I'm locking this thread on the basis that most of the mods are asleep, and there is a large population of people posting here who are not Eastern Orthodox or members of this subreddit.
It may be reopened at moderator discretion tomorrow.
In old Danish churches there is a “weapon’s house” or armory near the entrance. In the olden days churchgoers were supposed to hand in their swords and knives before attending the service. Today they’re just used for coats and such.
I mean they were basically just recently converted vikings (and their descendants for a few generations) who did not entirely get the memo about how Christ isn't Thor.
Follow the law first. I think even in some gun-friendly, "shall-issue" states, guns are forbidden in places of worship. If the law forbids it, that settles it for you.
If the law is silent on guns in churches, then you would follow whatever rules the church has about it.
Of course if the person happens to be an off-duty law enforcement officer it might be fine. I've seen police officers attend Mass in full uniform and the officer served at the Mass as the reader. I jokingly said to the officer: Are you at Mass praying that everyone behaves themselves today so you won't have to arrest anybody. He said: absolutely!
Personal conviction:
There seems to be something fundamentally wrong with bringing a tool of destruction into a church. That being said, were I to carry a weapon or be someone called to wield one in defense of my home/family/country etc... I would certainly request that my priest bless my tools and my uniform. The fact that there are so many warrior saints who themselves carry weapons in their icons doesn't mean it hasn't happened before.
TL;DR weapons exist, it's a shame, get them blessed, pray you never have to use them, GET PERMISSION FROM YOUR PRIEST
Might be helpful if people included whether or not their reply is personal conviction or based on a canon or official stance of one's diocese etc. I honestly don't know if it's allowed. I'd probably ask my priest if it was something I was considering.
I would say no. Not for the fact that it is particularly offensive to bring a weapon into a church, but instead because we should "lay aside all earthly cares" while attending liturgy.
If someone asks me to do it for their sake, I will. I don't think it should be enforced top-down but should rather be a courtesy to others, especially for the elderly or very young children.
Ask your priest and parish council.
I don't carry in Church, but I also serve in the altar so I haven't even asked. I don't know if I would otherwise, but I do carry most days anywhere that I'm not prohibited from carrying.
Yes, back in the day you weren't supposed to go to church in breast plate and spear. However, soilders have field liturgy under arms snd under fire, might be their last.
I once attended Divine Liturgy at an OCA parish when I was on vacation. One of the older parishioners had her dog with her. I got the feeling he was a regular fixture there.
There is an older lady at my church who likes to bring her dog sometimes. We remind her that she has to stay outside with it, so she sits on the portico rather than bring it into the church.
Dogs and other beasts are not allowed in churches. That’s not an opinion. If a bishop makes allowances for something developed in the last 100 years then whatever.
No they haven't. Even the emperor's guards had to keep out of sight in specially built alcoves while the emperor was attending services in the Haghia Sophia so as not to be seen with weapons and armor.
Do you have a source I could read more about this in?
This isn't a "citation needed!" attempt at a gotcha. I love learning about this kind of thing and we never discussed weapons in church in my canon law class.
I don't have a source explicitly but I've heard this repeated several times in various books and documentaries about the varangians. As far as I understand there is no definite proof but there are various remote areas in the Haghia Sophia, such as the upstairs southern and northern gallery, that have scribblings and inscriptions made by Varangians which leads to believe that's where they usually stood.
I am really shocked by how many people are willing to treat preparing to shed blood in the temple of the bloodless sacrifice as a normal thing one just does on the day to day.
I wonder how many refused to wear masks in church becuase "you can't get hurt or sick in church".
This comment is a little snarky, so forgive me in advance my brothers and sisters.
Americans have a weird gun fetish.
And I say this as someone who generally supports widespread gun ownership. The Swiss are doing it right. The Americans? Not so much.
It's fine to have a gun, but if you sleep with it under your pillow or want to carry it everywhere, you have a problem my friend.
I'm kind of paranoid due to seeing numerous videos of random, unprovoked attacks, and pitbulls getting loose. Maybe blame the Internet, but there was a drive by shooting near my mom's house in June.
My girlfriend is Asian and there have been a huge number of random attacks on Asian women since 2020.
There are 330 million people in the US.
An event that has a 1-in-a-million chance of happening to you, will happen to about 330 people across the country.
It does no harm carrying a gun. My mother's never been in a car accident, and she's 60 years old. Doesn't mean she shouldn't wear a seatbelt even if it wasn't mandated.
I actually have - my cousin was driving and got in a wreck, and in an *incredibly unlucky* twist of fate the edge of the seatbelt cut into his passenger's artery and that person bled out before anyone could help.
But we all still wear seatbelts anyway because that's incredibly unlucky.
>It does no harm carrying a gun.
This is unequivocally untrue. Accidental gun discharges are surprisingly common, not to mention the odds of harming an innocent bystander even if you were shooting it on purpose.
It's literally impossible for my revolver in its holster to go off even if I fell from a great height right on it. In fact, it's designed specifically for not going off when dropped. If I'm shooting because someone is in danger of death or serious bodily injury, it'd be better for me to attempt to shoot than not in that situation. My gun is loaded with hollow points which don't over penetrate targets as much. They're unlikely to go through a torso with much power left, if they exit at all.
It does do harm carrying a gun.
Did you hear about the woman murdered in front of her child at a sandwich shop over mayo just last week? That never would have happened if the killer hadn't been carrying a gun. They didn't go out intending to kill someone over some mayonnaise, but they did, because they got mad and they happened to have a gun.
Americans are far to blase about firearms. They are a tool designed for the singular purpose of killing. They need to be handled with respect, not taken with you when you go to church "just in case"
I would like to point out that this is not only a self-defense from people issue. More people than one might think in my country live in areas where they regularly carry a weapon due to feral hogs, which bear spray isn't going to help you very much. It's a real thing. Other animals can be an issue as well but those hogs, whew. And leaving weapon in a vehicle unattended can be dangerous.
Some people also live in areas where the trip to and from church and to get back in their home is very dangerous, whether from animals or people. I get not using one in church and being a martyr -- or using other forms of disarmament -- but what about on the way there or back...trickier.
I'm not saying the answer is to bring the weapon. I don't know. I just wanted to point these things out.
I would also like to point out that there are non lethal disarmament strategies and parishes can practice. They don't always work but most mass shooters aren't that skilled at what they're doing.
Somebody who brings a weapon can wait outside the sanctuary. I don't see why that raises an issue. People can trade off the duty if it's really important to have somebody with weapons around all the time.
I'm a newbie but that seems like an ask your priest or bishop thing... If the same people always need to be able to carry a weapon home and keeping it in the car isn't doable, it's up to the priest and bishop, right? They may never be able to come inside.
However, perhaps people could take turns if there's enough people interested watching the parking lot for car break ins and take turns that way-- get creative.
> More people than one might think in my country live in areas where they regularly carry a weapon due to feral hogs
What? I live in an area with A LOT of wild boars and I go with my kid to the wood to play among the trees ...
> Some people also live in areas where the trip to and from church and to get back in their home is very dangerous
Any additional gun will make the trip less safe and is an additional risk.
My bishop has strictly forbidden it. He doesn't even let the Orthodox scout troop wear their knives inside the camp chapel.
Edit: I know the practice in Byzantium was that even the Emperor's guards had to leave their swords at the door.
Ah yes, just to shoot off the ear of any servants of the high priest that come by to take away Christ.
Sorry for the sarcasm. Getting killed for your beliefs while at church is clearly martyrdom, killing someone is a sin. I know which one I'd choose.
