From the King Of Blogging, Sean Conners. Various articles and op/ed's on just about anything from A to Z. Politics, religion, entertainment and whatever else seems interesting at the moment. Members and non-members alike are welcomed to participate in th
showing their position on life to be consistant
Published on December 29, 2006 By Sean Conners aka SConn1 In Current Events
In America, we often have debates concerning "the right to life" concerning various procedures that occur from before our departure from the womb to the end of our life. Good people, many of whom are Christians and Catholics will debate whether it is ok or not to abort a fetus, euthenize a terminally ill patient or put a serial killer to death. And we, reflecting our diversity, will take up various positions along the way.



Some will stand on permitting abortion but opposing the death penalty. Some will stand on the opposite ground. But not the Catholic Church. Here,, unlike in other areas, the church is probably the most consistant entity in the debate.



The Catholic Church's philosphy on life is simple. Man has no right to take it. Man has no right to end a pregnancy. Man has no right to perform any kind of "mercy killing" of any terminal patient. Man has no right to put someone to death, no matter what their crimes are.



The Catholic Church pays strict adherence to the commandment that tells us "thou shalt not kill." The Catholic Church sees no justification to kill whatsoever. This has remained consistant since after the Crusades and the middle ages. And at least in the modern era, they have remined uberconsistant on their position.



My hat certainly is tipped to the Church here. Where I do criticize and scrutinize some of their doctrine and practices, this particular one is at least not contradictory of itself. American evangelicals and conservative christians often confuse their "culture of life" philosophy by limiting it to abortion and Terri Shaivo, while endorsing wars, supporting the death penalty and allowing thousands of others who aren't Terri Shaivo to be euthenized without protest or congressional intervention. The Catholic Church, at least officially, remains consistant.



The latest statement of that consistncy came this week when the CC officially declared their view that putting Saddam Hussein to death was immoral and wrong. The church said in it's statement that hanging Saddam was simply committing another crime against humanity to somehow pay for other crimes and had nothing to do with justice.



Are they right? I don't know. Like most Americans, I like to think that I support life. I am against the death penalty. Tho my views on abortion, politically, at least, do not reflect the church's view. I am curious to how other Christians, and namely Catholics see the execution of Hussein. Will conservative Catholics side with their President or their Pope when it comes to this issue and the issue of the death penalty in general which the CC opposes and is uncompromising on? To me, at least, it could be an interesting discussion. I would be curious to how an American who calls themselves anything that puts them in concert with the GOP concept of "culture of life" looks at this. I would also be curious to know why those who support this way of thinking, that if the Church deems something immoral or wrong, that they should try to make America conform to those standards, rationalize this in their own mind. For example, anti-gay marriage stances are often defended with religion. But those same people will defy the pope when it comes to going to war or killing those who society has ruled a criminal so bad that they should not be allowed to live. Hmmmmmmmm.....

Comments (Page 1)
10 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Dec 29, 2006
Not being a Catholic, perhaps I should not comment, but there are some inaccuracies in your article.

In the Hebrew version, the Old Testament says "You shall not commit murder" not "Thou shall not kill." These are very different in meaning, of course. A State ordered execution is not a murder.

But that is the smallest detail.

You said "The Catholic Church sees no justification to kill whatsoever. This has remained consistant since after the Crusades and the middle ages. And at least in the modern era, they have remined uberconsistant on their position." That is not true at all.

Were you aware that the Catholic Church signed an agreement with the Nazis in 1933? Hitler was born and raised as a Catholic and there is disagreement whether he was ever excommunicated. (If he was, it was by inclusion in a group, never singling him out personally.) At any rate, in 1933 the Reichskonkordat was signed by Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli and Franz von Papen on behalf of Pope Pius XI and President Paul von Hindenburg, respectively. Under this agreement, the Catholic Bishops of Germany took an oath to support the Nazi government ("I swear and vow to honor the constitutional government and to make my clergy honor it") ending Church opposition to the Nazis in exchange for right to freely practice the Roman Catholic religion.

The Reichskonkordat is widely viewed as having conferred legitimacy to the Nazis. They were now acknowledged as the legitimate government by no less an agency than the Vatican.

The Catholic Church hierarchy - especially Eugenio Pacelli, before and after he became Pope Pius XII - aided the Nazis. Indeed, Pacelli and the Church played a central role in making Hitler the dictator of Germany. On 23 March 1933, the Nazi government put forward the Enabling act, which would allow Hitler to create new laws without parliamentary approval. The Zentrum, the Catholic Center Party, supported Hitler in this legislation. Zentrum leader Monsignor Ludwig Kaas, a close friend and adviser to Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, addressed the Reichstag, calling for a "Yes" vote.

