Pope says weapons manufacturers can't call themselves Christian

[friardchips]

KSU, if you want to trivialize Scipture and do down the message of the Gospels then that is up to you.

I’m well aware of what the Pope said. Which is why I don’t question his motives unlike many who jump at the opportunity.

Our Lord told St. Peter to keep his sword for the time being but this was in a different context. Studying Scripture is a good idea before remarking on it. Because, He does not contradict Himself. But you do contradict yourself, evidently.

When defending innocent civilians then guns might be necessary if there is imminent danger but the point is that guns kill and maim and ruin lives, and those whose lives are wrecked, become numbers only and are wrecked because of guns sold to such places as the East and Africa. Gun organisations are thinking of themselves as are the manufacturers. Power and money. The only reason the innocent and righteous need guns in some instances are because of the ones who really love guns, who thrive on guns, who treat guns like an extra ligament and who want to use them for gain.

Apparently your dates are wrong. In England, guns were first recorded in the 1300s. Unless you think that guns were being used in the Crusades!

The U.S joined the WWII not out of goodwill but because Churchill had a convo with your president at the time around Pearl Harbour. The U.S. before was neutral. Join the war near the end after all the effort and make out in all the history books and films that the U.S won the whole thing! I have no problem with admitting that U.S involvement sped up victory considerably.

The reason us Brits don’t speak German is thanks mostly to us winning the Battle of Britain, in which we had superior air technology and radar equipment, and a host of experienced fighter pilots who came from Europe, including Poland. In Russia, the germans were defeated by the winter, and in the East, we were pretty good at kicking our heels in with Montgomery and co. You did your little add-on. We did ours all the way through. But no one did enough for the Jews.

I think a great example of peace over war to bring unity is the comparison between MLK Jnr and Malc. X. It was MLK Jnr who helped stop segregation through peace protests. As opposed to violence. Guns have only brought death and terrorism. And now we have more of it in the East whilst the West feeds more of the same over there whilst sitting back and watching the slaughter carry on. Apart from the odd bombing of a truck.

 

[friardchips]

Ah, but we are all called to be a saint, even if not in the same way. Some will take the path of pacifism, others will not. As St. Paul taught, we all have spiritual gifts for the building of the body, but not all the same gift.

 

[Tbrightson]

Ah, but we are all called to be a saint, even if not in the same way. Some will take the path of pacifism, others will not. As St. Paul taught, we all have spiritual gifts for the building of the body, but not all the same gift.

Wonderful, so stop suggesting we all take a particular certain path. I for one will go down shooting. I’m not a sheep.

BTW it easy to be pacifist when there are rough men at the wall willing to kill in order to allow you to keep that luxury.

 

[KSU]

KSU, if you want to trivialize Scripture and do down the message of the Gospels then that is up to you.
My friend, basic scripture study would show you that God never said “Thou shalt not kill.” In fact, His command was “Thou shall not murder.” gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-murder.html

I’m well aware of what the Pope said. Which is why I don’t question his motives unlike many who jump at the opportunity.
Don’t blame me for what someone else may say

Our Lord told St. Peter to keep his sword for the time being but this was in a different context. Studying Scripture is a good idea before remarking on it.
Was it in the context of the apostles being told to have swords so they could chop up their vegetarian meals? And where does scripture say “it was in a different concept” from what I said, or that they were to keep their weapons only “for the time being”? The concept I offered is the correct one: Our Lord was warning Peter not to use swords unwisely or unjustly.

Apparently your dates are wrong. In England, guns were first recorded in the 1300s.
I don’t know for sure, so I was careful not to say when guns were recorded in England; I was correcting your statement that guns had not yet been invented when the Magna Carta was issued in the1300s. In fact, cannon certainly were being used in other places since the mid 1100s. My point is that the protection of church rights and other freedoms were not granted out of kindness; it was by the threat of arms against the King. That’s something America’s founders kept in mind as a guaranty of all other freedoms in our Constitution, i.e., the God-given right of the people to bear arms, which you dislike and disparage.

