Do you/would you carry a concealed firearm to Mass?

[Teek]

I am not against weapons, conceal carry, all that. The right to bear arms is fundamental to freedom. People can argue with that statement all they want: in our country (the U.S.A.) our liberty was secured by brave men and women who refused to be told they had no right to own weapons to defend themselves against tyranny. To ask us to give up that right is to ask us to give up the means to secure our liberty should tyranny rise again. Which it will, thus far it always has, and there is no plausible reason to expect that to change at this time.

Bringing a weapon to Mass? That one is tough. I think people who want to do so serve a brave and noble ideal: the desire to protect what they cherish. Keep that in mind, please, when I say my personal feelings for myself in the next paragraph. I do not intend to say that my feelings invalidate someone else’s. This isn’t me, practicing a form of moral relativism—what is bad for me can be good for you kind of lunacy: this is me saying BOTH are good for me and for anyone else. But I choose…

Personally, I wouldn’t bring a gun to Mass. Even if I suspected an impending threat. Well, I say that. l, sitting in my car waiting for daily Mass this morning, one hundred percent confident that there isn’t a threat this morning. So who really knows in the real scenario… But right now… I don’t believe I would arm myself that way—physically.

What exactly does my gun add to the might of the Father who loves me?!

I can tell you this right now: my Guardian Angel is bigger than whatever some terrorist might carry through the door of the Church.

If it is not my time, God will protect me.

Maybe by sending one of you, with your conceal/carry weapon. Ha ha.

Well, I already owe my freedom to the brave men and women who have risked their lives to defend and secure it. Might as well add you brave souls to the list…

In all sincerity, we are people of good will trying to serve the Lord in Truth. Some of us will be called to different forms of spiritual warfare. Spiritual warfare crosses over into the realm of human life. Most sin has physical manifestations. So some will be called to physical spiritual warfare. Some will be called to be warriors of prayer. Some will miss their calling.

I don’t think it is a matter of yes for all or no for all. I think it is a matter of yes to God.

And that will take many forms. Be open to your calling, and pray that others take up their own cross and enter the fray.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Eric_Hyom:

if Jesus was pro sword, then Jesus would have a sword himself. I cannot imagine Jesus hiding behind other people with swords, in the hope that they would defend him.

Nah. He had the legions of angels waiting on his command. And they had all the swords.

Catholic Study Bible

Matthew 26:53

53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?

26:53 twelve legions: In the Roman army, a “legion” consisted of nearly 6,000 soldiers.

If swords were important to Jesus, then the angels with their swords would have defended Jesus. We follow the example of Jesus, so show me a passage where Jesus uses a sword.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Eric_Hyom:

Gun ownership would make matters worse.

Try selling your opinion to the pensioner or the single mother living in fear in West Yorkshire each night who would deeply appreciate a means of defense.

Likewise, go tell the tens of thousands of people who are shot in America that guns are ok. There are thousands left grieving when self defence did not happen.

 

[Teek]

If swords were important to Jesus, then the angels with their swords would have defended Jesus. We follow the example of Jesus, so show me a passage where Jesus uses a sword.

No—I wasn’t arguing with you! I just meant the King of Kings and Lord of Lords doesn’t cower, with or without swords.

But if you WANT me to, ok.

First of all, it was Jesus’ will that he be led away. It wasn’t the first time he stopped Peter from trying to prevent the passion. The first time Peter tried to say he didn’t have to do this, and Jesus said “Get behind me, Satan!” He goes out to the garden because he knew it was time to be delivered up, and the Apostles try to stop what needed to be done. So he stopped them from stopping him.

That does not mean he was against all violence. He was against being prevented from doing the Father’s will.

Because, when it was righteous to be so, Jesus was violent.

Catholic Study Bible

John 2:14-16

14 In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers at their business.
15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all, with the sheep and oxen, out of the temple; and he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
16 And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; you shall not make my Father’s house a house of trade.”

 

[Teek]

Jesus used violence to defend His Father’s house.

Good people here are saying they would be willing to do the same. I am grateful.

I still pray that they won’t have to!

 

[LilyM]

Jesus used violence to defend His Father’s house.

Good people here are saying they would be willing to do the same. I am grateful.

I still pray that they won’t have to!

Jesus most emphatically did NOT use instruments capable, fairly easily, of ending an innocent life to do so, although swords, clubs, spears etc were all available to Him.

 

[Teek]

Jesus most emphatically did NOT use instruments capable, fairly easily, of ending an innocent life to do so although swords, clubs, spears etc were all available to Him.

If he had used an available sword or spear to do the job, he still would not have ended an innocent life, and yet still it is violence towards other people using a weapon.

making a whip of cords, he drove them all, out of the temple; and overturned their tables.

He made his own weapon which he used to drive them out. And then he tossed the tables.

That was violence at the service of righteous anger. And it was Jesus. And he is AWESOME!!

 

[LittleFlower]

This whole thread is approaching the question from a very American stand point.

As a non-American, I wholeheartedly answer:

No, I would not carry a concealed firearm to Mass nor would I attend a Mass where this is allowed, or suspected.

Citizens carrying weapons are not equal to military or the police, not here in Australia nor in continental Europe. Thus if you are a citizen carrying a weapon, I would strongly avoid you.

Not many countries or people share the same view as Americans concerning gun ownership and concealed carry.

We can go back and forth, but this is my opinion. It isn’t changing. You can have your gun rights in the US, and I can go to peace to Mass here without thinking does that Nonna have a concealed weapon in her Sunday purse.