The result of granting Hitler freedom to enact whatever laws he wanted with the tacit approval of the Catholic Church was the Shoah or Holocaust.

Even 60 years later, the Catholic Church denies responsibility. Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, explained the Church's position as follows: "Even if the most recent, loathsome experience of the Shoah (Holocaust) was perpetrated in the name of an anti-Christian ideology, which tried to strike the Christian faith at its Abrahamic roots in the people of Israel, it cannot be denied that a certain insufficient resistance to this atrocity on the part of Christians can be explained by an inherited anti-Judaism present in the hearts of not a few Christians.'"

In other words, it was not the fault of the Church at all. It was a few "bad" Christians who sided with anti-Christians...yeah, thats the ticket. Standing aside and allowing the Nazis to kill millions of people...well, that is "insufficient resistance." Ratzinger, of course, was a member of the Hitler Youth and of the German Army.

The Church also supported the pro-Nazi government in Croatia during World War II. The Church protected Catholic leaders accused of genocide in Croatia.

But that is old news. What is more current is the conviction of Catholic priest Father Athanase Seromba for crimes against humanity in Rwanda. He has been convicted of deliberately sending 19 Tutsi schoolgirls to their deaths at the hand of Hutu extremists. Father Wenceslas Munyeshyaka has also been convicted of committing rape and aiding militiamen in the genocide. Nuns have also been implicated. Sister Julienne Maria Kizito and her Mother Superior, Sister Gertrude Mukangango, were sentenced by a Belgian court to 12 and 15 years in prison, respectively. They were accused of calling in militiamen to drive out Tutsis who had sought refuge in their convent at Sovu.

The list could go on and on. But the short version is that the Church picks its own battles, depending on what serves its needs.
on Dec 29, 2006
It gets really interesting with all of the new reproductive technology out there, artificial insemination, in vitro, selective reduction, "designer" babies, clones.

And Larry I don't know the history of the Catholic Church during WWII but I do know that those Catholic nuns helped the Von Trapp family get away from the Nazi's.   
on Dec 29, 2006
You said "The Catholic Church sees no justification to kill whatsoever. This has remained consistant since after the Crusades and the middle ages. And at least in the modern era, they have remined uberconsistant on their position." That is not true at all.

i should have remembered the nazi exception,,,,you are right, they caved there. the rest of your filibuster really wasn't necessary. but outside of supporting nazi's i can't find much in the modern era where the church has strayed from their life doctrine. so, let me say that since WWII they have remained consistant. that to me is "the modern era" ,,,since vatican II actually might be more accurate.

In the Hebrew version, the Old Testament says "You shall not commit murder" not "Thou shall not kill." These are very different in meaning, of course. A State ordered execution is not a murder.

semantics and nonsense. i believe a state ordered execution is murder and i find nothing in life that tells me otherwise. and the CC agrees with that. what is your justification again?
on Dec 29, 2006
The Catholic Church's philosphy on life is simple. Man has no right to take it. Man has no right to end a pregnancy. Man has no right to perform any kind of "mercy killing" of any terminal patient. Man has no right to put someone to death, no matter what their crimes are.


did they not also burn witches at the stake?
on Dec 29, 2006
did they not also burn witches at the stake?


that was the pilgrims,,,they weren't catholic. calvanist i believe (tho i could be wrong there)
on Dec 29, 2006
I thought the great spanish inquisition was done by catholics?
on Dec 29, 2006
yes it was
see below

Spanish Inquisition
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478 by Ferdinand and Isabella to maintain Catholic orthodoxy in their kingdoms and was under the direct control of the Spanish monarchy. It was not definitively abolished until 1834, during the reign of Isabel II.

The Inquisition, as a tribunal dealing with religious heresy, had jurisdiction only over baptized Christians. However, since Jews (in 1492) and Muslim Moors had been banished from Spain, jurisdiction of the Inquisition during a large part of its history extended in practice to all royal subjects. The Inquisition worked in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of recent converts known as conversos.
on Dec 29, 2006
I thought the great spanish inquisition was done by catholics?


that would be in the era of the crusades, late 1400's i believe...although some other sporadic events might have taken place after that. again, that is well before vatican II or anything considered modern.

i wasn't trying to give a complete history of the church there jennifer...you are missing the point with this nitpicking...

