CATHOLIC forums have been buzzing like angry wasps over the news this week that a young Spanish man was slapped by a priest for allegedly desecrating a communion wafer.
Outraged by the act, one religiot calling himself Sternhauser posted this comment on Phatmass.com:
Boy, that priest should have slapped that boy until he acknowledged that he had done wrong. Over and over again. A million slaps, yea, even a million lashes wouldn’t be able to punish the boy for what he did, or force him to acknowledge that what he did was wrong, but that priest sure should have tried. Perhaps he should have even called down fire from heaven upon the young blasphemer’s house. Because that’s how souls are saved.
According to this report, the priest in Spain’s province of Valencia slapped the young man in a church in the town of Rótova during a local festival on the evening of September 5.
Believing that the young man had discarded a communion wafer, which the Catholic faith teaches is truly the body and blood of Jesus Christ under the mere appearance of bread, Rev Victor Jimeno then threw him out of the church while denouncing him as a “blasphemer.”
The victim, however, returned the blow.
According to statements made by the priest, the young man may actually be innocent and is taking the blame for a friend who actually did commit the deed.
The priest spoke to the parents of the young man, who has taken to bed in an apparent fit of pique.
Said Jimeno:
Rótova is a small town, a big family, and we don’t want the news to go further.
And he hoped that the town would not become the butt of jokes.
While he recognized that it was indeed members of his own congregation who committed the outrage, the priest says he wants to promote reconciliation and peace.
A friend of the young man who was assaulted by the priest explained that his friend is very upset and unrepentant. The friend explained that the young man threw the communion wafer to the floor during a fit of choking.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
September 9th, 2010 at 9:21 am
That boy was lucky he only had a slap from the priest and not the usual kiddie-fiddling treatment. Stupid priests, it was only a “I can’t believe it’s not jebus cracker” water, flour and not much else.
September 9th, 2010 at 9:47 am
They’re crackers!
http://proudatheists.wordpress.....a-miracle/
September 9th, 2010 at 10:08 am
The Catholic church has been patting itself on the back for the effectiveness of its child protection policies – this demonstrates how hollow they are.
Can you imagine the uproar if this was a teacher hitting child for being “disrespectful”?
September 9th, 2010 at 10:14 am
Another Webster Cook I guess.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:29 am
Are these crackers special. Or would a Ryvita do? Or a Jacobs Cream Cracker? How do they differentiate? How are they turned into the body of Jesus? How do they make a single human body last amognst all these millions who are scoffing it?
September 9th, 2010 at 10:52 am
Doesn’t it equate to cannibalism? Which as far as I know is illegal. Arrest the lot of them!
September 9th, 2010 at 11:31 am
So what bit of Jesus was he choking on?
September 9th, 2010 at 11:41 am
That’s what you get when you try to steal PZ Myers’ fire… :/
http://www.crackergate.com/
September 9th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Definitely some hardcore nutters on that phatmass link. And they worry about what we might do during ratcatchers visit.
September 9th, 2010 at 2:00 pm
“Doesn’t it equate to cannibalism? Which as far as I know is illegal.”
In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is considered a grave offence to ever eat human flesh – even if dying of starvation and surrounded by corpses that won’t really mind. I remember watching the film Alive! in RE class at school, with the teacher explaining to us that under Catholic rules, what the survivors of a plane crash did to keep themselves alive was sinful. She clearly didn’t believe that and subtly encouraged us to think about situational ethics, which was very surprising in a Catholic school.
Anyway, I have pointed out to Catholics that it seems a bit hypocritical to claim to proudly eat the flesh of a human and then be against eating the flesh of a human, but they take great offence at the Eucharist being pointed out for what their own faith tells them it is.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
Look folks, let’s get down to basics here. I checked this out many years ago with an RC. He assured me that the cracker is the real stuff; real flesh; no substitutes. The wine is real blood but pass on that for now. There is only so much we can take on board at once.
In a somewhat heated and drunken discussion in a group with an RC – this was in my youth and a long time ago – the question arose as to what the cracker tasted like? Did it taste like flesh. Our drunken RC friend said it did not but it was a special kind of consecrated flesh. Another who had imbibed heavily wanted to know how he knew if it was flesh if it did not taste of flesh. I recall our source ending by saying that we were never going to understand as there were depths of understanding which were beyond us. On that we had to agree.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
It’s a sick breed that would beat a person over a freaking cracker. But that’s what religion does to people.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
It’s only cannibalism if it’s human flesh. Supposedly the person who’s flesh it is supposed to be was never human.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
@Harry.
Ist’t the person supposed to have been both fully human and fully non-human? That’s what I glean from this quote from the 1870 vatican council decree anyway. Perhaps I’m wrong – it does look a bit incoherent. More than a bit.
‘I, Pius, bishop of the catholic church, with firm faith believe and profess each and every article contained in the profession of faith which the holy Roman church uses, namely:
* I believe in one God
o the Father almighty,
+ maker of
# heaven and
# earth, of
+ all things
# seen and
# unseen. And in
o one Lord Jesus Christ
+ the only-begotten Son of God.
# Born of the Father before all ages.
* God from God,
* light from light,
* true God from true God.
* Begotten not made,
* of one substance with the Father:
+ through whom all things were made.
+ Who for us humans and for our salvation
# came down from heaven.
* He was incarnate by the holy Spirit of the virgin Mary: and became man. He
# was crucified also for us, he suffered under Pontius Pilate and was buried. The third day he
# rose again according to the scriptures. He
# ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father.
# He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. And in
o the holy Spirit,
+ the lord and the giver of life, who
+ proceeds from the Father and the Son.
+ Who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified: who
+ spoke through the prophets. And
o one holy, catholic and apostolic church. ‘
David B
September 9th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
The formatting of that makes me think Pius was tweeting…
September 9th, 2010 at 4:56 pm
It’s the vampirism that worries me more than the cannibalism. Maybe that’s why vampires can’t enter churches — unfair competition.
Tom Lehrer, anyone?
September 9th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
@ JohnMWhite
The formatting didn’t translate across from where I copy/pasted it from.
It’s an interesting read, to my mind – really bizarre. I wonder how many catholics have read it – I reckon that if they all did a lot of them would defect straight away.
http://www.papalencyclicals.ne.....ecum20.htm
The piece I quote below is particularly ironic, given the various reports from Ireland and elsewhere.
‘What is more,
* the church herself
by reason of
+ her astonishing propagation,
+ her outstanding holiness and
+ her inexhaustible fertility in every kind of goodness, by
+ her catholic unity and
+ her unconquerable stability,
* is a kind of great and perpetual motive of credibility and an incontrovertible evidence of her own divine mission.’
David B
September 9th, 2010 at 5:55 pm
Father, Son OK. But what about the Holy Ghost? How does that get eaten? I’m becoming confused about all this.
September 9th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
David B: interesting. So, it’s basically a formalized circular reasoning, built into the very heart of what it means to be catholic. “We do good, because we are here to do good, because we can only do good, because that is how we are here.” Somebody should clue them in. More crap from theologians gone wild.
September 9th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
@ David B – I remember parroting the drivel that is the profession of faith every week at Mass, and one week I just thought to myself “hang on, I don’t actually believe that bit… or that bit… uh-oh.” I have to wonder how many even know what they are saying, it just was automatic from as far back as I can remember. That’s not faith, it’s not even blind faith, it’s just a Pavlovian response. With blind faith you at least actively believe in something, but how can you believe when you in all likelihood don’t even know what you are professing?
@ Broga – it’s called the Holy Spirit these days, likely because it supposedly sloshes around in a chalice and gets parishioners a bit buzzed.
September 9th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
It has suddenly occurred to me that if consecrated wine is actually blood, it would not be possible to get pissed on it. I would imagine that if you actually drank a litre and a half of blood it would make you violently sick whereas a couple of bottles of wine would just make you drunk. Surely transubstantiation could be put to the test using a very simple experiment, or do the RC’s already have an answer prepared for that one?
September 9th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
I think they do have their answer ready Stonyground – as per usual. Unless you eat and drink in faith the trick doesn’t work. If you test God He gets V-E-R-Y A-N-G-R-Y!!!
September 9th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
@ Janstince & Broga The whole thing really is a horrendous, torturous philosophical and logical mess, isn’t it. How anybody can actually believe any of all this nonsense is genuinely beyond me. Yet sane, rational, clever people do. And, come to think of it, Ann Widdecombe. Which must prove it’s complete and utter bolocks!
September 9th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
The father is god, the son is god, and the holy ghost is god. And yet they are not three gods but one god. This is the Catholic faith, which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.
(Wikipedia)
September 9th, 2010 at 10:43 pm
“It has suddenly occurred to me that if consecrated wine is actually blood, it would not be possible to get pissed on it.”
As Peter Griffin said, if that’s really the blood of Christ, the guy must have been wasted 24/7.
September 9th, 2010 at 11:01 pm
I’m sure we all remember this.
“The shortage of priests has resulted in those who are currently ministering having to say multiple Masses, and often drive from church to church to do so, having drunk from the chalice in each church,” said Fr D’Arcy.
“Perhaps it could be enough for you to fail a drink-driving test. I don’t like to use the word wine, as it is Christ’s blood in the Eucharist — but it still has all the characteristics of wine when in the blood stream.”
http://www.independent.ie/nati.....09613.html
September 10th, 2010 at 9:35 am
Sorry, but this guy Sternhauser is not a religiot at all: he’s just being sarcastic.
September 10th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
I must say that I can’t decide whether that site is serious or not! Some of the comments definitely ARE meant to be taken seriously – like this (I think!):
Corporal punishment is an acceptable form of discipline in some situations. if the young man knew what he was doing then I would say he got off light.
Withhold not chastisement from a boy; if you beat him with the rod, he will not die. – Proverbs 23:13
I cannot think of a situation where it would be okay for an inferior (layperson) to slap a superior (priest).
Hmmm…I beg to differ. I think that there is one “superior” whom we would ALL like to slap!!