Life

An attack upon something as essential and foundational as life cannot be ignored, and it is so important that we defend all innocent human life.  This is why Blessed Pope John Paul II called out the modern culture in his Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, calling it the “Culture of Death”.    Abortion and euthanasia are two of the greatest evils ever to befall the world.  And sadly these evils are nothing new, because the devil has always been around since the beginning of mankind and has been working for our destruction from day one.

The killing of children is recorded early in sacred scripture in connection with the god worshiped by the Ammonites: Moloch.  It is important to remember here what Psalm 95:5 says: “All the gods of the Gentiles are devils”.  Thus Moloch is a demon to which the Ammonites, and later some Israelites, sacrificed their children on a regular basis (3 Kings 11:5).  This was even after God specifically forbid this practice on one occasion speaking with Moses, and clearly explained how terrible it was (Leviticus 20).  

Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich records another particularly horrifying instance of child sacrifice in the ancient world in one of her visions concerning the three wise men in her Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary:

“They took a child of one of the purest and most devout mothers amongst the followers of their religion, and she esteemed herself very fortunate to offer up her child in this way. The child was flayed and strewn with flour to absorb the blood. They ate this blood-soaked flour as a holy repast, and continued strewing the flour and eating until there was no blood left in the child’s body. Finally the child’s flesh was cut up into small pieces, which were distributed among them and eaten.  I saw them performing this gruesome ceremony with the greatest simplicity and devoutness, and I was told that they had adopted this dreadful practice as a result of misunderstanding and distorting certain prophetic and symbolical indications which they had received regarding the Holy Eucharist. I saw that this terrible sacrifice was carried on in Chaldaea, in the country of Mensor, one of the three holy kings, until he put an end to its horrors on receiving enlightenment in a vision from heaven on the day of Mary’s conception.”

Of course, one most terrible instances of ritual human sacrifice, and in particular that of children, ever recorded was during the height of the Aztec empire in Mexico during the 15^th century.  They would cut out the still beating heart of a grown man offering up his body and blood to placate the “god” (demon) they were worshiping: Huitzilopochtli.  On one particular occasion over the course of a single day 10,000 men were sacrificed in this way.  If that wasn’t terrible enough they also sacrificed many of their children, in fact one out of every five Aztec children was raised with the explicit intent of sacrificing them.  They were raised in all comfort being pampered in every way so that when it came time for their sacrifice they would cry more… in order to appease the rain “god”.  (Our Lady of Guadalupe: And the Conquest of Darkness, by Dr. Warren Carroll, founder of Christendom College)

Some believe that Moloch and Huitzilopochtli are one in the same and that this very same demon is intimately connected with the modern abortion industry.  It has been demonstrated on numerous occasions the close link between the demonic and abortion industry. Of course most are not explicitly satanic, but there are those abortion clinic nurses who would intentionally get pregnant simply in order to abort the child as part of a satanic ritual sacrifice. (Citation)

For an in depth look at the philosophical implications of this on society I recommend reading chapters Six and Seven of Part I of G.K. Chesterton's Everlasting Man.

Now many in the pro-life movement, even the Catholics, seem at some point along the way to have forgotten something very important.  Why is abortion so evil?  Most pro-lifers would answer something like: because it ends the life of an innocent baby in the womb.  This is true, but is it the worst part of abortion?  I don’t think so, because abortion is worse than homicide, suicide, euthanasia, or any other form of taking the life of an innocent human being.  Why do I say this?  Well I will let Pope Sixtus V answer for me from the first paragraph of his Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam (Against Abortionists) which was published on October 29, 1588:

“We who are placed by the Lord in the supreme throne of justice, being counseled by a most just reason, are in part renewing old laws and in part extending them in order to restrain with just punishment the monstrous and atrocious brutality of those who have no fear to kill most cruelly fetuses still hiding in the maternal viscera. Who will not detest such an abhorrent and evil act, by which are lost not only the bodies but also the souls? Who will not condemn to a most grave punishment the impiety of him who will exclude a soul created in the image of God and for which Our Lord Jesus Christ has shed His precious Blood, and which is capable of eternal happiness and is destined to be in the company of angels, from the blessed vision of God, and who has impeded as much as he could the filling up of heavenly mansions, and has taken away the service to God by His creature? who has deprived children of life before they could naturally see light or could be protected by maternal body from ferocious cruelty?”

