On March 5th of this year, the Episcopal Diocese
of Virginia will be debating a resolution to ban the carrying of guns in the
churches within the diocese. I am a lay
member of this deliberative body and I will be arguing against this resolution.
For my non-Episcopalian friends, I need to start with an
explanation of how our church is governed and how things work. Every year, each Diocese (geographical area
comprising a large number of parishes) holds a meeting to conduct business and
set the direction for the coming year.
These are normally pretty tame events, dealing with budgets, discussions
on increasing membership and sharing ideas on outreach.
There are votes on resolutions. These are statements that are brought to the
Diocese by just about anybody and they are debated and voted upon. For the last several years, I have been
watching these resolutions become more and more political and farther and
farther to the left on the political spectrum.
Many of them are downright silly such as the one that called upon the
church to lobby for a ban on “high impact ammunition.” I have yet to hear exactly what that means
and I bring it up to illustrate just how absurd they can be. Most resolutions just call for the church to
lend support to causes without actually forcing the individual parishes to
alter their policies.
Because my parish has stayed firmly outside of the political
fray, I have been comfortable maintaining my membership. The Episcopal method of worship, the approach
to the Bible and the traditions of the church are very appealing to me and the
people of my parish are just wonderful so I have been able to compartmentalize
my feelings about the Diocese of Virginia and their political leanings. My parish is very diverse politically and as
such, we have chosen to just keep all politics out of the service.
This year, the Diocese of VA is doing something
different. This year, they have a
resolution that forces a change in policy at all parishes within the Diocese. Resolution 3 is listed here: http://www.thediocese.net/Governance/AnnualCouncil/221st-Annual-Council-2016-/Resolutions/
It states that firearms will be banned at all churches
within the diocese. The only exceptions
are for law enforcement purposes and animal control. It doesn’t even offer an exemption for
off-duty law enforcement personnel carrying concealed.
The resolution incorrectly characterizes VA law with regard
to carrying in a place of worship. The
resolution correctly quotes the VA statue which references guns in church, but
ignores how that law is applied. Current law states that guns may not be
carried in church without “good and sufficient reason.”
There is a legal opinion written by the former Attorney
General that carrying for self-defense qualifies as “good and sufficient
reason.” The law is not intended to
forbid legal concealed carry in a church.
It is intended to create an additional charge against anybody who brings
a gun into a church to commit another crime.
It is possible however to ban guns in individual
churches. It would be done just like any
other private property owner can forbid guns upon their property. It entails asking those who are carrying to
leave and if they don’t, call law enforcement and charge the person with
criminal trespass. That is the method by
which the Diocese can enforce the resolution.
So what’s the big deal?
Who needs a gun in church, right?
We should be following the example of Jesus and not encourage violence,
right? Who really cares since nobody
will ever notice a concealed gun anyway, right?
Let’s look at those:
Who needs a gun in church?
Hopefully, nobody. I, like every
other permit holder in VA, subjected myself to a background check and underwent
a training course. VA currently has over
420,000 permit holders and some of us have done considerably more than the bare
minimum of training. For the most part,
few of us think we will ever “need” a gun for self-defense. If I ever thought I would need a gun, I would
find another place to be. I don’t want
to ever be in a gun fight and if one were inevitable and I had a choice, I sure
wouldn’t bring a pistol (I’d bring a rifle and friends with more rifles). The choice to carry a gun is to deal with
things that are outside the realm of the likely. It is a hedge against being wrong about the
perceived safety of any setting.
Ok, but what about the Christian belief system? My view is that it would be un-Christian for
me not to be armed. This is not so much
for the defense of self, but of others who are innocent. Our Baptismal Vows call for resisting evil
and striving for justice as well as respecting the dignity of every human
being. If I have the ability, training
and means to defend the innocent who are in the process of being assaulted,
raped, beaten or murdered, it is required of me to act with every tool and
spiritual gift available to me.
Yes, I said spiritual gift and I meant it. I have a mindset of being my brother’s
keeper. I will defend without
reservation to the limits of my training, the weak, the innocent and the
oppressed. It is what I am and is a part
of the core of my being and my spiritual walk with God reinforces this. I look at the parable of the Good Samaritan
and ask myself how Jesus would have described the scene if the priest, Levite
and Samaritan had witnessed the attack, rather than its aftermath. How should they have acted in defense of the
dignity and well-being of the victim?
That is how I view my commitment to God and my fellow
man. I certainly don’t expect others to
share this. As Paul wrote to the
Corinthians, we are all blessed with different spiritual gifts. This resolution that will be debated on March
5th insinuates that my gifts are unwelcome. More than that, I am unwelcome at the
communion rail. The Episcopal Diocese of
Virginia is announcing that if one chooses to be prepared to use that spiritual
gift, they are unwelcome to worship in any parish in the Diocese of Virginia.
Is it really that bad?
Since we’re talking about concealed pistols, who would know? Couldn’t permit holders just keep quiet and
carry anyway? The answer is yes but not
really. With 420,000 permit holders in
the Commonwealth, plus thousands of off-duty and retired law enforcement
personnel, it is likely that few Virginia Episcopalians have not shared a
communion rail with a legally armed person.
Under the language of this resolution however, they would run the risk
of being found out and asked to leave under threat of a charge of criminal
trespass.
Keep in mind that permit holders are by definition, rule
followers. Were we not rule followers,
we would not have bothered to get a permit in the first place.
The bottom line here is that while this resolution may have
a noble purpose of promoting a point of view that eschews all violence, it is
intolerant of anybody who choses an interpretation of the Bible as something
other than a call to absolute pacifism.
This intolerance is demanding all Episcopalians within the Diocese to conform
to an inflexible doctrine and that is not how an open and accepting church
behaves.
We will be debating and voting upon this resolution on March
5. I pray that reason and tolerance will
win the day.
