Christianity And Self Examination In Light Of the Norway Killings
BY Herschel Smith
13 years, 5 months ago
My regular readers may be wondering why I haven’t weighed in on the horrific killing spree perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik in Norway. In fact, I think that it’s important for Christians to engage in honest, open self-examination in light of events such as this, as suggested by one reader at National Review Online’s Corner (in reponse to thoughts by Mark Steyn). This sort of thing is extremely serious, and for those on the left believe that there is a sense of unease among right-leaning Christians, you are correct whether we admit it or not. So I may as well engage in open confessions and admit what we all know to be true.
I have made my position clear on personal ownership and carryng of weapons, and Christian scholars far better than I have already made a case against gun control. But … evil actions like those in Norway, that cause so many people, so young, to perish in such a violent way, should cause soul searching for every sane individual, and especially so for those of us who claim to carry the name of Christ.
So Mr. Breivik was apparently shooting a rifle (perhaps a Ruger Mini-14?). He was apparently good with it. I’m good with my rifle too, and I can put a tight group on target at 100 yards, but I don’t engage in open carry of my rifle. I don’t engage in concealed or open carry all of the time, only when I consider the situation as warranting such security. But this event goes to remind us that only God knows the future, and thus, my predilections on personal security and when I might need a weapon are not only foolish, but self-deceiving.
After serious reflection, I hereby vow to carry my handguns more often (both concealed and open, depending upon the circumstances). But he was shooting a rifle, you say. Yes, and that means that my moderate targeting skills with my handguns (in contrast to my finely-tuned skills with my rifle) need to get much better. I hereby vow to buy more ammunition and get to the range even more often than I do. And, I vow to continue my workouts at the gym and practice my tactics and techniques so that when the awful day comes that I need to perform tactical maneuvers against a shooter in order to defend myself or my family or friends, I am capable of doing so. If I die defending loved ones, then I die.
As for the Mr. Breivik’s prose, I find it so inconsistent, incoherent, incomprehensible and ridiculous that it has no meaning for me at all. With a short review of Mr. Breivik and after having sworn an oath to shoot better and more often, I think I have done my Christian duty regarding this event. Oh, and I will pray for the families of the victims too.
On July 25, 2011 at 11:48 am, Burk said:
Hi, CJ-
A word to the wise… self-examination doesn’t mean putting yourself, as a right-wing Christian, in the position of the Labor party youth victims who wouldn’t have been carrying guns in any case. It means putting yourself in the position of the shooter, and recognizing that your guns pose an enormous hazard to others, due to the fact that your own mental processes are not 100% and forever reliable. None of ours are.
On July 25, 2011 at 2:30 pm, jrr said:
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 41, Art. 1 said:
But in him who defends himself, it may be without sin, or it may sometimes involve a venial sin, or sometimes a mortal sin; and this depends on his intention and on his manner of defending himself. For if his sole intention be to withstand the injury done to him, and he defend himself with due moderation, it is no sin, and one cannot say properly that there is strife on his part. But if, on the other hand, his self-defense be inspired by vengeance and hatred, it is always a sin. It is a venial sin, if a slight movement of hatred or vengeance obtrude itself, or if he does not much exceed moderation in defending himself: but it is a mortal sin if he makes for his assailant with the fixed intention of killing him, or inflicting grievous harm on him.
On July 25, 2011 at 2:43 pm, Warbucks said:
The mishmash of factoids that are in the news about the Norway crime do not offer a firm sense of understanding on the killer’s motivations. Perhaps its time to start that religious blog forum still inside you.
On July 25, 2011 at 9:16 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Burk: Not 100% reliable. What do you mean by this? What if I become a much better shot and say, approached 100% reliability? Would that suffice?
Rich: He had a faked Facebook page. Nothing the MSM is reporting about him can be trusted as accurate. His manifesto is totally incomprehensible, and thus points nowhere. Sound and fury signifying nothing. As to a religious blog, maybe in the future.