The morality of being a costumed vigilante

[The_Harlequin_King]

Any ideas on what Christian theology has to say on the matter of being a costumed vigilante? Obviously, Batman comes to mind first, but for pre-comics examples, there's Zorro, and also perhaps the Scarlet Pimpernel; both of whom are predecessors to the Dark Knight.

In particular, is it moral to use lethal force like the Punisher when the justice system is hopelessly corrupt?

[Resurrexi]

In a society where the State is not defending the people, vigilantism (when done justly) seems not only acceptable, but commendable and virtuous.

[SouthpawLink]

Obviously, you are allowed to defend yourself and help out your neighbor in a case of necessity, but beyond that, you're still a private person.  In the absence of competent/legitimate public authority...  I don't know (I lean towards 'No,' but the citizens may be able to set up some kind of political structure).  Have any theologians ever tackled the issue?

[Crusading Philologist]

Even in a situation without a competent justice system, I don't think that we would be permitted to go around committing random acts of righteous vengeance. According to St Thomas, we would need public authority to do something like that. Of course, that doesn't tell us what we should do when the state is unable to enforce the law. Although, we should also keep in mind that there was nothing like the modern state in St Thomas's time. So, presumably other pre-state centers of authority, such as the family or the Church, would be able to Maintain justice in the absence of the state. I think people would also be justified in forming some sort of organization responsible for defense and law enforcement, like medieval guilds and communes.

[The_Harlequin_King]

Even in a situation without a competent justice system, I don't think that we would be permitted to go around committing random acts of righteous vengeance.

Do you make a distinction between Batman style justice and Punisher style? Batman never kills or uses lethal weapons against people. The Punisher, of course, does.

[Crusading Philologist]

If you directly witnessed the crime taking place, I think you would be justified in using violence in an attempt to stop the crime or capture the criminal. However, even if you don't intend to kill anyone, I still don't think that you would be justified in hunting down random criminals without public authority.

[SaintSebastian]

I think defense of others is fine, but meting out justice as a private person would be exceeding your rights.

"He who takes vengeance on the wicked in keeping with his rank and position does not usurp what belongs to God but makes use of the power granted him by God. For it is written (Romans 13:4) of the earthly prince that "he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." If, however, a man takes vengeance outside the order of divine appointment, he usurps what is God's and therefore sins."

Secunda Secundæ Partis. Q108, Art. 1,  Reply to Obj. 1

If the person(s) God has given this authority to is negligent in their duty, then I think we must be patient and wait for God Himself to execute justice (which He will eventually) rather than take it into our own hands.

So I think being Batman is acceptable, but being the Punisher is not (as far as I understand their characters).

[The_Harlequin_King]

However, even if you don't intend to kill anyone, I still don't think that you would be justified in hunting down random criminals without public authority.

Alrighty.

Returning to Batman, I think it depends on the comic author's interpretation on whether he has "public authority" or not. Most of the time, though, in any story arc where Batman has been established for a while, the chief of police (Gordon) works closely with him. So if he's not officially deputized, the Gotham police unofficially accepts him as a necessity.

[devotedknuckles]

It depends on whether the state has not lived up to it's bogus claim of protecting the citizenry. Once that bogus clIm fizzles I. Peopel eyes I becomes the duty of youto protect yourself as it always is and your family and those around you. Even when the bogus claim of state is intact. Justice is hardly served. Depending on where you are. In Canada An example is Carla homolka who kidnapped and murdered girls with her husband and murdered her own sister  in 12 yeArs she go out and is doin well now.
Justice?
Maybe for some but if that was me boy oe daughter mark me words I would happily accept that as justice no damn way. It's an outrage against justice to expect people to swallow injustice. Isherwood the state stands to it's bogus claims or it does t but justice must be  served
my 02 I csn go on. Sadly it's a rather long litany of injustice being protected by the state at the expense of justice  but that a different thread. And I'll rather not chat about ulster
 

[Rosarium]

Any ideas on what Christian theology has to say on the matter of being a costumed vigilante? Obviously, Batman comes to mind first, but for pre-comics examples, there's Zorro, and also perhaps the Scarlet Pimpernel; both of whom are predecessors to the Dark Knight.

In particular, is it moral to use lethal force like the Punisher when the justice system is hopelessly corrupt?

Usually, no. However, if there is means of justice, then any means itself because the "government". A just government exists for the fulfillment of the temporal needs of people and for protection of those people. A good government starts when a person says "that isn't right, I should do something about it".

So, to fight against injustice is just. Sometimes the means to do this are forceful. Zorro, as portrayed in the The Mark of Zorro in 1940 shows a very just man doing what is good for everyone and the Church. He only uses the mask while it is needed. The Punisher, although one of my favourites (for being human) shows a justifiable human actor, but he is less just than the classic Zorro.

To think of real examples, of the underground movements in the Soviet territories, one must admit that defying the "law" when it is so against natural law and divine law is a proper course at times.