Gun Control & the Catholic Church

[melensdad]

That is how I think you see and do things also, not look at it in the whole, but only in selective context to win the discussion concerning the stand you make.

Well I try to provide context, as when I cite the CCC, I cite the relevant portions, but also clearly have provided sections both before and after the relevant portions and other sections as well. Through this thread I’ve attempted to post references from the Vatican, individual Bishops, the USCCB and other sources. I’ve probably made some errors too. But I don’t see how it could be stated that I’m being selective. In fact many of my questions to various forum members that were in response to anti-defense or anti-gun statements are still unanswered.

As to self defense I took the extreme opposite of your position, in order to to bring you into a possible understanding of what I posted above. I just do not believe using the obligation of self-defense is a good defense to oppose gun-control.

I’ve tried not to take extreme positions, but simply to state what is in the Catechism. Now if you consider the CCC to be extreme then that would be stating something different all together. Further, I have consistently stated that the CCC does not advocate the use of any particular way to defend yourself, just that it is your duty to do so. Regarding the difference we have on the issue of gun controls, I believe you have conceded many points but still cling to the claim that I need to give up my rights. I’m sorry, but no. Especially when you admit that guns are not the root cause, and when it has been shown that the politicians of your state clearly have priorities that are far from controlling crime and simply are looking for a quick buck and a scapegoat.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I disagree and many bible scholars will too,

From one of earlier post.

Luke 22:38** But they said: Lord, behold, here are two swords**. (We will protect you against the armies of Rome with this two swords, :knight2:we don’t just have one but two:bounce
And he said to them: It is enough!doh2:you still don’t get it, :shrug:three years with me and you still don’t get it. :banghead: )
note* My comments added.

I have done a lot reading and research over this verse over that last week and every commentator I have read concerning this verse, indicates that Jesus was rebuking the disciples on this issue that they needed swords for what was about to come, the statement, ‘it is enough’, is like the way we say today “that is enough of this foolishness” and some refer to Deut. 3:26 for example
And the Lord was angry with me on your account and heard me not, but said to me:*** It is enough: speak no more to me of this matter. ***Deut. 3:26

So, the “great teacher” who, according to scripture, explained everything that He taught to the apostles because they were going to carry on His message for Him did not bother to explain this important point?

If you and your “many bible scholars” are correct in your view point, then the bible is wrong when it says that Jesus explained EVERYTHING to His apostles.

I’ll place my faith in the infallible Word of God.

 

[Man]

Next time put a link to the page, it will would be easier to reference and read, but I still don’t get the point your trying get across in light of the discussion.

Do you understand the value of the “Pope in dialog with the world”?

If you have a question or protest that your priest can’t answer and your bishop can’t do anything about, it become imperatives that you search for the answers and, if there is nothing, ask the Vatican. It is not their will that any should fall away. In fact, many delight in the study of difficult questions.

We aren’t talking politics and so forth, but rather matters like this, which would be part of the deposit of faith, something that defends the Catechism, is scriptural, and follows what was written by those before us.

Here, I present the same historical Jesus, as a Man also of shrewd prudence. I ask the Holy See if I am correct.

Where do you think all those old documents come from?

Maybe, I’ll live on in the deposit of faith. Hopefully, I won’t waste anyone’s time. Maybe, if you listen carefully, he’ll answer to the world.

 

[Bennie_P]

Well I try to provide context, as when I cite the CCC, I cite the relevant portions, but also clearly have provided sections both before and after the relevant portions and other sections as well. Through this thread I’ve attempted to post references from the Vatican, individual Bishops, the USCCB and other sources. I’ve probably made some errors too. But I don’t see how it could be stated that I’m being selective. In fact many of my questions to various forum members that were in response to anti-defense or anti-gun statements are still unanswered.

I’ve tried not to take extreme positions, but simply to state what is in the Catechism. Now if you consider the CCC to be extreme then that would be stating something different all together. Further, I have consistently stated that the CCC does not advocate the use of any particular way to defend yourself, just that it is your duty to do so. Regarding the difference we have on the issue of gun controls, I believe you have conceded many points but still cling to the claim that I need to give up my rights. I’m sorry, but no. Especially when you admit that guns are not the root cause, and when it has been shown that the politicians of your state clearly have priorities that are far from controlling crime and simply are looking for a quick buck and a scapegoat.

