Cardinal Dolan finds common ground with Obama on guns

[Prodigal_Son1]

Being involved in several of the gun control discussions, it seems I have had trouble putting all my thoughts into words. After reading this article, and the Cardinal’s blog, I see it explained as I view it, and his view of the Church’s teaching on the matter.

Cardinal Dolan finds common ground with Obama on guns

New York City, N.Y., Feb 20, 2013 / 02:00 am (CNA).- Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan of New York highlighted President Barack Obama’s “call for sensible steps on gun control,” noting that it is an area of agreement for the two leaders.

“I found myself nodding in agreement when the President said, ‘….Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the Second Amendment – have come together around common-sense reform, like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun,’” the cardinal said.

As the Cardinal speaks out, he qualifies that he is not an expert on specific controls, the constitution, or legislative responsibilities. The thing that stood out, for me, was an echo of what I’ve tried to explain.

Advocating for Gun Control

For me, regulating and controlling guns is part of building a Culture of Life, of doing what we can to protect and defend human life. The easy access to guns, including assault weapons, that exists in our nation has contributed towards a Culture of Death, where human life and dignity are cheapened by the threat of violence. No law, no piece of legislation, will ever be able to protect us from every act of aggression, or from the harm that can come from an individual bent on killing. But, we must do what we can to minimize the opportunities for such acts, by limiting the easy access to guns – and, I would add, by increasing funding for programs to treat those who suffer from mental illness, especially those that might lead someone to commit mass murder.

He also articulated his view of the focus of the bishops, while citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Advocating for gun control is not something new for the Church. The Holy See has continuously been a strong voice in opposition to international arms trading, the world’s version of gun control; it’s even in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the official teaching of the Catholic faith (see numbers 2315-2316 in particular) . Here in the United States, the bishops have for decades supported measures to get handguns off the streets, and to ban assault weapons. To cite but one instance, in Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration, released in 2000, the bishops reiterated their support for legislative efforts that seek to protect society from the violence associated with easy access to deadly weapons. “As bishops, we support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and make them safer (especially efforts that prevent their unsupervised use by children and anyone other than the owner), and we reiterate our call for sensible regulation of handguns.”

 

[Lucky7]

And who would like to bet that this is not mentioned in the mainstream media?

You know, because the Catholic Church is only concerned with abortion and gay marriage.

 

[Least]

Cardinal Dolan owes his life to GOD, but his very continued existence on this planet, and that of the Roman Catholic Church, due to people that are willing AND HAVE THEIR OWN MEANS to defend him/it.

If anyone doesn’t think so, move to the Middle East or Africa or South America or Canada or Asia.

If you want it to continue to be cool to be Christian, you leave me the means to defend myself, and I will manage the rest.

The US government (or any government) cannot, with any certainty, guaranty it’s own survival, much less any of its constituency. Therefore, the right to keep and bear arms ESPECIALLY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT (Which is comprised of no more noble creatures than the ones that the government EMPLOYEES spent a great deal of money asking for the job to serve their fellow man [Americans]) is guaranteed to outlive even the idea of America. --TERMS, J.M.Thomas R. 2012

 

[Least]

New York City, N.Y., Feb 20, 2013 / 02:00 am (CNA).- Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan of New York highlighted President Barack Obama’s “call for sensible steps on gun control,” noting that it is an area of agreement for the two leaders.

“I found myself nodding in agreement when the President said, ‘….Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the Second Amendment – have come together around common-sense reform, like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun,’” the cardinal said.

Overwhelming majorities of people, throughout history, have chased the faithful into smaller and smaller enclaves where they have been more easily removed.

Men in small red hats have prostrated themselves before evil like this throughout history as well it’s called Apostasy, and you can implore my prayerful intercession for your salvation later but, due to your ignorance of human nature and physics, I might be otherwise occupied in solely defending myself and mine.

I would rather we promise each other only one thing, that we each try to be the last one to ask St. Peter if he has a “spare mag.” It’s safer than gun control.

 

[Lucky7]

Maybe it’s me, but I am having trouble understanding Least’s posts. Are you in agreement with Dolan or not?

