Wheat-allergic girl denied Communion

[younggiftedandblack]

Church says girl's communion not valid

Thursday, August 19, 2004 Posted: 7:32 PM EDT (2332 GMT)

BRIELLE, New Jersey (AP) -- An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained no wheat, violating Roman Catholic doctrine.

Now, Haley Waldman's mother is pushing the Diocese of Trenton and the Vatican to make an exception, saying the girl's condition should not exclude her from the sacrament, which commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ before his crucifixion. The mother believes a rice Communion wafer would suffice.

"It's just not a viable option. How does it corrupt the tradition of the Last Supper? It's just rice versus wheat," said Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman.

Church doctrine holds that Communion wafers, like the bread served at the Last Supper, must have at least some unleavened wheat. Church leaders are reluctant to change anything about the sacrament.

"This is not an issue to be determined at the diocesan or parish level, but has already been decided for the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world by Vatican authority," Trenton Bishop John M. Smith said in a statement last week.

Haley was diagnosed with celiac sprue disease when she was 5. The disorder occurs in people with a genetic intolerance of gluten, a food protein contained in wheat and other grains.

When consumed by celiac sufferers, gluten damages the lining of the small intestine, blocking nutrient absorption and leading to vitamin deficiencies, bone-thinning and sometimes gastrointestinal cancer.

The diocese has told Haley's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could be harmed by even a small amount of the substance.

Haley's Communion controversy isn't the first. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Massachusetts girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer.

Some Catholic churches allow no-gluten hosts, while others do not, said Elaine Monarch, executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, a California-based support group for sufferers.

"It is an undue hardship on a person who wants to practice their religion and needs to compromise their health to do so," Monarch said.

The church has similar rules for Communion wine. For alcoholics, the church allows a substitute for wine under some circumstances, however the drink must still be fermented from grapes and contain some alcohol. Grape juice is not a valid substitute.

Haley, a shy, brown-haired tomboy who loves surfing and hates wearing dresses, realizes the consequences of taking a wheat wafer.

"I'm on a gluten-free diet because I can't have wheat. I could die," she said last week.

Last year, as the third grader approached Holy Communion age in this Jersey Shore town, her mother told officials at St. Denis Catholic Church in Manasquan that the girl could not have the standard host.

After the church's pastor refused to allow a substitute, a priest at a nearby parish volunteered to offer one, and in May, Haley wore a white Communion dress, and received the sacrament alongside her mother, who had not taken Communion since she herself was diagnosed with the disease.

Last month, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate Haley's sacrament because of the substitute wafer.

"I struggled with telling her that the sacrament did not happen," said Pelly-Waldman. "She lives in a world of rules. She says 'Mommy, do we want to break a rule? Are we breaking a rule?"'

Pelly-Waldman is seeking help from the Pope and has written to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, challenging the church's policy.

"This is a church rule, not God's will, and it can easily be adjusted to meet the needs of the people, while staying true to the traditions of our faith," Pelly-Waldman wrote in the letter.

Pelly-Waldman -- who is still attending Mass every Sunday with her four children -- said she is not out to bash the church, just to change the policy that affects her daughter.

"I'm hopeful. Do I think it will be a long road to change? Yes. But I'm raising an awareness and I'm taking it one step at a time," she said.

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/08/19/communion.denied.ap/index.html)

[Banana]

I'm pretty sure God doesn't care what you eat.

[thaite]

What's she scared of?

Transubstantiation.

She lacks the faith.

[Yeahman]

I'm pretty sure God doesn't care what you eat.
"...Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." - John 6:51-52

What's she scared of?
Death.

For some reason the parents of the girl are refusing to let her drink the wine instead. It's not like you're gonna get drunk off one sip.

[thaite]

Why should she be scared of death if transubstantiation converts the host?

Like I said, she lacks the faith.

Also, as you said:


"...Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." - John 6:51-52


Either the Bible is true, or John's lying.

