A Letter from the Kentucky
Bishops
December 1996
In the Pope's 1995 message, delivered in Rutherford, NJ, he calls on
American Catholics "to be committed to the defense of life in all its
stages," challenging all of us to renew our efforts to end state-sanctioned
killing. Our new Catechism of the Catholic Church (1995) charges us with
seeking "bloodless means" to protect our society from acts of violence, and
not answer violence with yet more violence.
First published in 1984, our
pastoral letter,"Choose Life: Reflections on the Death Penalty," sought to
teach Roman Catholics and all persons of good will to reflect on the
sacredness of the human person. We now re-issue our pastoral letter to mark
the more than two decades which have passed, and more than 350 persons
executed, since the United States Supreme Court re-instated the death
penalty in 1976.
Since that time much has
changed and yet much has remained the same in Kentucky. We are now joined in
our call to respect the dignity of all human life by our brother Bishop
Robert W. Muench. Bishop of Covington. Three men in Kentucky's maximum
security prison in Eddyville are awaiting the life or death verdict from
their final round of court appeals. Twenty six other persons are living on
death row. Our state's Governor, Paul E. Patton, has said in no uncertain
terms that he will not use the power granted him to stop the killing, and
Kentucky's death chamber has been readied for its first execution since
1962.
We are thus compelled to again
spread the Church's continued teaching of opposition to the death penalty.
In our 1994 video production,"Capital Punishment: The Death of Morality," we
sought to educate our young people that it is a paradox to kill people in
order to show that killing people is wrong. We have been inspired by the
example and teachings of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II's call to reject
our growing culture of death, in Evangelium Vitae (1995).
We remain hopeful that through
our teachings and re-issuing this pastoral letter that all Kentuckians will
reflect on this issue and join with US in our call to end the violence and
stop the killing.
Reflections on the
Death Penalty
Yahweh, our Lord, how great
your name throughout the earth! ...I look up at your heavens, made by
your fingers, at the moon and stars you set in place~ah, what is man1
that you should spare a thought for him, the son of man that you should
care for him? Yet you have made him little less than a god, you have
crowned him with glory and splendor..." (Psalm 8: 1-6)2
With these words, the psalmist
meditated upon the great dignity of the human person in God's creation. The
Church in every age has striven to make this prayer her own and to
understand more deeply what this vision of humanity as "little less than a
god" means for our treatment of one another.
The Vision
It is out of this vision of the
psalmist that we, the bishops of the Catholic Conference of Kentucky, speak
to the issue of capital punishment. We wish to situate our teaching in the
context of what has become the basis of all Catholic social teaching - the
fundamental dignity of the human person. In the words of the Vatican
Declaration on Religious Freedom,"A sense of the dignity of the human person
has been impressing itself more and more deeply on the consciousness of the
contemporary man."3 We make our own the words of Pope John Paul
II who has frequently asserted that human dignity is at the heart of the
Gospel: "Think how important and precious human beings must be in their
creator's sight if they 'gained so marvelous and great redeemer and if God
gave 'His only Son' in order that the human race might 'not die but have
eternal life.' As a matter of fact, this profound wonder at the value and
dignity of the human person is called 'Gospel',that is 'Good News'."4
The Challenge
In this pastoral letter we
share the results of our exploration of the issue of capital punishment
which have led us to serious questions regarding the morality of the use of
the death penalty. We conclude that it should be abolished. We invite
Catholics and those in the larger community in Kentucky to join us in the
challenge to reinterpret for our times the truth about human dignity
expressed in the words of the psalmist:
"What is man that you should
spare a thought for him, the son of man that you should care for him?"5
The Complexity
We note with alarm and with
increasing dismay that there are over 1200 human beings awaiting legal
execution in the United States, twenty of whom are on death row in Kentucky.
