"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."
I understand that the Church is struggling to find a place for itself in modern times... but lordy loo, when was the last time they had positive press?
posted
I hadn't realized that doctrine teaches that, say, rice cakes cannot be translated through the power of God.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The article states that doctrine requires at least some amount of alcohol in communion wine, that grape juice is not acceptable. Must make it hard to be a Catholic recovering alcoholic....
Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, Catholics believe that Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species. This is more commonly used to justify only distributing bread at Communion, but clearly partaking only of the wine is a full reception of the Sacrament. This neatly solves the problems for both celiac sufferers and alcoholics, although an alcoholic with celiac has some issues that need to be dealt with.
Second, Catholic beliefs on Communion are deeply held and considered sacred. We believe that during the Eucharist Christ is literally, substantively present.
You might want to think about that before mocking, Tom and Elizabeth.
Finally, as to this particular case, the priest exceeded his authority. If this decision is overturned, it will be on the schedule of the Church and following the correct forms of the Church. Again, this touches on something at the very core of Catholic beliefs. Should such a decision be rushed?
Some of you may consider this trivial. I can assure you many others see the physical form of the Eucharist as very important.
posted
"We believe that during the Eucharist Christ is literally, substantively present.
You might want to think about that before mocking, Tom and Elizabeth."
I DID. Which is why I mocked you. Because if you believe that the body of Christ is in some way empowered by God to BECOME the piece of bread being nibbled, why the heck do you require that the bread be of a certain sort? What logic demands that God only be capable or willing to manifest within wheat-based meal?
Bear in mind that you believe that the bread is, in some imperceptible way, transformed into the body of Christ without physically changing. What aspect of this process requires the presence of ground wheat, and why? Do you honestly believe that Christ does not stoop to, say, cohabiting a corn muffin?
posted
I don't consider the Communion trivial. I am, however, astounded that such a vital part of a religion can be denied to someone who is physically incapable of receiving it.
Since I cannot accept that God would do this, I must assume that it is the Church's decision. I hope that they come to a conclusion that allows a substitution of some sort, and I think they could have handled it in such a way as to leave no doubt that one way or another this girl would receive the Eucharist.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, I apologize for making light of this, but to be honest, these (to me) trivial aspects of Roman Catholicism are why I am no longer a Roman Catholic. I am truly sorry to offend you, but I will leave my post in so the reference to what I am apologizing for is there.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:"We believe that during the Eucharist Christ is literally, substantively present.
You might want to think about that before mocking, Tom and Elizabeth."
I DID. Which is why I mocked you. Because if you believe that the body of Christ is in some way empowered by God to BECOME the piece of bread being nibbled, why the heck do you require that the bread be of a certain sort? What logic demands that God only be capable or willing to manifest within wheat-based meal?
Bear in mind that you believe that the bread is, in some imperceptible way, transformed into the body of Christ without physically changing. What aspect of this process requires the presence of ground wheat, and why? Do you honestly believe that Christ does not stoop to, say, cohabiting a corn muffin?
As you've so lovingly pointed out before, Tom, it's not a question of logic. It's also not a question of God's power - God can do anything, so technically we could dispense with the Mass, the altar, and the priest and just call lunch Communion, right?
It's a question of the Church's interpretation of the command given by Christ at the Last Supper. Frankly, you have no basis for comprehending what this means to Catholics.
You can either accept at face value that at least one practicing Catholic, whom you're at least somewhat acquainted with, is incredibly insulted by such comments and take steps to avoid such insults in the future, or you can keep being insulting.
I can't convince you to stop. But it says more about you than it does about Catholics.
quote:I don't consider the Communion trivial. I am, however, astounded that such a vital part of a religion can be denied to someone who is physically incapable of receiving it.
Since I cannot accept that God would do this, I must assume that it is the Church's decision. I hope that they come to a conclusion that allows a substitution of some sort, and I think they could have handled it in such a way as to leave no doubt that one way or another this girl would receive the Eucharist.
