The Vatican changed Thursday the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s teaching on the permissibility of the death penalty, which the Church has taught is legitimate in limited cases, stating the penalty is ‘inadmissible,’ and its elimination should be sought.
A new draft of paragraph 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Aug. 2, after Pope Francis approved it in May.
Quoting Pope Francis’ words in a speech of Oct. 11, 2017, the new paragraph states, in part, that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,’ and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”
Reasons for changing the teaching, the paragraph says, include: the increasing effectiveness of detention systems, growing understanding of the unchanging dignity of the person, and leaving open the possibility of conversion.
Until now, the Church has consistently taught that the state has the authority to use the death penalty, in cases of “absolute necessity,” though with the qualification that the Church considered such situations to be extremely rare.
Full story at Catholic News Agency.
It should be noted that the Catechism is not an authority document but is only a document which reflects authority. Since the Church teaches something different, this would put the Catechism on a collision course with the Magisterium.
It would take an ecumenical council to decide the matter. Any development of doctrine from the council would still have to be consistent with [and not contradict] prior teaching.
Note: I may have been over-exuberant when mentioning that it would take a council to decide the matter.
This is ludicrous thinking. The Catechism IS a product of the Magisterium. They wrote it! To pose a conflicting and false dichotomy between the Catechism and the Magisterium is hilariously warped thinking!
Jon,
I don’t think you understand the difference between authority and catechesis. The Catechism was issued by the Vatican [not the magisterium] to aid bishops and catechists in creating catechetical instruction. Its authority doesn’t come from itself but from documents that have authority. I have two questions for you:
Do you think there’s a reason why people typically reference the Council of Trent rather than the Catechism of Trent? If the Trenten catechism contradicts the Council, which do you think carries weight?
Seitz’ premises here need correction. The Catechism can only be printed with the authorization of the Magisterium. It is NOT the Catechism that “authorizes” bishops to teach. It is Our Lord who has given authority to the apostles to teach the flock. This is from Scriptural.
Francis was wrong to do this. Quite simply wrong. He has introduced heresy into the Catechism. Now one is left to wonder about the indefectibility of the Church.
Complete garbage; an exemplary of the Vatican II “NewChurch,” of which Francis is the premier example. The Vatican governance has become like a Latin American banana republic, with little recognition or respect to the “Deposit of Faith.” How much additional effort will it be to now strike Catechism rules on homosexual sex and the “disordered” nature of being homosexual (or priestly celibacy, or female ordination, or many other things). Don’t think for a moment that this “breakthrough” was not fully thought of and advanced; start the wedge with little things, then it will grow. Don’t stand for this.
Have you, SC, even read the Catechism as it pertains to the death penalty. If you had, you will find the Francis is TOTALLY with the “deposit of the faith.” Check out Catechism 2267 to know what the “traditional” teaching of the Church is on this matter before you call anyone “garbage.”
“jon”: you can always be counted on to mislead the argument. Catholic Tradition and its Catechism — yes, § 2267 — do not exclude use of the death penalty, until the unilateral power grab of Francis. His insanity would insert several subjective, Sociology 101, reasons for ignoring almost 2000 years of Catholic teaching and dogma (this is the “garbage” referenced in the post, jon). As many, including theologians, are saying, Francis lacks authority to sua sponte void dogma in favor of his goofy, Zombie-Liberal personal philosophies. See, e.g., “Killing Capital Punishment: Francis vs. the Catholic Church,” by Christopher Ferrara, and, “Heresy in the Catechism,” by Steve Skojec. Rejoicing in homosexuality is next.
Sorry SC but given the circumstances today–that is, with the existence of other means to defend society short of the death penalty such as the present penal system—the use of the death penalty IS EXCLUDED in our times! That’s the whole point of Catechism 2267! Your talk about some “power grab” is ridiculous.
No, you’re wrong and missing. the point. The point is that the death penalty cannot be absolutely excluded, which Francis has done, acting entirely outside the realm of his competence as Successor of Peter because he cannot contradict Catholic Faith. Francis has claimed that the death penalty is contrary to the Gospel and contrary to human dignity. He’s wrong.
Let’s see now: who am I, and the rest of the world, to believe is correct: the successor of St. Peter, or someone hiding behind the name “Anonymous”? Folks, Francis has NOT contradicted the faith because, yes, the death penalty CAN BE EXCLUDED and deemed INADMISSIBLE if circumstances (one of the three founts of morality: check your Catechism, peoples!) have changed!
“jon” your Zombie-Liberal position, and that of Francis, is indefensible. The point, jon, if you care to learn anything about the Church and its governance, is that the Pope cannot simply do something like this because he wants to. Of course, a number will say that he can, but nope, Francis cannot be like Obama and just do what he wants to do. Oh yes, the homo-lobby is already up and at it, too. Take a look at New Ways Ministry article of Aug. 3, “What Does Change in Church’s Death Penalty Teaching Mean For LGBT People?” You know, and everyone should know, that Francis is setting us all up for the ultimate perversion, ex nihilo.
Sorry but St. Christopher’s response here does not address the issue at hand. Francis did not “simply do something because he wants to.” Rather, he has merely CONTINUED the magisterium of John Paul II and Benedict concerning the inadmissibility of the death penalty in our time.
No he did not continue the magisterium of previous Popes, he contradicted them. Stop trying to deceive us. We are not that stupid.
Sorry to have to inform you “Anonymous” that JP2 spoke vehemently and repeatedly against the death penalty: anyone who’d deny that would be practicing historical revisionism. And Benedict praised nation-states that abolished the death penalty. These are recorded facts. Therefore, Francis is continuing the teaching of these two pontiffs. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
Jon,
John Paul II never taught that Church teaching prohibits use of the death penalty.
“May the death penalty, an unworthy punishment still used in some countries, be abolished throughout the world.”
–Pope John Paul II at the Papal Mass in the Regina Coeli Prison, Rome, July 9, 2000.
Respect life!
Jon,
The context tells it all, and I think I now know where you’re coming from. John Paul was merely giving his opinion in a homily. This is different then when he expounded on Church teaching as it relates to the death penalty.
For example, as a catechist, I’m very careful to teach the Church’s view on different subjects. I also have my own views and opinion which I feel are consistent with the Church but which are not necessarily Church teaching.
There is no magisterium of Pope John Paul II. It is not like an administration. There are not previous magisteriums.
The magisterium of the Catholic Church is it’s teaching authority. It exists from Peter until now. It does not change with each new Pope.
Sorry, but popes when delivering a homily are not merely “giving their opinion.” They are instructing and guiding the Church in their capacity as Shepherd of the Universal Church. I say that the folks who are most dismayed by Francis’ words are the same ones who have not been paying attention for the past 30 years to the speeches, homilies, statements, messages from John Paul II and Benedict. These two popes have consistently called for the abolition, the end, of the death penalty.
I’m not following the Pope on this and I don’t have to because he’s wrong. When will the corruption of the clergy and the church end, o Lord?
“I’m not following the Pope on abortion and I don’t have to because he’s wrong.”
C&H I know you are being sarcastic, but the Pope is wrong on the Death Penalty, when was the last time he said a word abortion, not a word on the tragic result of the Irish repealing the abortion law.
Gee, homosexuals go along with that too, in their thoughts and in their words.
Upholder of the Faith or archechict of dissent with the Deopsit of Faith and Sacred Tradition?
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/pope-francis-change-to-catechism-contradicts-natural-law-and-the-deposit-of
Additional interpretation found here:
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/the-devil-is-in-the-details-pope-francis-changes-catechism-on-the-death-pen
Looks like the Holy Father is concentrating on upsetting two millenia of Church teaching and sacred tradition, instead of addressing the sexual abuse issues (adults and minors) that continually haunts the Chirch.
St. Augustine, St. Charles Borromeo, St. Thomas Aquinas, St Robert Bellarmine, St Clement of Alexandria, St Alphonsus Liguori—and many more— all developed a consistent moral Catholic Teaching on the just use of the death penalty. Furthermore, Pastor Aeternus (1870), III: “The Pope cannot disclose new teaching..”
And over in this corner we have Pope Bergoglio of Argentina.
False teaching, false church. Can ye not discern the signs of the times? (Mt. 16:3)
not to mention the Old & New Testament, etc. Does his mean that no matter how many people a person murders, how many lives he steals, he is allowed to keep his life? The one who murders multiples and spends life in prison and murders fellow prisoners, prison guards, and puts hits to murder those on the outside still gets to keep his life – is this fair and just? The Scriptures and most of Church history says no. Mercy is given to the one on death row, he has time to repent and knows the date and time of his execution, mercy not given to his victims. Pope Benedict XVI said Catholics can have various opinions on this topic but apparently not anymore. If one upholds Biblical teachings on this issue is one now a heretic?