 

You must see then that abortion is so evil because it deprives children of the possibility of baptism, and thus from the possibility of living in heaven, for which sanctifying grace is necessary, and which can only come through the “laver of regeneration” in the sacrament of Baptism.  As the Council of Trent infallibly defined: 

“If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.” (Session 7, On Baptism, Canon 5, 3 March 1547)  

The only exception might be if a baby was specifically aborted with explicit satanic intent, and thus the baby would be killed for the sake of Christ and would then merit Baptism of Blood as a martyr, maybe.  Now where do the children go if they don’t go to heaven?  Do they go to Hell?  Well that it was Saint Augustine taught, but I am inclined to follow the Church’s subsequent and far more merciful teaching of the existence of the Limbo of the Children (in addition to the Limbo of the Fathers, where the saints of the old testament resided until they were liberated by Christ after his death on the Cross).  To read the pronouncements of the Church on this important teaching please see this post on my other blog here.

It appears that many Christian pro-lifers have forgotten the words of our Lord: 

“And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt. 10:28)  

How very important to remember that "our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places." (Ephesians 6:12)  I have been convinced even more of the deeply spiritual nature of the battle against the culture of death, and the necessity of prayer as the essential weapon in this fight, after reading the book “Unplanned” by Abby Johnson (which I highly recommend).

This forgetfulness of the spiritual and the focus on the temporal brings me to the final issue I wish to address in this post, and that is the thorny subject of capital punishment.

In my experience the common opinion among pro-lifers is that capital punishment is in the same category as abortion, euthanasia, homicide, suicide, etc.  This is a grave mistake, however, because all of the latter are clearly intrinsically evil according to the teaching of the Church, but the former most certainly is not.  Now it seems that this misconception about capital punishment derives from three main sources.

The first of these is a misunderstanding based on the translation of Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17. Most commonly it is translated in English as “Thou shalt not kill”, as it was originally in the Douay-Rhiems and (borrowing from it) the original King James.  The problem is that the English language has changed a great deal over time and the meaning of words have become different over time as well.  The word kill today is the general word of ending the life of any creature whatsoever.  This was not the meaning in the 16^th century when these translations were made.  In fact the equivalent word for them would have been “slay”, but kill had a much more specific meaning of “murder”.  To have a clear and Catholic understanding of the nature of what constitutes murder I would recommend that you read the entirety of Question 64 of the Secunda Secundae of the Summa Theologiae of Saint Thomas Aquinas, and in particular Article 2.

The second issue is that a very basic and yet vital distinction is not made by so many pro-lifers.  This is that there is a big difference between the taking of the innocent human life which is always evil, and the conviction and sentencing to death of a criminal (not innocent) by the legitimate governing authority.

Thirdly, many Catholics seem to be under the impression that Blessed Pope John Paul II condemned capital punishment as being an intrinsic evil on the level of abortion.  This is simply false and part of a common trend among many Catholics today to simply neglect to read the original sources to see what was actually said and not just repeat what they’ve heard third or fourth hand ad nauseum.  I will point you to the very same thing he does in Evangelium Vitae, and that is paragraph 2267 of the CCC:

"If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person"

Now you need to remember that the CCC actually has no binding teaching authority, but is simply an approved explanation of the binding teachings of the Catholic faith, which may yet still carry errors since it does not bear the mark of infallibility.  Be that as it may, what our late Holy Father actually said was that capital punishment ought to be a last resort, but this clearly means that it can be resorted to when necessary, and thus cannot be intrinsically evil.  Now our late Holy Father also believed (though it is important to point out that this was his opinion and not by any means infallible teaching) that it would only be necessary in rare instances today to impose the death penalty.  His reason given for this was because “today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare”, but I fear the Holy Father mistakenly put far too much faith in the prison system in the United States, which as anyone who is at all familiar with the system will know is completely broken.

This brings me to another important point.  Just as with abortion pro-lifers have completely missed the spiritual side of this issue.  What is the most important thing for condemned criminals?  Is it that we save them from capital punishment?  Or is it that we work and pray for their conversion and the salvation of their soul?  Of course the Holy Father makes an important point when discussing the centrality of the reformation of each individual criminal.  Now he believed that capital punishment denied the criminal the opportunity to reform his life, and hopefully to convert and be saved.  The problem with this is that for many criminals the prison system not only does not help to reform them and given them an opportunity for conversion, but instead buries them deeper in the darkness of evil.  Being sentenced to death, however, makes things very clear to a criminal that his days are numbered and the time for conversion is now, and if then remains obstinate in his sin then that is his choice to reject the grace of God which is always there.  This terrible punishment also is a great deterrent for other criminals.

Of course on the other hand the legal system in the United States is just as broken as the penal system.  Far too many men and women are falsely convicted and even sentenced to death for the crimes of others.  Still this does not make capital punishment intrinsically evil, or even sinful when legitimately implemented.