We recognize that the issue of capital punishment is a complex one that has
many legal and political implications, especially at a time in history when
excessive crime and other factors have moved the majority of the American
population (75% by some polls) to favor the death penalty. We affirm from
the outset that we are concerned for all persons affected by crime,
especially the victims and their families. By our opposition to the death
penalty, we do not want to be insensitive to the sufferings of these victims
and we urge a compassionate response to meet their needs.
Catholic teaching has always
recognized the right of the state to inflict punishment. There is a
difference in the possession of a right and its use. Given the circumstances
of today, we question whether the use of capital punishment is morally
justified. "Without intending to condemn capital punishment as manifestly
immoral in principle, there is an evident and growing awareness in the
Church that the death penalty no longer can be seen as a valid form of
punishment for serious crimes."6
The Question of
Deterrence
Traditionally, punishment has
been administered for one or more of the following reasons: deterrence,
retribution, rehabilitation of the criminal, and the protection of society.
On the question of deterrence, there is a great deal of disagreement about
the value of capital punishment to deter future crime. However, it should be
clear that "Any punishment to have deterrent value must be swift, sure and
certain."7 The almost endless appeals process makes it impossible
to use the death penalty as swift and sure punishment. The small number of
persons convicted of capital offenses who actually receive the death
sentence also lessens its deterrent value. Professor Anthony Amsterdam
testified to this effect before a House subcommittee:
"No punishment is less
swift or less sure today than capital punishment. Used in this fashion,
the only fashion in which our society can tolerate it at all, how can it
deter? What prospective murderer, after all, will be deterred by a
penalty whose risk is less and less predictable than the risk he runs
driving to and from his crime on a crowded highway."8
Another strong reason for
questioning the deterrent value of capital punishment lies in the very
nature of most capital crimes, especially murder. These crimes fall into
three categories: they are committed under the influence of either strong
emotion or alcohol and drugs; or they are committed by people who do not
expect to get caught; or they are committed by terrorists or psychopathic
personalities. It is hard to imagine that the rational thinking required for
deterrence to be effective would be a factor in any of these cases.9
The Question of
Retribution
A second justification of
punishment is retribution. Many use the Bible to justify the use of
vengeance. There are certain references to vengeance in the Bible. In fact,
Christians looking for biblical support on either side of the capital
punishment issue can find it. But, it seems that"stronger scriptural support
can be mustered for mercy and forgiveness than for revenge and
retribution."'10
The Question of
Rehabilitation
The third reason why punishment
is administered is for the rehabilitation of the criminal and his
restoration to society. Obviously, with capital punishment, rehabilitation
is impossible.
The Question of
Protecting Society
The fourth and final purpose of
punishment is the protection of society by the state. We do not question the
right of society to protect itself against unjust aggression. We maintain
that this protection can be accomplished in today's society in alternative
ways, such as life imprisonment.
Some Practical Matters
Beyond the theoretical level of
justification of punishment, we find numerous practical problems with
capital punishment. First the possibility of mistakes is always present in a
fallible system of justice. Second, in most cases, the death penalty seems
"cruel and unusual punishment" due to the inherent long delays and its
apparent random application. Third, the anguish that the death penalty
brings to all concerned is a further practical problem. This anguish touches
not only the executed criminal, but also his family and those who are called
on to perform and/or witness the execution. A fourth problem with capital
punishment is that its unhealthy publicity caters to the dark side of human
nature. The fifth and final problem is perhaps the greatest: executions are
discriminatory and unfair. The majority of people on death row are poor,
young and in most states, non-white. This means that those without financial
resources or favorable social position are much more likely to be executed.
The Statistics
The situation of the twenty
death row inmates in Kentucky seems to bear out this charge of unfairness.
All are indigent; only one was able to hire private counsel. Although only
two of the present death row population are black, of the 162 executions in
Kentucky since 1911, 85 (or 52%) were black. Educational and occupational
records were available on 127 of these: 41 had an eighth grade education or
less (17 were considered illiterate), and no people with college degrees
have ever been executed.
