In an odd and unexplained rule change proposal, California may ban chaplains from meeting with death row prisoners nearer than three hours before their scheduled execution.
The California Department of Corrections (CDCR) is engaged in a detailed revision of its procedures for ending the lives of prisoners sentenced to death. The elaborate set of rules specifies in minute detail death drug formulation, testing, staff training, protocols and numerous other aspects of executions.
But one unexplained new provision would prohibit the doomed inmate from meeting with a chaplain in the last three hours before the scheduled execution.
More than three hours ahead a chaplain could meet with the convict. But within three hours the religious counselor would be barred from being present with the person about to lose their life. The only possible contact during the prisoner’s last three hours might be by phone.
“In the previous protocols, the chaplain could stay until a few minutes before,” says Rev. George Horan, a Los Angeles priest.
But the proposed new rule changes that dramatically. The final three hours before death is “the time that the person needs them the most,” says Fr. Horan, adding that the new draft rule “defeats the purpose of spiritual advising.”
Horan was chaplain at the Men’s Central Jail in Los Angeles for 30 years. He still works with prisoners and is a leading figure in the restorative justice community.
“I know a lot of people on death row,” he says simply.
“When you (the state) are involved in pre-meditated murder, you are not thinking of the spiritual welfare of the person you are killing. It is not surprising that the CDCR would remove the last person who might bring some comfort, hope, and support to the person to be executed.”
While the state has not explained why it wants to bar chaplains from personal contact with prisoners in the last three hours of their lives, the secrecy has raised speculation. Some say the state may not want to allow the personnel involved to be identified. The state might also be seeking to protect the identity of medical personnel involved in the killing, since the draft regulations say the members of the execution team will remain anonymous and that medical personnel will not be reported to their licensing agencies for taking part in an execution.
Full story at California Catholic Conference.
I have wondered why the lethal medications given to patients in states that legally allow euthanasia, can’t also be given to the prisoner, who is to be executed? And yes, a chaplain should be present, to the final moment! The prisoner must be fully aware of his punishment for his crime, and that God is also waiting for his soul! A good opportunity for repentance of sin, if the inmate has not already done so, and to express remorse for sin, and apologize to the victim’s family! As for the modern-day Catholic debate on the abolition of capital punishment– I lack the experience to decide “yes” or “no,” on this subject!!
I am firmly pro-life, from conception to natural death. I do not believe in euthanasia. However, our Church has always taught that governments have the right to execute prisoners found guilty of extremely serious crimes. I have read Pope St. John Paul’s views, stating that in the modern-day world, capital punishment should be abolished, for good reasons. I am not sure if I totally agree with him, but I do respect his views. Regardless– I feel that a prisoner about to be executed, should have the right to a chaplain’s services, and should also try to say he is sorry for his crimes, and apologize to the victim’s family– and to God.
LInda Maria, I am unclear how you are pro-life and how you supposedly believe in life from conception to natural death, and yet you support the State to cause a very extremely unnatural death. I’m unclear also about whether you are correct that the “Church has always taught…” Actually that is NOT what she has always taught. She has taught that capital punishment is OK if there are no other methods to protect society. That is a pretty big IF. And as to using ” lethal medications given to patients in states that legally allow euthanasia”, there are no such states, and there are no such medications. If you find a state that allows legal euthanasia, I’d like to look into them. Which ones are they?
YFC– better to just be content to write about your own views! Don’t bother with other posters! I already said– I am not certain what I believe, on the topic of capital punishment– and don’t feel I have the expertise for his subject! I recall the topic of Germans, former Nazis, being convicted of war crimes, after World War II– should they face capital punishment, especially for torturing and killing the Jews?? Well– other than the subject of capital punishment– I am pro-life, from conception to natural death.
YFC– I don’t know if the Death Row prisoners are given the same lethal medications, that are now legally given to (non-criminal) patients, who request euthanasia– but many liberals present euthanasia as easy, painless, and simple! Yet, they protest that lethal injections for criminals– is “inhumane!!” I do not believe in euthanasia. Is “humane” euthanasia for the innocent, and “inhumane” lethal injections for criminals– identical?? And yes, YFC, we all know what the Church has taught for centuries, until the modern era, and Pope St. John Paul II’s views! Fine!!
