Defense of Property

[PeteZaHut]

I know that we have a right to defend our lives from an unjust aggressor. I couldn’t find anything in the catechism about defending our private property. I wouldn’t think that it would ever be just to kill someone over property, but do we ever have a right to physically defend something?

 

[HickmanJosh]

I know that we have a right to defend our lives from an unjust aggressor. I couldn’t find anything in the catechism about defending our private property. I wouldn’t think that it would ever be just to kill someone over property, but do we ever have a right to physically defend something?

Im not sure but is keeping a big screen tv really worth someones life? I guess it really depends on what you are defending, although im not sure there are very many things (if any) that can be valued more than a life.

 

[PeteZaHut]

Im not sure but is keeping a big screen tv really worth someones life? I guess it really depends on what you are defending, although im not sure there are very many things (if any) that can be valued more than a life.

That’s what I meant when I said that I assume that an object would never be worth killing someone over, but for example, if I have my wallet out, and someone tries to grab it from me, am I justified in punching him in the face?

 

[gelsbern]

Do you trust a thief enough at his word that he only wants your TV (or other property). Do you trust him if he says, “I won’t hurt you or your family, I just want to take an item.”? Do you stand there and wait until he gets away before you call the police? What action will he take if you start to call the police while he is still there?

Finally, would defending your property fall under the corporal work of mercy “Admonish the sinner.” Seems to me if you just let him have it, you are just enabling him to sin thus taking part in the sin itself. Thou shall not steal no less of a commandment than thou shall not kill.

There’s a lot of questions. This could be a very interesting discussion.

 

[PeteZaHut]

Do you trust a thief enough at his word that he only wants your TV (or other property). Do you trust him if he says, “I won’t hurt you or your family, I just want to take an item.”? Do you stand there and wait until he gets away before you call the police? What action will he take if you start to call the police while he is still there?

Finally, would defending your property fall under the corporal work of mercy “Admonish the sinner.” Seems to me if you just let him have it, you are just enabling him to sin thus taking part in the sin itself. Thou shall not steal no less of a commandment than thou shall not kill.

There’s a lot of questions. This could be a very interesting discussion.

And there’s also the Bible passage about turning the other cheek and giving someone your tunic as well after they’ve taken your coat (My wording might be a little off on that)

 

[Corki]

I know that we have a right to defend our lives from an unjust aggressor. I couldn’t find anything in the catechism about defending our private property. I wouldn’t think that it would ever be just to kill someone over property, but do we ever have a right to physically defend something?

I think we can physically defend what is rightfully ours. Physically defending is not necessarily the same as deadly force. I don’t have a problem with macing someone trying to break into my car, for example. (or punching out the wallet snatcher, if I had a better jab ) I don’t think using deadly force would be justified for most property.

OTOH, I believe I have the right to use physical force, even deadly force, to defend my home against an invader.

 

[James_S_Saint]

It isn’t a question of whether to defend but how to defend.

Without any property at all, your life becomes in danger. This is actually why you ever desire property in the first place. Thus, to a degree, defending your property is defending your life. But to what degree?

The final incentive for doing anything at all in life is simply to establish a harmonious environment because it is from this that life cannot perish.

All that Jesus taught was about this one concern of establishing not really “peace” as much as active, momentus harmony. The more momentus the activity is, the more difficult it is to interfere with or become disharmonious.

This means that to establish more mass and energy (momentum) of harmony one must cause his surroundings to be something that is both in harmony and active.

But that means that other people, who have become disharmonious must be brought into harmony by one means or another. Sometimes that means that other things than that other person must change so as to maintain a harmony. That means you.

Thus Jesus taught to not resist an evil man. “Turn the other cheek” and “give your tunic also”. Because it is by these things that you allow for your own harmony of life (your soul) to not be destroyed in battle.

The Church of Jesus is to establish rules of encounter reinforced by ethos authority so as to allow for potential conflict to be dismissed before life is actually threatened. It does this by a variety of means. But it requires your cooperation.

As you display through your actions, a behavior that compels harmony, you help to ensure that harmony is maintained. By it being maintained, you survive.

But harmony is not about how to get along with one individual, but rather how to have many individuals all living void of conflict. This is accomplished by the fundamental act of love and more specifically the act of forgiveness.

Thus if someone threatens you through the act of taking property, your highest goal is to balance what is necessary to re-establish and/or maintain the harmony of both lives (both souls). This involves the act of giving.

