Reflection on Death Penalty

The death penalty is controversial because people disagree about whether the capital punishment system serves justice appropriately. There is no manner in which to agree upon this because everyone's concept of justice varies along with each individual's sense of morality. According to Keenan's book Moral Wisdom "Conscience 'dictates' that we pursuit justice" (35). Therefore, those people that support the death penalty believe in their conscience that it is justice to make a person who has committed a crime of exceptionally high degree to be sentenced to death. However, Keenan notes that conscience can be erroneous, and what matters is what a person's motivation is during the course of moral decision making. The entire concept of the capital punishment system is malicious in that it carries vindictive sentiments towards another individual. As an opponent of the death penalty, I will have to say that I look towards Jesus in the New Testament as a guide in how we as Catholics should follow Him in the moral decisions that we make each day.

Keenan describes Jesus' three greatest virtues as being loving, obedient of God's will, and merciful. If anything, the death penalty contradicts all three of these virtues. A supporter of capital punishment may say that the sentence is justice done in love for the victim and the victim's family. This "love" is negated with the hateful sentiments towards the criminal. The anger that it arouses detains people from being merciful, which is significant in that mercy is what distinguishes Christianity from other religions. As to whether or not taking a life is obedient to God's will, I cannot say because I do not know the answer to that. I think that it is condescending for human beings to assume that they do know the answer and therefore believe that it is acceptable to determine a value of a person's life. I think that only God Himself can determine what the value of a life is and therefore it should be put in His hands whether to end it, however, I do believe that we all share a sense that the criminal has to repent as it is also a significant aspect of our faith. This is why I believe in the alternative of life imprisonment because it is still a manner of protecting our citizens and it allows us to abide by our faith, which encourages us to believe, hope, and love.

Question of Morality

How do I choose to make moral decisions? Although I initially underestimated the difficulty of this question, I find that it requires me to to make an analysis of what significantly drives me as a human being. I believe that in order to establish this as accurately as possible, I must introspect about the diverse aspects of my growth development. I begin with the very person who instilled in me a first perception of what is right or wrong: my mother. As a child, the motivation to act in a manner that was deemed to be "right" originated in my desire to gain approval from my mother, who of course was significant in her status as my sole provider. Because she was my main source of interaction, I mistook morality for an exchange of benefits. I did something that was "good" and my mother would reciprocate by showing me affection. However, once I began to interact with people outside of my home, the simplicity of that idea began to develop into something much more than what I had estimated morality to be. People external to the home do not naturally possess the unconditional love that a parent or family member has for one. Therefore one will find variance within the responses that one receives to an act which an individual might have initially perceived to be "good". It is these social interactions which allow one to transform themselves into a state that is more independent from their parent's ideals, as one modifies these moral foundations which were influenced by their family into ones that also fit into their society's norm. Human experience from both familial and social interactions are significant to how my sense of morality has molded.

As one develops the concept of morality, an effect attributable to the interaction between the home and public setting, it is still a complicated matter as to whether logic or intuition are more significant into what morality entails. I will categorize anything that is learned from human interaction (speech, visual aids, writings, etc.) under logic, and will only refer to the sentimental aspects of the psychical as being categorized under intuition. Logic includes religion, for one would not have the concept of God without some form of education on behalf of another human being (whether it be word of the mouth, scriptures written by apostles, etc). While logic does greatly influence one's conscience, I will have to say that logic would not have significance without intuition. We would not follow instructions blindly from logic as to what is morally correct unless we felt emotionally guided by the information it provides. Although one may argue that children follow parents instructions blindly, it is not so, because from within they are seeking approval from a person whom unconditionally loves them. A child loves the affection which they receive from their parent and in love they try to reciprocate the favor. As Keenan mentions in the first chapter of Moral Wisdom, love is a driving force. Therefore I will have to conclude that intuition is the strongest influence on my moral decisions. My intuition guides me immediately as to whether or not I believe something to be morally right depending on how confident I feel about the logic which I have acquired through human interaction and experience.

Elimination of fear through Overcoming of Tragedy

"How should members of a tradition respond when their tradition is implicated in tragedy or evil?"

When I was a child, I would always dread the moment when I would first walk into church. My parents always made sure to arrive a couple of minutes early, just in time for us to make our way over to the giant statue of Jesus' crucifixion that was right at the entrance of mass. I remember it perfectly, the way that Jesus would look down at me in agony. I remember the blood stains all over his wounds, and the nails that were pounded into his hands and feet. I watched as people would stare right into his face, and tenderly place their hands on his wounds. My mother always would urge me to do so as well, but I always rejected her offer as I found myself to be experiencing complete and immediate fear at the thought of it. I just simply could not comprehend how people could purposely confront such a gruesome image, and then symbolically put themselves in the situation by relating to it and TOUCHING it. I was scared of it all. And this image made me somewhat afraid of all that was religious and that which is labeled as "holy". It all always brought me back to that image.