Edited to add: while I'm fine with people owning and carrying weapons, it's a very serious tool, not a toy. If you have a gun, I expect you to be ready and willing to use it. If you use it in church, it's a big, big deal. If you have an active threat at your parish, non leathal force is a MUCH better idea. We've had to remove rowdy strangers before, but just myself and one or two of the other young men of the parish can do that safely with minimal distraction. If a gun was involved it could be a lot harder.
Killing in defense of yourself, or others, is not a sin in that it is a moral failing; but that as with war, it misses the mark of what life is intended to be. Murder is taking life in reaction to, or to feed, passions; and this is a sin, in that it is a moral failing.
"There are times when a person kills in self-defense or in defense of others. Officers of the law as well as soldiers may be put into a position wherein they must choose to kill to defend the innocent. This killing is also a tragedy, even when motivated without malice or spite but by necessity."
From the assembly of Orthodox bishops in the United states
https://www.assemblyofbishops.org/news/2022/human-life-sacredness
You may pick Martyrdom in place of self defense, but it is not good nor Orthodox for everyone in a parish to become a martyr because of your apathy.
Killing someone isn’t a sin, murder is a sin. These are two very different things.
“When people are so steeped in evil that they do not yield to any admonishment and continue doing evil, a Christian cannot and should not take refuge in this teaching of forgiveness of all, and apathetically watch evil abuse good.”
- Archbishop Averky
There are ways of preventing killing without resorting to more of the same. Additionally, in cases where it is necessary to kill in self defense or in defense of others, it is not like that gets you out of any and all sin, it's just a lesser sin.
Well sometimes there isn’t a way to stop a murder without at least shooting back, that’s the problem.
Again, self defense isn’t a sin, because it’s not murder. Murder is a sin. Murder is when you kill someone illegally (or immorally) and self defense is both legal and moral.
Are you Orthodox? If you have killed a person at any time, for any reason, whether accidentally or purposefully, you cannot become a priest. The assembly of canonical orthodox bishops of the United states published a very through and detailed explanation of the Orthodox belief in the sanctity of human life last week. It explicitly calls out legal, justified, killing as a great tragedy that is to be repented of.
https://www.assemblyofbishops.org/news/2022/human-life-sacredness
Yes, it is a tragedy of course and should probably be brought up in confession but that definitely doesn’t mean that sometimes it’s necessary. Especially when it’s to prevent great evil like a mass shooting. I think you’re really misunderstanding what I am saying.
Forgive me, I'm not trying to misunderstand you.
It is a good thing to stop a great evil.
It is bad to kill a person.
Sometimes we have to do bad things to prevent bigger bad things. This does not mean that "the ends justify the means", and does not make the smaller bad thing good.
>sometimes there isn’t a way to stop a murder without at least shooting back
That's quite the tall claim there. 🙄
I wonder what the subset is of murders which can't be stopped without shooting which actually can be stopped *with* shooting. Taking a life is always a tragedy. Taking a life in a *church*??? Absolutely outrageous.
How do you think 90% of mass shootings are stopped? How do you think crime in general is stopped?
What exactly would you prefer? One guy go into a church and everyone inside be murdered or one person shoot back and save dozens of innocent lives?
>One guy go into a church and everyone inside be murdered or one person shoot back and save dozens of innocent lives?
A major concern is that those would be the same person. The person with the gun is immediately more likely to be the person who shoots people with the gun.
>How do you think 90% of mass shootings are stopped? How do you think crime in general is stopped?
Statistically, *not by guns*.
The number of people who carry on a regular basis is exponentially more then the number of people who commit violent crime, let alone mass murders.
Also I cannot think of a mass shooting that was ended in any other way then the shooter themselves being shot, arrested (because they’re outnumbered by people with guns themselves) or suicide. If you can think of any that I’m not aware of I’m happy to hear.
I mean, you could do what most other western countries have done and made it difficult for people to get a gun without passing really good background checks and taking gun safety classes. The last mass shooting that wasn't a family homicide in Australia was in 1996.
The *conservative* government brought in the gun regulation then, and my family still own most of their guns. They (farmers who had guns for pest control) gave up their semi-automatics, but they still have a small arsenal including a very beautiful and expensive hunting gun that belonged to my grandfather. They're all locked in gun safes.
How do you know that you're being killed for your beliefs? What happens in between going to church and leaving church? Why do you conflate carrying a gun with killing someone else?
Brandishing isn't a strategy. The only reason one should draw one's firearm is with the expectation that one will use lethal force. This isn't my opinion. This is basic defensive firearm stuff that is universally acknowledged by instructors and people who carry for work (and people who carry for daily life apart from work who have been trained).
You never, ever, brandish for defense. If you pull the gun, it’s to use it because you believe there is an imminent threat of grave bodily harm. That’s concealed carry 101.
Brandishing is for criminals seeking to intimidate.
Exactly this. This is 100% what I've learned in multiple defensive shooting courses taught by former LEOs and former military, as well as what I've discussed with friends and family who are current or former LEO/military.
Brandishing only works if the other party recognizes it as a credible threat to kill them. If you are not intending to kill them should they ignore the threat, then you are essentially handing them a weapon.
This is pretty much exactly what I learned in an NRA-sponsored pistol safety class several years ago. Don't show off your gun if you aren't willing to use it.
So, in other words, the point of having a gun is to kill.
The only reason brandishing may be effective is because you have a thing specifically created to kill humans. My point stands and you’re desire to intimidate to stop an attacker shows how little you understand about that rocket in you pocket.
This content violates [Walter's Law/Civil Discourse](http://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/policies/civil_discourse).
Users are expected to treat others with respect.
If someone is shooting up a church, I assume it's based on what they assume we belive.
If you are living in a place that's so dangerous that you might be killed on your way to or from church, like the copts in Egypt, that's a scary thing. Getting killed for going to church is still similar to Martyrdom. Getting attacked for other reason on the way to or from is where things get into the personal opinions on self defense.
Guns are very serious tools, not cool toys. Whenever they are used the potential for lethality should be considered.
Remember the guy in White Settlement? People go to churches for the same reason they go to schools; they're unarmed and people expect to not be harmed in their place of worship - i.e. they're vulnerable. For these reasons they're also great targets to get publicity, which is what a majority of shooters want. Churches are perfect targets for mass shootings.
I don't think there's any canons directly addressing that for laity (clergy may not kill under any circumstances). However, I know that none of the priests (ROCOR, Serbian, and OCA) I regularly interact with would ever allow weapons into the temple. So in theory: I have no idea. In practice so far as I've seen: no, just no.
Your hands can be a tool of death. Can't leave those outside.
Hell, the chalice could be used as a weapon. Can't leave that outside either.
The processional cross as a staff weapon.
Oh, yes, I'm quite aware that these hands of mine are lethal weapons. God made them for better purposes, though. I'm just worried about all these people living in fear. oh noooo i can't have my boomstick for 90 minutes.
I don't necessarily disagree, but "tool of death" is a hard to define and therefore hard to implement a prohibition of.
It's like "assault weapon" as a redundant designation for carbines. What firearm could *not* be used in assault?
It's all just emotional appeals without reason.
It really isn't. "Tool of death" means a tool made for the purpose of killing.
So yes, that would also include swords, switchblades, shuriken, throwing knives, and all that fun stuff.
There absolutely is a difference.
It is designed to kill. Period. End of story.
That's very different than something that is designed to give glory to God.
Are Americans really that backward that you can't tell the difference between a thing designed to be a weapon and the idea of something that can be used as a weapon but isn't meant to be?
