Monday, November 6, 2017
ARE YOU NOW AFRAID TO ATTEND MASS AND IF SO WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND PARISHES DO IN LIGHT OF THE DEMONIC SHOOTING OF BAPTIST CONGREGANTS IN TEXAS
A small Baptist Church in Texas experienced the most demonic attack on their members. At this point 26 of this small congregation have been murdered and two dozen or more injured.
A man with assault weapons and for whatever reason did it and then killed himself.
Can these things be stopped?
If you fear going to Mass now, what do you recommend? And if you aren't afraid, why not?
The talking heads on the 24 hour news stations are politicizing this tragedy almost instantly. Now it is about gun rights or not.
I personally think that assault riffles in the wrong hands is deadly as we have seen time and time again. But even a sane person can go crazy and in a fit of range kill those close to themselves, strangers and themselves.
I think the major culprit in all of this is caused not by liberal gun laws, but the news media that covers these cases ad nauseum and makes them into reality shows and inspires the unbalanced and those who feel impotent or marginalized to want to have the same kind of notoriety on the world's stage of 24 hour a day news.
I RECOMMEND LAWS THAT LIMIT NEWS COVERAGE OF THESE EVENTS!
Eternal rest grant unto them O Lord and may light perpetual shine upon them. Grant them eternal rest. Amen. And may their souls and the souls of all the faithful departed through the mercy of God Rest In Peace.
God's healing on all those injured physically, spiritually and mentally.
Posted by Fr. Allan J. McDonald at Monday, November 06, 2017
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I'm not afraid. Why? First, reason requires that we recognize that the chances of this sort of thing happening are extremely low. In 2013, for instance, more people died in car accidents than by firearms. In 2010, death by firearms was not in the top 15 causes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Second, being afraid does very little to counteract violence.
Third, being afraid can actually make person more susceptible to irrational responses to imaginary threats. Some people have worked very hard to make people afraid of every Muslim who walks down the street and we know that attacks against Muslims are way up. (From the Chicago Tribune, 6 November 2017, "We are easy targets because of the way we dress and when we pray," said Hassan Ali, a 34-year-old resident of Finsbury Park, a north London neighborhood that is home to a large Muslim population and where the attack occurred. "But every time there is an attack here or elsewhere, we are blamed. When we are attacked, people look away.") Attacks in the US are increasing. From Newsweek, 21 July 2017, "FBI data show that in 2015 there were 257 hate crimes against Muslims—the highest level since 2001 and a surge of 67 percent over the previous year."
Fourth, I choose not to be controlled by external forces. Stress is not caused by events, but by our reaction to events.
"I RECOMMEND LAWS THAT LIMIT NEWS COVERAGE OF THESE EVENTS!"
No. Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This amendment is generally understood to prevent the government from interfering with the distribution of information and opinions.
Father, most of the English-speaking West has a free press as we do -- England, Canada, Australia -- with a fraction of the violence and near zero mass shootings. Please explain the difference between them and us?
The accused of any crime should not have their name released to the press until convicted, as a matter of innocent until proven guilty. This may prevent instances of celebrity, if that is what these people seek, and protect the innocent from undue infamy.
Unfortunately we are coming to the time where churches need to hire off-duty police...we have some at our parish in 30327 but they also help direct traffic in our oft-congested parking lot Sunday mornings. I don't agree that the news coverage is a factor in the shootings; I mean hardly anyone is talking about the Las Vegas shootings a month or so later, and probably not many will be talking about this one over Thanksgiving dinner. But whether or not someone is a regular church attendee seems to be a factor---you don't typically hear that the typical murder suspect was a regular in church and/or Sunday School...
I know that our bishop and the archbishop of Atlanta have diocesan policies prohibiting firearms in their churches. However, just as the Baptist minister Jeffress has suggested in a recent Fox News interview, all churches need to have some kind of security plan in place. Larger parishes might be able to afford to hire an off-duty policeman to keep watch outside the church building during Mass, for example.
We should not simply sit back and pray that nothing will happen. We must consider putting defensive policies and practices in place. We must act and pray at the same time.
Qwikness, so people shouldn't know about a rapist or career thief or child molester or serial drunk driver in their neighborhood who's out on bond?
North Europeans kill each other (excluding abortions) at an annual rate of 1 per 100,000 residents, while we Americans do so at a rate of 5 per 100,000. It's a statistically significant difference, but practically speaking the difference in itself is hardly cause for alarm. Besides, over the last century, Northern Europe has us beat when it comes to war and genocide.
Getting rid of the free press may alleviate some mass killings by certain publicity-seekers, but it would also open a door to unreported government oppression.
If churches are serious about security and they feel they are in a high risk situation, they are going to have to get serious.
