Bishop says tighter gun laws will help build culture of life

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prodigal_Son1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And how many have their weapons already locked and loaded in fear and are potentially ready to shoot most anyone - however innocent - who dares commit the heinous crime of coming anywhere near them?
Absolute hyperbole!

And to the other proponents of big government who bow down to the state, I would suggest you really have no concept of the political maneuvers well documented in police states by those who have lived through them, only to find that eventually, through an incremental process of restriction, their precious liberty is gone. I, for one, have a healthy dose of self-preservation, but it goes way beyond that to include living in a place where my individual freedom (s) is not threatened.
 
politics is the ultimate game, and the gun grabbers lost. the president was the victim of bad timing. a sour economy, North Korea, the Boston bombers all sideswiped the momentum he had from exploiting the CT shootings. and with the coming election cycle, he’s never get enough congressional or senate votes to grab.

F
Running the race is the ultimate ‘game,’ as Paul said.
 
Gun laws?*** Instead ***of Bishops? :confused: 🤷

Breaking story: “New gun law has abortion clinics closing in droves!” < Don’t see it. :nope:

I’m a non-gun-owner Catholic but I propose a (silly) compromise to keep the peace:

The Church should manufacture guns under the brand name “Sword*.”

Come to think of it, maybe the Church can buy stock in a cloak making enterprise to help the flock clear the preliminaries.
  • Per the Bishop’s counsel the new “Sword” will be a “tighter gun”! :doh2:
http://i.tfcdn.com/img2/i4OfA0oAY5r...nl5yfq4-RETfU9_EMNXA083RKEnXRy-rIB0A/fyVMtP8A

“Sword and Cloak Set” (plastic bullets or marshmallows not included)

:gopray2: - **“Please send us more clerics who teach of you … and shepherd our Dioceses.
To pick up the slack for the ones out Social Crusading with the politicians” **
If that verse supported ‘weapon’ rights, why did the early Church suffer such martyrdom for over 300 years? Seriously, that misapplied verse has been responded to multiple times, with Catholic commentaries, and the early Church fathers. I guess some missed it. :rolleyes:
 
Luk 22:35-38

Ver 35. And he said to them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked you any thing? And they said, Nothing.36. Then said he to them, But now, he that has a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip, and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.37. For I say to you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.38. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said to them, It is enough.

CYRIL; Our Lord had foretold to Peter that he should deny Him; namely, at the time of His being taken. But having once made mention of His being taken captive, He next announces the struggle that would ensue against the Jews. Hence it is said, And he said to them, When I sent you without purse, &c. For the Savior had sent the holy Apostles to preach in the cities and towns the kingdom of heaven, bidding them to take no thought of the things of the body, but to place their whole hope of salvation in l km.

CHRYS. Now as one who teaches to swim, at first indeed placing his hands under his pupils, carefully supports them, but afterward frequently withdrawing his hand, bids them help themselves, nay even lets them sink a little; so likewise did Christ deal with His disciples. At the beginning truly He was present to them, giving them most richly abundance of all things; as it follows, And they said to them, Nothing.

But when it was necessary for them to show their own strength, He withdrew from them for a little His grace, bidding them do something of themselves; as it follows, But now he that has a purse, that is, wherein to carry money, let him take it, and likewise his scrip, that is, to carry provisions in. And truly when they had neither shoes, nor girdle, nor staff, nor money, they never suffered the want of any thing. But when He allowed them purse and scrip, they seem to suffer hunger, and thirst, and nakedness. As if He said to them, Hitherto all things have been most richly supplied to you, but now I would have you also experience poverty, therefore I hold you no longer to the former rule, but I command you to get purse and scrip. Now God might even to the end have kept them in plenty, but for many reasons He was unwilling to do so. First that they might impute nothing to themselves, but acknowledge that every thing flowed from God; secondly, that they might learn moderation; thirdly, that they might not think too highly of themselves. For this cause while He permitted them to fall into many unlooked for evils, He relaxed the rigor of the former law, lest it should become grievous and intolerable.

BEDE; For He does not train His disciples in the same rule of life, in time of persecution, as in the time of peace. When He sent them to preach, He ordered them to take nothing in the way, ordaining in truth, that He who preaches the Gospel should live by the Gospel. But when the crisis of death was at hand, and the whole nation persecuted both the shepherd and the Hock, He proposes a law adapted to the time, allowing them to take the necessaries of life, until the rage of the persecutors was abated, and the time of preaching the Gospel had returned. Herein He leaves us also an example, that at times when a just reason urges, we may intermit without blame somewhat of the strictness of our determination.

