The Vatican supports complete civilian disarmament

[jbombelli]

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

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.

My bad. I failed to properly understand what I read. I guess I didn't get enough sleep last night. Or maybe I was fooled by Rambone's thread title.

 

[Cherryspringer]

I understand their idealistic viewpoint. But the the fact is that were approaching a time again where we have to ask the question " who is going to protect us from the army, police & courts?" maybe they have a better balance of power in Vatican city.

 

[OD*]

The Catholic Church does not have a problem with individuals right to self-defence.

Catechism of the Catholic Church;

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.[65]

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]
- Saint Thomas Aquinas

 

[Wabatuckian]

And, OD, I was just getting ready to post that.

Thank you!

I'd rep you if I weren't out for the next day!

Josh

 

[danielocean03]

And, OD, I was just getting ready to post that.

Thank you!

I'd rep you if I weren't out for the next day!

Josh

Got him for you Josh.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

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

Yep - we agree here. Spot on.

 

[miguel]

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?

Spot on here, AP.

Catholicism is very legalistic as far as how it defines what official Church dogma is -- that is, what is obligatory to believe as a Catholic in order to remain in "good standing" -- versus something that doesn't directly relate to the salvation of one's soul.

Dogma isn't left to the PR department or a minor curial office like Justice and Peace. Only the Bishop of Rome, aka "the Pope", can define/implement new dogma. And unlike what some would have you believe, he can't say, "You all have to buy HK over Glock 'cause I said so!" -- because a preference in firearms is not a matter of personal salvation, though it may save you a few tenths in an IDPA match!

Rather, the official beliefs of a member of the Catholic Church are set forth in the Catechism, which isn't something that is voted on or "adapted" to meet the sensibilities of a place or time. It is believed to be divinely revealed truth and several of us have pointed out the specific elements of the Catechism that not only allow, but also require, one to defend one's own life. The means by which one may defend one's life are left to the person being threatened. Just like Congressmen may not understand the Constitution, some Catholics, including prelates, can fail -- by choice or ignorance -- to understand and advocate what is in the Catechism. And that's what the people in this article are guilty of.

Bottom line, gun control is not in the Catechism. The right -- and obligation -- to defend one's own life are. Game over for their argument. The author's approach is a typical tactic used by persons with an agenda to take advantage of the uninformed.

In summary, while the people cited in this article are Catholic and some are even on the payroll of the Church, none of the persons quoted or referenced -- including the USCCB -- have dogmatic authority to require anything of you as a Catholic. It's nothing but an attempt at peer pressure to advance their Modernist agenda.

p.s. On a side note, has anyone ever heard of St. Gabriel Possenti? He was a monk who was well known for his actions in defense of the people of Piedmont, Italy...using (gasp) a gun! There is actually a St. Gabriel Possenti Society, which is a group of Catholic laymen dedicated to exposing the anti-gun elements within the Church. (The St. Gabriel Possenti Society)

p.p.s. It's also interesting to note that the five Supreme Court justices who voted pro-gun in D.C. vs. Heller are, you guessed it, Catholic.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I just found this, where does it fit in?

The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493).

And this?

The Popes laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44) .

Could this be why they have no need to be members of the UN?

 

[2cool9031]

I also am a former catholic...went to catholic school. Gun Control sponsored by the people that protect (inappropriate insult removed) priests!!!

 

[MinuteMan47]

Help me make heads or tails of this...

Directly from a link posted in the thread.

International Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects

This quote came from the pope, himself. (Very bottom of the link....2nd "Mr. President" letter)

"The culture of solidarityis closely connected with the value of peace... The alarming increase of arms runs the risk of feeding and expanding a culture of competition and conflict, a culture involving not only States but also non-institutional entities, such as paramilitary groups and terrorist organizations ... Faced with such threats, everyone must feel the moral duty to take concrete and timely steps to promote the cause of peace and understanding among peoples".

To me, it seems the pope made an anti-gun statement here. He says we must feel a "moral duty" to take "concrete steps"...which I take it to mean steps towards gun control.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I also am a former catholic...went to catholic school. Gun Control sponsored by the people that protect (inappropriate insult removed) priests!!!

You can all thank the above member for not paying attention to the multiple reminders by several mod (and non-mod members). The above is uncalled-for and unacceptable.

Thread closed.

 

[Scutter01]

After discussing with the rest of the staff, and per the discussion in this thread:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/forum_support_suggestions/134160-closing_threads.html

I'm re-opening this thread for discussion with the following caveat: You will either heed the warnings previously posted by the moderators as they've attempted to reiterate the INGO's site rules, or you are going to be banned for a minimum of 48 hours. If you don't think that you can control yourself or if you decide that you just HAVE to turn this into a religious discussion, then do yourself a favor: step away from the keyboard or go and find another thread to read. This will be the only warning you will receive. There will be no infractions handed out.

 

[christman]

I'm late to the party. Stupid washer and dryer shopping.....

 

[MinuteMan47]

Thank you, Scutter.

Bump.

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.


International Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects

Does anyone here disagree with that?

Help me make heads or tails of this...

Here is your link...

International Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects

This quote came from the (former) pope, himself. (Very bottom of the link....2nd "Mr. President" letter)

As Pope John Paul II affirmed in his Message for the World Day of Peace at the beginning of this year (2001), "The culture of solidarityis closely connected with the value of peace... The alarming increase of arms runs the risk of feeding and expanding a culture of competition and conflict, a culture involving not only States but also non-institutional entities, such as paramilitary groups and terrorist organizations ... Faced with such threats, everyone must feel the moral duty to take concrete and timely steps to promote the cause of peace and understanding among peoples".

To me, it seems the pope made an anti-gun statement here. He says we must feel a "moral duty to take concrete steps"...which I take it to mean steps towards gun control.

 

[neraph]

To me, it seems the pope made an anti-gun statement here. He says we must feel a "moral duty to take concrete steps"...which I take it to mean steps towards gun control.

There is context to that statement. From that same document: "Nonetheless, in our meeting today the topic is fairly limited. Here we are discussing illicit trade in small arms and light weapons."

Also, the quote from Pope John Paul II is missing a bit:

"The alarming increase of arms, together with the halting progress of commitment to nuclear non-proliferation, runs the risk of feeding and expanding a culture of competition and conflict, a culture involving not only States but also non-institutional entities, such as paramilitary groups and terrorist organisations. Even today the world is dealing with the consequences of wars past and present, as well as the tragic effects of anti-personnel mines and the use of frightful chemical and biological weapons. And what can be said about the permanent risk of conflicts between nations, of civil wars within some States and of widespread violence, before which international organisations and national governments appear almost impotent? Faced with such threats, everyone must feel the moral duty to take concrete and timely steps to promote the cause of peace and understanding among peoples. "

 

[neraph]

I just found this, where does it fit in?And this?Could this be why they have no need to be members of the UN?

The first one "The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)." has little to do with the Pope's ownership. They are recognising that Spain has ownership of the land in South America and forbidding other Catholic countries from attempting to claim them. It's somewhat akin to a modern peace treaty. This is particularly important because, by 1493, Portugal was trying to lay claim to certain areas and the Papal Bull set which areas belonged to Spain. This was modified only a year later by the Treaty of Tordesillas.

The second quote "The Popes laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44)." I can't actually find the original document for this, so I'm not sure what it is actually saying. I'm supposing that "Syllabus" is referring to the Syllabus of Errors issued by Pope Pius IX in 1864. If that is the case, then #28 states that Bishops have the right to publish the Pope's letters even if the civil government says otherwise, #29 states that the Pope's "favours" are valid even if the civil government says otherwise, #44 states that civil government may not interfere with matters of "religion, morality and spiritual government". If you go read the Syllabus of Errors, you should know that it's actually written as a list of things condemned, so what Pope Pius IX was saying is the opposite of what is listed there. Also, "favours" in #29 refers to dispensations from Canon Law. For example, the Pope could permit someone to get married outside of a Catholic church, which a Catholic would ordinarily be required to do. (although in this particular case, it is usually the bishop that grants that dispensation.)

EDIT: I found the supposed source of that quote. It is Pope Benedict XIV's De Synodo Dioecesana, book IX, chapter VII, number 4. You can find a scan of the book here: Synodo diocesana (Open Library)
The referenced section is on page 65 and it is in Spanish. The referenced section deals with how priests are supposed to dress and fines them 4 pesos if they are caught disobeying.

 

[Prometheus]

Religious post

It's just one of the things the catholic church is wrong about.

It's also why I escaped it many, many years ago. I look back upon it as very cult like.

Anyone or any thing who wants to take away my ability to defend myself is my enemy.

