| Author |
 Topic  |
|
MarkEofE
Starting Member
USA
21 Posts |
 Posted - 09/01/2006 : 16:30:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Reader
Dear LOM,
You said earlier, "Priests (and those intending to be priests) are canonically forbidden to be hunters and fishermen." Please site for me the source of this canon. Thank you.
Steve
Warrior Prince St. Alexander Nevsky comes to mind here. |
Edited by - MarkEofE on 09/01/2006 19:29:08 |
 |
|
|
punch
Starting Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 04:42:35
|
| Luke 22:36 answers this pretty clearly. These are the words of Jesus. Not only does he say to take a sword, but if you do not have one to sell your garment to buy one. I don't see how it can get any clearer than this. I guess if you guys want to argue with Jesus, have at it. For my part, I have no problem owning either my Smith an Wessons, or my nice built in an Orthodox country Makarov. I do, however, pray to God every night that I do not ever need to use them in anger. Thankfully, my prayers have been answered to this point. So, while I may carry a weapon to defend myself or the innocent when needed, I am not going around "planning" to kill anyone. I have used a firearm to defend myself on three occasions and have not had the need to fire the weapon on any of the occasions. Just having the weapon caused the person to reconsider. So, while Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson may not have been apostles, they did on a couple of occasions prevent certain individuals from increasing their sins with me. |
|
|
|
Lover of Monasticism
Average Member
USA
919 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 13:20:10
|
Not to throw a wrench into everyone's wheel here, but the Lord also said that whoever lives by the sword will die by the sword. In this case, replace "sword" with "gun". Again, I'm not disagreeing with all that's been said, just quoting Scripture.
Kyrie Iesou Christe eleison me. |
Edited by - Lover of Monasticism on 09/10/2006 13:20:37 |
|
|
|
punch
Starting Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 22:03:55
|
| Having a weapon for self protection is not "living by the sword". I have always understood this passage to mean people who make their living using violence (criminals, mercenaries, perhaps even professional soldiers). I believe that we can agree that the people who engage in "violent" professions have a very high incidence of meeting a violent end. This is not particularly true of those who engage in more "peacefull" professions, but simply arm themselves for the defense of themselves and family. |
|
|
|
punch
Starting Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 22:12:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism
And I have never once considered picking up a gun or any other type of weapon because I feel carrying such a thing would be extremely unethical for me as an Orthodox Christian.
Though there is one huge blessing: I live practically next door to an Orthodox church.
Kyrie Iesou Christe eleison me.
You hit the nail on the head here. YOU feel that it is unethical for you as a Christian to carry a weapon. You must do what your concience dictates. It is possible that you have greater faith than some of us. For my part, my concience is perfectly clear when I carry a weapon. I am a person of little faith I am afraid. I do not always know what the will of God is, but I DO know what a 230 grain hollowpoint will do at 1000 feet per second. Again, I pray that I never have to use my weapon, I will be a very happy man if I can go my entire life without ever having to harm a person. I trust God as well as I am able. However, I do not trust the fallen creation. |
|
|
|
Dantheman
New Member
USA
57 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 22:29:17
|
I am in agreement with Punch. I don't believe that carrying a firearm or other weapon for protection is "living by the sword".
I envision that "living by the sword" is a warrior or a bandit. A person or people that use a sword to reap their rewards in life be it food, property or territory.
I also agree with Punch on the .45 caliber... |
|
|
|
macacic
Moderator
USA
1968 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 07:05:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism
...I'm not disagreeing with all that's been said, just quoting Scripture.
Actually, you're rewriting Scripture and misrepresenting its meaning at the same time.
When Peter drew his sword in the garden, you'll notice that Christ did NOT chastise him for having one but only for using it at the wrong time. |
|
|
|
Dcnwilltex
Starting Member
25 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 07:51:27
|
The Orthodox Church has never been a true passivist movement by any means. Both the Scriptures and the Early Church records verify that troops and commmon soldiers from the Roman Garrisons were part of the first congregations.
Christ's admonishment towards Peter is not about wielding the sword, but rather, now is not the time to use the sword.
The issue of pennance for a Soldier was never a real issue in any Orthodox State. Very few Priests would ever impose a restriction since the Soldier was performing his duty as directed by the King who was appointed by the will of GOD. If there was a pennance to be served, it was forced by the request of the Soldier returning, a voluntary act of contrition that allowed the returning Soldier a transitionary period and closure in a phase of his life.
One of the Pre-Revolution Russian Bishops wrote a treatise on the subject, Anthony of ???(Sorry, my memory is 2 days and a time zone away).
Concerning the issue of carrying a concealed weapon, it's like my Martial Arts Teacher advised his students- if you advertise, somebody may want to check out the product. If you use it, there will always be legal and moral ramifications as a result. But would you rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6?
B. |
|
|
|
MarkEofE
Starting Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 18:40:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by macacic
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism
...I'm not disagreeing with all that's been said, just quoting Scripture.
Actually, you're rewriting Scripture and misrepresenting its meaning at the same time.
When Peter drew his sword in the garden, you'll notice that Christ did NOT chastise him for having one but only for using it at the wrong time.
Peter didnt draw his sword he drew a sword from one of the guards. Peter never wore a sword. Here is an example of the one who is not living by the sword getting a lecture as if he had.
|
Edited by - MarkEofE on 09/11/2006 18:41:29 |
|
|
|
punch
Starting Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 20:14:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by MarkEofE
quote:
Originally posted by macacic
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism
...I'm not disagreeing with all that's been said, just quoting Scripture.
Actually, you're rewriting Scripture and misrepresenting its meaning at the same time.
When Peter drew his sword in the garden, you'll notice that Christ did NOT chastise him for having one but only for using it at the wrong time.
Peter didnt draw his sword he drew a sword from one of the guards. Peter never wore a sword. Here is an example of the one who is not living by the sword getting a lecture as if he had.
What bible are you using? This is what mine says:
Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. So Jesus said to Peter, "Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?"
I checked this with the Greek, and the second verse certainly shows that the sword was Peter's. No place does this scripture indicate that Peter used someone else's sword. If I am wrong, enlighten me. |
|
|
|
Lover of Monasticism
Average Member
USA
919 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 20:51:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by macacic
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism
...I'm not disagreeing with all that's been said, just quoting Scripture.
Actually, you're rewriting Scripture and misrepresenting its meaning at the same time.
When Peter drew his sword in the garden, you'll notice that Christ did NOT chastise him for having one but only for using it at the wrong time.
Must you get hostile? I forgot what context it was used in! Geeze!
Kyrie Iesou Christe eleison me. |
|
|
|
punch
Starting Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2006 : 22:54:58
|
quote:
Must you get hostile? I forgot what context it was used in! Geeze!
Kyrie Iesou Christe eleison me.
Ok, that it! Where's my pistol  |
Edited by - macacic on 09/12/2006 07:58:53 |
|
|
|
Lover of Monasticism
Average Member
USA
919 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2006 : 00:06:24
|
Hehe. That's funny, but maybe a little too racey for these forums.
Kyrie Iesou Christe eleison me. |
Edited by - Lover of Monasticism on 09/12/2006 10:41:33 |
|
|
|
ZeroTX
Starting Member
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2006 : 09:17:14
|
I don't believe that being faithful to Christ means being a sitting duck for criminals to victimize you, your family, your friends or any innocent bystanders you happen to be near. While my job, in a school, prohibits me from carrying my firearm to work, I do always carry it when traveling and any time I know that I won't be back to work (school) for a while (e.g. summers, vacations, weekends).
If everyone carried a weapon, crime would go down substantially. After all, if the guy you're mugging doesn't shoot you, perhaps any of the 10 people walking by just might! It makes for civilized people and those who aren't civilized are quickly eliminated from society via self-defense.
People often fear things like "it will be like the old west!" ... to which I response... so what? In the old west, criminals were hunted down and eliminated or shot by would-be victims. The only criminals you ever hear about are the notorious ones who were able to escape this punishment for a number of years, and virtually all of them were killed in self-defense by law enforcement or civilians long before thier natural death, e.g. no money wasted on prisons.
-Michael
|
Edited by - ZeroTX on 09/14/2006 09:18:21 |
|
|
|
macacic
Moderator
USA
1968 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2006 : 11:17:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by ZeroTX
People often fear things like "it will be like the old west!"
I am so amused that they still use that same cliche! I first heard that back when Florida was going with Concealed Carry and it never happened as a result of licensed, law-abiding citizens. Yet everytime a state moves to reform their carry laws, you'll hear that same stupid line repeated again and again. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Carrying of guns/weapons?
