Concealed Carry in Church?

[chain]

I know that gun ownership is a debated item. However, it appears that the Catholic Church believes we have a moral duty to protect ourselves and others we are responsible for (and on a larger level, we have a moral duty to protect the innocent and others), and that ownership is not morally prevented.

I am curious if the Catholic Church has a position on concealed carry in church. In my humble understanding, Texas law allows for licensed (concealed) carry in churches - unless the church notifies (posts) otherwise.

 

[kdq042007]

I am in Florida. I am not aware of an offical position of the church, but on occasions I have attended services in uniform I am genuinely welcomed by most pastors. One priest did ask me to remove my weapon before entering. I will as a courtesty tell the pastor I am carrying, if they know me well. However, I will carry concealed as my duty and priviledge to protect and defend both myself and others. I think what is most important is that those who exercise right to CC should be sensitive to the concerns and fears of those others who do not agree so much with presence of firearms. Be well.

 

[vppoole]

While I can see how a person has the right to CC, I do not see a significant reason why someone (other than an officer on-duty) would feel the need to take their weapon into a church during Mass.

Even if handguns would have been available back then, I don’t think anyone present at the Last Supper would have CC during the meal.

Pax!

 

[kentuckyliz]

There was at least one weapon at the Last Supper. Simon Peter cut off Malchus’ ear. John 18:10.

Lest you object that Jesus scolded him (next verse), yes he did–put your sword back into its scabbard, not that he shouldn’t have brought a weapon to the Last Supper at all.

The Church does not discriminate against its batguano crazy members and embraces them. We could theoretically have a church shooter like happened in TN, or was it TX. The CC permit people might someday save your life.

 

[chain]

I am not aware of a church shooting in TX, but a priest (Rev. Shaji Varghese) was stabbed after mass on May 8, 2009 in Sinton Texas.

As a side note - I was listening to Father Corapi this morning - he mentioned an incident when a man came into his courtyard carrying a gun. He said he looked at the rosary in his hand, said a prayer, looked at the loaded .45 on his nightstand (or end table) and said “Thanks be to God” (or “Praise the Lord” - I forget). He then went on to say he did not shoot the intruder, but he convinced him to leave. (please forgive me if a paraphrased any of this - I did not take notes when he said it).

 

[CGDouglas]

I don’t know, but the idea of bringing weapons into a Holy place seems rather unnerving.

God Bless.

Chris.

 

[Oscarthecat]

If the Church sees nothing wrong with a responsible person carrying a concealed weapon in other circumstances, then why should it suddenly become an issue when they enter Church?

 

[puzzleannie]

I do ask our parents and sponsors who are in uniform not to carry when they come in to accompany their children to first confession, as it might give the wrong message.

 

[CGDouglas]

If the Church sees nothing wrong with a responsible person carrying a concealed weapon in other circumstances, then why should it suddenly become an issue when they enter Church?

Nor has the Church approved of it, since it has no stance on the subject, I just find it wrong to bring a weapon to a Holy place.

God Bless.

Chris.

 

[kdq042007]

Chris I respect your opinion. However, if I accept that my calling is law enforcement, I take with serious consideration that God may require me to act to protect life. With the general lack of respect for human dignity and life and a love of self, more and more incidents of violence are occuring, and this includes places of worship. If I attend a service while on duty, I stand in the back; if I am in civillian clothing I wish to be armed. I know that makes me the wolf among the sheep, but this is the path I walk.

Be well.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Nor has the Church approved of it, since it has no stance on the subject, I just find it wrong to bring a weapon to a Holy place.

God Bless.

Chris.

Yes, but why?

There must be some logical reason you “just find it wrong.”

 

[Oscarthecat]

Nor has the Church approved of it, since it has no stance on the subject, I just find it wrong to bring a weapon to a Holy place.

God Bless.

Chris.

