The Morality of Capital Punishment

Dear Fr. Leo:

     What does the Church teach about the morality of capital punishment? – G

Dear G:

     In Alaska, we do not have the death penalty, so the question is academic, but it is one well-worth asking.

     In looking at the morality of capital punishment it helps to first understand the purpose of any punishment in general, next to see how that plays out in the criminal justice system, and finally evaluate whether capital punishment makes sense within that framework.

     In general, punishment has three main goals.  First, to bring a cessation to the offending activity; second, to reform the offender, and third, to restore the moral order, i.e., to satisfy the demands of justice.

     Let’s take an example from family life. Melissa is a 16 year-old girl. She has a curfew of 12:00 Midnight, because as we all know, nothing good happens after midnight in this town.  One night Melissa comes in at 1:00 AM. Even though she tried to sneak in through the garage, Mom and Dad are waiting. She is busted big time. The next evening at a family meeting, her parents explain to her and the other kids the seriousness of the violation, why a curfew is important and to impose a suitable punishment.    Melissa is grounded for one day for every minute she was late, or sixty days. Melissa apologizes to the members of the family and accepts her punishment. At the end of this time, her parents meet with her to discuss the matter one last time and ask what she has learned as a result. Melissa responds that not long after she was grounded some of her friends went to a party where bad things happened and got into a car wreck at about 2:00 AM. In light of that, she states that she has come to appreciate the benefits of the curfew and will not break it again. 

     In this idyllic scenario, we see that all the goals of punishment have been achieved. The offending behavior has ceased, the offender is reformed, and by her being grounded for a fitting amount of time, the demands of justice have been met.

     You can see how these same principles apply to law enforcement and the criminal justice system. If someone commits a crime, law enforcement arrests them, and their guilt is determined by the court, either by admission or by trial. If they admit guilt or are found guilty, the judge has sentencing guidelines for various offenses given the circumstances under which they were committed.

     The death penalty is usually reserved for the most heinous of crimes, namely brutal murders.  Let’s see how it measures up. Regarding the first criteria, it is rather definitive.  One cannot murder again if one is dead. However, upon further reflection, it does not do so well with the second two criteria. Putting the offender to death simply removes the offender from society. There is no possibility of reform. Finally, there are serious questions about how well the death penalty serves the demands of justice.  There are three things (among others) to consider here. First, given the expense of legal appeals which can continue for decades, condemning someone to death costs society several times more than sentencing them to life in prison without parole.  We must ask ourselves if such a high cost to society is justified.  Second, it has been shown that the death penalty does not bring closure for friends and family members of the victim. Ironically, the results are often the opposite. Often families of the victim feel that the offender got the easy way out. They have to deal with the loss of their loved one for the rest of their lives, but the murderer does not. Finally, even now, society does not necessarily possess the means to ensure that an innocent person will not be executed. The recent examples of DNA testing exonerating a person on death row are too numerous to ignore.

      All practical arguments aside, for the Christian, capital punishment eliminates the possibility of the grace of repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation. We cannot ignore the example of Our Lord and the countless examples throughout history where those who have committed even the most heinous of crimes have come to faith and even reconciled with the families of their victims. One great example of this is the case between Colonel Herbert Kappler, the Nazi commander of the occupational forces in Rome and Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty, whom he tried (unsuccessfully) to have assassinated multiple times. At the end of the war, for his many war crimes, Kappler was sentenced to life without parole in Regina Caeli Prison. For years he had only one visitor. Fourteen years later, Col. Kappler entered the Catholic Church and was baptized by none other than his sole visitor, Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty. The film, The Scarlet and the Black, (1983) starring Christopher Plummer and Gregory Peck tells the story, as well as a number of books.

     Such Christian hope is reflected in the Catechism, #2267. While noting that in the past, the death penalty was seen as a legitimate means of protecting society, in these times more effective means of detention are available which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.

     Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *