Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title Posted By Question Date
Eucharistic Sacrilege John Sunday, July 8, 2012

Question:

Greetings Brother! My daughter was married last weekend in the Catholic Church where she grew up. She has married a man, who though a baptized Catholic has not practiced since a child and now says he does not believe in God. His father is also an unbeliever. Since the pastor at this church was away that weekend, she chose a wedding conducted by the deacon,without the Eucharist as part of the sacrament. Though it grieved me not to have the Eucharist as part of the celebration, I later confided to my older daughter (now also claiming to have lost her Faith, despite a degree in Theology from the University of Dallas) that I was relieved that the Eucharist was not subjected to potential sacrilege, with many non-believers present, including several who publicly flaunt their homosexuality. My daughter was appalled that I made such a judgemental statement. Was I wrong in feeling this way?



Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OMSM(r), L.Th., D.D.

Dear John:

I moved your question to this form since it has nothing to do with Liturgical Law, the forum you post originally.

I applaud your daughter for doing the right thing and avoid any sacrilege by not offering communion during her wedding.

As for your other daughter, as I understand the situation you describe, you expressed relief that Our Lord was not abused by those not qualified to receive our Lord, such as by non-believers and homosexuals.

Your judgment and feelings on the matter are spot on and totally correct. Sacrilege of the Blessed Sacrament is about the most serious sin possible. St. Paul describes that people were sick and some even died because they committed sacrilege against the Body and Blood of our Lord (1 Cor 11:27-30).

As for your daughter, if she does not believe in making judgments about people, then why did she judge you as being judgmental? I always get a kick at these so-called "let's not judge" hypocrites.

We are to make judgments, just not judgments of a person's soul, or judgments that are based on double-standard or hypocrisy. Otherwise we have a duty to judge behavior and ideas.

When a person chastises a person for telling the truth about something, what they are really saying is, "Please do not judge because I want to do this sin and not have to feel guilty about it."

You may be interested in an essay that talks all about this called, Three Secret Strategies of Satan. This essay goes into great detail on the theology and biblical exegesis of the three demonic lies: 1) never judge anyone; 2) all opinions are equal; and 3) never step on toes. All the problems in our society and in our Church can be distilled down, I believe, to one or more of these three lies of Satan.

As for so-called "tolerance", those that preach most on tolerance are the most intolerant people on the planet. Bishop Fulton Sheen, who was recently raised to the honor of "Venerable Servant of God" (the first step in the canonization of saints), said back in the 1930s:

“America is not suffering from intolerance. It is suffering from tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Our country is not nearly so much overrun with the bigoted as it is with the broadminded. In the face of this broadmindedness, what the world needs is intolerance.”

Thirty years later, the essayist Louis de Wahl wrote an essay called, "Against Tolerance," in which he put the pedal to the metal on this issue:

Tolerance is not a virtue. It is no more than amiable weakness. Yet it is typical of the confused thinking of our time that many people regard it as a virtue and believe they are giving praise when they say a man is tolerant. To tolerate something means to accept it or to permit it, even though one does not agree with it. Tolerance is an entirely passive concept, and only too often serves as a cloak for indifference and cowardice. It is, as someone once said, “the lowest form of collaboration”; and for exactly that reason it entails a great deal of personal responsibility. He who tolerates evil becomes an accessory to it.

Truth, because of its very nature, is absolutely intolerant. Two plus two equals four. Truth must protest against any other result of this addition. It will not accept seventeen, and it will not accept three and nine-tenths. Only four.

Besides, there is a certain measure of condensation about tolerance. I tolerate your proximity. Nice of me, isn't it?

But the worst thing about tolerance is that it knows nothing about love. It is, at best, the pale stepsister of patience.

All this does not imply that intolerance is a good thing. The opposite of a swelling on your head is a hole in your head, and that is not so good either.

We must always love the sinner, but hate the sin. We cannot tolerate sin unless we become an accomplice to it. The Church says that in the Catechism (CCC 1868).

In short, the sentiments you expressed to your daughter were not only appropriate, but were required of you. We are always to stand for truth, and whenever and wherever we have an opportunity we must confront error and evil and present the Truth of our Lord.

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary


Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum