Bishop says tighter gun laws will help build culture of life

[Ridgerunner]

Was it sinful for the theater shooter, the mall shooter, the shooter that killed the first responders, or the shooter that killed all those children at their school?

I’m surprised you didn’t get what I meant.

I went by what you said.

We don’t actually know whether it was sinful for those shooters, because we don’t know their subjective states of mind. One is inclined to believe it was sinful for them, but we don’t actually know.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

So, this only means that possibly three bishops agree with Bp. Blaire. Oops, possibly two.

There are four names, the President and the three bishops. It’s not a numbers game, especially when there are NO dissenting opinions.

 

[TEPO]

Here’s a good article on understanding Private Revelation.
newadvent.org/cathen/13005a.htm

…still not sure if the Bishops are claiming that their social teaching on this issue is based on revelation or if they themselves can undoubtedly predict the future.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I went by what you said.

We don’t actually know whether it was sinful for those shooters, because we don’t know their subjective states of mind. One is inclined to believe it was sinful for them, but we don’t actually know.

It was an objective evil, but they were probably mentally ill.
No one can say for sure if they are in Hell or not.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I went by what you said.

We don’t actually know whether it was sinful for those shooters, because we don’t know their subjective states of mind. One is inclined to believe it was sinful for them, but we don’t actually know.

We’ve gone as far as I’m going. Follow your faith formed conscience. Mine has not changed, but strengthened, and I will follow mine.

God Bless

 

[Ridgerunner]

Brother you can discount 40 if that’s what your faith formed conscience calls you to do. There are 454 active, and retired, bishops in the US. I have shown you four different names of those who were identified. Of 454, that are all associated with the USCCB, not one has spoken against the Call to Actions, by committees, their President, or representing them through their website.

I am in no way obliged to assume that one, or even three, bishops speak for all of them, particularly not when Canon law says they don’t. Indeed, it would be contrary to the Church’s laws for me to assume that.

That’s not a matter of what “faith formed conscience” says, it’s just an objective fact.

You can speak to whatever your conscience tells you, but you cannot speak for the Church any more than Bp Blaire and (we are informed without being shown the letter) the other two do.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There are four names, the President and the three bishops. It’s not a numbers game, especially when there are NO dissenting opinions.

If they had all agreed, they would have all agreed. But they didn’t. And as far as I know, we still have not been presented by anything signed by all three or four or whatever number it is.

 

[TEPO]

“When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them. Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: “It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)” (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).”

newadvent.org/cathen/13005a.htm

…still dont think gun laws really even fall into the realm of Private Revelation though…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Testimony
Submitted for the Record
On behalf of the
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Senate-Testimony-Proposals to Reduce Gun Violence: Protecting Our Communities While Respecting the Second Amendment”

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is grateful for the opportunity to provide this testimony for the hearing on Proposals to Reduce Gun Violence: Protecting Our Communities While Respecting the Second Amendment. The tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as the many other tragedies that have happened in our communities, homes and throughout the world, shatters the peace of us all. There are countless examples: Columbine, Virginia Tech, mall and cinema shootings in Oregon and Colorado, and the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Sadly, gun violence, the global illicit trade of weapons and ammunition, and other acts that strike at the life and dignity of persons, are an all too common reality.

More than ever, the Church and all people of good will must work together to confront the pervasive culture of violence and instead build a culture that values life, peace and the inherent dignity of all. We join Pope Benedict XVI who stated in his 2013 Message for the World Day of Peace, “Life in its fullness is the height of peace. Anyone who loves peace cannot tolerate attacks and crimes against life.”Today, we particularly call on Congress to pursue policies that will contribute to reducing gun violence in our society and help save lives.
.
The Work of the Church
The Church has been a consistent voice for the promotion of peace at home and around the world and a strong advocate for the reasonable regulation of firearms. Simply put, guns are too easily accessible.

The Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, in their document, “The International Arms Trade (2006),” emphasized the importance of enacting concrete controls on the production, possession, and trade in weapons, including handguns, calling for them to be regulated "by paying due attention to specific principles of the moral and legal order.”

The USCCB has also been a consistent advocate for peace and the prevention of gun and other forms of violence that strike at the life and dignity of persons. In 1994, recalling the words of Pope Paul VI, “if you want peace, work for justice,” the U.S. bishops issued their pastoral message, Confronting a Culture of Violence: A Catholic Framework for Action. In their message the bishops stated, “We have an obligation to respond. Violence–in our homes, our schools and streets, our nation and world–is destroying the lives, dignity and hopes of millions of our sisters and brothers.” The USCCB was also a supporter of the Assault Weapons Ban initially passed in 1994 but which expired in 2004.

In 2000, the U.S. bishops issued their pastoral statement, Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice. In the statement the bishops called for all people to work for a culture of life and to do more to end violence in our homes and to help victims break out of patterns of abuse. In regard to gun violence prevention the bishops wrote, “We support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and make them safer (especially efforts that prevent their unsupervised use by children or anyone other than the owner), and we reiterate our call for sensible regulation of handguns.”

I would ‘assume’ that this is something recognized by all the bishops, and more of the hierarchy of the Church.

 

[lcburgundy]

This reminds me why I don’t take USCCB pronunciations on almost purely regional political matters very seriously. They repeat same old tired tried-but-failed proposals for pointless and arbitrary capacity limits and so-called universal background checks, as if the criminals cared. I wonder if anyone clued them in that criminals are automatically exempt from punishments associated with circumventing registration and background check schemes because you cannot be forced to self-incriminate.

