DATE: Thursday, September 25, 1997          TAG: 9709250001

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B10  EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Opinion 

SOURCE: BY STEPHEN M. COLECCHI 

                                            LENGTH:   85 lines

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Murder is a heinous crime. Murder robs a person of the gift of life and devastates the victim's family. It rips the social fabric of communities and weakens everyone's sense of safety.

God calls the church to heal the wounds of victims' families and the whole community. But God also calls the church to minister to the murderer. Jesus' whole ministry made it clear that he ``did not come to call the righteous but sinners'' (Matthew 9:13).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a summary of church teaching, was recently revised to strengthen the church's opposition to capital punishment. How can the church change or refine its teaching on the death penalty?

Biblical teaching is clear. ``You shall not kill'' (Exodus 20:13). God banished Cain for killing his brother Abel and then protected Cain from death threats (Genesis 4:8-16). On the other hand, some biblical passages support a death sentence. For example, adultery, rape and premarital sex were punishable by death (Deuteronomy 22:20-27).

Quoting isolated biblical passages cannot settle the moral question of capital punishment. Instead we need look at biblical teaching as a whole and at where God's spirit is leading. The same spirit that inspired the Scriptures - the Spirit of Pentecost - is with humanity today. Moral teaching rests on the Scriptures and on the continuing guidance of God's spirit through the years. This development of teaching is known to Catholics as the living tradition of the church. Jesus had more to teach; the Holy Spirit is the guide (John 16:12-13).

A case in point is the immorality of slavery. There were biblical laws that gave slaves some rights; these were advances in their day (Deuteronomy 15:12-18). Later Saint Paul taught that in Christ ``there is neither slave nor free'' (Galatians 3:28). But Paul did not call for the abolition of slavery. (See Ephesians 6:5-9.) Humanity did not answer the call of God's spirit to abolish slavery until much later. It was not God's truth that changed, but rather humanity's readiness to see the truth.

Jesus provides another example of the development of teaching. The original biblical teaching of ``an eye for an eye'' was an advance in its day; it limited revenge to the harm inflicted. Jesus pushes the teaching further by insisting on no retaliation and turning the other cheek (Leviticus 24:20; Matthew 5:38-39).

The revised Catechism acknowledges that ``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.'' But it adds: ``If, however, nonlethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means. . . .'' Why? Because nonlethal means are ``more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.'' Incarceration renders a person ``incapable of doing harm - without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself;'' therefore, ``the cases in which execution of the offender is an absolute necessity `are very rare, if not practically nonexistent''' ((NU)2267).

In a primitive culture without the resources to incarcerate murderers, capital punishment may have protected human lives. But today the death penalty serves no such purpose. Studies show it is not a deterrent. Many other countries without the death penalty have dramatically lower murder rates. With our capacity to incarcerate murderers, capital punishment is never necessary.

Capital punishment serves no moral purpose; in fact, it undermines respect for human life. It contributes to the cycle of violence. Its application is discriminatory - falling disproportionately on minorities and poor people. Just as murder devastates a victim's family, execution devastates a prisoner's family. For these and other reasons, Bishop Walter Sullivan and other religious leaders have repeatedly called on Virginians to reject the death penalty since it was reinstituted.

In the encyclical (teaching letter) that led to the revision of the Catechism, Pope John Paul II makes a powerful moral argument for a ``culture of life.'' He opposes abortion and euthanasia. He sees signs of hope in the growing opposition to war and the death penalty, and in growing attention to quality of life and ecology. The pope is no naive idealist. He has suffered a brush with death at the hands of an assassin. What did he do? John Paul visited his attempted murderer in prison. He acted on the belief that no person is beyond redemption or forgiveness.

The moral question is: Does abolition of the death penalty help build a ``culture of life?'' Is this where the spirit of God is leading humanity? I believe it is. MEMO: Stephen M. Colecchi is special assistant to Bishop Walter Sullivan

of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond and director of the diocesan Office

of Justice. KEYWORDS: ANOTHER VIEW

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu