The Vatican supports complete civilian disarmament

[neraph]

Hi, I'm a Catholic that actually knows what he's talking about rather than believing some sensationalist article. So let me explain some things.

First, some quotes:

"In a world marked by evil ... the right of legitimate defence by means of arms exists. This right can become a serious duty for those who are responsible for the lives of others, for the common good of the family or of the civil community. This right alone can justify the possession or transfer of arms". (Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, "The International Arms Trade: an Ethical Reflection" in Origins 8 (24), 7 July 1994, p. 144).
International Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects

Does anyone here disagree with that?

That's an actual document that I can link to that you can read. I can't for the life of me find the supposed "The International Arms Trade," document that the original article quotes. Feel free to go to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace's website and search for ANY reference to handguns: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
No hits. Try a google search on the vatican.va domain for handguns. (handguns site:vatican.va). Again, no hits.

As far as the USCCB goes (that is, the United States Council of Catholic Bishops), they have NO ACTUALLY AUTHORITY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. They have the authority to rule on a few liturgical matters, but have no moral or doctrinal authority. If you like, I can show you the Canon Law that says exactly how much authority the USCCB has.

It seems to be absolutely true that the USCCB wants to ban handguns. That has no bearing on what the Catholic Church or individual Catholics believe or even what a particular Bishop believes or teaches. It is purely the prudential opinion of one particular group of people on one particular committee in the USCCB. I am a Catholic that agrees with and practices all that the Church actually teaches doctrinally and morally and I disagree with the USCCB on this matter.

Notice also that the Catholic News Service, where this article originated, is an arm of that same USCCB.

So, in short, this whole mess is simply the result of a few people grossly overstepping their authority for their own ends.

 

[esrice]

Ok guys you know we have a "no religious discussion rule" here on INGO.

Because this topic does indeed broach a 2nd Amendment issue, we can allow it to stay, as long as the responses continue to focus on the gun control aspect, and not the Catholic Church in general.

I've removed a handful of posts that didn't fit the above requirement.

 

[TopDog]

OK here we go. Im Catholic. I also have a lot of issues with the church. I'm very disappointed in the church and the current Pope. So that is where I stand.

For those of you that don't think the church has global influence you are being naive. Just because you don't like what the church is saying that does not mean that are not millions of sheep that listen to priests preach their own "special interpretations" of what the church is saying. One huge problem the church has is priests teaching what they want and not what is doctrine. Too many people go to church and say the words but never think about what they are saying.

If the popular interpretation by liberal priests is that the church supports gun control then that is what the sheep are going to walk out the door believing.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

Since we're speaking of the pope in terms of his position as the leader of an independent city state, I'll note that this city state has a population of 800 people. I could give a rip about what the leader of an 800 person nation has to say. I think there's more people than that on my facebook friends list.

 

[melensdad]

For all the Catholics in this thread, it should be noted that the Vatican and/or Bishop's support of gun control is NOT doctrine and the Catholic faithful are FREE TO DISAGREE with the position of the Church. Consequently one is NOT in religious schism with Church teaching if one chooses to oppose this opinion of the Church.

For those non-Catholics in the thread, realize that the Pope is just like you, in that he has the right to state his opinion, just as you and every other citizen have that right.

 

[miguel]

So many things to say about a thread that involves my two favorite subjects: Catholicism and firearms!!!

First things first, let me state I am a Catholic and a gun owner. Those facts now known, let's get it on.

(what's the name of head piece the pope wears?)

Since the death of Paul VI, the Pope has exclusively worn a mitre, the standard-issue headgear of any Latin-rite (or Maronite) Catholic bishop. Previous to John Paul I, the Bishop of Rome (aka "The Pope" in popular parlance, though the Patriarch of Alexandria is also referred to as Pope by Copts and Greeks, but I digress...) also wore what is called the "papal tiara" or "triple tiara". The papal tiara was not worn during liturgical functions, save the coronation of a new Pope. Photos of the the tiara can be found via Google images: papal tiara - Google Search

Now, on to the article itself. I believe the issue is less clear cut than the author might like it to be.

The author states in the second paragraph, "The answer is resoundingly clear: Firearms in the hands of civilians should be strictly limited and eventually completely eliminated." then follows with a reference to a statement by the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) issued 11 years ago. (USCCB - (SDWP) - Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice)

It's important to note that national conferences of bishops do not speak for the Vatican, per se. Nor do they have the theological authority to implement dogma within the Catholic Church. The USCCB can make a statement on toothpaste or aerating your lawn and as a Catholic you are not morally bound to respect or subjugate yourself to its opinion. While national bishops have always been loosely organized, the USCCB is basically a Modernist invention that was hoisted on us Catholics after Vatican II. Without going too far off course here, there are many Catholics who believe that national bishops conferences are an attempt by Modernists to interfere with the proper relationship between local bishops and their ordinary, the Bishop of Rome.

The author then references a previous USCCB pastoral statement on substance abuse, a document left unnamed, which was published in 1990. Hardly a rock-like foundation to build her argument upon.

Continuing, the article then turns to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (excuse me while I throw up in my mouth a little...) and a document named, The International Arms Trade. My understanding of this document is that it deals with the import, export and exchange of conventional weapons, not the regulation or infringement of the right of individuals to own small arms. (though we gun owners know that the UN and sundry pinko groups do wish to regulate our ownership of firearms...)

We're then treated to the personal musings of Tommaso Di Ruzza, "the expert on disarmament and arms control at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace" -- that's journalist speak for somone at the Vatican who speaks English that will convince uninformed readers of our point of view. An advisor to a Pontifical Council, even an "expert" one, does not set policy or dogma.

Now for the fun part. The author then sheepishly references the authority on matters of being a Catholic, the official Catechism of the Catholic Church, stating the obvious to anyone who is worth his salt as a Catholic: "individuals have a right and a duty to protect their own lives when in danger"...duh. This is specifically stated in the Catechism, in the "Legitimate Defense" section (Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText) that officially defines Catholic doctrine regarding the Fifth Commandment.

I will quote specifically from the Catechism:

Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor.... the one is intended, the other is not."65
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:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful.... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.66

The footnotes reference St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiæ, which is broadly considered to be the normative theology for the interpretation of the Catholic faith, despite it's sublimation, post-Vatican II.

Let's summarize what we've learned so far:

1. Despite the poor argument of a silly, leftist journalist, it's OK to own guns as a Catholic. Indeed, based on the Catechism, "Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm." and "one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's" -- what better way to render an unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm and care for one's own life than a 45ACP, be it a Glock 21, FNP 45 or 1911?

2. 97.6% of the people on Earth, including those claiming to be Catholic, do not understand the organization that is the Catholic Church, let alone its authentic moral teachings versus the non-binding comments of some of it's unauthorized or wayword members. (I'll leave out the part about their preference for felt banners depicting rainbows and puppies in the narthex for another thread...)

3. There are no ex cathedra statements on the ownership or sale of firearms by the Bishop of Rome.

Hope this clears up the "official" Vatican position on gun control.

AMDG

 

[melensdad]

After digging a bit more, let me state that I question the accuracy of this report especially when the Vatican's own website says the following:

... the right of legitimate defense by means of arms EXISTS. This right can become a SERIOUS duty for those who are responsible for the lives of others, for the common good of the family or of the civil community. This right ALONE can justify the possession of arms ...​

... Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, "The International Arms Trade: an Ethical Reflection" in Origins 8 (24), 7 July 1994, p. 144).​

Now bear in mind that I believe that many of our Bishops blindly take the Brady Campaign for its word and rubber stamp its agenda, and further I believe that the Church itself strives for peace and harmony and removing violence from society would be their goal. But its very clear that there are many references to self-defense that can be quoted that show some level of legitimacy to the use of any form of arms required to repel the unjust.

Does the Vatican like guns, no I don't think it does. In an ideal world would the Vatican like to see arms banished from the world, yes, I think it would. However, in the real world it strikes me that the Vatican is walking a tightrope of practicality. It wants illegal arms trade eliminated, that it what most of the article is referring to. It also allows for, in fact clearly states, that self-defense is a "grave duty" under certain circumstances, and accepts arms as a means of self-defense. Doesn't mean it really likes guns, but clearly accepts them as legitimate tool.

 

[LPMan59]

it absolutely kills me that the "suggestion" subforum is filled with people who whine that religious topics have gotten the boot on INGO.

this thread is/was filled with theological commentary, often ill-informed or flat out wrong, as well as plain insults. I would think you guys would LOVE the Catholic Church, seeing as how it is the largest private charity on the face of the planet. Despite wrong-doings by some members, the Church does what a lot of INGO members believe the government should not be doing.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Miguel -

So hopefully to clarify - and to get this back on track...

For us non-Catholics out here - these folks writing this paper are a) purporting to speak for the Catholic position b) don't have the -authority- to speak for the Catholic position and c) the people who DO have the authority to speak for the Catholic position have not taken an official position on gun control. Is that close to accurate?

If so - then I disagree mightily with the author of the article. And I have no beef with the Catholic position on the matter, since there does not seem to be a position. And you can understand the confusion that one might have as a reader of such an article - by someone like me - ignorant of the inner workings of the Vatican, etc.

MG - this is a discussion of GUN CONTROL and the Catholic postion - or lack thereof - on it. A couple of Mods have asked (and correctly so) that it be confined to that. I would ask that you be respectful of their request.

 

[LPMan59]

Miguel -

So hopefully to clarify - and to get this back on track...

For us non-Catholics out here - these folks writing this paper are a) purporting to speak for the Catholic position b) don't have the -authority- to speak for the Catholic position and c) the people who DO have the authority to speak for the Catholic position have not taken an official position on gun control. Is that close to accurate?

If so - then I disagree mightily with the author of the article. And I have no beef with the Catholic position on the matter, since there does not seem to be a position. And you can understand the confusion that one might have as a reader of such an article - by someone like me - ignorant of the inner workings of the Vatican, etc.

it can be very confusing. It is not uncommon for the US Bishops to take a different position than Rome and vice versa.

 

[Fargo]

For us non-Catholics out here - these folks writing this paper are a) purporting to speak for the Catholic position b) don't have the -authority- to speak for the Catholic position and c) the people who DO have the authority to speak for the Catholic position have not taken an official position on gun control. Is that close to accurate?

That sums it up pretty well. The USCCB has no binding authority on any such matter but constantly likes to pretend that it does. "Pontifical councils" are advisory bodies which put out position papers trying to get something adopted. They also have no authority to bind the faithful.

The right, and frequent obligations, to self-defense is a defined teaching of the church to which the faithful are bound to adhere. A right to legitimate means to exercise this right is also not in question despite what the liberal news arm of the USCCB would have you believe.

Best,

Joe

 

[Leadeye]

Married a catholic and go to catholic church. Through history doctrines and practices have changed, they don't burn people as heretics now, you can expect them to change again as new people move in and out of the church's heirarchy. It's a big organization and just like the police chiefs organization in dc does not represent a monolithic view of all leos on gun control, this does not represent how all catholics feel.

 

[lovemachine]

Why is this topic even on INGO? Topics concerning religion aren't even allowed here!

Ok guys you know we have a "no religious discussion rule" here on INGO.

Because this topic does indeed broach a 2nd Amendment issue, we can allow it to stay, as long as the responses continue to focus on the gun control aspect, and not the Catholic Church in general.

I've removed a handful of posts that didn't fit the above requirement.

That's why.

 

[lovemachine]

Please keep this on topic. We're not talking religion. Read esrice 's post. The one I quoted to you.

If you have a problem with that, talk to a MOD.

 

[Mike H]

I was born and raised a Catholic. That said I always believed that the official position of the Catholic Church supported gun control. Except for their turkey or beef shoots!

 

[danielocean03]

OK, I've just removed a handful of off-topic posts in this thread. This thread will be locked if it can't be discussed in relation to our 2A rights without citing other unrelated religious issues or insulting other members' religion.

 

[jbombelli]

What do you expect from a bunch of whining, namby pamby Europeans?

 

[Fargo]

What do you expect from a bunch of whining, namby pamby Europeans?

Actually the USCCB/CNS is a bunch of whining Americans still heavily influenced by the liberal limp-wristed mafia which gained control of many U.S. seminaries in the late 60's-90's. That they are pushing gun control is no surprise.

As you can see from the responses of myself and the other practicing Catholics in this thread, they and their opinions are not held in high regard by many of the faithful. Most importantly, they have no authority to create Church teaching in this regard as much as they like to pretend to.

IMO, that CNS article is a perfect example of those who chose to pervert religion to further political goals.

Best,

Joe

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Unfortunately - from the above, it would seem that it's the US council of bishops (jump in if I'm wrong - since I know beans about this) that is putting out the pro-gun control view. And the Vatican hasn't taken a stand one way or the other.

I agree with the thought jbombelli - in general I'd have figured that way. But this appears to fly in reverse....

I'm confused on a number of levels by this. But hey, I'm not Catholic. I DO know that I disagree with whomever put out the article that the OP referenced.

 

[Fargo]

Unfortunately - from the above, it would seem that it's the US council of bishops (jump in if I'm wrong - since I know beans about this) that is putting out the pro-gun control view. And the Vatican hasn't taken a stand one way or the other.

I agree with the thought jbombelli - in general I'd have figured that way. But this appears to fly in reverse....

I'm confused on a number of levels by this. But hey, I'm not Catholic. I DO know that I disagree with whomever put out the article that the OP referenced.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certain there is a heavy contingent within the European Catholic church which favors gun control; after all look at the laws in those countries.

My point was simply that this particular attempt to push the issue is coming out of the USCCB/CNS which are American organizations who apparently want to emulate the dying "enlightened" societies of Europe. I lived in Europe for a bit and while the history etc. is fascinating it is not a place I would chose to live on anything but a most temporary basis.

Best