I've come up with a thought experiment to reveal your ethical priorities when forced to choose between well-being in the here and now or in the hereaf

  • Thread starter Thread starter howmanymakecommunity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

howmanymakecommunity

Guest
If a priest had to choose whether to offer the Eucharist or a meal that would save a starving man for just one more day, during which he’d perhaps commit a mortal sin, which should he offer?

Serious answers only, please. Be charitable and assume I know: that this is a highly improbable scenario (as is the trolley case obviously), that I didn’t use the proper language to signify what happens when a priest celebrates the Eucharist. There’s always a pedant in the crowd.

If it helps, forget the scenario and just answer the question directly by telling me whether it’s more important to receive the blessed sacrament than it is to eat.
 
Last edited:
If a priest had to choose
Why does he have to choose?
whether it’s more important to receive the blessed sacrament than it is to eat.
Depends on what you mean by that. More important in what way?

What are you trying to prove? That is to say, what will be your response to the person who says the Eucharist, and what will be your response to the person who says a meal? I find the way you’ve structured your question to be not only highly improbable, but also designed to induce an answer which you will then use to presume upon the motives of the one responding.

I’ll take the Wargames approach. The only winning move is not to play.

-Fr ACEGC
 
The only winning move is not to play when you risk losing something. But if your faith is solid, you should have nothing to fear!

This isn’t an actual situation unfolding in real life, father, so there isn’t a priest that really must choose between one or the other. I could try to come up with some wacky scenario, but the exercise was really to answer the question I ended my post with: is it more important to receive the blessed sacrament for spiritual nourishment or to eat for physical nourishment? See how it drives a wedge between the supposedly inseparable body and soul?
 
This is the philosophy forum right? Welcome to philosophy! ; )

Edit: the point is stated in the title of the post.
 
Last edited:
It’s not useless. I asked the question two different ways in order to make it easy for people to understand and you’re making no effort whatsoever to answer. Where is your intellectual curiosity?
 
What sort of person butts into a conversation to tell the people talking that they’re wasting their time?

Do you want me to explain to you why it’s a good question?
 
Last edited:
It depends.

Which means that you have not provided sufficient background, At this point it does not qualify as a highly improbably scenario; as there is no scenario at all. In any scenario even approaching reality, the priest could accomplish both.

In order to pt the priest in a “one, but not the other” situation, it would appear that it would need such an elaborate and unreal scenario that any answer would be meaningless.
 
I asked a perfectly legitimate question and the supposed apologists come flying in to do nothing but talk down to me. One of them claims to be a priest. Winning souls?
He is a priest, and has been posting here for many years.

I am not an apologist, just someone who sees the huge amount of disrespect you’re showing.

Please stop being argumentative, and have a great day.
 
If it helps, forget the scenario and just answer the question directly by telling me whether it’s more important to receive the blessed sacrament than it is to eat.
 
Don’t just come in here to be a grump and call it all humbug.
I don’t come to grump or to call it humbug.

If the question is “Which is more important, reception of the Eucharist or reception of food”, even that bare question cannot be answered with a simple choice.

It depends.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top