Fr. Gerry Creedon's homily delivered at the 11AM Mass at St. Charles on January 27, 2002
"The people who live in darkness have seen a great
light; for those living in a land overshadowed by
death, light has arisen."
The Papacy of John Paul picks up this gospel theme. In the
darkness of the culture of death, the church is called to
proclaim the life and the light.
Last weekend and all this week, we celebrate the call to
Christian unity. It's a call to tolerance and
understanding of other Christians, other believers. On
Monday, we celebrated Martin Luther King and his clarion
call for justice, civil and human rights. On Tuesday,
Catholics marched for life, with others, to underline our
belief in and respect for life, even when the womb doesn't
protect. And on Thursday, the Pope led a pilgrimage to
Assisi to pray for an end to war, terror, violence and a
new beginning of peace and nonviolence in the footsteps of
Francis of Assisi.
Catholic Advocacy Day in Virginia
This coming Monday, on Catholic Advocacy Day, I join Bishop
Loverde as we go down to the heart of the Commonwealth, to
Richmond Virginia. We will present to the Old Dominion the
advocacy of Catholic Virginians on four issues: abortion,
the need for parental notification of minors who want to
abort; housing and homelessness at a time when lines to
homeless shelters are increasing dramatically, for a
variety of reasons; the death penalty; and poverty.
Now, you can say to yourself, "Why is Bishop Loverde going
down to Richmond to tell them how to manage the State when
we with difficulty manage our diocese?" Well, it's not
that the Church has the answer, the blueprint at to how we
manage the State or the Nation, but we do have the
responsibility to be the voice for the voiceless and the
vulnerable. In all of these aspects of the Church's social
mission, there are two pillars that the Church's teaching
is founded on -- the dignity of the human person, and the
sacredness of human life. They constitute a consistent
ethic of life.
The Challenge of the Death Penalty
I would like to focus particularly on the question of the
death penalty for a few minutes. It's a complicated topic
cannot be handled fully in a few minutes. I will offer a
few thoughts.
Let me preface it by a personal experience. One of the
joys in my ministry here at St. Charles is to accompany our
jail ministry at least once a month, tearing myself away
from pastoral and administrative duties, to visit the
Arlington Detention Center, where there are about 500
people who need our pastoral care. On any given Monday
night, we'll have 20 or 30 that we reach out to with the
celebration of the Mass and pastoral visits. Recently, at
the end of the Mass, a woman who was part of the group and
had done the readings with great care came to me and said,
"Father, pray for me that I'll have leniency when I go
before the judge next week." I took the risk of saying to
her that I'd be glad to do that but would she mind sharing
with me what her situation was. She said, "I killed my
husband." She was such a gentle, tender person that she
took me by surprise. You don't get all the facts in a few
minutes, but she said, "He was threatening to kill my
child, and in my anxiety and panic and anger I took his
life before he took the child's life."
Leniency or Accountability?
I left there with a set of questions. Do I pray for
leniency as I said? Or does the Church also have to hold
up accountability for the victims of crime? There was a
man killed here. Doesn't there need to be accountability,
time to pay for one's actions? Isn't there also a need for
some punishment? Isn't there a need to protect society?
And on the other hand, as she was admitted to the
Eucharist, isn't there also a need to uphold an ideal of
reform, rehabilitation? Perhaps even forgiveness. If her
crime was so heinous (I don't know) that it was elevated to
the rank of a crime that merited capital punishment, would
it be all right to say "an eye for an eye," as many have
said? As a way of protecting society?
Increasingly, our Church, while it stands for
accountability and justice, is advocating for an end to
capital punishment as a way for guaranteeing security and
protection, or as a way of giving outlet to vengeance.
Let's listen to what our Pope has to say on the topic (St.
Louis, 1999): "The New Evangelization calls for followers
of Christ who will acclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel
of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the
increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must
never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has
done great evil. Modern society has the means of
protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals
the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most
recently on Christmas (and I would like to get under the
Pope's skirts and make his appeal my own personal appeal
too). I renew the appeal for a consensus to end the death
penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary."
