Archbishop Buechlein of Indianapolis, the Archbishop of the area where
Timothy McVeigh’s execution is to take place has made the following statement:
It would be difficult to imagine a more heinous crime than the
catastrophic explosion of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April
1995. We can’t imagine the full impact of the shocking loss of the families and
friends whose loved ones, including small children, were victims of human madness. We
continue to pray for the victims and their families.
What twisted mind could perpetrate such a crime against innocent
humanity? Not a foreign terrorist, but a citizen from America’s heartland
masterminded this act of violence.
Timothy James McVeigh was tried and duly convicted of this sordid crime
in a court of law. He has been sentenced to death, and there is little sentiment in favor
of staying his execution, now less than a month away. As we approach the first federal
execution in our country in more than 38 years, many believe no criminal is more deserving
of the death penalty.
Like no other, the McVeigh case tests the mettle of the emerging
Catholic view about the inappropriateness of capital punishment. Rational analysis is
difficult in the face of the emotion this man’s crime evokes. The
"tantalizing" manner in which this is becoming a national media event compounds
the task. Yet in matters such as this, the good society requires that we rise to the
challenge of a measured and larger vision.
Last October Jesuit theologian Cardinal Avery Dulles traced the history
of religious teaching on the death penalty through the ages and demonstrated that the
Catholic church has consistently asserted that the state has the authority to exact
capital punishment and, in principle, does so today.
"It is agreed," Dulles said, "that crime deserves
punishment in this life and not only in the next. In addition, it is agreed that the state
has authority to administer appropriate punishment to those judged guilty of crimes and
that this punishment may, in serious cases, include the sentence of death."
But what is "appropriate" punishment? This is the question
raised for our day by Pope John Paul II. Dulles outlined the four purposes of the criminal
punishment in general:
1. Rehabilitation. The penalty should try to bring the
criminal to repentance and to moral reform. (Under certain circumstances this could lead
to a return to normal civil life.)
2. Defense against the criminal. The government is
obliged to protect society by preventing the criminal from committing additional crimes.
For heinous crimes, the church favors life imprisonment without parole rather than death.
3. Deterrence. Punishment should discourage further
violence and crime. We believe life imprisonment without parole does so.
4. Retribution. Punishment should try to restore the
right order violated by the crime. A criminal should pay a price for the offense
committed. If possible, the victims of the crime should be compensated for the wrong
suffered. This does not mean revenge.
Dulles also summarized four objections to capital punishment in our
day:
1. Wrongful death. The possibility that the convict may
be innocent is the more common reason for opposition to the death penalty. A significant
number of wrongly accused criminals on death row have been proven innocent.
2. Revenge not justice. The death penalty seems to fan
the flame of revenge (and violence) rather than foster a genuine sense of justice in
society.
3. Devaluation of human life. Capital punishment
contributes dramatically to the devaluation of human life in an escalating culture of
death.
4. Incompatibility with Christian forgiveness. While
pardon does not remove the obligation of justice, capital punishment seems incompatible
with the teaching of Jesus about forgiveness.
Even as our Church opposes the death penalty in a case as awful as
McVeigh’s we do not question in principle the state’s right to impose the death
penalty. Yet we must oppose the death penalty because the circumstances of our day do not
warrant it. Pope John Paul II wrote in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae ("The
Gospel of Life"):
"As a result of steady improvements in the organization of the
penal system, cases in which the execution of the offender would be absolutely necessary
are very rare, if not partically nonexistent."
The church’s teaching on the state’s authority does not
change, but the state should not exercise its right if the evil effects outweigh the good.
In recent times the death penalty does more harm than good because it feeds a frenzy for
revenge, while there is no demonstrable proof that capital punishment deters violence.
Revenge neither liberates the families of victims nor ennobles the
victims of crime. Only forgiveness liberates.
To be sure, we as a society must never forget the victims of crime and
their bereaved loved ones. The truly honorable memorial is to choose life rather than
death.