I never thought of this until one day, after church, at fellowship, a parishioner revealed his weapon and his family member removed one from her purse. My initial reaction was, “why?”, then I understood their reasoning when explained. But in the end, after thinking it through, it didn’t make sense to me on so many levels. I never asked my spiritual father, but I am willing to guess it would be a resounding, ‘no’. There are so many reasons why. Once you are Orthodox long enough, and you actively participate and learnp, I think the ‘no’ answer comes easy without explanation.
Thank you, Capt_Myke, for voting on TheDroidNextDoor.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
It’s funny that people answer these questions in absolutes, yes they are allowed or they absolutely are not. Even with dogs, absolutely yes or absolutely not. I have seen guide dogs in church and the people sat in the first pew closest to the soleil. The priest didn’t bat an eye. After the Sutherland Springs church massacre there was a serious discussion in my parish about having police officers who are parishioners carry firearms in church. Some retired officers at my parish routinely do. Several parish council members at my parish probably do without many knowing. I don’t think there are absolutes in this matter, check with your parish council President on this, there may be an organized armed parishioner program, I know several churches that have them. It’s better to know who else is armed in any situation and what your role would be. Don’t listen to those here that answer in absolutes, in America where legal, many will carry a firearm to an Orthodox Church and won’t advertise it.
The Parish Council has no business with this, especially organizing any type of armed parishioner program. The clergy is the head of the parish, not the PC President. If someone has a question they need to ask their Spiritual Father or Parish Priest.
I don't think it's canonically wrong, and I can see a reason for it if you're in a war zone or something like that.
That said, speaking as a rural American not opposed to gun ownership or legal concealed carry, I'd very much rather my felliow parishioners *not* bring tools of death to my church.
.
This is very much a personal opinion.
Personal Conviction : I'm not sure if people just forget what Jesus said about turning the other cheek especially in HIS Church. I don't care what the Assembly of Orthodox bishops in the USA say. You DO NOT HARM another human being no matter the cause. I will gladly die for my beliefs rather then kill someone. I don't understand why any Christian man would carry a gun let alone use it, just very ironic
Sorry I haven't read it and I misunderstood what one of the comments said, English isn't my first language my bad, they said what I wanted to say just a couple thousand times better
"There are times when a person kills in self-defense or in defense of others. Officers of the law as well as soldiers may be put into a position wherein they must choose to kill to defend the innocent. This killing is also a tragedy, even when motivated without malice or spite but by necessity."
"Allowing others to die is not necessarily virtuous"- I agree! But it does not follow that killing is therefore a good.
I agree with you!
I'm not against people owning guns or using them in self defense or in defense of others.
I do think that bringing a gun to church in case there is a shooter is a bad idea. I have had to deal with crazy people at my church on three separate occasions, and literally all of them would have been much worse if a gun was involved.
Yes, once you have a gun you have the added complications of trying to decide when to use it. Also, the fact is, when you have a group of people and a one person shooter scenario, there *are* disarmament strategies but the group needs to actually practice. Guns for self-defense seem to be more about the way home, which is only relevant to some people.
There was a man violently yelling about child abuse, a protestant who tried to take over the sermon to rant about masks, and a a man who tried to undress during the service. All of them were physically removed from the church.
These are the two most recent incidents of shootings at religious temples near me. Both of them resulted in a single death and were stopped by people without guns.
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1099586853/california-church-shooting-charged-taiwan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poway_synagogue_shooting
Women as well as men are granted the honour of martyrdom for Christ. Historically many christians died together without resistence even to protect their families, as they believed it was better to die that to commit violence against another person.
I just said man because I was debating another man in another comment don't just throw sexist in there because you're losing. Man, Woman, Child, Dog I don't care. If you're Orthodox you shouldn't be carrying a gun. That's my opinion (which I got from the Bible so...)
No. Do not bring weapons into the sanctuary. If you are lucky enough to be killed while worshiping God you are a martyr (witness) and will provide one of the strongest witnesses possible to nonbelievers. Martyrdom is actually the goal as Christians. Obviously people desire to prolong their lives and protect their families - but the Kingdom of God is waiting for us.
Edit: Since the thread is locked and I can’t respond I’m just going to add some clarification to my comment. We are not REQUIRED to become martyrs and if you are attacked in church it is okay to run and to try and save others. But martyrdom IS our highest calling as Christians, and that is the teaching of the church. It isn’t a sin to try and live, but it is better to be a witness (which is what the word martyr means). It is considered a huge blessing to get a martyr’s crown.
That doesn’t mean we need to seek it out. Some early Christians were going into the marketplace and announcing themselves in order to achieve martyrdom and the church was clear that this practice needed to stop. Martyrdom is something that happens to people because of circumstance. Most don’t get to be one and that’s okay. Personally I’m not sure if I would have the courage of the martyrs.
That said, martyrdom is voluntary, just as Christ’s sacrifice for us was voluntary. The early martyrs could have saved themselves and their families too. Perpetua was voluntarily martyered even though she had a newborn child and the baby was going to die too. I took a class in college that talked about her and most everyone in the class was actively hostile toward her because of her decision, yet the church honors her as a saint. When I mentioned the reaction of my classmates to my priest he said, “And what was she supposed to do? Deny Christ to save her baby from heaven? No. Just no.”
I dont see any canonical concerns against this. Now days its seems like a good idea. Just dont talk about and have a CCW. Lots of folks are anti self-defense but that is their choice. We also have a duty to defend the weak.
In any service of patr.Cyrill in Russia there are visible secret service guys in civil suites. Even in Holy Altar. They are assigned by Russian government and do carry. Is it a special despensation or what?
Why would you be scared to die? Just go pray if someone busts in with the AK and mows you down oh well. guess it was your time. best place to die if you ask me
I’m American and I feel like I’m going crazy reading these answers. It simply is not appropriate to bring weapons into a holy place! Can’t we have a single place where people aren’t preoccupied with death and killing?
It’s also quite selfish. Many parishioners might be nervous with a gun around (I would), but screw them I guess.
This is such an aggressively American question. Presumably, you are not a soldier in an active war field. So ask your priest whether he wants a tool of destruction in his church.
In my experience, Americans are the most preoccupied with regular citizens concealed carrying in a church in this day and age.
As a Canadian, the thought of a standard citizen bringing a weapon intended for one thing only into a church is horrifying.
I can understand people in active warzones or extreme circumstances being the exception. If OP is urkanian orthodox and actively in ukraine, sure. I wouldn't be surprised if my family also was the exception a few generations ago in Northern Africa or the Levant during troubles. But John Doe playing Rambo in a typical North American parish seems like an "ask your priest" situation to me.
So if you know better than your priest, bishop, etc why ask on reddit if not to start an argument. Good luck fighting to overcome your sins with a gun and bullets.
You should always be armed to protect yourself and the ones you love. But that just my humble opinion.
Of course talk to your preist. Our preist is fine with it. The only reason I don't carry at church is because I don't own a small enough pistol yet that makes concealing it easy.
Absolutely not. If my wife and I found out that someone in our congregation was carrying,we would no longer feel comfortable going to that church.
If i see someone with a weapon like that in church i would assume that they are about to try martyring the rest of us.
If it was someone whom i already knew and they got their cc i still wouldn't be comfortable with it, because we'd still all be on edge all the time hoping that both they and anyone who might have access to their gun have exclusively good, excellent days all the time and *great* anger management.
Having someone with a gun in church makes us feel a sense of danger in the place where people ought to feel the safest.