As I explained in my first post, in no way is she denied Communion. The substitute is there, in the wine, and is complete as receiving bread alone is. Most Catholics receive only bread at Communion, at least in America.
posted
Fair enough, but as I said I think the Church representatives could have made that point more clearly in the story (although it is always possible that they did, but the reporter either missed it or chose to go the more accusatory route).
Now that you've mentioned it, though, I do wonder how they would handle an alcoholic with celiac. Possibly extremely watered-down wine? What has been done in the past?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
That if you're going to make a movie mocking an institution where the entire plot turns on the interpretation of several points of that institution's doctrine, then you better make sure you understand and present those points well.
In other words, it was too stupid to be offensive.
quote:Now that you've mentioned it, though, I do wonder how they would handle an alcoholic with celiac. Possibly extremely watered-down wine? What has been done in the past?
I don't know what they would do - maybe watered down wine, maybe low-gluten hosts, depending on which is worse for the person. Maybe gluten-free hosts will be allowed - the decision isn't final yet.
The entire orgaization of the Catholic Church is set up to guarantee the availability of Communion to its members. It's not like the Church has a motive to prevent as many people as possible from receiving Communion. I'm sure they'd think of something.
posted
Dag, WHY does the Catholic church believe that Christ only chooses to manifest in certain types of grain? What basis do they use for that belief?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are two things in the article that I don't quite understand:
quote: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...
If this is the case, why does the girl's mother have a problem with her just drinking the wine?
quote:Last month, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate Haley's sacrament because of the substitute wafer.
Why not, if she drank the wine?
. I guess that I also don't really understand why one can receive the sacrament by just drinking the wine. I was taught (as a Religion major) that transubstantiation requires both wine and bread. I check the Catholic Church's web site and it basically confirms what I was taught:
quote:2. Doctrine about the Eucharistic sacrament, sacrificial meal and sacrificial food: The Holy Eucharist is a true sacrament, instituted by Christ. Christ is really present in the Holy Eucharist, even when not being received. It is therefore to be honored and adored. The whole Christ is present in either kind and is received by the communicant. For the wheat bread and grape wine are transubstantiated by the ordained priest into the flesh and blood of Christ so that only the appearance of bread and wine remains.
posted
Isn't it illegal for an eight year old girl to imbibe an alcohol-based liquid at communion? Or is it low enough % that it's okay? I didn't think that religion trumps drug laws. Though presumably it's legal to give your children nyquil.
BTW I'd like to suggest that celiac sprue, whichs is what the girl has, is not that rare.
quote:In the US: The frequency of celiac sprue in the US is relatively low, about 1 in 4700 persons. This might be due to underdiagnosis of the disease in part because of the lack of diagnostic laboratories experienced in celiac sprue. Internationally: Celiac sprue is prevalent in some European countries with temperate climates. For example, the frequency of the disease is between 1 in 250 persons and 1 in 300 persons in Italian and Irish populations. In comparison, the disease is rare in Africans or Asian
It's almost become a trendy thing to be "gluten-free," as seen in WholeFoods-like stores. But it's true that many people are likely undiagnosed. Check out eMedicine if you're curious, especially if you feel you get diarrhea, cramps, and fatigue.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because that is what was used at the Last Supper? As to why that's so important, the Church has to meet two very different goals - meeting the needs of a vastly changing society while preserving two-thousand year old beliefs, traditions, and commands received directly from God and Christ. This requires a very difficult balancing act, and any change has to be thoughtfully and prayerfully considered.
Maybe the Church will decide that non-wheat hosts are OK; maybe it won't. But it's not nearly as clear cut or straightforward as you make it out to be. Especially when an alternative already exists within current Church teaching.
posted
"The entire orgaization of the Catholic Church is set up to guarantee the availability of Communion to its members. It's not like the Church has a motive to prevent as many people as possible from receiving Communion. I'm sure they'd think of something."