Legal gun owners are already one of, if not the most law abiding segment of society.

Hey, if I am victim of violence, I guess someone from the USCCB will be willing to pat me on the hand at least. I’m touched.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

USCCB MISSION

1. Through Conference Committees and Staff

In carrying out their respective mandates, committees and work groups strive to respond to the mission of the Conference as a total body.

Bishop Blaire serves as Chairman, on the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development. The mission goals of the USCCB list relationships.

1. Mission Relationships (Cf. Apostolos suos, no. 15.)

• With the Holy See

• With bishops and dioceses

• With episcopal conferences

• With national catholic organizations and associations of the christian faithful

• With civil authorities and other groups

I find it hard to believe, through their mission goals and protocols, that ‘one hand doesn’t know what the other hand is doing’ so to speak. There’s a lot to absorb there, and I am open to someone being able to point out my mistakes.

 

[pnewton]

Absolutely there are. I am trying to pin people down to get someone to identify a particular moral choice involved with this issue (which is a bit like trying to put your finger down on a drop of mercury). If no one can identify a specific moral choice then this cannot be a moral question.

You have received several answers. You just argue that they are wrong, false, or some other way not an actual answer. I tend to quit answering such questions once they have been back an forth enough. My answers remain on this thread.

Sometimes I think there is too much posting for the sake of arguing or the sake of having a public “ditto”.

 

[lcburgundy]

I think the other real issue people are overlooking here is where will pressure cooker regulation fit into all this? I mean, it was undoubtedly a key component in the most recent weapon of choice in inflicting great harm to life with grisly results. I don’t want to see a repeat of these attacks either, so what is to be done?

I must confess in advance that I own a high-capacity pressure cooker myself, so I apologize in advance for any bias I may display.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I think the other real issue people are overlooking here is where will pressure cooker regulation fit into all this? I mean, it was undoubtedly a key component in the most recent weapon of choice in inflicting great harm to life with grisly results. I don’t want to see a repeat of these attacks either, so what is to be done?

I must confess in advance that I own a high-capacity pressure cooker myself, so I apologize in advance for any bias I may display.

Guns didn’t get us out of that one, did they? Bombs, and possession of such, is illegal. Pressure cookers, designed to cook food, can be misused, with the right knowledge. Guns were designed to kill, period. It’s ironic to see some suggest regulations for ‘pressure cookers’ and then deny anything need be done for guns, or even certain types of guns used in the most recent mass shootings.

 

[Geist]

It’s ironic to see some suggest regulations for ‘pressure cookers’ and then deny anything need be done for guns, or even certain types of guns used in the most recent mass shootings.

Yes, its “ironic”, thats the point.

In any event MA has some of the tightest gun laws in the country, why didn’t these two obey them and register those guns before blowing a ton of people up?

Oh, criminals and terrorists don’t care about laws. Of course.

Thats OK, subject me, a gun owner who has not nor will ever commit an atrocity to more red tape and laws so politicians can crow how they “did something” when that something only makes gun violence worse…**because criminals don’t obey laws! **

I used to be a fairly laid back apathetic gun owner, but since the assault on my right to own what I want has come under attack I’ve been lobbying my butt off to stem the tide. And I’m thankful to God to see my efforts and that of millions of others succeeding!

 

[ishii]

Yes, its “ironic”, thats the point.

In any event MA has some of the tightest gun laws in the country, why didn’t these two obey them and register those guns before blowing a ton of people up?

Oh, criminals and terrorists don’t care about laws. Of course.

Thats OK, subject me, a gun owner who has not nor will ever commit an atrocity to more red tape and laws so politicians can crow how they “did something” when that something only makes gun violence worse…**because criminals don’t obey laws! **

I used to be a fairly laid back apathetic gun owner, but since the assault on my right to own what I want has come under attack I’ve been lobbying my butt off to stem the tide. And I’m thankful to God to see my efforts and that of millions of others succeeding!

Yes, the efforts of the Obama/Democrat party/liberals to exploit tragedies to further their political goals of transforming our country and “modernizing our constitution” have awakened a sleeping giant of gun owners and constitutionalists. Obama does not like our constitution because it gets in the way of his efforts to re-shape our country. Its inconvenient. Passing gun control may make liberal Catholics feel better and self-righteous, but it won’t prevent future massacres. Meanwhile, there is a trial of the Planned Parenthood slaughterer but liberals don’t care because of who got slaughtered (the unborn) and who was doing the slaughtering (a minority “doctor” at Planned Parenthood).

Ishii

 

[Michael_Mayo]

The charitable answer, especially in the absence of information to the contrary, would be yes.

Like you, what we think is best.

Ender

What specifically is that?

I might like to jump on board.

 

[pnewton]

Thats OK, subject me, a gun owner who has not nor will ever commit an atrocity to more red tape !

So your objection is that it is inconvenient? Or is it that there is nothing that can be done to more effectively safeguard life?

 

[TEPO]

So your objection is that it is inconvenient? Or is it that there is nothing that can be done to more effectively safeguard life?

Surely there is no guarantee that any new policy will save lives. If bombs became popularized because guns are too difficult to get, then the loss of life could be greater after a policy change… We just can’t know. But we do know that bombs have become very popular in other parts of the world.

I’ll need sworn promises from the USCCB before I support this effort. Promises that God has directly called for it through Private Revelation. Then for me it will be a faith based moral decision.

 

[TEPO]

…and for the record, I don’t own any guns nor do I have any plans on getting any. Just say’in.

For me, this is all about moral decisions -and how this really isn’t one.