Bishop Loverde reflects on the death penalty as the Washington area sniper prepares to be executed.
On November 10th, John Allen Muhammad is scheduled for execution in Virginia. As many will recall, Mr. Muhammad orchestrated the 2002 sniper attacks in the Washington metropolitan area — a rampage that left 10 people dead, others wounded and entire communities in shock and fear. To say that these acts are horrific and appalling would be an understatement. Certainly, a person who committed such brutal acts should be punished severely, and many among us would surely desire revenge and would even say that such a person deserves to die for what he did. It is understandable for us — all of us, myself included — to have these reactions, and to be outraged at the way in which innocent lives were so senselessly taken, with their families left to mourn and to ask questions which have no satisfactory answers.
These emotions, however, are a beginning, not an end. We are called to be more, and to do more, than we could ever be or do without God’s transforming grace. In seeking to “be more,” we should begin with prayer for the families of the victims of the sniper attacks, beseeching Our Blessed Lord to help them experience the healing that only His hand can offer. And then, as we open our minds and hearts in prayer, we can prepare ourselves to ask Jesus: “Who are you calling me to be in this situation?”
During his public ministry, Jesus Himself was asked to make a statement on putting someone to death:
But early in the morning he arrived again in the temple area, and all the people started coming to him, and he sat down and taught them. 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. (John 8:2-6)
Many of those gathered probably wanted Jesus to reach the “inevitable” conclusion that stoning was the appropriate punishment under the law. Jesus’ response, of course, surprised them all:
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. Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She replied, "No one, sir." Then Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more." (John 8:7-11)
While recognizing the seriousness of the woman’s offense and admonishing her to “not sin anymore,” Jesus refused to choose death over life, or despair over hope. Although He understood the demands of justice, His emphasis was on mercy and the human dignity of the sinner.
Because each person is created in God’s image and likeness, each person retains an intrinsic human dignity — even someone convicted of a heinous crime. This dignity is what leads the Church — while acknowledging the legitimate defense of individuals and society — to teach that the death penalty cannot be justified when a government has other ways to protect its people adequately against an unjust aggressor:
If 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” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2267; Evangelium Vitae, 56).
In solidarity with this teaching and with the consistent appeals made by Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI for an end to capital punishment in modern society, we are called to choose hope — hope in the redemption of an immortal soul – over the despair embedded in the death penalty. If the woman had been stoned, she would not have had the opportunity to “not sin anymore.” And so, despite the initial reactions we might have in seeking revenge, we must not opt for the death penalty.
When life without the possibility of parole in a maximum security prison is an option, we have no need for the death penalty. By sparing the woman caught in adultery, Christ taught us a lesson which Saint Paul later expressed: “do not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good.” (Romans 12:21). Christ did this in the temple where He was teaching, and He enables us to do this, with His help, within the temples of our hearts today.
In the needles of lethal injection, we see the manifestation of despair. And in this despair, in advocating the use of the death penalty, our society has moved beyond the legitimate judgment of crimes. Brothers and sisters, we are better than this. We are called to be more than slaves to despair; we are called to be heralds of hope!
We find a striking example of this hope in Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus, who, as a young girl, prayed and did penance for the conversion of a convicted murderer Henri Pranzini. Although he had repeatedly refused to repent, at the moment before placing his head in the noose, he kissed the crucifix held out to him three times. Through the prayers and penance of Saint Thérèse, a person judged to be lost was won for Christ!
Imitating Saint Thérèse, let us unite our prayers and penance for John Allen Muhammad that he may experience Christ’s redemptive mercy, for the victims of his crimes and their families, and for the courage in our Commonwealth to choose the path of hope instead of despair.
Stop Scheduled Executions
Visit vacatholic.org and click on “Current Alerts” to contact Governor Tim Kaine.
Email
Print
The problem with this line of reasoning is that the present teaching of the Church is untenable apart from the traditional teaching that the death penalty is justified in retribution as punishment for murder. If the retributive indication were not present in a crime, it would not be morally illicit to punish anyone at all, even were it necessary to protect society. And if the murderer did not justly deserve the death penalty, his execution would be evil in its object: an act which, by reason of its kind could not licitly be directly willed on any occasion at all, whether as an end or as a means.
But if it is justified in retribution, then the lawful execution of a murderer is never objectively sinful, even where the necessity of protecting society is not present.
Sorry, I should have said 'morally licit' not 'morally illicit'.
One more thing I want to add.
The incident where Jesus rescued the woman caught in adultery was one of three similar ones we can identify in the Gospel. Here, He remitted both sin and crime, and as King of the Jews - let alone as God - He had the right to do so.
The second incident was where Jesus carried to Calvary the cross which had been meant for Barabbas. In taking his place He providentially released him from the punishment for his crimes, but not as far as we know his sins.
The third incident was the act of repentance which the Good Thief made as he professed that he and his obstinate partner were receiving the just punishment for their crimes. Jesus pardoned his sins and promised him Paradise, but He did not remove the earthly punishment.
I find the reasoning here inconsistent. I concur with the following words:
This is true, and I was ready to hear the argument that followed that might challenge my belief in the death penalty. But the woman caught in adultery killed nobody, so I don't see how her example can be used as a legitimate comparison.
If I remember correctly, the origin of the prison system comes from the Quaker belief that every person, when placed in a cell, had the opportunity to be rehabilitated by their inner light. We know that doesn't work, at least not the way envisioned.
I fail to understand how it is better that the law abiding support murderers for the rest of their lives. I'm ready to say that there are times for forgiveness for the crime of murder. It's been done. But that doesn't mean there should not be a death penalty. If it does I'll certainly have to hear a better argument than this.
The woman caught in adultery had killed nobody, yet adultery was a capital crime under the Law of Moses, provided that it was committed by and with a married woman. Between an unmarried woman and a man married or not, adultery was not a crime at all. That is why polygamy is found in the Old Testament, though it was not common except among kings and the wealthy.
Jesus' teaching on adultery equalised the status of women in regard to it in that He held that a married man could commit it whether his accomplice was herself married or not.
Don't have an account? Click here to sign up for one - it's quick, easy, and free!