It is interesting to note that Pope Sixtus V actually decreed that those who perform abortions or sterilizations in the Papal States were to be punished with the death penalty.  This of course was when the Church still had the Papal States which covered most of central Italy and was ruled over by the Pope.  Sadly these lands given free to the Church by various Catholic Kings were stolen from the Church during the reign of Blessed Pope Pius IX in the late mid-19^th century.  And in fact according the Lateran Treaty of 1929 the death penalty is still in force in the Vatican City State.

This misunderstanding about the church’s teaching on this issue I believe is exemplified in these campaigns by Catholic communities to have letter writing sessions to the Governor of my home state to stay an execution that was soon to take place.  I could only see the stark contrast with what Saint Therese of Lisieux did when she heard that Pranzini was to be put to death.  She didn’t write the magistrate letters to stop the execution, but rather prayed for (and it would seem obtained) the conversion of the man.  Never once in these Catholic communities, however, was there any mention of praying for the soul of the condemned criminal we were exhorted to write letters to save his body.   And certainly if the intent was to stay the execution to obtain more time for the repentance of the criminal as Saint Thomas and Blessed Pope John Paul II speak about, then I think that would be most laudable, but it certainly did not seem to be the intent there.

I would like to conclude with a defense of the practice during the Inquisition in France and Spain in the 13^th-16^th centuries where in some cases the death penalty was applied. This defense is from Saint Robert Bellarmine who was declared a Doctor of the Church in 1931 by Pope Pius XI.  It is from his work De Laicis – On Government, and was translated from the original Latin by Fr. James Goodwin, S.J.:

Chapter XXI - Can Heretics Condemned by the Church Be Punished with Temporal Penalties and even with Death

John Huss, in the recorded article 14 of the Council of Constance, session 15, asserted that it is not permitted to hand over an incorrigible heretic to the secular power and to allow the penalty of burning. Luther held the same in article 33 and its assertion. Nor is the error new, for the Donatists also taught the same, like Parmenianus, Petilianus, and Gaudentius (as Augustine testifies, in Book I against the letter of Parmenianus, in Chapter 7, Book II against the Letters of Petilianus, in Chapter 10 of Book II, against the letter of Gaudentius, and in Chapters 17 and 26 of his Letter 50 to Boniface.)

All Catholics teach the contrary, and even some of the heretics. For Calvin, after he had publicly punished as a heretic Michael Servetus with the ultimate penalty, and after it was debated by other sectarians, published a book in which he demonstrates that it is permissible to take notice of heretics with a sword. Also Benedict Aretus, in a history of the punishment of Valentius Gentilis, argues that the same Gentilis was rightly punished by the Magistrate Bernensis. Theodore Beza, indeed, teaches the same, at greater length, in a book on the punishment of heretics by a magistrate.

We, then, will briefly show that incorrigible heretics, and especially recidivists, can and should be expelled by the Church and be punished by the secular powers with temporal punishments and even by death itself.

The first proof is from Scripture: The Scripture of the Old Testament (in Deuteronomy XIII, 12) commands most severely that false prophets who encourage the worship of false gods be put to death, and in Chapter XVII, after saying that in doubtful cases the High Priest should be consulted, soon adds: "If the person is haughty, however, and is unwilling to obey the command of the High Priest, let him die by the sentence of the judge. (Deuteronomy XVII, 12). And, again, in Chapter XVIII, the false prophet is sentenced to be killed. And, in reality, Elias (or Elijah), Josias (Josiah), Jehu, and others observed this law by killing a great many false prophets, as is clear from III Kings, XVIII, and IV Kings, X and XXIII, there is almost no difference between our heretics and the false prophets of those days. Nor did only the holy Kings and Prophets punish blasphemers with death, but even Nabuchodonosor [now more often spelled Nebuchadnezzar], as is said in Daniel III, promulgated an edict, that whoever should blaspheme the God of Daniel, that is, the true God, should be put to death and his home be destroyed; in the same edict, he performed a most worthy service to the True God, as St. Augustine remarks in his Epistle 50 and elsewhere. In the New Testament, in Matthew XVIII, we find that the Church can excommunicate and treat as aliens and tax-gatherers those who refuse to obey and to allow them to be treated by the secular powers as no longer children of the Church. We have, then, in Romans XIII, 4, that the secular power can punish criminals with sword: "It is not without purpose that the ruler carries a sword; he is God's servant, to inflict His avenging wrath upon the wrongdoer." From these two scriptural passages, it can be clearly inferred that it is permissible that heretics, who by the judgment of all are rebels against the Church and disturbers of public peace, be cut off from the Church and be punished with death by a secular judge.

