Archbishop Wenski should re-read the Cathechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition.
He will find that the Church does not rule out the death penalty, but simply discourages it if there are other options to protect society.
This is a prudential judgement exercised by the laity, not by prelates of the Church.

If our good Bishops keep over-stepping the bounds of their authority, people will continue to disregard them more and more.

God bless you Bishop Wenski!!  Finally somebody who is willing to be an example of what it means to be unconditionally pro-life.

All life is sacred.

Sorry Archbishop but a convicted murderer on death row forfeited his dignity when he took another’s life. Society has no obligation to feed and house him.

Gene & Fred Penar:

No, the Catechism only allows for the Death Penalty when there are no other options for self-defense against the prisoner.  The Catechism calls it, ““are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” 68” 

That means if you have a prisoner contained, you are NOT ALLOWED TO KILL HIM.  Stop trying to twist the Catechism to fit your own needs. If you believe the death penalty is acceptable, then that’s your choice.  You are also not choosing to be in Communion with the Catholic Church.

Gene & Fred Penar -

The Catechism and Pope JPII were very, very clear on this.  Capital Punishment is only allowed in the case of self-defense where society cannot protect itself from an offender.  JPII referred to such situations as “practically non-existent.” 

It is not good for the soul to try and twist Church teaching in order to fit one’s bloodthirst.

At 6:00 pm I will join Reverend Marino’s prayer vigil in a Divine Mercy Chaplet.  May the intercessions of a Pro-life Faithful grant Mr. Pardo God’s great Mercy that needs no approval from we, His creatures.

Gene & Fred are right.

The state has the right to use capital punishment.

At its very worse, capital punishment is killing the guilty. Abortion is murdering the innocent. Huge difference.

With that in mind, Wenski should be more selective in what and who he launches a prayer campaign for.

This Archbishop must have way too much time on his hands, this is ridiculous, one more reason why people disregard the bishops when they do try speak out on important issues.

For me it all comes down to the flaws in our merely human processes of “justice”.  ARE WE SURE ENOUGH TO TAKE A LIFE?  Even if I’d seen the alleged act(s) with my own eyes, there have been enough recent investigations of eyewitness veracity to raise a reasonable doubt in my mind where the death penalty is involved.  Since I read my email too late for anything else, I will pray for the soul of Manuel Pardo Jr.

Now, if some nut-case is captured in front of witnesses in the act of committing “great evil”, that would, IMHO, be a different thing entirely, especially in the absence of any contrition.  (Think Islamists shouting “Allahu akbar” and demanding to be sent to their 72-virgin reward when tried for their evil.)

CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition -
QUOTE:  “2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty,
if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” UNQUOTE.
and
“WORTHINESS to RECEIVE HOLY COMMUNION, General Principles” - Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Pope Benedict) 2004.
QUOTE: ” 3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.
For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion.
While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment.
There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia. ” UNQUOTE

” if not practically non-existent.”  So, given the availability of our penal system here in the U.S., where do you think it is ok to kill a prisoner?

If “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” means there is “wiggle room” on the Death Penalty, logic follows that cases where abortion are allowed to preserve the life of the mother means that there is “wiggle room” on abortion.

Here’s a question for you.  Many pro-choicer’s scoff at pro-lifers because these same pro-lifers belief that capital punishment is ok.  They tell us we are hypocrites even to our own faith.

If you could come out and say you are 100% pro-life, including anti-Capital Punishment, and by doing so you could convert just one person over to be anti-abortion, wouldn’t it be worth it to save potentially one baby?  Is capital punishment so important to you that you wouldn’t abandon it to save even one baby?