A Catholic Perspective on Jewish Advocacy for Noahide Law Capital Punishment (Beheadings) Now: Contrasting Justice and Addressing Misconceptions (Code Purple)

 

 See Home Page
SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com

 This article is "Code Purple": Courts of Justice

A Catholic Perspective on Jewish Advocacy for Noahide Law Capital Punishment Now: Contrasting Justice and Addressing Misconceptions

From a Catholic perspective, grounded in the teachings of the Church as articulated by the Council of Trent, the Roman Catechism (1566), and papal encyclicals such as Pope Pius XI’s Casti Connubii (1930) and Pope Francis’s revision of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2267, 2018), justice is a cardinal virtue that balances retribution with mercy, respecting the inviolable dignity of every person created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27; CCC 1807). The Noahide Laws, derived from Genesis 9:1–7 and codified in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 56a–b) and by Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 9:1), are promoted by some Jews as a universal moral code for non-Jews, including prohibitions against theft, murder, and idolatry, often carrying capital penalties. An article by Menachem Ben-Mordechai, published in The Jewish Press in 2013, titled “Like It or Not, the Seven Noachide Laws Are Still Pending,” advocates for the death penalty for various Noahide violations, including minor theft and sexual sins. This essay summarizes Ben-Mordechai’s article, refutes Catholic misconceptions that there is no current Jewish push for Noahide capital punishment, and demonstrates that the Catholic sense of justice, which limits or rejects the death penalty for most Noahide offenses, is more aligned with mercy and human dignity.

---

Full Text of Ben-Mordechai’s Article

Like It or Not, the Seven Noachide Laws Are Still Pending
There are many good, solid reasons to support applying the death penalty to a variety of crimes.
By Menachem Ben-Mordechai

• 10 Heshvan 5774 – October 13, 2013
  During a recent Shabbat, I was reading volume one of Rabbi Joseph Telushkin’s A Code of Jewish Ethics. In a discussion of permissible lying under oath, Rabbi Telushkin writes of a situation where “the punishment to be imposed on the basis of the testimony is so enormously disproportionate to the crime committed as to be a worse offense than perjury.” As an example, Rabbi Telushkin notes how pickpocketing in eighteenth-century England was a capital offense, then states:
  “It would seem to me that a person who saw an act of pickpocketing and was summoned as a witness would be morally obligated to lie under oath if his truthful testimony could result in a person being killed for an act of pickpocketing (it is better to lie under oath, if one cannot avoid testifying, than to be responsible for bringing about a non-violent felon’s death).”
  This position seems admirable, but was England’s policy in fact contrary to Torah?
  Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt”l wrote in Abraham’s Journey, “From a halakhic viewpoint, the universal mission of Abraham crystallized in seven mitzvot, the covenantal mission in 613.” The universal mission refers to the Seven Laws of Noah (Sheva Mitzvot Bnei Noach) that apply to gentiles. Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch zt”l described the Noahide laws as “the moral code for all of mankind” (commentary to Bereshit 2:16) and observed in this vein during a speech in 1859:
  “The Jewish mind understands that the law of Judaism was intended only for the sons and daughters of Abraham as the God-ordained norm for the nation that has been chosen as a nation of priests, as consecrated torchbearers of the truth that is destined to redeem all of mankind. But the Jewish mind also understands that truth as such, that justice, that enlightenment and that moral civilization are intended to be the heritage of all to whom God has given breath on earth.”
  In relation to Rabbi Telushkin’s example, one of these seven universal commandments prohibits theft. What is the punishment for theft under Noahide law? Rabbi Moshe Weiner writes in his study of the Sheva Mitzvot:
  “An adult Gentile is warned about the prohibition of theft, and can be subject to capital punishment in a court of law for this transgression. This applies whether one forcefully robs or secretly steals money or any moveable property, or kidnaps a person, or withholds the wages of his employee or other similar acts, or even an employed harvester who eats from his employer’s produce without permission to do so. For all such acts, a Gentile is liable for a capital sin, and one who commits any of these types of transgressions is considered as a robber.”
  Likewise, in his 2012 book We’re Missing the Point: What’s Wrong with the Orthodox Jewish Community and How to Fix It, Rabbi Dr. Gidon Rothstein dedicates two chapters to the Noahide laws and writes on the prohibition of theft:
  “Like murder, theft as a broad concept is intuitive, but its exact definition and the punishment accorded it in the Noahide code goes beyond the expected. First, Noahide law punishes theft of even minimal amounts of money, even if the victim is not the rightful owner. Second, like all Noahide law, theft is considered a capital crime.”
  Rabbi Dr. Rothstein observes in a footnote to that passage:
  “I suspect most of us find it difficult to justify the death penalty, even in theory, for stealing a few dollars. That may reveal how inured we have become to theft’s ubiquity; were we more sensitive to the damage theft does to a social sense of unity and common purpose, we might understand better how it could arouse the kind of moral revulsion usually reserved for murder or rape–which, incidentally, is seen as a kind of theft by at least one rabbinic author.”
  Similarly inured to certain sexual deviancies, some Jews—among them those who identify as Orthodox—might have difficulty with Noahide prohibitions in this realm. Rabbi Dr. Rothstein notes that “Judaism has a view of wrongful sexuality for non-Jews as well” and how “part of being Jewish is to adhere to and believe in a universal ethic about sexuality, one at great odds with common assumptions of contemporary Western thought.”
  As specific examples, Rabbi Soloveitchik wrote in The Emergence of Ethical Man, “It is worth mentioning that both prohibitions (bestiality and homosexuality) apply to non-Jews too and form part of a universal religion that is based upon the concept of man and personality.” Rabbi David Bar-Hayim of Machon Shilo has more recently discussed these matters.
  There are Jews who act like the Noahide laws are some historical curiosity with no binding relevance today. For instance, a self-described Orthodox rabbi recently wrote of “how foggy our understanding is of Noahide law.” Contrast this glib claim with the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s advocacy of Noahide outreach and Rabbi Soloveitchik’s reflections:
  “Our task was and still is to teach the Torah to mankind, to influence the non-Jewish world, to redeem it from an orgiastic way of living, from cruelty and insensitivity, to arouse in mankind a sense of justice and fairness. In a word, we are to teach the world the seven mitzvot that are binding on every human being.”
  Judaism does not care only about Jewish conduct. Judaism is not indifferent to whether gentiles commit idolatry, rape, etc. The Seven Laws of Noah still exist, as do both our national and global duties.
  Source: https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/a-banner-raised-high/like-it-or-not-the-seven-noachide-laws-are-still-pending/2013/10/13/

