Case XI: A Criminal Condemned to Death Bidden to Execute Himself

Case.—A noted criminal in the West was convicted of murder in the first degree and has been sentenced to death. In sentencing him the Court gave the doomed man the alternative of dying by his own hand on a fixed day, the method to be selected by the criminal himself.

Question.—Is this not suicide? If so, is it not forbidden by the law of the country and the law of God?

Solution.—It is never lawful directly and intentionally to take one’s own life. To do so would be a grave violation of the law of charity which obliges one to love his body and soul in the proper way and to the proper degree. It would likewise be a serious infraction of the virtue of justice, for by self-destruction we are depriving God of what is His, and the State of what belongs to it, viz., the lives of its citizens. Beyond doubt the State acts properly in putting to death criminals who have been duly condemned according to the just laws of the land. But does this involve a right on the part of a judge to order a criminal so condemned to put himself to death? We know that this has been a long-standing practice among Eastern nations. Such a practice cannot be justified in conscience. Hence we find theologians very decided in declaring that a criminal ordered by the State to put an end to his own life is not bound to obey such a command. They consider that obedience in the given case would constitute grave disobedience to the divine law as expressed in the precept “thou shalt not kill.” Moreover, in such an action the dictates of the natural law would be set at naught, for nature abhors self-destruction as something inhuman and cruel, even when brought about at the command of lawful civil authority; such authority does not extend to the act of self-destruction.

As to the main question involved in the case, viz., whether a justly condemned criminal can with a safe conscience take advantage of the opportunity offered by the State and choose death at his own hands in a manner less painful, less dishonorable, and therefore less revolting to human nature, theologians are not agreed. The common opinion seems to be that a criminal is not at liberty to effect his own death, moved by reasons given above, for he is directly effecting something that is intrinsically evil and that at the same time is abhorrent to nature, a something, therefore, never to be countenanced. If, they say, a man is never justified in executing capital punishment upon his father or his children, by reason of the demands of the law of charity, so likewise is he forbidden by the same law and with greater stringency to execute himself at the behest or sufferance of the State. (Lessius, St. Thomas, Bus. Suar. Soto et alii apud St. Alphonsum de precepto V, No. 369.)

Other theologians assert that one justly condemned can with the permission of the State execute himself without breaking the law of God or doing violence to the love due himself. (Genicot, Vazquez, Bon, Elbel et alii.) “If,” it is argued, “a criminal can open his mouth and swallow the poison given him by his executioner, why cannot he take it from his own hands? What difference does it make whether he or someone else pours out the poison, as long as no further delay is vouchsafed? Just this difference, that there is less horror in taking the fatal draught from his own hands.” (Franc, Victoria.) Again, if the judge can justly commit the execution of the sentence to a stranger, he can certainly commit it to the criminal himself. In executing himself he is not taking the life of an innocent man, nor acting by his own authority (Vide Less. lib 2, 19, nn. 25, 26), nor without sanction of the law. Hence he is not disposing unjustly of what belongs to God and to the State, and is exercising the virtue of charity towards himself by choosing an easier death in preference to a more cruel one; at least one less revolting to his own sensibilities. It is evident, then, that the man whose life is forfeit to the State can follow either of the opinions given above with a safe conscience.