The U.S joined the WWII not out of goodwill but because Churchill had a convo with your president at the time around Pearl Harbour. The U.S. before was neutral. Join the war near the end after all the effort and make out in all the history books and films that the U.S won the whole thing! I have no problem with admitting that U.S involvement sped up victory considerably.No comment.

Guns have only brought death and terrorism. And now we have more of it in the East whilst the West feeds more of the same over there whilst sitting back and watching the slaughter carry on. Apart from the odd bombing of a truck.
** That’s more or less correct. Barbarism and unspeakable horror has metastasized around the world, and has gone largely unchallenged as a result of America electing a gun-hating, European-style Socialist. It’s gotten so bad that even Pope Francis has had to step into the breech and call for military intervention. **

 

[TEPO]

Makes me want to get a side job at a gun manufacturing facility. Probably because radicalism breeds more radicalism.

 

[TEPO]

Wonderful, so stop suggesting we all take a particular certain path. I for one will go down shooting. I’m not a sheep.

BTW it easy to be pacifist when there are rough men at the wall willing to kill in order to allow you to keep that luxury.

The pope is definitely not a pacifist.

 

[Tbrightson]

The pope is definitely not a pacifist.

I wasnt referring to the Pope. But I do wonder how one can be ok with military force when making weapons makes you a lousy Christian. Kind of hard to defeat ISIS with just hard looks.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I wasnt referring to the Pope. But I do wonder how one can be ok with military force when making weapons makes you a lousy Christian. Kind of hard to defeat ISIS with just hard looks.

Please stop treating the title of this thread as if it were a true quote by the pope. As I have said numerous times,** he didn’t say that**.

 

[TEPO]

Please stop treating the title of this thread as if it were a true quote by the pope. As I have said numerous times,** he didn’t say that**.

Implications are obvious.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Implications are obvious.

Please quote for me the section in the pope’s actual text that “obviously” implies the title of this thread, and I will show you why it is an incorrect interpretation.

 

[friardchips]

KSU, if you want to trivialize Scripture and do down the message of the Gospels then that is up to you.

My friend, basic scripture study would show you that God never said “Thou shalt not kill.” In fact, His command was “Thou shall not murder.” gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-murder.html

Why do you keep suggesting this Bible quote as if we don’t know it?!!

No one is saying that we can’t protect ourselves.

The fact is, that our Creator gives life and so it is not by our hands that life should be removed, unless discerned properly, as in the case of a just war, or under immediate attack.

Misusing firearms and a life about revolving around causing death is not a way to live with a Christian outlook.

I’m well aware of what the Pope said. Which is why I don’t question his motives unlike many who jump at the opportunity.

Don’t blame me for what someone else may say

You are saying this thread is about pacificism which it is not. So yes, you are misquoting the Pope.

What I said does not. It is Church understanding that those who live by the sword die by it; IOW, one puts one’s trust in arms, not our Creator, and faces the consequences. Our Lord said that we can’t serve two masters. And this goes for anything in life. Our Creator must come first. Otherwise, we make idols of the things around us. There is a time for defending people. Sure. And there are arms in existence without manufacturers spending trillions more. This is a self-defeating spiral.

Our Lord told St. Peter to keep his sword for the time being but this was in a different context. Studying Scripture is a good idea before remarking on it.

Was it in the context of the apostles being told to have swords so they could chop up their vegetarian meals?

If you want to make fun of Scipture then you’re on your own.

And where does scripture say “it was in a different concept” from what I said, or that they were to keep their weapons only “for the time being”? The concept I offered is the correct one: Our Lord was warning Peter not to use swords unwisely or unjustly.

One can use arms without murdering. The gun industry wipes it hands of responsibility for tragedy when it comes to the distribution of arms around the world. Take a look around. Think of all the countries around the world that have suffered at the hands of those who make arms their priority in life.

Apparently your dates are wrong. In England, guns were first recorded in the 1300s.

I don’t know for sure, so I was careful not to say when guns were recorded in England; I was correcting your statement that guns had not yet been invented when the Magna Carta was issued in the1300s. In fact, cannon certainly were being used in other places since the mid 1100s.