[Banana]

"...Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." - John 6:51-52

Sorry. I was speaking the agnostic point of view.

[bluemonq]

Either the Bible is true, or John's lying.
two observations/questions that should answer you:
1)when the bible says the sun stood still/a gigantic flood covered the entire earth/the world was created about 5 millenia ago, did those things actually happen?

2)jesus spoke many times with the help of analogies, parables, and metaphors. do you believe that jesus meant what he said literally?

[krome]

Ultimately, it's her own fault for wanting to join such an idiotic religion. This is not the first REALLY STUPID thing they've done, and it sure as H*ll won't be the last, either... :rolleyes:

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Hasn't this happened before anyway?

[thaite]

two observations/questions that should answer you:
1)when the bible says the sun stood still/a gigantic flood covered the entire earth/the world was created about 5 millenia ago, did those things actually happen?

2)jesus spoke many times with the help of analogies, parables, and metaphors. do you believe that jesus meant what he said literally?

1) Hell if I know that actually happened. I wasn't there.

2) i dunno. What does that have to do with this particular situation?

[Yeahman]

two observations/questions that should answer you:
1)when the bible says the sun stood still/a gigantic flood covered the entire earth/the world was created about 5 millenia ago, did those things actually happen?

2)jesus spoke many times with the help of analogies, parables, and metaphors. do you believe that jesus meant what he said literally?
Very different case.
The entire story from John 6...
This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ 52The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ 53So Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.’ 59He said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum.
60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, ‘This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?’ 61But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it, said to them, ‘Does this offend you? 62Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64But among you there are some who do not believe.’ For Jesus knew from the first who were the ones that did not believe, and who was the one that would betray him. 65And he said, ‘For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted by the Father.’ 66Because of this many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him.

Clearly Jesus did not intent this as a metaphor and the early church did not believe it to be a metaphor either.

[Mr.Lum]

Ultimately, it's her own fault for wanting to join such an idiotic religion. This is not the first REALLY STUPID thing they've done, and it sure as H*ll won't be the last, either... :rolleyes:

I tend to agree. The Catholic church is a bunch of hogwash.

[Banana]

Guess God and Jesus won't tolerate people with diseases.

[Yeahman]

Why should she be scared of death if transubstantiation converts the host?

Like I said, she lacks the faith.
The physical characteristics of the bread and wine remain. She would get sick.

Guess God and Jesus won't tolerate people with diseases.
He does by giving us 2 species; body and blood. The girl could just drink the wine. Don't think there's anyone with severe allergies to both wheat and alcohol.

[DragonKnight]

Ultimately, it's her own fault for wanting to join such an idiotic religion. This is not the first REALLY STUPID thing they've done, and it sure as H*ll won't be the last, either... :rolleyes: Thanks for making the rest of us Catholics feel sooooo much better. :rolleyes:

Personally I think this is all bullshit. The girl can't digest wheat, why deny her this blessed Sacrament? The pastor there has some fucking issues cause the pastors I know wouldn't be such dicks about it. That's what I love about the church. There's actually some liberal diversity out there despite what some statistically obsessed fucktards like to believe.

Man, I swear its all symbolism. Jesus isn't gonna shit a brick over a fucking rice wafer.

[rice cracker]

They should go to a new church.

[thaite]

The physical characteristics of the bread and wine remain. She would get sick.


Say what? Wanna explain that further?

[Yeahman]

Though the substance turns into the body and blood, the accidents remain. It retains the physical characteristics of bread and wine. If you are allegeric to wheat or alcohol, you would still experience its ill effects.

[thaite]

that doesn't make any sense, dude.

[Yeahman]

When you eat the body does it taste like meat to you? Does it look like meat? Does it smell like it? Does it feel like it?
The physical characteristics, or accidents, are retained. The reality, or substance, changes. That is why it is called transsubstantiation and not transaccidentiation. This is a unique transformation. We see things change in their accidents but retain their substance but the Eucharist is the only instance of the opposite.

