>> If "cannibalism" meant only "eating human flesh," then Catholics would be cannibals. But since it also means "profaning a body for physical nourishment," the word doesn't apply.
To the extent that explanation seems hyper-specific, I would guess it's because the Eucharist is literally a miracle - something out of the ordinary that we therefore don't usually need language for. (What's coming to mind is if an alien race colonized earth, we would start making all kinds of distinctions we had previously taken for granted.)
"If I can’t externally verify whether you’re worshipping or venerating, is it idolatry?"
>> If I can't externally verify whether you're saluting the flag or shielding your eyes from the sun, is it patriotism? Seems to me it can still be patriotic, even though the external gesture is the same.
"candles you can light for €1."
>> You actually converted me on the candles! I once complained to you about our college charging $0.10 for printing; you were in favor of the policy and your answer made me pro-$1-candles where I wasn't previously. (In short: the people using them pay for how many they want vs everyone paying for something they don't want / need - though in this case the cost *is* "socialized" somewhat as payment isn't mandatory.)
PS: I'm told the Eucharistic Miracles (eg Lanciano) are scientifically impressive!
Re cannibalism: Yes, I think "eating human flesh" is the way that most people would define cannibalism. Sure - if the novel situation is actually completely novel, that's worth a hyper-specific new definition.
Re external verification: The part I find most notable is that the act cannot be externally verified, _and so Catholics completely stop the analysis_. With the flag-salute, we could imagine many debates on this topic: "Was the soldier honoring the flag or simply shielding his eyes?" sounds a lot like "Was Elon Musk doing the nazi salute or throwing his heart out to the crowd?" or "Was Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem to honor the nation or to offend it?" (both real discussions about what it means to be patriotic and what physical gestures we want to do in our country). The solution that Catholicism seems to take in these situations is: "The external is not what's important, and since the internal is only visible to the individual, ignore the external". Bold move! Really removes a huge facet of human behavior from the picture.
Re candles: Fair point! There's a general economic discomfort I often experience in churches that I was unfairly generalizing to the candles. I first felt it watching the donation poles go out during Easter services two years ago. I'm still irked by the admission fee (church space seems like a non-rivalrous good at these crowd sizes) and the pay-to-turn-on-lights thing (often there's a dark section of the church, but $1 illuminates it for a few minutes). But the candles are a material with a marginal cost, so a small charge seems fine.
Seems to me the external is very important in Catholicism, especially relative to other religions - the hat guard you encountered is an example of that, as are all the physical signs and relics (like the hand itself).
It's a good question why there aren't separate gestures for veneration and worship (eg, why not kneel for God and bow to everything else, or vice versa?). I think this is because human gestures are limited, not necessarily in number but in what you can do to express "super-duper." Eg: You "love" your mom and "love" turkey sandwiches - we could invent different words for these (and some languages do), but we haven't because we reliably recognize their meaning in context.
Economic discomfort:
I sympathize with this. The problem to resolve is "How do we fund the existence of this building?" We can imagine various solutions, but I think it makes sense that the people using it pay a portion, with tourists paying more than pilgrims given the building's purpose. The light thing can probably go.
Those external items are all items or objects: crosses, clothing, relics. They're not behaviors. (The relics prove Catholicism cares about external things, not that it adjudicates external acts.) There's a joke in judaism that illustrates the point reasonably well: a man goes to his rabbi. He says, "Rabbi, I'm worried I'm disconnecting with the religion. I don't believe in God anymore, I don't understand the point of kosher, it all seems so empty to me!" The rabbi says, "That's too bad, that's too bad..." The man continues: "I'm even thinking of stopping coming to synagogue." The rabbi stands up, shocked: "But you've got to come to synagogue!" (There are a few interpretations here of why this would be funny; I'm reading it for the "We measure you by your external behaviors" interpretation)
It seems to me that there's a benefit to keeping the same gesture for veneration & worship: the ambiguity has a crossed-signals impact that gives increased power to the item/relic itself. If one kneeled to God but bowed for everything else, the lesser objects would be less beloved, and there's a value to the organization in applying the power that people assign to God to lesser objects. I don't think the ambiguity is a bug; I think it's a religious feature.
I should have used behavior examples: there *are* gestures explicitly reserved for God / the Eucharist in worship, like genuflecting. And obviously behavior matters alongside intention and circumstance in the moral life. I was thinking about the worship behaviors that do overlap and wondering why they do (I would say because expression is limited, you would say because ambiguity is good for business?).
I don’t think there’s an argument that the Church wants to promote ambiguity. It outlines degrees of honor due to God vs Mary etc (dulia, protodulia, hyperdulia, latria) and publishes documents and preaches on the distinctions all the time. Whether there’s corruption among particular churches I can’t say… maybe there are places promoting idolatry for money! They would / should be condemned. But it doesn’t sound like this church is going for that
Juicy content for Socrateas!