Lifelong, I have always hoped, never to be chosen for jury duty, on cases that might involve capital punishment! Scary!
Pro-life priests all have different views, on the topic of capital punishment.
You brought up some very good points, Linda Maria. It does seem that our justice system is now very topsy turvy. It seems our state pushes to kill the innocent and save the guilty. This is what Roe vs Wade has done.
I remember the words Fr. John Powell, God rest his soul, that he quoted in his book, “Abortion the Silent Holocaust”. They were these: “If a doctor will take money to kill the child in the womb, when you are old and no longer useful to society, he will take money to kill you.” That is not only happening, but it is happening to those far younger whose lives are not considered worth living.
You know, LM, I was just taking heart the plea to not be immature, babyish and responsible. I think I heard that somehwere! And part of that means telling the truth. There are no states in the US with legal euthenasia. You keep making up that idea. And capital punishment is only permitted by the Church in specific circumstances. Fraonkly, I don’t think “pro-life” priests who approve of capital punishment always reflect what the Church teaches on the subject. But when you make up some story about the drugs that are given legally to non criminal patients – you are making up a story that is just simply not true.
That’s fresh, YFC. You, of all people, lecturing others about not accepting everything that the Church teaches. What nerve! Want to tell us all how you accept the Church’s teachings about marriage and sexual morality and male/female natures?
BTW, some states have legalized assisted suicide. That’s probably what LM is talking about while being confused about the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Assisted suicide, or euthanasia, is legal in California, and in many other states! This website also published the news, when doctor-assisted euthanasia was legalized in California! Gov. Brown– (a former Jesuit seminarian!) is a big supporter of it, for patients requesting it! A HORROR!! It seems contradictory to me, that liberals who support doctor-assisted suicide, state that it is “painless, and easy” — yet, they are against capital punishment, by lethal injection (same drugs??) saying it is “cruel, painful, and unjust!” What is the truth??
“However, there are some exceptions made by the divine authority to its own law, that men may not be put to death…And, accordingly, they who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, You shall not kill.” Augustine, City of God, Book 1/Chapter 21
“The power of life and death is permitted to certain civil magistrates because theirs is the responsibility under law to punish the guilty and protect the innocent. Far from being guilty of breaking this commandment [Thy shall not kill], such an execution of justice is precisely an act of obedience to it. For the purpose of the law is to protect and foster human life. This purpose is fulfilled when the legitimate authority of the State is exercised by taking the guilty lives of those who have taken innocent lives.” Catechism of the Council of Trent, Part III
“The secular power can without mortal sin carry out a sentence of death, provided it proceeds in imposing the penalty not from hatred but with judgment, not carelessly but with due solicitude.” Pope Innocent III
“Even in the case of the death penalty the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. Rather public authority limits itself to depriving the offender of the good of life in expiation for his guilt, after he, through his crime, deprived himself of his own right to life.” Pope Pius XII, 1952
Dear Larry Northon: The citations you give here are all fine and good, for the time and era they were written: capital punishment was entirely acceptable in 1952 which is the latest source you cite, and before then. HOWEVER, it is no longer acceptable in our time, as judged by Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and Pope Francis, and the rest of the bishops of the Church.
“A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death…
penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.” Pope John Paul II at the Papal Mass in St. Louis, Missouri on January 27, 1999.
And as you can see from the citations I’ve given, this concept was a novelty introduced by Pope John Paul II, who offered no foundation in Scripture or Tradition for the notion that imprisonment eliminates the justification for execution. As such, it is without validity or authority.
Wrong again Larry Northon. The justification comes from the long-standing moral discipline of the Church concerning the sources of morality of human actions. Check it out in the Catechism 1750-1754. Plus, the argument that the call to abolish capital punishment as now taught by the Magisterium is outside of tradition is a myth. MYTH!
“She has taught that capital punishment is OK if there are no other methods to protect society.” That is a recent JPII invention.
This is bizarre. How can we raise a voice here?