Examination of the criminal
records of Kentucky inmates shows they conform to other parts of the
national picture: many had been drinking or using drugs prior to their
crime, many were marred by harsh social or economic influences, and few of
their crimes seem premeditated. We are also struck by the apparent random
application of the death penalty in these twenty cases. Many of them have
legally-defined mitigating circumstances that seem to have had no effect
upon the outcome of the sentencing. Several others were part of capital
crime involving more than one person and in only one case did both persons
receive the death penalty.11
The Evaluation
We fail to see the justice in a
system where it is impossible to determine why one convicted murderer gets
the death penalty while another gets life imprisonment or even a lesser
sentence. We conclude that under the circumstances prevailing in society
today the death penalty as punishment for reasons of deterrence,
retribution, or the protection of society cannot be justified. But beyond
that, whether capital punishment is logically defensible on these grounds or
not, a deeper question remains about its compatibility with gospel values as
they are understood today.
Forgiveness
As we searched the Gospels for
insight into the issue of capital punishment, we perceived three important
themes that are relevant. The first of these is the forgiveness and call to
conversion that Jesus practiced in His ministry. There we see Him give a
message of hope to the outcasts and sinners of His society: "People who are
in good health do not need a doctor: sick people do. Go and learn the
meaning of the words,'lt is mercy I desire and not sacrifice.' I have come
to call, not the self-righteous, but the sinners." (Mt. 9:12-13)
By His forgiveness of sinners
and His acceptance of all persons, Jesus called forth the best in them and
always left open the possibility of conversion. In His life, Jesus showed
Himself opposed to every form of violence. He allowed Himself to be unjustly
condemned and executed. His response was forgiveness: '~Father, forgive them
for they know not what they are doing."(Lk. 23: 34) Thus He broke the chain
of violence that answers death with death.
In His teaching also, Jesus
seemed intent upon breaking the cycle of violence: "You have heard the
commandment,'An eye for an eye, a tooth for a sooth.' But what I say to you
is: offer no resistance to injury. When a person strikes you on the right
cheek, turn and offer him the other." (Mt.5:3-40)
Love
A second gospel theme is God's
boundless love for every person regardless of human merit or worthiness.
This love was especially visible in Jesus' acceptance of sinners and in His
parables of the Workers in the Vineyard (Mt. 20:1-14) and the Prodigal Son
(Lk. 15:11-32). In both stories God deals with His undeserving people, not
out of strict justice or merit, but out of boundless love and mercy.
Prayer
The third Gospel theme is one
that connects ethics with worship. Jesus instructed us in the Gospel of
Matthew: "If you bring your gift to the altar and there recall that your
brother has anything against you, leave your gift at the altar, go first to
be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Mt.
5:23-26)
The Conclusion
After prayerful reflection on
these themes, we conclude first of all that the death penalty is
inconsistent with Jesus' own example of forgiveness that offered hope and
the possibility of conversion. It is our judgment that putting human beings
to death is a rejection of hope toward the condemned persons and it may deny
them the opportunity to move from sin to repentance. The Gospel proclaims
that even the most hardened sinner is a person to be redeemed rather than
destroyed.
Second, the death penalty is
inconsistent with the biblical vision of human beings as worthy of love
regardless of their merit.
Finally, the death penalty is
inconsistent with our belief as Christians that what we do to other human
beings is an indication of our relationship with God. In the words of the
1971 Synod of Bishops' document, Justice in the World: "According to the
Christian message, therefore, man's relation ship to his neighbor is bound
up in his relationship to God: his response to the love of God, saving us
through Christ, is shown to be effective in his love and service of men. For
love implies an absolute demand for justice. namely a recognition of the
dignity and rights of one's neighbor. Justice attains its inner fullness
only in love. Because every man is truly a visible image of the invisible
God and brother of Christ, the Christian finds in every man God himself and
God's absolute demand for justice and love."12
The Past...
