Should a catholic support GUN RIGHTS?


you are texting in circles.

ST JP II states the common good of the family; so yeah everybody. it is his cite of 2265 not mine.

Moreover, “legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life, the common good of the family or of the State”. [The quotation is from # 2265 in the first edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.]


OK, then why can’t we say that the police bear arms in the name of the people even if people do not have exactly the same rights they are authorizing?


No,I mean your Fathers had the civilty required to sit down and talk about how to give shape to what they understood was the will of their people in the best possible light.


We have two quotes, One of them defines the right to bear arms (by those in authority ) and the other defines the right to self defense (by anyone). It is a mistake to conflate the two to say that everyone has the right to bear arms.


the pope sites 2265 and states it is for the good of the family

you can’t change what he wrote


Nemo dat quod non habet.


I just gave several examples where people do give what they do not have as individuals. Just repeating that phrase in Latin does not make it applicable to this question.


I’m not trying to change it. I’m only pointing out that JPII did not conflate the two statements and neither should we,


Yes, we do have that authority as individuals. In a society, we collectively delegate that authority to the government. We do it by choice, and by mutual agreement (the social compact).

They cannot give it to the government unless they have it first. That’s why I keep repeating it.

Nemo dat quod non habet. No one gives what he does not have.


You are speaking in progressive code words. Code words which indicate that you clearly place great trust in an all-powerful government - one that will enforce what YOU personally want it to enforce. But when that government is finished with me, you are the only target left.

I do not trust anyone who desires ; who aspires to authority over me, or over you. I wish the reverse was true.

Why is freedom frightening to the progressive?


the words were his and not mine: so yeah he did


The majority of the lords in Parliament today are appointed not hereditary so your argument regarding nobility has already been addressed in a sense. In theory such appoints are based on merit. Hereditary nobles are no longer guaranteed a seat in the upper house. It’s now much closer to our (Canadian) Senate. The monarchy not only represents continuity with tradition, but it’s one of few remaining explicitly Christian symbols in an increasingly secularized society. As a Canadian, where elected officials wouldn’t utter the “G word” if a gun was put to their head (let alone the “C word”) I always appreciate listening to the Queen’s annual Christmas address and hear her talking about Christ (even speaking of putting the “Christ” back into Christmas a couple years ago). The anointing of a monarch was always a very important sacramental in Catholic cultures…an image of Christ the King.
On a practical level, what’s the harm? I’m sure the monarchy brings in loads of tourist revenue for the UK…and all actual power is exercised by elected officials. There are also advantages to having an apolitical chief of state who represents the dignity and grandeur of the nation while those who get their hands dirty with politics are just “dudes”. The US President is treated as a king with adoring fans lining up and all the pomp of royalty…our prime ministers are just another civil servant at the end of the day.


You can try to explain it.

But it won’t change the fact that we in the US still don’t understand it. It still makes no sense to us why you continue to allow a monarchy when you’re no longer being compelled to endure one. Even if it has become mostly just for show, it just makes no sense to us.

That’s especially true of Canada and Australia etc. We cannot imagine how anyone would actually want (or even not choose to be free of) to be the subject of any monarch and especially a foreign monarch.

We know you have your reasons. You can explain those reasons all day long. We just cannot grasp it. We cannot understand it.


I would be more afraid of loosing the right to have a lock,and an alarm, but basically the weakening of the Institutions…that is collapse…
There are things that give us a sense of freedom,and they may be different in different societies. And even personally.And at different historical ages
As for a gun,unfortunately,there seems to be no way out yet,for me…but if I could be relieved of its use for defense,I d be very grateful…
I guess you meant The Social Contract,but if if it is “social compact”,I do not know what it is…( except for a small car for social purposes :flushed:)


Technically in her capacity as Queen of Canada (a distinct office from that of Queen of the UK) she isn’t a foreign monarch…but that’s quibbling. Her mother made a point of wearing a maple leaf broach, given to her during a 1939 tour, throughout much of World War II. The ties have historically been very close. Regardless, I would be totally fine with an elected monarchy… the papacy and the Holy Roman Emperor being examples of such… but I would not give up having an apolitical chief of state. Leave politics and controversy to civil servants in suits. As a Catholic convert I appreciate the value of external signs pointing to grander mysteries (in this case the idea of a nation, the sense of history).

Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anointed Solomon King…and all the people rejoiced… alleluia!


I intended to write exactly what I wrote “the social compact.”


What is it,Father?


It is the same thing as the “social contract.”

It was not a typo.


Thank you.
I found it. Amazing the way to go back to Locke and Hobbes after so many years…The Leviatan,man wolf of man…
So interesting…I still have the books…
Thanks again.Unexpected pleasure…


With respect I only pointed out that I’m a British citizen to give some context. It may interest you to know that there are people in the UK who would prefer a republic; I’ve also met people from the USA who admire and respect the Queen and her position.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit