Does Your Pastor Carry a Concealed Weapon?

Does Your Pastor Carry a Concealed Weapon?

Rev. Douglas Olds

17 October 2013

“The cross and the gun offer us two very different versions of power. One says that there is something worth dying for, and one says that there is something worth killing for.” -

@ShaneClaiborne

One thing likely to cause a scandal to non-Christians is the news that a church pastor who dons the clerical collar, a Cross, and/or a Robe carries under that garb a concealed weapon, perhaps a loaded gun. And that they may organize a portion their congregation to carry concealed weapons to church.  This causes many inside and outside the church to be scandalized, as isn’t Jesus a peace bringer and a peace maker?  What role does a concealed weapon play in pastoral ministry?  And what, if anything, might the Bible say about pastors carrying guns?

What might convince a pastor that it is legitimate to carry a concealed weapon in his public and private ministry?  The arguments that I’ve found from pastors for carrying weapons  involve three broad categories.  First, these pastors claim that we live in evil times, and that their role in guiding a flock necessitates the physical protection of that flock, which includes the responsibility to bring deadly force against bad guys who might storm in.  Second, they are  convinced that Jesus was not a pacifist, contrary to the common cultural perception, and that the Book of Revelation, certain Old Testament verses concerning David and the temple, and Jesus’ own instructions to the disciples validate the taking up of weapons by Christian pastors.  Third, these gun carrying pastors resort to the claim they are American citizens entitled by the Second Amendment to bear arms.

The first argument for a pastor to arm himself  (or herself?) clandestinely involves a “watchdog” theory of leadership.  This scenario involves the pastor’s followers--the sheep--assailed by wolves who are the bad guys.  Pastoral leadership adopts this secular leadership paradigm so that a pastor is not an especially fearless or spiritually endowed and trained caretaker sheep, or an agent battling evil with words from scripture, but rather a sheepdog who can engage the wolf on the wolf’s terms while simultaneously or sequentially engaging the sheep on the sheep’s terms.  Pastors who conceal a gun under their preaching garb speak the language of violence—some have claimed to “shoot for the center” and “won’t be cowering behind a pew when the bullets start flying” all the while claiming allegiance to agape love.

The second argument for pastors taking up concealed weapons is that Jesus was not a pacifist, at least in the modern understanding of the term.  These pastors argue for a fuller rendering of the Godhead’s power than afforded by a simple view of a putatively peacemaking earthly ministry of Jesus.  This understanding of the supposed violent power of the Godhead comes from a warrior’s reading of the Book of Revelation.  Notoriously difficult to interpret, so much so that even the prolific John Calvin refused to produce a commentary on the Book, Revelation promotes itself to pastors  who are drawn to the language of violence so that they may claim a prerogative to carry concealed weapons.   The fact that others read these as metaphors or allegories of violent battle in Revelation does not matter: they are alleged to be outsiders to the true Revelation of God’s historical plan. Pastors who read the Book of Revelation as justifying and demanding preparation for a military earthly battle validate concealed weapons on their person from the basis that they have a justifying understanding of the “full reality of Christ.”  This knowledge of Jesus as part of the Godhead’s supposed eschatological violent battlefield power gives them warrant to accrue concealed weaponry for application to their pastoral ministry, always justified by the duty to protect the flock.

Isolated Old Testament verses, it is proposed, support this view of God’s commissioning of weaponry.  The writer of Psalm 144.1 is asserted to be David, whom they see is an Old Testament "type" of Christ.  Since "David" writes in Psalm 144:1 (NRSV)

1           Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle;”

 it is interpreted that Jesus is trained in the military arts. (Of course, such a claim ignores that "David" stops speaking through the Psalms at Ps 72.20 so that Psalm 144 is not Davidic).

Another isolated Old Testament verse is proposed by armed pastors:  Nehemiah 4:16–18 (NRSV):

16 From that day on, half of my servants worked on construction, and half held the spears, shields, bows, and body-armor; and the leaders posted themselves behind the whole house of Judah, 17 who were building the wall. The burden bearers carried their loads in such a way that each labored on the work with one hand and with the other held a weapon. 18 And each of the builders had his sword strapped at his side while he built. The man who sounded the trumpet was beside me.

In this verse, the builders of the second temple were authorized to build while armed, even to build with one arm holding onto a weapon. Here we are to meant to see sacred construction is blended with outfitting for physical battle. 