On cannibalism:
>> If "cannibalism" meant only "eating human flesh," then Catholics would be cannibals. But since it also means "profaning a body for physical nourishment," the word doesn't apply.
To the extent that explanation seems hyper-specific, I would guess it's because the Eucharist is literally a miracle - something out of the ordinary that we therefore don't usually need language for. (What's coming to mind is if an alien race colonized earth, we would start making all kinds of distinctions we had previously taken for granted.)
"If I can’t externally verify whether you’re worshipping or venerating, is it idolatry?"
>> If I can't externally verify whether you're saluting the flag or shielding your eyes from the sun, is it patriotism? Seems to me it can still be patriotic, even though the external gesture is the same.
"candles you can light for €1."
>> You actually converted me on the candles! I once complained to you about our college charging $0.10 for printing; you were in favor of the policy and your answer made me pro-$1-candles where I wasn't previously. (In short: the people using them pay for how many they want vs everyone paying for something they don't want / need - though in this case the cost *is* "socialized" somewhat as payment isn't mandatory.)
PS: I'm told the Eucharistic Miracles (eg Lanciano) are scientifically impressive!
Thanks for the note!
Re cannibalism: Yes, I think "eating human flesh" is the way that most people would define cannibalism. Sure - if the novel situation is actually completely novel, that's worth a hyper-specific new definition.
Re external verification: The part I find most notable is that the act cannot be externally verified, _and so Catholics completely stop the analysis_. With the flag-salute, we could imagine many debates on this topic: "Was the soldier honoring the flag or simply shielding his eyes?" sounds a lot like "Was Elon Musk doing the nazi salute or throwing his heart out to the crowd?" or "Was Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem to honor the nation or to offend it?" (both real discussions about what it means to be patriotic and what physical gestures we want to do in our country). The solution that Catholicism seems to take in these situations is: "The external is not what's important, and since the internal is only visible to the individual, ignore the external". Bold move! Really removes a huge facet of human behavior from the picture.
Re candles: Fair point! There's a general economic discomfort I often experience in churches that I was unfairly generalizing to the candles. I first felt it watching the donation poles go out during Easter services two years ago. I'm still irked by the admission fee (church space seems like a non-rivalrous good at these crowd sizes) and the pay-to-turn-on-lights thing (often there's a dark section of the church, but $1 illuminates it for a few minutes). But the candles are a material with a marginal cost, so a small charge seems fine.
External verification:
Seems to me the external is very important in Catholicism, especially relative to other religions - the hat guard you encountered is an example of that, as are all the physical signs and relics (like the hand itself).
It's a good question why there aren't separate gestures for veneration and worship (eg, why not kneel for God and bow to everything else, or vice versa?). I think this is because human gestures are limited, not necessarily in number but in what you can do to express "super-duper." Eg: You "love" your mom and "love" turkey sandwiches - we could invent different words for these (and some languages do), but we haven't because we reliably recognize their meaning in context.
Economic discomfort:
I sympathize with this. The problem to resolve is "How do we fund the existence of this building?" We can imagine various solutions, but I think it makes sense that the people using it pay a portion, with tourists paying more than pilgrims given the building's purpose. The light thing can probably go.
Those external items are all items or objects: crosses, clothing, relics. They're not behaviors. (The relics prove Catholicism cares about external things, not that it adjudicates external acts.) There's a joke in judaism that illustrates the point reasonably well: a man goes to his rabbi. He says, "Rabbi, I'm worried I'm disconnecting with the religion. I don't believe in God anymore, I don't understand the point of kosher, it all seems so empty to me!" The rabbi says, "That's too bad, that's too bad..." The man continues: "I'm even thinking of stopping coming to synagogue." The rabbi stands up, shocked: "But you've got to come to synagogue!" (There are a few interpretations here of why this would be funny; I'm reading it for the "We measure you by your external behaviors" interpretation)
It seems to me that there's a benefit to keeping the same gesture for veneration & worship: the ambiguity has a crossed-signals impact that gives increased power to the item/relic itself. If one kneeled to God but bowed for everything else, the lesser objects would be less beloved, and there's a value to the organization in applying the power that people assign to God to lesser objects. I don't think the ambiguity is a bug; I think it's a religious feature.
“you've got to come to synagogue!” 😂
I should have used behavior examples: there *are* gestures explicitly reserved for God / the Eucharist in worship, like genuflecting. And obviously behavior matters alongside intention and circumstance in the moral life. I was thinking about the worship behaviors that do overlap and wondering why they do (I would say because expression is limited, you would say because ambiguity is good for business?).
I don’t think there’s an argument that the Church wants to promote ambiguity. It outlines degrees of honor due to God vs Mary etc (dulia, protodulia, hyperdulia, latria) and publishes documents and preaches on the distinctions all the time. Whether there’s corruption among particular churches I can’t say… maybe there are places promoting idolatry for money! They would / should be condemned. But it doesn’t sound like this church is going for that