Iiiiit’s Dubia Time again.
“Dignity of man” is a modernist Vatican II construct. Man must EARN his dignity!
Traditional Catholic Church teaching: The Death Penalty is Just Punishment.
Archbishop LeFebvre: “What is dignity? According to Catholic tradition, man derives dignity from his perfection, i.e, from his knowledge of the truth and his acquisition of the good. Man is worthy of respect in accordance with his intention to obey God, not in accordance with his errors, which will inevitably lead to sin. When Eve the first sinner succumbed, she said, “The serpent deceived me.” Her sin and that of Adam led to the downfall of human dignity, from which we have suffered ever since. Source: ‘Open Letter To Confused Catholics.’
Michael Davies: The title…
Nina: You’re quoting a man who died excommunicated from the Church, which is why you got it wrong. Instead, please read Catechism 1700 where the Church teaches that “The dignity of the human person is rooted in his creation in the image and likeness of God…” Man DOES NOT earn his dignity, but rather is invested with it by virtue of the fact that he is a human being!
Jon, you’re getting it wrong because you’re not looking to the content of what is being said but rather being blinded it seems by a person’s position. It is not an offense against God for the State to carry out its duty before God. And it is not dignified to pretend that adults who choose freely to commit crimes are not, by their very actions, choosing to be subject to said penalties.
Our Lord God Himself commanded that others be killed by His chosen people. You are losing sight of the dignity of the Almighty it seems.
Ann Malley’s response DOES NOT speak to my point. She is speaking about the choice of a criminal to do the crime, which is not in dispute. Regardless of the crime–and this is the Holy Father’s point–the criminal DOES NOT LOSE his human dignity! I say, the Holy Spirit indeed has chosen the right Pontiff for our times, especially for folks like AMalley. God bless the Magisterium! Listen to it! Respect life!
jon— a sincere question. are you asserting that, by his “redaction” of the Catechism, Pope Francis is teaching that the death penalty is “intrinsically evil”? A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice.
Nina,
If you were correct, it becomes fairly easy to justify treating people as “means” rather than “ends.” This is , essentially, the thought of Karl Marx and Communism.
seems consistent with the Church teaching against abortion.
No, it’s not. Opposition to abortion protects innocents. Opposition to the death penalty protects murderers.
mike m,
I would say that John Paul II’s view protects life. Francis’s view, on the other hand, prevents a state that doesn’t have effective means to protect innocent inmates, guards, or the public from executing an offending murderer.
Oh? so which states do not “have effective means”?
Additionally, the category is effective means to PROTECT SOCIETY–that is, the INNOCENT, the general population; not the guilty. The Church can hardly condone the death penalty merely to protect the guilty!
Have you been to Syria lately?
Add in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Congo, South Sudan…
I say the words of Pope Francis on the death penalty is NEEDED MESSAGE in states like Syria where torture, abuse, and murder of its prisoners are sadly rampant. The message proclaiming the inherent dignity of all human life, including the most heinous criminal, is JUST THE RIGHT MESSAGE to send to these regimes! Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
Jon,
What you said about the politics of Syria is a matter of opinion and may or may not be wrong. But the subject at hand is whether the death penalty is intrinsically wrong — a different issue.
Time for more dubia:
1) Does the magisterium now teach that capital punishment is intrinsically evil?
2) If yes to #1, did previous popes, bishops, priests and laity sin grievously when they supported capital punishment?
3) If yes to #1, was the previous magisterium in error when it taught that capital punishment was justifiable based on Scripture, Tradition and natural law?
4) If yes to #2, is the Church still indefectible with regard to teaching about faith and morals?
5) If no to #1, is it possible for a Catholic in good conscience to support capital punishment?
Outstanding logical analysis, Rebecca.