---

Summary of Ben-Mordechai’s Article

Menachem Ben-Mordechai’s article, published in The Jewish Press on October 13, 2013, argues for the contemporary relevance of the Seven Noahide Laws, emphasizing their application of the death penalty for various crimes, including minor theft and sexual sins. He begins by referencing Rabbi Joseph Telushkin’s A Code of Jewish Ethics, which suggests lying under oath to prevent a disproportionate death penalty for pickpocketing, questioning whether such a punishment aligns with Torah law (¶1–2). Ben-Mordechai cites Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik and Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch to establish the Noahide Laws as a universal moral code for non-Jews, distinct from the 613 commandments for Jews (¶3–4). He highlights the prohibition against theft, quoting Rabbi Moshe Weiner to show that even minor theft, such as eating an employer’s produce without permission, incurs capital punishment for non-Jews (¶5–6). Rabbi Dr. Gidon Rothstein’s We’re Missing the Point reinforces this, noting that Noahide theft, regardless of value, is a capital crime, challenging modern sensibilities (¶7–8). Ben-Mordechai extends this to sexual sins, citing Soloveitchik on prohibitions like bestiality and homosexuality, which also carry death penalties for non-Jews (¶9–10). He criticizes Jews who dismiss the Noahide Laws as irrelevant, invoking the Lubavitcher Rebbe and Soloveitchik to affirm their binding nature and the Jewish duty to teach them globally (¶11–12). The article concludes by asserting that Judaism is not indifferent to Gentile conduct, advocating for the enforcement of Noahide Laws, including their severe penalties (¶13).

