to commit itself all the more to the defense of the
culture of life.
— Pope John Paul II, The Church in America (Ecclesia in America)
13
This is a daunting challenge for all of us. But, with the grace of God, we can be faithful to
the Gospel of Life in our personal relationships, in our workplaces, and in our civic involvement.
Perhaps we will, bit by bit, help to build God's reign of justice, peace, mercy, and compassion.
Thank you for your kind attention.
14
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0