Fred Hiltz has taken his cue from protesting teenagers and denounced USA gun culture. It’s no surprise, since Anglican clergy seem to have difficulty digging up an original thought of their own and the higher one ascends the ecclesiastical totem pole the deeper one must excavate before hitting coherent thought.
Hiltz has grave concern over gun violence, leaving the impression that he is unwilling to fritter his limited reserve of concern on less conspicuous forms of violence: violence against the unborn, for example which claims the lives of almost 1 million babies per year in the USA.
Predictably, Hiltz offers a political solution – the church is, after all, more interested in politics than religion – rather than a Christian solution, namely modification and, I’m sure, eventual scrapping of the Second Amendment. Western Anglicanism, for the most part has given up on heaven or hell in the afterlife and is focussing what little energy it has left in cheering on socialist utopianism with carefree disregard of the resulting nastiness when the goal is attained.
Clerical distaste for guns can quickly dissipate when personal safety is in jeopardy: TEC’s first homosexual bishop, Gene Robison, was protected by armed guards during his consecration. Anglican gun culture at its finest; perhaps the guns were blessed beforehand.
From here:
What is remarkably notable in the aftermath of this recent shooting in Florida is the tremendous resilience of the young people in standing up and speaking out with grave concern for the gun violence that is tearing apart families and communities. While some people note that many of the shooters have serious mental health issues or have links with terrorist groups, and that needs to be acknowledged, many others are asking deeper questions about “the gun culture” across the United States. Some question an all-or-nothing approach to the Second Amendment in an age of automatic weapons. Some question why many Americans so vehemently defend that right. Some question the measures around gun control and the extent to which they can be enforced. Some question access to semi-automatic weapons that can fire dozens of rounds within seconds.
One young man reminded a rally in Florida, that addressing these issues was not about being Republican or Democrat, but about being human. These students are speaking out with a courage and conviction that cannot go unnoticed. Their cry for reform will not pass soon as some might expect and others might hope. Many Americans are joining them and crowding the roads to places where legislation is considered, including those to Capitol Hill in Washington.
What next? Will good old Fred come out in favour of motherhood? With exceptions when inconvenient of course!
From the article
“While some people note that many of the shooters have serious mental health issues or have links with terrorist groups, and that needs to be acknowledged, many others are asking deeper questions about “the gun culture” across the United States.”
This is one of the finest examples of putting the horse in front of the cart that I have ever seen. He actually admits that there are underlying problems (which in truth is the actual issue that needs to be addressed) but then immediately goes back to the symptom and endorses a Band-Aid. This approach will do nothing to solve the problem. Perhaps the challenge that people like Hiltz have is that they have failed to accurately define the problem in the first place. The definition of the problem that Hiltz has is “gun culture”, when in fact it is many other things, some of which he mentions. It is these other things that need to be effectively addressed, and that means dropping all of the politically correct crap and actually doing something that makes a real difference. But that would mean living in the real world, something that Hiltz has not done for a considerably long tine.
As a teenager, I was a rabid what I thought was a Christian pacifist. A few decades later, I realized that Jesus telling his followers to sell your clothes to get a sword was what Jesus really taught regarding self-defence: If the People show a willingness to defend themselves and their family and their brothers, the big guns of the government cannot kill or control all the armed people, and thieves, who probably do not want to commit suicide by trying to rob armed “victims”, may lessen their goals.
The University of Chicago, a bastion of liberal “thought”, did a detailed study some years ago, and, BIG SURPRISE (to them), found that arming citizens pushed crime down. The ridiculous lie that ALLOWING trained school personnel to be armed is tantamount to FORCING them to be armed is a black comedy that elicits not a laugh. Also, to present Trump’s proposal only mentioning teachers, as most of the media does, instead of arming administrators, coaches, etc, is also part and parcel of the stupidity to blackwash the supporters of the Second Amendment.
The United States is home to less than five percent of the world’s population, but 25 percent of the world’s prisoners. Don’t tell me that there are proportionally more bad buys in the States than in other nations.
“Some question why many Americans so vehemently defend that right.”
Er, perhaps they vehemently defend it precisely because it is a constitutional right?
I wish Hilz would stop acting like a virtue signalling retard.
He is so irrelevant, who cares what BS comes out of his mouth ?
Fred Hiltz might well speak out against gun violence but he remained totally silent when his apostate colleagues legally stole properties from orthodox Christians – properties that were totally paid for by true orthodox Christians. I firmly believe the time has long since past for gun control within the U.S. and also Canada but it also long since past for the ACoC to reform and become true followers of our Lord and Saviour rather than the “gods of political expediency”.