---

Refuting Catholic Misconceptions: Jewish Advocacy for Noahide Capital Punishment

Some Catholics, particularly those unfamiliar with contemporary Jewish thought, assert that there is no current push among Jews to implement the Noahide Laws’ capital punishments, such as for idolatry, viewing them as a historical or theoretical framework. Ben-Mordechai’s article directly refutes this misconception, demonstrating that certain Jewish voices actively advocate for the legal enforcement of Noahide Laws with death penalties for a range of offenses. His endorsement of capital punishment for minor theft (e.g., eating unauthorized produce) and sexual sins like homosexuality, citing authoritative figures like Weiner, Rothstein, Soloveitchik, and the Lubavitcher Rebbe, reflects a clear intent to apply these laws now, not merely in a future messianic era (The Jewish Press, October 13, 2013, https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/a-banner-raised-high/like-it-or-not-the-seven-noachide-laws-are-still-pending/2013/10/13/). The Rebbe’s advocacy for Noahide outreach, as noted, underscores a proactive mission to influence non-Jewish societies, aligning with posts on X reporting the Sanhedrin’s 2025 call to Trump for an international Noahide court (Israel365 News, https://israel365news.com/400368/sanhedrin-letter-to-trump-you-have-been-elected-to-fulfill-a-heavenly-mission/). The Talmud’s prescription of beheadings for Noahide violations like idolatry (Sanhedrin 56a) further supports Ben-Mordechai’s stance, showing that some Jews envision immediate legal consequences, challenging Catholic assumptions of dormancy.

---

Catholic Justice: A Contrast to Noahide Capital Punishment

Catholic moral theology offers a more balanced and merciful sense of justice, significantly diverging from the Noahide Laws’ application of the death penalty for offenses like idolatry, theft, or sexual sins. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2267, revised 2018) teaches that the death penalty is inadmissible in most cases, as non-lethal means suffice to protect society, reflecting the inviolable dignity of the human person (Evangelium Vitae 56). Historically, the Church permitted capital punishment for grave crimes like murder (Roman Catechism, Part III, on the Fifth Commandment), but modern teaching emphasizes mercy and rehabilitation (CCC 2266). The Noahide Laws’ death penalty for minor theft, as Ben-Mordechai advocates, citing Weiner and Rothstein, is disproportionate, violating Catholic principles of proportionality (Gaudium et Spes 27). Similarly, executing individuals for idolatry—often encompassing Catholic Trinitarian worship (Sanhedrin 63b)—or sexual sins like homosexuality contradicts Catholic justice, which seeks conversion and forgiveness, not death (CCC 2357–2359). The Church condemns idolatry as a sin (CCC 2112–2114) but addresses it through evangelization, not execution, as seen in St. Paul’s dialogue with pagans (Acts 17:22–31).

Catholic justice prioritizes the common good and equal dignity (Rerum Novarum 37, 1891), rejecting the Noahide Laws’ ethnic disparities, such as harsher penalties for non-Jews in feticide (The Rainbow Covenant, Dallen, 2003, pp. 196–197) or indirect murder (Sanhedrin 77a). The Roman Catechism (Part III, on the Fifth Commandment) insists that all murders, direct or indirect, are grave sins, ensuring no exemptions based on ethnicity. Unlike Noahide courts, which Ben-Mordechai envisions enforcing beheadings (Sanhedrin 56a), Catholic courts, guided by canon law, balance retribution with mercy, protecting life while promoting redemption (CCC 2267). This merciful ethic, rooted in Christ’s call to love all (John 13:34), surpasses the Noahide framework’s severity, offering a justice that honors human dignity.

---

Conclusion: Catholic Resistance to Noahide Capital Punishment

Menachem Ben-Mordechai’s article, advocating for the death penalty under Noahide Law for minor theft, idolatry, and sexual sins, refutes Catholic misconceptions that no Jews currently push for such punishments. His call for immediate enforcement, supported by Weiner, Rothstein, and the Lubavitcher Rebbe, reveals a proactive agenda, challenging claims of historical irrelevance. Catholic justice, limiting the death penalty and rejecting it for most Noahide offenses (Catechism 2267), aligns with mercy and dignity, contrasting with Noahidism’s disproportionate severity (Sanhedrin 56a). Catholics must resist this flawed framework, proclaiming Christ’s universal salvation (Acts 4:12) and the Church’s mission to uphold justice (Matthew 28:19). Trusting in Our Lady, we defend the imago Dei against systems that devalue life, affirming the Gospel’s call to mercy (Luke 6:36).