Replies

I see an apparent contradiction here which has been (I think) glided past without acknowledging the inherent tension.

If we say it was wrong for God to allow Cain, Moses, David the King, and Saul of Tarsus to keep their lives after having committed murder, then we are accusing God of moral failure, which is impossible.

Nevertheless, in the Torah God did, as you say, command that murderers be put to death; while at the same time, He spares the lives of sinners in the Torah. Cain (who, as primordial murderer, one would think should be the primordial example of life-for-a-life) is specifically put under God's protection, although as far as we know he showed not one bit of regret or repentance, neither out of regard for his brother nor out of respect for God. And Moses, as we know, was regarded as most just and righteous, notwithstanding his act of murder.

Later on, God says He does NOT desire the death of a sinner.

"Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?" (Ezekiel 18:32)
And later, almost pleadingly:
"Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?" (Ezekiel 33:11)

I reject +Francis' revision of the Catechism, if it is read--- as I think it must be --- as a repudiation of +Benedict's teaching (and all of his predecessors back to Apostolic times!) and a novel declaration that the Death Penalty is inherently and in every case, gravely wrong.

I adhere to +Benedict's Catechism, which allows me to both affirm that the Death Penalty may be just, AND point out that a just application of it, is in practice almost impossible.

In other words, it allows me to say I am not opposed to the Death Penalty in theory, only in practice.