St. Thomas Aquinas on transsubstantiation including answers to the effects of consecration on the substance and accidents: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/407500.htm

[DragonKnight]

Reason why I don't try to take the Bible too literally. Christians were accused of being cannibals and it was more justified to persecute us back in the days.

[Yeahman]

I am not a literalist either. I believe that the big bang and evolution are entirely possible and perhaps even probable. But the Eucharist is a clear cut case where Jesus made the effort to reinforce the fact that he was not speaking metaphorically. As it says in John 6, Jesus was asked if he meant it literally. He repeats himself and says that he knows that it is a hard teaching to swallow. As a result many of his follows leave him. They wanted to follow him if only they could reinterprete his words to be merely symbolic. Jesus did not give them that choice.

[thaite]

You gotta have faith, brotha!

[DragonKnight]

I am not a literalist either. I believe that the big bang and evolution are entirely possible and perhaps even probable. But the Eucharist is a clear cut case where Jesus made the effort to reinforce the fact that he was not speaking metaphorically. As it says in John 6, Jesus was asked if he meant it literally. He repeats himself and says that he knows that it is a hard teaching to swallow. As a result many of his follows leave him. They wanted to follow him if only they could reinterprete his words to be merely symbolic. Jesus did not give them that choice. Of course, my other reasoning is that the Bible is translated scripture with many interpretations by whoever translated it. Of course, this is a seperate discussion altogether. Feel free to start up / revive a thread on this particular subject. :wink:

[Mr.Lum]

They should go to a new church.
I know right? Yeesh. This is America, land of Christian churches left and right.

[krome]

The physical characteristics, or accidents, are retained. The reality, or substance, changes. That is why it is called transsubstantiation and not transaccidentiation.
Um, that sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. The "substance" but not "accidents/physical nature" changes? And are "transsubstantiation" and "transaccidentiation" even real words? Talk about a bunch of pseudo-scientific Biblical rational-lies-ing. I think a physicist would bust a gut laughing at that mental ma5turbation...

Never ceases to amaze me the lengths Christians will go to try to make sense out of clear nonsense.
:rolleyes:

[rice cracker]

I know right? Yeesh. This is America, land of Christian churches left and right.

Seriously, I bet there's another Catholic church like two streets over. Making a big deal out of nothing.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Never ceases to amaze me the lengths Christians will go to try to make sense out of clear nonsense.
:rolleyes:

Hey, while I don't quite agree with yellowman since I'm not Catholic, I'm still Christian and I'd appreciate it if you didn't generalize. :biggrin: Your statement here would be akin to me saying "Never ceases to amaze me how short Asians are".

[krome]

^ Well, but if the shoe fits, right? :wink:

Seriously, if Asians really were so short, I really couldn't argue with you on it. But, I think we are only a bit (inch or 2) shorter on average though, so I would have to call you on that one. :biggrin: Now, I do understand that a generalization is just a generalization. They can be valid if you take them simply for what they are, not more, not less.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

^ Well, but if the shoe fits, right? :wink:

Seriously, if Asians really were so short, I really couldn't argue with you on it. But, I think we are only a bit (inch or 2) shorter on average though, so I would have to call you on that one. :biggrin: Now, I do understand that a generalization is just a generalization. They can be valid if you take them simply for what they are, not more, not less.

But the thing is, most Christians I know DON'T go around trying to make sense out of clear nonsense (and once again, what constitutes 'nonsense' is often times left up to the individual). I'm guessing if you're not Christian, most of the Bible will seem like 'nonsense' to you too. Of course, there are those who are unreasonable/extremist/fanatic etc. but then again such a selection exists in all populations or groups. Asians being short is a stereotype, just like how Christians are all illogical unreasonable individuals who throw out a bunch of bullshit and see what sticks is also a stereotype, and a fairly inaccurate one at that, IMHO.

