The more Christian a US state, the higher the percentage of executions. A recent survey shows that more than half of Catholics alone support the death penalty, even though papal directives in the Catechism state the opposite.
Majority support for the death penalty
An interesting and quite revealing survey of Catholic voters in the USA shows strong support for the introduction or continuation of executions. A poll conducted on December 11, 2025, by EWTN News & RealClear Opinion Research found that a majority of 55 percent of Catholics support the death penalty. (Source).
This proposed execution should therefore be applied to those convicted of murder. Only 20 percent rejected execution in this case as well. Twenty-five percent of the surveyed US Catholics (a total of 1,000 eligible Catholic voters) remained undecided. The analysis also differentiates between Catholics who regularly attend Mass and those who do not regularly fulfill this “sacramental duty.” According to the Catholic News Agency, those who regularly participate in the Eucharist, the eating of the “true flesh” of Jesus Christ, who was repeatedly killed by the priest, show a stronger rejection of the death penalty.
Difference – Obedient vs. Unruly
According to the survey, 52 percent of weekly Mass attendees support this drastic measure, while 26 percent oppose it. 22 percent are undecided. In contrast, 57 percent of those who attend Mass less frequently, in accordance with Catholic doctrine, support it. Of these, only 16 percent oppose execution. 27 percent are unsure of their opinion.
The difference between regular churchgoers and their “lazy” fellow believers is marginal in this sense. However, viewed from the other perspective, it becomes clear that both groups overwhelmingly support the death penalty.
A very risky position
Strictly speaking, the proponents are treading on thin ice. They hold a different position than the Roman Curia’s official doctrine. On October 13, 2017, Pope Francis, in a brief and concise statement prepared in advance for an address marking the 25th anniversary of the publication of Canon 2267 of the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, published his “new position” on the state execution of convicted persons. (Source).
“Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.
Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.“
Old Canon 2267
Canon 2267, as it stood in 1997, contains the following wording:
“Provided that the identity and responsibility of the guilty party is established with absolute certainty, the Church’s traditional teaching does not preclude recourse to the death penalty if this is the only viable way to effectively defend human life against an unjust aggressor.
However, if non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect the safety of persons against the attacker, the authority must adhere to these means, as they better correspond to the specific conditions of the common good and are more appropriate to human dignity.”
Heretic or schismatic?
Strictly speaking, Catholics who support the death penalty represent the opposite of Church teaching, and this would therefore be a “hot potato.” What is “heresy” according to the Roman Catholic understanding? Canon 2089 describes the following:
“Heresy is the persistent denial, or persistent doubt, of a truth to be believed according to divine and Catholic faith after receiving baptism;“
This canon also uses the term “schisma” in this context.:
“Schism is the term used to describe the refusal to submit to the Pope or to communion with the members of the Church who are subject to him.“
Catholic supporters of the opposite of papal legislation are now free to identify themselves as “heretics” or “schismatics”.
The crime of heresy
The Roman Catholic Church primarily views “heresy” as a division within the unity of the Body of Christ, and less as a mere “sulking” due to a lack of approval from the Pontiff’s “divine inspiration.” The alleged “heresy” was ultimately the reason for the birth of the Inquisition.
SAccording to canon law, heresy and schismatics have drastic consequences (CIC 1364).:
“§ 1: The apostate, the heretic, or the schismatic incurs excommunication as a punishment for their actions. …”
Canon 1331 contains a total of 25 positions that an excommunicated person may no longer perform, or from which such a person is excluded. According to Catholic doctrine, even the first position costs one eternal life, or rather, direct descent into hell. The Eucharistic sacrifice and other sacraments may not be received. Thus, according to the Church’s self-definition, these are absolutely essential services for salvation.
Heretics – Church vs. Gospel
The Roman Catholic “master saint” and doctrinal innovator, Thomas Aquinas, had a precise idea about how to deal with heretics:
“I answer that, With regard to heretics two points must be observed:
one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to besevered from the world by death […]” (Article 3, Summae Theologiae, ii-ii, Question 10)
What does the Gospel say about heretics?:
“But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.” (Titus 3:9-11)
Persecution, torture, killing, execution—euphemistically termed “separation from the world”—versus the biblical exhortation to admonish, rebuke, and shun a heretic. Isn’t there a subtle difference here?
Rather committed to the truth
It is surely preferable to remain faithful to the Gospel and to be committed solely to the Gospel (sola scriptura – Info) (standing on the foundation, “fundamentalist”), living the will of God according to a truly simple and clear principle, rather than submitting to an ecclesiastical power with the character of a pool of assembled pathological despots, whose ambitions are exclusively aimed at securing unlimited power and especially immeasurable wealth through dictatorial, tyrannical doctrines, laws and imaginary idolatry.
This is done in the hypocritical garb of Jesus Christ, whose robes are soaked to the neck with the blood of centuries of campaigns, persecutions, murders, and the extermination of entire peoples. Henchmen of the great adversary, marked with the mark of Cain (Info).
The Gospel stood firmly before the first Bishop of Rome
The Apostle Paul, treated as a “saint” by the Church of Rome, left a corresponding consequence for those who supplement, shorten, or modify the Gospel’s doctrine of salvation, which had long been completed during the apostles’ active time, in any way with their own ideas (tradition) (see examples below).
This is completely incompatible with the papal claim to act in apostolicity, to possess divine authority to abolish or change God’s appointed times or His laws.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:8
Bible verses from King James Version (1611)
