Seattle, Wash., Feb 8, 2019 / 03:04 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Catholic bishops of Washington state are expressing support for a senate bill that would repeal the death penalty.
This comes after the state’s Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in October 2018, finding it had been applied in an arbitrary and racially-biased manner.
“Our country’s legal system is far from perfect when it comes to imposing the death penalty,” Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle wrote in a Feb. 5 joint statement released by the Washington State Catholic Conference.
“Senate Bill 5339 removes the unconstitutional language and moves Washington state towards greater justice and respect for life at all stages.”
The bill would change the sentence for aggravated first degree murder to life imprisonment without the possibility of release or parole. The bill’s text states that the goal of the bill is “reducing criminal justice expenses.”
The bishops, in their support for the bill, cited the Catholic Church’s belief that every human life is sacred from conception until natural death.
“The act of murder cries out for an appropriate punishment, but the death penalty merely adds violence to violence, perpetuating an illusion that taking one human life for another can somehow balance the scales of justice,” Sartain said.
The Washington effort to repeal the death penalty is part of a national trend. New Hampshire legislators voted to remove the death penalty from the state last year, but the bill was vetoed by Republican Governor Chris Sununu.
Lawmakers in Colorado have said they are planning to introduce a proposal to repeal the death penalty in the upcoming legislative session. Similar legislation has already been introduced in Nevada and Kentucky this year.
Pope Francis in Aug. 2018 ordered a revision to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, updating it to describe the death penalty as “inadmissible” and an “attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.”
The Catechism previously taught 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.”
In declaring the death penalty inadmissible, the new text cites “an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes,” as well as the development of “more effective systems of detention…which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Fr. Richard Cassidy, professor of Sacred Scripture at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, dresses in Roman prisoner garb as he holds a copy of his newest book, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians.” Fr. Cassidy’s eighth scholarly work, the book explores the subversive nature of St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, which the apostle wrote from behind bars in a Roman prison cell. / Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
Detroit, Mich., Apr 30, 2022 / 08:00 am (CNA).
It was a tough decision for Rick Cassidy as he began graduate studies at the University of Michigan in mid-1960s. Would he take the course on Imperial Rome, because of his love of history, or the course History of Slavery, because of his deep concern for social justice?
The Dearborn native chose the course on slavery. The insights he acquired have helped to guide Fr. Richard Cassidy’s scholarly work for three decades, including his latest work, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians“ (Herder & Herder, 2020).
Paul’s letter, composed in chains and secreted out of his Roman jail cell, is intentionally “counter-slavery” argues Father Cassidy, professor of Sacred Scripture at Sacred Heart Major Seminary since 2004, as well as “counter-emperor.” At its core, Philippians is an underground epistle that subverts the Roman power structure and the “lordship pretensions of Nero.” Reviewers praise the “distinctive thesis” of Father’s groundbreaking work as “fresh and illuminating,” making for “fascinating reading.”
This is Father Cassidy’s seventh book that examines the influence of Roman rule on the writers of the New Testament, and his eighth book overall. He returned to Ann Arbor on a rainy afternoon in late June to discuss his newest work.
Dan Gallio: St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians is most known for its soaring declaration of the divinity Christ, before whom one day “every knee must bend,” and “every tongue proclaim” his universal lordship (2:6-11).
Your new book presents a unique argument: Paul’s letter is primarily a “subversive” document of resistance against the Roman Empire—particularly against emperor worship and slavery. How did you arrive at this against-the-grain interpretation?
“A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians” (Herder & Herder, 2020) is Fr. Cassidy’s eighth book and a follow-up on his 2001 work, “Paul in Chains: Roman Imprisonment and the Letters of St. Paul”. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
Father Cassidy: These insights were the result of long hours with the text, spending a lot of prayer time for guidance, as to Paul’s situation.
The issue of slavery came into play strongly. I now saw that Jesus was executed as a violator of Roman sovereignty, condemned by Pilate, executed under Emperor Tiberius—and that this was the slave’s form of death. This is a crucial point.
In regards to the two topics you mention, I had the intuition that the Letter to the Philippians was “counter-emperor cult” and “counter-slavery.” First, the self emptying of Christ from on high—descending downward into human form, downward, downward to the point of the slave’s death on a Roman cross—and then you have St. Paul’s wonderful words in chapter 2, verses 9-11.
My insight was that there is going to be a redressing of what has happened. Because of the great faithfulness of Jesus Christ, the Father intervenes and begins the lifting up, the ascending of Christ, where the Father exalts Jesus and bestows upon him “the name above every other name.”
So I can now speak about this famous passage in terms of a kind of “drama”: four scenes that represent the descent of Jesus, and four scenes that represent his ascent, akin to a medieval passion play. The Father intervenes on Christ’s behalf, conferring upon him the name of “Lord.” Now all of creation, including the emperor, the governor, the imperial personnel, are all subject to Jesus. They have to prostrate themselves before the name of Jesus.
DG: So, essentially, Philippians is subversive because it makes a political statement as much as a theological one.
FC: Yes, but for some, it is a great privilege to genuflect at the name of Jesus. This includes slaves! Paul had integrated slaves into his community in Philippi. They were empowered now to proclaim the name of Jesus, standing alongside free men and women. They are standing alongside the Roman imperial power structure, all involved in the same process of bowing before Christ and proclaiming his name.
A security guard at Sacred Heart Major Seminary helps Fr. Cassidy don his “prisoner’s clothing” for a photo shoot promoting Fr. Cassidy’s latest book, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians,” which details Paul’s experience behind bars and the conditions under which he wrote his Letter to the Philippians. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
And that name is “Lord.” Jesus is being acclaimed as Lord, and not the emperor, to the glory of God the Father. This is the decisive element of Philippians 2:6-11, blended together in this one passage.
DG: You provide a forty-four-page introduction to the social situation of the Roman colony of Philippi. Why did you feel such an informative but lengthy introduction was necessary to support your thesis?
FC: I had to establish that conditions at Philippi mirror conditions at Rome. This is important. Philippi was like “Little Rome.” When Paul is speaking of conditions at Philippi, his is also experiencing the same oppressive conditions at Rome as a chained prisoner. I had to establish that emperor worship was everywhere, in Philippi’s renowned amphitheater, in the streets, in public artifacts. That is why I had to go into an extensive introduction to set the stage of what Paul is doing in his letter.
DG: Your appendices are extensive, too, like bookends to the introduction, driving the thesis home again using illustrations.
FC: There is one illustration of a monument where slaves are chained, and a slave trader is proclaiming his prowess as a slave trader. This monument to the degradation of slavery was at a city adjacent to Philippi. Paul almost certainly passed by it on his way to and from Philippi. It was discovered back in the 1930s and almost destroyed in the war by Nazi bombings.
DG: Paul is sometimes criticized by revisionist commentators for not rejecting the institution of slavery in his letters. Is your book an answer to these critics?
FC: Paul’s approach to slavery is complicated. There are some letters where he seems to envision the imminent return of Christ. Possibly he minimized the importance of slaves being freed in these letters. However, in Philippians, his final letter before his death, he addresses the issue definitively. It is very undermining of slavery.
I intended to de-establish the idea that Paul acquiesced to slavery. He did not acquiesce. The laudatory prepublication comments by scholars make me think the book will have a decisive role in re-imaging Paul.
Against a prevailing notion that St. Paul “acquiesced” to the idea of slavery in his writings, Fr. Cassidy’s book aims to counter the idea by showing how St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians actually served a subversive purpose in a Roman empire dominated by emperor worship and tight controls. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
DG: Back to Philippians 2:6-11. Why do you maintain this passage is not a hymn or baptismal catechesis, as is customarily believed, but is an original composition of Paul? Is this position another example of your counter exegesis?
FC: This is not some other preexisting hymn. No! This is fresh imaging. Visceral imaging. This is intensity from identifying with Christ as the “slave crucified.” No one else could have composed this passage. And Paul could not have composed this passage until he was in Roman chains and could see the threat posed against Jesus by the counterfeit claims that Emperor Nero is Lord.