But in the case where giving becomes a true threat to any life, the giving must be limited and another means must be found to resolve disharmony and threat to life. This is what constitutes the entirely of your life - finding that balance.

I recommend the following process as a way of life so as to answer your dilemma and cause an increase in the stability of all lives involved;

 

[Athanasiy]

I heared about one Christian businessman who was killed , just because he had the principles and did not wanted to give up his wealth ( factories , and many other riches )
the person lived gently , had one wife , kids , did a lot of charities and was a good Evangelical preacher.
These kinds of people in the developing countries are not very welcomed in their surroundings.
And eventually I heard that he was killed , but I have much respect to this person who passed to eternity , because he had the principles , he was a personality , he believed in a life as a mission , and even believed that the money has a mission.
But many people would choose life , they would preffer better to live with a little and happily than to be wealthy and in constant defence

think that the Justice has a right
if the justice can not provide our defence or even if the justice is unjust
then , I do not know
I think defence is not about greediness for your property or your self - its about ‘‘truth’’ its about ‘‘right’’
I have a right to preserve my life , to defend it , I have theright for the respect of my lif

no violence is permitted
if there is a degree of vilolence it must be moderate violence !

 

[chain]

The Old Testament had laws governing how to deal with this. They distinguished between various events - robbery versus burglary, weather or not it was at night or during the day…

In my humble opinion they centered over the concept of self defense (and perhaps the defense of others). I am pretty sure canon allows for letal force when necessary for self defense. There are times, during a theft where there is a legitimate argument that your life was in danger. Other times not so much so.

 

[Athanasiy]

after the collapse of Soviet Union in 1990-th
you had to defend your property by strength
there rule was this - the strongest takes every thing !
the right and justice was in the hands of the one who had connections and money.

there were constant contract murders and changing of the owners
often the property was passing from one clan to another
many money-making businesses were literally in the hands of the bandts
there were the zones of influence
and the murders of the businessmans were taking place very frequently
there were no western rules for business , there was just the rule of power - strongest takes every thing!
Some times the big businessman was forcing to sign the papers of giving up the factory in exchange for life , or even in exchange for the dropping of criminal charges , which were done by the compromat or organized by stronger clan.

I mean , what about to defend the property
in this kind of business climate ?

I think as a Christian you have the moral right to defend the property
but the question is how far you can go by defending it ?

 

[Logan5]

St Francis and the Catholic church teaches living in moderation and that there is obscene wealth, but what if a Catholic inquistor sort insist you should be poor, or not have any intellectual property, or a fine car… ?

 

[Thos]

 This is my first post in quite some time.  I found this topic very interesting since I am a retired law enforcement officer and I have a concealed weapons permit.  The times we are experiencing now in the USA grows more and more violent and many of the criminals have absolutely no respect for life.

 We can discuss the moral, Christian, ethical or other philisophical issues and decide on what might be best.  However, when any perceived criminal event presents itself, we usually don't have time to think clearly since we are overcome with surprise and in most cases fear.  We don't know what the criminal is thinking at the time of the event.  Does he just want property?  If he succeeds in this by us giving him what he wants, do we enable him to continue in this activity?  Will his/their activities become more bold and  perhaps endanger life down the road?  These will always be unanswered questions.

 I believe that if we keep Jesus, Mary and the Holy Spirit centered in our daily lives, a solution will be given that may possibly be the use of deadly force.  We just don't know what God's plan is for us or them.  As a former law enforcement officer who always wore a weapon, I gave an oath to protect people and their property.  We recieved many weeks of training and there was a strong emphasis on when to use deadly force.  If someone is breaking into my home, I don't immediately know if he/they are armed.  I have seen often in the news reports of serial crimes where the use of threat of deadly force is used against the victim. Ultimately, someone gets very seriously hurt or killed.  Where does it end? 

 In just one example of many, think for a moment if you witnessed in the early morning a child being abducted from a school bus stop or along the road.  What would you do?  Children are precious and must be protected.  My way of thinking regarding chldren at the moment is to use deadly force on the criminal even if he/they do not appear to have weapons.  Jesus will be the absolute judge of me when all is said and done.  I could go on and on with this topic but for now I'll leave the issue alone.

 

[long215]

One of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shalt not steal.” There is a spiritual price the thief will have to pay to God for breaking this commandment. On the temporal side, is me not wanting the thief to steal from me. The thief will pay a price for making the attempt to take from me what God has given me stewardship over. The thief will decide what the cost is.