This is a response post to Fr. Stephen’s post on the desecration of the Holy Eucharist. While the desecrator had no direct confession of his atheist’s conviction, there’s a common thread between him treating the consecrated Host with disdain and atheist Sam Harris calling the Christian celebration as “eating crackers”. I hesitate to cross the line of Christian apologetics especially in this blog for personal reasons. But I couldn’t agree more with author Dinesh D’Souza that it’s actually part of loving God with all our mind. Some of you might have come across with my response posted in Fr. Stephen’s blog to probably the first e-debate over the subject triggered by the Blogger’s Prayer during last year’s Philippine Blog Awards. I remain convinced that opening the conversation in this country will allow us to explore new tools especially for our young people to counter the cunning minds of atheists in our midst. Our reasonableness is not based on fear of losing our faith; it is clearing our minds with the cobwebs of reservation. Here’s what partly inspired me to write this second post for today. It is a talk (quite a length of 44 minutes) delivered by D’Souza, author of What’s So Great About Christianity. Here’s also an online response to atheism from a Georgetown University professor, thanks to Explorefaith. Believe me – the talk is as captivating as Dan Brown’s novels!
Climbing Mt. Tabor/DesertFishing... 
It is just that non-Christians find the idea of eating your lord and savior… weird. Aren’t you guys supposed to be opposed to cannibalism?
Hi Mr. Skinner, thanks for visiting my blog. Since you are non-Christian, then I’m not going to respond to your “weird feeling” over the Eucharist by thumping the Bible because for us, it takes FAITH to assent to the truth of the words of our Lord and Savior. But come to think of this: if you were conceive through a natural birth process, then, it’s not hard to imagine that you actually came to exist by “eating the flesh” of your mother. That’s cannibalism of sort. What’s the choice for you to exist but for your mother to flesh off so to speak. Yes, Christianity opposes cannibalism; even pioneered the moral grounds for opposing to it. But there is undeniably a kind of natural cannibalism that could not be fenced off by reason and we Christians call it kenosis. It keeps the world going in a more meaningful way just as you freely express your opinions on this blog.
Actually no- what we get from our mothers would be blood. Technically, not even that- the blood stays in the mothers system and transfers nutrients over to the baby. It is as sterile process you can get with flesh and blood.
It isn’t that I am unfamiliar with Christianity- I have been on the net too long for that. It is just that whenever I see spandrel I seek an explanation. The whole concept of the Eucharist is… odd.
I’m glad you’re back. Hematological residues aside, there are other givens that you must have inherited from your mother (and your father) such as genes and other emotional carryovers. The whole concept of the Eucharist is SELF-GIVING, and if you see no sign of self-emptying in the fetal development and birth-giving, then, my argument would be irrelevant for you. Since you have been over-familiar with Christianity as you claim, and still find the Eucharist an odd ritual, then, let’s just leave things as they are. But I hope that as a seeker, openness to Mystery is a coeval phrase, in the same manner that as a seeker myself, odd things also come my way.
Except neither of those are comparable. The genetic material and add-on coding we get from our parents are in the sperm and egg- both specialized vehicles and neither considered body proper.
The reason pregnancy is such a sacrifice is that you have your life support systems working for two and your body can’t handle it well, not any sacrifice of the flesh… well, except for appearence.
The reason I find it odd is it closely resembles the rational for primitive cannabalism- absorbing anothers power.
“…it closely resembles the rational for primitive cannabalism…”
I’ll glean a grain of truth from this proposition because aside from its air of uncertainty, (I assume that you know the definition of cannibalism which is eating the same species), on the metaphorical level, truth is better conveyed correlationally than with absolute, dogmatic certainty. And when I say natural cannibalism in its evolutionary, self-emptying sense of women experiencing the birth process, I mean its Eucharistic correlation. That’s comparison on the metaphorical level and I hope it clears the discussion field. To resonate with you, yes, the Eucharist appears cannibalistic but is not because Christians do not undermine the truth that Christ is really present substantially even if in the form of bread and wine “only” (there goes our definition of cannibalism!). The rest of the proof, we leave to the cavern of mystery.
i wouldn’t be able to explain that Dfish… thanks for this entry and the comments here. Tonight i just had a conversation with an agnostic student from Spain and i am ashamed I could not defend the faith I profess…
i have a confession to tell hehe (kala mo mabigat), my closest friends in my lists of students are the agnostics and athiests… We have very close ties now. We email and chat outside class hours. A Christian couple ive met told me might be God puts me where I am right now to be His instrument for these people… mahirap kasi i dont want to sound preachy because these are smart people and di mga tga bundok.. well one of them is interested in knowing God and is now reading Catholic articles… thanks again!
It’s good to meet where are, often, at the cerebral level. For a while, i have to set aside faith as a way of life because they have no idea what’s it’s all about. They always think faith should always be reasonable. Friendship – yes, you’re right on your experience, it’s always possible. Minsan, hindi lang kasi tayo sanay sa rational conversation kasi as Filipinos, it often slips into personalan. This is something i have to unlearn also. But personal witnessing i still maintain is the most convincing argument in favor of our faith. thanks for taking the time to read this difficult topic…
i must admit na-anemic aq sa pagbabasa ng entry nato… God bless bro!
Take ka ferrous sulfate kapatid…di man gud pwede mag-binisaya kay si Mr. Skinner wrote from DC…Familiar lagi imo face Day?
nah mao na ni ron basi kaila ta hehe… pari ako manghud dire sa diocese of tagum… oist wala na akong cursor na makalibat hehehe… so kasabot ka bisaya?
hinuon common aq fes always nay moingon kaila ba raw mi… daghan sa palengke ning dagwaya
Basaha na lang akong Kalamunggay Sa Bisaya na Manok widget. Kasabot ba ka Sinurigao?
lisod man sab xa sabton oi 😦 di q kasabot sinurigao…
hay naku I am always wasted when arguing with these atheists. It is as if there no end.
Buti naman alam mo yung nangyari sa PBA dati nung inatake nila si Fr. Stephen, naku isa ako sa mga nadisgust noon sa isang atheista na blogger. Nasa blogosphere na ako noon. Unak sabak ko pa lang sa blogosphere puro away na inabutan ko haha, at sa blog pa ni Fr. Stepehen LOL
naku mapapagod ka lang kasasagot dyan kay skinner LOL
Balita ko, sa Yuropa may heat wave na ng atheism kaya dun pinapadala ang mga Pinoy missionaries natin. Sa atin, may mangilan-ilan na rin na nagqu-quote kay Dawkins, porke nakabasa lang ng The God Delusion, tapon na kaagad ang lahat ng pinagtyagaan ng mga boluntaryong katekista sa parokya. But i still believe atheism comes as one stage of an inquiring faith. Kung kelan lang “maliwanagan” ulit, yan ang tanong.