Gun Control

[ddarko]

I already explained this earlier, when Peter cut off the ear, Jesus told Peter to put the sword away – not to throw it away. The reason was that the purpose of the sword was for His followers to be able to defend themselves after Jesus was gone. It was not for defending Jesus, who could have called down twelve legions of angels to defend Him.

If we conclude that Jesus did not means physical swords as you suggest, then Jesus is a liar because throughout the Gospels Jesus said that He was in perfect agreement with His heavenly Father and through the Old Testament we see numerous times when God told people to use the sword to kill their attackers. God even turned His back on Saul when Saul refused to use the sword against an enemy.

You are joking right?

Have you read the acts of the apostles. No where did an Apostle use a sword after Jesus’s death.

Hmmm. seems like we have even more contradictions on your interpretation

Btw, Jesus not meaning physical swords has been explained over and over again in reconciliation with the OT passages. Now I must come out and say this. You seem to be lacking a bit of theological knowledge overall. It might help to read up on what theologians like Dr. Scott Hahn actually have to say about such OT passages.

God Bless

 

[Sir_Knight]

After a while, I swear I feel like this is an AI answering. I’ve heard this exact same words multiple times among multiple threads haha.

Anyway, the obligation is for us is to fight EVIL the proper way. Carrying a gun is for authorities and IT IS THEIR duty to protect us. We are called to love our persecutors. NOT put a bullet between the eyes. **We can certainly defend with all our might if the need ever arises. But if we walk around pre-supposing such a need would arise, then it is to be suspicious of our brothers and sisters in Christ. That is sinful and judgmental. **

The Authority MUST defend the oppressed because THAT is a MORAL duty of the Authority. The JUST WAR doctrine does not therefore apply to every individual in that sense.

God Bless

I already addressed this earlier …

Why does one in uniform have a right to defend his life with the best means possible but those out of uniform don’t? Doesn’t Christianity teach that we are all equal? Doesn’t the CCC state that we all have a grave duty to protect our lives? Why should some be allowed to have better means of defense than others?

 

[ddarko]

And the gang-banger living down the street, when he does evil, is to be opposed so that the innocent are not harmed – that is our DUTY as Christians. To oppose evil is at the heart of Christianity.

Yes, you notify the authorities. And you try to do all you can in that moment of his crime.

What I am pointing out is that for you to get all afraid and carry a gun around because that person living down the street is a gang banger shows that you are being judgmental of him and unloving. You are called to LOVE everyone.

The more right thing for you to do is to go to his place and talk to him and try and preach him the message of Christ. Not run and buy a gun from Walmart with the hope of putting a bullet between the eyes the next time he tries to rape someone.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

I already addressed this earlier …

Major flaw.

Uniforms have authority.

This is why the Pope can declare teachings, Dogma etc while you cannot.

We are all equal in dignity BUT not equal in who we are. To say so is actually Unchristian.

God Bless

 

[Sir_Knight]

You are joking right?

Have you read the acts of the apostles. No where did an Apostle use a sword after Jesus’s death.

Hmmm. seems like we have even more contradictions on your interpretation

Nowhere is it RECORDED that they used the sword. Given the fact that they were under Roman rule, they were not permitted to even own weapons. To admit in writing that they violated the law would not have been a good thing to write down. Remember that scripture tells us that not all things were recorded in it’s pages.

Btw, Jesus not meaning physical swords has been explained over and over again in reconciliation with the OT passages. Now I must come out and say this. You seem to be lacking a bit of theological knowledge overall. It might help to read up on what theologians like Dr. Scott Hahn actually have to say about such OT passages.

God Bless

And I suggest you read some of the writings of the saints …

“Without doubt one is allowed to resist against the unjust aggressor to one’s life, one’s goods or one’s physical integrity; sometimes, even ’til the aggressor’s death. This act is aimed at preserving one’s life or one’s goods and to make the aggressor powerless. Thus, it is a good act, which is the right of the victim. One is also allowed to kill other people’s unjust aggressor.” – St. Thomas Aquinas, (Dizionario ecclesiastico).

… I’ll be back to continue this discusion after I come back from work where I sell guns for a living.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Major flaw.

Uniforms have authority.

This is why the Pope can declare teachings, Dogma etc while you cannot.

We are all equal in dignity BUT not equal in who we are. To say so is actually Unchristian.

God Bless

So the lives of those not in authority are worth less than those in authority? Major flaw.Christianity teaches that we are all equal in the eyes of God. None of the Apostles wore uniforms but Jesus instructed them to get swords.

 

[ddarko]

Nowhere is it RECORDED that they used the sword. Given the fact that they were under Roman rule, they were not permitted to even own weapons. To admit in writing that they violated the law would not have been a good thing to write down. Remember that scripture tells us that not all things were recorded in it’s pages.

