Correction re capital punishment + FREE offer for Catholic readers

In "Arizona to use chemical invented by a Jew to execute criminals", WWW 3/6/21, I wrote: "Much in all as there are 1000s of miscreants whose removal from society would be a public good, Walt remains opposed to the death penalty. Exodus 20:13." 

That sentiment is in line with the teaching of the "new and improved" Roman Catholic Church, which says, in its "new and improved" Catechism, that "the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person." 

Our old friend Christopher A. Ferrara, whose words have been quoted here many times, says that statement is wrong, contrary to 2000 years of Church teaching based on Divine Revelation. He quotes from Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in His own image."

As regards the Fifth Commandment, to which I referred, Mr Ferrara points out that the Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that capital punishment of murderers defends human dignity. "The use of the civil sword, when wielded by the hand of justice, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this commandment which prohibits murder."

Since the Council of Trent, unlike Vatican II, was a dogmatic council, its interpretation must be understood to be the true teaching of the One True Church. I therefore stand corrected.

FREE offer to Catholic Readers

Mr Ferrara's thoughts on capital punishment are taken from a newly published article (in the Fatima Crusader, Summer 2021) headed "3000 Days to Flatten the Curve"

The reference is to the almost 3000 days which have passed since Jorge Bergoglio began his reign of error as Pope Francis, and to the almost 3000 days remaining until the 100th anniversary of the instruction of Our Lady of Fatima to Sister Lucia during the apparition at Tuy, Spain, on 13 June 1929.

The moment has come [Our Lady said] when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means.

So numerous are the souls that the justice of God condemns for sins committed against Me, that I come to ask for reparation. Sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray. 

Mr Ferrara argues that today, as the failure of a line of Popes to heed Our Lady's request nears that 100th anniversary, why Sister Lucia said that the Third Secret of Fatima should be revealed not later than 1960 -- just before the commencement of the Second Vatican Council -- because it would be "more clear" then.

The Second Vatican Council caused a revolution in the Church, more terrible in its consequences than the French Revolution or the Communist Revolution in Russia. In "3000 Days to Flatten the Curve", Christopher Ferrara give examples of the poisoned fruits of Vatican II, under these headings:

- Chaos in the aftermath of the Council

- Francis' papacy abandons Catholic tradition

- The prophecy of Fatima is ever more urgent

The article is too long for us to repost, or even excerpt here. But we will gladly send you a .pdf file if you will send an e-mail to Ed. requesting it. There is no charge. It's FREE. And we promise not to use your e-mail address for any purpose whatsoever, not even to send you notices of other articles of interest. We're just not set up to do anything that sophisticated.

As our old friend Michael Matt pointed out in a recent video, even if you're not Catholic, you should be concerned about the very real crisis in the Roman Catholic Church. The Third Secret of Fatima contains a vision of a world destroyed by war with a "bishop in white" being murdered by alien enemies. 

If the Church falls, Western civilization will fall with it, just as our enemies intend. Read the article to find out what you can do, in the next 3000 days, to keep this from happening!

VIDEO: Is the death penalty really "inadmissable" or "unacceptable"?

Last week, Pope Francis sowed a great deal of confusion amongst faithful Catholics -- especially traditional Catholics like yr obdt servant -- by declaring that capital punishment -- the death penalty -- is "unacceptable in all cases". Until now, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) taught that the death penalty was acceptable if it was "the only practicable way" to defend lives and protect society.

On Thursday, the Pope said that executions are "an attack on human dignity", and that the Church would work "with determination" to abolish capital punishment worldwide. Abolishing the death penalty has long been one of the Francis's top priorities, along with saving the environment and caring for immigrants and "refugees". That tells you all you need to know about the man who apparently wants to go down in history as "the SJW pope".