So how exactly should one react to the traditions of the church when its origin derives from a tragedy? That is a question that I have struggled with since my childhood when I watched those people embracing Jesus in that graphic depiction of his crucifixion. This image made me fear Jesus. With the look of agony that the statue gave me, I could not help but feel guilty as well. I felt that his look was a cry for help, and there I was, doing nothing. Therefore, I also feared that Jesus would spite me. And growing up I thought that the only way I could escape that fate was by completing the rituals that the Church offered. I found that there was no alternative to that because if I didn’t follow through with the traditions, I would be punished by God.

Now that I am older, I still believe that my initial reaction to the Church and its rituals is a very natural one. The crucifixion of Jesus is a very dark and powerful image that requires maturity to confront. And initially fear is how I approached it and what motivated me to follow the Church’s traditions. However, as a child I lacked the understanding that Jesus died for our sins. It was something that I heard all of the time, but I never understood what it meant until very recently in my life. It is at this point when I started to approach the church and its traditions very differently. It is not something I have to do anymore, but something I choose to do. Understanding the tragedy behind the crucifixion allows us as Catholics to understand why we follow through with the traditions of the church. Most importantly, it gives us purpose and erases that fear which we may initially feel. It is difficult to know how to react to tragedy, but overcoming it eliminates fear and allows for development in one's faith.

Defining the terms "holy" and "apostolic"

From my perspective, to define something as holy is to describe it as being associated with the Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I interpret the Holy Trinity to be the epitome of the divine; therefore in my opinion, any person, place, or thing that is blessed with its presence is considered to be holy. I also believe that sacraments are holy, both the community valued Seven Sacraments and the individual sacraments that we experience in our everyday lives. I think that these moments generate the awareness of such a holy presence that exists in our world and therefore, they are just as holy. They enable us to form a relationship between the secular and holy which is why they hold so much significance within our faith. As to whether or not something is holy, I believe it is the Church’s responsibility of determining its genuineness. I believe that it is the Church’s responsibility to determine whether or not something is holy comes along with the authority which God has granted the Church in guiding us through interpretation of the word. I think that through this authority, the Church is a more qualified candidate in making that decision.

What is resonant to me in the term apostolic is the reference to the apostle’s mission to spread the word of God. I think that this aspect of Catholicism emphasizes the model Christian way of life. As I mentioned in my last blog post, I don’t believe that God would reject an individual who declares their faith in Him. By this, I don’t mean to say that I don’t believe in the significance of Sabbath, but I believe that a person should foremost be actively engaged with the apostolic mission, whether it is by spreading the word or living according to it. The apostolic mission encourages each and every one of us to become active members within our Church which should be a priority. Faith is an activity; one is not truly engaged in it unless one is actively participating in it. Therefore, if one truly declares their faith in God, one is fully involved in the apostolic mission and its message. I think that the Church most represents the apostle’s mission through its teaching of God’s word. However, it also represents those that live according to the word of God because the Church is charitable in its teaching and promotes hospitability within it (which was something heavily emphasized within the Bible). Despite my opinion that one does not necessarily have to go to Sabbath to be part of the apostolic mission, I think that those that go demonstrate great dedication to the mission and contribute to its purpose.

What is the Catholic Church?

The role of the church within the Catholic faith is one that I have always struggled to understand. I have to admit that it is not something that I am well informed of, and that my opinions of the church all concern either rumors that I have heard or assumptions that I have made. When I currently think of the Catholic Church, I am under the belief that it is intended to be the "mediator" between God and the individual. I currently assume this on a basis of two rumors that I have heard: 1. The Church is responsible for the establishment of regulations within the faith, and 2. The Catholic church is necessary because one cannot communicate with God unless an individual follows through with certain rituals under the presence of a priest. If that information is correct, my stance on the Catholic church would be greatly challenged. To me, the necessity of clergy presence for there to be a relationship with God sounds inaccurate, for I could never imagine that He would reject a relationship with any person who declares their faith in Him. For this reason I have developed my own perspective of what the role of the Catholic church is as a result of my experience and developing faith.

I will emphasize once more that this opinion of mine lacks any serious knowledge and therefore is mainly a result of my experience and very basic knowledge of Catholicism. I believe the role of the Catholic church is to bring together people of one faith and share in the recognition that there is a holy presence in this world and praise its existence. This holy presence is of the Holy Trinity (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). When we come to appreciate this presence as a community, we are both physically and spiritually bonded as God's creation and share a common aspiration towards salvation. However, I do not think that this excludes other members of the Catholic faith who do not attend Sabbath. I think that it is especially important to have developed a personal relationship with God prior to attending church on its own. If one does not have a personal relationship with God developed, then it becomes increasingly difficult to become publicly involved . I think that the Catholic Church and regulations ultimately serve as guidance towards how things are translated into modern day and to encourage people to expand one's relation to God to a more public level. However, I don’t think that it is absolutely necessary (although highly recommended) because all of us are striving towards the same individual goal, which is salvation. By either going to Church or praising God on your own, we share the same intention which is to reach out to God .