I think we both have made some mistakes, but for me this has been an excercise in forming an argument which I still haven’t be able to present as clearly as I want. - but I’m getting closer to be able to do so. I have seen a change in the way you present your argument, though you position appears to be the same. I think that we may getting closer to a dialogue.

By the way which state do you think I’m from?

My hood

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

So, the “great teacher” who, according to scripture, explained everything that He taught to the apostles because they were going to carry on His message for Him did not bother to explain this important point?

If you and your “many bible scholars” are correct in your view point, then the bible is wrong when it says that Jesus explained EVERYTHING to His apostles.

I’ll place my faith in the infallible Word of God.

John 10:6 and John 12:16 are examples that EVERYTHING was not explained.

Sorry, Sir Knight; But in the context of Luke 22:36, the sword is a metaphor for the Word of God (see Hebrews 4:12).

You may not agree with that, and you may not agree that “Is is enough” is a dismissal of the subject, but you should respect our interpretation.

 

[Bennie_P]

Except that it doesn’t work in the US. Those cities and states with strict rules against guns have the highest crime rates. Those states with “shall issue” laws – where any citizen without a criminal record can get a license to carry a concealed handgun – have lower crime rates.

And when a state adopts “shall issue,” all the “predictions” about shootouts in the streets** fail** to come true. Instead of going up, the violent crime rate drops.

Is that overall crime or per capita?

Peopleper 100,000 Chicago vs Little Rock
Murder Chicago, IL 15.6 / Little Rock 22.1
Robbery Chi - 555.6 / LR - 462.7
Aggravated Assault Chi 624.4/ LR 1224.6

Arkansas State Requirements
Rifles and Shotguns
Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No
Registration of rifles and shotguns? No
Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No
Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No

Handguns
Permit to purchase handgun? No
Registration of handguns? No

Licensing of owners of handguns? No

Permit to carry handguns? Yes “Shall Issue”

Other Requirements Is there a State waiting period? No

Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? Yes

Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? Yes

Record of sale: No
*NICS - National Instant Check System

Illinois State Requirements
Rifles and Shotguns
Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? Firearms Owner’s ID card required.

Registration of rifles and shotguns? Chicago requires registration of all firearms.

Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? Subject to municipal control, handguns banned in some municipalities.

Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? Carrying concealed is prohibited entirely. There is no permit to carry concealed.

Handguns Permit to purchase handgun? Firearms Owner’s ID card required.

Registration of handguns? Chicago requires registration of all firearms.
Licensing of owners of handguns? Subject to municipal control, handguns banned in some municipalities.

Permit to carry handguns? Carrying concealed is prohibited entirely. There is no permit to carry concealed.
Other Requirements
Is there a State waiting period? Up to 30-day wait to acquire Firearms Owner Identification Card (FOID), 3-day waiting period to purchase a handgun, 1-day waiting period for a long gun.

Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? No, a state system is used.

Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? Not allowed.

Record of sale: Yes
*NICS - National Instant Check System

crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/Gun_Laws_by_State.htm

 

[Sir_Knight]

John 10:6 and John 12:16 are examples that EVERYTHING was not explained.

No, that is incorrect. If you read the rest of the passage and not just those verses listed, you see that Jesus DOES go on to explain further and the bible is very clear in Mark 4:34 …

He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.

… Remember, Jesus was preparing the Apostles to carry on His message for Him. Could He even be considered “good” teacher, let alone a “great” teacher, if He taught things to them without explainining it? Definitely not!

The only place where an explanation is not offered is when it is not needed because the Apostles understood correctly. As is the case in this passage. Jesus does not offer further explanation because the Apostles correctly understood Him.

Sorry, Sir Knight; But in the context of Luke 22:36, the sword is a metaphor for the Word of God (see Hebrews 4:12).

So a purse is a purse. A walking stick is a walking stick but a sword is not a sword? That’s rather confusing, isn’t it? Especially coming from the Great Teacher. How were they to figure that out especially when all other times He explained everything to them?

But let’s assume that you are correct. If the sword is a metaphor for the Word of God, then Jesus is telling the Apostles that they are to sell their coats to BUY the Word of God? I thought that Jesus was FREELY giving them the Word of God. Who are they to BUY the Word of God from? And doesn’t the church consider the SELLING of sacred things to be a serious sin?

Sorry, Charlie; but there arise too many unexplained issue that conflict with the rest of scripture and church teaching when one takes the position the sword is anything other than a sword.

You may not agree with that, and you may not agree that “Is is enough” is a dismissal of the subject, but you should respect our interpretation.

You may not agree with what I say and you may not agree that “It is enough” is a reply that they are sufficiently armed but you should respect our interpretation.

 

[FightingFat]

He’s telling them that things are going to be tough from now on.

 

[ufstudent]

Many catholics believe in gun control because “thou shalt not kill”. I just just reading a post about abortion, asking if it was okay to abort a baby if the mother’s life was directly in danger for carrying the baby to term.

Everyone responded, “thou shat not kill” “thou shalt not murder”, they said it was better to lose the mother’s life and save the babies.

But now everyone is saying on here that it is okay to kill out of self denfense. I feel that situation of abortion is self defense. The mother knows that she will die unless she aborts her baby. If someone has a gun to your head, you know you will die unless you kill that person.

It’s not good to have situational ethics. Either you should be okay with defense killings or not okay. My abortion example IS a defense killing.

That’s why many catholics are anti-gun. They actually beleive “thou shalt not kill” under any circumstance. They are not “situational catholics” like some.

 

[melensdad]

Charlie . . . I’ve looked at your “metaphor” argument before and in a prior post you even cited sources and I looked at those. I honestly believe your sources are not correct, therefore your argument is also invalid. I have to go with Sir Knight on his explanation simply because his is consistent throughout the Bible. It doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that I agree with his gun issue, it has to do with the consistency of the way the word is presented through the Bible and to claim the sword is a metaphor simply doesn’t work when applied within the context of the rest of the Bible.

I am willing to believe that the phrase “It is enough” could have multiple meanings. It could mean we need to end this discussion AND it could mean that 2 swords are enough AND it could also mean that swords will not be needed in what is about to come. And the multiple interpretations are NOT mutually exclusive of each other, they in fact can easily compliment each other.

So, to claim ONE interpretation trumps the others to me is actually pretty vain when all 3 of the above can clearly work together within the context of the passages that come before and after the quoted section. Jesus tells them to get a sword, they have 2, He tells says “It is enough” and that could easily mean that you must be prepared for the worst, you have plenty, and when the time of His arrest comes, they won’t be needed to protect Him. Again, I’m looking at it from the context of the series of events before, including and following the quoted passage.

 

[RyanL]

Many catholics believe in gun control because “thou shalt not kill”. I just just reading a post about abortion, asking if it was okay to abort a baby if the mother’s life was directly in danger for carrying the baby to term.

Everyone responded, “thou shat not kill” “thou shalt not murder”, they said it was better to lose the mother’s life and save the babies.

But now everyone is saying on here that it is okay to kill out of self denfense. I feel that situation of abortion is self defense. The mother knows that she will die unless she aborts her baby. If someone has a gun to your head, you know you will die unless you kill that person.

It’s not good to have situational ethics. Either you should be okay with defense killings or not okay. My abortion example IS a defense killing.

That’s why many catholics are anti-gun. They actually beleive “thou shalt not kill” under any circumstance. They are not “situational catholics” like some.

Someone has been filling your head with mush.

No one says kill the mom. No one says don’t treat the medical problem. All we’re saying regarding abortion is that it’s never moral to intentionally kill an innocent human. If you have to remove a fallopian tube where the embryonic human is attached and the embryonic human dies as a result, that’s not an intentional killing so it’s morally permissible.

Now go to gun control and self-defense. The aggressor is not “innocent”. The above rules don’t apply – different ones do. The rules that apply are rules about the intentional/unintentional killing of guilty humans in order to preserve the lives of innocents.

Apples to oranges.

Oh, and if abortion is a matter of self-defense…who is the knife pointed at?

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Man]

Many catholics believe in gun control because “thou shalt not kill”. I just just reading a post about abortion, asking if it was okay to abort a baby if the mother’s life was directly in danger for carrying the baby to term.

Everyone responded, “thou shat not kill” “thou shalt not murder”, they said it was better to lose the mother’s life and save the babies.

But now everyone is saying on here that it is okay to kill out of self denfense. I feel that situation of abortion is self defense. The mother knows that she will die unless she aborts her baby. If someone has a gun to your head, you know you will die unless you kill that person.

It’s not good to have situational ethics. Either you should be okay with defense killings or not okay. My abortion example IS a defense killing.

That’s why many catholics are anti-gun. They actually beleive “thou shalt not kill” under any circumstance. They are not “situational catholics” like some.

Don’t have sex if you don’t want/can’t have a baby. If its ectopic, you remove the tube, otherwise lay in the hospital and wait it out (go bankrupt). No one ever said life was going to be easy.

A baby is not guilty of endangering its mothers life and is considered innocent. Don’t kill it. How hard is that to understand.

Self-Defense carried out against an aggresor.
Baby = innocent.

If you want to change the definitions you can get confused.

 

[Bennie_P]

That’s part of it. The other part is they refuse to be grounded in reality. Liberalized concealed carry laws reduce crime. Yet they refuse to accept that simple truth.

It is hard to accept truth that doesn’t seem to ring clear - Arkansas is one of the most liberal gun law states in the nation, along with Georgia, Mississippi, and Alabama. Look at the Liberal gun law cities compared to strict gun law cities and your truth seems to fade.

Little Rock vs New York
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=New+York&s1=NY&c2=Little+Rock&s2=AR

Little Rock vs Boston
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Boston&s1=MA&c2=Little+Rock&s2=AR

Little Rock vs Indianapolis
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Indianapolis&s1=IN&c2=Little+Rock&s2=AR

Little Rock vs Detroit
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Detroit&s1=MI&c2=Little+Rock&s2=AR

Little Rock Vs Atlanta (Both in Gun friendly States Crime rates similar)
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Atlanta&s1=GA&c2=Little+Rock&s2=AR

Atlanta (shall carry) Vs Chicago
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Chicago&s1=IL&c2=Atlanta&s2=GA

Birmingham (do issue) Vs Chicago
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Chicago&s1=IL&c2=Birmingham&s2=AL

Jackson MS (shall carry)Vs Chicago
http://phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Chicago&s1=IL&c2=Jackson&s2=MS

Detroit(Shall Carry) Vs Chicago
phoenix.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Chicago&s1=IL&c2=Detroit&s2=MI

Gun Laws by State

goodgun.org/images/youdontpanel2.jpg

 

[FightingFat]

Many catholics believe in gun control because “thou shalt not kill”. I just just reading a post about abortion, asking if it was okay to abort a baby if the mother’s life was directly in danger for carrying the baby to term.

Everyone responded, “thou shat not kill” “thou shalt not murder”, they said it was better to lose the mother’s life and save the babies.

But now everyone is saying on here that it is okay to kill out of self denfense. I feel that situation of abortion is self defense. The mother knows that she will die unless she aborts her baby. If someone has a gun to your head, you know you will die unless you kill that person.

It’s not good to have situational ethics. Either you should be okay with defense killings or not okay. My abortion example IS a defense killing.

That’s why many catholics are anti-gun. They actually beleive “thou shalt not kill” under any circumstance. They are not “situational catholics” like some.

:clapping:

 

[melensdad]

Bennie, did you notice that there have been NO incidents of Rape in Chicago? I’m not sure that your website’s data is credible? Or if it is, it is only partially credible.

It is also skewed against cities versus national because national numbers will always look lower when big cities are compared. I compared several small towns and it really made the national numbers look horrible.

 

[melensdad]

:clapping:

I’m confused on your answer, being just an emoticon. Are you agreeing with someone who clearly misinterprets the church’s teachings and is only looking at a narrow focus without taking into account the fuller context of the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Seriously I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

 

[Bennie_P]

Bennie, did you notice that there have been NO incidents of Rape in Chicago? I’m not sure that your website’s data is credible? Or if it is, it is only partially credible.

It is also skewed against cities versus national because national numbers will always look lower when big cities are compared. I compared several small towns and it really made the national numbers look horrible.

If you read the note it declares information on rape in Chicago wasn’t made availble. It is a third party websight with no ties to the gun control lobby nor the gun lobby. The web site is there to make available information to people about cities they may think about moving to, so they do not have an agenda considering the issue we are discussing. It is more objective then what you or I have come up with so far. How else can you compare crime but by per capita? Besides, in a smaller city you are suppose to be safer?