The Holy Father seems to have overlooked (or ignored) the fact that making this radical change to what the Church has always taught is likely to challenge Catholic politicians, judges and officials who have argued that their Church was not entirely opposed to capital punishment. And let's not forget the millions of "ordinary people" like Walt who understood from many right-to-life events that the Church was opposed to capital punishment, in any circumstance, as Pope Francis is now saying.

"Thou shalt not kill." Period. I was dimly aware that there were exceptions to that commandment -- a just war, for example -- but didn't realize that an exception might apply in certain criminal cases. Had I thought about it, I would have wondered what sort of crimes deserved that punishment, other than murder. Would treason, for example, be rightly punishable by "Off with his head!"? It certainly wasn't justifiable in the case of Saint Thomas More. How about abortion? Should we kill the baby-killers? How about rape? How bad would it have to be? Would the age of the victim be a factor? There are those who think that execution is too good for someone who rapes of a child of tender years. (St Matthew 18:6)

There is a further point of concern. The president of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization (whatever that is) said that the revision of the CCC's teaching on the death penalty is an instance of "true dogmatic progress...that has gradually matured to the point of making us understand the unsustainability of the death penalty in our day." That's the official Vatican line. It's all part of that "hermeneutic of continuity" that Pope Benedict XVI talked about while making a series of radical breaks with the past.

Writing in L'Osservatore Romano, the official Vatican organ, Abp Rino Fisichella said Church tradition "is not representable as an insect imprisoned in amber, to say it in a colorful English expression. If that were the case, we would have destroyed it. The teaching of the faith of the Church, rather, is an announcement, a word that remains alive..."

But that's Newspeak (vide 1984) It's just wrong! A diocesan priest wrote to me his thoughts on "a very bad move by Francis. I still think that the Holy Spirit knew that it would be a severe test of the faith of many good conservative Catholics; or that maybe Satan got permission from God to 'inspire' the Pope to do this, sure that it would do a lot of harm....

"Catholics in general were not against total mercy, not against dealing with crime other than [by] capital punishment, but...against total condemnation of it because of Scripture, the Church, and tradition. Commendable faith. But the teaching has always been justifying capital punishment, not commanding it....

"On so many levels Francis seems wrong. In order to agree with him I might have to double down and go with the assumption that God in the Old Testament (and even in the New) has catered to man's weakness. That would explain why He allowed polygamy in the O.T. On the other hand, Christ decreed the end of polygamy but did not do the same for capital punishment.... Does that mean there is a difference between changing a teaching that specifically allows something (e.g. capital punishment in some circumstances) and changing a teaching that specifically condemns something (e.g. homosexual practices)?

"I'm also concerned that the Church is taking the necessary tools away from the civil authorities to exercise their responsibility to control crime in some times, places and conditions. These circumstances prevailed in the past, probably exist to some extent even now, and could return again in the unforeseeable future."

That's one priest's opinion. Here's another, the latest in the "Sunday Sermons from South St. Paul" series on The Remnant TV. In what surely must be one of the most courageous sermons of 2018, this diocesan priest (from a different diocese) takes the gloves off and asks: "What's it going to be? The constant teaching established by Scripture, doctors and fathers of the Church, sainted popes and God Himself? Or that which rests on the whim of Pope Francis, who seems to think the Catholic Church’s binding teaching is whatever his opinion happens to be." God help us, what is this man thinking, that in the middle of the most outrageous clerical sex scandal to date he decides it’s time to go after capital punishment.



Further reading:
"The Absolute 'No' To the Death Penalty. A Victory For the Gospel, Or For 'Secular Humanism'?", by Sandro Magister, in Settimo Cielo, his blog in L'Espresso, 6/8/18.
"Le non absolu à la peine de mort. Victoire de l’Évangile ou de 'l’humanisme séculier'?" The same, in French, in Diakonos.be: Regards sur l'Eglise catholique.
"The Death Penalty, Instituted by God Himself (The Biblical Basis for Catholic Teaching on Capital Punishment)", an older piece by Solange Herts (RIP), reprinted in The Remnant, 6/8/18.