[Yeahman]

Of course, my other reasoning is that the Bible is translated scripture with many interpretations by whoever translated it. Of course, this is a seperate discussion altogether. Feel free to start up / revive a thread on this particular subject. :wink:
We can use the original Greek if you'd like. It makes no difference.



They should go to a new church.
I know right? Yeesh. This is America, land of Christian churches left and right.
But the girl and her mother are not just Christians. They are Catholics. The policy would not change between different Catholic parishes or even different Catholic Rites.

Hey, while I don't quite agree with yellowman since I'm not Catholic, I'm still Christian and I'd appreciate it if you didn't generalize. Your statement here would be akin to me saying "Never ceases to amaze me how short Asians are".
I've gotten used to it. Many liberals just can't stand people who practice a religion. We Christians will be forever attacked by the left for our beliefs. I pray for the day we can practice our faith without harrassment.

[DragonKnight]

Never ceases to amaze me the lengths Christians will go to try to make sense out of clear nonsense.
:rolleyes: And it never ceases to amaze me that people with SN's named krome can be complete dicks and then whine like a little bitch when people go on the offensive. :rolleyes:

^ Well, but if the shoe fits, right? :wink: So what size boot is up your ass?

We can use the original Greek if you'd like. It makes no difference. It does to the translator and the person recieving the translation. That and we have to deal with the passage of time. Scripture undergoes that as well. The Bible itself has been tampered with many times to the 'good' of the church throughout history. As much as I am a practicing Catholic I put the Scripture under a ton of scrutiny and debate. That and I make sure to add the human factor into it as Scripture tends to rub people the wrong way. In other words...

You worship God?

Yes.

You worship MY God?

No.

Bang!

But the girl and her mother are not just Christians. They are Catholics. The policy would not change between different Catholic parishes or even different Catholic Rites.

Oh it does and it will. Many parishes are not as rigid as you think. You gotta remember that not everyone thinks the same. So please don't generalize your POV of Roman Catholics as the same as everyone else's.


I've gotten used to it. Many liberals just can't stand people who practice a religion. We Christians will be forever attacked by the left for our beliefs. I pray for the day we can practice our faith without harrassment.
I'm a liberal who is still with the Roman Catholic church. Once again, don't generalize. I'm not the only one. So get with the program.

[krome]

But the thing is, most Christians I know DON'T go around trying to make sense out of clear nonsense (and once again, what constitutes 'nonsense' is often times left up to the individual). I'm guessing if you're not Christian, most of the Bible will seem like 'nonsense' to you too. Of course, there are those who are unreasonable/extremist/fanatic etc. but then again such a selection exists in all populations or groups. Asians being short is a stereotype, just like how Christians are all illogical unreasonable individuals who throw out a bunch of bullshit and see what sticks is also a stereotype, and a fairly inaccurate one at that, IMHO.
Actually, I don't believe the Bible is all rubbish - but that it has been heavily distorted and is heavily open to interpretation. Personally, I subscribe more to Zechariah Sitchin's interpretation of the OT and possibly the Priory of Sion (http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/priory-of-sion-more.html) theory about the NT, if than anything - both of which are RADICALLY different than any Christian church.

And ye110man, it is debateable if the "original" NT was written in Greek...or Aramaic. Or even what exactly constitutes the "Bible," as it was codified by the Roman emperor Constantine - notably a politcian, not a spiritualist. And, the OT was a retelling of even older Sumerian mythology and many books got deleted later on as well.

Constantine began what was to become a centuries long effort to eliminate any book in the original Bible that was considered unacceptable to the new doctrine of the church. At that time, it is believed there were up to 600 books, which comprised the work we now know as the Bible. Through a series of decisions made by the early church leadership, all but 80 of those books, known as the King James Translation of 1611, were purged from the work, with a further reduction by the Protestant Reformation bringing the number to 66 in the "Authorized" King James Bible. (http://www.bibleufo.com/anomlostbooks.htm)

I'm sure you know all this, but anyways...there is method to my madness.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Well to cap this all off (not to turn this into another religious debate cause I'm really sick of those) I think one thing many Christians do need to work on is to stop focusing so much on this 'us and them' mentality, which simply fosters an attitude that non-Christians are 'beyond hope' or that they are the 'enemy', because if anything, non-Christians should be the target of our love and efforts even though we are to enjoy fellowship with fellow Christians. That's why I always cringe when I hear people say "I pray that they will let us worship (and keep to ourselves) and leave us alone, because we know we are right and they are not, etc. etc."

