FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Assault and batter desecrators?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Men, you're at a traditional Mass. You're sitting near the front. The last man to take communion goes to the center, turns to the congregation, spits out the Host, and starts yelling: "This is a farce! You idiots believe that this wafer is GodHuh? Fools!" He says other predictable things. He's clearly of the "new atheist" herd. He then starts stamping on the Host he spat out.

Do you assault and batter him? If not, what would it take for you to do so?
Restrain and have him arrested, probably.
That's one bold dude.  LOL

I really don't know what I'd do. I would be really angry. But, yeah. It wouldn't take anything more than that to boil my blood. I'd probably vault over the pews just like anyone else.

I can't imagine he'd avoid getting his ass handed to him at either of the TLMs I've attended. The ushers at both are a group of pretty big dudes, and they'd still be up there to get the last guy back to his seat.

Actually, come to think of it, the ushers are the last to receive at both of the TLMs, so he'd have to deal with them.
This question has come up before and this is the response I gave:

I think we can use proportionate force with prudence to defend sacred things. For example, I knew of a church where some guy rushed the tabernacle and the ushers tackled him. On the other hand, I think we've crossed the line when one as a private individual takes it into his own hands to punish, take revenge, or exact retribution from a blasphemer. The temporal authority has the authority to do this to advance the common good, but individuals cannot claim that authority of their own accord. In other words, if the ushers in my first example, after sufficiently restraining the offender, had proceeded to give him a beating, they would have exceeded their authority.
Yeah, I'm thinking in terms of local law... I mean, if a dog barks at you and you kick up you could be charged with cruelty to animals for use of disproportionate and unnecessary force. So if such a desecration were to occur and the blasphemer wasn't physically threatening those around him, I'm not sure how kindly a judge would look on assault and battery... although that would be mitigated because of the provocation. But yet - at the cross, the disciples didn't start fighting the Roman guards who were abusing Our Lord.
(12-01-2010, 12:04 PM)Jitpring Wrote: [ -> ]Men, you're at a traditional Mass. You're sitting near the front. The last man to take communion goes to the center, turns to the congregation, spits out the Host, and starts yelling: "This is a farce! You idiots believe that this wafer is GodHuh? Fools!" He says other predictable things. He's clearly of the "new atheist" herd. He then starts stamping on the Host he spat out.

Do you assault and batter him? If not, what would it take for you to do so?

What would be the motivation to "assault" him?  He's clearly already committed the act, for one thing.  By assault, did you perhaps mean "restrain" - a completely different matter?

If you think that the Church would ever support a crowd physically beating a person who committed a blasphemous act I think you are rather off-base.  Young, angry, single male trads might be prone to such acts but no saint would be.
(12-01-2010, 01:00 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-01-2010, 12:04 PM)Jitpring Wrote: [ -> ]Men, you're at a traditional Mass. You're sitting near the front. The last man to take communion goes to the center, turns to the congregation, spits out the Host, and starts yelling: "This is a farce! You idiots believe that this wafer is GodHuh? Fools!" He says other predictable things. He's clearly of the "new atheist" herd. He then starts stamping on the Host he spat out.

Do you assault and batter him? If not, what would it take for you to do so?

What would be the motivation to "assault" him?  He's clearly already committed the act, for one thing.  By assault, did you perhaps mean "restrain" - a completely different matter?

If you think that the Church would ever support a crowd physically beating a person who committed a blasphemous act I think you are rather off-base.  Young, angry, single male trads might be prone to such acts but no saint would be.

Yeah, like St. Nicholas would never punch out the heretic Arius.

I think Catholics need to start becoming more like the Muzzies in terms of putting out hits on these "artists" that show ants crawling on Jesus and the Blessed Mother being urinated on.

St Nicholas: He Who Punches Heretics in the Face (and Gives Gifts to Children)
Posted by Taylor Marshall

[Image: nicholas-punches-arius.jpg]
The painting above depicts St Nicholas
punching the heretic Arius at the Council of Nicea

When President Teddy Roosevelt was a college student, he taught a Sunday School class for elementary school children. During this time, Roosevelt awarded a dollar to a boy in his Sunday School class for beating the snot out of a bully who tormented little girls. "You did exactly right," said Roosevelt with pride. However, the congregation disagreed. They immediately dismissed Roosevelt for teaching the "un-Christian" principle of laying the smack down on those who have it coming to them.