Early Christians for the most
part found violence of any kind, and especially the taking of human life,
incompatible with the Gospel. Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr gave witness
to this attitude when they taught: "To witness a man's execution, regardless
of the justice of his prosecution, is forbidden by the moral law of Christ,
for to assist at the killing of a man is almost the same as killing him."
(Clement of Rome) And,... to watch a man being killed is practically
equivalent to taking life " Justin Martyr)13 The state was not
denied the right to inflict capital punishment, but Christians were not to
be a part of this punishment.
St. Augustine began the
classical Church position on violence by justifying it in some specific
cases, most notably in the Just-War Theory. He also admitted the legitimacy
of the death penalty as a means of deterring the wicked and protecting the
innocent.14
During the Middle Ages, capital
punishment became more and more acceptable. In the thirteenth century, St.
Thomas Aquinas, like Augustine before him, justified the death penalty in
certain circumstances.15 This teaching of Aquinas continued to
form the basis of Church teaching through the twentieth century.
The Present...
In our day, however, many
religious people, including theologians and bishops, have serious questions
about the practice of capital punishment. Much of this current debate is
based on either"a more adequate exegesis of the Bible, or on a better
understanding of the Gospel commandment of love and mercy, or an increased
sensitivity and respect for the dignity of the human person and his right to
life, or finally, on the conviction that society today is able to defend
itself and the lives of its members without the necessity of recourse to
capital punishment..."16
Modern Church teaching on the
dignity of the human person began with Pope John XXIII who taught that "all
must regard the life of man as sacred"17 because God created
human beings in His own image and likeness. Moreover,"if we look upon the
dignity of the human person in the light of divinely revealed truth, we
cannot help but esteem it far more highly. For men are redeemed by the blood
of Jesus Christ. They are by grace the children and friends of God and heirs
of eternal glory."18
Vatican II's Constitution On
the Church In the Modern World (GAUDIUM ET SPES) continued to expand this
theme: "For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some
fashion with every man." Contemplation of this truth has led to"a growing
awareness of the exalted dignity proper to the human person, since he stands
above all things and, his rights and duties are universal and
inviolable...Thanks to this belief, the Church can anchor the dignity of
human nature against all tides of opinion..."19
Pope John Paul 11 has made the
dignity of the human person one of the recurrent themes of his pontificate.
On his U.S. tour in 1979, he spoke out: "I do not hesitate to proclaim
before you and before the world that all human life - from the moment of
conception and through all subsequent stages - is sacred, because human life
is created in the image of and likeness of God. Nothing surpasses the
greatness or dignity of a human person...All human beings ought to value
every person for his or her uniqueness as a creature of God, called to be a
brother or sister of Christ by reason of the Incarnation and the universal
redemption. For us, the sacredness of human life is based on these premises.
And it is on these same premises that there is based our celebration of life
- all human life. This explains our efforts to defend human life against
every influence or I action that threatens or weakens it, as well as our
endeavors to make every life more human in all its aspects. And so, we will
stand up every time that human life is threatened."20
The Pope went even further in
his encyclical, REDEMPTOR HOMINIS: "The human person - every person without
exception - has been redeemed by Christ, because Christ is in a way united
to the human person - even if the individual may not realize this fact."21
Since Vatican II, the National
Conference of Catholic Bishops has added its own insights to the defense of
human life and dignity. In a pastoral letter, Human Life In Our Day, in
1968, the bishops taught: "We honor God when we reverence human life. When
human life is served, man is enriched and God is acknowledged. When human
life is threatened, man is diminished and God is less manifest in our midst.
A Christian defense of life should seek to clarify in some way the
relationship between the love of life and the worship of God. One cannot
love life unless he worships God, at least implicitly, nor worship God
unless he loves life...We are convinced that belief in God is intimately
bound up with devotion to life...The attitude man adopts toward life helps
determine the person he becomes...The judgment of the Church, on the evil of
terminating life derives from the Christian awareness that men are not the
masters but the ministers of life."22
This current Catholic teaching
on the dignity of the human person represents a unified "Respect Life"
stance, a "consistent life ethic" encompassing all human life from
conception through natural death, from the innocent to the guilty. Cardinal
Joseph Bernardin of Chicago has compared this approach to a"seamless
garment," one which does not separate life issues but rather seeks to slow
their essential unity.