Canons were not introduced here as early as the 1100s. Nevertheless, the dates of Crusades are confusing because there were so many of them, and so I can see why the confusion happened. However, my trusted book of historical dates records the first gun (canon - so you were right there) as late as 1415, in the seige of Harfleur, which Henry V faced. After this it was in use in 1439, and again, in 1450 then 1453.

My point is that the protection of church rights and other freedoms were not granted out of kindness; it was by the threat of arms against the King. That’s something America’s founders kept in mind as a guaranty of all other freedoms in our Constitution, i.e., the God-given right of the people to bear arms, which you dislike and disparage.

Hmm. Not sure what website you are getting your info. from. Can you post the link please.

The American Constitution is not Roman Catholic in principle or entirety.

We have a natural right to defend ourselves. This is defence, just war, not out-of-proportion gun-toting lifestyles centred around killing wantonly - which includes the unethical buying and selling of arms to countries that cannot discern how and when to use them justly.

The U.S joined the WWII not out of goodwill but because Churchill had a convo with your president at the time around Pearl Harbour. The U.S. before was neutral. Join the war near the end after all the effort and make out in all the history books and films that the U.S won the whole thing! I have no problem with admitting that U.S involvement sped up victory considerably.

No comment.

Guns have only brought death and terrorism. And now we have more of it in the East whilst the West feeds more of the same over there whilst sitting back and watching the slaughter carry on. Apart from the odd bombing of a truck.

That’s more or less correct. Barbarism and unspeakable horror has metastasized around the world, and has gone largely unchallenged as a result of America electing a gun-hating, European-style Socialist. It’s gotten so bad that even Pope Francis has had to step into the breech and call for military intervention.

I don’t wish to knock leaders. But I agree that the Church is not always about “no action”. We have to do more. The pwerful nations have appeared to ignore the plight of those suffering people in the East. We are not disagreeing there.

The thread is not about pacificism. But when people are told, “think less gun and warfare and more about preservation of life”, everyone shouts: “Pacifist!”.

There is a film called ‘The Mission’. Robert De Niro ends up defending the people when under attack, with arms, after having gotten his priorities, via penitential living, in order - as before he seemed too keen on rigid justice at the expense of mercy - and the other man, the priest, leads a peaceful procession, praying, and martyring himself to the oncoming assailants. They have different roles. Neither is wrong. Because in their hearts their priorities are not about putting themselves first but about our Creator.

 

[pnewton]

Wonderful, so stop suggesting we all take a particular certain path.

I never suggested any such thing. Me thinks you have confused me with someone with more pacifistic tendencies. I understand pacifism. I respect pacifism. I am no pacifist. My zeal for justice runs too deep to allow evil to slide if I can slow it.

 

[tnjr5]

The link doesn’t seem to work. Do you have a better link? Thanks.

 

[gilliam]

OK, so this is what he actually said,

"
Vatican City, 22 June 2015 (VIS) – The first day of the Pope’s apostolic trip to Turin concluded with his encounter with the young in Piazza Vittorio. Francis answered to questions from three of them regarding the meaning of love, trust in life and the importance of sharing ideals, setting aside the discourse he had prepared. The following is a summary of the Holy Father’s answers:

“Love, life, friends: … these three words are important for life, and they share a common root: the desire to live. … Love moves on two axes: first of all, love is found in actions more than in words: love is concrete. … God began to talk about love when he was involved with His people … when He made a covenant with His people, He saved His people, He made gestures of love, acts of love. And the second dimension, the second axis on which love turns, is that love always communicates itself, that is, love listens and responds, love is found in dialogue and communion. Love is neither deaf nor mute, it communicates itself. … Love is very respectful to others, it does not use them, and therefore love is chaste. … It considers the life of the other person to be sacred: I respect you, I do not want to use you. … Forgive me if I say something you did not expect, but I ask you: make the effort to live love chastely. And a consequence derives from this: … love sacrifices itself for others. Love is service. When Jesus, after the washing of the feet, explains this gesture to the apostles, He teaches them that we are made to serve one another”.

“Very often we breathe an air of distrust in life. There are situations that make us think, ‘But is it worth living like this?’. I think of the wars in this world. At times I have said that we are living a third world war, but in pieces. There is war in Europe, there is war in Africa, there is war in the Middle East, there is war in other countries … But can I trust in a life like this? Can I trust world leaders? When I go to vote for a candidate, can I trust that he or she will not take my country to war? If you trust only in men, you have lost! Think of the people, leaders, entrepreneurs, who say they are Christians and then produce weapons! They say one thing and do another. Hypocrisy … But we see what happened during the last century: in 1914, or rather in 1915 precisely. There was the great tragedy in Armenia. Many people died. I do not know how many, but certainly more than a million. Where were the great powers of the time? They looked away. Why? Because they were interested in war: their war! And those who died, they were second class people, human beings. Then, in the 1930s and 1940s, the tragedy of the Shoah. The great powers had photographed the railway lines that carried the trains to the concentration camps, such as Auschwitz, to kill Jews, and also Christians, Roma, homosexuals, to kill them there. But tell me, why did they not bomb them? Interests! And soon after, almost at the same time, there were the lagers in Russia: Stalin … how many Christians suffered and were killed. The great powers divided Europe like a cake. Many years had to pass before reaching a certain ‘freedom’. There is the hypocrisy of speaking about peace and producing arms, and even selling weapons to this one, who is at war with that one, and to that one who is at war with this!”

“I understand what you say about distrust in life: today, too, we are living a culture of waste. All that is not of economic use is discarded. … And so, with this culture of waste, is it possible to trust in life? … A young person who cannot study, who does not have a job, who suffers the shame of not feeling worthy because he does not have a job, does not earn life. … How often do young people commit suicide? … Or how often do they go to fight with terrorists, at least to do something, for an ideal? … And this is why Jesus told us not to place our security in wealth, in worldly powers. How can I live a life that does n destroy, that is not a life of destruction, a life that does not discard people? How can a live a life that does not disappoint me?”.

“We must go ahead with our plans to build, and this life does not disappoint. If you are involved in a plan for construction, to help … that sense of distrust in life goes away. Be active, and go against the grain. For you, young people, who experience this economic and also cultural, hedonistic, consumerist situation with its soap bubble values, with these values it is not possible to go ahead. Do constructive things, even if they are small, that bring us together again, that unite us together, with our ideals: this is the best antidote to this distrust of life, against this culture that offers you only pleasure. … The secret is clearly understanding where you live. In this land … at the end of the nineteenth century there were the worst possible conditions for the growth of the young: Freemasonry prevailed, even the Church could do nothing; there was anti-clericalism, there was Satanism. … It was one of the worst times and one of the worst places in the history of Italy. But in that period, many saints were born. Why? Because they realised that they had to swim against the tide of that culture, that way of life. Live in reality, and if that reality is glass and not diamond, I find an alternative reality and make it my own, a reality that is of service to others”.

vis.va/vissolr/index.php?vi=all&dl=e7af6e27-aa7a-ab01-1563-5588188efb1c&dl_t=text/xml&dl_a=y&ul=1&ev=1

Updated link: vis.va/vissolr/index.php?vi=all&dl=e7af6e27-aa7a-ab01-1563-5588188efb1c&dl_t=text/xml&dl_a=y&ul=1&ev=1

 

[mikekle]

I wasnt referring to the Pope. But I do wonder how one can be ok with military force when making weapons makes you a lousy Christian. Kind of hard to defeat ISIS with just hard looks.

God also told us prayer was a very powerful ‘weapon’, why hasnt prayer been enough to stop all the violence in the past or present?

WW2,it took the allies, LOTS of guns, tanks, weapons, to stop that, today, Islamic terrorists, ISIS, etc. why isnt prayer working?

 

[Tbrightson]

God also told us prayer was a very powerful ‘weapon’, why hasnt prayer been enough to stop all the violence in the past or present?

WW2,it took the allies, LOTS of guns, tanks, weapons, to stop that, today, Islamic terrorists, ISIS, etc. why isnt prayer working?

Sometimes prayer isnt the answer, but rather getting off ones butt and taking action.

Reminds of this parable:

A man was trapped in his house during a flood. He began praying to God to rescue him. He had a vision in his head of God’s hand reaching down from heaven and lifting him to safety. The water started to rise in his house. His neighbour urged him to leave and offered him a ride to safety. The man yelled back, “I am waiting for God to save me.” The neighbour drove off in his pick-up truck.

The man continued to pray and hold on to his vision. As the water began rising in his house, he had to climb up to the roof. A boat came by with some people heading for safe ground. They yelled at the man to grab a rope they were ready to throw and take him to safety. He told them that he was waiting for God to save him. They shook their heads and moved on.

The man continued to pray, believing with all his heart that he would be saved by God. The flood waters continued to rise. A helicopter flew by and a voice came over a loudspeaker offering to lower a ladder and take him off the roof. The man waved the helicopter away, shouting back that he was waiting for God to save him. The helicopter left. The flooding water came over the roof and caught him up and swept him away. He drowned.

When he reached heaven and asked, “God, why did you not save me? I believed in you with all my heart. Why did you let me drown?” God replied, “I sent you a pick-up truck, a boat and a helicopter and you refused all of them. What else could I possibly do for you?”

 

[Tbrightson]

I never suggested any such thing. Me thinks you have confused me with someone with more pacifistic tendencies. I understand pacifism. I respect pacifism. I am no pacifist. My zeal for justice runs too deep to allow evil to slide if I can slow it.

Sorry was meant for FriedChips

 

[Tbrightson]

Please stop treating the title of this thread as if it were a true quote by the pope. As I have said numerous times,** he didn’t say that**.

Again:

“If you trust only in men, you have lost! Think of the people, leaders, entrepreneurs, who say they are Christians and then produce weapons! They say one thing and do another. Hypocrisy!”

The take away:

1. Dont trust men who makes weapons as they are hypocrites (among others)
2. Why are they hyprocrites?
   Say one thing: I am a Christian
   Do another: Make weapons.
3. So using s(name removed by moderator)le deductive reasoning, making weapons must be un-Christian according to him hence the hypocrisy.

 

[friardchips]

God also told us prayer was a very powerful ‘weapon’, why hasnt prayer been enough to stop all the violence in the past or present?

WW2,it took the allies, LOTS of guns, tanks, weapons, to stop that, today, Islamic terrorists, ISIS, etc. why isnt prayer working?

W H A T ?

You blame our Creator for lack of listening?

First, He does listen but it is not His fault if governments don’t care enough. He has people working for Him out there, getting kidnapped and held hostage - people who work for the Church (check the ACN website occasionally, you will see). But we live in lands in which child murder (abortion) is legal. And you expect our leaders to have their fingers out their ears listening attentively to the plight of the innocent in places where they don’t reap any benefits?!

Second, why should He listen to a Church whose laity live unholy distracted lives and barely pay Him any attention, with our modernistic contemporary class-system progressive flatulence that people mistake for faith. Many Christians mock the lives of Catholic saints as I have even heard scholars doing, thinking they know better - which they don’t. We have sacrificed real spirituality for a distracted excuse for one - the spirit of the world. And you suddenly expect our Creator to listen when we treat Him like this… ha!

The reason is because there are no people who care enough about putting our Creator first and because of this there are very few holy sacrificies made in the west.

 

[friardchips]

Sorry was meant for FriedChips

To both posters: I don’t have pacifist tendencies, though I would choose the more peacful option if given a choice, but even that would depend largely on the circumstances. There is such a thing as a just war. And there is such a thing as putting too much trust in warfare. The world would be a better place if the world stopped producing guns. And as some holy leaders have proved in the past, a lot can be changed by peaceful demonstration; however, there are times when we have to use what we have to defend the weak which we have not being doing. And have neglected to do in the past, also. It seems that everything is out of sync.