i am trying to find out how catholics and conservative christians, but mainly catholics can reconcile a direct decree from the Pope when executing Saddam Hussein. i want to know why they don't protest this as they do 2 guys who want to get married. the same people who screamed bloody murder about terri Shaivo that can't be bothered to hold a vigil for any of the literally thousands of people euthanized each day. if those folks were true to that cause as they wanted us to believe when terri's husband made his agonizing choices, there should be protests outside every single full service hospital in America. the same people who want to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her own life and body that feel they have no responsibility whatsoever once they are born because they trump their "free market" values over their religious values when the religious ones dip into their pockets.

i did give the church credit, and maybe too much credit when speaking historically about their doctrine. but as far as i know, in modern times, their official stance has been to defend life in all it's stages and to codemn killing. thru my life, at least, they have been very consistant in that.

that doesn't mean backroom deals weren't made. that doesn't mean practice didn't stray from their own doctrine historically. i am speaking of their official stance, which in in effect today, which is the sanctity of life and that man has no right to take any life.
on Dec 29, 2006
wasn't trying to give a complete history of the church there jennifer...you are missing the point with this nitpicking...


no not nit picking - I just do not see how it can be claimed that they stick to the letter of the law - namely the one you listed - when their history shows otherwise... I know you stated in your article Modern Times...for me the history is not to be discounted.

The latest statement of that consistncy came this week when the CC officially declared their view that putting Saddam Hussein to death was immoral and wrong. The church said in it's statement that hanging Saddam was simply committing another crime against humanity to somehow pay for other crimes and had nothing to do with justice.


As for them defending Saddam Hussein - why am I not surprised - it is rumored that they assisted so many nazi's to escape - it amazes me that they get away with this nonsense and their church members just accept it and do not do something about it?

on Dec 29, 2006
yes it was
see below


who gives a rat's ass? you are sooooo missing the point here. i threw the inquisition in with the crusades...THIS ISN'T A HISTORY OF THE CHURCH...get with the program jen....
on Dec 29, 2006
their church members just accept it and do not do something about it?


so,,,the catholics want to spare saddam's life so they can help him escape? cmon jen,,,one last time,,,get with the program please...pretty please with sugar on top...ok?
on Dec 29, 2006
I'm pro-life and pro-death penalty. Sure, to many it is a contradiction, but like you say not much more so than when I see someone who is "pro-choice" and anti-death penalty. How do you really weigh the killing of a child (which, while debatable, is what people like me consider a "fetus" to be), and the killing of someone who has committed an offense against humanity grave enough to merit death?

I have a lot of respect for people like the Amish and others who are totally, completely down-the-line consistent in their beliefs. To them, the act of killing is the evil, period, regardless of reason, so even killing in self defense is wrong. Outside of some Buddhists, I don't know of anyone that is really that consistent.

The Catholic Church doesn't condemn killing as self-defense. Nor, if I am not mistaken, do they feel that killing during a war is murder. To me, once you get to that point, then capital punishment is just a matter of degrees, right?

Isn't that what capital punishment is, basically? Removing someone who has been deemed such a threat that their continued existence can't be tolerated? Whether you draw that line at someone pointing a gun at you, a nation invading your borders, or someone who has murdered and defined themselves as a threat to their society, you're still drawing a subjective line.

To me, and granted it is subjective, but I don't see where children, born or unborn, really fit into that. The only thing you have there is imagined threat of poverty or illness, etc. If you go to that extreme then you might as well start killing people because of the perceived threat of their ethnicity, culture, or beliefs.

on Dec 29, 2006
thank you for addressing the point baker. before i respond specifically to your comments and we get into a big ol tussle (lol) i wanted to make that clear...



The Catholic Church doesn't condemn killing as self-defense. Nor, if I am not mistaken, do they feel that killing during a war is murder. To me, once you get to that point, then capital punishment is just a matter of degrees, right?


well, on the death penalty stance,,,here is the most recent article i can find from the church...if you don't want to bother to read it, that's ok, let me just say that their position is no death penalty ever. they call for the abolition of it. WWW Link


their feelings on any non "self defense" killing isn't quite as concise as their death penalty stance, which they do not see as "self defense." but the way i read it, they don't justify most killing the way their flock does so easily. and that includes the iraq war, wwII and other conflicts. for example, the church does recognize that the nazis were bad people who needed to be stopped. they don't agree with our nuclear actions in japan or the killings of civillians in "obliteration bombing" throughout europe.




on Dec 29, 2006
so,,,the catholics want to spare saddam's life so they can help him escape?


You know very well that is not what was meant!

The catholics assisted the nazis to escape - the nazis were killers.

SO

I am not surprised they argue to kepp asshole Hussein alive

Simple enough for you?
on Dec 29, 2006
And Sean there is no need to be so bloody short tempered!
10 Pages1 2 3  Last