La. bishops: No guns in Catholic churches

[Byzman]

If he carries in church, I hope that he has informed his superiors (the owners of the property).

That is not state law here! He wouldn’t have too…, but then again maybe he already did. His Bishop and other priests know about him amyways, he is actively in the NRA.

 

[sidbrown]

So any and all disobedience to a Bishop is a mortal sin! I rather doubt that.

In this case it is a matter of life or death. When people are pulling out their loaded guns in Church and shooting around during Mass, many innocent children could be killed on the spot in the crossfire. This is against the Commandment: Thou shalt not kill. It is wrong to kill, and it is doubly wrong to go around shooting in Church and killing innocent people, and it is triply wrong to disobey the Catholic bishops in such a serious matter as this.
As it is there are fewer people going to Mass these days when you compare the attendance as it was 50 years ago. Now as it becomes advertised that more and more people are carrying loaded concealed guns in Church and who knows what other lethal weapons to Church during Mass services, I suspect that this will frighten many good Catholics who have an obligation and duty to protect their children against harm. If it comes down to being shot to death during Mass in some sort of crossfire and not going to Mass at all, people are going to stop and think about what is the right thing to do, considering the safety and lives of their children.

 

[Rascalking]

Okay since you want me to answer this so bad.

I will say that I pretty much carry anywhere I can. I enjoy doing it too.

I do not worry about being killed anywhere at any time. I like to look at it as having the upper hand on a criminal if he would want to cause harm to me or my family. The weapon, being concealed, is good to have for an element of surprise to an attacker!

I don’t speak for you, (clearly) but like most gun owners, I hope to God I never have to use it. Also, I hope that the fact that you think I have a gun is deterrent enough for you not to rob me.

 

[Byzman]

I am just trying to understand the motivation to want to bring a weapon to kill into a place that worships Jesus and represents what he stood for and what the RCC stands for. They are even opposed to capital punishment! I think that you would have to be VERY worried about your safety to consider having one there, or just plain-old fixated on the “feel” of having a death tool on you.

The claims you are now making are wrong towards the Church!

Catechism of the Catholic Church!

Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.66

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

I will not touch the issue of capital punishment, because we must stay on topic of the thread!

 

[sidbrown]

I don’t know if you are being sarcastic or if you are being serious when you post this ridiculous stuff!?

You are a danger and a threat to the well being, safety and lives of innocent children who could be shot to death in crossfire in Church. You have no business carrying your concealed weapons into our Churches and when we object for the safety of our lives, you sit back and say it is ridiculous. Well, I have something to tell you. The safety of our lives is not ridiculous.

 

[Rascalking]

You are a danger and a threat to the well being, safety and lives of innocent children who could be shot to death in crossfire in Church. You have no business carrying your concealed weapons into our Churches and when we object for the safety of our lives, you sit back and say it is ridiculous. Well, I have something to tell you. The safety of our lives is not ridiculous.

My friend, it’s people like him protecting us FROM danger.

I’d say people like US, but I’m a humble guy.

 

[Byzman]

You are a danger and a threat to the well being, safety and lives of innocent children who could be shot to death in crossfire in Church. You have no business carrying your concealed weapons into our Churches and when we object for the safety of our lives, you sit back and say it is ridiculous. Well, I have something to tell you. The safety of our lives is not ridiculous.

Is this a joke?:ehh:

 

[larkin31]

The claims you are now making are wrong towards the Church!
Legitimate defense

Catechism of the Catholic Church!

I meant the request NOT to carry into the church. I am aware that self-defense is not a sin.

I will not touch the issue of capital punishment, because we must stay on topic of the thread!

I used this as a reminder that the RCC loathes killing and violence of nearly all kinds.

Perhaps sanctuaries that have guns in them should post signs to such effect: full disclosure, so that parishioners can make their choices both ways.

 

[larkin31]

My friend, it’s people like him protecting us FROM danger.

That’s a stretch. If churches objectively needed this protection, they would ask for it. How many killers in churches are refraining because they think someone else in the room can draw faster? After all, those missions tend to be suicide missions anyway, so their dying is part of the plan. It is not fear of packed guns that holds them back, no matter how much better you feel (and that is all that this is about) packing.

 

[Rascalking]

It is not fear of packed guns that holds them back, no matter how much better you feel (and that is all that this is about) packing.

So you can just cut right though everything, read our minds, and determine what an argument is really about? Wow, your totally coming to my next party! When my family argues about politics, I want you on my side.

