Write for God

Sister Helen Prejean

Today, March 1, is International Death Penalty Abolition Day and, by coincidence, it’s also the First Sunday of Lent.

On March 1, 1847, the State of Michigan became the first English-speaking area in the world to abolish capital punishment. Since then, other states and nations have followed, but the Bible Belt states remain resolute in their claiming the right to kill. In New Mexico and Maryland, the death penalty could be on its last legs, too.

A visiting priest who will be doing the Lent mission at our parish today mentioned the true meaning of the verb “repent.” It’s not a matter of saying you’re sorry or of giving up chocolate to repent for your sins during Lent, it’s about metanoia, or changing’s one’s way of thinking. Residents of New Mexico and Maryland can change their state government’s way of thinking by expressing their support for legislation to introduce the abolition of the death penalty. What a unique chance to experience the metanoia of Lent in a real way!

Catholics pondering what the church really says about the death penalty should familiarize themselves with the US Conference of Catholic Bishops campaign to end the dealth penalty and read attorney and chaplain Dale Recinella’s Biblical Truth About America’s Death Penalty.

Pope John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae in 1995 acknowledged a clause in the Catechism about society’s need to protect itself, but went on to say:

It is clear that for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: In other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare if not practically nonexistent [italics mine].

In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: “If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must 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.”

 The dignity of the human person is preserved by the church in its positions against abortion and euthanasia and, here, Pope John Paul II is saying that we debase our pro-life position when we say it’s OK to kill anyone.

Unfortunately, many doctrinaire Catholics prefer to side with the Bible Belt’s evangelical preachers in demanding death for crimes rather than upholding the seamless garment of life with the greatest Pope of our century.

Last year, I searched through countless hours of program listings on EWTN during its pro-life month of January looking for an interesting segment on the abolition of the death penalty. Bud Welch, Antoinette Bosco and Sister Helen Prejean are three of the best-known Catholic abolitionists, after all. Yet, EWTN had zilch on the issue in January. Not an interview with Sister Helen or with Welch and Bosco, who saw loved ones murder and yet have become abolitionists. Nothing on 20th century death-penalty victims St. Maximilian Kolbe, Blessed Titus Brandsma, Saint Edith Stein, Jacques Fesch or Blessed Miguel Pro.

I wrote to the network to ask why and the answer came that abortion is always wrong, but the Catechism allows the death penalty. In other words, don’t even discuss what the Pope or the Bishops say about the death penalty, just follow the narrowest possible excuse for judicial murder. In fact, don’t even feature a program that allows Catholic viewers to consider that the Pope or the Bishops say about the death penalty. Another classic case of scribes and Pharisees straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel.

New Mexico’s Governor Bill Richardson has publicly stated that he is reconsidering his position on the death penalty. Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley has marched for abolition this past week. Metanoia, it seems, can be a blessing on everyone, except for those with whitewashed tombs.

Political theorist Hannah Arendt coined the phrase “the banality of evil” during Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann’s trial for his role in the Holocaust. Arendt was struck by Eichmann’s demeanor during the trial: He wasn’t a psychopath, a rabid anti-Semite or a lunatic. He seemed an ordinary, not particularly bright, little man who claimed he was only following orders and doing his job when he committed genocide, in much the same way that an accountant might add a row of numbers or a barber might trim a little off the top. It was just another day at the office when Jews were gassed and beaten by kapos in concentration camps.

Eichmann provided the most banal of excuses for his role in the systematic murder of millions of Jews, Poles, Russians, Romany, Jevohah’s Witnesses, homosexuals–the list of the Third Reich’s victims is long and not very selective–but Arendt could see beyond his blind reasoning.

While there were “good Germans” who insisted their war crimes were just a case of following orders, there were other nations that didn’t support the Nazi regime. She points to Denmark as an example of non-cooperation with Hitler’s murderous intent:

One is tempted to recommend the [Danish] story as required reading in political science for all students who wish to learn something about the enormous power potential inherent in non-violent action and in resistance to an opponent possessing vastly superior means of violence.

The Danes refused to allow the Nazi regime to implement the Final Solution where other nations became collaborators. In fact, their efforts to save Jews are the stuff of legends. Vichy France and the people of the Anschluss certainly bought into Hitler’s plan with enthusiasm or an eye toward being on what they thought would be the winning side.

Nonviolent action and resistance to an enemy that resorts to violence is much more difficult than fighting back or merely “doing one’s job,” as in Eichmann’s case. When the Nazis murdered conscientous objector Franz Jagersttater for refusing to serve, when they beheaded Hans and Sophie Scholl for urging resistance, when they killed St. Maximilian Kolbe and Blessed Titus Brandsma by lethal injection for standing up for Christ against Hitler and when they gassed St. Edith Stein for being born a Jew, they came up against the superior, immovable, nonviolent force of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Banal little men like Eichmann and the petty tyrants that have come before and after him can always claim they were doing their jobs by cooperating with evil. We remember them with disdain or forget about them entirely, but we celebrate the heroes whose revolution and resistance coupled with their love of Christ allowed them to see the difference between doing one’s job and taking the hard road to what is good and right.

Evil may sometimes be banal, but nonviolent resistance is always heroic.