Responding to the Pope's statement about gun manufacturers

[LongingSoul]

The overwhelming Christian message pertains to peace… both inner and outer peace. I really don’t think Jesus message should ever be used to justify war or glorify weapons either at the State level or among neighours. It’s enough to accept that they are a necessary evil for the State to defend its citizens against threat. Anything to do with weapons manufacture, distribution and profit should be a State responsibility. The weapons trade around the world is like the drugs trade. The monetary incentives make for blooming antisocial attitudes and intentions in those who stand to profit in some way.

 

[LongingSoul]

You’ll have to enlighten me as to which Saint. A google search doesn’t bring any answers.

 

[EasterJoy]

zenit.org/en/articles/pope-s-off-the-cuff-address-to-youth-of-turin

It makes me think one thing: people, leaders, entrepreneurs that call themselves Christians, and produce arms! This gives some mistrust: they call themselves Christians! “No, no, Father, I don’t produce them, no, no … I only have my savings, my investments in arms factories.” Ah! And why? “Because the interest is somewhat higher …” And a double face is also a current coin today: to say something and do another. Hypocrisy …l But let’s see what happened in the last century: in ’14, ’15, in ’15 in fact. There was that great tragedy in Armenia. So many died. I don’t know the figure: more than a million certainly. But where were the great powers of the time? Were they looking elsewhere? Why? Because they were interested in war: their war! And those that died were persons, second class human beings. Then, in the 30s and 40s the tragedy of the Shoah. The great powers had photographs of the railroad lines that took trains to the concentration camps, such as Auschwitz, to kill the Jews, and also Christians, also the Roma, also homosexuals, to kill them there. But tell me, why didn’t they bomb that? Interest! And shortly after, almost contemporaneously, were the lager in Russia: Stalin … How many Christians suffered, were killed! The great powers divided Europe among themselves as a cake. So many years had to pass before arriving at “certain” freedom. It’s that hypocrisy of speaking of peace and producing arms, and even selling arms to this one who is at war with that one, and to that one who is at war with this one!

He is obviously not talking about not producing arms at all, since he wondered out loud why the Allies did not bomb the railway lines leading to the death camps. He wonders out loud why people who stockpile lots of weapons for defense don’t use them to defend the vulnerable, but look out for their own interests, instead. He is obviously saying that there is a moral use for arms. He is saying, though, that if you stockpile arms, the onus is on you to use them in a moral way when morality demands your help. That’s a big responsibility. Let’s face it: most soldiers would prefer to think they are in the military to preserve freedom and to protect defenseless civilians, rather than risking their lives in a profession that primarily defends the ability of the wealthy to make money or the ability of the powerful to wield power.

What he is saying is that the production of weaponry, more even than other capitalistic ventures, requires the investors and producers to put concern for how their products are going to be used ahead of profit. It is a business that requires a very active conscience, because the difference between the immoral and the moral use of weapons is a life and death difference. The decision to act or not to act can quickly run to thousands and in some cases millions of lives. That is more important that millions or even billions of dollars.

What does this have to do with a gun dealer? He needs to look at what he sells and ask himself if he’s selling weapons that are appropriate for self-defense or weapons more appropriate for committing crimes against the defenseless. That is a fair question to raise. If you sell a product that is very dangerous, you take on the responsibility of at least trying to avoid selling product that is designed with crimes in mind and to avoid selling to persons who are going to make bad use of the product. Maybe you invest in high-resolution security cameras, so you can help police identify people who use your wares later to commit crimes. That is a matter for discernment by the merchant, but the Pope’s point is that arms merchants aren’t selling eggs or wheat. They have a responsibility that most other merchants do not have, a responsibility that far supersedes the desire for profit.

Think of what John the Baptist told the soldiers:
Soldiers also asked him, “And what is it that we should do?” He told them, “Do not practice extortion, do not falsely accuse anyone, and be satisfied with your wages.” Luke 3:14 The person whose profession is to wield weapons can be a Christian, but the Christian soldier has a responsibility to carry his or her power over life and death responsibly. That is even more true of the general than it is true of the infantryman.

 

[EasterJoy]

The overwhelming Christian message pertains to peace… both inner and outer peace. I really don’t think Jesus message should ever be used to justify war or glorify weapons either at the State level or among neighours. It’s enough to accept that they are a necessary evil for the State to defend its citizens against threat. Anything to do with weapons manufacture, distribution and profit should be a State responsibility. The weapons trade around the world is like the drugs trade. The monetary incentives make for blooming antisocial attitudes and intentions in those who stand to profit in some way.

When the soldiers came to John the Baptist, he didn’t tell them they had to quit the military. He told them they had to be responsible and moral in how they carried out their duties. The more powerful the nation, the more the nation is bound to use its power for the common good.

A soldier can take pride in what he does. He can train to go to war and know that it is moral to kill the person who cannot be allowed to succeed if the defenseless are to be defended. He doesn’t have to hold the soldier he does battle with personally responsible for the evil the other soldier’s government does. It is enough to know when duty requires killing in order to prevent those with evil designs from dominating the innocent. He doesn’t have to put on a long face about doing his duty, either. He can take pride that he does what he does well and that he does it for the right reasons. The long face can wait for the day when he has to face a court martial for refusing to be complicit in an immoral campaign, because that will be a sad and shameful day for the country he was willing to die to defend from actual evil.

 

[LongingSoul]

When the soldiers came to John the Baptist, he didn’t tell them they had to quit the military. He told them they had to be responsible and moral in how they carried out their duties. The more powerful the nation, the more the nation is bound to use its power for the common good.

A soldier can take pride in what he does. He can train to go to war and know that it is moral to kill the person who cannot be allowed to succeed if the defenseless are to be defended. He doesn’t have to hold the soldier he does battle with personally responsible for the evil the other soldier’s government does. It is enough to know when duty requires killing in order to prevent those with evil designs from dominating the innocent. He doesn’t have to put on a long face about doing his duty, either. He can take pride that he does what he does well and that he does it for the right reasons. The long face can wait for the day when he has to face a court martial for refusing to be complicit in an immoral campaign, because that will be a sad and shameful day for the country he was willing to die to defend from actual evil.

I’m not sure what aspect of my post you are addressing? I respect and appreciate the role of state lines of defense of society from police to the military. But the Christian goal is always towards peace among men. The Church has been increasingly involved in advocating for disarmament and demilitarisation around the world since the 2nd WW. St JPII is credited with influencing the end of the Cold War and the gradual dismantling of bombs and extreme weapons. Christian theology proposes reactions that err on the side of putting down the weapons to resolve our disputes rather than stay permanently in an armed defensive mode as a normal course of day to day living.

I perceive Pope Francis to be making a keen distinction between two opposing attitudes in his address to the students. One attitude is motivated towards peace and seeks peace through military actions. The other is motivated by inordinate lust for war and conquest albeit in the name of some noble goal. He is addressing the second attitude in those who have something to gain from the trade that is opposed to peace. It’s a reality that if there is peace, some very wealthy and powerful players are going to redundant.

 

[EasterJoy]

I’m not sure what aspect of my post you are addressing? I respect and appreciate the role of state lines of defense of society from police to the military. But the Christian goal is always towards peace among men. The Church has been increasingly involved in advocating for disarmament and demilitarisation around the world since the 2nd WW. St JPII is credited with influencing the end of the Cold War and the gradual dismantling of bombs and extreme weapons. Christian theology proposes reactions that err on the side of putting down the weapons to resolve our disputes rather than stay permanently in an armed defensive mode as a normal course of day to day living.

I perceive Pope Francis to be making a keen distinction between two opposing attitudes in his address to the students. One attitude is motivated towards peace and seeks peace through military actions. The other is motivated by inordinate lust for war and conquest albeit in the name of some noble goal. He is addressing the second attitude in those who have something to gain from the trade that is opposed to peace. It’s a reality that if there is peace, some very wealthy and powerful players are going to redundant.

I was referring to this part of his remarks:
There was that great tragedy in Armenia. So many died. I don’t know the figure: more than a million certainly. But where were the great powers of the time? Were they looking elsewhere? Why? Because they were interested in war: their war! And those that died were persons, second class human beings. Then, in the 30s and 40s the tragedy of the Shoah. The great powers had photographs of the railroad lines that took trains to the concentration camps, such as Auschwitz, to kill the Jews, and also Christians, also the Roma, also homosexuals, to kill them there. But tell me, why didn’t they bomb that? Interest!