It’s actually about alot more, thank you. Freedom, security, little things like that.

 

[Byzman]

That’s a stretch. If churches objectively needed this protection, they would ask for it. How many killers in churches are refraining because they think someone else in the room can draw faster? After all, those missions tend to be suicide missions anyway, so their dying is part of the plan. It is not fear of packed guns that holds them back, no matter how much better you feel (and that is all that this is about) packing.

You know…I cant help but bring up the Virginia Tech Massacre. If they were someone in that school carrying a handgun, in the location where the shootings took place, how much sooner could the threat have been taken out?

This same reasoning can be applied anywhere else, even churches.

Oh…yes! I am for concealed on campus too!
concealedcampus.org/

 

[sidbrown]

That’s a stretch. If churches objectively needed this protection, they would ask for it. How many killers in churches are refraining because they think someone else in the room can draw faster? After all, those missions tend to be suicide missions anyway, so their dying is part of the plan. It is not fear of packed guns that holds them back, no matter how much better you feel (and that is all that this is about) packing.

And of course we have the suicide bombers. If people start to bomb themselves up in Church, and those with concealed loaded weapons begin firing here and there, how many innocent children and parishoners are going to be killed in the crossfire?

 

[curlycool89]

That is not state law here! He wouldn’t have too…, but then again maybe he already did. His Bishop and other priests know about him amyways, he is actively in the NRA.

That has nothing to do with State law. It has to do with Canon Law and the promises or vows he takes, and the fact that all property is solely owned by the Bishop of the diocese. If a bishop forbid guns in all Church buildings, then all diocesan priests would be bound by their promise of obedience to obey.

 

[sidbrown]

It’s actually about alot more, thank you. Freedom, security, little things like that.

Freedom?
Freedom to kill people in Church?
So all of these gun owners and NRA kooks want freedom to carry their loaded weapons to Church and the ability to shoot to kill in Church even though the Catholic bishops have condemned it?

 

[Byzman]

And of course we have the suicide bombers. If people start to bomb themselves up in Church, and those with concealed loaded weapons begin firing here and there, how many innocent children and parishoners are going to be killed in the crossfire?

I am starting to think this guys posts does not deserve comments back.

 

[Byzman]

Freedom?
Freedom to kill people in Church?
So all of these gun owners and NRA kooks want freedom to carry their loaded weapons to Church and the ability to shoot to kill in Church even though the Catholic bishops have condemned it?

Wow!

 

[Byzman]

That has nothing to do with State law. It has to do with Canon Law and the promises or vows he takes, and the fact that all property is solely owned by the Bishop of the diocese. If a bishop forbid guns in all Church buildings, then all diocesan priests would be bound by their promise of obedience to obey.

Well it is a good thing my Bishop doesn’t than! and the Bishops in my State. Louisiana, on the other hand, I feel sorry for the law abiding Catholics who have a concealed carry license.

 

[larkin31]

So you can just cut right though everything, read our minds, and determine what an argument is really about? Wow, your totally coming to my next party! When my family argues about politics, I want you on my side.

It’s actually about alot more, thank you. Freedom, security, little things like that.

Concealed guns do NOTHING to add to the actual security of a church. They add ONLY to the “feeling” of security of some of those (excepting those for whom it increases anxiety to know this) who know that there are guns in a room. Is there a part of my reasoning about deterrence of crime in churches (nothing to do with the presence of guns) that you would like to object to? (so we can avoid the personal mockery)?

You are misapplying “freedom” if you include the right (freedom) to carry on private property not your own. You do not have that “freedom” in this country (it is fictional).

 

[Rascalking]

Freedom?
Freedom to kill people in Church?
So all of these gun owners and NRA kooks want freedom to carry their loaded weapons to Church and the ability to shoot to kill in Church even though the Catholic bishops have condemned it?

You, my friend, are the one said “killing”. We, on the other side, are the ones who try to stop such. It’s not really complicated.

I walk around with a loaded handgun. No one is telling me not too (I have a permit). That’s freedom. Someone tells me, “No, you can’t bring it into X”. That’s restrictive. So, I choose to go to another church. There you go.

So, when someone decides to hold you up, you can feel noble and lecture him about guns. When he takes your car keys, maybe if you ask nicely, he’ll let you have a ride home.

 

[larkin31]

I am starting to think this guys posts does not deserve comments back.

He is showing you that his sense of security is not increased by the knowledge of concealed weapons in a sanctuary with him where children also collect. There is nothing wrong with stating this.