 

[Seeker1961]

Uh oh…Cardinal Dolan is about to go on the dreaded “liberal” list…

 

[Least]

Luke 22: 36-38 [KJV] JESUS said “But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and
likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” “The
Author here prays, in shrinking awe of his LORD, that in all the Author does, he causes not
even your shadow to fall one stray footfall from that where GOD directs you. The Author
claims to NOT be a biblical scholar, but the Author believes, that JESUS directed HIS
apostles, and by them – us, to travel ‘armed’. Not in the manner in which to facilitate the use
of force to master any domain. Instead, HE directs (all of us) to carry ourselves, in our
current mortal form, as the children of GOD, on this earth, into tomorrow, with dignity,
sovereignty and security. That we are each entitled “UNDER GOD,” life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness, provided by GOD as HE provides for the bees in the flower, but that we
are entitled, when necessary, to obtain or extract our own security, where necessary, and
forthrightly, under GOD. By further reference, it is also logical here to cite the translation of
the words of JESUS in Matthew 26:52 speaking to his apostle Peter, in the garden at
Gethsemane, after Peter’s cutting off the ear of one of the servants of the high priest’s with a
sword, “Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish
with the sword.” While the latter of that bible passage is most used (cited), it should be
noted that Peter had the sword, that he had it with him, that he was OBVIOUSLY not
unfamiliar with its swift employment, and that the LORD had to still-him from further
carnage after drawing blood. The Author posits that it should be well noted too, that JESUS
did not tell Peter to throw the sword away, or even to lay it on the ground. JESUS merely
told Peter to store it on his person from where it was drawn.

–TERMS, J.M.Thomas R., 2012

 

[scipio337]

Uh oh…Cardinal Dolan is about to go on the dreaded “liberal” list…

Well, he does currently live in New York.

I don’t know of many people who don’t want background checks. The New York laws, on the other hand are oppressive. Major gun manufactures (Bushmaster is located in upstate New York) have basically said “If you’re going to ban civillians from owning these, we’re not selling themm to your law enforcement”.

Remember: Laws are for the “little” people.

 

[SamH]

Well, he does currently live in New York.

I don’t know of many people who don’t want background checks. The New York laws, on the other hand are oppressive. Major gun manufactures (Bushmaster is located in upstate New York) have basically said “If you’re going to ban civillians from owning these, we’re not selling themm to your law enforcement”.

Remember: Laws are for the “little” people.

Olympic Arms has made the same statement.

 

[scipio337]

In the meantime, more “sensible” proposals are being proposed, not only banning the dreaded ‘assault weapons’, but making it a felony to own one (if you don’t turn it in).

washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/14/mo-bill-would-make-refusing-turn-over-newly-define/

Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;

(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills131/biltxt/intro/HB0545I.HTM

10.20 Sec. 7. PERSONS POSSESSING ASSAULT WEAPONS ON EFFECTIVE DATE

ACT; REQUIRED ACTIONS.

Any person who, on February 1, 2013, legally owns or is in possession of an assault weapon has until September 1, 2013, to do any of the following without being subject to
prosecution under Minnesota Statutes, section 624.7133:

(1) remove the weapon from the state;

(2) surrender the weapon to a law enforcement agency for destruction;

(3) render the weapon permanently inoperable; or

(4) if eligible, register the weapon as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 624.7133, subdivision 5.

revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0241.0.html&session=ls88

But hey, no one wants to “take away your guns”, honest!!

 

[stevegravy]

I guess need to add Dolans mug shot next to Obama’s

from thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/rogue-s-gallery-t10699.html

 

[Lucky7]

Well, he does currently live in New York.

I don’t know of many people who don’t want background checks. The New York laws, on the other hand are oppressive. Major gun manufactures (Bushmaster is located in upstate New York) have basically said “If you’re going to ban civillians from owning these, we’re not selling themm to your law enforcement”.

Remember: Laws are for the “little” people.

That sounds like a threat.

 

[RKO]

I wonder if in 1000 years or so, scholars will debate whether the inclusion of a person’s right to use a weapon against someone in the Gospels is original or not.

This business of every conservative value being part of the church is a little dangerous. If you are pro-life, be pro-life.

 

[scipio337]

That sounds like a threat.

More like being consistant.

The laws for the little people should be applied to the big people, too (hat tip to David Gregory).