Let me try this from another perspective…

It is getting late, so maybe this won’t make much as much sense in print as it does in my head…but here goes…

I am more concerned that people believe that gun possession and one’s fitness for worship are somehow mutually exclusive- that they somehow compromise eachother.

That is, what you’re asking is that people trade their gun for a missal when they walk into Church, and in doing so assume the posture of a “gun-less” person when they pray.

But that also means they must eventually trade that missal back in for their gun as they walk OUT of church, and thus take on the identity of a “gun carrying” person.

I, for one, would prefer that a person have their gun with them while they’re sitting in church so that they are better able to consider how to define themselves as a “gun carrying” person of faith.

And as a practical consideration, I think it is ill advised to promote a policy which not only requires that all people sitting in church be defenseless, but also makes it public knowledge that guns are not allowed. Think about it- if someone did wish to do harm to a large group of people, don’t you think they’d be more likely to choose to do so in a building that says “no guns allowed?” This is one of the reasons that shooting sprees are more likely to happen at schools- where guns are not allowed.

 

[CGDouglas]

Let me try this from another perspective…

It is getting late, so maybe this won’t make much as much sense in print as it does in my head…but here goes…

I am more concerned that people believe that gun possession and one’s fitness for worship are somehow mutually exclusive- that they somehow compromise eachother.

That is, what you’re asking is that people trade their gun for a missal when they walk into Church, and in doing so assume the posture of a “gun-less” person when they pray.

But that also means they must eventually trade that missal back in for their gun as they walk OUT of church, and thus take on the identity of a “gun carrying” person.

I, for one, would prefer that a person have their gun with them while they’re sitting in church so that they are better able to consider how to define themselves as a “gun carrying” person of faith.

And as a practical consideration, I think it is ill advised to promote a policy which not only requires that all people sitting in church be defenseless, but also makes it public knowledge that guns are not allowed. Think about it- if someone did wish to do harm to a large group of people, don’t you think they’d be more likely to choose to do so in a building that says “no guns allowed?” This is one of the reasons that shooting sprees are more likely to happen at schools- where guns are not allowed.

When they go outside of Church, they, if they wish, can carry their guns, however, in what is supposed to be a Holy place, I don’t see any reason whatsoever that anyone should bring a weapon to a sanctuary.

The whole idea of a person targeting a place which says ‘no guns allowed’ would be kind of void, if this person decides to go in and bring a gun into a place which is forbidden, don’t you think some people would have already defied the will of the local law and brought guns to consider their own safety as more of a priority than obeying law.

Shooting sprees also happen in the streets, and in public, where guns are allowed.

Oscarthecat:

I, for one, would prefer that a person have their gun with them while they’re sitting in church so that they are better able to consider how to define themselves as a “gun carrying” person of faith.

I personally forbid any use of weapons, even outside of Church, while you see me state that people should have their guns when outside of Church, I take this in consideration as to a persons free will. I on a personal level condemn weapons, why would anyone want to define themselves as not only a ‘gun carrying person of faith’ but a ‘weapon carrying person of faith’ is beyond me. Weapons and Peace seldom go hand in hand.

God Bless.

Chris.

 

[Newbie2]

I think the presumption of carrying a loaded firearm into mass would be the liklihood of using it in Church, no? If a law enforcement official needed, say to be “on call” (I don’t know much about the logistics) i.e. needed to leave mass to respond to an emergency, wouldn’t it be better to leave the firearm in the car and retrieve it on the way to the emergency?

So the question for me is, if someone brings a loaded weapon to mass, is he or she prepared to shoot someone in Church? If not, they should not bring the weapon into mass.

The question then becomes, is it legitimate to use deadly force, when necessary to stop a bad guy, during mass?

 

[chain]

There is a second, abet smaller question. Cars are not secure. When firearms are prohibited from a building, they are usually left in the parking lot.