The Pope was saying that those with military arms had a duty to come to the aid of those in immediate peril of murder, but that they did not do it because they let their other interests take precedence. He was not talking about disarming the powerful. He was talking about the duty that comes with being well-armed. You cannot just use those arms to defend yourself and your own interests, not if other people are being murdered by the tens of thousands.

Weapons don’t make peace. Sometimes weapons are necessary to stop the violent from killing and destroying. Sometimes a Christian can have the duty to take up a weapon to protect others from unjust violence. That should not be confused with peace-making, though. When you’re leveling an opponent, you’re not making peace with him. You’re killing him or disarming him before he kills someone innocent or enslaves the innocent or destroys the livelihood of the innocent. Once you have him disarmed, though, you haven’t actually “made peace” yet. Those are two different things.

 

[Exiled_Child]

No, people are not afraid of the world turning Christian. I, myself would love to see ISIS and others turn away from their bloody ways. I’m sure people would share the same view as I.

What people are objecting to, is that if you work for say Lockheed or Boeing, or other defense contractor, as an engineer, clerk, accountant, etc. then you are not a Catholic or a Christian. Are these people now excommunicated?

Thanks for clarifying that, Sarcelle, but I’m actually not sure that people who work for Lockheed or Boeing should be called Christians. Everybody needs employment, but what we do while we’re on Earth matters. We’re too easy on ourselves, and we let ourselves off the hook far too freely and lightly. It’s possible that none of us are Christians, and will discover as much when we die. I’m thinking of the taxes we all pay, and the fact that we’re all therefore implicated in wide-ranging acts of torture and murder around the globe. It’s for God to judge, not us.

 

[LongingSoul]

I was referring to this part of his remarks:
There was that great tragedy in Armenia. So many died. I don’t know the figure: more than a million certainly. But where were the great powers of the time? Were they looking elsewhere? Why? Because they were interested in war: their war! And those that died were persons, second class human beings. Then, in the 30s and 40s the tragedy of the Shoah. The great powers had photographs of the railroad lines that took trains to the concentration camps, such as Auschwitz, to kill the Jews, and also Christians, also the Roma, also homosexuals, to kill them there. But tell me, why didn’t they bomb that? Interest!

The Pope was saying that those with military arms had a duty to come to the aid of those in immediate peril of murder, but that they did not do it because they let their other interests take precedence. He was not talking about disarming the powerful. He was talking about the duty that comes with being well-armed. You cannot just use those arms to defend yourself and your own interests, not if other people are being murdered by the tens of thousands.

Weapons don’t make peace. Sometimes weapons are necessary to stop the violent from killing and destroying. Sometimes a Christian can have the duty to take up a weapon to protect others from unjust violence. That should not be confused with peace-making, though. When you’re leveling an opponent, you’re not making peace with him. You’re killing him or disarming him before he kills someone innocent or enslaves the innocent or destroys the livelihood of the innocent. Once you have him disarmed, though, you haven’t actually “made peace” yet. Those are two different things.

The theme of those statements is not a pro war theme. He is saying that in war when the ‘great powers’, who I assume was the US and England at that time, were aware of and capable of coming to the rescue of a persecuted people… they instead play politics and do what ultimately serves their own interests in the long run. This is a demonstration of how those invested in war trade aren’t coming from a Christian place. I think that the confusion is created when people try to scramble to defend war and weapons and ultimately water down what the Pope has said.

 

[EasterJoy]

The theme of those statements is not a pro war theme. He is saying that in war when the ‘great powers’, who I assume was the US and England at that time, were aware of and capable of coming to the rescue of a persecuted people… they instead play politics and do what ultimately serves their own interests in the long run. This is a demonstration of how those invested in war trade aren’t coming from a Christian place. I think that the confusion is created when people try to scramble to defend war and weapons and ultimately water down what the Pope has said.

He was talking about bombing railroad lines. That’s an act of war, no matter how you cut it. There is no way to imagine coming in with weapons to rescue the Armenians without the understanding that it would take an act of war to do it. He was talking about people who were playing politics when an act of war was the more moral course, because of the innocent lives being lost by not going to war. Let us not try to kid ourselves about that.

 

[LongingSoul]

He was talking about bombing railroad lines. That’s an act of war, no matter how you cut it. There is no way to imagine coming in with weapons to rescue the Armenians without the understanding that it would take an act of war to do it. He was talking about people who were playing politics when an act of war was the more moral course, because of the innocent lives being lost by not going to war. Let us not try to kid ourselves about that.

I confess I’m totally confused about the point you are trying to make? To me the theme of the address was clear. “It makes me think one thing: people, leaders, entrepreneurs that call themselves Christians, and produce arms! This gives some mistrust: they call themselves Christians! “No, no, Father, I don’t produce them, no, no … I only have my savings, my investments in arms factories.” Ah! And why? “Because the interest is somewhat higher …” And a double face is also a current coin today: to say something and do another. Hypocrisy …l”

Mentioning ‘entrepreneurs’ and ‘savings’ and ‘investments’ and profits… seems clearly to indicate that he thinks that privately profiting from weapons of war is not Christian. That it’s hypocrisy to talk about peace and profit from gun manufacture. The other aspects of the address ie. failure of the big powers to help the Armenians and the Jews, was not to indicate how good war and weapons are… but how private agendas distorted the purpose of the military.

One of the humanitarian issues that we have over here, is our involvment in the world arms trade these days.

Who owns Australia’s arms industry?

The local arms industry used to be dominated by state-owned enterprises such as Australian Defence Industries (ADI), the sole purpose of which was to serve and supply the Australian armed forces. Because of the program of liberalisation, the sector is now dominated by private, often multinational, corporations. The former ADI is now owned by Thales Australia, the local branch of the French-based Thales Group.

A privatised military sector cannot be counted on to place national security, peace or human rights interests above the pursuit of profit. Ironically, a sales-driven arms industry is best served by the undermining of these very concerns.

mapw.org.au/australian-issues/australias-arms-industry

If arms manufacture is strictly overseen and controlled by the appropriate military sector, there’d be little influence from a capitalist agenda.

 

[anthrogirl]

Okay, if we put all the gun manufacturers out of business, where will law enforcement and military units get their weapons? Maybe they could carry knives or baseball bats? Or buy the guns from atheist manufacturers in China, since they’re not Christians anyway!

I’m hoping the Pope was misquoted.

There are a lot of products manufactured solely for the army and law enforcement. If they stopped selling to the public, manufacturers could downsize or they could move into other sectors. Like when cigarette sales dropped drastically in the US, tobacco companies expanded other divisions. For example, Philip Morris expanded its food division. It also looked for tobacco markets outside of the US. Smoking, guns, pollution and other public health related considerations must be made with life as the primary and central issue. Letting people get sick, suffer or die so someone can earn a paycheck or an investor can get a big fat check is just as immoral as you can get. Your life, the lives of your family members are far far far more important than my paycheck. I can always find another way to make money. When you’re shot or when you’re fighting asthma or cancer, your options are far less varied and not at all appealing.

 

[LongingSoul]

There are a lot of products manufactured solely for the army and law enforcement. If they stopped selling to the public, manufacturers could downsize or they could move into other sectors. Like when cigarette sales dropped drastically in the US, tobacco companies expanded other divisions. For example, Philip Morris expanded its food division. It also looked for tobacco markets outside of the US. Smoking, guns, pollution and other public health related considerations must be made with life as the primary and central issue. Letting people get sick, suffer or die so someone can earn a paycheck or an investor can get a big fat check is just as immoral as you can get. Your life, the lives of your family members are far far far more important than my paycheck. I can always find another way to make money. When you’re shot or when you’re fighting asthma or cancer, your options are far less varied and not at all appealing.

That’s a very good example. My father-in-law and his brothers were Italian immigrants to Australia in the late 50’s and began tobacco farming. It was very lucrative for them. When the official recognition that tobacco did more harm than good meant that the farmers were forced to downsize to meet small quotas… they diverted their land to pineapple, avocado and macadamia farming. How brilliant was that. They survived and nobody ever killed anyone with an avocado or pineapple… it’s all only good.

 

[white_sheep]

At the same time he is more vocal on his belief that we(the world, I guess) should declare war on ISIS than just about anybody.

Worrying about a statement such as this is no reason to second guess a conversion. The Church is much bigger than just a pope.