AUG. By no inconsistency then of Him who commands, but by the reason of the dispensation, according to the diversity of times are commandments, counsels, or permissions changed.

AMBROSE; But He who forbids to strike, why does He order them to buy a sword? unless perchance that there may be a defense prepared, but no necessary retaliation; a seeming ability to be revenged, without the will. Hence it follows, And he who has not, (that is, a purse,) let him sell his garment, and buy a sword,

CHRYS. What is this? He who said, If any one strike you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also, now arms His disciples, and with a sword only. For if it were fitting to be completely armed, not only must a man possess a sword, but shield and helmet. But even though a thousand had arms of this kind, how could the eleven be prepared for all the attacks and lying in wait of people, tyrants, allies, and nations, and how should they not quake at the mere sight of armed men, who had been brought up near lakes and rivers? We must not then suppose that He ordered them to possess swords, but by the swords He points at the secret attack of the Jews. And hence it follows, For I say to you, that this that is written must, be accomplished in me: And he was numbered with the transgressors.

THEOPHYL. While they were contending among themselves above concerning priority, He said, It is not a time of dignities, but rather of danger and slaughter. Behold I even your Master am led to a disgraceful death, to be reckoned with the transgressors. For these things which are prophesied of Me have an end, that is, a fulfillment. Wishing then to hint at a violent attack, He made mention of a sword, not altogether revealing it, lest they should be seized with dismay, nor did He entirely provide that they should not be shaken by these sudden attacks, but that afterwards recovering, they might marvel how He gave Himself up to the Passion, a ransom for the salvation of men.

BASIL; Or the Lord does not bid them carry purse and scrip and buy a sword, but predicts that it should come to pass, that in truth the Apostles, forgetful of the time of the Passion, of the gifts and law of their Lord, would dare to take up the sword. For often does the Scripture make use of the imperative form of speech in the place of prophecy. Still in many books we do not find, Let him take, or buy, but, he will take, he will buy.
 
continued…

THEOPHYL. Or He hereby foretell to them that they would incur hunger and thirst, which He implies by the scrip, and sundry kinds of misery, which he intends by the sword.

CYRIL; Or else; When our Lord says, He who has a purse, let him take it, likewise a scrip, His discourse He addressed to His disciples, but in reality He regards every individual Jew; as if He says, If any Jew is rich in resources, let him collect them together and fly. But if any one oppressed with extreme poverty applies himself to religion, let him also sell his cloak and buy a sword. For the terrible attack of battle shall overtake them, so that nothing shall suffice to resist it. He next lays open the cause of these evils, namely, that He suffered the penalty due to the wicked, being crucified with thieves. And when it shall have come at last to this, the word of dispensation will receive its end. But to the persecutors shall happen all that has been foretold by the Prophets. These things then God prophesied concerning what should befall the country of the Jews, but the disciples understood not the depth of His words, thinking they had need of swords against the coming attack of the traitor. Whence it follows; But they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords.

CHRYS. And in truth, if He wished them to use human aid, not a hundred swords would have sufficed; but if He willed not the assistance of man, even two are superfluous.

THEOPHYL. Our Lord then was unwilling to blame them as not understanding Him, but saying, It is enough, He dismissed them; as when we are addressing any one, and see that he does not understand what is said, we say, Well, let us leave him, lest we trouble him. But some say, that our Lord said, It is enough, ironically; as if He said, Since there are two swords, they will amply suffice against so large a multitude as is about to attack us.

BEDE; Or the two swords suffice for a testimony that Jesus suffered voluntarily. The one indeed was to teach the Apostles the presumption of their contending for their Lord, and His inherent virtue of healing; the other never taken out of its sheath, to show that they were not even permitted to do all that they could for His defense.

AMBROSE; Or, because the law does not forbid to return a blow, perhaps He says to Peter, as he is offering the two swords, It is enough, as though it were lawful until the Gospel; in order that there may be in the law, the knowledge of Justice; in the Gospel, perfection of goodness. There is also a spiritual sword, that you may sell your patrimony, and buy the word, by which the nakedness of the soul is clothed. There is also a sword of suffering, so that you may strip your body, and with the spoils of your sacrificed flesh purchase for yourself the sacred crown of martyrdom. Again it moves, seeing that the disciples put forward two swords, whether perhaps one is not of the Old Testament, the other of the New, whereby we are armed against the wiles of the devil. Therefore the Lord says, It is enough, because he wanted nothing who is fortified by the teaching of both Testaments.
 
you’ll have to explain how God works to Prodigal, who is somewhat misinformed.

regarding the Warsaw Uprising, apparently our CCC does not approve.