This connection among life
issues has been pointed out before. Pope Paul VI in the mid-1970's connected
the issues of war and abortion in his speech: "If You Want Peace, Defend
Life." This connection was made more specifically in the U.S. Bishops'
Pastoral, The Challenge of Peace, and broadened therein to include other
life issues as well.23 But certainly the most comprehensive
treatment of this approach has been articulated by Cardinal Bernardin.
In a December 1983 speech at
Fordham University, he made several important points. He spoke first of"the
sacredness of human life and the responsibility we have personally and
socially to protect and preserve the sanctity of life." While he
acknowledged both the presumption against taking human life and the need for
exceptions to that principle, he pointed out that in the last thirty years,
there has been a shift in Catholic pastoral practice regarding capital
punishment. Increasingly, Catholic leaders urge the state not to exercise
its right to use the death penalty. Cardinal Bernardin explained the
rationale behind the shift by citing"a more acute perception of the multiple
ways in which life is threatened today." Thus, the modern context of
perennial life and death questions has led to the need for a consistent
approach to life issues.
As Cardinal Bernardin
explained: "The dominant cultural fact...which induces a sharper awareness
of the fragility of human life is our technology... From the inception of
life to its decline, a rapidly expanding technology opens new opportunities
for care but also poses new potential to threaten the sanctity of life...The
essential question in the technological challenge is this: In an age when we
can do almost anything, how do we decide what we ought to do? The even more
demanding question is: In a time when we can do anything technologically,
how do we decide morally what we should do?
"Asking these questions along
the spectrum of life from womb to tomb creates the need for a consistent
ethic of life. For the spectrum of life cuts across the issues of genetics,
abortion, capital punishment, modern warfare and the care of the terminally
ill. These are all distinct problems, enormously complicated, and deserving
individual treatment. No single answer and no simple response will solve
them. My purpose, however, is to highlight the way in which we face new
technological challenges in each one of these areas, this combination of
challenges is what cries out for a consistent ethic of life..."24
The United States Catholic
Conference within the last decade has begun to apply this respect for life
attitude to capital punishment. The bishops' first statement in 1974 was a
simple one: the bishops opposed capital punishment in the context of the
Christian faith and the Gospel of Jesus. Their most recent of financial
statement was an extensive document issued in 1980 which reiterated their
opposition to the death penalty and spoke of the Christian values that would
be promoted by its abolition.
Thus, the Catholic "Respect
Life" position recognizes that ''the call to grandeur and the depths of
misery are both a part of the human experience,"25 but the misery
of old age, sickness, physical and mental handicaps, or criminal violence
does not negate or completely mar the grandeur of a human person made in
God's image and redeemed by His divine Son.
The Future...
In this letter, we have called
for the abolition of capital punishment in our state and in our nation as a
whole. In doing so, we acknowledge that sincere differences of opinion are
possible at present on this issue and that traditional Catholic teaching has
allowed for the execution of justly convicted criminals. As this letter
enters into the discussion of Kentucky Catholics, we made our own the words
of all U.S. bishops in their pastoral letter, The Challenge of Peace: 'We
urge mutual respect among different groups in the Church as they analyze
this letter and the issues it addresses. Not only conviction and commitment
are needed in the Church, but also civility and charity."26
Having acknowledged that
differences of opinion are inevitable at present, we nevertheless have felt
called to exercise our office of teachers for the faithful. As shepherds of
Christ's people in our respective dioceses we would be unfaithful to our
mission if we neglected to proclaim the social aspects of the Gospel.
