# "Desecration" of the Eucharist **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 18, 2011, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144 "2011-03-18T13:09:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/261 "2011-03-21T20:52:23Z")
I put the question of criminality up in a separate [GQ thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13597704#post13597704). Hopefully we can get some lawyers to give us a definitive answer. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/262 "2011-03-21T20:55:53Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That is not an applicable case. That person was not arrested or charged for walking out with a wafer given to him during communion, but for trying to grab a handful away from a priest. You won’t he able cite a case of anyone charged with a crime for walking out with a wafer they received during communion because that’s flat out not illegal. There is no relevant difference between grabbing a wafer from a priest and sneaking one. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/263 "2011-03-21T21:11:50Z")
Being given a wafer is not “sneaking” one. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/264 "2011-03-21T21:14:52Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Being given a wafer is not “sneaking” one. What part of “palming” is not “sneaking”? You are given the wafer for a particular purpose. the only way you can leave the church without fulfilling that purpose is to hide it, as a shoplifter hides the swag. That is the very definition of “sneaking”. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/265 "2011-03-21T21:19:06Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > What part of “palming” is not “sneaking”? he didn’t palm it until after it was given to him and became his own property. > [@](#): > > You are given the wafer for a particular purpose. the only way you can leave the church without fulfilling that purpose is to hide it, as a shoplifter hides the swag. That is the very definition of “sneaking”. This will get you nowhere as a theory to charge somebody with theft. Cook made no such promise and was aware of no such agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/266 "2011-03-21T21:19:15Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > What part of “palming” is not “sneaking”? > > You are given the wafer for a particular purpose. the only way you can leave the church without fulfilling that purpose is to hide it, as a shoplifter hides the swag. That is the very definition of “sneaking”. You cannot shoplift what is freely given you. Is it against the law to put in my pocket a cracker that a store has given me to sample? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/267 "2011-03-21T21:20:57Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > he didn’t palm it until after it was given to him and became his own property. > > This will get you nowhere as a theory to charge somebody with theft. Cook made no such promise and was aware of no such agreement. If he thought he was committing no wrong, why did he “palm” it? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/268 "2011-03-21T21:23:18Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > You cannot shoplift what is freely given you. Is it against the law to put in my pocket a cracker that a store has given me to sample? Because it is not “freely” given to you. It is given only for a certain purpose. In this case, for communion. You can’t take it for desecration. The store is not analogous, because the store employees will not forcibly prevent you from leaving if you simply walk out with a cracker, and do not care if you desecrate it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/269 "2011-03-21T21:28:05Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > If he thought he was committing no wrong, why did he “palm” it? We’re not talking about a “wrong.” That’s purely subjective. We’re talking about whether it’s actually a crime. It ain’t. Having said that, Cook apparently knew he was _expected_ to eat the wafer, and knew it might be perceived as rude if he didn’t. That’s not the same thing as showing awareness of some grievous “wrong,” much less a crime. Sometimes my daughters like to experiment in the kitchen with baking things, and the results aren’t always great. I have, on occasion, pretended to accept a less than stellar “cookie” or “brownie,” only to hide it and covertly dispose of it later. Am I doing “wrong” when I do that? What if the next door neighbor offers me hockey puck cookies, and I palm one then toss it when I get home. Have I done “wrong?” ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/270 "2011-03-21T21:28:56Z")
All you have to do is show me where it is written down for the parishioner what may or may not be done with the communion wafer. I’d even accept a verbal statement given before communion. Until then, the church’s expectations as to what will be done won’t matter a whit in a court of law. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/271 "2011-03-21T21:29:05Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Because it is not “freely” given to you. It is given only for a certain purpose. Cook made no such agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/272 "2011-03-21T21:30:24Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cook made no such agreement. Maybe it was written somewhere on the church bulletin, or on the back of the wafer? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/273 "2011-03-21T21:34:03Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > All you have to do is show me where it is written down for the parishioner what may or may not be done with the communion wafer. I’d even accept a verbal statement given before communion. Until then, the church’s expectations as to what will be done won’t matter a whit in a court of law. I’ve sat through scores, probably hundreds of Catholic masses and have never heard the priest or anyone else make any verbal statements about what may or may not be done with the host after it’s received. They don’t even say out loud that you have to be Catholic to receive it. A person unfamiliar with Catholic beliefs and practices would not be informed of these things during mass, and could easily receive the wafer and take it home without any idea that they were breaking any rules. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/274 "2011-03-21T21:34:33Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cook made no such agreement. He doesn’t need to make any express “agreement”. He presented himself for the sacrament, which only believing, baptised Catholics are supposed to do. By so doing, he impliedly represented himself to be one - and that he would follow the sacramental procedures. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/275 "2011-03-21T21:36:07Z")
Is a claim being made that it is actually against the law to take Communion under false pretenses? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/276 "2011-03-21T21:36:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’ve sat through scores, probably hundreds of Catholic masses and have never heard the priest or anyone else make any verbal statements about what may or may not be done with the host after it’s received. They don’t even say out loud that you have to be Catholic to receive it. A person unfamiliar with Catholic beliefs and practices would not be informed of these things during mass, and could easily receive the wafer and take it home without any idea that they were breaking any rules. Any notion that he had no idea what he was doing was wrong is negated by the fact that he allegedly “palmed” the host. Obviously, if he truly did not understand that what he was doing was wrong, no crime was committed - intentionality, or mens rea, is part of the definition. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/277 "2011-03-21T21:37:52Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Is a claim being made that it is actually against the law to take Communion under false pretenses? No, the claim is that taking of property under false pretences is a crime. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/278 "2011-03-21T21:39:40Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > No, the claim is that taking of property under false pretenses is a crime. The communion wafer is the property under discussion here, so there is no difference. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/279 "2011-03-21T21:42:05Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The communion wafer is the property under discussion here, so there is no difference. Sure there is. Merely attending the mass without following the Catholic rules is a different thing from attending a mass to steal a wafer for later desecration. The latter is the subject of the thread, not the former. ---
**Author:** ![Pazu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pazu/32/15522_2.png) [@Pazu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pazu)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144/280 "2011-03-21T21:55:39Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Sure there is. Merely attending the mass without following the Catholic rules is a different thing from attending a mass to steal a wafer for later desecration. The latter is the subject of the thread, not the former. There is no evidence that Cook intended to desecrate the wafer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/desecration-of-the-eucharist/575144.md?page=15)