Christians who claim to be 'spreading the word' or 'doing the will of God' often times to me seem to be just going around and telling people how wrong they are (instead of letting God shine through them which is what is supposed to happen). If we as Christians are really ones filled with faith in our beliefs, the concept of unconditional love and forgiveness (to everyone) is key. I do not believe that God sees non-Christians as any less than Christians, and he doesn't draw a line and say 'okay these people are with me and I love them, and these people are not so fuck them i'm just gonna forget about them'. No wonder people get turned off and think Christianity is a joke if all of us are going around telling people that they are full of shit, and then proceed to walk away and revel in our feelings of self-righteousness. Of course, I am not one to talk since I haven't done my fair share of shining lately haha ^^;

Disclaimer: I don't mean to preach, I'm just posting insight since we're on the topic of Christian flaws or flaws of Christian individuals.

[Yeahman]

It does to the translator and the person recieving the translation. That and we have to deal with the passage of time. Scripture undergoes that as well. The Bible itself has been tampered with many times to the 'good' of the church throughout history. As much as I am a practicing Catholic I put the Scripture under a ton of scrutiny and debate.
I meant that it makes no difference to this particular point on the Eucharist. Not only does Scripture state that is it true flesh and blood, in any translation, but the early church held to that belief so we have historic evidence of the immediate acceptance of this teaching.
How was the Bible tampered with? Keep in mind that the Bible was not a single book controlled by one church. It was a collection of books held all throughout Christiandom from Ethiopia to Rome to India. Tampering beyond the 1st century would have required a conspiracy on an inter-continental scale. In the first century, there could have been some tampering. But it doesn't really matter, since the Church declared the final canon, tampering and all, as divinely revealed at the councils of Carthage and Hippo. If you believe in the Catholic belief that the Church has the authority to bind and loose then that final canon is the Word of God. You don't have to believe in the historical accuracy of the Bible to believe it to be the Word of God. The Bible is not a history book and should not be read as one. It is a divine revelation. If you want history you can look at other writtings of the early church fathers which will only support my claims. Of course whether or not you want to believe any of them is another matter.

Oh it does and it will. Many parishes are not as rigid as you think. You gotta remember that not everyone thinks the same. So please don't generalize your POV of Roman Catholics as the same as everyone else's.
It is not a generalization. It is Church law. No Roman Catholic parish anywhere in the world may use rice waffers for communion. If they do, they are in violation of canon law and the offending priest, if he does not cease this practice, is subject to sanctions or even excommunication. If he leaves and starts his own church, that church would not be in communion with the Catholic Church. Many people seem to forget that Catholicism is not only a set of beliefs but an organization.

I'm a liberal who is still with the Roman Catholic church. Once again, don't generalize. I'm not the only one. So get with the program.
I did not generalize. I said "MANY liberals." That is the truth.

[Mr.Lum]

But the girl and her mother are not just Christians. They are Catholics. The policy would not change between different Catholic parishes or even different Catholic Rites.


Like I said, another Church. Catholics are barely even Christian in many respects. There are a ton of other churches she could go right on into and join with out having to risk her health.



I've gotten used to it. Many liberals just can't stand people who practice a religion. We Christians will be forever attacked by the left for our beliefs. I pray for the day we can practice our faith without harrassment.

I have no problem with Christians, well soem of them. I only really have serious idealogical issues with the Catholic church. You can and do practice your faith without harassment BTW. Catholics and much more conservative churches tend to be the ones who harass others for practicing their faith.

Christians who claim to be 'spreading the word' or 'doing the will of God' often times to me seem to be just going around and telling people how wrong they are (instead of letting God shine through them which is what is supposed to happen).


I agree. That's why many people don't like them. Because they get in your face and in your house as if they have a right to.

[Yeahman]

Actually, I don't believe the Bible is all rubbish - but that it has been heavily distorted and is heavily open to interpretation. Personally, I subscribe more to Zechariah Sitchin's interpretation of the OT and possibly the Priory of Sion (http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/priory-of-sion-more.html) theory about the NT, if than anything - both of which are RADICALLY different than any Christian church.
You can't be serious! You subscribe to conspiracy theories presented in modern works of fiction?

And ye110man, it is debateable if the "original" NT was written in Greek...or Aramaic. Or even what exactly constitutes the "Bible," as it was codified by the Roman emperor Constantine - notably a politcian, not a spiritualist. And, the OT was a retelling of even older Sumerian mythology and many books got deleted later on as well.

Constantine began what was to become a centuries long effort to eliminate any book in the original Bible that was considered unacceptable to the new doctrine of the church. At that time, it is believed there were up to 600 books, which comprised the work we now know as the Bible. Through a series of decisions made by the early church leadership, all but 80 of those books, known as the King James Translation of 1611, were purged from the work, with a further reduction by the Protestant Reformation bringing the number to 66 in the "Authorized" King James Bible. (http://www.bibleufo.com/anomlostbooks.htm)

I'm sure you know all this, but anyways...there is method to my madness.
The NT was written in Greek with the possible exception of Hebrews which may have been originally written in Hebrew then translated to Greek. None of it was written in Aramaic.
The Bible was not codified by Constantine.
That quote is riddled with errors.
Constantine called the Council of Nicea at which the bishops of the word reaffirmed the doctrine of the Trinity. Prior to Nicea, Eusebius with no help from Constantine, had already compiled a list of books. He broke them up into "accepted", "disputed", and "spurious." There were not 600 books in consideration! The canon was not declared until long after Constantine's death at the councils of Carthage and Hippo.
Constantine played no part whatsoever in what the Bible was going to look like.
It is true that some in the early church considered as biblical books which we do not consider part of the canon today. We still have Bibles in existence today from after the time of Constantine which contain books which we do not consider canonical today. These books are all available for everyone to read and much of Catholic doctrine is derived from these extra-biblical books. The Catholic Church encourages everyone to read these other books as they may still be profitable, though not infallible. The reason they weren't included is the simple fact that they weren't written by the apostles or by those which the apostles entrusted to write for them. That was the standard of inclusion into the canon. It wasn't an arbitrary standard set by Constantine.
The 1611 King James has 73 books and I hope we all know that the Protestant Reformation was before 1611. It wasn't until the 1800's when the 7 deuterocanonical books were taken out of the King James. The final authortative Bible was the Latin Vulgate of 405 AD. The King James is simply an English translation.

Like I said, another Church. Catholics are barely even Christian in many respects. There are a ton of other churches she could go right on into and join with out having to risk her health.
She doesn't have to risk her health in the Catholic Church either. She could just drink the wine. She can even drink grape juice with negligable alcohol content.

I have no problem with Christians, well soem of them. I only really have serious idealogical issues with the Catholic church. You can and do practice your faith without harassment BTW. Catholics and much more conservative churches tend to be the ones who harass others for practicing their faith.
I agree. That's why many people don't like them. Because they get in your face and in your house as if they have a right to.
Read through this thread from the begining and notice who the ones being disrespectful.
You can't post a thread on Christianity on this forum without the faith being mocked.

[thaite]

I've gotten used to it. Many liberals just can't stand people who practice a religion. We Christians will be forever attacked by the left for our beliefs. I pray for the day we can practice our faith without harrassment.

You automatically think that everybody who criticizes Christianity is a liberal?

