The Vatican supports complete civilian disarmament

[MinuteMan47]

The Pope did not write that letter. It is not, therefore, the "Pope's definition" of WMDs. It was written by a Pontifical Council, which is purely advisory. It's also not discussing firearms in the context of legally owned firearms in the USA, but in the context of smuggling small arms illegally (eg. into the hands of Mexican drug lords or al-Qaeda).

Ok, my apologies on that one..... but,


Here is what the current pope has to say on the issue. From Pope Benedict's blog page...


The Benedict Blog: Pope Benedict Roundup!

. . . I wish to urge the international community to make a global commitment on security. A joint effort on the part of States to implement all the obligations undertaken and to prevent terrorists from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction would undoubtedly strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation regime and make it more effective. I welcome the agreement reached on the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear weapons programme, and I encourage the adoption of suitable measures for the reduction of conventional weapons and for dealing with the humanitarian problems caused by cluster munitions

So, then what's a conventional weapon?

Well, as defined by Wikipedia...

"Conventional weapons include small arms and light weapons..."

Conventional weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Expat]

It isn't just this particular group either. We Presbyterians are against most guns as well. THey are dangerous you know.

 

[MinuteMan47]

...and "The Voice of the Pope".


Fight Against Small Arms


"Fight AGAINST Small Arms"

The project aims to raise awareness, campaign for better gun laws and push for stronger regulation of the global arms trade.

 

[Fargo]

Ok, my apologies on that one..... but,


Here is what the current pope has to say on the issue. From Pope Benedict's blog page...


The Benedict Blog: Pope Benedict Roundup!




So, then what's a conventional weapon?

Well, as defined by Wikipedia...

"Conventional weapons include small arms and light weapons..."

Conventional weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I would point out that "suitable measures" is not the same as "all measures," especially in the context of a paragraph about anti-terrorism and global security.

I don't disagree that the Vatican is in favor of arms regulation, especially as regards the sale of arms to folks like the Islamic militias responsible for genocide in Sudan and Somalia or to terrorist organizations. This is certainly true.

However, I'm yet to see anything which would apply to the possession of arms by a law abiding citizen or by anyone needing arms for self defense. Pretty much everything on the subject is in the context of terrorism, oppression and lawlessness.

That the liberals at CNS conveniently miss that distinction speaks volumes about their character.

Best,

Joe

 

[neraph]

...and "The Voice of the Pope".


Fight Against Small Arms


"Fight AGAINST Small Arms"

Seriously? You're going to claim that Vatican Radio reporting news means that the Pope endorses the subject of the news?

 

[MinuteMan47]

It's also not discussing firearms in the context of legally owned firearms in the USA, but in the context of smuggling small arms illegally (eg. into the hands of Mexican drug lords or al-Qaeda).

Are military weapons considered "legal"?

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...4285-mexican_guns_are_coming_from_the_us.html

I would point out that "suitable measures" is not the same as "all measures," especially in the context of a paragraph about anti-terrorism and global security.

I don't disagree that the Vatican is in favor of arms regulation, especially as regards the sale of arms to folks like the Islamic militias responsible for genocide in Sudan and Somalia or to terrorist organizations. This is certainly true.

However, I'm yet to see anything which would apply to the possession of arms by a law abiding citizen or by anyone needing arms for self defense. Pretty much everything on the subject is in the context of terrorism, oppression and lawlessness.

That the liberals at CNS conveniently miss that distinction speaks volumes about their character.

Best,

Joe

As for small arms, I would prefer NO measures.

Seriously? You're going to claim that Vatican Radio reporting news means that the Pope endorses the subject of the news?

Yes. You must have missed my previous post when Pope Benedict said it, himself.

 

[E5RANGER375]

If a large entity such as this supports banning guns then its our duty to stop their efforts in the united states. We already need to ditch the UN, but the big money string pullers wont let us. And anyone who isnt an American and wants to try and tell us what to do in our own country needs to shut up! Theres no doubt in my mind that this group would love to ban guns. and when I say this group, im especially meaning their leader.

 

[Fargo]

If a large entity such as this supports banning guns then its our duty to stop their efforts in the united states. We already need to ditch the UN, but the big money string pullers wont let us. And anyone who isnt an American and wants to try and tell us what to do in our own country needs to shut up! Theres no doubt in my mind that this group would love to ban guns. and when I say this group, im especially meaning their leader.

Really? I am yet to see anything the Pope has said/done which in anyway relates to firearm regulation in the US.

I see tons about places like Somalia, or the Sudan, or Croatia, or Lebanon where guns are being deliberately trafficked to organizations bent upon oppression and genocide but nothing about guns in the US or any place like it.

Keep in mind that damn near every example referenced by the Pope is a place where there already is strict gun control for the oppressed. Do you really think the Islamic militias in Darfur tolerate firearm ownership by Christians?

The arms regulation referenced here is basically to stop selling guns to people who will use them to violate the rights of the defenseless, not anything about renewing the AWB.

I'm all for poopcanning the UN and all its meddling but I just don't think that is what the Vatican is doing here.

Best,

Joe

 

[neraph]

Are military weapons considered "legal"?

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...4285-mexican_guns_are_coming_from_the_us.html

It may or may not be. I have not researched how those weapons are ending up in Mexico or who in Mexico they are headed to.

Yes. You must have missed my previous post when Pope Benedict said it, himself.

Here is what the current pope has to say on the issue. From Pope Benedict's blog page...

Again, the quote you referenced is about military buildup, not civilian gun ownership. That's why the section you bolded is bounded by talk about nuclear weapons and cluster bombs.

Also, that is NOT THE POPE's BLOG! It is a blog ABOUT the Pope.

 

[rhino]

It would be tough to decipher what such documents "really mean" without some study and asking questions of someone who is well versed in Church law.

Given that, the previous Pope (John Paul II) was absolutely not against private ownership of firearms for personal defense. In one of his encyclicals from the mid 1980s (I think 1986), the theme was the protection of innocent life. That included not only opposing abortion (especially elective abortion), but self-defense as well.

I think it's likely that the guys who are writing the documents from the Vatican are concerned about the proliferation of small arms in the wrong hands, and perhaps not thinking of the unintended consequences of blanket assertions that all weapons are bad.

In any event, the Church definitely supports the right to self-defense (both on a personal as well as a state level).

 

[MinuteMan47]

...not thinking of the unintended consequences of blanket assertions that all weapons are bad.
.

This is my concern.

Again, the quote you referenced is about military buildup, not civilian gun ownership.

Would a citizen's militia fall into that category?

Also, that is NOT THE POPE's BLOG! It is a blog ABOUT the Pope.

You keep questioning my credibility. Are you saying that he never made that statement?

 

[maxmayhem]

Whatever...who cares? that is just annoying and stupid...do they not remember the genocide that occurred in history on disarmed people.

 

[wrigleycub]

Yeah, it's been going on for the past 50 years.

As a former Catholic, I looked into the Church's stance on a lot of things... and the gun control issue is one of the major reasons I'm "former".

Josh

It seems like I'm moving in this same direction.

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

The Catholic Church, like most Protestant Churchs, believes in peace and the well-being of man. That does not mean that you simply lie down like a lamb and let someone take your life or the life of someone in your family. You are morally obligated to defend your life against an aggressor.

Some will say "what about turning the other cheek"? Turning the other cheek is in a totally different context. Turning the other cheek certainly does not mean for us to simply be doormats. Too often, things get intermingled and ou of context. I pointed out earlier that when Peter cut the ear off the high priest's servant, he was told to put his sword back in his sheath. He was never told throughout his discipleship that he had to make his sword into a plowshare. So to turn the other cheek, when thoughtfully understood, actually encourages subversive, even dangerously subversive behavior. Why? because it is non-violent, but yet makes a clear point to not be subservient to, or submissive to the unjust or irrational use of authority.

Clearly, people 2000 years ago wore swords on their sides for protection from robbers, murderers, etc., when they traveled. Had there been firearms back then, they probably would have been carrying them as well.

 

[neraph]

Given that, the previous Pope (John Paul II) was absolutely not against private ownership of firearms for personal defense. In one of his encyclicals from the mid 1980s (I think 1986), the theme was the protection of innocent life. That included not only opposing abortion (especially elective abortion), but self-defense as well.

Evangelium Vitae was published in 1995.
Evangelium vitae - Ioannes Paulus PP. II - Encyclical Letter (1995.03.25)

P. 55: "Moreover, "legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life, the common good of the family or of the State". Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason. "

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

It's really funny how so many folk in this world think that The Vatican speaks for "The Church" when in fact, they really do not. I am an avid Believer in Jesus Christ and have a personal relationship with Him. I have many very good friends who are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal, the list goes on and on. We have one common bond--Jesus Christ--and that is the bond that ties us together in brotherly love. Just know that Catholicism is not the be all and say all when it comes to "The Church" as the Bible knows "The Church" as "The Body of Christ."

Enough of the sermon. The Bible is pretty clear on protecting ones family, loved ones, and belongings.

Luke 11:21 "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe.

When Jesus saved me, he took away my sin, he did not take away my spine. Blessings to you all.

Actually, it isn't all that funny but amazing. The Vatican is NOT the church. As you pointed out, believers in him are the Body of Christ. The Vatican is the office of the church, established to uphold the teachings of Christ and to not allow deviation from those teachings. It is contained in the Bible how the apostles looked to Peter as the leader among them. The teachings of the church have never deviated. It is rich in Tradition going back a couple thousand years.

 

[neraph]

Would a citizen's militia fall into that category?

Potentially, but not necessarily. The Swiss militia system, for example, is undoubtedly licit. The community defences that have been keeping the looters at bay in Egypt are undoubtedly licit as well. There are probably some examples of "citizen's militias" that are not though. As you stated, blanket statements are dangerous, which is always why context must be considered.

You keep questioning my credibility. Are you saying that he never made that statement?

I acknowledged that the Pope made that statement and responded that there was context (ie it was not about legal gun ownership as practised in the USA).

You have made several inaccurate statements and I have called you on them. That is your own fault.

 

[neraph]

Actually, it isn't all that funny but amazing. The Vatican is NOT the church. As you pointed out, believers in him are the Body of Christ. The Vatican is the office of the church, established to uphold the teachings of Christ and to not allow deviation from those teachings. It is contained in the Bible how the apostles looked to Peter as the leader among them. The teachings of the church have never deviated. It is rich in Tradition going back a couple thousand years.

As we have been warned, lets keep this on topic.

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

As we have been warned, lets keep this on topic.

Indeed...so back to topic, the Catholic Church, does not condone violence, but non-violence and the right to life.

 

[MinuteMan47]

Potentially, but not necessarily.

So the potential is there. I hope the grandchildren of my grandchildren (...and so on) are able to have the same liberties that I do. Neither, you or I, can predict the future, and you never know when these things might come back to bite us. Don't be so naive that things couldn't happen on US soil. I think some people refer to it as SHTF.

*Tin foil hat engaged*

You have made several inaccurate statements and I have called you on them. That is your own fault.

You are correct. But, he still said them.