Your questions however will go unanswered: Because they point in one direction: the Truth. God cannot change and His Truth cannot change. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever.” (Heb 13:8) What is true Catholic teaching is what the Catholic Church has always taught, at all times, everywhere (St. Vincent of Lerins). St Paul warns that even if an angel were to teach a different Gospel, it is cursed (Gal. 1:8, 2 Cor. 11:4). What we have received through the centuries is the truth, and even the pope cannot disclose new doctrine
Rebecca, I agree with Anonymous 2 that your post goes to the heart of the matter. I assume that your questions are posed to jon and other muddled writers. But don’t expect a reply. Especially, from jon. He restricts himself to infallible sermonizing. He NEVER responds to a challenge. Perhaps analytical thinking far exceeds his intellectual capacity.
#1 no
#5 no
#5 yes
fixed it for you
Do you understand that something that is not intrinsically evil is still evil?
can we please stop all
the changes – just for a change ?
You can chuck the Catechism now because Bergoglio has shown it’s not worth the paper it’s printed on. If this can be revised, what next? Everything can be revised. Then there’s no confidence in the truth of Church teaching and no confidence that what the Catechism says is right today won’t be wrong tomorrow.
Sorry, 2,000 years of Catholic Tradition is not wrong. The death penalty is legitimate and will always be. This, of course, is only the beginning. Next? The total disarmament of citizens and governments. No personal defense, no national military defense. I’m sure that I am not the only one who saw this coming years ago when he stated that all forms of the killing of humans was condemned by the Ten Commandments.
The convenient timing of Pope Francis’ announcement cannot be overlooked.
Did some friends in the Vatican need a change of topic from the misdeeds of Cardinal McCarrick? A shot in the arm from their liberal allies?
It’s just sad the comments here: clearly they haven’t even read the soon-to-be replaced paragraph 2267 of the Catechism. It says that the “traditional” Church teaching is that when the death penalty “is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor” can there be recourse to it! Well guess what folks there are now other ways through the penal system. And Francis points that out in the new paragraph 2267! The Pope hasn’t changed doctrine. Circumstances have changed, making the use of the death penalty inadmissible today. Listen to the living Magisterium! Respect life!
That’s not the traditional teaching. It was JPII’s opinion.
“jon” you continue to bleat nothing but noise. Centuries of Catholic thinking — See “Anonymous 2” post of 3:33 (Aug. 2) above — have considered and refined the Catholic position. Here is what a recent Pope –.Pope Pius XII — said, “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.” Francis cannot simply by fiat declare that all Catholic thinkers were wrong. The “just” thief on the Cross accepted his sentence and offered only a prayer in repentance to Christ. And, he got Heaven in return. Not good…
Excuse me, SC, but there are MORE RECENT popes than Pius XII! During Pius’ pontificate the death penalty IS ADMISSIBLE. But not in our more recent times.
“jon,” you seem happy with limiting the Catholic Church to a political realm where the only thing that matters is who is the present pontiff. We are not a banana republic, throwing out what has sustained Mankind for 2000 years because a theological nutter assumes power (and how he did it is open to serious analysis; see the discussion by Bishop Gracida). Pius XII is used to show that a recent Pope adhered to Catholic dogma and for the right reason. The fact of “we have better jails now” means nothing; the quality of capture was not the sole reason to support the Death Penalty historically. But truth never bothers Zombie-Liberals, who want nothing more than to remake the Church in many ways. As St. Athanasius said, you may have the…
Replace any other paragraph, while you’re at it, change it all.
And tomorrow, change it again.
No firm anchor in thus Church. What is ordered today will be prohibited tomorrow.
The Catholic News Agency should learn the meaning of a ‘runon sentance’. The first paragraph, a single sentance, has over 35 words. Keep it short and direct.
mike m,
I agree, unless they were translating from the Latin. :)
Yes, Anonymous 2! I respect our Church’s ancient teachings, Magisterium, and Deposit of Faith! Our current post-Conciliar popes seem to want to place Man at the center of the universe— with little respect for God! The Catechism must be correctly written and published, with only the true teachings of our authentic Catholic Church– not the whims of one goofed-up pope! Erroneous catechisms should be stopped, and a world-wide recall of them all should occur!
You crack me up sometimes LM. People were once declared heretics for saying that the sun was the center of the solar system, and that the earth is not the immovable center of the universe. It was in that era that the “Church’s ancient teaching” put MAN at the center. But I suppose the Inquisition was right, huh?
gosh you are ignorant about history. what a simplistic distortion of what happened.
