During the first several weeks
following the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary, my Episcopal diocesan
leadership joined the hue and cry for gun control. At the same time, my State
government passed some truly bad legislation called "the SAFE Act". Very
few legislators actually read the bill which was overwhelmingly passed in a
great big hurry 147-61, days after the
start of a new legislative session.
I read statements from
Episcopal leaders regarding gun control and started to become irritated, and
then alarmed by the rhetoric. This letter was a response sent by me to my local
Bishop, and to The Very Reverend Gary Hall, Dean of Washington National
Cathedral. Since I have not been given the courtesy of a reply, I am now
publishing this as an open letter, with personal information redacted.
It is my hope that others who value
our 2nd Amendment rights will respectfully challenge their clergy as
warranted.
January 27, 2013
The Right Reverend Lawrence
Provenzano
Bishop of the Episcopal
Diocese of Long Island
36 Cathedral Avenue
Garden City, NY 11530-4435
Dear Father Provenzano,
After
prayerful consideration, I am writing to you on a matter that concerns me
deeply. I sincerely hope you will read and consider my meditations.
I am relatively new to
the Episcopal Church, but feel blessed to be part of it. I was confirmed in
October of 2007, a month before my wedding. That confirmation was a remarkable
joy to my parish as we had among ourselves many more confirmands and persons to
be received than in years past. I was delighted to be able to participate by
delivering the Old Testament reading, Isaiah 61, before the full Cathedral. Our
parish group was first to be received, and as the first of the first to
approach the Bishop, I was anointed with the Sanctum Chrisma. My fiancé was
present to lay his hand on me as I was joined to the church.
I took the special
blessing and my confirmation vows seriously and got right to work. I joined our
parish vestry, served on committees, worked for fundraisers, and taught Sunday
school. I recently began serving as a Lay Eucharistic Minister. I attend mass
regularly, and do my Christian duty to the best of my ability by serving
others, and by representing both Christians and Christ in a world which seems
increasingly to care less about both. Throughout my daily life and work I ask
myself what it is God’s will and for him to make it known to me if my works
find favor in His sight.
I try to be an informed
and active voter, and always seek Christ’s guidance on my decisions. I am a
shooting sports enthusiast, a law-abiding American citizen, and a member of the
National Rifle Association. As such, I cannot adequately describe how troubled
I am by the tone taken by some of the Church leadership recently concerning the
lawful exercise of my constitutional right to own a firearm.
There are Episcopalian
and Christian gun owners of all denominations, and I can say with certainty
that every single one of them is keenly interested in helping to eliminate
violence. I can also say with almost the same degree of confidence that given
some of the derogatory statements made about firearm ownership, each of these
gun owners feels that his voice is not only not
valued, but unwanted. For all the talk of dialogue, debate and deliberation,
too frequently all that occurs is demonization and demagoguery. The honest
search for solutions is being shoved aside in the pursuit of fulfilling a
narrow-minded agenda. Your statements contribute to this unfortunate state of
affairs.
In August of 2012 you
issued a statement about gun violence in our area of New York. You stated that
“No one has the right to carry a gun for the purpose of unleashing its power on
another human being,” not considering the point that it is primarily criminals
who use guns to settle disputes, steal property, and otherwise prey upon
others. I am not prepared to offer an apology here for self defense and there
are others who can do so with more information and eloquence than I have. I
will state, however, that I firmly believe that the sanctity of life requires
that it be defended when necessary. Thus, the law-abiding citizen, Christian or
otherwise, when able to navigate the necessary permit process will sometimes
carry a firearm in order to defend himself and others against criminals who
have no concern for the law or for human life.
Your statement
pronounces it “illegal, immoral and sinful” to carry a weapon. This statement
is troublesome for several reasons.
First, granted the necessary permit, it is within a person’s legal right
to possess or carry a weapon. One may argue that a legal action is immoral or
sinful, but certainly it is legal. Further, I cannot believe it is immoral or
sinful merely to possess a firearm. God created us as creatures of free will,
and almost any object can be used as a weapon. Is it reasonable to say that
certain inanimate objects are manifestly sinful or immoral? Or is morality more
a matter of how an object is used? I
also cannot believe that self defense, when necessary, is sinful. Christ gave himself over to violence and
death for our sins so that those who believe might have everlasting life. His
teachings, however, do not suggest that believers are somehow required to
surrender their own lives or the lives of others when confronted with violence.
I cannot accept that defense of innocent life is somehow sinful.
You also said that the
end to gun violence is to be brought about by an end to guns. Even if all guns
and the knowledge of their manufacture miraculously disappeared from the Earth,
people would go back to using swords and clubs if not sticks and stones. Gun
violence would certainly end in the absence of guns, but violence itself would
not end. Violence is a problem as old as Cain and Abel, and because the causes
are so complex and the will to dispense justice is so weak, the easy road of
demonizing the law-abiding gun owner is all too often taken. This is a most
deplorable mistake.
It has not escaped the
commentary of many people in the blogosphere and other online sources that the
Episcopal church has seen membership decline steeply over the last few decades
due to various policy stances, and this is regrettable given the number of
hands needed to do Christ’s work. There is a heated exchange going on currently
at the Episcopal News Exchange’s comment area and elsewhere. How many gun
owners are sitting in the pews, trying to justify their continued membership
and service in an organization that, based on statements such as yours,
apparently not only doesn’t want them, but also thinks they suffer from some
kind of psychological, moral, and mental defects? How are they supposed to
choose between supporting the Church and the abrogation of their rights? Is this the next in a series of schisms to
further chip away at the body? This vehemently anti-gun tone taken by the
Episcopal Church is divisive, wrong, and can only serve to alienate members and
others from the Church.
I recognize that I am
but one member of Christ’s community, and that not everyone will agree with my
opinions. Differences are natural and part of the process of discerning God’s
will. Inconsiderate criticism of whole segments of the Church and general
population, however, is unreasonable. I take offense at the implication that I
am somehow less of a Christian and perhaps a defective human being because I
enjoy shooting sports and take a stand for my right to defend myself. And I am
not the only one who feels this way.
I encourage you to
consider my perspective and rethink some of the divisive statements you have
made concerning firearms and firearm ownership. Addressing the issue of
violence is unquestionably part of the Church’s mission, but this cause is not
served by ill-conceived criticism of moral, law-abiding people who choose to
exercise their right to keep and bear firearms.
Respectfully,
TC