 

[MinuteMan47]

There is context to that statement. From that same document: "Nonetheless, in our meeting today the topic is fairly limited. Here we are discussing illicit trade in small arms and light weapons."

Also, the quote from Pope John Paul II is missing a bit:

"The alarming increase of arms, together with the halting progress of commitment to nuclear non-proliferation, runs the risk of feeding and expanding a culture of competition and conflict, a culture involving not only States but also non-institutional entities, such as paramilitary groups and terrorist organisations. Even today the world is dealing with the consequences of wars past and present, as well as the tragic effects of anti-personnel mines and the use of frightful chemical and biological weapons. And what can be said about the permanent risk of conflicts between nations, of civil wars within some States and of widespread violence, before which international organisations and national governments appear almost impotent? Faced with such threats, everyone must feel the moral duty to take concrete and timely steps to promote the cause of peace and understanding among peoples. "

Ok. So, I'm curious. why would the Vatican leave that out of THEIR letter? I did not modify the quote in any way. The way I had it posted came DIRECTLY from their website.

Was the quote only left out because they were not concerned with WMD (weapons of mass destruction) at the UN Conference, and they were only concerned with small arms?


If some people believe the stance of the Vatican is only to eliminate WMD, then they might want to read the pope's definition of WMD. Again, DIRECTLY from the Vatican website and their letter to the UN...

...it is sad to note that solidarity with the victims of the use of small arms and light weapons - which are in fact arms of mass destruction against the poor

I will not support ANY type of gun control, whether it be in the US or for the UN. In my opinion, banning the export of small arms to "poor" countries could hurt even the US in the future....


The reason I wanted to be so involved in this thread was to learn more about the United Nations, especially the Security Council, and see if their duties could possibly affect us here on US soil in the future.

As someone stated earlier in the thread they weren't worried about the pope because the nation only had a population of 800. Well, if they were a full member of the UN it wouldn't matter if the population was 1. They still have an equal vote. Also, the pope does have a LARGE political influence since not only does he communicate with the people around him, but he gives PEACE TALKS around the globe. The former pope was one of the MOST TRAVELED WORLD LEADERS IN HISTORY.



I am all for peace. But I ain't givin' up my guns...

 

[Regionnus Rattis]

I'm Catholic. I attend Mass regularly. I was an altar boy for years. I even trained altar boys in the past. I even wanted to become a priest when I was in high school! I'm actually proud to be a Catholic. Not wanting to get into religion here, since it's againt the rules, but I will say that I'm offended by some of the above comments. A cult? Child Molesting? That pisses me off.

But anyway, I won't go in to it. I will say this. I have researched this very topic. Here's what I've found. The pope, the vatican, the church, are all for self defense. But not murder. You should do anything possible, and legal, to protect yourself and your family. It says that very clearly in the Catechism. ("law book" of the catholic church)
And from other readings, you get different meanings on what the church says about gun control. I haven't read anything that says one way or the other.

I don't agree with EVERYTHING the Church believes. But I agree with most. If they ARE for gun control, well, that's just one more thing I don't agree with. And that's not going to stop me from being a proud Catholic.

I agree, as a Catholic. It is in the Catechism that self-defense is valid, because of the reason is that "love towards 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". So that it may have been the church secretly wishes civilians did not have guns, that is the reason why it is not announced publicly...it goes against their teaching of right to life and defending one's own life against an aggressor.

It even says in the "book" that He did not tell Peter to go make his sword into a plowshare, when Peter cut off the ear of he high priest's servant. It was that the servant was not an aggressor and threaten anyone's life. It was common in the day to carry a small sword...if they had guns back then, they probably would have armed themselves with those, to protect from robbers and thieves who might have threatened their lives.

 

[neraph]

Ok. So, I'm curious. why would the Vatican leave that out of THEIR letter? I did not modify the quote in any way. The way I had it posted came DIRECTLY from their website.

Was the quote only left out because they were not concerned with WMD (weapons of mass destruction) at the UN Conference, and they were only concerned with small arms?

If some people believe the stance of the Vatican is only to eliminate WMD, then they might want to read the pope's definition of WMD. Again, DIRECTLY from the Vatican website and their letter to the UN...

I will not support ANY type of gun control, whether it be in the US or for the UN. In my opinion, banning the export of small arms to "poor" countries could hurt even the US in the future....

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).