Moreover, Christ and His Apostles have placed heretics in the same category as those matters that can be disposed of, without question, by fire and sword; for in Matthew VII the Lord says: "Be on your guard against false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but underneath are wolves on the prowl." In Acts 20: 29: "I know that when I am gone, savage wolves will come among you who will not spare the flock." It is certain that heretics ought to be known by the title of "wolves," as St. Ambrose explains in his commentary on the beginning of Chapter X of St. Luke. But ravenous wolves are killed for an excellent reason, if they cannot otherwise be driven away; for much more should be made of the lives of the sheep than of the deaths of wolves. Likewise, in John X, 1: "Truly, I assure you: Whoever does not enter the sheepfold through the gate but climbs in some other way is a thief and a marauder." Under the name of thief and marauder heretics are meant, and all subversives and founders of sects, as Chrysostom and Augustine explain; how thieves and marauders should be punished has been explained. Likewise, in II Timothy, II, heresy is compared to a cancer which is not cured by medications but should be excised with a knife, otherwise it will spread progressively and the whole body will be destroyed. Finally, Christ, in John, Chapter II, using a whip forces the merchants to leave the temple. Peter, in Acts V, killed Ananias and Sapphira because they had presumed to lie to the Holy Spirit; and Paul, in Acts XIII, vs. 6-12, struck with blindness the false prophet who was trying to keep Sergius Paulus, the Roman proconsular governor, from the Faith.

The matter is proved, secondly, from the sentences and laws of the Emperors which the Church regularly approved. The Emperor Constantine the First sent into exile Arius and some companions at the request of the Nicene Synod, as the author Sozomenus notes in Book I, Chapter 20 of his History; likewise, he imposed the penalty of death on the Donatists, as Augustine reports in Book I, in a letter opposed to Parmenianus, Chapter 7, and in Epistle 166, to the Donatists, wherein he enumerates many excellent Emperors who passed many very severe laws against the heretics, and only one, Julian the Apostate, favored heretics.

Then Theodosius, Valentinianus, Martianus, and other very religious Emperors passed laws against heretics by which, on occasion, they sought to punish by fines of pounds of gold, sometimes by confiscation of all their goods, sometimes by exile and scourging, sometimes by imposing the ultimate penalty, as is clear from "C. de hereticis, L. Nanichaeos, L. Ariani, L. Quicumque." by the last of these laws, which is one of Valentinian and Martian, all are to be put to death who attempt to teach perverse doctrine; those, also, who listen to these teachers are punished by fines of some pounds of gold. Justinian, as recorded by Paul the Deacon in Book XVI, by a promulgated law, banished all heretics beyond the boundaries of the entire Empire, while allowing three months for their conversion; later, the Emperor Michael, as is related in Book XXIV of the same Paul the Deacon, established the capital punishment for heretics.

A third proof is had in the laws of the Church: under the headings, "Ad abolendum," "Excommunicamus, extra de hereticis," and in "Sexto de hereticis" in the chapter ahead of it, the Church defines that incorrigible heretics are to be handed over to the secular power, so that they may be punished in a just manner. Likewise, the Council of Constance, in session XV, condemned the opinion of John Huss; and it handed over the same John and Jerome of Prague to the secular power, by whom the two were burned; finally, Leo the Tenth condemned the articles of Luther.

A fourth proof is had in the testimonies of the Fathers. Cyprian, in a book of exhortation on martyrdom, in Chapter 5, after he had recalled from Deuteronomy XIII, that pseudoprophets should be killed, he added, "If this was done under the Old Testament, much more should it be done under the New."

Jerome, in reference to the text in Galatians, Chapter 5, "A little yeast can effect the entire dough," (v. 9) says: "as soon as a spark appears, it should be extinguished, and yeast close to a batch should be removed; spoiled meat should be cut away, and a scabby animal should be driven from a sheepfold, lest the whole house, or mass, or body, or herd burn, be corrupted, spoil, or perish. Arius was one spark, but since he was not immediately extinguished, the whole earth was affected by his flame."

Augustine, in Book II of his Retractions, Chapter 5, and in Epistles 48 and 50, retracts what he had once thought, that heretics should not be forced to believe, and proves at length that it is very useful; he always rules out the punishment of death, not because he thought they did not deserve this, but both because he judged that this was unbecoming the gentleness of the Church and also because no imperial law was in existence, by which heretics were sentenced to death; for the Law, "Quicumque, C. de hereticis," was promulgated a little after the death of Augustine.

That, however, Augustine judged it to be just, if heretics were put to death, is beyond question; for, in Book I, in opposition to the letter of Parmenianus, in Chapter 7, he demonstrates that if the Donatists were punished by death, they would be justly so punished. And in tract 11, on John: "They kill souls, he says, and are afflicted in the body, those who bring about eternal deaths complain that they suffer temporal deaths," by which he says they falsely complain that they are killed by Emperors; nevertheless, even if this were true, they would be complaining unjustly. Finally, in his Letter 50, to Boniface, he writes that the Church does not want any heretic to be put to death: nevertheless, as the House of David could not enjoy peace unless Absalom were done away with and David was consoled by the peace of his realm in his grief over the death of his son: so when, from the laws of Emperors against heretics, the deaths of some follow, the sorrow of the maternal heart of the Church is assuaged by the deliverance of a multitude of people.

St. Leo, in Letter 91, to Turbius, Chapter 1: "Deservedly," he wrote, "our Fathers, in whose time this nefarious heresy broke out throughout the world, acted immediately to drive out the unholy madness from the universal Church; when, also, the Rulers of the world so detested this sacrilegious madness, that they destroyed its author and many of his disciples by the sword of public law; and this interference with Ecclesiastical lenience, which, although content with a judgment that fled from bloody punishments, was nevertheless helped by the severe laws of Christian Rulers, while they who fear corporal punishment sometimes revert to a spiritual remedy." Optatus Milevitanus, in Book III, in replying to the calumnies of heretics who were sorrowful over the death of two of theirs killed by the Prefect Macarius: "You see," he wrote, "that similar things were done by Moses, and Phineas, and Elias, and Macharia, because the punishment of the One God emanates from all of them."

St. Gregory, in Book I, Letter 72, to Gennadius, the Exarch of Africa, praises him because he persecuted heretics with weapons, and he urges him to continue.

St. Bernard in Sermon 66, on the Canticle: "They without doubt would be better coerced by the sword of him who, not without cause, carries the sword, than that they be allowed to draw many into their error; for he is a servant of the Lord and vindicator of wrath against him who does evil. Some marvel that they were not only patiently but joyfully led to death, but they scarcely recognize how great is the power of the Devil, not only over the bodies of men but even over their hearts, once he has been allowed to possess them. Is it not better for a man to take himself in hand, than for him willingly to accept force from another."

There is, finally, a proof from reason. First, heretics can be justly excommunicated, as all admit. Therefore, that they [may be] put to death. The consequence is proved from the fact that excommunication is a greater penalty than temporal death. Augustine, in Book I, contra advers. Legis et Prophetarum [against the adversaries of the Law and the Prophets], Chapter 17, says it is more terrible to be given over to Satan through excommunication, than to be struck down by the sword, be consumed by flames, or exposed to being devoured by animals.

Secondly, experience teaches that there is no other remedy; for the Church proceeded gradually, and tried all remedies; first, it fines, then exile, finally, it was driven to the penalty of death; for the heretics show contempt for excommunication and call them "cold thunderbolts;" if you threaten the penalty of fines, they neither fear God nor revere men, since they know that ignorant people will be found who will believe them and feed them. If you confine them to prison or send them into exile, they will corrupt their neighbors with their speech and those who are far away with their books. Therefore, there is only one remedy, send them timely to their place.

Thirdly, forgers, in the judgment of all, deserve death; but heretics are forgers of the Word of God.

Fourthly, by the reasoning of Augustine, in Letter 50, it is more serious for man to fail to keep faith with God, than for a women not to keep faith with a man, but this is punished by death, why not the former?

Fifthly, there are three reasons why, as reason teaches, men are to be put to death, as Galen eloquently teaches in a book whose title is: "That the habits of the soul imitate the temperaments of the body," toward the end of the book.

The first reason is, Lest the evil injure the good, or the innocent be abused by the injurious, in the judgment of all, all are to be executed who are guilty of homicide, adultery, or robbery. The second reason is: That, by the punishment of the few, the many may be corrected: and that those who are unwilling to help society by living may benefit it by dying. And hence, we also see that, in the opinion of all, certain most horrendous crimes are most justly punished by death, even though they do no injury to the neighbor, except by example: crimes like Necromancy, crimes that are abominable and contrary to nature are, therefore, most severely punished, in order that others may know they are monstrous crimes and should not dare to perpetrate the like. Thirdly, because to the very men who are killed it is beneficial to be killed, when, namely, they are becoming ever worse and it is not probable that they will ever revert to sanity of mind.

All these reasons are persuasive that heretics should be put to death; for, in the first place, they injure the neighbor more seriously than any pirate or robber, since they kill souls; even worse, they take away the foundation for all good and fill the state with the upheavals that inevitably result from the diversity of religions.