A Critique of NCR’s ‘Catholic leaders object to reinstatement of federal death penalty.’

A Critique of NCR’s ‘Catholic leaders object to reinstatement of federal death penalty.’

By Matthew J. Bellisario O.P. 2019

Due to the misunderstanding that many Catholics have today regarding the use of capital punishment, I have written a response to an article written in the National Catholic Reporter on July 25^th, 2019. There are several misconceptions in the article itself by those quoted both in support of the death penalty and in its opposition. This article was in response to the president’s decision to reinstate Federal Capital Punishment. As usual, both the proponents and opponents of this punishment demonstrate little knowledge as to the Church’s consistent teaching on the matter as well as the reasons behind the teaching. I will quote sections indented below from the article and then offer a response after each passage cited.

WASHINGTON — The July 25 announcement by the Justice Department that it is reinstating the federal death penalty for the first time in 16 years was unwelcome news for Catholic leaders who have advocated against capital punishment.

"The United States' death penalty system is tragically flawed. Resuming federal executions – especially by an administration that identifies itself as 'pro-life' – is wrongheaded and unconscionable," said Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, executive director of Catholic Mobilizing Network, a group that champions restorative justice and an end to the death penalty.

Starting here at the top of the article, we can see that Murphy uses flawed reasoning as well as an assumed narrative in her response. She claims the penal system in the US is flawed. As we know, however, those who have studied the statistics understand that the legal system in the US is among the most just in the world. In fact, this is easily proven by the time death row inmates spend on the death row due to endless appeals. Very few innocents are executed. Moreover, no one in their right mind can claim that the punishment is overused, nor misapplied, since only the most heinous of criminals are ever sentenced to death. Serial killers, mass murderers and those involved in gruesome homicides are the most likely candidates for this punishment, and even then only a small fraction receive it. How many criminals in the US since 1976 have been executed? Only 1500 total across all 50 states in 43 years have been executed. There are somewhere around 15,000 to 17,000 murders per year in the US, and there is only a 60% conviction rate due to our legal system. This means that there are somewhere around 10,000 convicted murderers every year! The fact that only 1500 have been executed in 43 years proves that the system is not abused or overused!

Secondly, Murphy assumes that if one is pro-life they cannot support the use of Capital Punishment, as if the two are opposed to one another. This is not true and has never been taught in the 2000 year history of the Church. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, used for over 400 years to teach bishops, priests, and laity was very clear on the Church’s consistent teaching,  “Far from being guilty of breaking this commandment [Thou shall not kill], such an execution of justice is precisely an act of obedience to it. For the purpose of the law is to protect and foster human life. This purpose is fulfilled when the legitimate authority of the State is exercised by taking the guilty lives of those who have taken innocent lives.” There are also many papal statements I can quote to which I will provide only one, that of Pope Pius XII who publicly stated in an address, "Even when it is a question of the execution of a condemned man, the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. In this case it is reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned person of life in expiation of his crime when, by his crime, he has already disposed himself of his right to live." I could also give a list of Saints who also supported its use, but again for sake of space I will use only one, St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, II; 65-2; 66-6. Writes the following, "If a man is a danger to the community, threatening it with disintegration by some wrongdoing of his, then his execution for the healing and preservation of the common good is to be commended. Only the public authority, not private persons, may licitly execute malefactors by public judgement. Men shall be sentenced to death for crimes of irreparable harm or which are particularly perverted." It is a fact that the Catholic Church has consistently taught that this was indeed a legitimate form of punishment, and thus it cannot be against the pro-life mentality.

The execution of five inmates on federal death row will take place from December 2019 through next January.

Attorney General William Barr, who is Catholic, said in a statement: "The Justice Department upholds the rule of law – and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry forward the sentence imposed by our justice system."

The last time there was a federal execution was in 2003.

In 2014, President Barack Obama directed the Bureau of Prisons to conduct a review of federal capital punishment cases and issues surrounding the use of lethal injection drugs. According to the July 25 announcement, that review is complete and the executions can proceed.

The next statement by Barr also demonstrates ignorance on his part as a Catholic. For one, there is no “owing” to the victims and their families. Capital Punishment is not primarily revenge in the sense of getting even for the families. Punishment is done for the sake of first restoring the moral order to society which has been corrupted by the vice of the criminal. Punishment is therefore retributive, meaning that it addresses wrongdoing that was committed in the past. If a person uses a bomb and kills a multitude of men, women, and children, this is a severe crime that destroys the very fabric of society. If the common good can be destroyed freely by such crimes without an adequate restoration of punishment, then society becomes anarchical. A punishment is appropriate then that redresses the crime committed, given by the state to restore the moral order in an act of justice. Obviously, a child who steals a sucker does not warrant the same punishment as a bomber. It has been the consistent teaching of the Church that such heinous crimes as murder can indeed be legitimately redressed by capital punishment. Regarding the manner used in its application has varied across centuries, but one reality is certain, the method used will surely end the life of the punished. Whether it be by lethal injection, hanging, firing squad, walking the plank, etc. are various means to the same end. Unless the means are overtly tortuous they are licit.

