ULC searches for the elusive balance between curbing violence without placing undue burden on hunters, hobbyists, and those would seek to merely defend themselves

The horrible cinema shooting in Aurora, Colorado, which left twelve dead and fifty-eight wounded, has revived the gun control debate in the United States. Some church leaders have called for stricter gun control laws, while others have shown apprehension and even outright resistance toward such measures. There are problems with both sides of the argument, though, and we want to know how you think ULC ministers and others who become ordained in online churches should respond to this tragedy.

Some have endorsed gun control by comparing gun violence with abortion. Rev. Frank Pavone, an anti-abortion activist and head of Priests for Life, tells Religion News Service, “[a]nyone concerned about protecting human life has to be concerned about the misuse of guns, and of anything else that can become a weapon against the innocent.”  The Universal Life Church takes a different approach than Rev. Pavone.  While we agree that the issue of gun control is a concern, we do not liken it to a woman’s right to choose.  The church supports a position of non-interference for citizens, and we seek regulation that allows maximum freedom while ensuring safety.

Other leaders have cast doubt on churches’ ability to effect change: Mark Galli, senior managing editor of the evangelical magazine Christianity Today, proclaimed the following in a 23 July essay:

We are kidding ourselves if we think we have within our national grasp an educational or psychological or political solution to evil. There is no solution or explanation for evil.

While this may be the case in theory, in practice churches are happy to continue pushing legislation to attempt to combat what they perceive as evil, so Mr. Galli’s comments fall flat.

Disturbingly, some leaders have even downplayed the gravity of gun violence: “[w]e ought not to let the term ‘pro-life’ become so elastic as to lose all meaning,” says Christian ethicist and theologian Russell D. Moore, adding that “[i]n most cases, the expansion of ‘pro-life’ is a way to divert attention from the question of person-hood and human rights” and that “[t]he abortion issue isn’t about prudential means to a common goal, but about legally protecting those who are subject to lethal violence.” In other words, Moore implies, 1) protecting fetuses is more “pro-life” than protecting people from shootings, 2) person-hood and human rights apply more to fetuses than to shooting victims, and 3) protecting fetuses is about legally protecting those who are subject to lethal violence, but, somehow, protecting people from shootings is not. These do not sound like the priorities of ULC ministers or online churches.

The problem with the above arguments is that they either compare gun violence with abortion, exonerate churches of social responsibility, or downplay the human rights of shooting victims. As ministers in the ULC Monastery, we should be speaking out against gun violence because it harms others. But we want you to share your thoughts. What steps do you think people who become ordained online should take to prevent the kind of tragedy that occurred in Aurora?

Source:

The Huffington Post