"Desecration" of the Eucharist

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

Malthus, thought experiment to separate the issue of the acquisition of the cracker and the actual desecration.

I get a cracker that looks just like Eucharist cracker from an imposter cracker store, and then use it to reenact this guys thing. Then I post a video of the event claiming it’s a Eucharist cracker.

I’ve committed the same level of mocking, and the same offense as far as anyone can tell. Since the action is just as damaging do I deserve the same punishment even though it was secretly and completely my own property?

Why or why not?

How about another hypothetical. Let’s say I get a hold of some top secret $cientology documents through lies that only [del] thoroughly scammed[/del] devote are supposed to have through similar means to the cracker guy. I then post their documents for the world to see to help others avoid the scam.

Same methods, and probably the same level of outrage, just as wrong?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Ibn_Warraq

Ah my mistake. Well then I assume those who insist that destroying a wafer shouldn’t be seen as an insult to Catholics don’t think destroying a Quran or flushing a Quran in a toilet should be viewed as an insult to Muslims.

Anyway, would you mind answering my earlier question.

Since you’ve claimed that “Catholics have only been discriminated against by other Christians” were you A) unaware of the Armenian Holocaust, the discrimination Christians faced in the Ottoman Empire, the discrimination Christians face in the present day Middle East and Israel or B)when you say “Catholic” are you only referring to Roman Catholics?

I was talking about America.

[VarlosZ]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

. . . Those are the arguments which religionists can’t really refute, so they try a subtle kind of ad hominem approach instead.

Totally off-topic, but this seems as good a place to ask as as any: Is there something wrong with the word “theists” that requires its replacement with “religionists”? I’ve noticed its popping up more and more lately, and was wondering why. It sure *seems *to be used as a casual put down, and the dictionary definition (which I had to look up just now) would suggest that I’m right.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

The primary meaning of “eucharist” is to the ceremony, not to the fucking cracker.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@VarlosZ

Totally off-topic, but this seems as good a place to ask as as any: Is there something wrong with the word “theists” that requires its replacement with “religionists”? I’ve noticed its popping up more and more lately, and was wondering why. It sure *seems *to be used as a casual put down, and the dictionary definition (which I had to look up just now) would suggest that I’m right.

Yes, there is a difference. Not all theists are religionists. “Religionism” refers to a politicized, aggressive, activist attitude, Religion as a cause opposed to atheism. Armband religion. Not just believers, but a subset of believers.

[John_Mace]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

The primary meaning of “eucharist” is to the ceremony, not to the fucking cracker.

It may be the primary meaning, but it’s common to refer to both by that term. Note this thread title. And from wikipedia:

The phrase “the Eucharist” may refer not only to the rite but also to the consecrated bread (leavened or unleavened) and wine or, unfermented grape juice (in some Protestant denominations) or water (in Mormonism), used in the rite,[3] and, in this sense, communicants may speak of “receiving the Eucharist”, as well as “celebrating the Eucharist”.

As someone who grew up going to Catholic schools and going to church every Sunday, I can attest to both usages.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Malthus

You were not, in fact, mistaken.

Thank you for the correction.

I assumed since Dio has been so forceful about his knowledge and understanding of Catholicism that when he said “The Eucharist is the ceremony, not the wafer” that he was speaking from a position of authority.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John_Mace

As someone who grew up going to Catholic schools and going to church every Sunday, I can attest to both usages.

I went to Catholic schools too, am married to a catholic have kids in catholic school right now and have only heard the “eucharist” referred to as the ceremony, not the host. Now let’s quit with the juvenile gotcha game and return to the topic.

[John_Mace]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I went to Catholic schools too, am married to a catholic have kids in catholic school right now and have only heard the “eucharist” referred to as the ceremony, not the host. Now let’s quit with the juvenile gotcha game and return to the topic.

Well, the best way to ensure that happening is to simply admit your mistake and quit digging deeper.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Incidentally, even when the word “eucharist” is used to refer to the host, it is used to refer to the wafers and wine as a collective whole. Individual wafers are not “eucharists.”

[VarlosZ]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Yes, there is a difference. Not all theists are religionists. “Religionism” refers to a politicized, aggressive, activist attitude, Religion as a cause opposed to atheism. Armband religion. Not just believers, but a subset of believers.

Yeah, but it sure doesn’t seem to be used that way, at least not generally. Often the precise implication is debatable, but a lot of the time (e.g. this post) it clearly just means “not atheist,” and I don’t think I’ve ever seen it used to refer *explicitly *to a mere subset of believers (though I assume it has happened and would welcome examples).

Not a big deal, of course, but I would suggest that people deploy the term precisely and sparingly.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John_Mace

Well, the best way to ensure that happening is to simply admit your mistake and quit digging deeper.

I didn’t make a mistake. I corrected one. Individual wafers are not individual “eucharists.”

[Sarahfeena]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I went to Catholic schools too, am married to a catholic have kids in catholic school right now and have only heard the “eucharist” referred to as the ceremony, not the host. Now let’s quit with the juvenile gotcha game and return to the topic.

Sounds like you weren’t paying attention…the nuns should’ve whacked you for that!

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Sarahfeena

Sounds like you weren’t paying attention…the nuns should’ve whacked you for that!

I was paying attention. see above.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@VarlosZ

Yeah, but it sure doesn’t seem to be used that way, at least not generally. Often the precise implication is debatable, but a lot of the time (e.g. this post) it clearly just means “not atheist,” and I don’t think I’ve ever seen it used to refer *explicitly *to a mere subset of believers (though I assume it has happened and would welcome examples).

Not a big deal, of course, but I would suggest that people deploy the term precisely and sparingly.

I can’t speak for everybody, but that’s how I use it, and that’s why I use it.

[John_Mace]

So your objection is to the use of “a” instead of “the”.

[Ibn_Warraq]

It’s a bit amusing to see Dio angrily complaining about others playing a “juvenile gotcha game” considering his earlier behavior on this thread when he was claiming that Serbs were Catholics before revealing that he didn’t consider them Catholics since, according to him “Catholics have only faced discrimination from other Christians” which makes no sense if he honestly considered the Serbs to be Catholics.

[Peremensoe]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

I get a cracker that looks just like Eucharist cracker from an imposter cracker store, and then use it to reenact this guys thing. Then I post a video of the event claiming it’s a Eucharist cracker.

I’ve committed the same level of mocking, and the same offense as far as anyone can tell. Since the action is just as damaging do I deserve the same punishment even though it was secretly and completely my own property?

I’ve been largely baffled by the maniacal digression (with supporting threads, even) into the matter of how the particular wafer in question was obtained.

The real offense is to civility. It’s the obnoxious message, the pointless trolling gesture. Just as, for me, Pastor Terry Jones would be equally contemptible for burning a book of blank pages that he claimed was a Qur’an, as for announcing the burning of an actual Qur’an.

Punishment? No, just scorn for jerkishness, and for some maybe resentment for the bad name he helps to give atheism. (Oddly, Dio’s definition of “religionist” to me sounds like it applies perfectly, to himself and Myers.)

[Sarahfeena]

@John_Mace

So your objection is to the use of “a” instead of “the”.

Yes, it’s a meaningless pedantic nitpick. If you consecrate only one host, it’s still “The Eucharist.” If you consecrate a pile of them, and take one to a hospital to give to someone, it’s still “The Eucharist.” If you take one home and flush it down the toilet, you’re flushing “The Eucharist.”

[Ibn_Warraq]

@spark240

I’ve been largely baffled by the maniacal digression (with supporting threads, even) into the matter of how the particular wafer in question was obtained.

The real offense is to civility. It’s the obnoxious message, the pointless trolling gesture. Just as, for me, Pastor Terry Jones would be equally contemptible for burning a book of blank pages that he claimed was a Qur’an, as for announcing the burning of an actual Qur’an.

Punishment? No, just scorn for jerkishness, and for some maybe resentment for the bad name he helps to give atheism. (Oddly, Dio’s definition of “religionist” to me sounds like it applies perfectly, to himself and Myers.)

Agreed.

Also, I’m still surprised no one thinks it’s peculiar that in reaction to something done by Catholics that Myers defaced a Quran(or at least what he thinks is a Quran).

He reminds me of the Iranian government, in response to the Muhammad cartoons, printing a bunch of anti-Semitic cartoons.