F
You may want to read the rules of the forum. It’s not allowed to ‘suppose’ what another believes, and it’s also against the rules to change the topic to posters personally.
 
I honor the memory of the Jews who died in the Warsaw Uprising, CCC notwithstanding. I don’t think I could explain why in terms that would make sense to you.

I’d stop my daughter’s would-be rapist with a gunshot. if you’d choose different, its not for me to criticize or question your motives.

F
Perhaps you’ll share with us how background checks would prevent you from defending your family?
 
Luk 22:35-38

<snipped, only because of the overflow of letters which by the way the forum rules state not to write overly long statements)

But when it was necessary for them to show their own strength, He withdrew from them for a little His grace, bidding them do something of themselves; as it follows, But now he that has a purse, that is, wherein to carry money, let him take it, and likewise his scrip, that is, to carry provisions in. And truly when they had neither shoes, nor girdle, nor staff, nor money, they never suffered the want of any thing. But when He allowed them purse and scrip, they seem to suffer hunger, and thirst, and nakedness. As if He said to them, Hitherto all things have been most richly supplied to you, but now I would have you also experience poverty, therefore I hold you no longer to the former rule, but I command you to get purse and scrip. Now God might even to the end have kept them in plenty, but for many reasons He was unwilling to do so. First that they might impute nothing to themselves, but acknowledge that every thing flowed from God; secondly, that they might learn moderation; thirdly, that they might not think too highly of themselves. For this cause while He permitted them to fall into many unlooked for evils, He relaxed the rigor of the former law, lest it should become grievous and intolerable.

BEDE; For He does not train His disciples in the same rule of life, in time of persecution, as in the time of peace. When He sent them to preach, He ordered them to take nothing in the way, ordaining in truth, that He who preaches the Gospel should live by the Gospel. But when the crisis of death was at hand, and the whole nation persecuted both the shepherd and the Hock, He proposes a law adapted to the time, allowing them to take the necessaries of life, until the rage of the persecutors was abated, and the time of preaching the Gospel had returned. Herein He leaves us also an example, that at times when a just reason urges, we may intermit without blame somewhat of the strictness of our determination.

AUG. By no inconsistency then of Him who commands, but by the reason of the dispensation, according to the diversity of times are commandments, counsels, or permissions changed.

AMBROSE; But He who forbids to strike, why does He order them to buy a sword? unless perchance that there may be a defense prepared, but no necessary retaliation; a seeming ability to be revenged, without the will. Hence it follows, And he who has not, (that is, a purse,) let him sell his garment, and buy a sword,

CHRYS. What is this? He who said, If any one strike you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also, now arms His disciples, and with a sword only. For if it were fitting to be completely armed, not only must a man possess a sword, but shield and helmet. But even though a thousand had arms of this kind, how could the eleven be prepared for all the attacks and lying in wait of people, tyrants, allies, and nations, and how should they not quake at the mere sight of armed men, who had been brought up near lakes and rivers? We must not then suppose that He ordered them to possess swords, but by the swords He points at the secret attack of the Jews. And hence it follows, For I say to you, that this that is written must, be accomplished in me: And he was numbered with the transgressors.

THEOPHYL. While they were contending among themselves above concerning priority, He said, It is not a time of dignities, but rather of danger and slaughter. Behold I even your Master am led to a disgraceful death, to be reckoned with the transgressors. For these things which are prophesied of Me have an end, that is, a fulfillment. Wishing then to hint at a violent attack, He made mention of a sword, not altogether revealing it, lest they should be seized with dismay, nor did He entirely provide that they should not be shaken by these sudden attacks, but that afterwards recovering, they might marvel how He gave Himself up to the Passion, a ransom for the salvation of men.

