I was surprised to see that Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is responding in a rather un-Catholic manner to the recent Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v. Louisiana that recourse to the death penalty cannot be had in cases of non-homicidal child rape. Jindal has described the Court’s decision as “incredibly absurd.” Not content merely to voice his displeasure, he is now pressing for a reconsideration. This opens up questions over the degree to which his Catholic faith informs his political choices.
Let us take a liberal interpretation of the Catholic Church’s teaching on the use of the death penalty by states. According to paragraph 2267 of the Catechism, the state my have recourse to the death penalty if:
- The offender’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined
- The death penalty is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the offender
- Nonlethal punishments are insufficient to defend and protect its citizens
The permissibility of using the death penalty in paragraph 2267 is conditioned by paragraph 2266, which states that public authority may inflict punishment “proportionate to the gravity of the offense.” Given the clear teaching of the Catholic Church, the use of the death penalty by the state in the case of non-homicidal child rape is not permissible. The death penalty as a punishment is not proportionate to the gravity of the offense (whereas it would be in the case of homicide), and there are plenty of nonlethal means to protect children in the United States from convicted child rapists.
So when Jindal declares that the five Justice majority of the Supreme Court “do not share the same ‘standards of decency’ as the people of Louisiana,” I reply that Jindal does not share the same “standards of decency” as the Catholic Church.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In