"Action on behalf of justice is a significant criterion of the Church's
fidelity to its mission. It is something to which all Christians are
called..."27
We insist that the Church has a
prophetic mission to constantly remind the world that God is the Lord of
Life and all human life is sacred and belongs to him alone. We see our
rejection of capital punishment as part of the Church's opposition to every
attack upon human life. It is in line with the struggle against abortion,
against euthanasia, against the destruction of a nuclear war. We proclaim
the sacredness not only of innocent life, but even of the life of the
guilty! By affirming life in opposition to the death penalty, then, e hope
to proclaim clearly the gospel message: "no human life, no matter how
wretched or how miserable, no matter how sinful or lacking in love, is
without worth; no one is beyond realizing and receiving Christ's redemptive
grace of conversion at any moment during life."28
We preach the love and mercy of
God toward all persons, especially sinners, and even toward criminals and
murderers. We, as Church leaders, understand that we are commissioned to
proclaim the Gospel of salvation in Christ, but also to defend the human
person: "In reality, it is not a question of two things which can be
separated. The Gospel, in fact, is proclaimed, and God is glorified whenever
man is saved and his dignity and freedom are respected, whenever the kingdom
of hatred, of vengeance, and of enmity is supplanted by the kingdom of love
and brotherhood among human beings. The cause of God cannot be disjoined
from the cause of humanity."29
We offer our reflections as an
invitation to both Catholics and the wider community to rethink traditional
attitudes and values,"to undertake a prayerful and studied reconsideration
of their position,"30 and discover more deeply what the Lord
Jesus is calling us to in this modern age. We have spoken because of our
conviction that the issue of capital punishment is one of the many life
issues that need Christian attention in our time, and "there must be
internal consistency in the pro-life commitment."31
We call on all who are
currently engaged in ministry within the Church to initiate dialogue on this
issue as soon as possible. We are aware that this dialogue, if it is to be
fruitful, will require conversion of heart, and so we commend this effort to
the prayerful remembrance of all the faithful in our respective dioceses.
We conclude with a reiteration
of the Church's position that all of life needs to be respected. We are
opposed to capital punishment simply because it deliberately ends human life
and thus threatens the sanctity and dignity of all human life. "In her
defense of human life the Church in our day makes her own, as did Moses, the
words by which God Himself reduces our perplexities to a clear, inescapable
choice:'I call heaven and death to witness against you this day, that I have
set before you life and death... therefore, choose life that you and your
descendants may live!' (Deut: 30:19)"32
If we choose life, we are
accepting the challenge of the Gospel that teaches us that God is Father to
all persons and that every person is redeemed as a brother or sister of
Jesus. In offering this letter to the people of Kentucky, especially our
Catholic faithful, we make our own the closing statements of the 1980
document of our national Catholic bishops: "We urge then to review the
considerations we have offered which show both the evils associated with
capital punishment and the harmony of the abolition of capital punishment
with the values of the Gospel. We urge them to bear in mind that public
decisions in this area affect the lives, the hopes and the fears of men and
women who share both the misery and grandeur of human life with us and who,
like us, are among those sinners whom the Son of Man came to save. We urge
our brothers and sisters in Christ to remember the teachings of Jesus who
called us to be reconciled with those who have injured us (Mt. 5 43-45) and
to pray for forgiveness for our sins as we forgive those who have sinned
against us. (Mt. 6:12) We call on you to contemplate the crucified Christ
who set us the supreme example of forgiveness and of tile triumph of
compassionate love."33
Footnotes
1 We recognize
that non-inclusive language is a problem in the Church today; we are
sensitive to that issue and affirm the need for inclusive language. However,
we deemed it inappropriate to change the wording of direct quotations from
Scripture of official Church documents.
2 Psalm 8:1-6
Jerusalem Bible Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co, 1971. All
other scripture references are from The New American Bible New York:
Catholic Book Publishing Company, 1970.
3 Declaration on Religious Freedom in Joseph Gremillion, The
Gospel of Peace and Justice (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 976), #1,
p.337.
4 John Paul II, REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, The Pope Speaks, Vol.24
(Summer 1979),#10, p.110.