Ok don’t try to escape the point. I was pointing out that your interpretation of SWORDS was incorrect.

You said Jesus said to keep it for defense. NO WHERE did apostles ever use a sword in the Acts of the Apostles.

And I suggest you read some of the writings of the saints …

Me too. Just don’t read the ones you like

“Without doubt one is allowed to resist against the unjust aggressor to one’s life, one’s goods or one’s physical integrity; sometimes, even ’til the aggressor’s death. This act is aimed at preserving one’s life or one’s goods and to make the aggressor powerless. Thus, it is a good act, which is the right of the victim. One is also allowed to kill other people’s unjust aggressor.” – St. Thomas Aquinas, (Dizionario ecclesiastico).

We already touched upon this. I agree with St. Thomas.

… I’ll be back to continue this discusion after I come back from work where I sell guns for a living.

Oh I see. Ok that clarifies quiet a bit of things.

I think its not much point in us debating then for sure. I will keep you in my prayers.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

So the lives of those not in authority are worth less than those in authority? Major flaw.Christianity teaches that we are all equal in the eyes of God. None of the Apostles wore uniforms but Jesus instructed them to get swords.

I know and I really understand why you don’t see the obvious reason why what you said above is false.

I honestly don’t think there is much to debate anymore Sir Knight. Even I would be somewhat against changing my mind on something I practice as my daily livelihood just because someone on a forum says its wrong.

So I quiet understand where you are coming from now.

I will keep you and your family in my prayers.

God Bless

 

[momor]

Sir Knight, it seems to me that you are taking the Catholic teaching that we are allowed to defend ourselves or others from harm and turning it into a duty to do so, even to the point of carrying a gun around in case you come upon a crime. That is vigilanteism and the Church doesn’t teach that at all.

What the Church actually teaches is that we should try and defend our fellow man from harm but we do not have to do so at the cost of our own life. If we do choose to give our life to save another that is considered heroic, not a duty.

I actually fear vigilantes as much as I do the criminals since I believe some of them are just as dangerous and unstable and they are out looking for situations in which they can pull a gun on someone.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Ok don’t try to escape the point. I was pointing out that your interpretation of SWORDS was incorrect.

You said Jesus said to keep it for defense. NO WHERE did apostles ever use a sword in the Acts of the Apostles.

And I am pointing out that Jesus commanded His followers to purchase swords. Just because it is not recorded that they were ever used does not mean that Jesus did not intent for them to be used. To have them spend their money on something that was not to be used would have been extremely wasteful and not something that a firm supporter of the poor would have commanded. Instead, He would have instructed them to give the money to the poor,

Me too. Just don’t read the ones you like

Is there not merit in ALL of their writings?

We already touched upon this. I agree with St. Thomas.

So you have no problem with killing an attacker, if need be, with your hands but nit with a gun? That is illogical. The person would be dead in either case. What about the weak and the old? They are to be at the mercy of an attacker? That is very uncivilized. The weak and the old are subject to the big and the strong.

Oh I see. Ok that clarifies quiet a bit of things.

I think its not much point in us debating then for sure. I will keep you in my prayers.

God Bless

Tomorrow, when I attend mass, which is usually said by my pastor, who normally carries a firearm under his garments while saying mass, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers as well.

 

[momor]

Tomorrow, when I attend mass, which is usually said by my pastor, who normally carries a firearm under his garments while saying mass, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers as well.

First off I don’t believe this for a minute.
Secondly, if it is true then he is a paranoid nut that should be reported to the bishop. It is an obscenity to wear a gun while saying Mass.

 

[ddarko]

And I am pointing out that Jesus commanded His followers to purchase swords. Just because it is not recorded that they were ever used does not mean that Jesus did not intent for them to be used. To have them spend their money on something that was not to be used would have been extremely wasteful and not something that a firm supporter of the poor would have commanded. Instead, He would have instructed them to give the money to the poor,

Is there not merit in ALL of their writings?

So you have no problem with killing an attacker, if need be, with your hands but nit with a gun? That is illogical. The person would be dead in either case. What about the weak and the old? They are to be at the mercy of an attacker? That is very uncivilized. The weak and the old are subject to the big and the strong.

Tomorrow, when I attend mass, which is usually said by my pastor, who normally carries a firearm under his garments while saying mass, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers as well.

I just want to clarify because I don’t want you to be in ill conceived view.

I am pointing out that carrying a gun in FEAR or ANTICIPATION that a gang banger is going to rape you or someone else is sinful.

We are called to be brothers and sisters in Christ. We can’t be judgmental. We are called to love everybody. Even the gang banger. To do otherwise is a SIN.

So authority is the one who enforces the Law. That is why they carry guns and you cannot. We are all not equal in that terms. The Pope can teach Dogma. The priests can turn bread and wine in to the body and blood of Christ. You can’t and I can’t. Similarly, we can’t carry guns and it does not CONTRADICT catholic teaching on authority and equality.