YFC– Are you really a good, sincere “fellow Catholic?” The Bible is not a modern science textbook, and Christ did not come to teach science! A long time ago, before the development of science, people had very different ideas about this subject. The Church publicly recognized her error, regarding the earth revolving around the sun. She has also apologized publicly, for the mistakes of the Inquisition! And since Vatican II, the Church seems to place Man at the center of the universe— not God! “Almighty Man”– who can do as he pleases– and God, so what??
I am not going to get into this death penalty argument, but the inquisition was right about Galileo because Galileo could not prove his theory since he was using the wrong methods, The pope and other scientists at that time told him not to present as fact what he could not prove, and he was too stubborn to listen. The pope was well educated and thought Galileo might be right, but the theory had to be proven, which another scientist or scientists later did with the RIGHT methods.
By the way, this does not take away from the fact that Galileo was a great scientist, just that he had faults too. From what i have read, he was not tortured nor was he executed, just put under house arrest in what was pretty much a mansion at that time. If I remember correctly, it was the house of a relative.
May the Lord bless you.
Praise be to God for Pope Francis! He is a wonderful Pope. Remember Jesus was an innocent victim of capital punishment! Also, the Church’s teaching on the death penalty evolved over time; the early church fathers and popes said very little about capital punishment. As evident by the work of the Innocence Project, the death penalty is applied in an unjust manner in the USA and innocent men (mostly black men) have been put to death. Pope Francis’s teaching on the death penalty is consistent with the Church’s pro-life efforts.
Time to brush off the old theologians’ texts about heretic popes and whether they are automatically excommunicated or need some sort of forum (e.g. College of Cardinals) to be judged and removed from office. Bergolio the Destroyer has just jumped the shark. Same with his CDF flack, who should have told Bergolio that he was going a bridge too far. Things were well-enough with the Catechism as it was.
I made a comment like that but mine was deleted. Yours snuck by.
Anonymous,
It’s rare but I’ve occasionally had comments that were never posted. I suspect your comments got caught in a glitch. If it happens again, I’d recommend reposting.
That’s it. This pope has exceeded his authority and attempted to teach grave error. He has become a heretic. Now what wise St. Robert Bellarmine speculated about concerning a pope who becomes a heretic has come true: and the See of Peter has been automatically vacated because a heretic cannot be pope.
jon— a sincere question. are you asserting that, by his “redaction” of the Catechism, Pope Francis is teaching that the death penalty is “intrinsically evil”? A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice.
You think it’s heresy? You need to learn what heresy is and isn’t. It is not heresy.
If you are Catholic, and called to jury duty, and in a very extreme case of a very violent and dangerous ISIS Mafia-style “crime boss” and repeated mass murderer– and the jurors and judge are thinking that capital punishment might be appropriate for the violent, dangerous “crime boss” and mass murderer– appropriate also, for our duty to protect society– what will you do, as a responsible Catholic juror?? Would Pope Francis care about protection of innocent mothers and babies, and the sick, handicapped, and elderly of society?? And poor Christians attending Mass at churches where evil ISIS bombings occur?? What would he say is the right thing to do?
In cases (hope they are few!) in which capital punishment might be a possible punishment for the criminal– what will all the Catholic civic leaders, lawmakers, and judges do, in all countries, worldwide?? What will the Pope say to them? Civic leaders, lawmakers, and judges, all have a big responsibility to protect the people (not protect the dangerous, violent criminals!) whom they serve, in their countries!
Correction: the pope changed what one paragraph in the catechism says but he didn’t change church teaching because he can’t do that. This is all part of the master plan to permit different moralities without formally changing church teaching. Just watch: changing the wording of the paragraphs on homosexuality are next.
I see that the pontificator is back to brag about his pet issue getting some reinforcement from the pope and tell everyone else how wrong they are to be critical of a pope making a change to the catechism that shouldn’t be made.
The death penalty is affirmed in Scripture. Case closed. The Church for 2,000 years taught the death penalty was acceptable. Case closed and sealed in concrete. Natural law validates the use of the death penalty. Case close, sealed in concrete, and buried at the bottom of the ocean.
The death penalty’s legitimacy cannot be disputed by any intelligent and educated person. So who’s running the church and our dioceses?
