[Salvation]

Finally, recall that the Sermon on the Mount is not a list of moral rules that we are expected to follow with the power of our own flesh. Rather, they are a description of the transformed human person. They describe what a person is like when the Lord lives in him and transforms him by His grace. The transformed person is not excessively concerned with personal dignity. The world did not bestow dignity and thus cannot take it away. The transformed person is not concerned with getting back at those who have inflicted blows against their dignity; He is content to be in God’s favor and increasingly free of vainglory, the excessive desire for human praise and standing.

[Salvation]

Monsignor Pope Ping!

[DungeonMaster]

There are many many kinds of self defense. I’m thinking of King David and the Apostle Paul.

[Red Badger]

Sell your cloak and buy a sword.......................

[olepap]

This kind of thing is why I am not a Christian.

[clamper1797]

“Turn the other cheek” was not meant as a suicide pact

[PapaBear3625]

Keep in mind that the same Jesus who said “turn the other cheek” in response to offenses against personal dignity, responded to an offense against the dignity of the Temple by whipping the money changers out of the temple.

[Jim Noble]

God dealt with the Hebrews as a collective.

Jesus dealt with everyone as individuals.

[yarddog]

We know for certain that some of Jesus’ disciples carried swords. He obviously didn’t object.

He also said that he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword. That is not saying you should not defend yourself or your family or others for that matter.

[ExGeeEye]

Take your wallet and your backpack, and if you don’t have a sidearm, sell your parka and buy one.

—Luke 22:36 (NRAV)

[Little Ray]

That is a stupid question.
Jesus TOLD his disciples to purchase swords to protect themselves during their travels.
Luke 22:36

[GoldenPup]

Joel 3:10.

[Manly Warrior]

Msgr Pope does a good job on the topic. Cultural context is one rule of understanding scripture. Too much has been promulgated by folks reading only literally.
As far as “force in moderation” goes,the need to defend ends when the threat is removed. One stroke, shot or other means of reduction,or ten, which ever is needed. Modern defensive tactics for handgun essentially states that the defender is justified in applying lerhal force until the threat stops his attack or is renderned incapable.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

An exposition of Scripture would have given a definitive and authoratative answer...with less flailing around and making things up... but we can surmise the arch-pope is unfamiliar with such.

[beethovenfan]

Like my Dad used to say, “Jesus said to turn the other cheek, but he didn’t say what to do after that”.

[metmom]

Thus, self-defense and the ending of unjust aggression should never be something we do lightly or without reflection.

I don't think in most self-defense situations there's a lot of time for reflection.

Usually you are called on to act quickly.

You can purpose to not get carried away and allow the self-defense turn into retaliation, just stop as soon as the situation is diffused or under control, but other than that, when split second decisions need to be made, you make them and then deal with it later.

[sparklite2]

Jesus does not say that one should not defend oneself if attacked; He says that one should turn the other cheek

---

Like there’s a difference. This attempt to explain away uncomfortable religious diktats is of a piece with elevating ‘tradition’ to the status of scripture. AKA making it us as you go along.

[IronJack]

My theory is that killing is always wrong. Always and without exception. Including in self defense. Including in time of war. Including in the administration of justice.

But sometimes the greater wrong lies in NOT killing.

No one ever said the only choices we would have to make in life were between good and evil.

[PeterPrinciple]

Self defense? How did that get in the discussion? Lets reframe it, protection and defense of others which we are called to do.

Had a pastor once that didn’t want a gun as he wouldn’t shoot anyone. I asked , “what if your wife or grandchildren were threatened?? He has a gun now...……………………………………..

[daniel1212]

As typical of Catholics, your priest restricts what Jesus taught to only the gospels, and substitutes the CCC in its place as further explanatory, thus once again he manifests that he is unfit to teach Christian doctrine. And he never really clearly answers the (admittedly difficult) question

What Scripture also says is

Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. (Romans 12:17-19)

See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men. (1 Thessalonians 5:15)

Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing. (1 Peter 3:9)

For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: (1 Peter 2:20-23)

Thus retaliation is proscribed, and enduring persecution and wrongs is prescribed. Yet appealing to just laws, and exposing injustice and combating it, at least for principle sake and when it hinders the preaching of word of the Lord, is positively exampled:

And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? (Acts 22:25)

And the keeper of the prison told this saying to Paul, The magistrates have sent to let you go: now therefore depart, and go in peace. But Paul said unto them, They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out privily? nay verily; but let them come themselves and fetch us out. (Acts 16:36-37)

What your priest does not ask is, "Does Jesus Forbid The Burning/Extermination of Heretics by the sword of men in the hand of the RC church?" And physical punishment by the same means against wayward members?

Time to sleep.

[READINABLUESTATE]

A man only has so many cheeks.