So, yeah, ok, here comes the victimization and the martyrdom complex. Boo hoo. Who's harassing you here? Here's a cross and some nails -- put yourself up so we all can get back to the discussion at hand.

Can anyone besides ye110man since he's busy acting all victimized and oppressed and shit give a definitive answer why non-gluten host cannot be used. What is so divine about a bread host that another symbol could not be used. The same question regarding the alcohol in the wine.

[Mr.Lum]

Read through this thread from the begining and notice who the ones being disrespectful.
You can't post a thread on Christianity on this forum without the faith being mocked.


You can go out into the real world and have all your Catholic stuff be taken seriously. Christians have it well in America. They like to pretend they are oppressed and downtrodden so they can get more power. You're posting on a site where I doubt most people are Christian. If someone were to mock Christianity in the mainstream of America they would be shunned. I personally think some Christians could use some real persecution. They're usually the ones dishing it out. They can't take 25% of what they hand out. Get over yourself.

[krome]

You can't post a thread on Christianity on this forum without the faith being mocked.
Well, when you post crap like this, what do you expect?
The physical characteristics, or accidents, are retained. The reality, or substance, changes. That is why it is called transsubstantiation and not transaccidentiation. This is a unique transformation. We see things change in their accidents but retain their substance but the Eucharist is the only instance of the opposite.
And I thought Catholics insisting on wheat was ridiculous to begin with...lol. :rolleyes:

Drop the Christ complex already - your intellectual criticism is legit and WELL-deserved.

[Mr.Lum]

Well, when you post crap like this, what do you expect?

:biggrin: I know!

[DragonKnight]

Can anyone besides ye110man since he's busy acting all victimized and oppressed and shit give a definitive answer why non-gluten host cannot be used. What is so divine about a bread host that another symbol could not be used. The same question regarding the alcohol in the wine. I personally can't see why. It's ridiculous to use doctrine based on a belief system that didn't even know about disorders that would've prevented certain parish members to participate. Imagine if milk was used instead instead of wine. The lactose-intolerant members of the community would be up in an uproar. :rolleyes:

[Yeahman]

I personally can't see why. It's ridiculous to use doctrine based on a belief system that didn't even know about disorders that would've prevented certain parish members to participate. Imagine if milk was used instead instead of wine. The lactose-intolerant members of the community would be up in an uproar. :rolleyes:
The Church did know. This isn't a new contraversy. Those who are allegeric to wheat can receive the blood instead. Nobody is being prevented from participating.

Why can't the Church use pizza and a beer? Because Jesus used wheat bread and fermented wine.

[DragonKnight]

The Church did know. This isn't a new contraversy. Those who are allegeric to wheat can receive the blood instead. Nobody is being prevented from participating.

Why can't the Church use pizza and a beer? Because Jesus used wheat bread and fermented wine. To think I could've been having pepperoni pizza every Sunday along with a bottle of Corona. Hah!

[Banana]

Now, if she can either recieve either the bread or the wine and have it be just as effective, then I fail to see why the family is in a uproar. However, if you have to eat and drink both to make communion valid, then the church and religion is in the wrong.

Additionally, I also find the sheer idea of Christianity and Catholicism as being a persecuted religion in this country as laughable. This coming from me who's whole family is Christian except for myself.

Not sure who mentioned the practice (Think it was DK or Gumby) of how Christianity and Catholicism just makes the whole situation as an "us versus them" mentality but I find it 100% true. Most of my family members regard Islam, for example, as a dirty religion and just make fun of them about how wrong they are.

[Mr.Lum]

I fail to see why the family is in a uproar

Because they want to feel important.

then the church and religion is in the wrong.


I think that is the case with many Catholic practices.

[applehead]

i'm a bit confused by this article.
first, i didn't know that wine can be
substituted for the wafer in you FIRST holy communion.
i always thought it was the wafer and the wine.
or just the wafer.
in the subsequent holy communion you are
offered both and can choose to receive both
or just one.

and if the above is correct then the little girl
can't have just wine to validate her first holy
communion and they have a right to be
angry.

yelloman. am i mistaken?