Tough cookies! Committing crimes that qualify for the death penalty means lots of consequences, and not having a spiritual adviser at the bitter end, the final 180 minutes, is just one of them. Chaplains will have to adjust their schedules.
Wow, Kristin. You don’t think the Jesus was a chaplain “spiritual advisor” “at the bitter end, the final 180 minutes” to the two men hung on a cross next to him? Do you think Jesus said, “Tough cookies” to the thieves crucified with him?
“YFC”, the point is repent while you still can because there may not be another chance.
As you recall, one thief cursed Jesus, the other appealed to Him. It comes down to the choices people make and the consequences they must endure, in life and in death.
More “politically correct” lunacy.
Fr. Horan has it wrong: capital punishment is not “pre-meditated murder”; it’s justice.
Disgusted is totally WRONG! The Magisterium has judged that the death penalty in our time is unjust. This teaching was first articulated by St. John Paul II, continued by Benedict, and now by Francis. As recently as June 2016, the Holy Father called the death penalty unjust: “It does not render justice to victims, but instead fosters vengeance. The commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ has absolute value and applies both to the innocent and to the guilty,” the pope said in his message to the meeting in Oslo, Norway. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
“The commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ has absolute value and applies both to the innocent and to the guilty”
This is nonsense. Gonna throw out the Just War theory too and take away one’s right to self-defense? When Francis can answer the dubia and quits lionizing the likes of Emma Bonino, may be then he’ll have something relevant to say.
Because you have written this edison, you must be reminded of what Our Savior said to his apostles and by extension to the present Pontiff and bishops (who have all succeeded into the office of the apostles): “He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me” (Luke 10:16). Disregard and mock the words of the Magisterium to the detriment of your own salvation.
The Commandment in context is: Thou shalt not murder. That is because God gave Moses the right to use the death penalty for certain serious crimes. Murder is the unjust killing of the innocent. Execution is not murder no matter what ones thinks about it.
Sorry Anne T., but you’re wrong. The Magisterium has judged that for our time—not in the time of Moses of whom you speak—the use of the death penalty is tantamount to MURDER! Especially if there are other means now available to defend society against a capital criminal short of putting him to death. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
Good catch. Fr. Horan calling the death penalty murder shows he needs to return to theological studies. The CCC affirms Catholic doctrine that governments may have legitimate recourse to the death penalty, and the Magisterium throughout the ages has universally taught that it is a valid option for states, notwithstanding the flawed personal opinions and non-binding prudential judgments of some recent pontiffs and bishops.
Sorry, but Sorry is wrong again, per Lumen Gentium, article 25, the judgments of the Holy Father and the bishops united to him are to be adhered to with religious submission of mind and will: “This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.”
Plainly put, the Magisterium’s is THE prudential judgment on any given issue.
Additionally, no where in the Catechism or in any Church document does it say that a Catholic may disregard and ignore the teachings of the Magisterium on this or on any issue. No where.
During the executions of the German war criminals Chaplains were present on the scaffolds with the prisoner. What is different here? That’s when you need spiritual solace, right before death.
don’t want to debate death penalty morality BUT
y’all gotta know that Govt / “The State” is NOT
in the mercy business.
and will be increasingly merciless in the future
This is an unjust decision. A chaplain or priest should be with the prisoner right until the moment before death. After all did not the good thief on the cross not be forgiven for his sins by Christ himself just before facing his death. Pray America Pray.
The poster jon very zealously promotes a magisterial positivism, which isn’t Catholic. According to him, anything a pope or bishop says is the truth and should be accepted and obeyed. That isn’t Catholic faith nor Catholic teaching. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him make a positive statement on his own; he only posts to contradict others, usually to castigate them for not agreeing with some pope’s or bishop’s opinion. News flash: opinions are not authoritative.
Again Disgusted is VERY WRONG! The principle (as articulated by St. Ignatius) of thinking with the mind of the Church–“sentire cum ecclesia”– is a VERY CATHOLIC instinct. This deflates and demolishes Disgusted’s false accusation of “magisterial positivism.” Disgusted: in matters of faith and morals, the teachings of the Magisterium are to be adhered to. I have given the correct citation for this from Lumen Gentium, article 25 shown in one of my posts above. Additionally, the CDF’s “Donum Veritatis”, article 23, gives the three levels of assent to any authentic Magisterial teaching. And the teaching on the abolition of the death penalty is AUTHENTIC Magisterial teaching.