 

[Brendan]

itizens carrying weapons are not equal to military or the police,

You offered an opinion as if it were a fact. Why are they not equal? Equal by what standard? Equality under the law, in that the police or military are legally superior to everyone else? That seems also like the classic definition of a police state?

All people are ( or should be) equal under the law.

 

[upant]

Citizens carrying weapons are not equal to military or the police,

in the usa many citizens have more training with a gun than a cop. the requirements for most cops are very minimal and it shows with the misuse of guns by cops. i believe many of these questionable cops-shooting-people incidents wouldn’t happen if they had more training.

Not many countries or people share the same view as Americans concerning gun ownership and concealed carry.

yes and their violent crime rates show it

I can go to peace to Mass here without thinking does that Nonna have a concealed weapon in her Sunday purse.

but since no one knows who is carrying concealed your peace may be a false peace and that nonna may be carrying.

 

[Rozellelily]

The interesting thing or irony is that in a country like USA where citizens can carry guns they have such a much higher violent crime rate than other countries such as AUS or European countries where people don’t carry guns and that is withstanding any differences in population rates.

For example,there was roughly 500 reported crimes involving murders,attempt murders and homicides in 2014 in Australia whereas according to the FBI website there was approximately 1,165,383 violent crimes in the US in 2014.

Realistically,Perhaps if I lived in some areas of USA I would consider carrying a gun too but I do believe that the USA needs to find solutions for its violence issues that don’t involve everyone carrying weapons.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2014-crime-statistics
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@...Main Features~Homicide and Related Offences~9

 

[LittleFlower]

Have your guns, and I’ll keep having my (apparently false sense of) peace.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Been that way in large urban churches in America for quite a while. It’s not well publicized because shootings there are rare, probably in no small part to the fact of visible police protection and people who know the places realize there are undercover officers there who conceal carry.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Citizens carrying weapons are not equal to military or the police, not here in Australia nor in continental Europe. Thus if you are a citizen carrying a weapon, I would strongly avoid you.

I wouldn’t advertise this. Would-be criminals almost always look for easy, unarmed targets. Most of them aren’t looking for an epic battle to the death.

 

[sulliman]

Whatever happened to the concept of Sanctuary in the Church. It was a refuge, nominally a place where the violence of the secular world had no place.
It’s one thing for Law Enforcement, or working Military to bring a weapon with them but really should a civilian? What else should I bring in the Church with me, because maybe I don’t feel safe leaving it in my vehicle

I’m not going to say there may not be some people who carry for work, and cannot leave their CW unattended to attend mass but for the rest of us, can we go without it in the Lord’s house?

I try and keep my trust in the Lord.

 

[Teek]

Whatever happened to the concept of Sanctuary in the Church. It was a refuge, nominally a place where the violence of the secular world had no place.

Wouldn’t it be awesome if it still was? Seriously! Who would just walk into a Church and start firing on the innocent people who are just there to worship God? But that is what is happening. If the people trying to hurt you don’t care that it is the house of the Lord…

It is kind of like schools being gun free zones. Well, thank you, for telling every person who wants to make themselves a notorious legend that my kids are sitting ducks with no protection to be concerned about. But if they have to worry that maybe the third grade teacher isn’t going to let someone mess with her students…or that the 8th grade science teacher might just have a different idea about your right to disturb the peace and he is equipped to do something about it… They know they might be walking into a whole different kind of party. One they don’t really want to go to.

 

[Brendan]

The interesting thing or irony is that in a country like USA where citizens can carry guns they have such a much higher violent crime rate than other countries such as AUS or European countries where people don’t carry guns and that is withstanding any differences in population rates.

Homicide rate are higher in the US, but both the UK and Australia have significantly higher rates of crime in general, rape and physical assault

Countries Compared by Crime > Total crimes per 1000. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Countries Compared by Crime > Assault victims. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Countries Compared by Crime > Rape victims. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Why are those in the UK and Australia so violent, compared to those in the US?

 

[pnewton]

All people are ( or should be) equal under the law.

They are not, and never will be, when it comes to law enforcement authority. If I pull you out of your car and put you mine against your will, it is kidnapping. If a policeman does it, he operates under the color of the law. If a policeman pulls a gun on you and you pull one back, his killing would be justified; yours, capital murder. It is a principle to which the only alternative is anarchy.

 

[pnewton]

It is kind of like schools being gun free zones. Well, thank you, for telling every person who wants to make themselves a notorious legend that my kids are sitting ducks with no protection to be concerned about.

The shooting in Texas occurred in a place that was not a gun-free zone. Yet it happened. Also, a school being a gun-free zone only means that no one carry a gun without authorization. There still could be a teacher or other personnel authorized to carry a gun.

 

[Teek]

“It is kind of like schools being gun free zones. Well, thank you, for telling every person who wants to make themselves a notorious legend that my kids are sitting ducks with no protection to be concerned about.”

The shooting in Texas occurred in a place that was not a gun-free zone. Yet it happened. Also, a school being a gun-free zone only means that no one carry a gun without authorization. There still could be a teacher or other personnel authorized to carry a gun.

I wasn’t making a claim about any particular shooting. I was expressing a concern that I have about gun free zones. I did not make any claims to evidence or historical support for my claim.

There can and could be people authorized to carry a weapon. But it would conceivably be fewer than in a not-gun-free-zone.