MUST HE DIE?

MARCH 8, 2008

Two thousand years ago, on that dark day we now call Good Friday, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was put to death. Since the Jews didn’t have the power under Roman rule to carry out the death penalty, they brought Jesus to Pontius Pilate.

Even though Pilate openly confessed he could find no guilt of wrongdoing in Jesus, he washed his hands of the matter and surrendered Jesus to the mob, who had incessantly been crying out, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”

What was the compelling argument that led to Jesus’ condemnation and death on the cross? What caused Pilate to yield to public pressure? The crowd’s claim, “We have a law, and the law says he must die” (John 19:7).

On this day, when we recall the horrendous injustice of what was done to God’s Son in ancient Israel, I appeal to all people of good will to speak out against the death penalty and to work to end it.

The traditional arguments in support of the death penalty have been that it ensures that hardened criminals will commit no further offenses, that it deters violent crime, that “lex talionis” (the law of retribution – an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth) is taught in the Bible (e.g. Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:18-21; Deuteronomy 19:21) and is, in fact, required by justice.

The Bible elsewhere seems to give further witness of approval of the state’s right to inflict the death penalty. For example, Genesis 9:6 states that “If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.” St. Paul the Apostle, in Romans 13:3-4, states, “For rulers are … a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.”

The Church’s teaching authority has traditionally acknowledged in principle the authority of the state to have recourse to the death penalty. The 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church acknowledged this authority, as well, in cases of extreme gravity (n. 2266), but stated that if bloodless means are adequate to protect human lives and public order against aggressors, the death penalty should not be used (n. 2267).

Public authority has, in fact, not only the right but the duty to punish those guilty of wrongdoing by a system of just penalties that are proportionate to the gravity of the crime. The right and duty in principle, however, is not license for indiscriminate or unnecessary use.

The five primary moral problems with the use of the death penalty are that:

First, substantial research has concluded that the death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent. Second, it has numerous times ended the lives of convicted criminals who were later shown to be innocent. Since 1973, at least 100 people have now been exonerated and released from death row in the U.S.! Third, it has been administered unevenly from place to place, and unjustly in that it has been carried out disproportionately on minorities and the poor. In illustration, Texas is responsible for three times more executions than any other state, and claims 35% of all executions in the U.S. since the death penalty was reinstated. Fourth, it cuts off all possibility of repentance, rehabilitation, and restitution. Fifth, it easily leads to an erosion of respect for life. How can we build a society committed to human life by sanctioning the taking of any human life?

Scholars of the history of the death penalty, in fact, point out that it had its origin among barbaric peoples, and that it remains, in whatever sanitized form it is carried out, an essentially barbaric practice. Some argue that for us to kill someone because he or she has killed makes us killers, and lowers us to the same barbaric level of the violent criminal.

In his encyclical “The Gospel of Life”, Pope John Paul II observed that a society which fosters a culture of life needs to give criminal offenders opportunity and assistance to change and rehabilitate. Toward that end, said John Paul II, “the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not to 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” (n.56).

I ask everyone to examine his or her conscience in light of the teaching of Christ and the example of his mercy. What we need to do is to teach and promote respect for life from conception until natural death, and temper a thirst for justice with a longing for mercy. We must teach the Fifth Commandment, “Thou Shalt Not Kill” to our children, along with all the Ten Commandments, and follow them in our own lives. We must offer personal support to the victims of crime and to their families, and at the same time reach out to offenders and their families. We must build up the fabric and unity of society.

While we abhor all crime and violence, we should not abandon those who have lost their way.

In our Good Friday worship, we acknowledge that we have all had a hand in the death of Christ by our sins. Instead of condemning us, though, he died for us. Today should be the day we resolve not to wash our hands, like Pontius Pilate. It is not enough to say, like the crowd, “We have a law, and the law says (they) must die!” Let us remember the Beatitudes, and our Lord’s words, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy” (Matthew 5:7). Let us remember the Our Father, and the words we pray daily, “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us” (Matthew 6:12). Let us resolve today to be a people of life, and work hard to put an end to the death penalty.

+Bishop Raymundo J. Peña

last updated 19-Sep-2008 13:30 sitemap