Because they want to feel important.

you say in another thread that circumcision shouldn't be
judged because a lot of it is done for cultural and religious
reasons but you're poking fun at this little girl and her mother
because she wishes to partake in her own religious beliefs?

[Yeahman]

Receiving just the consecrated wine is just as valid even for first communion.
As the article states...
The diocese has told Haley's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could be harmed by even a small amount of the substance.
Doesn't say why the mother rejected the wine.

[Banana]

Oh, so if you can eat -OR- drink and make the communion valid, then I don't see the big deal with the family.

[kuilong]

I also don't understand why the mother didn't just have her kid drink from the cup. Jesus, according to Catholic belief, is present fully in both kinds, the bread and the wine. For alcoholics, they actually have mustum, with an extremely low alcohol content. The Catholic belief is that the priest is not even able to consecrate a host which contains no gluten -- though it only needs to contain very little.

All this debate as to how the relevant passages in Jn, etc. is completely irrelevant. Not only has transubstantiation been supported by almost every church father who wrote on the subject, but the magisterium of the Church holds that the substance (but not the accidents) is transformed, meaning that for Catholics, the case is closed. A Catholic is indeed permitted to dissent (according to John Henry Cardinal Newman) if their conscience is truly against the belief of transubstantiation, but they must (1) Not declare that the church is wrong and they are right (2) Not spread their dissent and (3) Spend time in prayer and contemplation, and examine the issue in more depth. "Lord I believe. Help me in my unbelief."

And can we please stop the Catholic bashing (e.g., "Never ceases to amaze me the lengths Christians will go to try to make sense out of clear nonsense." or "some Catholic practices are barely Christian")?

What is so divine about a bread host that another symbol could not be used. The same question regarding the alcohol in the wine.

Because that's what was used in the Last Supper, and what has been used in the course of constant tradition in the church, and what the magisterium dictates today. The Church believes that she's divinely guided -- so none of her infallible dogmas are wrong, and will never change. All other beliefs flow from this one. ("I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church." -- St. Augustine) If you don't believe that, fine, but I don't understand why people who don't believe in the things that define Catholicism choose to label themselves with the word "Catholic" -- after all, a religion is at base some sort of supernatural belief system, not just going to a certain place of worship or partaking of certain rituals.

The NT was written in Greek with the possible exception of Hebrews which may have been originally written in Hebrew then translated to Greek.

Hebrews as well was almost certainly written in Greek; the language is entirely too fluent to be a translation. A few people seem to believe in Peshitta-primacy; this belief is held by almost none of the relevant scholars.

[Mr.Lum]

you say in another thread that circumcision shouldn't be
judged because a lot of it is done for cultural and religious
reasons but you're poking fun at this little girl and her mother
because she wishes to partake in her own religious beliefs?

They're making a big deal out of nothing. I'm not poking any fun at them. This seems like they are just making a big deal out of nothing.

Also, I'm on circumsision I'm just saying that people should mind their business. Don't do it if you don't like it. I'm not Catholic because it in my view, has many frivolous and pagan rituals.

[DragonKnight]

Doesn't say why the mother rejected the wine. Actually, that's been bothering me. Why *did* she reject the wine? Would it affect her daughter's condition?

[kuilong]

Actually, that's been bothering me. Why *did* she reject the wine? Would it affect her daughter's condition?

I read somewhere that she didn't want her daughter drinking alcohol. A very American (Puritan?) concept. :tongue:

[applehead]

thanks yellowman.


it's not like she has to gulp the wine.
all she has to do is take a little sip.
it seems like the mother doesn't want to yield
at all.

They're making a big deal out of nothing.
it might seem like that to you.

[Banana]

How about this? How about the child drink the wine that's meant for alcoholics?