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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duesenberg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
graciew said:
" It is enough" means" end of discussion."
The disciples were not getting the meaning of what was to come.
Not that they needed swords literally,nor He is saying that " Two swords are enough"
Click to expand...
Jesus always seemed to lead from the front, if swords were to be a part of his ministry, then Jesus would be the first person to have one. It does not make sense that Jesus would expect other people to defend him. Even when it came to the point of Jesus needing self defence, he chose to go quietly.

My understanding of Luke 22, is one of love and pray for your enemy.
 
Eric_Hyom said:
reduce tension in our cities.
Click to expand...
as london is now considered more violent than new york.

and the uk has another gun amnesty going on.

outside of our big cities we are pretty safe and in the big cities it is only certain neighborhoods you need to be concerned with.
 
Seeksadvice said:
Those suicides would have occurred using other means if a firearm wasn’t available. Seriously, if somebody is going to kill themselves, they are going to do it however they can.
Click to expand...
I see this a lot, and it’s simply not true.

Sometimes it is true, but so many times, a suicide is something of the moment. Sadly, I have personal knowledge of this. And if you care to look, there are plenty of accounts from people who attempted suicide, but failed, and are glad they failed, and did not try again.
 
Perhaps a Holy hand grenade?

Anyone?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Jokes aside, we don’t have weapons in Canada, so that settles it for us.
 
Last edited:
Eric_Hyom: You are comparing apples and oranges. Having a sword is about being armed and ready to defend oneself. You can do that for a lifetime and never use it. Using a sword is about reacting to a threat. The model for the using of deadly force is to stop, “an imminent threat of grave bodily harm.” That threat level was not present that night in the the Garden of Gethsemane.

The people coming for Jesus could have shown up in attack mode, ready to kill Him and the Apostles on the spot. If they had, the use of swords would have been justified and the Apostles would have wished they had followed Jesus’ command to the letter and ALL gotten swords. But the adversaries came in what seems to be an orderly and I guess legal manner to arrest Jesus and take him to trial. So the use of swords was not called for. So Jesus’ first statement about swords was essentially, “Be prepared to defend yourself.” His second statement about swords was essentially saying, “Stand down, lethal force is not warranted.” It’s exactly the kind of thought process that’s taught in most firearms self-defense courses.

I have always thought the Apostle who cut off the man’s ear wrongly overstepped his bounds. Even then, Jesus does not say, “You did wrong.” or “Get rid of your swords, even though I just told you to get some.” He just says as the equivalent of “They didn’t come with swords out, so we’re not going to go use our swords either.

Also, Jesus knew he had to go with the people who came for Him to fulfill His destiny, but I think he wanted those people, and us today, to know He was going willingly, not just because they had all the swords and His people didn’t. He also wanted the Apostles to be ready to defend themselves and survive that scene, because they had important work to do after he was gone.

So Jesus is clearly pro-sword ownership for citizens. He not only permits it, He commanded it for the Apostles. But he is also clearly for using restraint from that position of strength, to not use the weapon unless someone is threatening deadly force. That is exactly how the vast majority of law abiding citizens think of the use of guns for defense today.
 
Last edited:
I carry to Mass.

I understand the “death comes for us all” argument to a point but while we are here we do have some obligations to God, ourselves and each other to not let evil run amok. We have an obligation to protect our traditions and our faith.

Now, I usually have children under my care at Mass so I will not be the first line of defense. I am the someone-broke-into-the-cry-room line of defense.

I didn’t start carrying because of mass shootings but for personal defense. I don’t live in fear but I am aware there are people who wish harm on others.
 
What I mean is; Civilians cannot own weapons (other than hunting weapons), and wear them in public.
That is how Canada works, and the level of criminality/terrorism is massively below what is seen in the US.

I don’t say we won’t ever need them, but so far…
 
Canada (vs) US, mate, we’re talking countries here.

Focus on one city, and I’ll bring your attention to New Orlean, Detroit or Baltimore (just to name a few).
44.5, 44.7, 51.1 per 100k, respectively.

The numbers speaks
 
Last edited:
CatholicGearSolid said:
Canada (vs) US, mate, we’re talking countries here.

Focus on one city, and I’ll bring your attention to New Orlean, Detroit or Baltimore (just to name a few).
44.5, 44.7, 51.1 per 100k, respectively.
Click to expand...
i agree our big cities are worse. i’ve posted similar prior.

you made an outlandish claim.
CatholicGearSolid said:
Jokes aside, we don’t have weapons in Canada, so that settles it for us.
Click to expand...
The numbers speaks
Click to expand...
but the number doesn’t speak to all of us. many of us live in areas far below edmonton’s count. the national numbers mean nothing to where i live or to a large part of the country.
 
"That settles it for us", meaning we don’t have to worry about carrying concealed firearm at mass or not,
we simply can’t; it is the law in Canada.

Why bumping on such an irrelevant detail to begin with,
were you offended or something?
 
CatholicGearSolid said:
were you offended or something?
Click to expand...
not at all.

i was amused at what you wrote.

some people believe such claims about gun controlled countries.

i know one snowbird who honestly believed you could not buy an ar type rifle in canada. i showed him a website and podcast by 2 canadians explaining the process for an ar style gun. he says it is fake. yes he lives in canada most of the year
 
Last edited:
I don’t own a firearm, let alone carry one on my person. Having said that, I live in a safe area. I think I might be more tempted to carry something (even if only bear mace or a tazer) if I lived in an area where crime was more prevalent.

Having said that I do think it would be a good idea for churches to have at least one security guard on the premises. If not at every church then at least at big churches and at churches in heavily populated areas. There’d be less church vandalism too.
 
twf said:
I mean the principal of it… the symbolism of approaching the Holy of Holies ready to kill… even if for a just cause.
Click to expand...
The Pope himself has armed guards at every Mass, as even the ceremonial Swiss guard carry pistols. So the carrying of firearms at Mass is not without precedent.
 
Is the Pope armed?
It’s one thing to arm law enforcement officials. Another to encourage everyone to be armed during worship.

Weren’t medieval clergy generally forbidden from carrying a sword?
 
You never heard of the Swiss Guard?

Pontifical Swiss Guard[edit]
Main article: Pontifical Swiss Guard
The Pontifical Swiss Guard (German: Päpstliche Schweizergarde; French: Garde suisse pontificale; Italian: Guardia Svizzera Pontificia; Latin: Pontificia Cohors Helvetica or Cohors Pedestris Helvetiorum a Sacra Custodia Pontificis) is an exception to the Swiss rulings of 1874 and 1927. A small force maintained by the Holy See, it is responsible for the safety of the Pope, including the security of the Apostolic Palace. The Swiss Guard serves as the de facto military of Vatican City.
 
Last edited:
In addition to the Swiss Guard that numbers about 110, there is the armed Vatican Corps of Gendarmerie, which numbers about 130. The Guard can dress in ceremonial uniforms, tactical uniforms or plain clothes. Protective units of the Guard accompany the Pope on his trips. They are all volunteers from the Swiss Army. The Gendarmerie generally only work at the Vatican, wear more traditional police uniforms and are probably all Italian. So Masses at the Vatican have more guns present and nearby than probably any religious ceremonies on Earth.

What a lot of people don’t realize is that the Vatican almost certainly has more guns per capita than any other country in the world. It has about 870 permanent residents. Each member of the two security forces mentioned above have up-to-date pistols they carry and long arms as backups in the armory, so that’s at least 480 guns. But here is the real kicker: The Guard has has kept all of the weapons it has issued in its 500 years or so of existence, including muskets back to the 1870’s. All these weapons are stamped as Vatican property and they are all in working order. Sometimes they are used in special ceremonies. That has to add up to thousands of working firearms for 870 residents. They have made the armory into a kind of weapons museum, but it is not open to the general public.
 
Last edited:
twf said:
Is the Pope armed?
It’s one thing to arm law enforcement officials. Another to encourage everyone to be armed during worship.

Weren’t medieval clergy generally forbidden from carrying a sword?
Click to expand...
The Pope himself is not armed, but some of those in Mass are. Is the Pope unaware of the symbolism that you describe, He, after all, is the one instructing those men to carry firearms at Mass.

And yes, medieval clergy were often forbidden from carrying a sword, but others certainly could (and did), even at Mass.

There were whole religious orders that carried swords and used them. Templars, Hospilitiers were all monks.
 
Yes. We have 2 off duty police officers and a retired FBI agent protecting at each of my Parishes Sunday masses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top