Folks, let me help you all out here. The death penalty is NOT an “intrinsic good.” It is not necessarily good at all times and in any circumstance. It is admissible during the time of Moses, and the time of Our Lord, even during the time of Pius XII, but not in our time. OK? It is always tragic and sad when one has to take the life of another because of the inherent dignity of all human life, even that of the most heinous criminal (Francis’s point).
The CHANGE is in the circumstances–namely as John Paul II pointed out throughout his pontificate–that there are now other means to defend society short of killing the criminal. To kill a criminal for society’s self-defense when there are now other means to defend us is CRUEL…
and UNNECESSARY! Do read Catechism 1754: circumstances “contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness” of an action. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
Shall a German war criminal who killed thousands of Jews in World War II, be given the same punishment in a War Crimes court– as an ISIS “crime boss” and mass murderer criminal would be given, in today’s era?? What is cruel and unjust, is always cruel and unjust— no matter what era people live in! Isn’t the worth and dignity of a German war criminal’s life, the same as the worth and dignity of the ISIS war criminal’s life?? Church teachings on crime and punishment, should always be consistent, for all eras! Some Christian religious groups (i.e. the Amish) live totally separate from the rest of the “fallen” world, and are total pacifists– period. Is that more “Christ-like??”
When the times changes, the Church’s teachings change…
Remember folks Jon is a self appointed theologian he knows more than anyone including the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church…
If Church teaching can change because the times have changed, then anything the Church teaches can be changed at any time. The Church can change its teaching on drunkenness, fornication, contraception, and revenge and we all go out and do whatever we feel like doing.
This is a seriously wrong understanding of BASIC Catholic moral theology. Those things you mention–such as fornication and contraception–are INTRINSICALLY EVIL. The death penalty however is NOT an “intrinsic good”. You people are treating it as if it were! That’s the flaw in your thinking. To think that we can now “do whatever we feel like doing” just because the Holy Father has judged that the death penalty is inadmissible–given in the change in circumstances–is seriously flawed thinking as well.
The Church can change its teachings on what things are intrinsically evil and what things are not. The times are always changing.
There is no basis to change the CCC based upon subjective feelings about a “change in circumstances.” That view is simply wrong, and illogical, and a pretext for what is surely to come next, a wholesale group of changes based upon “a change in circumstances.” Nope, not going to happen, at least not for believing Catholics. You nutters can go ahead and admit women to the priesthood, play dress-up with them, embrace the “gifts and qualities” of homosexuals, marry them all day, whatever you wish.
But you lack faith in doing so. Such changes mean nothing.
All these machinations over something of minor importance. There is no valid evidence that the death penalty discourages murder. Just look at this week’s killings in Chicago. There is much evidence that the legal system jails people for a murder that are later found innocent because of DNA matching. Except for a few instances, people on death row aren’t murdered by the state anyway because there are too many things wrong with the process. Commentators on this site are all too quick to tell people to follow the Popes’ teachings unless they don’t like their teachings. Then, in that case, he doesn’t have the authority to teach that with which they disagree.
Funny how that works.
“Bob One”: No “rational” basis test is ever used to determine whether one or another dogma ought to be changed. In fact, as a good number of theologians have said, “dogmas do not evolve.” The fact of recognizing the right of a state to execute a criminal has nothing to do with whether other criminals are discouraged from murdering others as a result.
St. Christopher,
There is the concept in Church history known as the Development of Doctrine. This occurs when a greater understanding of a doctrine/dogma becomes known through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
In Jon’s case, though, he appears to believes in the development of contradictory doctrine whereby a doctrine develops to the point of contradiction. If true, this would mean that the Church and the Popes are not infallible. Thus, his argument is inherently self-defeating if he claims that the Pope is infallible.
The Church teaches that the Pope and the bishops in union with him are the authentic interpreters of tradition and the Scriptures for our times. They judge the circumstances of our times and judge the morality of actions, in accord with Scripture and tradition. Folks, this is basic Catholicism 101. Plus, there is NOTHING in what Francis said about the death penalty that deviates from the “traditional” teaching of the Church on this issue. I mean, just check Catechism 2267. That citation alone justifies…
the Holy Father’s words condemning the death penalty. Listen to the living Magisterium. Respect life!
2 Popes different views I think it’s because of Generation Culture dividend. Pros or Cons there is one better we need to pray everyday that’s inevitable.