Comments on: Walk the Talk Show with Waylon Lewis: Sister Helen Prejean of Dead Man Walking fame.

By: Dudley Sharp

Dudley Sharp — Mon, 24 May 2010 15:59:40 +0000

Brother Rog duplicates one of the obvious errors of the Catechism.____The Catechism finds that we should end the death penalty in order to provide alternate sanctions "without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself" (2267)____First, the Catechism appears to be reversing the redemption process – the Catechism states, above, that the wrongdoer redeems himself. The biblical/theological realities appear to find that all wrongdoers can/should seek redemption, but that God provides redemption to the wrongdoer by His grace.__ __Secondly,the Church is, hereby, stating that the death penalty is "taking away from him (the executed party) the possibility of redeeming himself". __ __The Catechism is stating that the God invoked sanction of death takes away the possibility of redemption. Think about that. There is nothing to defend such a claim, in such a context.__ __All of our sins have us die "early". Is there a case, whereby God has erased the possibility of our redemption, solely because of our earthly and "early" deaths? Such an interpretation is, in context, flatly, against God's message and cannot stand.____contd

By: BrotherRog

BrotherRog — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 22:28:14 +0000

Mr. Sharp,

You state above: "If the most important part of any Christian ministry is saving souls….what could be a more important point for a death row ministry? Ending the death penalty?"
That's just it. I have a hard time fathoming that you don't get it. If someone is killed, we remove the ability for the people they've wronged to forgive them directly; we remove the ability of the offender to own up to what they did, express remorse, and ask forgiveness; we reduce the opportunities for the Holy Spirit to work in the offender's life to restore and reconcile them as fully as possible to the community (even if it may mean spending the rest of their life behind bars). In sum, killing an offender reduces the opportunities for them to know and experience salvation. It also limits the extent of the salvation (and even possibility for it in some cases) of the grieving families who mourn their loved one who was killed by the offender. Salvation in the Judeo-Chrisian sense, is not merely personal, it is relational, it is social and it hence involves reconciliation of persons – and that can't happen if the offender is killed.

To help drive that last point home, when I've been wronged in life, and have yet to forgive the persons who have wronged me, my own salvation is diminished.

Finally, as it is often put, "When Jesus said to love your enemies, I'm pretty sure he meant don't kill them."

By: Dudley Sharp

Dudley Sharp — Wed, 20 May 2009 03:24:54 +0000

Rev. Wolsey:

Possibly I wasn't clear enough. I don't, personally, use of need biblical instruction for death penalty support. I believe that it is a just and appropriate sanction for some crimes. Period.

I only researched the Christain support of the death penalty to counter the absurd claims by anti death penalty folks that Christianity doesn't support the death penalty.

I think one scholar found 33 sins/crimes for which the death penalty was the appropriate sentence, by biblical instruction. My response is so what?

My personal belief is that the death penalty should be applicable in murder cases and terrorism planning and acts.

I think a devout biblical adherent can find that murder may be the sole sin/crime for which the death penalty is to be appplied, because, I believe it is the only sin/crime for which biblical instruction does not allow mitigation for a lesser sentence.

I posted a lot of biblical and theological referenes for the death penalty, which this site , sadly, removed, But go to the other site you posted to and look at my replies.

By: Rev. Roger Wolsey

Rev. Roger Wolsey — Tue, 19 May 2009 21:48:30 +0000

Dudley, I fully agree with you about the importance fo public policy debate and what it's all about. FYI, this website is not mine, I'm merely a dude with an opinion like you who is posting on this forum. That said, re: "The ONLY reason I present the material is in the context of Christian support for the death penalty. That is the topic I am dealing with." So, in THAT context, shall I take it that you support the "Biblical" assertions that homosexuals and persons found guilty of adultery should be given the death penalty? If not, why hot?

