Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
The Death Penalty is Wrong Because Killing is Wrong

The Death Penalty is Wrong Because Killing is Wrong

Last updated on: November 20, 2020 at 2:28 pm by Mary Pezzulo

The Death Penalty is Wrong Because Killing is Wrong 2020-11-20T14:28:46-04:00 Mary Pezzulo

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Last night, the United States committed another federal execution.

Orlando Hall, a rapist and murderer, was put to death by lethal injection. This happened after a stay of execution was overturned by the United States Supreme Court. One of the justices who voted to overturn the stay was the newest supreme court justice, a Charismatic Catholic and darling of the pro-life movement, Amy Coney Barrett. Of course she’s not the only Catholic on the Supreme Court; Justice Kavanaugh ruled to kill Hall as well. And Attorney General Barr, a Catholic, is the one who resumed federal executions in the first place.

When a Catholic commits a scandalous act in public like this, it’s necessary to remind everyone of what Catholics actually profess. The Catholic Church teaches that the death penalty is wrong. The death penalty is wrong for the same reason abortion is wrong: because it’s wrong to kill people. Full stop. You’re not supposed to kill people.

Yes, this is a teaching of the Church that has been defied at countless times in history, including by devout Catholics who thought they were glorifying God by killing– and I mean by clerics, the hierarchy and even by some saints. The saints were mistaken. It remains Church teaching anyway. What’s wrong is wrong, even when ostensibly good Catholics do it. Killing people is wrong, not because the people being killed are innocent or because they’re cute or because they have the potential to do good, but simply because they are people. Human life is sacred and it’s a grave sin to end it, whether the human is a saint or a monster. That’s the rule.

There are some circumstances where it’s permissible to react to a deadly threat with proportionate force in order to protect yourself and others. The catechism says:

Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.

We’re allowed to react with deadly force to protect ourselves and others from a deadly threat. But it has to be the minimum necessary force, and when the threat is neutralized, the violence has to stop. If a pirate wielding two pistols with a cutlass in his teeth climbs into my bedroom window to murder me, I am allowed to push him back out the window to defend myself. I don’t sin by pushing him back out. I don’t sin even if he dies from the fall. But if I run out on the lawn and find that the pirate is still alive but incapacitated with his pistols out of reach, and I pick up the pistol and finish him off, I commit a grave sin. I also sin if I don’t run inside and call him an ambulance. I defended myself from a deadly threat, but during and after that act of defense, the pirate remained human. And it’s a sin to act to kill a human, even if that human is a bloodthirsty pirate. It doesn’t matter who the human is. It matters that they’re human.

This principle can be applied to situations like war as well. The Catechism says:

The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war.All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war. However, “as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.”

The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

– the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

– all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

– there must be serious prospects of success;

– the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

If my neighbors and I in LaBelle learned that an angry militia from the next neighborhood over was coming with guns to massacre us and couldn’t be persuaded to go home and leave us alone, we could get out our own guns and have a battle to fight them off. That’s not a sin. We’d be in danger of lasting, grave, and certain damage. We couldn’t figure out a way to stop the battle without fighting in it. We’re not creating a greater evil than what would’ve happened if we’d let them slaughter us. And we would probably win, because LaBelle has more guns than Fort Knox.

But if the militia surrendered and we decided to shoot them to teach them a lesson, or if we didn’t go out after the battle and take the wounded to the hospital, or if we decided to nuke their neighborhood to prevent them from doing this again– that would be grave sin. Because killing people is wrong.

At some points in history, it was not always wrong to apply the death penalty, but that time has come and gone. The Catechism says:

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 to 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 definitely 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 nonexistent.

The only time it would not be a sin to execute a prisoner, would be if that was the absolute only way to protect people from that prisoner killing again. If you and I were cowboys living in the Wild West, and we were absolutely certain the evil highwayman was certainly going to escape from the tiny jail cell at the sheriff’s office in Dirty Gulch and murder people again, it wouldn’t be wrong for the sheriff to go ahead and execute the highwayman. But in modern times, with the existence of maximum-security prisons, that condition doesn’t exist anymore. It’s possible to lock people away for life. If it’s possible to do that, that means the death penalty is not necessary anymore, and that means executing someone is a grave sin. The death penalty would only be morally permissible if it was used to protect others, and not for any other reason. Not to punish a bad person. Not to deter future bad people from doing what the bad person did. Not to give the murderer’s victim’s family “closure.” Because it’s wrong to kill people.

Orlando Hall was a bad person. He was a cold-blooded killer who kidnapped and raped a teenage girl before burying her alive. If there was a textbook example of a person who might deserve to be killed in vengeance, it would be Orlando Hall. But Orlando Hall was a human being, and that means that we as Catholics are required to respect and safeguard his life. Because human life is sacred and taking it is wrong.

Last night, Orlando Hall was himself the victim of killing. He was strapped to a gurney and injected with a drug cocktail that suffocated him, just as his victim suffocated to death in 1994. This was done even though he was not a danger to anyone anymore. Not only was he locked up in a modern-day prison where he couldn’t escape, but he’d spent the past few decades repenting of the murder and was no longer a violent man. His execution was a grave sin and injustice committed against Heaven and against him, just as the murder he committed was a grave sin and injustice committed against Heaven and against Lisa Rene.

He was killed because the Supreme Court overturned his stay of execution, and because federal executions were resumed. These were grave sins on the part of public Catholics we’re all supposed to believe are pro-life.

What happened last night to Orlando Hall was deeply unjust. May God have mercy on his soul, and on all of us.

Image via Pixabay.

Mary Pezzulo is the author of Meditations on the Way of the Cross.

Steel Magnificat operates almost entirely on tips. To tip the author, visit our donate page.

Public face of Catholicism

Previous Post

November 19, 2020

I Dreamed I Went Swimming

Next Post

November 21, 2020 A Walk After Leaf-fall

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abortion Abuse Advent America American Christianity angel angels Annunciation Appalachia apparition apparition chaser apparition chasers apparition culture art art review babies baby baby Jesus Bad Lip Reading bad statue contest bath beauty Bible story blog blogkeeping blood book review Brandon Sanderson breastfeeding bus Catholic catholic conspiracy alarmism Catholic Oppositional Disorder Charismatic Renewal Charlie the Cat chastity Christ Christian idenitity Christianity and Judaism Chronic Illness clean clothing COD piece comedy compassion conscience conspiracy theory conversion cop-on-black violence Crucifixion cry of the poor culture Daesh Daily Saints death death penalty devotional diaconate diaper diapers dirty disability Donald Trump Dorothy Day dream drugs Eastern Catholicism Eastern Christianity education election election update Elsewhere on Patheos empathy environment Fear feminism film review fish flashback fluffy buns food Franciscan University of Steubenville Friendship Room fun Gabriel gardening gospel hair-splitting Heaven hell heresy Hillary Clinton history Holly the Witch Holy Spirit holy war Homeschooling homosexuality horror human dignity humor Icon idol immigrants infection inter-religious dialogue Interpretation of Scripture Islam Jesus Jihad Joseph joy laity and lay vocations lamb dinner laundry lent lgbtq literature love manners Mary Medicine and Science Meditation mercy mess milk misogyny Missouri monasticism monster motherhood mourn with those mourn movies movis music mystery nature neurodiversity New Pro-Life Movement news nonsense nostalgia O antiphons obituary objectification Ohio Valley Ordinary Time ordination Ordo Amoris parable paradox Passover peanut butter personal beliefs pets philosophy Planet Charismatic poetry politics polls poop Pope Francis Pope Leo power in the Church prayer prayer request prayers preferential option for non-violence president presidential election priest primary private revelation pro-life prophecy Public face of Catholicism Pure Flix Q and A race racism random rape rape. sexuality reader's request Reckoners refugee religious trauma ressurrection Right to life Saints saints and celebrations same-sex same-sex marriage satire scandal secular feasts seder Seven Joys Seven Last Words sex sexual ethics sexuality silencing six months skid row slavery social justice Speculative fiction spiritual abuse spoon stain story suffering suffrage suffragette Sunday Gospel temple Tenebrae Responsories Terror the exorcist The Friendship Room The New Pro-Life Movement Things I Learned on the Internet tin cup traffic true story tv review Uncategorized USCCB vice and temptation violence Virtue virtue and vice war Way of the Cross whimsy whole life women's ordination work of mercy Year A

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which book in the New Testament is the shortest?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Philemon Jude 3 John 2 John