The Church’s emphasis on the sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, also calls into question the use of capital punishment. What the pope did was to acknowledge that the conditions which may have justified capital punishment in the past are no longer present in much of contemporary society. This wasn’t some innovation on the part of Pope Francis. In his decree he drew from the writings of recent popes on the topic. The most detailed reflection on capital punishment was done by Pope Saint John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae, which deals with the range of “right to life” issues, including capital punishment along with abortion and reaches essentially the same conclusion as Pope Francis. Thus, there is no moral justification for capital punishment any longer.
The media announced that the pope changed Catholic teaching on capital punishment and this stirred up concern among many that some basic belief was being changed. Those announcements and the concern they stirred up are mis-informed. Remember, it was only around the time of St. Augustine that the church specifically addressed the issue of capital punishment, the opposition to capital punishment was the basic position of most church leaders, with Augustine providing for exceptions to the basic prohibition and then under very limited circumstances. Pope Francis is just noting that the circumstances which provided for exceptions don’t seem to apply any longer, so the exceptions don’t apply either.
It also helps to understand that there are different levels of church teaching. Dogma refers to fundamental beliefs of the church, the sort of teachings that we proclaim each Sunday when we say the Creed. Our response to dogma should be “assent of faith”. That is, we believe that these dogmas are true based on our faith in God revelation of love to us.
Just below dogma in authority is “definitive doctrine”. While dogma mediates divine revelation, definitive doctrine does not. Its role is rather to support dogma. So, for example, Mary as the Immaculate Conception is not divine revelation, but it is definitive church teaching that underscores Christ as being divine, which is dogma. The response of the believer to definitive doctrine is to firmly accept the teaching and hold it as true.
Authoritative doctrine is the next level of church teaching and is reflected primarily in the teaching of the church on moral issues. This level of teaching acknowledges that the possibility exists that the church is making the wrong judgment on the issue but to the best of its understanding and theological reflection it believes that its teaching on the matter is true and correct. Over time you can see changes in the church’s understanding of these issues. For the first thousand years of the church it was considered a moral evil to charge interest on a loan. During the middle ages this teaching changed somewhat, so that interest on loans was allowed but the interest rates must not be excessive. In a similar manner during much of the past two thousand years slavery was an economic reality that was not praised but accepted as an economic reality. It has only been in the past couple of hundred years that slavery in any form has been condemned by the church. Authoritative doctrine does undergo change as the circumstances of society and the church undergo change. It is an attempt to apply the fundamental beliefs of the church to the moral context of the time and place in which the church exists. The believer’s response is “obsequium”, a Latin word that implies respectful acceptance of the teaching.
Prudential judgment is the type of teaching that one generally encounters in an encyclical or an apostolic letter. It is the reflection of the pope on current conditions in the world in an attempt to apply church teachings to the situation described. So, when the pope or bishops speak of the needs of the poor and refugees, they are applying the church’s fundamental respect for the dignity of each person to the particular situation in which the poor and refugees find themselves today. The expected response is to respectfully consider the arguments of the pope or bishops and to seek ways to apply the appropriate fundamental teaching of the church to this situation, even if you don’t agree with the solution offered by the Pope or bishops.
Considering that the capital punishment deals with the moral teachings of the church, it is probably best understood as an example of authoritative doctrine. The pope changed nothing dealing with the dogma or definitive doctrine of the church. Within the level of authoritative doctrine, the pope clarified a moral teaching of the church.