Currently, there are 62 inmates – 61 men and 1 woman – on federal death row, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Most of the federal death-row prisoners are at the U.S. Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana.

Inmates in the group include convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Charleston, South Carolina, church shooter Dylann Roof.

Two things of note here. There are only 62 inmates on federal death row? This seems hardly an overuse of the “system.” It also looks like once again that only the most heinous killers have been sentenced like the Boston Marathon bomber who indiscriminately blew the limbs off of 16 innocent people, wounded several hundred and murdered 3 others with homemade bombs!

In a July 25 statement released by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop Frank J. Dewane of Venice, Florida, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, said that Pope Francis in 2015 called for "the global abolition of the death penalty," which he said the U.S. bishops also have supported for many years.

"In light of these long held and strongly maintained positions, I am deeply concerned by the announcement by the United States Justice Department that it will once again turn, after many years, to the death penalty as a form of punishment, and urge instead that these federal officials be moved by God's love, which is stronger than death, and abandon the announced plans for executions."

Sr. Helen Prejean, a Sister of St. Joseph of Medaille, who is a longtime opponent of capital punishment, tweeted a brief reaction to the July 25 announcement saying that as she was about to "board a plane to Alaska to join the celebrations of 62 years without the death penalty in that state" when she learned "the federal government plans to restart executions later this year after a 16-year hiatus."

"The DOJ regresses as the rest of our country evolves," she added.

Bishop Dewane rightly states that Pope Francis seeks the abolishment of the death penalty and that the US bishops have also been trying to do the same. It should be clear that one can oppose the use of the death penalty under certain conditions. None of which are used by Francis nor the bishops to justify its abolition. Such reasons would be if a state becomes an illegitimate state, or a state where death sentences are given out indiscriminately, unjustly or as acts of tyranny, then they should be opposed. The act of capital punishment in and of itself cannot be called “evil” nor “against human dignity”. The act is not evil in and of itself, it would only be wrong if carried out unjustly. The same would be considered for any punishment, such as arresting someone unjustly or giving out a penalty that is disproportionate to the crime. What is amazing and a wonder to our eyes is the comment by Sister Prejean, who said, "The DOJ regresses as the rest of our country evolves,” How has the country evolved? Have we evolved in our humanity by now committing the act of abortion in the US nearly 3000 times a day! Isn’t it wondrous that Catholics can wrongfully attack the legitimate use of the death penalty used 1500 times over the past 43 years, an average of 34 per year, and yet, they say nothing as to the 3000 executions of the most innocent human beings every day! 3000 innocents a day are murdered, 34 convicted killers receive the death penalty per year! Where do your moral convictions lie as a Catholic?

Other church leaders also reacted on Twitter to the announcement.

In a July 25 tweet, Chicago Cardinal Blase J. Cupich called Barr's announcement "gravely injurious to the common good, as it effaces the God-given dignity of all human beings, even those who have committed terrible crimes."

He also pointed out that last year that Pope Francis ordered a revision to the Catechism of the Catholic Church to say that capital punishment is "inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person."

Cardinal Cupich and many others keep telling us that the Catechism “revision” is a development of doctrine, yet educated Catholics understand that a change or revision is not a development. If indeed what they claim is true, that capital punishment is "inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person," then the entire Catholic Church has been teaching against human dignity for 2000 years including multiple catechisms, teachings of the saints and all of the past popes. If you believe this, shame on you. Not much more to say here.

The Sisters of Mercy called the Justice Department's decision "tremendously disappointing" and said in a July 25 tweet that they would continue to uphold Catholic social teaching regarding the dignity of human life with education and advocacy efforts to "continue to work for the death penalty's abolition."

In a statement released the afternoon of July 25, Prejean described the Justice Department's announcement as a "seemingly measured statement," which "belies the fact that this is a rush to kill: They plan three executions in one week using a new, untested -- and not yet approved -- lethal injection protocol."

She also said it is "disheartening that the administration has chosen to follow the death road, when the life road calls us to work for justice for all."

Prejean, echoing a message she has said before, added: "The death penalty is deeply flawed, with a terrible history of racism in its implementation and an equally terrible history of errors, resulting in many innocents on death row. We also know that it does not offer the healing balm to victims' families that is promised."

Sister Prejean again demonstrates that she does not understand what justice is, nor what the common good of society is. If we are to work for “justice for all” this means that society needs to protect its citizens, not just by preventing the killer from killing again, but by restoring the moral order through punishment. This fixation on preventing the killer from killing again is misplaced and untenable, being that even in prison these violent offenders often kill again. Are the guard’s lives not of value? Is justice actually done just because a mass murderer is spared from execution? Or is justice done when the state acts responsibly in executing a person who has committed unspeakable crimes and who have sown fear, confusion, and horror into the lives of innocent citizens?

