Null

[dogs4thewin]

Paul says the king is authorized to use the sword, but Jesus said, "All who live by the sword shall die by the sword."

This is not a contradiction: Earthly governments exist by the power of violence, and fall by the power of violence.

There is a difference in living by the sword and using a sword though. To live by sword is to start something a person may use a sword in defnse of others. The cold hard truth of war is that non-combatants will die and in fact they are more likely to die than combatants are today. Unless a person walks around in war randomly shooting civilians for no reason then really they are not doing anything wrong as such even in the old testament combatants were never the only ones killed.

 

[Aaron112]

Are the sparrows dependent on anyone ?
They seem to be thriving !

yes, as written, all animal, birds, and fish seek on earth, look to Yahweh for sustenance(food) DAILY.

I will continue to depend on God.
You can continue to depend on man, and self.
Don't expect any miracles though.

The miracles are every day, regardless if seen or not.

 

[Aaron112]

If a man uses violence in order to save his friend, is he condemned because he used violence?

If as is the case he trusts in the flesh, he is cursed.

 

[dogs4thewin]

If as is the case he trusts in the flesh, he is cursed.

so let me asks you this would you be mad if someone saved you by use of violence directly.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

If as is the case he trusts in the flesh, he is cursed.

Trust in the flesh meaning what exactly? Let's say there are two men who are friends. One of the friends is attacked. What does trusting in the flesh look like? Does it mean the other friend coming to his rescue and relying on his physical strength to overcome the aggressor? Is coming to the defense of the friend via the use of physical force, wrong and worldly?

 

[o_mlly]

A fellow Christian member called support for conscription "disturbing" in another thread. I know countries vary widely on the topic, so I wanted raise the issue and approach it from a Christian perspective. Let's use iron to sharpen iron and see if we can help one another be better brothers and sisters in Christ.

Should a Christian support or oppose conscription? Why?

If a Catholic living in a country waging a just war is conscripted then he is morally bound to serve.

Such service often requires heroic virtue and the one serving should pray for that grace if necessary.

Heroic acts cannot be commanded by human law in the normal course of events since they are far too difficult and for most people ​

almost impossible. Any law which ordinarily ordains excessively difficult or even impossible acts is no longer a useful law and thus​

ceases to be a law. Nevertheless, there are two occasions when heroic acts may be commanded: 1. if the common good certainly require such acts, e.g., fighting for one’s country; 2. if someone freely obliges himself to perform even heroic acts, such as nursing sisters who freely tend the sick even though they endanger their own lives (HANDBOOK of MORAL THEOLOGY, Fr. Dominic M. Prümmer, O.P. )​

 

[timothyu]

Such service often requires heroic virtue and the one serving should pray for that grace if necessary.

That's what happens when religion re-aligned itself with the world to serve state rather than Kingdom

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

If a Catholic living in a country waging a just war is conscripted then he is morally bound to serve.

Such service often requires heroic virtue and the one serving should pray for that grace if necessary.

Heroic acts cannot be commanded by human law in the normal course of events since they are far too difficult and for most people ​

almost impossible. Any law which ordinarily ordains excessively difficult or even impossible acts is no longer a useful law and thus​

ceases to be a law. Nevertheless, there are two occasions when heroic acts may be commanded: 1. if the common good certainly require such acts, e.g., fighting for one’s country; 2. if someone freely obliges himself to perform even heroic acts, such as nursing sisters who freely tend the sick even though they endanger their own lives (HANDBOOK of MORAL THEOLOGY, Fr. Dominic M. Prümmer, O.P. )​

What if the Catholic in question considers the war immoral. Is he still bound to serve?

 

[dogs4thewin]

What if the Catholic in question considers the war immoral. Is he still bound to serve?

depends on the law. In the United States you cannot pick and choose which wars you serve in. If you object to war you may get out ( after proving it) or not be allowed in, but it has to be all or nothing. With that being the case if conscription was a thing you would either have to oppose all wars or be willing to serve in all wars now there is a pretty good chance that if conscription were being used one could request non-combat roles.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

depends on the law. In the United States you cannot pick and choose which wars you serve in. If you object to war you may get out ( after proving it) or not be allowed in, but it has to be all or nothing. With that being the case if conscription was a thing you would either have to oppose all wars or be willing to serve in all wars now there is a pretty good chance that if conscription were being used one culd request non-combat roles.

I suppose I'm more asking if it's right to compel one who disagrees with the war, that they ought be compelled to serve. Especially if they don't want to fight. Perhaps someone in that situation can be heroic as a result of necessity, but that would not justify the conscription.

 

[RDKirk]

There is a difference in living by the sword and using a sword though.

No, ultimately there is not.

 

[RDKirk]

What Christ said is not a moral condemnation of having a sword, but an aspect of reality. If you play the game of violence then you are subject to the game of violence. Unfortunately violence cannot be avoided in any society, lest complete anarchy take place and only those who would use violence for evil purposes are able to exercise it. If a man uses violence in order to save his friend, is he condemned because he used violence?

It is a reality necessitated by the Fall, which does not mean it is righteousness.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

It is a reality necessitated by the Fall, which does not mean it is righteousness.

Does that mean therefore that all force or violence is immoral?

 

[RDKirk]

Does that mean therefore that all force or violence is immoral?

Will it exist among us in heaven?

 

[dogs4thewin]

No, ultimately there is not.

so does that mean that we should just allow ourselves to be attacked or allow others to be attacked when we COULD do something about it? My late aunt and recently deceased grandfather for example were two of the LAST people I would expect to raise their voice in anger and I do not recall seeing either mad and certainly never violent, but I can also promise you that if they felt that their family ( particularly the grandchildren and in Pa Pa's case great grandchildren were in danger that may well be the last thing you ever did. Particularly sense my aunt carried in public with a permit ( though by her death one was NOT required in GA.)

 

[Aaron112]

Human fleshly and carnal desires of protecting life are contrary to what is written in God's Word.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Human fleshly and carnal desires of protecting life are contrary to what is written in God's Word.

so then the answer is yes.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Will it exist among us in heaven?

Likely not but that's because God will have full sovereignty and power. Do we assume that God doesn't want us to reflect that aspect of himself but in a way which is geared towards the good?

Human fleshly and carnal desires of protecting life are contrary to what is written in God's Word.

Protecting human life is carnal? This sort of pacifism only results on the domination of forces who would do evil because you have no power to resist.

 

[RDKirk]

Likely not but that's because God will have full sovereignty and power. Do we assume that God doesn't want us to reflect that aspect of himself but in a way which is geared towards the good?

It's not good.

 

[RDKirk]

so does that mean that we should just allow ourselves to be attacked or allow others to be attacked when we COULD do something about it? My late aunt and recently deceased grandfather for example were two of the LAST people I would expect to raise their voice in anger and I do not recall seeing either mad and certainly never violent, but I can also promise you that if they felt that their family ( particularly the grandchildren and in Pa Pa's case great grandchildren were in danger that may well be the last thing you ever did. Particularly sense my aunt carried in public with a permit ( though by her death one was NOT required in GA.)

Remember, you're talking to someone who spent 26 years in the military. And, btw, I'm licensed to carry a concealed weapon. When it comes down to it, I'm a sheepdog.

But not for a moment am I fooled to think that there is ever anything righteous about taking another life.