BASIL; Or the Lord does not bid them carry purse and scrip and buy a sword, but predicts that it should come to pass, that in truth the Apostles, forgetful of the time of the Passion, of the gifts and law of their Lord, would dare to take up the sword. For often does the Scripture make use of the imperative form of speech in the place of prophecy. Still in many books we do not find, Let him take, or buy, but, he will take, he will buy.
This from the fellow who was so vociferous and in effect being against the defunding of planned parenthood? :rolleyes: No, not offtopic, we are talking about lives but only the lives that fit your agenda.
 
This from the fellow who was so vociferous and in effect being against the defunding of planned parenthood? :rolleyes: No, not offtopic, we are talking about lives but only the lives that fit your agenda.
You need to simmer down. A quick reading of your posts this morning reveals extreme anger. At what, I have no clue. Maybe you should just turn off the computer and get some fresh air.
 
This from the fellow who was so vociferous and in effect being against the defunding of planned parenthood? :rolleyes: No, not offtopic, we are talking about lives but only the lives that fit your agenda.
What are you talking about? I am pro life, from conception until natural death, for all people, as the Church teaches. It gets old to be falsely accused because I don’t agree with all on all political issues.
 
Cars take lives. Bathtubs take lives. Ladders take lives
Cars are designed for transportation and bathtubs for cleansing. None of the have the primary function of killing. Change the function, then it becomes a moral issue, a car rigged to explode, a ladder designed to collapse under weight or an electrified bathtub.
 
What are you talking about? I am pro life, from conception until natural death, for all people, as the Church teaches. It gets old to be falsely accused because I don’t agree with all on all political issues.
But effectively pro-life, or just theoretically? Anyone who give the Democrat party support is participating in that party’s agenda of abortion rights. Being pro-life includes a political component - working to change our laws so that they protect the unborn. It would seem that helping to keep those in power who are working to maintain anti-life laws would be an ineffective pro-life strategy.

Ishii
 
But effectively pro-life, or just theoretically? Anyone who give the Democrat party support is participating in that party’s agenda of abortion rights. Being pro-life includes a political component - working to change our laws so that they protect the unborn. It would seem that helping to keep those in power who are working to maintain anti-life laws would be an ineffective pro-life strategy.

Ishii
I understand pro life, and it’s not ‘theoretic.’ I also believe it extends to many other issues, where the Church calls for a ‘dignity of life.’ The issue becomes politicized often, when other issues are discussed and the bishops are questioned for not staying with the ‘single’ issue. Christ called us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the stranger, care for the sick, and visit the imprisoned, among other things; primarily to love one another, including our enemies, as He loves us. There was no single issue, forsaking all others. To forsake a dignity of life in one area, forsakes life in another. We are called to be a people of life on ALL issues, and not just one that seems to be sometimes used to advance positions on other issues.
 
Less than 8% of the time does a citizen wound his or her attacker, and in less than one in a thousand instances is the attacker killed.
Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes are prevented just by showing a gun. In less than 0.9% of these instances is the gun ever actually fired.
Two-thirds of the people who die each year from gunfire are criminals being shot by other criminals.

 
There was no single issue, forsaking all others. To forsake a dignity of life in one area, forsakes life in another. We are called to be a people of life on ALL issues, and not just one that seems to be sometimes used to advance positions on other issues.
Abortions always comes up. If this thread was talking about supporting the democratic party or voting for a person based on the lone issue of gun control, then abortion would be a valid argument, at least until (if ever) democrats back off abortion as a tenet of their faith. Otherwise, abortion is not the topic.
 
The head of a committee most certainly can speak, and normally does, representing committee findings.
Each bishop is responsible for his own diocese and no bishop can make any statement at all that is binding on another bishop. The head of a committee can obviously speak but his comments carry no weight outside of his own area of responsibility.
We’ve had Cardinal Dolan speak, and there was a response to the Newtown massacre, naming several bishops.
It wouldn’t matter if the pope offered his opinion. The prudential judgments of one bishop have no significance whatever outside his own diocese.
Still, not one bishop speaks concerns of correction, or in favor of gun rights as they are conveyed on these forums.
One bishop does not have to offer correction for what another has said. If he does not positively confirm it for his diocese the comment is meaningless … and I am unaware of many bishops lining up to support Bishop Blair’s opinion.
We can politicize their words, for our own interests, or we can accept the words as guidance on a culture of life in a secular world, in my opinion.
You are quite free to find direction wherever you choose as are we all but there is no reason to believe that the direction Bishop Blair has provided on this issue is any more moral than the opinions offered on this forum. There would appear to be, however, reason to believe his opinion is less well informed than some of those that have been expressed here.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top