I hope that someday when you look back you will understand the above.

As I said before, sometimes our position in life can cloud our judgment. In your case, the fact that you are a gun seller certainly does effect your stance on this matter and it shows in your argumentation.

Thanks for keeping me in your prayers

God Bless

 

[Tigg]

Your inability to agree with the fact that WE can all agree that our DUTY as Christians is to get that would-be rapist from ever getting to that point really baffles me.

In an ideal world, there would be no rapists and no sin and that would indeed be the goal for those intent upon living the gospel mandate. Aaaahhh, to be able to go back to the garden! Unfortunately, we must deal in the reality of a corrupted world with an inclination to darkness. Yes, I can stress the love of God to my brothers and sisters and live the message in my heart the very best I can. I can pray for them and attempt to proselytize them, but your hearts and flowers ideology would deny the truth that they have the power to choose evil over good. In the meantime, my home is broken into, I am threatened at knife point to submit to evil, or my grandchildren are in the room facing grave threats. I have nothing to protect myself or them. Would you have me start preaching the Good News upon deaf ears whose sole intent is to cause bodily harm?

 

[itrytofight]

Dear Sir Knight,

Are you saying that when a rape “IS IN PROGRESS”, one needs a gun to stop it?

Second, I’ve never really heard someone getting raped when bystanders CHOOSE to do anything. Note, usually what happens is that bystanders DONT do anything when someone is getting raped. INCLUDING calling 911 and simply yelling out.

This is a well documented psychological phenomenon known as the bystander effect.

I don’t think that ANY rapist is going to continue in his merry way if you or any other person walked in and said “What are you doing? Stop, Somebody help!!!”. Even that would be enough to stop a rapist. I’ve not heard of someone ever raping a woman in the presence of a stranger right in front of him and telling him to stop and crying out for help.

I think in short, you and I and all Catholics can agree that our duty is to LOVE everyone as our brother and sister. Our duty is to maintain good mental, physical, and spiritual health in all members of Christ. You are certainly correct that in our society, some might turn out to be bad people. Our duty is NOT to shoot the rapist BUT to make sure that the person NEVER becomes that ‘what if’ rapist. Our duty is to GET RID of the Guns on the streets that are used by drug dealers and all other kinds of people who engage in violent organized crime. We can’t do this by having a gun ourselves. The other person would just use a bigger gun. So we do that our duty by giving the young would be ‘gang bangers’ a good education and most of all, teachings of CHRIST.

God Bless

Wait, wouldn’t a gun be useful in holding the perpetraitor in place untill the appropriate authorities arrive?

If I were just to yell for the rapist to stop, or come at him to stop him with whatever is nearest at hand he or she would just probably make a run for it.

In any case I’m not at all for gun controll as a future hunter and someone who would like to defend a family he hopes to have in the future.

Plus, I don’t think carrying a conceiled weapon would mean that the person’s extremely fearful or wary of his brothers and sisters (outside his or her family) but just wants to be prepared for that off chance that he meets someone that wishes harm to him or another.

 

[hxcCatholic413]

I find your posts very judgmental! As with all liberal thinking, you are erroneously believing that somehow we can bring about Utopia on earth and change the hearts of those intent on following evil. No one is disputing that as Christians, we have a duty to promote the Kingdom values of love and peace, but it appears to me you would rather give a free pass to criminals and let them abdicate their personal responsibility for crimes committed by their own free choosing. It sounds to me as though you would rather place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the righteous!

Gun control is not about guns; it is about control. This is a purely progressive, political issue which addresses the agenda to erode self reliance and the independence of a free people. I do not want to live in a country where government has unrestrained power to tyrannize. There are many things more dangerous than a gun, which incidentally, can save lives as well as take them. I would never want to face judgment and have to explain to my Lord why I did not try to protect those I love from a danger which caused them grave harm.

Disagree (with bolded ^^^^ statement) I find that ddarko’s post was very non-judgmental…he sounds like the Holy Spirit is burning within him:thumbsup:

Underlined portion^^^^: It’s called seeing the glass half-full as opposed to seeing it half-empty. Very realistic way of thinking. TIGG: this way of thinking will be fully revealed in 6 or so years from now. God Bless!

 

[ddarko]

Wait, wouldn’t a gun be useful in holding the perpetraitor in place untill the appropriate authorities arrive?

If I were just to yell for the rapist to stop, or come at him to stop him with whatever is nearest at hand he or she would just probably make a run for it.

And? You probably saw his face anyway?

So no. You don’t carry a gun because you shouldn’t be thinking that you would need to use it. That is the sin.

You are called to treat others as your brothers and sisters. Not anticipate that you are going to have to use a gun to hold them in place

So the problem of carrying a gun is because of its sinful intention. i.e. judgmental of others and that contradicts being a loving person

In any case I’m not at all for gun controll as a future hunter and someone who would like to defend a family he hopes to have in the future.

Yes, I understand. But please note, we do not justify our actions because we do them. We must as Catholics, FIRST see if it is Christian and THEN choose our livelihood.

Plus, I don’t think carrying a conceiled weapon would mean that the person’s extremely fearful or wary of his brothers and sisters (outside his or her family) but just wants to be prepared for that off chance that he meets someone that wishes harm to him or another.

Thats exactly where the sin is. So that person is actually in mistrust of his brothers and sisters in Christ. Furthermore, he doesn’t even trust those with authority.

Just as we do not carry a weapon around when we are among our brothers and sisters at home (they can certainly harm us too), we should not carry a weapon around when we are among strangers. These strangers are our brothers and sisters in Christ. If we treat them in any lesser way even in our thoughts and intentions, that is Un-Christian. The goal of being a Christian is to come to accept this fully.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

In an ideal world, there would be no rapists and no sin and that would indeed be the goal for those intent upon living the gospel mandate. Aaaahhh, to be able to go back to the garden! Unfortunately, we must deal in the reality of a corrupted world with an inclination to darkness. Yes, I can stress the love of God to my brothers and sisters and live the message in my heart the very best I can. I can pray for them and attempt to proselytize them, but your hearts and flowers ideology would deny the truth that they have the power to choose evil over good. In the meantime, my home is broken into, I am threatened at knife point to submit to evil, or my grandchildren are in the room facing grave threats. I have nothing to protect myself or them. Would you have me start preaching the Good News upon deaf ears whose sole intent is to cause bodily harm?

First, you call the authorities. If not, you can of course try to defend with whatever you have. It can certainly be words. Many saints were canonized that died preaching to their would be executioners. So even that is not as foolish as you might think it is.

The problem with the gun is actually in the intention and thought process for owning it. Implicitly, one who owns a gun has divided society as ‘these are my brothers and sisters’ and ‘these are not’. That contradicts Christianity at its core. We are called to LOVE all as our brothers and sisters.

In the case of an actual crime, we can of course choose to defend the oppressed. There is nothing wrong in that thought process. That is in-fact Catholic teaching. Note, even here, the goal is to defend the oppressed. NOT to harm the oppressor. The harm is an accidental by product of the act of defending.

It is one thing to defend yourself against an aggressor. It is another to continuously prepare for an event with a possible aggressor in the form of one the brothers and sisters you meet on the road. The first is Morally good while the second is a SIN.

God Bless

 

[hxcCatholic413]

In an ideal world, there would be no rapists and no sin and that would indeed be the goal for those intent upon living the gospel mandate. Aaaahhh, to be able to go back to the garden! Unfortunately, we must deal in the reality of a corrupted world with an inclination to darkness. Yes, I can stress the love of God to my brothers and sisters and live the message in my heart the very best I can. I can pray for them and attempt to proselytize them, but your hearts and flowers ideology would deny the truth that they have the power to choose evil over good. In the meantime, my home is broken into, I am threatened at knife point to submit to evil, or my grandchildren are in the room facing grave threats. I have nothing to protect myself or them. Would you have me start preaching the Good News upon deaf ears whose sole intent is to cause bodily harm?

perhaps your not preaching it loud enough

 

[itrytofight]

perhaps your not preaching it loud enough

I’m going to have to side with Tig and Sir Knight on this one.

To tell you the truth I don’t currently own a firearm (but have fired a few in practice due to my current occupation) but carry a knife or other items for self defense. I won’t worry much if I forget that knife on my outings (which seems to happen often) or remember to bring it, nor do I expect the worse to happen or suspect every person to have intention of harming me.

There is a chance of things happening that requires the use of self defense or reasoning/preaching to preserve ones life and those under my charge; regardless if I’m armed or not I will defend myself or mitigate the damage somehow if it’s too risky without too much damage being done.

Like you said though, there are ways to avoid danger or work your way out of it without being armed at all, like situational awareness, negotiation, situational awareness, running/screaming/draw attention, situational awareness, stay out in well lit areas with some people around, and situational awareness.

I guess that’s being prudent, that and it’s easier to hunt with a rifle or handgun than, say, a bow and arrow. (The truth is, though I support the NRA and conceiled carry, I don’t want a fire arm for self defense but one for hunting).

Well, I typed what I typed; I’m sorry for disagreeing.

 

[Sir_Knight]

First off I don’t believe this for a minute.
Secondly, if it is true then he is a paranoid nut that should be reported to the bishop. It is an obscenity to wear a gun while saying Mass.

Why? Peter had a sword at the very first Mass said by God Himself and being God, Jesus knew that Peter had the sword and didn’t say anything about it.