For instance, suppose I attend daily mass at 7am. I am probably not going back home before work. Suppose also that the church I attend has a school attached - with numerous youth walking through the parking lot during mass. I know pretty much as a fact that my truck can be broken into in about 5-10 seconds, w/o it looking obvious (6 break in’s to date - none at church yet - 2 at home, 3 at work, 1 at gym)

I can say I really would not want to park a vehicle near a gun free zone with any indication that I might be pro 2nd Amendment (such as it simply being a 4x4 with a little mud on it) - even if I did not have a firearm in it (and certainly not if I did, x2 next to a school).

 

[Oscarthecat]

CGDouglas and Newbie2,
I think you are both operating on a couple of faulty presumptions-

First, that the act of USING a gun for self-protection takes on a unique moral character when one is inside of a church. However, the Church teaches that moral acts have a persistent moral quality. If the act of using a gun for self-protection is at least morally neutral, which we can safely assume given that the Church teaches we have a right to protect ourselves according to the principle of double-effect, then it must be so in all places at all times. As such, the use of deadly force in self-defense does not have a different moral quality during mass or in a church than it does at any other time or in any other place, nor does it lose its legitimacy as a morally acceptable act.

Second, that the assumption that the mere act of a responsible person carrying a weapon necessarily predisposes that person toward USING that weapon. While you may think this is true, you would be hard pressed to find objective evidence to support it.

As for trying to find some common ground here…we may be able to agree that brandishing a gun in a church would be inappropriate, as it brings attention to the gun in a place where our attention ought to be focused on worship. But the issue in this case, at least for me, is no different than those who fiddle with their cell phones during mass, step out for a cigarette, etc.

 

[Oscarthecat]

I do ask our parents and sponsors who are in uniform not to carry when they come in to accompany their children to first confession, as it might give the wrong message.

What message does it send?

 

[Newbie2]

There is a second, abet smaller question. Cars are not secure. When firearms are prohibited from a building, they are usually left in the parking lot.

For instance, suppose I attend daily mass at 7am. I am probably not going back home before work. Suppose also that the church I attend has a school attached - with numerous youth walking through the parking lot during mass. I know pretty much as a fact that my truck can be broken into in about 5-10 seconds, w/o it looking obvious (6 break in’s to date - none at church yet - 2 at home, 3 at work, 1 at gym)

I can say I really would not want to park a vehicle near a gun free zone with any indication that I might be pro 2nd Amendment (such as it simply being a 4x4 with a little mud on it) - even if I did not have a firearm in it (and certainly not if I did, x2 next to a school).

Valid point. I was picturing my parish, in a city where we get the occasional drunk, a few speeders and the police don’t really have a whole lot to do. Many areas are not as fortunate.

CGDouglas and Newbie2,
I think you are both operating on a couple of faulty presumptions-

First, that the act of USING a gun for self-protection takes on a unique moral character when one is inside of a church. However, the Church teaches that moral acts have a persistent moral quality. If the act of using a gun for self-protection is at least morally neutral, which we can safely assume given that the Church teaches we have a right to protect ourselves according to the principle of double-effect, then it must be so in all places at all times. As such, the use of deadly force in self-defense does not have a different moral quality during mass or in a church than it does at any other time or in any other place, nor does it lose its legitimacy as a morally acceptable act.

Second, that the assumption that the mere act of a responsible person carrying a weapon necessarily predisposes that person toward USING that weapon. While you may think this is true, you would be hard pressed to find objective evidence to support it.

As for trying to find some common ground here…we may be able to agree that brandishing a gun in a church would be inappropriate, as it brings attention to the gun in a place where our attention ought to be focused on worship. But the issue in this case, at least for me, is no different than those who fiddle with their cell phones during mass, step out for a cigarette, etc.

Wow.

Possessing a lethal weapon no different than fiddling with a cell phone. I fail to see the similarity.

So…why then would a person, besides the very limited situation where a law enforcement officer might not have a secure place to keep a personal firearm during mass, carry a firearm if he or she thinks he or she might not be using it?

