In violation of the conduct code

Has has, of course, made his classroom a truly noxious place for Roman Catholics and presumably Muslims. Can a Roman Catholic expect a fair grade from this guy?

The University of Minnesota has become a by-word from the nation. My condolences to anyone who, for reasons of finance, has to go there in order to receive post-secondary education.

Can. 1367 One who throws away the consecrated species or, for a sacrilegious purpose, takes them away or keeps them, incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; a cleric, moreover, may be punished with some other penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state.

It seems to me that this qualifies as taking them away for a sacrilegious purpose.

Drew Mariani announced on Relevant Radio that the sacriledge was indeed carried out by Mr. Myers. He posted photos of the horrid act on his blog.

Geoff, Myers isn't Catholic so he can't be excommunicated. But if the people who retrieved hosts for him are Catholic they're excommunicated and it can't even be removed by their local bishop - they've gotta go all the way to Rome to get it lifted.

Boy, I will be glad when his 15 minutes are over...unless he keeps making noise that should be pretty soon. While it would've been more spectacular if the earth had opened up under his house or something, I get the idea that the madness he is clearly experiencing will be punishment in and of itself, as the madness is sure to grown when, as I said, his 15 minutes are over.

This is very sad, but not surprising. It would seem that every other world religion is left alone except those that have developed from the Judaic Law. Judaism and Christianity, in particular, have been mocked, ridiculed, and villified - and for what?

Moral absolutism. And oh, how the great and mighty intelligentsia hate absolutism.

I see this awful act as nothing more than a desperate professor yearning for notoriety. Look at his title - "The Great Desecration." What hubris! As though he thinks he is the most important person to desecrate something holy? One would almost think he looks at himself as the Roman soldier who pierced Jesus' side at the Cross.

As much as I felt a deep sorrow for what he had done, I almost wish that all Catholics would have simply ignored him. That would have stunned him. Especially with all his little bots running around his combox, wondering who they could rip into next. It was a feeding frenzy on his blog and he gleefully lapped it up.

Could he be a Saul of Tarsus? Maybe. Meanwhile, I do believe it reveals the issue of respect. (Our culture is quickly circling the drain on that one.) Why are we expected to respect all other religions but yet not Catholicism? I respect the beliefs of others, even atheists. Why is it they have such a problem respecting the beliefs of those who are Christian?

I agree with the observation on his credibility. But one thing this outrageous act did accomplish: it catapulted a mediocre mind into the realm of legend. Unfortunately, too many college students will mistakenly think this an act of brilliance.

Prof. Myers desecrates the host, he says, to prove that nothing is sacred, and that the destruction of any symbol, object, etc., is morally natural as objects have neither any inherent dignity nor any power to affect men, nor any ability to hurt them if they are insulted.

To prove this thesis, I suggest he perform the following experiment as a control: he should take a large cross and burn it in public.

If the professor can do so without any personal suffering, it would serve to prove his point.

wac

Certain parts of the Old Testament are making a lot more sense right now.

This is why we need state power.

I think the English translation hides a fundamental fact in the CIC 1367: Qui species consecratas abicit aut in sacrilegum finem abducit...

Meaning that the abduction needs to be done with the INTENT of causing sacrilege. If the person was conscious and knew full well that Myers would exactly execute what he announced, then, yes, they have excommunicated themselves. The main point of deciding this however is the intent behind it. For all we know, the person in question could have been a good Catholic, thinking and hoping and praying that the body of our Lord would bring down the Holy Spirit on Prof. Myers himself and sway him, or someone provided an unconsecrated host to him in order to factually minimise the damage. We simply cannot know. But the technicality is clear, even if the person doing the sacrilege was not the one doing the abduction, 1367 applies.

I am sure that anyone who responded to the request to "score" Myers some consecrated hosts realized that Myers intended no respectful actions. And what about the "Amen" said by the "scorers"?
As in, "Body of Christ", "Amen".
Myers was calling Jesus in the Eucharist a "cracker" from the beginning of his recent shenanigans. At the very least, his accomplices lied to provide him with the material he sought.
Also, I don't understand why Myers' public action was not seen immediately as a provocative act of violence. He is endangering many people by his little "lesson" to society. If some unbalanced person of Catholic or Muslim background
retaliates with violence, Myers should be held accountable for it.
Of course he should be fired. He has proven nothing significant by his words and actions but that he is incompetent for his current position and that he should not be in a role in which he can influence young people. He is already encouraging his fans to go out do more of what he has done.

"Could he be a Saul of Tarsus? Maybe."

Fresh into the current Pauline Year, it certainly would not be out of place to say some prayers to St. Paul for Myers' conversion.

Meanwhile, sickening as the whole thing is, I find some comfort in the fact that Myers' scorn and mocking statement are strongly reminiscent of the supposed triumph of Christ's first enemies on Calvary. They could see nothing but their "victory"; but of course, it was then that Christ was at his strongest and most victorious. May it also be so now.

Besides needing to pray for this man and his seriously deranged cohorts, I was trying to sift through his supposed bright logic for doing this desecration.

IF nothing should be 'sacred', this means, logically *nothing* in society ought to be held in high regard or with greater respect (since these are serious aspects of something held to be 'sacred') Sacred things are set aside and set apart from common use, and as objects given this value are saved for the exclusive use of a few chosen people who will treat the objects with respect and use them properly.

Kind of like personal property is set aside from common use of everyone and saved for the exclusive use of its owner. The owner of a car or a house expects his property to be treated with respect by others, and expects that no one will treat his personal objects as common goods.
Yet, this respect with which personal property is held is a kind of 'set apart' respect we also hold sacred objects to be - they belong in essence to someone else (or Someone else as it may be) and out of respect, they are not touched or used, except by those who are authorized to touch them by the someone or Someone who owns them. Sacred objects are God's personal property, and only those who are authorized to use them are permitted to do so.

Moving this progression forward just a bit, this notion that 'nothing should be sacred' should then extend to personal property too. Take the professor's car, for example. If students took his car for a joy ride, scratched their initials in the paint and slashed the tires, could he really complain about that in light of his own 'nothing is sacred' logic? Yet, I'll bet he's at the police station faster than you can whistle Dixie.

Now, if nothing should be sacred, and objects should not hold human respect, does this mean that the professor himself ought not be treated with human respect? Seeing that he does not seem to hold that there is a God, this means that he probably sees himself as an highly evolved animal. Should HE be given any human respect by his students or other faculty - should he be set aside for any kind of special human regard simply because he is called 'professor'? He is just an animal being paid to do a task, just like the janitor or the students hired to scrub the toilets in the dorms. He ought to be given no more respect or regard than the dean's dog.

I wonder how he'd react if this were pointed out to him - in his own classroom? By his own students? By the janitor?

By the dean's dog?

Remember what you said about all Church dissidents having problems with Church's teaching on sexual morality?

Here is Meyer's response to a question posed by the Raving Atheist

I am planning a day of fasting & prayer in reparation for his actions on August 6th - The Feast of the Transfiguration.

Please spread the word & join me!

Not one to link to myself, but after reading Dan's comment, I thought maybe I should.

At any rate, some might be interested in this:

http://catholic-teaching.org/2008/07/august-2008-is-officially-pray-for-pz-myers-month/

Thank you for that idea, Dan.

Thank you for that idea, Dan.
I think I"ll join you.
Lynn

It is very clear that Mr. Myers has a very small mind, and he is making up for that with outrageous behavior, with the intent of looking bigger and smarter than he is or can hope to be. Once one turns away from the love of God, one becomes desperate for any sort of affirmation, even from the anonymous crowd he seems to attract to his website. Rather than feed his useless quest for admiration, we should pray that he find and know what true fulfillment is--the love and mercy of God. Perhaps a Divine Mercy novena is in order, on his behalf. If I were as lost as he, I would certainly want someone to pray for me,too.

Thanks, TCN. Your suggestion came to me after the "deed" (the Divine Mercy deed, that is) but because of your suggestion, I think the deed bears repeating. I will do so. :)