Why did my diocese ban guns?

[Usagi]

Property owners or those with authority over a certain property can indeed decide who can carry there, and should be obeyed.

Much like the First Amendment, the Second Amendment means the state can’t punish you for [protected behavior], not that other citizens must allow or help you to do it on their property.

I say this as a gun owner and strong proponent of the 2A. If we’re going to say that law-abiding gun owners aren’t the problem, we need to be law-abiding gun owners.

 

[pnewton]

I take offense because if someone decides to attack, nobody can defend.

I would like to point out, that this is not entirely true. There may or may not be more or less effective defense, depending on the nature of the attack. I have always thought it best that no one let a gun be the only way he can defend himself.

Additionally, I do not know what Mass is like where you are, but where I go, defense with a fire arm is itself extraordinarily dangerous to others.

 

[Saxum]

I really get that. Not that I feel exasperated, but I understand that emotion well and know how it can lead to frustration. That said, I do not think this is particular issue represents any focus on politics. After all, I can’t even find this referenced on their website, and as I said, in my own parish it is still a non-issue.

I remember listening to Fulton Sheen years ago. It was a repeat he gave to priests late in his life. The Venerable Archbishop said many of the clergy were worried about politics more than the Faith. My experience persuades me the Archbishop told the truth. You might not think this particular issue is political but it is. It could be seen as an approval of the political movement to restrict the second amendment. I view it as another episcopal endorsement of leftist politics.

 

[EXdrinker]

but I realize that gun ownership in America is related to pride, sex appeal, vanity, and cultural heritage, and no amount of statistics are going to alter perceptions.

What?!? Seriously? Owning/carrying a firearm is about the ability to project force at a distance. Carrying to protect yourself or others is not about pride, sex appeal, vanity, or cultural heritage. It is about sacrificing your time, comfort, money, and possibly your future in order to have a reasonable chance to stop an aggressor should the need ever arise. Please rethink this comment a little. It is way off base to reality.

Thanks.

 

[TK421]

Somebody here has to be provocative or this thread would be boring and not a proper gun-control thread. I volunteer.

I’m not looking down on your personally. I"m sure you’re a great guy.

 

[JHC]

Yes, and I don’t even have a gun but would like to think there are at least some parishioners armed and trained. I don’t like that we have an actual sign advertising that we are defenseless.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

A diocese doesn’t have that kind of power. It’s a secular government thing

 

[TK421]

If the diocese didn’t have that kind of authority, the bishop never would have said that.

Civil law (in this case) allows people to decide if guns can be carried on property they are in charge of. In this case, it would be the bishop.

I’m allowed to kick somebody out of my apartment if they are walking around with a death ray gun holstered to their pelvic region. Their civil right to carry something engineered to slaughter human beings doesn’t abrogate property or lease rights.

 

[FrDavid96]

We are required to obey legitimate civil laws. The “just law” doctrine of the Church.
One criteria of a legitimate law is that it must be promulgated by legitimate authority (in other words, the law must be passed by the person or body who has the authority to make such a law in the first place). In the U.S. the supreme law of the land is the U.S. Constitution. No legislative body, no governor, no president (sorry B.O.) has the authority to act contrary to the Constitution. Non-compliance with a unjust law is not a sin. It might be a sin in other ways, but all by itself it’s not a sin.

If the Bishop said NO GUNS in any Catholic Church in his diocese and I carry in my purse with a permit would that be a sin.

The bishop has power of governance over his own diocese. He is not bound by the requirements of the Constitution in the same way that a state government is bound. It would be a sin to disobey the bishop because he does have governing authority.

What if it’s in the vehicle parked outside in the parking lot. … I have talked to a veteran at Church and he carries in his vehicle. After what happened in other Church shootings I was just wondering would that overrule anything civil or even Diocesan.

That depends. If you know he has one in his car, who else might know? Some people are discreet. Some less so. Obviously since you know, it’s not a secret. To what extent is this an occasion for sin for someone else? How safe is it in his vehicle? I remember the days when citizens would leave a rifle on a rack inside a pickup truck (the rifle could be seen for blocks away) and not even rollup the windows. We have to ask “to what extent is that an invitation for someone to steal it?” How secure is it? I don’t pretend to know. I’m just saying that these questions would be part of answering your question “is it a sin?”

I heard one news reporter call the church a “soft target” because it was a house of worship and probably didn’t have anyone inside who belonged to the church carrying a firearm.

A fair statement.

But then the question is “what’s next?” Once we accept that a church is a soft target, what is the appropriate response? Make it a difficult target? Ask for law enforcement presence during Masses? Accept martyrdom gracefully? No single response can be said to be the only right answer that applies to every situation and church building.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

A civilian outside the Texas church at the mass murder today shot the gunman causing him to stop shooting. Prayers said for all affected by this tragedy.

 

[anikins]

Probably because guns have no place in a church.

 

[anikins]

I realize that gun ownership in America is related to pride, sex appeal, vanity, wrath, and cultural heritage, and no amount of statistics are going to alter perceptions.

Sadly this is the most accurate statement in this thread tonight.

 

[RandomAlias]

What?!? Seriously? Owning/carrying a firearm is about the ability to project force at a distance. Carrying to protect yourself or others is not about pride, sex appeal, vanity, or cultural heritage. It is about…

I see your point, but @TK421’s statement has much truth in it. Look at the way guns are glamorized in movies and other media. It is huge in US culture, almost on a par with sex, alcohol, money, and power. Self-defense is a plausible cover story, with some validity, just enough validity not to be thrown out.

 

[JHC]

Then throw out the communion wine too.

 

[TK421]

A semi-assault rifle and a 5% AV grape vintage have multiple differences.

 

[KS_Housewife]

Don’t assume your bishop’s decision to ban firearms from being carried into church by worshipers is political. It could be he has decided carrying would adversely impact safety and insurance premiums (someone might forget to put on the safety, after all.) He might be right or he might be wrong, but the diocese is the property owner and the property owner gets to decide.

 

[RandomAlias]

Then throw out the communion wine too.

An interesting proposition. If your reply is in reference to my mention of alcohol, I was merely comparing the cultural presence of alcohol to that of guns, sex, money, and power.

Do you listen to Country music? I would rather not, but I hear a lot because my daughter loves it. I can’t believe how many songs sing of beer and whiskey, doing shots, holding your liquor, and so on. Country music is full of references to casual sex too. These things are large in the culture of the US.

Guns, sex, money, alcohol, and power are not intrinsically evil. If misused, they can be harmful. They can even become false gods to us, if we let them. However, in the right circumstances and with the right intention, each of these can be good, and can do good.

Saint Augustine once said “Love, and do what you will.” What that means is that if you have a proper love of God and love of neighbor, you will know what to do with the things of this world. You will know how they can be properly applied, or properly enjoyed, for the good of man and to give glory to God.

 

[Seeksadvice]

Sex appeal… really. I never considered any of my weapons to be about “sex appeal.” If my .38Sp “snubby” revolver is a source of “sex appeal,” I’ve got other issues

Vanity? I don’t have/carry/use weapons for vanity.

 

[upant]

Please elaborate on what you mean by your diocese banned guns. Is your diocese saying they don’t want guns on any church property? Why would you take offense to that?

because in this day and age gun free zones are unhealthy

 

[upant]

Probably because guns have no place in a church.

why the catechism recognizes self-defense

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:

is the clergy is responsible for the safety of the people attending

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.

if you are properly carrying concealed, no one knows.