Churches are going to have to have a security plan that involves armed members in advantageous positions inside and outside the church. I don't mean standing on the church steps with an AR, either. That may or may not be a deterrent. He might just shoot you from his car or cover, then go in shooting, anyway. I would suggest having someone discreetly placed near every entrance where they have a view of the approaches to the church but are not obvious. There should be another person or two inside similarly placed. I would suggest an AR and at least one shotgun for the outside folks and handguns inside...maybe an AR in a balcony or choir loft if there is one. The people need communication...walkie talkies or some kind of remote set up they can all communicate on. They need to practice co-ordinated responses to probable scenarios. They could seek help or training from local LE, former MP's, or other people with security background. This would not be that difficult and would not require a lot of training, especially if you have any former LEO's or military in the congregation. Choose enough people to rotate Sundays.
The church doors need to be closed and locked at a given time. Signs can be placed saying, "No admittance after 11:10," or something. There needs to be some way to screen or observe visitors or strangers...this would take more training to teach people what to look for in terms of suspicious behavior, certain tells or give aways, or clothing hints. Eliminating a threat already inside the church and blending in with the congregation is a whole different ballgame. They might actually consider a trained guard dog to be posted outside or inside the church...one that is trained to attack on certain cues or to sniff out weapons. There are other considerations, but these are essential for serious security. This would not actually be that hard to do..you need to pick the right people, preferably those with some related background or experience.
Distasteful...of course it is. But, that is the reality of real security. Read Ezra/Nehemiah about how some stood guard while others built the walls and the Temple and worshipped.
Amen to what Joseph said on church security---prior concerns may have been on keeping children safe (like in Sunday school or regular school itself), but security concerns now have to broaden...I was at a church in Charlotte a few months ago which publicized new security regulations, like not allowing anyone to bring a backpack, suitcases, anything covered into the sanctuary...
But the odds of being in such attack are indeed slim. and as an old poster for the Episcopal Church stated years ago (for those tempted to stay at home on Sunday and watch the TV preachers), "with all due respect to a SONY, have you ever seem a TV that gives you Holy Communion"????...........
Ushers have a moral obligation to protect the Most Blessed Sacrament with whatever force is needed?
"Larger parishes might be able to afford to hire an off-duty policeman to keep watch outside the church building during Mass, for example."
Keep watch for what outside the church? A man dressed in all black walking toward the church like the shooter in Texas?
In which case he officer might shoot Fr. McDonald as he arrived at the church for the celebration of mass.
Jeffress is HARDLY a sourced for reliable thinking/advice. He has stated, "Much of what you see in the Catholic Church today doesn't come from God's Word, it comes from that cult-like, pagan religion. Now you say, 'pastor how can you say such a thing? That is such an indictment of the Catholic Church. After all the Catholic Church talks about God and the Bible and Jesus and the Blood of Christ and Salvation."
Further, Jeffress has called Roman Catholicism "Satanic" and the result of "Babylonian mystery religion."
Recommending Jeffress as a reasonable/reliable source is highly problematic.
I think not. News people are looking for a story and something with legs to stretch out over weeks or months. It sells. Richard Jewell for example. A hero. Accused of setting the bomb at Centennial Park. His life was ruined even after acquittal. People still think he had something to do with it. Suspects and "persons of interest" should be kept concealed until conviction.
Jeffress is a Catholic hater, pure and simple, and Trump praises him as his spiritual advisor. Those facts speak for themselves. Why aren't Catholics talking about that?
As with so much else, the explanation for the mass shootings is complex and there are multiple factors at work. To focus on two:
You don’t need laws to restrain the media. You need virtue and common sense. The media should exercise the virtue of self-restraint and proper concern for the common good. I turned off the incessant coverage yesterday because it was sickening to see the media exploit the tragedy for ratings and adverting revenue, as they usually do.
But we do need better gun control laws, for example expanded background checks, because one cannot expect a mentally disturbed individual to exercise virtue and common sense.
I am aware of Jeffress's anti-Catholic statements. Nonetheless, on the subject of church security, he made a valid point.
If "the real problem is mental health" (talking point by our president and his apologists), then why would we make it easier for the mentally ill to obtain firearms (as Congress did earlier this year)?
Jeffress lives in a world of Scriptural misunderstanding and misinterpretation. His views are, I suspect, formed by his misreading of Old Testament prophets who, he wrongly thinks, a predicting future events. Further, I suspect his reading of the Book of Revelation ENTIRELY misses the point since he likely sees it as a book of fortune-telling and future-predicting rather than what it is - a book of hope.
Jeffress says the tragedy proves what the Bible teaches about evil. Since Jeffress is so very wrong about what the bible teaches, how does he manage to get this one right?
Pastor Jeffress mentions not one word in the interview about common-sense regulations on guns and gun owners. Like others who are minions of the NRA, he will neglect what the majority of Americans favor - good, sound regulations that can help to keep us safer.
Australia did it in 1996. Since then there have been no mass shootings in that country.
The last time I went to the Latin Mass at St. John's Cathedral in Savannah, there was a Chatham County Deputy stationed in the narthex. I think that's not such a bad idea. Can anyone explain the story behind that observation?
There are no nations anywhere getting rid of their guns. There are only nations taking guns away from private citizens. Americans trust our neighbors with guns more than we trust our government with guns. There would never have been an American Revolution without large-scale private gun ownership, and there would never have been a Nazi Germany with such private gun ownership.
I agree that Jeffress is wrong in some of his Biblical interpretations--that is not what I was referring to in stating that he made a valid point on the need for church security. We need to have someone keeping an eye out for possible maleficent actors.
I am a prosecutor who deals weekly with domestic violence cases and people with mental health issues. Many (though not all) of these people need to be permanently institutionalized for their own safety and for the safety of others. Unfortunately, our government (the State of Georgia, in my locality), long ago stopped doing this. Consequently, these individuals then commit crimes (often involving violence) and find themselves in the criminal justice system, which is ill-equipped to deal with their underlying issues. One way I attempt to deal with them is to have the criminal judge order that they be evaluated for involuntary outpatient commitment through the local probate court. This provides for forcible medication of mentally ill individuals (if they refuse to take their prescribed mental health medications) for a 12 month term subject to yearly renewal by the probate judge if needed. This is the best we can do since institutionalization (in Georgia it used to be in Milledgeville) is no longer an available option.
The part of Jeffress's point that I think he gets right is the need for churches to have a security plan--period.
Dialogue, you're citing many historical myths. There was not "large-scale private gun ownership" before the American Revolution. Most Americans did not own guns, and the few white males who did used slow-loading muskets suitable for hunting, not large-scale, high-speed weapons.
Despite their flaws, I trust our US military and local law enforcement more than Kelley, Paddock, Lanza, Holmes and their ilk.
I'm a defense attorney, and Mr. Johnson has accurately identified the role that mental illness plays in the criminal justice system. Even if there were a mechanism for people to be institutionalized for some period of time, once they return home, they are extremely unlikely to keep up with procuring and taking whatever medications they need, often due to environmental and other factors.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but it is probably not the multiplication of laws or greater enforcement since neither of these methods has a proven success rate. The reality is that people who want to obtain and carry a gun are going to be able to do so regardless of the laws or the enforcement.
Despite the efforts of law enforcement, it is absurd to think that they are able to track social media for unknown targets and make a meaningful evaluation of the threat in advance. It is more realistic to do just as Mr. Johnson says: people, including churches, need to have their own security plan.
Every nation and every state has mentally ill people and challenges in treating them.
What's different in the US, particularly our Southern red states, is how we encourage the mentally ill to own guns, carry them, take them to Walmart or off to college. We reap what we sow.
It's absurd & disingenuous to put the onus on churches themselves to repel armed invaders.
What level of security would be needed to protect the Cathedral of Savannah from a single man with an AR-15?
How many churches in town are holding Sunday services at 11 AM? How many out-of-shape retired deputies would we need to screw in that particular light bulb?
I never proposed that every church should have a retired deputy at every service or mass. I simply proposed that every church should have SOME kind of security plan. That plan may vary depending on each church's resources. Maybe some churches have officers who are members who would be willing to volunteer their services? Maybe, in the case of Catholic churches, the diocese could come up with at least some basic "floor" of a security plan or policy for all Catholic churches with more affluent ones being able to add to or augment that minimum requirement?
Due to limitations on resources at different churches, it may not be a "one size fits all" program. Bottom line, it needs to be considered. Courthouses have had security for some years now due to the Atlanta courthouse shootings a few years back.
Restore the minor order of Porter as an armed ministry and install metal detectors and all that other crap the TSA inflicts upon innocent air travelers.
In Europe, when a family home is invaded by an intruder, the family must either flee or risk being beaten and raped. In America, intruders do not invade homes when the family is home, because there's a one in three chance that the family is armed. It's two out of three in the rural South.
The initial shortage was indeed problematic, which is why it was overcome, and then a permanent solution to the problem was written into our constitution. Therefore, no tyrant would dare try to seize power in America by force. Trickery maybe, but not by force.
It is important to return to Father Kavanaugh’s wise comments at the beginning of this thread. We would do well to remember that our brains (and hence our minds) are rewired each time we are exposed to a stimulus. So, what effect do you think it has on our brains (and hence our minds) when we are constantly exposed to accounts of mass shootings, terrorist attacks, and goodness knows what else—and when not a day goes by without the word “terrorism” being uttered (and heard), and linked to Muslims, multiple times in that day? And isn’t this akin to a kind of “brainwashing”?
I se Anon 2 is still loving on his Muzzies. Pitiful...really pitiful.
Fr. McD asked, "If you fear going to Mass now, what do you recommend? And if you aren't afraid, why not?"
I'm not afraid going to Mass. I think I faced this fear a few years back when I heard a priest and woman were killed at a morning Mass at a Catholic Church in New York by a guy who walked in and pulled a rifle out from under his coat (Our Lady of Peace Roman Catholic Church in Lynbrook, N.Y.) I guess at that time I realized anything could happen anytime, and no one can control what someone else does...not with a bomb, or a knife, or a rifle. I could be killed by a shooter while driving down the street or even while sitting in my living room watching T.V.
It does however speak to me about being ready to die at any time. I do not know the day or hour my life will end, or how. Yesterday I was talking with a lady I work with, and she told me this time of year is very difficult for her family, because Nov. 2nd was the 2nd anniversary of her 20 year old granddaughter being killed in a drive-by shooting. She was not the intended target, and didn't even live in the neighborhood, but had just left her grandparents' house in the middle of the afternoon, and was headed to the bus stop to go home. She stopped to speak to a young man she knew when a car drove by and shot both of them. She died. The young man (the intended target?) was critically wounded but survived.
Just a few weeks before she had won the Mario Tricoci Make Me A Model contest. She was in college studying to be a paralegal. She was a very loved and accomplished beautiful young woman who seemed to be about to come into her own.
This past Friday an elderly man I knew died suddenly of a massive stroke.
I am not afraid of going to church, because if I die there, perhaps I will be as physically close to Our Lord as I could ever be at the hour of my death, either because He is nearby in the Tabernacle, or having just received Him in the Eucharist.
Jesus, I trust in you.
Marcus TUllius you are engaging in calumny and spreading shameful lies. The loon that shot these innocent folks had been REJECTED for a gun permit. You sound like someone accustomed to posting at the National Anti-Catholic Reporter
Anonymous 2, you should be an expert on brainwashing because that's what the political left does 24/7: the joys of gay marriage, the wonderfulness of transgender bathrooms and abortions, shutting down of free speech, etc
TJM, I'm not sure you get your "information," if we can call it that, but Kelley got a bad-conduct discharge from the Air Force for assaulting his wife & kid, but still passed background checks and was able to purchase AR-15 at Academy Sports. Obviously, the system worked for him. Not for those poor folks in the church. As for your jape about the "National Anti-Catholic Reporter," I don't know what the hell you're talking about. I assume you just say that about anyone who disagrees with you.
Maybe the armed forces should not give dishonorable or bad conduct discharges anymore as this causes people to go crazy and kill! So the problem isn't guns but mental illness that is caused by bad-conduct discharges. Change the law and eliminate bad conduct and dishonorable discharges! After all today, we give everyone awards at school so they won't go off the deep end if they don't get some positive recognition.
Marcus Tullius, well if you read at all, or listen to the news at all, it is common knowledge that the left (media and the Dems, but I repeat myself) glorify all of the things I mentioned. It's easier to be in denial like you. The National Anti-Catholic Reporter was ordered decades ago to remove the word "Catholic" from its masthead by the local bishop, but they ignored him. That rag is always fighting the last war and is no longer relevant. How much does George Soros pay you to post here?
TJM, my checks from Soros apparently are lost in the mail.
How much is Putin paying you to muddle our brains and spread nonsense?
Over 20 years ago, a then young but now well-respected middle-aged priest in our diocese referred to the NCR as "The National Catholic Distorter." Since hearing that, I have adopted that version and it has been my reflexive term of choice for that omnipresent liberal "catholic" publication (just as "Clinocchio" is my automatic reflexive term of choice for either of the Clintons!).
I was just having the exact same thought when I read your last post about Putin. In TJM’s own words from another thread, “there is no other reasonable interpretation” of his vicious ad hominem attacks.
Marcus Tullius, still in mourning because Greedy Grandma lost? Looks like she's far more implicated with Russia than anyone on the Trump side. I don't recall Melania being paid $500,000 for a canned speech in Russia like Horndog Clintoon
I agree. Give them an "Early Discharge" medal.
TJM at 10:39 p.m. on November 6:
Ah, I see we are practicing the Trumpian/Putinesque art of distraction again—please explain to us how your comment negates in the slightest the point made in my comment at 6:23 p.m.
I see Gene (at 8:58 p.m. on November 6) is still incapable of having an adult, rational conversation on such topics. Beyond pitiful.
Post a Comment