By: Dudley SHarp

Dudley SHarp — Tue, 19 May 2009 18:12:30 +0000

Rev. Wolsey:

In my reading of the literature and in my conversations with scholars, Saints Augustine and Aquinas stand alone as the preeminant biblical scholars, theologians and philosophers. You are of course, free, to put them on your own trash heap as "bastardizing the faith". I think you injure your credibility by doing so.

You put Prejean's video up because you find her words important, just as I do. Words matter, thus my proper response to her.

It is important for any public policy debate to have an exchange of ideas and fact checking. I am sure that you agree.

The fact that you did not review the important factual rebuttals to her work speaks volumes, as you know.

Your used car remark is a bad sign that you are headed toward immature discussion. Please don't go there.

The www makes geographic location irrelevant.

By: Dudley Sharp

Dudley Sharp — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:09:23 +0000

The links aren't working, just go to: http://homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Death%20P... all the tiles can be found there.

By: Dudley Sharp

Dudley Sharp — Tue, 19 May 2009 16:43:04 +0000

In Christian bilical and theological studies, Sainst Augustine and Aquinas stand above all others, as per my review of the literature, as well as in discussions with many scholars. You are free to disagree, of course.

There is no need for you to turn personal. I sent my essay on Sr. Prejean, so that your readership would have a balance for perspective. The fact that you elected not to review the blantant errors and contradictions of Sr. Prejean speaks volumes., as you know.

My concentration is on a balance of ideas within the death penalty debate, as well a a consitent and fact based challenge to many erroneous anti death penalty claims. Sr. Prejean is but one, highly visible, part of that effort.

You indicated your value of her importance by plaing the video on your site. I concur with that value and, therefore, added a different perspective. That is what public policy debate is all about.

Don't you agree?

By: Dudley Sharp

Dudley Sharp — Tue, 19 May 2009 15:43:39 +0000

Rev. Wolsey:____I never implied that Carey's writings were the only Quaker stance on the matter. His is, however, a thoughtful, intelligent writer, a biblical scholar and past President of George Fox College.____You mentioned Quakers, as did I. It is the reasonable exchange of ideas.____The teachings in Genesis, theologcally, are for all people and all times. If you have some writings which contradict that, please present them.____You may have noticed that I don't interpret passages of the bibie. I use the words of biblical scholars, theologians, Popes, saints, and other of the religious, etc.____I don't question the biblical words of God, ever. The ONLY reason I present the material is in the context of Christian support for the death penalty. That is the topic I am dealing with. If you wish to challenge the words and instructions of God for other topics, you are welcome to do so.____I counter the nonsense that there isn't strong, consistent biblical and theological teachings in Christianity.____I don't need biblical support. For me, the death penalty is a just and appropriate sanction for some crimes.__

By: Rev. Roger Wolsey

Rev. Roger Wolsey — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:58:49 +0000

4. Augustine and Aquinas had many great thoughts about the faith, but they certainly had the effect of bastardizing the faith by accommodating it to worldy norms and values.
5. I'm amazed that you came across this article that was just published in an obscure magazine from Boulder. If I'm not mistaken, you neither live in Boulder, nor Colorado. It occurs to me that you may have some sort of odd obsession with Helen Prejean that compels you to google her name everyday to seek out new articles and news reports about her so that you can lob in your 2cents worth of criticism of her. Did she sell you a bad car one time or something?

By: Rev. Roger Wolsey

Rev. Roger Wolsey — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:57:58 +0000

Dudley,
1. That "Quaker scholar" does not represent the Quaker stance on that matter and you know it.
2. The "divine decree" which you reference doesn't necessarily apply to the Gentile world, but perhaps, arguably, to the Jewish people.
3. It strikes me as peculiar how literally you seem to interpret passages of the Bible, but I doubt if you read all passages that way. If you do, you don't eat pork, wear clothing of mixed fibers, or approve of women initiating divorce, or of remarriage. If you don't then you are inconsistent in how you read the Bible.