Your risk of being hit by Crime in these smaller Cities is greater then Chicago, the numbers are against you, you are just trying to wiggle out of the facts.

Did you notice the stats between chi town and the motor city?

Yes, but

 

[FightingFat]

I’m confused on your answer, being just an emoticon. Are you agreeing with someone who clearly misinterprets the church’s teachings and is only looking at a narrow focus without taking into account the fuller context of the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Seriously I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

I think that ufstudent pointed out the hypocrisy in the Catholic pro-gun position very well. I think that you try and twist catholic teaching to promote gun ownership when the main thrust of theology is in direct contradiction to that position, and I think when the argument goes against you, you try to back up your position by playing at orthodoxy.

As it happens I don’t really have much of a problem with people owning and shooting guns. My problem is with people who try and play it off as being Catholic and somehow promoted by the Church and promulgated by her teachings!

 

[Bennie_P]

I think that ufstudent pointed out the hypocrisy in the Catholic pro-gun position very well. I think that you try and twist catholic teaching to promote gun ownership when the main thrust of theology is in direct contradiction to that position, and I think when the argument goes against you, you try to back up your position by playing at orthodoxy.

As it happens I don’t really have much of a problem with people owning and shooting guns. My problem is with people who try and play it off as being Catholic and somehow promoted by the Church and promulgated by her teachings!

I agree with you, though I’m totally disagree with ufstudent forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif view on abortion, he did point out to what seems to be a hypocrisy of the ‘so called Catholic’ pro-gun position as a pro-life position.

Myself, I don’t have a problem with gun ownership, but an anti-guncontrol postion is not an official Church stand.

 

[melensdad]

I think that ufstudent pointed out the hypocrisy in the Catholic pro-gun position very well. I think that you try and twist catholic teaching to promote gun ownership when the main thrust of theology is in direct contradiction to that position, and I think when the argument goes against you, you try to back up your position by playing at orthodoxy.

Please site any example where I have said the church promotes gun ownership. Very clearly I have NOT done that and very clearly I have cited many quotations by clergy that are anti-gun! What I have said is that the CCC clearly states that Self Defense is required. I have also said that it does NOT suggest any sort of weapon is preferred. For you to say that I have done/said things that I have not is clearly an insult to me, further it is proof that you only read what you want to read and only understand what you want to understand.

As it happens I don’t really have much of a problem with people owning and shooting guns. My problem is with people who try and play it off as being Catholic and somehow promoted by the Church and promulgated by her teachings!

Again, please show me where I have said the Church is pro-gun. In fact go all the way back to post #1 where I clearly was asking why the church is so ANTI-GUN.

Bennie P wrote to Fighting Fat
Bennie P:

I agree with you, though I’m totally disagree with ufstudent forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif view on abortion, he did point out to what seems to be a hypocrisy of the ‘so called Catholic’ pro-gun position as a pro-life position.

Myself, I don’t have a problem with gun ownership, but an anti-guncontrol postion is not an official Church stand.

And again, I have stated that I believe the church is basically anti-gun. The church seems, at best, to tolerate guns.

However, some of the anti-gun folks in this thread seem to confuse the issue of SELF DEFENSE and some seem to presume that all pro-gun arguments are derived from the CCC.

The Church, through the CCC clearly states that defense is not considered violent but is considered saving life and is necessary. It also clearly points out that you are required to come to the aid and defense of OTHERS and YOURSELF.

The church is VERY CLEAR that self defense is required, it simply does not state how (at least not within the CCC).

It also makes a very clear that ABORTION has nothing to do with SELF DEFENSE.

It also makes very clear that SELF DEFENSE is absolutely NOT to be equated to MURDER.

It also makes very clear that SELF DEFENSE is a pro-life issue. Self Defense shows the value in preserving innocent human life, and the CCC gives very very clear discussion of the point that you SHOULD value your own life over that of an aggressor and you should demand that your life be respected.

. . .

Bennie P wrote that I am trying to wiggle out of the facts presented by his website, and the answer is no I am not. But then I have not made many of the claims that Vern has made so I don’t all those stats. What I do know is that AFTER carry laws have been relaxed, crime RATES go down. I also know that MURDER rates in relaxed gun law states are typically LOWER than MURDER rates in harsh gun law states. But I’ve not made too many claims about specific cities, except for Chicago, which I do live very near.