Our U.S. bishops state, "The Church's commitment to the
value and dignity of human life leads us to oppose the use
of the death penalty." Notice they are not opposing it in
principle or theory, they are opposing its use, a subtle
distinction that will be appreciated by those of you with a
Jesuit education. Their Administrative Board in 1999
confirms: "The actions of Catholics who consistently and
faithfully oppose the death penalty reflect the call of our
Bishops' statement. We see the death penalty as
perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of
vengeance in our culture." Our own Bishop, Paul S.
Loverde, has declared: "We will not advance the culture of
life by taking certain human lives, no matter what offense
they have committed. We must work for their conversion and
rehabilitation. The answer is not to take human life to
preserve society; rather, the answer is to work to
rehabilitate those who have sinned and thereby advance the
Kingdom of God on earth."
What a Moratorium is and Why We Need It
On Monday, when I go with the Bishop to Richmond, I'm
hoping to bring signatures from St. Charles for a
moratorium on the death penalty. Let me clarify. A
moratorium on the death penalty isn't a call to end the
death penalty. It's a call to suspend its use while we
study its application in the State of Virginia. And why
would there be a need for a moratorium on the death penalty
in the State of Virginia? I would share a couple of
reasons apart from the Church's opposition to capital
punishment.
Virginia has a rule that 21 days after conviction new
evidence of innocence cannot be introduced, except DNA
tests. Most Virginians think that this is a rule that is
archaic and unjust.
Unlike other states, Virginia executes mentally retarded
people and people with mental illness. Particularly the
inclusion of mentally retarded people strikes many people
as egregious. Also, many states will not execute a
teenager, somebody who commits a crime under the age of 18.
Virginia has no such exception. A recent study in
Virginia, indicates that in the application of the death
penalty in Virginia, much depends on the district or the
region where the crime is committed. There are certain
areas where there are hanging judges and hanging juries.
If you happen to commit a crime in one of those
jurisdictions, you are more likely to receive the death
penalty. It's rather strange that there is not an equal or
uniform set of principles with regard to the application of
this most serious penalty.
A call to suspend the use of the death penalty until the
process is more transparent, even those who favor the use
of the death penalty will consider. Underneath the whole
question is the belief that we have a revolving door. Like
OJ Simpson, this society will not guarantee protection
unless we have the death penalty. Have we lost hope that
the judicial penal systems in the United States will
protect society? Most Virginians, if they are given the
option of life without parole or even 25 years, will choose
that as protection over and against the death penalty.
Are We a Moratorium Church?
You are free not to sign. We had a discussion about
whether we would become a Moratorium church, like a lot of
other churches in Virginia. My own belief is that it is
arrogant for me as a pastor to go to Richmond and say, "St.
Charles is a Moratorium church," when I haven't polled
every single family of the 2000 households. Were I to do
that, I might discover like the rest of Virginians that a
majority are in favor of the death penalty and may not
support a moratorium seeing it as the thin edge of the
wedge to get rid of the death penalty. So, instead of that
kind of approach, I just state my own conviction that I'm
in favor of a moratorium on the death penalty, and invite
any of you who share that opinion to sign. In this issue,
as in all other issues where the right to life or the
dignity of the human person is a dimension of public
policy, the Church's principles and values need to be
mediated through the use of individual reflection and
conscientious decision by individual citizens.
The Pope has an opinion, a conviction I happen to agree
with. There are other clergy who claim a right to dissent.
I believe that all of you have a right to dissent without
fear of excommunication in this issue. However, I believe
I have a right, a responsibility, and a duty to present the
Church's teaching on the issue and to call for your
reflection and your action as faithful citizens. I call you
to ponder these questions, and encourage you to believe
more clearly that forgiveness, redemption and
rehabilitation are values that we can expect to find not
only within our Church but also in our society.
* * *
