Pope John Paul II on many occasions declared his personal opposition to the death penalty, but never made an ex cathedra statement on this issue. However, this situation created confusion that created a widespread belief that the official Catholic Church teaching on the death penalty had changed. However, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, approved by Pope John Paul II, has this to say: Id., 2266. Would you agree that the Catholic Church's teaching on the death penalty remains unchanged?
Can you confirm that If a Catholic priest abuses a child and the local diocese covers up the act and as a result the child grows up with a hatred of the church and rejects it Then the priest, if he repents will still go to heaven but the victim is condemned to burn for eternity.
whats the reason for an official statement being made "ex cathedra" for the immaculation of mary in 1854? I guess my question is, why, at least 1800years after the birth, life, and death of Jesus, Mary and Joseph was there a reason to declare her, without sin? Could any of the church "dogmas" have still stood had it not been "declared"?
You left out a rather crucial bit in that quote. It goes on to say: "The primary effect of punishment is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment has the effect of preserving public order and the safety of persons. Finally, punishment has a medicinal value; as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender. 2267. If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority should 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 I should think if pesky little countries like the European one I live in manage to keep their public safe by just having a safe prison-system, the US should be able to accomplish the same. So as a good Catholic you should pray that one of your former Popes goals - to end the death penalty - will be accomplished in the US: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/pope-death-penalty-end_n_1120911.html
Blackrook, Junobet, This is what the Catechism has to say about the death penalty that has not been mentioned by either of you: I don't believe the teaching has changed as much as certain circumstances have changed. The Catholic Church has never taught that criminals MUST be executed. The problem with executing criminals is that it takes away any time for repentance or redemption. On the other hand, innocent people must be safeguarded against criminals. We have supermax prisons for this reason. We didn't have any supermax prisons a hundred years ago. If they can be imprisoned without the risk of harming anyone else, then the death penalty generally shouldn't be used. The Church has has always left it up to the state to make this distinction. The general idea with the idea is actually pretty consistent with the Church's view on the "just war" doctrine. It is permissible to kill in war to protect the innocent. Here is a good link on the Catholic belief on the death penalty: http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/did-the-church-change-its-teaching-on-the-death-penalty
No. I talked with a priest about a similar issue, a person who was turned off by religion by a parent. The priest said that hell isn't an automatic thing if that person is doing the best that they can. It's a Catholic principle called baptism of desire. - - - Updated - - - From what I gather, no "ex cathedra" statements are made that aren't generally what the Church has believed for some time. Church dogmas stood for 18 centuries without it.
This is one of those things I've changed my mind on. As a younger man, I was pro-death penalty. Now, I'm anti-death penalty. The chances of making mistakes are too high, and honestly, life in prison without possibility of parole is a much worse punishment. That said, if a person manages to escape from a supermax, and is recaptured, I have no problem with the death penalty for them. In that case, they cannot be held safely away from society.
I can't at confirm who goes to hell or not. Although, considering that this person's view of the Church had been marred by the priest, I would assume that both would go to heaven. That is if the priest is actually sincere about his conversion and not just some poof! I suddenly feel sorry now kinda thing.
I began studying NDE accounts a great deal back in 1990. Since that time I got the impression that Catholics would be significantly more likely than Protestants or Messianic Jews to take near death experience accounts seriously as probably being genuine encounters with God or angels. Do you think that I am right in this assumption? http://www.christianforums.com/t7647330/ Do you believe that some NDE accounts fit with scripture? Yes, I believe that some NDE accounts are genuine meetings with the Messiah or angels. 6 35.29% Maybe but perhaps some NDE accounts are of a meeting with Satan?! 4 23.53% No, the near death experience accounts are mostly false and misleading. 7 41.18% I don't know enough about this subject yet to express an opinion?! 1 5.88% Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 17. You have already voted on this poll
One of the reasons why I think Catholic would be more inclined to believe NDE accounts is because Baruch 6:6 seems to identify the being of light of NDE fame who asks people something to the effect of "what have you done with your life that you can show me" as being none other than the Word/Logos who became Jesus/Yehoshua??!! http://www.drbo.org/chapter/30006.htm "[6] For my angel is with you: And I myself will demand an account of your souls."