DG: It’s almost like the passage is “supra-inspired,” that he would get such an original insight while in such dreadful circumstances.
FC: Correct. And there is a real question as to how this letter could be transmitted from prison, with the security and censorship. In garments? In pottery? It is possible the original written letter was confiscated. So how is Paul is getting his subversive thoughts past the Roman guards?
I suggest in my book that Paul was drilling his associates, Timothy and Epaphroditus, to memorize his letter, given the role of memory in early Christian life.
DG: With your busy teaching and pastoral duties, where to you find the motivation and energy to produce such a thoroughly researched, and beautifully written, work of scholarship?
FC: It’s Spirit driven!
DG: Is the Spirit driving you to another book?
FC: I would say so. After a book comes to publication, there is always a kind of mellowing period. So right now I have not identified the next project. I am appreciating the graces I have received from this book, and trusting that the same Spirit who has shepherded me through this sequence will still stand by me, guiding me forward.
Archbishop Carlo Vigano. / Edward Pentin/National Catholic Register
CNA Newsroom, Apr 6, 2024 / 11:00 am (CNA).
A Wisconsin bishop has publicly rebuked the former apostolic nuncio to the United States, accusing him of defamation and a possibly … […]
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) testifies before a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on March 20, 2007 / Alex Wong/Getty Images
Washington D.C., Oct 20, 2021 / 11:00 am (CNA).
Pro-life Americans must do more to support embattled pro-life… […]
3 Comments
The death penalty is sometimes necessary and appropriate. Until the Church speaks definitively on this matter, I believe in certain capital cases it may be applied.
I support the death penalty and traditionally so too does the Catholic Church. I am vehemently opposed to a life sentence without the possibility of parole. That to me is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment because it robs a person of hope and that is nothing short of sinful and cruel. As a secularizing nation less and less connected with God we become more and more uncomfortable with the thought of an afterlife and hence our increasing national reticence to impose the death penalty. Meanwhile the rest of the world correctly concludes that we are weak.
St Thomas Aquinas stated that capital punishment is like amputating a diseased limb to protect the body. I accept, as Origen, Francis Spirago, St John Paul II and Avery Cardinal Dulles argued, that if a limb can be treated and cured, it should not be amputated. I further accept that amputating a limb that CAN be cured would, in such circumstances, do harm to the body.
However what I categorically cannot accept is the novel teaching by our current Pope that amputation is an evil in and of itself, regardless of how rotten and diseased a particular limb is and how much threat is posed to the body, as that definitely contradicts two thousand years of Church teaching (which cannot simply be changed by the stroke of a pen).
Capital Punishment, like killing in self defence or killing during a just war, should ideally be avoided when possible, but sometimes it is indeed necessary to protect the innocent, whose right to life is indeed absolute.
The death penalty is sometimes necessary and appropriate. Until the Church speaks definitively on this matter, I believe in certain capital cases it may be applied.
I support the death penalty and traditionally so too does the Catholic Church. I am vehemently opposed to a life sentence without the possibility of parole. That to me is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment because it robs a person of hope and that is nothing short of sinful and cruel. As a secularizing nation less and less connected with God we become more and more uncomfortable with the thought of an afterlife and hence our increasing national reticence to impose the death penalty. Meanwhile the rest of the world correctly concludes that we are weak.
St Thomas Aquinas stated that capital punishment is like amputating a diseased limb to protect the body. I accept, as Origen, Francis Spirago, St John Paul II and Avery Cardinal Dulles argued, that if a limb can be treated and cured, it should not be amputated. I further accept that amputating a limb that CAN be cured would, in such circumstances, do harm to the body.
However what I categorically cannot accept is the novel teaching by our current Pope that amputation is an evil in and of itself, regardless of how rotten and diseased a particular limb is and how much threat is posed to the body, as that definitely contradicts two thousand years of Church teaching (which cannot simply be changed by the stroke of a pen).
Capital Punishment, like killing in self defence or killing during a just war, should ideally be avoided when possible, but sometimes it is indeed necessary to protect the innocent, whose right to life is indeed absolute.