China executes the most people in the world, yet we hear no condemnation of this from the Vatican do we? 

Again Prejean buys into the false narrative that the punishment is primarily for healing victims’ families. No, it is for repairing and healing the moral fabric of the entire community violated by such monstrous crimes against humanity. It is the common good of the moral order that is important not the misused application of the “common good” of the killer. Prejean also shoots herself in the foot by claiming that racism is involved in the implementation of capital punishment. What Prejean never proves, however, is that those sentenced were not guilty regardless of race. In fact, I spoke to her at one of her conferences and put her to scrutiny. I asked her if more African Americans who were convicted of murder were more likely to be given a death sentence compared to Caucasians. She said quickly yes, of course. I then asked if all of these people were guilty, but fewer of them received the death penalty than should have been sentenced, isn’t that a good thing? This means that fewer guilty people are sentenced to death than should be. She had no answer of course and stood stupefied. The fact is, race has nothing to do with guilt or whether the crime they committed was worthy of such a punishment. Punishment ultimately has no bearing with these people, since people like her are now also pleading for the abolishment of life sentences. Do we let Jeffrey Dahmer out of jail then after serving a few years in jail? This all can be attributed to false compassion, which is emotionally driven due to a false narrative being promoted. If compassion were truly a motive for these people, we would see them every day calling for the end of abortion. It is a fact, they do not!

Federal death penalty cases are authorized by the Department of Justice in consultation with local U.S. Attorney Offices.

Vaillancourt Murphy said in her July 25 statement that in the 16 years since the federal government executed a death-row prisoner, the American public has changed its collective thinking on the death penalty. Last October, she said 49% of Americans said they believed the punishment is applied fairly and currently, 25 states have distanced themselves from the death penalty in some capacity, most recently, California, with its governor-imposed execution ban in March and New Hampshire's repeal of capital punishment by legislative veto override in May.

Hannah Cox, national manager of Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty, offered a similar response saying the reinstatement of federal executions "goes against the trend we have seen in states across the nation, where executions and sentences are at historic lows."

She also pointed out that a growing number of conservative state lawmakers "realize that capital punishment goes against their principles of valuing life, fiscal responsibility and limited government, and that the death penalty does nothing to make the public safer."

Vaillancourt Murphy reiterated that the Catholic Church's teaching is very clear on capital punishment, noting the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls it "inadmissible" in all cases "because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person."

She said the Justice Department's announcement "flies in the face" of American values of equality and fairness "and for Catholics, above all, a belief in the sanctity of all human life."

She said the decision also "promotes a culture of death where we so desperately need a culture of life."

What I have not seen in this article is any reference for the eternal souls of the killer or those affected by the killer. If we are to take seriously the teachings of the Church we must admit that this life is only a preparation for the next! Will the abolishment of the death penalty lead to a higher rate of repentance of the murderers? It seems that a person who faces their imminent death may be more apt to repent than if they were to remain in a prison system with other deviants. Saint Thomas Aquinas, in fact, states, “The fact that the evil ones, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit 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 that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so obstinate that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from malice, it is possible to make a quite probable judgment that they would never come away from evil.”

In closing, we can see here that Murphy wants to play the recent actions by states who have done away with capital punishment as a proof of it being contrary to valuing life. In fact, it is the very opposite. Those who support the legitimate use of this punishment value life so much that we would not permit such heinous men to not be subject to the possibility of such a sentence. The battle cry of these people is to cite the new “revision” of the Catechism, to which I can readily cite a hundred quotes from Saints, popes and other Church documents which in light of Tradition say the opposite. The sanctity of human life begins with defending innocent human life, to which most Catholics don’t have the fortitude to defend. Rather than offend their friends of polite company as they are sipping their wine and snacking on their hors d'oeuvres, they instead take up the easy path of attacking the death penalty. How popular and noble!

I will end this critique with a quote from the late and great moral theologian Ralph McInerny, "Some have said that retribution is no longer part of the church's view of punishment. This is false. Some will speak as if there is an equivalence to be made between the life of a guilty and condemned murderer and an unborn child, and seek, on that basis, to link opposition to abortion and opposition to the death penalty. This too is nonsense, incubated in a society which, permitting some citizens to take the lives of other innocent citizens, sees a moratorium on the death penalty as a moral imperative...But keep in mind that protecting society is only the secondary purpose of punishment. If, however rarely, the state's right to take the criminal's life is legitimately exercised, only recourse to the primary purpose of punishment--redressing the wrong--can justify it. It will not do to say that locking Adolph Eichmann up will prevent him from continuing with the Final Solution and give him a chance to repent. By his crimes, Adolph Eichmann had forfeited own life. One life compared with six million seems risibly disproportionate, but it is the most that could be exacted from Eichmann, and it justly was."