Back

The “hard case” of Timothy McVeigh

           On April 6, 2001, The Criterion, the newspaper for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, carried a front-page headline – “We must choose life, even for McVeigh”. The caption introduced a statement by Archbishop Daniel M. Buechlein, O.S.B.

          Archbishop Buechlein issued his statement as general chairman of the Indiana Catholic Conference and as the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church in central and southern Indiana. The only federal death chamber is located in Terre Haute within the Indianapolis archdiocese. It is there on May 16 that the execution of Timothy J. McVeigh, the convicted murderer in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, will occur.

          There is no doubt that Archbishop Buechlein recognizes both the unimaginable heinous nature of the worst mass murder in the nation and the insufferable loss of human lives, “victims of human madness.”

          The pastoral statement candidly observes that the “McVeigh case tests the mettle of the emerging Catholic view about the inappropriateness of capital punishment.”

          So-called “hard cases” in ethics tend to justify exceptions to general moral norms. Accordingly, the archbishop acknowledges that rational analysis becomes hard-pressed “in the face of the emotion that this man’s crime evokes.”

          The cover story in the May 4 edition of USA Today confirmed this point. The feature reported that half of the 38 percent of Americans who generally oppose the death penalty concede that McVeigh ought to be executed.

          When applied to exceptionally monstrous cases, arguments against the death penalty will not appear to be compelling, much less apodictic.

          “Hard cases” inevitably neutralize other competing moral considerations which provide a wider context of interpretation. On this question in particular, moral analysis must shift away from the emotive entanglement of an unspeakable crime to the social impact of state executions as the rhetoric of the national story.

          Why does any execution symbolize the national ethos better than a live prisoner?

          Thus, the pastoral statement cautions, “In matters such as this, the good of society requires that we rise to the challenge of a measured and larger vision.”

          In reviewing the traditional moral grounds for criminal punishment, the pastoral statement highlights the contemporary rationale against their justification for exercising the death penalty.

          While upholding the principle of the right of the state to impose a capital sentence, the archbishop draws a conclusion in line with the teaching of Pope John Paul II as reflected now in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nn. 2266-2267). That traditional principle notwithstanding, Archbishop Buechlein contends: “… (y)et we must oppose the death penalty because the circumstances of our day do not warrant it.”

          Pope John Paul II’s seminal text from The Gospel of Life (1995) is then quoted as support: “As a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” (n.56)

          Archbishop Beuchlein builds his case on the premise that the evil effects of the state’s exercise of the right to impose the death penalty outweigh the good effects.

          On the one hand, greater harm is created by feeding “a frenzy for revenge.” On the other hand, there is “no demonstrable proof that the death penalty deters violence.”

          The pastoral statement rejects revenge as liberating or ennobling for the families of victims or the victims of crime.

          Although society is obligated not to forget the victims of crime or the grief of their loved ones, “(t)he truly honorable memorial is to choose life rather than death.”

          Archbishop Beuchlein’s pastoral statement is consistent with the repeated and extensive calls since 1980 from the Catholic bishops of the United Stated to end capital punishment.

          In their recent statement (2000) on a Catholic perspective on crime and criminal justice, the bishops witness to their strong conviction “that capital punishment should no longer be used since there are better ways to protect society, and the death penalty diminishes respect for life.”

          Father Ronald Ketteler is director of ecumenism and continuing education of priests, Episcopal liaison to the Messenger and chair of the humanities division at Thomas More College.

Catholic Conference of Kentucky

1042 Burlington Lane

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

502-875-4345 502-875-2841 Fax cckstaffATccky.org

Last modified: November, 2008