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

–TERMS, J.M.Thomas R., 2012

Ver. 36.—But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip. A purse filled with money, a scrip with food, that they might have support in the impending persecution; for they will never find either, “because men will fly from Me, who am bound and accused, and consequently from My disciples as men wicked and condemned.”
And he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Christ, in these words, did not command them to take a purse and a scrip, and to sell their garment and buy a sword, for He soon after forbade Peter to draw his sword; but they were a warning of the fierce persecution which was about to fall upon Himself and the apostles, and which was so heavy to those that regarded the difficulty of the case with the eyes of mere human wisdom, that food and weapons would appear things absolutely necessary for the preservation of life. The meaning therefore is this, “Everything, so far, has happened to you, 0 my Apostles, well and prosperously; for when I sent you to preach the Gospel without purse, or scrip, or sword, you were kindly received by most, fed, and sheltered, and had no need of these things. But now so grievous a persecution is impending over you, and so great is the danger to your lives, that in human prudence it may seem necessary to each to think of the preservation of his life, and therefore to take a scrip and purse for provision, and a weapon for defence, and to sell his cloak, and buy a sword. But to Me, who weigh circumstances by the design and decree of God the Father, there is no need of such things; for I go voluntarily to the cross, and to death, and I offer Myself of My own free will, to those who will persecute Me and crucify Me, so that I may conform Myself to the will of My Father.” So S. Chrysostom (Hom. 85 on S. Matt.), and from him Theophylact on this passage, Jansen, Maldonatus, and others. S. Ambrose says well, “0 Lord, why commandest Thou me to buy a sword, and forbiddest me to strike, unless that I may be prepared for my defence, and that Thou mayest appear able to avenge though Thou wouldst not?”

Ver. 38.—And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. They did not understand the mind and words of Christ clearly. He did not mean that they should buy swords, but He wished to show them the impending danger. Christ did not explain His meaning to the Apostles, but concealed it, saying, “It is enough,” meaning that Peter and the other Apostles might carry these swords, and even cut off Malchus’ ear, which He Himself afterwards restored and healed, showing that He was not compelled by force, but was urged by love, willingly and freely to suffer and die. Some think that they were not military swords, but rather large butchers’ knives, which the apostles used for the slaughtering, sacrificing, and disjointing of the Paschal Lamb. So S. Chrysostom, from whom I have said more on Matt. xxvii.

The Great Biblical Commentary of Cornelius Lapide

 

[mountee]

I wonder if in 1000 years or so, scholars will debate whether the inclusion of a person’s right to use a weapon against someone in the Gospels is original or not.

This business of every conservative value being part of the church is a little dangerous. If you are pro-life, be pro-life.

I hope you won’t mind but I would appreciate a clarification. Do you mean that as a Catholic who is completely pro-life, I should not own and operate a handgun? Is that what you mean by the last sentence?

 

[ProVobis]

I wonder if in 1000 years or so, scholars will debate whether the inclusion of a person’s right to use a weapon against someone in the Gospels is original or not.

That will probably come with the next English translation of the Bible, no doubt in some nice poetic form.

 

[mburn16]

his business of every conservative value being part of the church is a little dangerous. If you are pro-life, be pro-life.

…and why should being pro-life not include the right to protect your life from a dangerous criminal or intruder, or, heaven forbid, a tyrannical government? People have a tendency to get bent into knots when we talk about high-powered rifles with 30-shot clips, but I think they need to consider that a 30 shot clip simply puts a homeowner on par with two thieves with handguns. And no, having your house broken into by two men rather than one is not particularly unlikely, particularly if you live in certain areas, like Detroit, as I do.

By all means, have background checks. Just make sure that the purpose of the check is to actually keep the guns out of the hands of criminals or the mentally ill only, and not simply to make it so onerous to obtain a weapon that many people choose not to.

As for banning certain types of guns…don’t do it.

 

[scipio337]

That will probably come with the next English translation of the Bible, no doubt in some nice poetic form.

Because, of course, every gun owner uses it on a person.

 

[ProVobis]

…and why should being pro-life not include the right to protect your life from a dangerous criminal or intruder, or, heaven forbid, a tyrannical government?

I believe many have extended the “pro-life” argument to waging war against Iraq too.