One of the most perplexing and divisive issues for Catholics in Texas continues to be the death penalty. Given the overwhelming support that the death penalty enjoys in this state, it is safe to assume that a large number of practicing Roman Catholics are among its supporters. This appears to put them at odds with the widely publicized official Catholic position of vigorous and vocal opposition to capital punishment. What are the reasons for this difference of opinion? Is there a way out of this dilemma?

There are fervent believers on both sides of this issue, spouting statistics and Bible verses to support their positions. The Old Testament contains a long list of crimes punishable by death, including laboring on the Sabbath (Num 15:32) and cursing a parent (Exod 21:17).

The secular arguments for capital punishment usually mentioned are deterrence, economy, protection, and retribution.

Although it seems reasonable to assume that the death penalty would be a deterrent to capital crimes, this is not supported by any scientific evidence. Most criminologists believe that certainty of punishment is more important than its severity. As the death penalty is seldom carried out, its deterrence value is marginal.

Likewise, the economy argument does not hold water. The truth is that, at least for now, it is much more expensive to execute a person than to jail him for life.

The protection argument, however, does seem to have some validity. Most citizens do not want convicted murderers released from prison. Poorly written laws, inept parole boards, judges, and prison officials have repeatedly allowed the offenders out to rape and kill again.

The death penalty can be seen as society’s frustration with the failure of the judicial system to effectively deal with the issue. The State of Texas, for example, has no true “life term”. The most time that a murderer can receive is 40 years, before he or she is eligible for parole. Complicating this problem is the fact that most criminals are not treated, counseled or rehabilitated during their time in prison. The final argument, retribution, is based on the Old Testament notion of an “eye for an eye”. The victims’ survivors often publicly demand revenge on the murderers to make up for their losses. There is no evidence, however, that this vengeance produces any long term therapeutic benefit for the survivors.

On the anti-death penalty side, the arguments are that it is barbaric, expensive, irrevocable and discriminatory. A local activist, Fr. P. John Mannion, says that “in light of the Gospels, it (the death penalty) is absolutely barbaric” and places the United States in the same human rights category as Iran, Iraq, Libya and China.

We are also one of the very few nations to execute the mentally retarded. Almost all Western civilized nations have outlawed the death penalty with the exception of our own. In addition, it is a penalty that if applied, cannot be undone or recalled.

As a result of new DNA evidence techniques, numerous convicted criminals, including some on death row have been released from prison. Obviously, the justice system has some serious flaws. Compounding the problem is the perception among minority groups that the death penalty is applied more often to minorities. While this may be debatable, there is clear evidence that men from the lower economic classes are by far the most numerous residents on death row. It has already been noted earlier in this article that it is far more expensive today to execute than to confine an offender.

While American society as a whole may be divided on this subject, the official Catholic position is firmly set against the death penalty, with very few exceptions. The latest version of the Latin Catechism (Sept 1997) issued by the Vatican allows for capital punishment only “if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor” (2267).

Closing the window even more was Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae in which he stated that the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” Fr. Mannion believes that any exception for executions allowed by the Church represents a fundamental flaw and inconsistency in the Church’s teaching which also says that the sanctity of life admits no exceptions when referring to abortion and euthanasia.

The October 18, 1997 statement of the Catholic Bishops of Texas echoes and amplifies the Catechism with the belief that “the compassionate example of Christ calls us to respect the God-given image found even in hardened criminals.” The Bishops also lament the fact that “a large majority of Americans, including Catholics, support capital punishment as a means of dealing with crime even in light of strong evidence of its ineffectiveness, its racially biased application and its staggering costs both materially and emotionally.”

The statistics kept by the American Bar Association and the NAACP seem open to interpretation regarding the allegation of racial bias. Recent figures show that of the 3122 inmates on death row in America, 48% are white, 41% are black, 8% are Latino, 2% are Native American and 1% are Asian. Of the 155 prisoners executed in Texas since the reenactment of the death penalty starting in 1982, 79 were white, 52 were black and 24 were “other”.

Nationwide, the defendant-victim pairings are also subject to interpretation. White defendants and white victims made up 58% of the pairings, followed by black defendants and white victims 23%, black defendants and black victims 12% and Latino defendants and white victims 2%. The question is, is it demographics or discrimination, or both?

Perhaps the most compelling document on this subject is the 1980 U.S. Catholic Bishops’ statement on capital punishment, which, although quoting the same secular arguments against capital punishment, concentrates on the religious aspects of the controversy and relies heavily on the example and teaching of Jesus Christ. It says “we must not remain unmindful of the example of Jesus who urges upon us a teaching of forbearance in the face of evil (Matt 5:38-42) and forgiveness of injuries (Matt 18:21-35).”

The Bishops called upon us “to contemplate the crucified Christ who set us the supreme example of forgiveness and the triumph of compassionate love.” The responsibility of the Church is “to provide a community of faith and trust in which God’s grace can heal the personal and spiritual wounds caused by crime and in which we can all grow by sharing one another’s burdens and sorrows.”

Although both sides are comfortable with their moral positions, there is reason for optimism that a rational compromise can be achieved. A recent poll by the Houston Chronicle found that support for the death penalty had dropped in Texas from a high of 86% in 1994 to 68% at the end of 1997. The execution of Karla Faye Tucker seems to have caused a lot of Texans to reconsider their positions.

Furthermore, 72% of those polled would be in favor of having “life without parole” as a substitute for capital punishment. A San Antonio Catholic, Mrs. Evelyn Guererro is a member of “Parents of Murdered Children” and the mother of Judy Guerrero, whose brutal murder remains unsolved after 9 years. She currently supports the death penalty, but says she would probably change her mind if she could be assured that murderers would be locked away forever, and would be rendered incapable of repeating their crimes. This seems to be a position that meets both sociological and theological concerns.

While it will not satisfy those zealots on either the extreme right or extreme left, it seems to be an attainable goal that our state representatives could adopt without committing political suicide. Hopefully, Texas legislators will take another look at this problem in the 76th session meeting in January. We must pray that the Gospels and the grace of God will eventually lead them to a correct and merciful position as exemplified by the life and words of Our Savior.