Why did my diocese ban guns?

[po18guy]

Assuming that the allegations are true, the Church seems increasingly to hysterically (over)react to news reports. By the making of such a “feel good” proclamation, the Church knowingly violates her own catechism, as well as discarding wisdom and prudence. By disarming mass goers and making public proclamation of it, the Church is effectively declaring to all deranged murderers that it is open season on Catholics.

We are bound to obey our Bishops in all things except sin. It is very arguable that each of us bears a grave duty and responsibility to defend innocent human life. If we fail to carry out a grave duty, does that amount to sin? a sobering question. If something the Bishop or any other diocese official states violates this, it seems that we are under no obligation to obey it. (CCC 2265).

Canonists are better equipped to address this.

 

[jfz178]

I have met Cardinal Dinardo and attended a Mass he said. He seems like a nice and holy man. But it is hard to ignore that a watchdog group named him one of the five worst Cardinals for covering up allegations of sexual abuse by priests and he did some really insensitive and ill-advised things in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike. S0 this does not surprise me.

I would look at Texas law. In most states, if you are otherwise legally carrying, the worst that can happen is that if you are found to be carrying, (and if it is concealed, why would that happen?) the venue can ask you to leave and if you refuse, you are trespassing.

I don’t see any obligation to follow the orders of a clergyman that don’t make sense and are outside the purview of the Church (referring to the organization, not the building itself). Follow your own conscience, that’s what mine says.

 

[poche]

Do you feel a need to carry a loaded gun to church?

 

[pnewton]

But it is hard to ignore that a watchdog group named him one of the five worst Cardinals

It is very easy for me to ignore self-appointed “watchdogs”. What groups outside the Catholic Church think about the Catholic Church are of no concern to me.

I would look at Texas law. In most states, if you are otherwise legally carrying, the worst that can happen is that if you are found to be carrying, (and if it is concealed, why would that happen?) the venue can ask you to leave and if you refuse, you are trespassing.

There is no room in the law for “otherwise legally carrying.” If one is in violation of the law, carrying where it is posted one cannot, it is a class A misdemeanor.

I don’t see any obligation to follow the orders of a clergyman that don’t make sense and are outside the purview of the Church (referring to the organization, not the building itself).

In this case, the “orders of the clergy”, if done in conjunction with following the law in regard to signage, carry the weight of the law. Besides that, there is no reason in the world to listen to Catholic clergy if one is not Catholic. If one is, then that is a matter for confession.

 

[jfz178]

So you are happy to ignore watchdog groups regarding clergy sexual abuse of minors, but I am a bad person for even suggesting ignoring misdemeanor statutes that are in violation of my Second Amendment rights? I will claim the moral high ground on that trade off every day. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. There is not a thing you could say to change my mind on that.

And there most definitely is room for “otherwise legally carrying.” It is talked about all the time in the tactical shooting community and in tactical shooting classes. You are obviously not plugged into that. “The weight of the law” from a local misdemeanor to a federal felony are clearly very different weights. And I would say the sexual abuse of minors by the clergy weighs more than any of them.

And as a Jesuit chaplain told me when I was in the Navy, you are a Catholic if you believe in the Nicene Creed. There is nothing in there about hanging on every word from the clergy. If that were true, there would be few real Catholics in the world and those few would be mindless automatons.

 

[jfz178]

Well carrying an unloaded gun to church would be pretty useless, wouldn’t it?

 

[pnewton]

So you are happy to ignore watchdog groups regarding clergy sexual abuse of minors, but I am a bad person for even suggesting ignoring misdemeanor statutes that are in violation of my Second Amendment rights? I will claim the moral high ground on that trade off every day

Please read what I wrote. I never said you were a bad person for your legal opinion, or anyone was bad who believes and exercises their legal rights. However, there is also a basic property right issue that allows people to decide what is best on their property. In the case of church property, the bishop or his delegate (like a priest) has the right to exercise the option in state law to prohibit handguns, as much as you have the right to not invite anyone armed into your house.

But saying that you should listen to a priest or bishop who is exercising his due competence in a matter of moral neutrality is really not the same as dissent for conscience. It is like fighting over a priest because he wants to paint the bathroom the wrong color. Sure, you can have your opinion, but re-painting the bathroom out of spite would be wrong. There is no “moral right to carry a gun into a church.”

 

[TechieGuy]

I am not a trained marksman. I don’t like guns, but in the very unlikely scenario of me holding a gun in such a situation, I don’t think even I would be ‘just as likely’ to kill a random innocent.

You won’t know for sure unless you participate in realistic training scenarios.