The third argument for pastors claiming the authority to carry concealed weapons is that they are citizens of the United States, and as such, they have that right under the second amendment to the Constitution.  I found in my challenge to armed pastors when the Biblical arguments failed for justifying concealed death dealing weapons, almost to a man (and they were all men) they reverted to their citizenship rights to bear arms in America.  It seemed to me that my challenge to them was a prelude to stripping them of the second amendment rights which they hold precious.

There are many arguments against “inverted reading” of the New Testament that seeks to engage weaponized violence to go back to Old Testament projects.  First, the Book of Hebrews seems to me clearly to warn against a return to Temple building of a physical kind.  Thus the quote from Nehemiah as a directive would be mooted for Christians. Second, reading David as a “type” for Christ also is very problematic.  What “type” means is unclear (though Col 1.15 uses similar language when proposing that Jesus Christ is the image for the new man, not David).  Also, David (who, historical critics argue, may not have written this particular Psalm) was a sinful and haunted man according to the accounts in the books of Samuel and Kings. In no way is he a model for the sinless Christ of our Confessions or for the renewed and reconciled person discipling and struggling to put on that sinlessness.

In my discussions with them, gun wielding or gun permitting pastors agree with me that some references to “sword” in the New Testament may be allegorical while other references are literal.

For example, Matthew 10:34–36 (NRSV)

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

    35      For I have come to set a man against his father,

    and a daughter against her mother,

    and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;

    36      and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household.

In this quote we can clearly discern allegory.  Otherwise, a literal reading is that the sword in this passage is brought to bear against relatives in an aggressively literal manner. This cannot possibly promote “family values.”

In the book of Revelation, so studied by these pastors who are drawn to and speak the language of violence, the first three references to swords occur in Rev 1.16, Rev. 2.12, and 2.16.  None of these first references refers to a literal battle sword.  They are symbolic or allegorical.  Yet how do these pastors move into the later narrative of Revelation to pick up a current historical reading of literal swords?  The Book of Revelation is a confounding mix of symbolism, heavenly proposals, and seemly concluded history, and it was for John Calvin a closed book--one for which he refused to write commentary.  I’ve read and translated the Book of Revelation from Greek and I am likewise not opened to its spiritual and supposed earthly meaning, but I am agreed with one pastor who noted that "Revelation offers no warrant for violence, bullying, or killing by the earthly disciples of Jesus Christ."

Now, there is a New Testament passage read literally by gun concealing pastors to show that Jesus arms his disciples, Luke 22:35-7:

35 He said to them, “When I sent you out without a purse, bag, or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “No, not a thing.” 36 He said to them, “But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was counted among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.”[2] 38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” He replied, “It is enough.”

The gun concealing promoting pastors with whom I discussed this verse appeal to the “plain meaning” of verse 36-- that Jesus wants his followers to become armed.  Yet I read verse 37 as directly relevant and contextualizes the previous verse.  Two swords are “enough” to fulfill the prophecy that he be counted among the lawless.  Verse 37 is related to verse 36 by the Greek connective γὰρ [1] so it has to be asked, what is the scriptural fulfillment from Isaiah 53.12: “and he was counted among the lawless”?  It was that two swords were sufficient for such a purpose.  Jesus is controlling his destiny by the calling for swords.  My exegesis is that Jesus is not carrying a personal sword up to this point.  Two swords are shown to him, two swords are enough for him to guide fulfillment of the prophecy of words from Isaiah 53.

Are disciples permitted to bear arms?  Perhaps from the reading of verse 36 they are. Christians may serve in the military and police if they sense a calling.  But are pastors?  Pastors who appeal to verse 36 in Luke 22 ignore a more germane reference in Matthew 26. 47-56, specifically how a mob carrying swords surrounded Jesus.  These swords were manufactured for the purpose of deterrence, protection against animals, and perhaps in extremis man-to-man combat. Note how verse 52 uses a strong construction to redefine the teleology (the end purpose or final cause) of the sword:

Matthew 26:47, 51–52 (NRSV)

47 While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived; with him was a large crowd with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people. ... 51 Suddenly, one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword, drew it, and struck the slave of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 

Verse 52 is a command (imperative: ἀπόστρεψον) that redefines a sword’s “place:” εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς  The eschatological prophet--our earthly Jesus--has redefined the eschatological place of the weapon for "those with Jesus." It is to be put away in the Kingdom he is inaugurating as he moves toward his destiny.  Disciples who take up arms will die by those arms, Jesus warns.  Pastors who take up arms, I believe, also violate their eschatological Kingdom call.

As Chris Hedges notes, people who speak the language of violence are liable to take up arms and act out their violence.  Threats are serious, threats backed up by weapons more so.  As I mentioned above, some pastors resort to images of hyper-masculinity to justify their concealing guns beneath their robes, crosses, and clerical collars.  One minister said, "I have to wonder what kind of man hides in the garb that signals to the world that they are messengers and agents of what many, including me, understand to be the Prince of Peace while themselves bearing a concealed death dealing weapon on their person.  What kind of man does that?" To which I add:  And is that kind of man you want around children?  Is a church service with attendants carrying concealed arms spiritually and physically a safe place for your children?  Not for mine.

Other quotes from pastors who promote concealed weapons include, “the scriptures are silent on whether the earthly Jesus carried a sword, so pastors are permitted either way.”  I don’t recognize the Holy Spirit in an argument from silence, and it conflicts with my "plain understanding of the whole" of the New Testament as well as my exegesis of Luke 22.37 outlined above.  Another statement was made: the Bible [including the Book of Revelation] reveals the “full reality of Christ.” Yet we who believe in a living God--in a living Christ--cannot conceive how a creature can make the claim that a written document of some limited number of sentences reveals absolutely everything (“full reality”) of the Living, Eternal God.  And how could a limited creature claim that he or she could understand with complete certitude such a full reality?   And how is it that these literal readers of an inerrant Bible disagree so radically about the Book of Revelation-- its times and prophecies?  See here and here for more discussion about the incoherence--really the scandal--of various Biblical fundamentalisms.

As Chris Hedges and Erich Fromm note, violence reveals a deep yearning to escape freedom.  Literal , bullying readings of the Bible are like violence in that both settle matters to a point of inertness.  Bullying takes the living spirit from those who are different from a norm and turns that spirit into coldness, distance, and silence.  Bullying the scriptures likewise kills the spirit of deliberation and the spirit of freedom to pursue joy and happiness, as well as service and neighborhood.  Shooting a gun at a provocation founded on anxiety or rage also takes away from the Living God to settle the dispute according to God’s Living operation of Justice and reconciliation that we have in Christ.  Pointing a loaded weapon also silences deliberation as it bullies and creates anxiety in others.  One step earlier in this sequence of bullying is carrying a concealed weapon. For it takes one step from concealment to pointing, one more step to firing.  How would that process proceed?  Would it be a process of the Holy Spirit who according to Gen 1.1-2 and Mark 1.10 initiates new life? Or would it be a process of fear?  Would the pointing of a gun, even ostensibly to protect life (“for the children of our church”) initiate the new life of those children protected? How would those children who witnessed a church shooting by their parents' revered pastor take that memory forward into life?  Rather, isn’t the process of concealing to shooting a concealed gun by a pastor one of both taking the physical life of an alleged bad guy and damaging the spiritual life of witnesses?

For me, the answer to the question of concealing a gun during my ministry is obvious.  For me and my  house, while we are on earth we will serve Jesus who preached the Sermons on the Mount and the Plain and is the Prophet of Eschatological peace and wholeness, through whom I am saved by the announcement of the forgiveness of sins validated by the gift of His Holy Spirit and the reports of His cross and resurrection (1 Cor 7, Col 1, Lk 23.24, Jn 1.1-5, Gal 1.6-10).  Accordingly, I will bless peace and peacemaking, neighborliness and care of the sick and hungry around me.  I cannot do that authentically and with integrity if my spirit is burdened by the false sense of security of a concealed, human made death device.  Those who live by the Spirit will live. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.  I won’t exchange my discipleship of the Lord of Heaven and Earth for citizenship in Bible thumping  2^nd Amendment Exceptionalism.

The urge to assert our wills over that of others is part of our human tendency to tyranny and oppression. Our desire to assert out wills in the creation of a god with the same enemies as our own is part of our human tendency to idolatry. If you're at all concerned, ask your pastor about weapons and instances of congregants carrying guns.  Demand the truth, for God is a God of light and truth, not a God of concealment waiting to get the preemptive or retributive drop on you or your neighbor the moment hostility is detected. My Presbyterian Church (USA) has a wide ranging policy where our churches prohibit or guide toward the prohibition of guns carried into our churches. Check out http://www.presbyterianmission.org/gunviolence/

---

[1] “For.”  There was no punctuation or verse numbers in the early Greek manuscripts of the New Testament so that our English Bible's creation of a verse 36 and 37 makes a separation where there was none in the Greek.

[2] Resolving the differing manuscript witnesses to the fulfillment of Isa 53:12 contextualized in

Luke 22:35-38 OR in Mark *15:28 has significant ecclesiastical and moral import. https://carm.org/king-james-onlyism/was-mark-1528-removed-from-modern-bibles/