Recently there has been a rash of desecration of the Eucharist during communion time. As a result, there have been some calls to restore communion on the tongue.
That is one solution.
A priest in Valencia Spain witnessed a young man during communion take the Eucharist and throw it on the floor. The priest then decided on a course of action that one could properly call old school apologetics of the corporal kind.
The priest slapped the young man across the face and dragged him from the Church and loudly pronounced him a ‘blasphemer.’
There are different schools of thought on this. Some will undoubtedly say that …
September 7, 2010 at 5:20 am
Its about time.
Obviously I always bank on the experience and temperance of the priest in these cases. One has to ask if the intent was malicious or rather only ignorant, I think that in the latter case the Priest might have acted more as a counselor than an enforcer but either way the correct message was given and I imagined received.
September 7, 2010 at 7:44 am
I don't think Jesus would condone violence.
And legally, I believe that constitutes as battery and is a transgression of our secular law.
September 7, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Slap him a second time.
September 7, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Loki: try reading the bible.
September 7, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Loki, according to the Bible, if totally freaking out and turning over tables is a valid option, why not a wake-up call delivered to the side of the head?
September 7, 2010 at 1:35 pm
A casual attitude toward the things of God should not ever been tolerated much less condoned. The second guessing of third parties is handicapped by their own assumptions. The priest in charge of the service is the only one in a position to know the truth of what happened and the truth of what exactly he did in response. The priest has no apology to make. The young man involved apparently has decided to sulk. From the article, he appears to have acted appropriately. Again with reference to the article cited, the anonymous "victim…. returned the blow" and having taken to his bed is described as "upset… unrepentant." He should be glad that good father did not step back so that the earth could open up under that young man's feet.
September 7, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Abort him. That's perfectly legal.
September 7, 2010 at 3:48 pm
"A friend of the young man who was assaulted by the priest explained that his friend is very upset and unrepentant."
Evidently "Father" didn't smack him hard enough.
September 7, 2010 at 4:05 pm
Well, my only question is if the appropriate person to administer the paternal correction would have been the priest or some Knights of Columbus/ushers standing watch by the communion lines. When I served as usher for a few years, one of our duties were to stand guard by parishoners receiving the Holy Eucharist, and there were times we had to step in to make sure the host was consumed properly. When necessary, we involved one of the priests (not the celebrant).
September 7, 2010 at 4:54 pm
Just cleansing the Temple, folks. Good job.
— Mack
September 7, 2010 at 6:55 pm
I agree with those that cite Christ and His reaction to the merchants in the Temple. Action was certainly called for in this case too, and I rest assured it was the correct action taken. God bless the priest for defending Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, it was a good lesson for all…
September 7, 2010 at 7:14 pm
If he shouldn't have been slapped for what he did, I'm sure there is something in his life he needs to be whacked for. Hit him again, I say.
September 7, 2010 at 8:24 pm
If this occured in the United States, the priest most probably would have been suspended, reassigned, or taken to the woodshed at best; at worst, his local Bishop would have apologized to the "community" and taken steps to have the priest laicized. The Bishop would have written a lengthy essay emphasizing the pacificity of Christ while giving lip service to the true meaning of the "Real Presence" (most probably using the word Church without the definite article). In the end the Bishop and the desecrator would be feautred on the cover of Time holding hands, as well as being invited to appear on Oprah. The Priest, on the other hand would be facing assualt and hate crime charges. And if the local federal prosecutor had national political ambitions, federal hate crime charges would also be filed.
September 7, 2010 at 9:00 pm
The way I see it there are two ways to defend Christianity there is the St. Francis way and the St. Louis IX way.
In both cases the will of God is being done.
September 7, 2010 at 9:08 pm
I had a protestant friend tell me that her greatest problem with converting is that Catholics don't take the Eucharist seriously. If we REALLY believe that this is the Body and Blood of Jesus- we should be going up the aisle on our knees weeping with gratitude that our Lord would even consider to share Himself in this way- in the Byzantine rite, the proper way to receive is both species together- so receiving on the hand is impossible- I believe the Roman rite should do away with receiving on the hand- it is like the lay person is giving him/herself the Eucharist
September 8, 2010 at 4:43 am
I'm going way out on a limb here, but I suspect the Blessed Mother might not be too mad with the priest in question. Why is it acceptable to profane, desecrate, abuse, and insult Jesus today? How is this different than those who spit upon Him on his long walk to Cavalry? Kudos to this brave and gutsy priest who believes that Jesus truly is present body, blood, soul and divinity in the Eucharist.Hooray!
September 8, 2010 at 5:33 am
@ Loki: I think Jesus did a lot more than condone righteous anger, he made a whip of some cords and drove the blasphemers out of the temple for sacrilege. I'm sure the people who felt his whip across their backs would disagree with your comment. In any case, I think the priest involved here was so incensed and infuriated by the sacrilege offered to God at that moment that he lost his cool. That can happen to us all. I don't think that was his modus operandi for dishing out pastoral discipline.
September 8, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Jerome-
you really described the condition of the Church in the USA. Too true and too SAD!!!
It was not like that in the 50's but as the liberals took over that has been the result.
September 8, 2010 at 11:43 pm
The young man knew what he was doing and he didn't expect to be rebuked . . . of course, he can keep his tail betwixt his legs where it belongs. I'd have slapped him twice, at least. Is not the Host the Lord of Hosts? That young man wanted to be tough and got knocked down, rightfully.
September 9, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Where I stand – excommunicate the culprit. The priest's actions causes him to lose dignity – both personally and officially.
On a related note, my pastor says, "The Lord can take care of Himself." The context was during my son's first communion and the concern over the particles that are comprised when receiving Holy Communion by the hand. IMHO – the Lord can indeed take care of Himself, but we as stewards of His immense mystery must do due diligence to prevent sacrilege and to encourage devotion. So, maybe have a communion police to watch the communicants consume the sacred species?