To further refute Disgusted’s very wrong notion that the Magisterium–when teaching–is merely giving a personal “opinion,” here’s article 25 from Lumen Gentium: “For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present, he is expounding or defending a doctrine of Catholic faith.”
This is what I mean: jon asserts everything a pope says is infallible. He quotes from documents without understanding them. Dangerously misleading. He asserts magisterial positivism while denying it in the same breath. It is recent popes and bishops who have not thought with the Church when they have erroneously asserted the death penalty is no longer legitimate. The death penalty will always be legitimate. It is in Scripture. Jon doesn’t need a Bible, he just needs to google what a pope’s opinions are.
WRONG AGAIN is Disgusted. Nobody has asserted that “everything a pope says is infallible.” This is called straw-man argument: and it is an illogical one.
Lumen Gentium, article 25 (which I quoted above) refers to when the Holy Father speaks about faith and morals. When he does so (as in a speech, a homily, a message, an Encyclical–all of which John Paul II did concerning the abolition of the death penalty), then Catholics must adhere to it with a religious submission of mind and will because these are AUTHENTIC Magisterial teaching.
Now, what the Holy Father says at the breakfast table, in his sleep, in the shower, in an informal gathering such as at the drinking fountain in Sancta Marta, or on the telephone, or on board…
a plane in front of the media–THESE ARE NOT INFALLIBLE and are NOT AUTHENTIC MAGISTERIAL TEACHING. This includes the infamous and most misunderstood phrase of his, “who am I to judge.”
Folks, this is Catholicism 101. Quite amazed that Disgusted doesn’t know how to make this distinction. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
Lastly, Disgusted refers to something “dangerous.” What is in fact dangerous is when someone who calls himself Catholic should write that is was the “recent popes and bishops who have not thought with the Church.” This is dangerous because it is heretical. Plain and simple.
I believe the reason many are against the death penalty is because they know that they themselves have been involved in the murder of the innocent by approving, voting for, helping to get or performing abortions, or have relatives or friends who have done so. Although there are degrees of guilt, many know subconscienciously that they, too, deserve death. That is the reason I think Pope John Paul II wanted a time of mercy without the death penalty, so people could repent and make right their wrongs. Nevertheless, after the time of mercy, as Sr. Faustina said, will come the time of judgment.
Anne T., sorry but your premise that “many are against the death penalty” is wrong. Didn’t you hear about the proposition in California just last November against the death penalty that failed to get enough votes?
Actually a blessing for the prisoner. Some time ago CC featured a Chaplain George Williams at San Quentin, a Marxist revolutionary not unlike George Horan. Par for the course these days in the hoosegow.
Imagine going to God with Marxist Jesuits like George Horan, George Williams, or Laetare Medalist Gregory Boyle (the three G-Dogs) distracting you.
Whatever one thinks about the death penalty, it is not murder unless the executors know the person is innocent. Murder is the deliberate killing of the innocent. Always has been and always will be, and no one can change that.
Anne T., a report came out in 2014 stating that: “Since 1973, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that’s just 1.6 percent. But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration, the study suggests what most people assumed but dreaded: An untold number of innocent people have been executed.” Why are you people, in light of the moral arguments and the evidence, still cling to this rotting relic from the culture of death?
Jon, we had the death penalty when abortion was illegal, so I would not necessarily say that it is from the culture of death. Abortionists and those who got abortions illegally were not executed, but the abortionists were hit in the pocket books by fines and jail, and/or taking away their licenses. Now they are making millions off of abortions and using these children for horribly cruel purposes. Perhaps we should not have the death penalty for those who commit one murder, but if they commit several, including killing prison guards, what does one do with such people. We also have DNA testing now.
Anonymous, John Paul II identified the death penalty as part of the culture of death. The culture of death did not come into the world with abortion.
As I said before, I left the ballot blank on that issue.