Viewing the death penalty through a Catholic lens
“From conception to natural death.” This is the Catholic phrase describing the pro-life stance; any medical procedure or practice that prevents or ends life anywhere along the timeline of when a child is conceived to when they die of natural causes is considered immoral and not pro-life. Common examples this brings to mind include abortion, contraception, and euthanasia, but a lesser thought about threat to the pro-life movement is the death penalty.
According to Amnesty International in 2022, 55 countries had the death penalty and excepting China, 883 executions were performed worldwide, the highest number of executions since 2017. Additionally, the United States was among the list of countries that persistently execute people every year, alongside countries like China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia.
St. John Paul II gives one of the earliest Church opinions on the death penalty when he writes in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) about the topic.
St. John Paul wrote that, “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.”
To understand this better, we can take a look at Catechistic teaching on the purpose of punishment in general. Highlights of the criteria include how the punishment must contribute to the correction of the offender, as well as how the punishment should be in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Most importantly, the state of punishment should not completely remove from the offender “the possibility of redeeming himself.” Capital punishment carries no possibility of future correction. Repentance and redemption, both tenants of Catholicism, are taken almost completely out of the question. Taking this into account, how can it be said execution is a moral punishment?
Further condemnation of the death penalty comes from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB): “When the state, in our names and with our taxes, ends a human life despite having non-lethal alternatives, it suggests that society can overcome violence with violence. The use of the death penalty ought to be abandoned not only for what it does to those who are executed, but for what it does to all of society.” No one lives in a vacuum. Not only does use of the death penalty affect the victim, it affects the mindset of any society it is used in.
One of the most common arguments made for the death penalty is the deterrent of future murders. Logically, if imprisonment is a working deterrent, an even harsher punishment would hold an even more effective deterrent. However, this is refuted by the authorities closest to the matter of executions. Former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox said, “It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you’ll find that the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse.”
The death penalty is wildly unnecessary and at its core reasoning renders incarceration obsolete. Prisons are made for three key reasons: to isolate criminals from society, rehabilitate them and act as a deterrent for others who may be considering the same actions. If at any point these principles become so inadequate that alternatives are warranted, the problem lies in the justice and incarceration system, not in the punishment itself. In a pro-life worldview, there is simply no room for the death penalty.
Jude Self is a Sophomore Business and Drama double major. She is a part of UD’s Mock Trial club and Drama Department.