Well, if tradition is true, that little boy was also richly rewarded by Jolly Old Saint Nicholas since the good Saint Nick allegedly "h-slapped" ("heretic slapped") the heresiarch Arius. You see, Arius wrongly taught that Christ was not fully divine. Rather, Arius taught that Christ had been created by God the Father.

During the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea (AD 325), Arius was called upon to defend his position on the inferiority of Christ. Saint Nicholas just couldn't listen to all of Arius' nonsense and so he stood up and laid in to Arius with his fist.

The Emperor Constantine and the bishops present at the Council were alarmed by Nicholas' act of violence against Arius. They immediately stripped Nicholas of his office as a bishop by confiscating the two items that marked out a man as a Christian bishop: Nicholas' personal copy of the Gospels and his pallium (the vestment worn by all bishops in the East).

Now if that were the end of the story, we probably wouldn't know about Saint Nicholas, and our children wouldn't be asking him for presents. However, after Nicholas was deposed, the Lord Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary visited Nicholas who was being held in a prison cell for his fist-fight with the heretic.

Our Lord Jesus Christ asked Saint Nicholas, "Why are you here?" Nicholas responded, "Because I love you, my Lord and my God."

Christ then presented Nicholas with his copy of the Gospels. Next, the Blessed Virgin vested Nicholas with his episcopal pallium, thus restoring him to his rank as a bishop.

Traditional icons of Saint Nicholas depict this miracle as in the image below:
[Image: sinnic.jpg]
Notice Christ (left) holding out the book of the Gospels,
and Mary (right) holding out the episcopal pallium,
Nicholas (center) holding the Gospels and wearing the pallium

When the Emperor Constantine heard of this miracle, he immediately ordered that Nicholas be reinstated as a bishop in good standing for the Council of Nicea. Today we recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday so we know how the controversy played out. The bishops at Nicea sided with Saint Nicholas and Saint Athanasius and they condemned Arius as a heretic. To this very day, we still recite in the Creed that Christ is "God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, begotten not made, one in being with the Father."

I leave you with one last painting of the legendary event:
[Image: 317163508_fea2ea9f01_o.jpg]
Nicholas is on the left holding up his fist, Arius is on the ground with his hands up. The guy on the throne is Constantine.

Saint Nicholas, pray for us.

http://cantuar.blogspot.com/2009/12/st-n...cs-in.html
(12-01-2010, 01:00 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: [ -> ]What would be the motivation to "assault" him?  He's clearly already committed the act, for one thing.  By assault, did you perhaps mean "restrain" - a completely different matter?

If I meant restrain, I would have said so. I mean precisely assault and battery. That is:

Assault:

1. the intentional,
2. nonconsensual creation
3. in another
4. of a reasonable
5. apprehension (not necessarily fear)
6. of imminent
7. harmful
8. or offensive
9. contact
10. upon his person.

Similarly, by battery, I mean it in its precise legal sense:

1. the intentional,
2. nonconsensual infliction
3. of harmful
4. or offensive
5. contact
6. upon the person of another.

Some suggested that the authorities be called. They'd do nothing. They'd say: "Arrest him? On what ground?" Rather, that valiant man who assaults and batters the desecrator would be charged, and could well be convicted - for he can't, in the eyes of the world, reasonably claim defense of a third party.

As the "new atheist" pig has desecrated the body of Christ, the primary motive for this assault and battery would be justice. The secondary motive would be vengeance. And the tertiary motive would be deterrence of any similar future actions by such pigs.

As posted above, St. Nicholas punched out Arius. That was assault. In today's day surely he would be arrested and jailed. In fact St. Nicholas we learn was jailed when he did this and had his Bishopric stripped by man. Our Lord appeared to St. Nicholas and asked why he was in jail. Nicholas said "Because I love you, my Lord and my God." Our Lord and the Blessed Mother gave Nicholas his Bishopric back. I would say that is proof that Our Lord and Our Lady rewards those who defend Him even with violence if necessary.

I would rather be punished by man and rewarded by God.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10