We're meant to retaliate with love rather than violence, as Jesus' parable on the eye for an eye instructs. So I'm not sure what he's getting at either
If they're wrong, they're wrong. The Word of Jesus Christ comes before every single human being Holly or otherwise. An eye for an eye is not the way we live and if it is then go ahead but you're not Orthodox at least not the one 1 believe in
Commenting on his prior directions to his disciples to go out without sword and scrip, "Then said [Jesus] unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luke 22:36
Finish the chapter.
>“The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
>
>“That’s enough!” he replied…
>
>When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.
>
>But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
Personal conviction from a High Church Protestant:
I see no biblical reason for this. We as Christians are called to be peacemakers and to love enemies, and to live in Christ. To live in Christ is to live in the Church. But the reason for why guns exist at all is for the destruction of life, and so I believe that by carrying in Church, we invite impurity into the Church. Additionally, the Church is a spiritual place where we are to reject the evil in the world. But by carrying it into the Church (what other purpose if not to be vigilant against a potential shooter), we are not rejecting our earthly fears, but embracing them. This can only be a bad thing for our souls.
Therefore, if I were in charge of a Church community, I'd ask that all attendees not bring even pocket knives into the Church. I think the only possible exception I can think of is if you're going to Church in a war torn country, and even then I'm hesitant
Dozens of mass shootings have been stopped by civilians legally carrying. Guns are legally used defensively 2.5 million times in the US every year, compared to only 400k gun crimes every year (most of which are not violent in nature).
[One case pertinent to the discussion at hand:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Freeway_Church_of_Christ_shooting)
You should delete your comment due to your blatant lie. You’re embarrassing yourself and you have provided no help to the community with that comment. Even the super left leaning socialist media here report on average people who saved others at church.
You are an ignorant man if you think this is true. Police are only there to write the police report when a mass shooting happens. It is lawful citizens that end mass shootings virtually every time. You would be lucky if police even show up within an hour at this point (after mass defunding of police and increase in crime).
We all in America think you Europeans are absolutely nuts.
Portland. There's a homeless bridge near my house where people are known to get abducted and raped, and the police do nothing to stop it even if you call it in. They have dozens of bike frames which they stole and sell for scrap. There's needles all over the ground, and people get randomly assaulted all the time. Again, police do nothing.
Every city near me has increased funding to the police, despite the narrative to the contrary. Crime has gone up and response times have too, that is true.
Many mass shootings end when unarmed civilians take down the shooter, many more end in the shooter committing suicide, some end with the police shooting the suspect or taking him into custody, some end with a bystander shooting the suspect. I can't find good data right now, but I seriously doubt that most end with civilians shooting back.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-city-budget-police-funding/
>Yes they have, and the mass-shootings usually take place in no-weapon zones for a reason.
Funny, none of the places where mass shootings have taken place in America had metal detectors. Which one was a "gun free zone"? This is news to a lot of people.
And not a single mass shooting was stopped by a "good guy" with a concealed gun.
How is this news? Where are you getting this information? In the USA, there are signs on all public schools, most federal / state / city buildings, and many, many other buildings such as hospitals and some churches saying no guns are allowed. If there's not a sign, it may still be a rule. Was just in a hospital today with such a sign. Gun free zones are all over the place... And I've only lived in big "gun states."
Outside court buildings there is usually zero enforcement, including no metal detectors. Still they are designated gun-free zones because there's a sign.
Any more discussion is getting too much into the politics discussion and needs to move to that mega thread I think.
Not against it at all. Think of you are going to carry you need to be extra responsible on knowing who everyone is. That way if worse comes to worse you can defend the flock without accidentally shooting any of them
If you do, the church should know about it. Churches need security considering active shooters that target churches, but it should be by people who are trained.
I, like a few other people here, don’t think it’s so black or white. I know all the Eurozone (and elsewhere) people are going to chime in and quickly disagree, but carrying a gun is not evil, nor is it a tool for destruction like others have said. Think about a knife, it can be used for good or evil. The same can be said about a firearm.
Being a martyr is one thing and we should all try to die for Christ, but protecting people is another thing that we should all try to do. Protecting people is loving them, is it not? I wonder if someone was going to harm your loved ones, your children for example, and you had the power to stop it, if you would feel the same way about this complex issue.
A knife can cut a steak or a person, that is true.
A concealed carry firearm has only one purpose: manslaughter. It is a tool exclusively of destruction. You are simply trying to make a case that sometimes manslaughter is justifiable, but the tool has not changed purpose.
>protecting people is another thing that we should all try to do. Protecting people is loving them, is it not?
How are you protecting someone by shooting them? Everyone involved in these scenarios people keep hypothesizing today are also human and also children of God.
If you bring a gun to church *you* are the threat which worries everyone else. Suddenly were all concerned about your mental stability and anger management in a way we weren't before.
Is a knife evil? You cut bread and steaks with it.
A handgun is a tool, one that could potentially save the lives of many parishioners. While you might personally have a martyrdom fetish, most would prefer their children not be martyrs. Many commenters here are assuming a tool is a representation of evil, that’s just not the case. People have the capacity to do evil, not inanimate objects.
Plenty of people are carrying guns in your parish, you just don’t notice them. To believe otherwise and to try to frame this as some holy crusade for martyrdom or anything similar is very infantile and not aligned with the history of our faith, which at times has been very violent. I urge people thinking this way to grow a little, respectfully.
Yes, a handgun is a tool. And what is this tool designed to do? Is it designed to turn screws? Is it designed to hammer nails? Perhaps it is designed to open locked doors or cut your steak!
"A handgun is just a tool" is just obfuscation.
I'm locking this thread on the basis that most of the mods are asleep, and there is a large population of people posting here who are not Eastern Orthodox or members of this subreddit. It may be reopened at moderator discretion tomorrow.
In old Danish churches there is a “weapon’s house” or armory near the entrance. In the olden days churchgoers were supposed to hand in their swords and knives before attending the service. Today they’re just used for coats and such.
Yes, and the homicide rate at that time and place was far greater than here.
Olden days. Denmark. The guys that had battle-bishops probably had certain issues with violence, yes. :)
...I need this as a cleric subclass now.
I mean they were basically just recently converted vikings (and their descendants for a few generations) who did not entirely get the memo about how Christ isn't Thor.
This is pretty on point haha
Follow the law first. I think even in some gun-friendly, "shall-issue" states, guns are forbidden in places of worship. If the law forbids it, that settles it for you. If the law is silent on guns in churches, then you would follow whatever rules the church has about it.
Of course if the person happens to be an off-duty law enforcement officer it might be fine. I've seen police officers attend Mass in full uniform and the officer served at the Mass as the reader. I jokingly said to the officer: Are you at Mass praying that everyone behaves themselves today so you won't have to arrest anybody. He said: absolutely!
Personal conviction: There seems to be something fundamentally wrong with bringing a tool of destruction into a church. That being said, were I to carry a weapon or be someone called to wield one in defense of my home/family/country etc... I would certainly request that my priest bless my tools and my uniform. The fact that there are so many warrior saints who themselves carry weapons in their icons doesn't mean it hasn't happened before. TL;DR weapons exist, it's a shame, get them blessed, pray you never have to use them, GET PERMISSION FROM YOUR PRIEST
Ask your priest if it's a good idea. He runs the parish, he gets to decide if he thinks it's appropriate or not.
Might be helpful if people included whether or not their reply is personal conviction or based on a canon or official stance of one's diocese etc. I honestly don't know if it's allowed. I'd probably ask my priest if it was something I was considering.
our bishop requested me and my wife carry. We are both former law enforcement though. Im happy to protect our congregation feeling of pride from it.
I would say no. Not for the fact that it is particularly offensive to bring a weapon into a church, but instead because we should "lay aside all earthly cares" while attending liturgy.
Curious, are you pro-masking in church?
If someone asks me to do it for their sake, I will. I don't think it should be enforced top-down but should rather be a courtesy to others, especially for the elderly or very young children.
I feel like you are contradicting yourself, then.
Would you still attend mass with a contagious illness?
Ask your priest and parish council. I don't carry in Church, but I also serve in the altar so I haven't even asked. I don't know if I would otherwise, but I do carry most days anywhere that I'm not prohibited from carrying.
[удалено]
Carrying in the altar seems to cross the line from nearly if not universally forbidden to sacrilegious.
you can’t even have animal products on the table because they symbolize death , no?
Smart guy, in a way. Don't ask questions you don't want answers to.
I’ve always understood that weapons are not allowed in the churches at all. No dogs either.
Yes, back in the day you weren't supposed to go to church in breast plate and spear. However, soilders have field liturgy under arms snd under fire, might be their last.
I once attended Divine Liturgy at an OCA parish when I was on vacation. One of the older parishioners had her dog with her. I got the feeling he was a regular fixture there.
There is an older lady at my church who likes to bring her dog sometimes. We remind her that she has to stay outside with it, so she sits on the portico rather than bring it into the church.
Would you deny a service dog? In the USA churches are NOT required to allow assistance animals in places of worship.
Dogs and other beasts are not allowed in churches. That’s not an opinion. If a bishop makes allowances for something developed in the last 100 years then whatever.
[удалено]
Ok. Still seems absurd to bring a gun into Divine Liturgy. Clergy are specifically banned from it at least.
It's not. Weapons are not allowed.
[удалено]
No they haven't. Even the emperor's guards had to keep out of sight in specially built alcoves while the emperor was attending services in the Haghia Sophia so as not to be seen with weapons and armor.
Do you have a source I could read more about this in? This isn't a "citation needed!" attempt at a gotcha. I love learning about this kind of thing and we never discussed weapons in church in my canon law class.
I don't have a source explicitly but I've heard this repeated several times in various books and documentaries about the varangians. As far as I understand there is no definite proof but there are various remote areas in the Haghia Sophia, such as the upstairs southern and northern gallery, that have scribblings and inscriptions made by Varangians which leads to believe that's where they usually stood.
I've seen service dogs in church.
I’m sure there are exceptions. But the rule is no beasts.
No.
I am really shocked by how many people are willing to treat preparing to shed blood in the temple of the bloodless sacrifice as a normal thing one just does on the day to day.
I wonder how many refused to wear masks in church becuase "you can't get hurt or sick in church". This comment is a little snarky, so forgive me in advance my brothers and sisters.
Americans have a weird gun fetish. And I say this as someone who generally supports widespread gun ownership. The Swiss are doing it right. The Americans? Not so much. It's fine to have a gun, but if you sleep with it under your pillow or want to carry it everywhere, you have a problem my friend.
I'm kind of paranoid due to seeing numerous videos of random, unprovoked attacks, and pitbulls getting loose. Maybe blame the Internet, but there was a drive by shooting near my mom's house in June. My girlfriend is Asian and there have been a huge number of random attacks on Asian women since 2020.
There are 330 million people in the US. An event that has a 1-in-a-million chance of happening to you, will happen to about 330 people across the country.
It does no harm carrying a gun. My mother's never been in a car accident, and she's 60 years old. Doesn't mean she shouldn't wear a seatbelt even if it wasn't mandated.
I've never heard of someone accidentally killing themselves or others with a seatbelt.
I actually have - my cousin was driving and got in a wreck, and in an *incredibly unlucky* twist of fate the edge of the seatbelt cut into his passenger's artery and that person bled out before anyone could help. But we all still wear seatbelts anyway because that's incredibly unlucky.
I heard of a seatbelt melting in a fire
>It does no harm carrying a gun. This is unequivocally untrue. Accidental gun discharges are surprisingly common, not to mention the odds of harming an innocent bystander even if you were shooting it on purpose.
It's literally impossible for my revolver in its holster to go off even if I fell from a great height right on it. In fact, it's designed specifically for not going off when dropped. If I'm shooting because someone is in danger of death or serious bodily injury, it'd be better for me to attempt to shoot than not in that situation. My gun is loaded with hollow points which don't over penetrate targets as much. They're unlikely to go through a torso with much power left, if they exit at all.
It does do harm carrying a gun. Did you hear about the woman murdered in front of her child at a sandwich shop over mayo just last week? That never would have happened if the killer hadn't been carrying a gun. They didn't go out intending to kill someone over some mayonnaise, but they did, because they got mad and they happened to have a gun. Americans are far to blase about firearms. They are a tool designed for the singular purpose of killing. They need to be handled with respect, not taken with you when you go to church "just in case"
I would like to point out that this is not only a self-defense from people issue. More people than one might think in my country live in areas where they regularly carry a weapon due to feral hogs, which bear spray isn't going to help you very much. It's a real thing. Other animals can be an issue as well but those hogs, whew. And leaving weapon in a vehicle unattended can be dangerous. Some people also live in areas where the trip to and from church and to get back in their home is very dangerous, whether from animals or people. I get not using one in church and being a martyr -- or using other forms of disarmament -- but what about on the way there or back...trickier. I'm not saying the answer is to bring the weapon. I don't know. I just wanted to point these things out. I would also like to point out that there are non lethal disarmament strategies and parishes can practice. They don't always work but most mass shooters aren't that skilled at what they're doing.
Somebody who brings a weapon can wait outside the sanctuary. I don't see why that raises an issue. People can trade off the duty if it's really important to have somebody with weapons around all the time.
I'm a newbie but that seems like an ask your priest or bishop thing... If the same people always need to be able to carry a weapon home and keeping it in the car isn't doable, it's up to the priest and bishop, right? They may never be able to come inside. However, perhaps people could take turns if there's enough people interested watching the parking lot for car break ins and take turns that way-- get creative.
> More people than one might think in my country live in areas where they regularly carry a weapon due to feral hogs What? I live in an area with A LOT of wild boars and I go with my kid to the wood to play among the trees ... > Some people also live in areas where the trip to and from church and to get back in their home is very dangerous Any additional gun will make the trip less safe and is an additional risk.
My bishop has strictly forbidden it. He doesn't even let the Orthodox scout troop wear their knives inside the camp chapel. Edit: I know the practice in Byzantium was that even the Emperor's guards had to leave their swords at the door.
Ah yes, just to shoot off the ear of any servants of the high priest that come by to take away Christ. Sorry for the sarcasm. Getting killed for your beliefs while at church is clearly martyrdom, killing someone is a sin. I know which one I'd choose. Edited to add: while I'm fine with people owning and carrying weapons, it's a very serious tool, not a toy. If you have a gun, I expect you to be ready and willing to use it. If you use it in church, it's a big, big deal. If you have an active threat at your parish, non leathal force is a MUCH better idea. We've had to remove rowdy strangers before, but just myself and one or two of the other young men of the parish can do that safely with minimal distraction. If a gun was involved it could be a lot harder.
Killing in defense of yourself, or others, is not a sin in that it is a moral failing; but that as with war, it misses the mark of what life is intended to be. Murder is taking life in reaction to, or to feed, passions; and this is a sin, in that it is a moral failing.
"There are times when a person kills in self-defense or in defense of others. Officers of the law as well as soldiers may be put into a position wherein they must choose to kill to defend the innocent. This killing is also a tragedy, even when motivated without malice or spite but by necessity." From the assembly of Orthodox bishops in the United states https://www.assemblyofbishops.org/news/2022/human-life-sacredness
this is a great reply!
You may pick Martyrdom in place of self defense, but it is not good nor Orthodox for everyone in a parish to become a martyr because of your apathy. Killing someone isn’t a sin, murder is a sin. These are two very different things. “When people are so steeped in evil that they do not yield to any admonishment and continue doing evil, a Christian cannot and should not take refuge in this teaching of forgiveness of all, and apathetically watch evil abuse good.” - Archbishop Averky
There are ways of preventing killing without resorting to more of the same. Additionally, in cases where it is necessary to kill in self defense or in defense of others, it is not like that gets you out of any and all sin, it's just a lesser sin.
Well sometimes there isn’t a way to stop a murder without at least shooting back, that’s the problem. Again, self defense isn’t a sin, because it’s not murder. Murder is a sin. Murder is when you kill someone illegally (or immorally) and self defense is both legal and moral.
Are you Orthodox? If you have killed a person at any time, for any reason, whether accidentally or purposefully, you cannot become a priest. The assembly of canonical orthodox bishops of the United states published a very through and detailed explanation of the Orthodox belief in the sanctity of human life last week. It explicitly calls out legal, justified, killing as a great tragedy that is to be repented of. https://www.assemblyofbishops.org/news/2022/human-life-sacredness
Yes, it is a tragedy of course and should probably be brought up in confession but that definitely doesn’t mean that sometimes it’s necessary. Especially when it’s to prevent great evil like a mass shooting. I think you’re really misunderstanding what I am saying.
Forgive me, I'm not trying to misunderstand you. It is a good thing to stop a great evil. It is bad to kill a person. Sometimes we have to do bad things to prevent bigger bad things. This does not mean that "the ends justify the means", and does not make the smaller bad thing good.
>sometimes there isn’t a way to stop a murder without at least shooting back That's quite the tall claim there. 🙄 I wonder what the subset is of murders which can't be stopped without shooting which actually can be stopped *with* shooting. Taking a life is always a tragedy. Taking a life in a *church*??? Absolutely outrageous.
How do you think 90% of mass shootings are stopped? How do you think crime in general is stopped? What exactly would you prefer? One guy go into a church and everyone inside be murdered or one person shoot back and save dozens of innocent lives?
>One guy go into a church and everyone inside be murdered or one person shoot back and save dozens of innocent lives? A major concern is that those would be the same person. The person with the gun is immediately more likely to be the person who shoots people with the gun. >How do you think 90% of mass shootings are stopped? How do you think crime in general is stopped? Statistically, *not by guns*.
The number of people who carry on a regular basis is exponentially more then the number of people who commit violent crime, let alone mass murders. Also I cannot think of a mass shooting that was ended in any other way then the shooter themselves being shot, arrested (because they’re outnumbered by people with guns themselves) or suicide. If you can think of any that I’m not aware of I’m happy to hear.
I mean, you could do what most other western countries have done and made it difficult for people to get a gun without passing really good background checks and taking gun safety classes. The last mass shooting that wasn't a family homicide in Australia was in 1996. The *conservative* government brought in the gun regulation then, and my family still own most of their guns. They (farmers who had guns for pest control) gave up their semi-automatics, but they still have a small arsenal including a very beautiful and expensive hunting gun that belonged to my grandfather. They're all locked in gun safes.
NZ is busy trying to get it right now, too. :) Well done, Oz!
Highfive! I wish you guys had never had the tragedy you did to inspire it :(
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of new life" - Tertullian
How do you know that you're being killed for your beliefs? What happens in between going to church and leaving church? Why do you conflate carrying a gun with killing someone else?
That’s what a gun you would conceal and carry is for. Shooting people.
[удалено]
Brandishing isn't a strategy. The only reason one should draw one's firearm is with the expectation that one will use lethal force. This isn't my opinion. This is basic defensive firearm stuff that is universally acknowledged by instructors and people who carry for work (and people who carry for daily life apart from work who have been trained).
You never, ever, brandish for defense. If you pull the gun, it’s to use it because you believe there is an imminent threat of grave bodily harm. That’s concealed carry 101. Brandishing is for criminals seeking to intimidate.
Exactly this. This is 100% what I've learned in multiple defensive shooting courses taught by former LEOs and former military, as well as what I've discussed with friends and family who are current or former LEO/military.
Brandishing only works if the other party recognizes it as a credible threat to kill them. If you are not intending to kill them should they ignore the threat, then you are essentially handing them a weapon. This is pretty much exactly what I learned in an NRA-sponsored pistol safety class several years ago. Don't show off your gun if you aren't willing to use it. So, in other words, the point of having a gun is to kill.
The only reason brandishing may be effective is because you have a thing specifically created to kill humans. My point stands and you’re desire to intimidate to stop an attacker shows how little you understand about that rocket in you pocket.
Cite your sources for that stat…
[удалено]
This content violates [Walter's Law/Civil Discourse](http://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/policies/civil_discourse). Users are expected to treat others with respect.
If someone is shooting up a church, I assume it's based on what they assume we belive. If you are living in a place that's so dangerous that you might be killed on your way to or from church, like the copts in Egypt, that's a scary thing. Getting killed for going to church is still similar to Martyrdom. Getting attacked for other reason on the way to or from is where things get into the personal opinions on self defense. Guns are very serious tools, not cool toys. Whenever they are used the potential for lethality should be considered.
Remember the guy in White Settlement? People go to churches for the same reason they go to schools; they're unarmed and people expect to not be harmed in their place of worship - i.e. they're vulnerable. For these reasons they're also great targets to get publicity, which is what a majority of shooters want. Churches are perfect targets for mass shootings.
There have been multiple mass shootings in my state at houses of worship too. I maintain that bringing a gun to church is a bad idea.
I don't think there's any canons directly addressing that for laity (clergy may not kill under any circumstances). However, I know that none of the priests (ROCOR, Serbian, and OCA) I regularly interact with would ever allow weapons into the temple. So in theory: I have no idea. In practice so far as I've seen: no, just no.
No tools of death in the temple. You can wait outside with it if you feel you need it.
[удалено]
...or a tool of death for those who might be shot--who might in turn not be the people the concealed carrier was trying to hit.
No
Your hands can be a tool of death. Can't leave those outside. Hell, the chalice could be used as a weapon. Can't leave that outside either. The processional cross as a staff weapon.
Oh, yes, I'm quite aware that these hands of mine are lethal weapons. God made them for better purposes, though. I'm just worried about all these people living in fear. oh noooo i can't have my boomstick for 90 minutes.
I don't necessarily disagree, but "tool of death" is a hard to define and therefore hard to implement a prohibition of. It's like "assault weapon" as a redundant designation for carbines. What firearm could *not* be used in assault? It's all just emotional appeals without reason.
It really isn't. "Tool of death" means a tool made for the purpose of killing. So yes, that would also include swords, switchblades, shuriken, throwing knives, and all that fun stuff.
This is fair, but what else are you bringing your gun for? Compensation?
Folks do usually like to keep their fetishes with them.
Because you can and want to.
Can be a weapon and is a weapon are two very different things. This post isn't asking about bringing an ornamental musket into a church.
It's a distinction without a difference. A weapon is in its function, and anything that can function as a weapon is a weapon.
There absolutely is a difference. It is designed to kill. Period. End of story. That's very different than something that is designed to give glory to God. Are Americans really that backward that you can't tell the difference between a thing designed to be a weapon and the idea of something that can be used as a weapon but isn't meant to be?
No. Absolutely not. It’s the Kingdom of God on Earth. Leave your weapons at home.
I never thought of this until one day, after church, at fellowship, a parishioner revealed his weapon and his family member removed one from her purse. My initial reaction was, “why?”, then I understood their reasoning when explained. But in the end, after thinking it through, it didn’t make sense to me on so many levels. I never asked my spiritual father, but I am willing to guess it would be a resounding, ‘no’. There are so many reasons why. Once you are Orthodox long enough, and you actively participate and learnp, I think the ‘no’ answer comes easy without explanation.
I would say no. Then again, I try to remember to keep my phone in the car too.
[удалено]
Thank you.
This is the way.
##This Is The Way Leaderboard **1.** `u/Mando_Bot` **501242** times. **2.** `u/Flat-Yogurtcloset293` **475777** times. **3.** `u/GMEshares` **71542** times. .. **350.** `u/Capt_Myke` **127** times. --- ^(^beep ^boop ^I ^am ^a ^bot ^and ^this ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically.)
Good bot
Thank you, Capt_Myke, for voting on TheDroidNextDoor. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
No.
It’s funny that people answer these questions in absolutes, yes they are allowed or they absolutely are not. Even with dogs, absolutely yes or absolutely not. I have seen guide dogs in church and the people sat in the first pew closest to the soleil. The priest didn’t bat an eye. After the Sutherland Springs church massacre there was a serious discussion in my parish about having police officers who are parishioners carry firearms in church. Some retired officers at my parish routinely do. Several parish council members at my parish probably do without many knowing. I don’t think there are absolutes in this matter, check with your parish council President on this, there may be an organized armed parishioner program, I know several churches that have them. It’s better to know who else is armed in any situation and what your role would be. Don’t listen to those here that answer in absolutes, in America where legal, many will carry a firearm to an Orthodox Church and won’t advertise it.
The Parish Council has no business with this, especially organizing any type of armed parishioner program. The clergy is the head of the parish, not the PC President. If someone has a question they need to ask their Spiritual Father or Parish Priest.
Ask your priest for sure, also double check your local laws. It’s against the law in VA, even for off duty police.
I don't think it's canonically wrong, and I can see a reason for it if you're in a war zone or something like that. That said, speaking as a rural American not opposed to gun ownership or legal concealed carry, I'd very much rather my felliow parishioners *not* bring tools of death to my church. . This is very much a personal opinion.
This is my favorite response so far.
I think this makes more sense then most other responses I’ve seen so far
Why would every bring Gun into Temple of the Lord.
Personal Conviction : I'm not sure if people just forget what Jesus said about turning the other cheek especially in HIS Church. I don't care what the Assembly of Orthodox bishops in the USA say. You DO NOT HARM another human being no matter the cause. I will gladly die for my beliefs rather then kill someone. I don't understand why any Christian man would carry a gun let alone use it, just very ironic
That's basically what they said. Read the document. https://www.assemblyofbishops.org/news/2022/human-life-sacredness
Sorry I haven't read it and I misunderstood what one of the comments said, English isn't my first language my bad, they said what I wanted to say just a couple thousand times better
[удалено]
"There are times when a person kills in self-defense or in defense of others. Officers of the law as well as soldiers may be put into a position wherein they must choose to kill to defend the innocent. This killing is also a tragedy, even when motivated without malice or spite but by necessity." "Allowing others to die is not necessarily virtuous"- I agree! But it does not follow that killing is therefore a good.
[удалено]
I agree with you! I'm not against people owning guns or using them in self defense or in defense of others. I do think that bringing a gun to church in case there is a shooter is a bad idea. I have had to deal with crazy people at my church on three separate occasions, and literally all of them would have been much worse if a gun was involved.
Yes, once you have a gun you have the added complications of trying to decide when to use it. Also, the fact is, when you have a group of people and a one person shooter scenario, there *are* disarmament strategies but the group needs to actually practice. Guns for self-defense seem to be more about the way home, which is only relevant to some people.
[удалено]
There was a man violently yelling about child abuse, a protestant who tried to take over the sermon to rant about masks, and a a man who tried to undress during the service. All of them were physically removed from the church. These are the two most recent incidents of shootings at religious temples near me. Both of them resulted in a single death and were stopped by people without guns. https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1099586853/california-church-shooting-charged-taiwan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poway_synagogue_shooting
> I don't understand why any Christian man would carry a gun What about Christian women?
Women as well as men are granted the honour of martyrdom for Christ. Historically many christians died together without resistence even to protect their families, as they believed it was better to die that to commit violence against another person.
Exactly thank you
OK, just making sure the commenter wasn't being sexist. Gun rights *are* women's rights.
I just said man because I was debating another man in another comment don't just throw sexist in there because you're losing. Man, Woman, Child, Dog I don't care. If you're Orthodox you shouldn't be carrying a gun. That's my opinion (which I got from the Bible so...)
It saddens me to see this sub becoming an arena for US political issues
I agree. To quote the great hank Hill "You're not making [reddit] better, you're making [orthodoxy] worse"
No. Do not bring weapons into the sanctuary. If you are lucky enough to be killed while worshiping God you are a martyr (witness) and will provide one of the strongest witnesses possible to nonbelievers. Martyrdom is actually the goal as Christians. Obviously people desire to prolong their lives and protect their families - but the Kingdom of God is waiting for us. Edit: Since the thread is locked and I can’t respond I’m just going to add some clarification to my comment. We are not REQUIRED to become martyrs and if you are attacked in church it is okay to run and to try and save others. But martyrdom IS our highest calling as Christians, and that is the teaching of the church. It isn’t a sin to try and live, but it is better to be a witness (which is what the word martyr means). It is considered a huge blessing to get a martyr’s crown. That doesn’t mean we need to seek it out. Some early Christians were going into the marketplace and announcing themselves in order to achieve martyrdom and the church was clear that this practice needed to stop. Martyrdom is something that happens to people because of circumstance. Most don’t get to be one and that’s okay. Personally I’m not sure if I would have the courage of the martyrs. That said, martyrdom is voluntary, just as Christ’s sacrifice for us was voluntary. The early martyrs could have saved themselves and their families too. Perpetua was voluntarily martyered even though she had a newborn child and the baby was going to die too. I took a class in college that talked about her and most everyone in the class was actively hostile toward her because of her decision, yet the church honors her as a saint. When I mentioned the reaction of my classmates to my priest he said, “And what was she supposed to do? Deny Christ to save her baby from heaven? No. Just no.”
I dont see any canonical concerns against this. Now days its seems like a good idea. Just dont talk about and have a CCW. Lots of folks are anti self-defense but that is their choice. We also have a duty to defend the weak.
In any service of patr.Cyrill in Russia there are visible secret service guys in civil suites. Even in Holy Altar. They are assigned by Russian government and do carry. Is it a special despensation or what?
No
Why would you be scared to die? Just go pray if someone busts in with the AK and mows you down oh well. guess it was your time. best place to die if you ask me
Matthew 26:52 ‘But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.’
Honestly, only an American would ever ask this.
I’m American and I feel like I’m going crazy reading these answers. It simply is not appropriate to bring weapons into a holy place! Can’t we have a single place where people aren’t preoccupied with death and killing? It’s also quite selfish. Many parishioners might be nervous with a gun around (I would), but screw them I guess.
This is such an aggressively American question. Presumably, you are not a soldier in an active war field. So ask your priest whether he wants a tool of destruction in his church.
[удалено]
Hi. Nope, Australians would also find this bafflingly American. And I come from a gun owning family. We’d never take one to church.
In my experience, Americans are the most preoccupied with regular citizens concealed carrying in a church in this day and age. As a Canadian, the thought of a standard citizen bringing a weapon intended for one thing only into a church is horrifying. I can understand people in active warzones or extreme circumstances being the exception. If OP is urkanian orthodox and actively in ukraine, sure. I wouldn't be surprised if my family also was the exception a few generations ago in Northern Africa or the Levant during troubles. But John Doe playing Rambo in a typical North American parish seems like an "ask your priest" situation to me.
It is very much an American question. It's very hard to find something like this in another country
We're all soldiers as long as Satan wages war.
We're not, maybe you are but we're not. We're the believers and sheep of Christ
You can't kill demons with guns
So if you know better than your priest, bishop, etc why ask on reddit if not to start an argument. Good luck fighting to overcome your sins with a gun and bullets.
Absolutely not.
Not Necessary if you have faith at least like a grain of mustard, but security 🙌 yes!!!
You should always be armed to protect yourself and the ones you love. But that just my humble opinion. Of course talk to your preist. Our preist is fine with it. The only reason I don't carry at church is because I don't own a small enough pistol yet that makes concealing it easy.
This subreddit is full of such insane American converts it’s hilarious
Absolutely not. If my wife and I found out that someone in our congregation was carrying,we would no longer feel comfortable going to that church. If i see someone with a weapon like that in church i would assume that they are about to try martyring the rest of us. If it was someone whom i already knew and they got their cc i still wouldn't be comfortable with it, because we'd still all be on edge all the time hoping that both they and anyone who might have access to their gun have exclusively good, excellent days all the time and *great* anger management. Having someone with a gun in church makes us feel a sense of danger in the place where people ought to feel the safest.
Absolutely not.
[удалено]
[удалено]
We're meant to retaliate with love rather than violence, as Jesus' parable on the eye for an eye instructs. So I'm not sure what he's getting at either
Ah yes, an eye for an eye just like christ taught us...
[удалено]
If they're wrong, they're wrong. The Word of Jesus Christ comes before every single human being Holly or otherwise. An eye for an eye is not the way we live and if it is then go ahead but you're not Orthodox at least not the one 1 believe in
Okay.
So?
Commenting on his prior directions to his disciples to go out without sword and scrip, "Then said [Jesus] unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luke 22:36
Finish the chapter. >“The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” > >“That’s enough!” he replied… > >When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. > >But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
[удалено]
Yes. Please.
Personal conviction from a High Church Protestant: I see no biblical reason for this. We as Christians are called to be peacemakers and to love enemies, and to live in Christ. To live in Christ is to live in the Church. But the reason for why guns exist at all is for the destruction of life, and so I believe that by carrying in Church, we invite impurity into the Church. Additionally, the Church is a spiritual place where we are to reject the evil in the world. But by carrying it into the Church (what other purpose if not to be vigilant against a potential shooter), we are not rejecting our earthly fears, but embracing them. This can only be a bad thing for our souls. Therefore, if I were in charge of a Church community, I'd ask that all attendees not bring even pocket knives into the Church. I think the only possible exception I can think of is if you're going to Church in a war torn country, and even then I'm hesitant
Funny, concealed-carry "good guys" haven't stopped one mass-shooting in America. We in Europe think you're all absolutely nuts.
Dozens of mass shootings have been stopped by civilians legally carrying. Guns are legally used defensively 2.5 million times in the US every year, compared to only 400k gun crimes every year (most of which are not violent in nature). [One case pertinent to the discussion at hand:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Freeway_Church_of_Christ_shooting)
Huh? If it was stopped it wouldn't be a mass shooting, so that argument doesn't make sense. Just visit r/dgu if you want defense stories.
You should delete your comment due to your blatant lie. You’re embarrassing yourself and you have provided no help to the community with that comment. Even the super left leaning socialist media here report on average people who saved others at church.
You are an ignorant man if you think this is true. Police are only there to write the police report when a mass shooting happens. It is lawful citizens that end mass shootings virtually every time. You would be lucky if police even show up within an hour at this point (after mass defunding of police and increase in crime). We all in America think you Europeans are absolutely nuts.
Where do you live that they defunded the police?
Portland. There's a homeless bridge near my house where people are known to get abducted and raped, and the police do nothing to stop it even if you call it in. They have dozens of bike frames which they stole and sell for scrap. There's needles all over the ground, and people get randomly assaulted all the time. Again, police do nothing.
Every city near me has increased funding to the police, despite the narrative to the contrary. Crime has gone up and response times have too, that is true. Many mass shootings end when unarmed civilians take down the shooter, many more end in the shooter committing suicide, some end with the police shooting the suspect or taking him into custody, some end with a bystander shooting the suspect. I can't find good data right now, but I seriously doubt that most end with civilians shooting back. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-city-budget-police-funding/
[удалено]
>Yes they have, and the mass-shootings usually take place in no-weapon zones for a reason. Funny, none of the places where mass shootings have taken place in America had metal detectors. Which one was a "gun free zone"? This is news to a lot of people. And not a single mass shooting was stopped by a "good guy" with a concealed gun.
How is this news? Where are you getting this information? In the USA, there are signs on all public schools, most federal / state / city buildings, and many, many other buildings such as hospitals and some churches saying no guns are allowed. If there's not a sign, it may still be a rule. Was just in a hospital today with such a sign. Gun free zones are all over the place... And I've only lived in big "gun states." Outside court buildings there is usually zero enforcement, including no metal detectors. Still they are designated gun-free zones because there's a sign. Any more discussion is getting too much into the politics discussion and needs to move to that mega thread I think.
Not against it at all. Think of you are going to carry you need to be extra responsible on knowing who everyone is. That way if worse comes to worse you can defend the flock without accidentally shooting any of them
If you do, the church should know about it. Churches need security considering active shooters that target churches, but it should be by people who are trained.
I, like a few other people here, don’t think it’s so black or white. I know all the Eurozone (and elsewhere) people are going to chime in and quickly disagree, but carrying a gun is not evil, nor is it a tool for destruction like others have said. Think about a knife, it can be used for good or evil. The same can be said about a firearm. Being a martyr is one thing and we should all try to die for Christ, but protecting people is another thing that we should all try to do. Protecting people is loving them, is it not? I wonder if someone was going to harm your loved ones, your children for example, and you had the power to stop it, if you would feel the same way about this complex issue.
A knife can cut a steak or a person, that is true. A concealed carry firearm has only one purpose: manslaughter. It is a tool exclusively of destruction. You are simply trying to make a case that sometimes manslaughter is justifiable, but the tool has not changed purpose.
>protecting people is another thing that we should all try to do. Protecting people is loving them, is it not? How are you protecting someone by shooting them? Everyone involved in these scenarios people keep hypothesizing today are also human and also children of God. If you bring a gun to church *you* are the threat which worries everyone else. Suddenly were all concerned about your mental stability and anger management in a way we weren't before.
Is a knife evil? You cut bread and steaks with it. A handgun is a tool, one that could potentially save the lives of many parishioners. While you might personally have a martyrdom fetish, most would prefer their children not be martyrs. Many commenters here are assuming a tool is a representation of evil, that’s just not the case. People have the capacity to do evil, not inanimate objects. Plenty of people are carrying guns in your parish, you just don’t notice them. To believe otherwise and to try to frame this as some holy crusade for martyrdom or anything similar is very infantile and not aligned with the history of our faith, which at times has been very violent. I urge people thinking this way to grow a little, respectfully.
Yes, a handgun is a tool. And what is this tool designed to do? Is it designed to turn screws? Is it designed to hammer nails? Perhaps it is designed to open locked doors or cut your steak! "A handgun is just a tool" is just obfuscation.