5 Psalm 8: 1-6 Jerusalem Bible
6 A statement by the Roman Catholic Bishops of Massachusetts on
Capital Punishment, March 5,1982.
7 J. Edgar Hoover, quoted by Peggy J. Keilholz, 'Capital
Punishment.~ Unpublished research paper prepared for the Missouri Catholic
Conference, November 16,1976, p. G.
8 Quoted in Keilholz, p.8.
9 Hugo A. Bedau, The Case Against the Death Penalty (New
York: American Civil Liberties Union, N.D.) pp.6-7.
10 James Breig, "Should We Kill Killers?"
U.S. Catholic, August
1977, p.24.
11 Data compiled by Kevin McNally and Ed Monahan, Assistant
Public Advocates Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy, 1983.
12 Justice in the World, 1971 Synod of Bishops, Crux
Information Service (Albany, New York: Clarity Publishing, Inc.) December
31, 1971.
13 Quoted by Bishop Rene Gracida,'A statement of Capital
Punishment' Catholic Mind,
October, 1979, p.60; and Richard McSorley, SJ., New Testament Basis of
Peacemaking (Washington D.C.: Georgetown Center for Peace Studies,
1979), p.74.
14 St. Augustine, City of God 1.21, Fathers of the Church
(Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1962), p.53.
15 St. Thomas Aquinas, SUMMA THEOLOGICA, trans. by the
Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York: Benzinger Brothers,
1947), II-II, q.64, a.2, CORPUS, p.1467; q.66, a.6, reply, p 1480
16 'Reflections `,n the Death Penalty," editorial from LA CIVILTA
CATTOLICA, ANNOA L32, Vol. l, QUADERNO 3137,7 MARZO 1981, trans. by CJ.
McNaspy, SJ. and Joseph M. Snee, S.J., p.12.
17 John XXIII, MATER ET MAGISTRA in Gremillion, # 194, p.184.
18 John XXIII, PACEM IN TERRIS in Gremillion, #10, p. 203.
19GAUDIM Fr SPES The Church in the Modern World in Gremillion,
#22, 26,41 pp.260, 264,276.
20 John Paul ii,"Let Us Celebrate Life!" USA -The Message of
Justice, Peace, & Love (Boston, MA: St. Paul Editions, 1979), #3,6;
pp.278, 282.
21 John Paul 11, REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, #14, R 118.
22 Human Life In Our Day (Washington, D.C.: United States
Catholic Conference 1968), pp.5-7, 28.
23 The Challenge of Peace: God's Promise & Our Response
(Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1983), #285, p.88.
24 Cardinal Joseph Bernardin,'Cardinal Bernardin's Call for a
Consistent Ethic of Life.' Origins, December 29, 1983, pp.492-93.
25 GAUDIUM ET SPES in Gremillion, #13, p.254.
26 The Challenge of Peace, #12, p.5.
27 Sharing the Light of Faith (Washington, D.C.: United
States Catholic Conference, Department of Education, 1979), #160, p.90.
28 Bishop Bernard Flanagan,~The Death Penalty is Immoral,"
U.S. Catholic,
November 1976, p.l2.
29 'Reflections on the Death Penalty,' LA CIVILTA' CATTOLICA,
p.13.
30 Cardinal William Baum,"A Statement on Capital Punishment,'
Catholic Mind,
May 1977, i p.3.
31 Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities (Washington,
D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1975), p.5.
32 Human Life In Our Day, p.46.
33. National Conference of Catholic Bishops.'A Statement on
Capital Punishment," Catholic Mind,
April 1981, p.50.
Signed:
Thomas C. Kelly, O.P.
Archbishop of Lexington
John J. McRaith
Bishop of Owensboro
J. Kendrick Williams
Bishop of Lexington
William A. Hughes
Retired Bishop of Covington
Robert Muench
Bishop of Covington
Charles G. Maloney
Auxiliary Bishop of Louisville