Good firearm safety dictates that if you point a firearm at someone, be prepared to kill them. When one carries a loaded firearm, one must assume that responsibility at all times. Going to mass with the distinct possibility of killing someone else, even in self-defense, defies the self-sacrifice of Christ.

So why bring a firearm to mass? You gonna stop a bad guy by shooting up the place? Recall a certain incident when Christ had Peter put away his sword?

How can we, on one hand, unite ourselves to our Lord who gave himself selflessly and at the same time “be prepared to defend ourselves” from a bad guy with deadly force? Seems hypocritical to me, for lack of a better term.

Are some that attached to their earthly life that they wouldn’t risk giving it up during the very time when we’re closest to our Lord?

 

[Brendan]

Good firearm safety dictates that if you point a firearm at someone, be prepared to kill them.

No, what firearm training (police and military both) say is that if you are pointing a weapon at a person, you should be prepared to use that weapon. In neither case, police or military ( or even civilian self defense) the goal is not to actually cause the persons death, but rather to stop their ability to attack that which you are defending.

Stopping an attacker is not in anyway contrary to Christian teaching.

When one carries a loaded firearm, one must assume that responsibility at all times. Going to mass with the distinct possibility of killing someone else, even in self-defense, defies the self-sacrifice of Christ.

Actually, it doesn’t see my comment above

So why bring a firearm to mass? You gonna stop a bad guy by shooting up the place? Recall a certain incident when Christ had Peter put away his sword?

First of all it was Christ Himself who told Peter to buy the sword in the first place, and to sell his cloak to do so.(Luke 22:35-38)

Secondly, Christ had to die for our sins, preventing the death of Christ would have actually been a bad thing. That is true for no other person. Preventing an attack is a moral good.

Read what Pope John Paul II had to say in Evangelicum Vitae ( the ‘Gospel of Life’) and then tell me exactly what that does not apply within the physical confines of a Church Building. Pay special attention to the second paragraph.

Certainly, the intrinsic value of life and the duty to love oneself no less than others are the basis of a true right to self-defence. The demanding commandment of love of neighbour, set forth in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, itself presupposes love of oneself as the basis of comparison: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself " (Mk 12:31). Consequently, no one can renounce the right to self-defence out of lack of love for life or for self. This can only be done in virtue of a heroic love which deepens and transfigures the love of self into a radical self-offering, according to the spirit of the Gospel Beatitudes (cf. Mt 5:38-40). The sublime example of this self-offering is the Lord Jesus himself.

Moreover, “legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life, the common good of the family or of the State”. Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason.

 

[Newbie2]

No, what firearm training (police and military both) say is that if you are pointing a weapon at a person, you should be prepared to use that weapon. In neither case, police or military ( or even civilian self defense) the goal is not to actually cause the persons death, but rather to stop their ability to attack that which you are defending.

Sorry, Brendan. What I mean is that with any basic firearm training, what is taught is that you should never, ever point a weapon at anyone. That point is reinforced by saying that you should be prepared that if you do, there is the possibility of killing them…so, one should not ever point a weapon at someone else unless you are willing to accept the possibility, intentional or not, of killing them.

Stopping an attacker is not in anyway contrary to Christian teaching.

I agree, using the least amount of force possible. But going to mass with a firearm is at issue here. That’s deadly force. And I presume we’re talking for the most part here about non-law enforcement people with less than ideal training (do you think that Joe Blow average has adequate firearm training? I don’t.)

Read what Pope John Paul II had to say in Evangelicum Vitae ( the ‘Gospel of Life’) and then tell me exactly what that does not apply within the physical confines of a Church Building. Pay special attention to the second paragraph.

My guess is statistically and otherwise, one of the least likely places one would find a need to use deadly force to defend one’s self is during mass. Perhaps in a few areas of the world, situations are different, but here in the USA, I think we need not worry about being attacked while we worship.

In any case, I think if someone feels a need to carry during mass, their mind is in the wrong place. My Humble opinion.