That is the most sensible thing I've read in this thread. Thanks for being patient with us Dag. Our questions are motivated by curiosity and they are not intended as an insult to your religion.
::...is reminded of the Simpsons episdoe where Bart's Sunday School teacher was forced to consider whether a ventriloquist and his dummy will both go to heaven (answer: the ventriloquist will go but the dummy won’t) and what would be the fate of a robot with a human brain. She finally snaps under the theological pressure and cries: “I don’t know! All these questions! Is a little blind faith too much to ask?” ::
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, when I was confermed (when I was still Catholic) they just used the wafer, so eithr both isn't neccessary, or I was confermed incorrectly.
quote:I was taught (as a Religion major) that transubstantiation requires both wine and bread. I check the Catholic Church's web site and it basically confirms what I was taught:
Both must be present on the altar during the Mass for transubstantiation to occur.
A recipient receiving Communion receives the full measure from either, although it is considered best to take both.
As I said before, most American Catholic churches only pass out bread during normal masses.
As to why her Communion was invalid, it may be that there was no wheat-based bread on the altar, which would mean transubstantiation did not occur, making the wine insufficient.
quote:Isn't it illegal for an eight year old girl to imbibe an alcohol-based liquid at communion? Or is it low enough % that it's okay? I didn't think that religion trumps drug laws. Though presumably it's legal to give your children nyquil.
I received wine when it was distributed from the time I was 6 or 7 (can't remember when I received First Communion). It's not the percentage, it's the amount. A very small sip is all that's taken.
I'm not sure it's strictly legal, but trust me when I say it would be soon if anyone was prosecuted for it. There's a LOT of Catholics in this country.
posted
Hmm... 8 year old girl condemned to the fires of hell for the mortal sin of a having a digestive disease.
At least, that's the impression I had from the article and upon reading most of this thread. And given my opinion on religion I was ready to jump all over it.
However...
quote: 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
There's no gluten in wine and that was part of the offer so why is this even a story? Looks like just a smear campaign on the Catholics.
(edit: looks like Mrs.M found the same quote interesting as me.)
posted
BTW, afaik, a smidge of gluten isn't going to kill the girl, maybe just give her a bit of an upset stomach. Many celiac-sprue sufferers don't realize they have the disease for a long time, and just deal with the ill effects.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm all for allowing kids and teens sips of alcohol if they're curious, or with dinner or ceremonies when they're big enough to handle it, but it's still illegal. In a situation like this, where the girl can't eat the wafer option, isn't it a little squicky to force an 8-year-old girl to drink wine?
posted
I suppose if you're forced to choose between hell and breaking the law, it's not really a hard choice, right?
-----
Seriously, though, Dag: what's the justification for limiting Christ to specific types of grain? I haven't read the logic behind that, and I'm legitimately intrigued.
posted
Well, she'll have learned a valuable lesson if she drinks the wine, won't she? It's good to learn that sometimes we have to think for ourselves no matter what the freaking law might say.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm all for allowing kids and teens sips of alcohol if they're curious, or with dinner or ceremonies when they're big enough to handle it, but it's still illegal. In a situation like this, where the girl can't eat the wafer option, isn't it a little squicky to force an 8-year-old girl to drink wine?
It may not be illegal in a Communion context - I don't have time to check right now.
quote:Seriously, though, Dag: what's the justification for limiting Christ to specific types of grain? I haven't read the logic behind that, and I'm legitimately intrigued.
As I said above, it's based on carrying on the tradition of the Last Supper. Proper form is important in Sacraments, though not as important as substance. Whether this is an acceptable reason to adjust the form is a theological question I'm not at all equipped to look into.
And it's not a question of limiting Christ. If anything, it's a question of accepting limits Christ has placed on himself.
quote: Both must be present on the altar during the Mass for transubstantiation to occur.
A recipient receiving Communion receives the full measure from either, although it is considered best to take both.
Beat me to it. This is what I was going to answer alr's comment about recovering alcoholics with. I stopped taking the wine when it occured to me that that might be a good way to catch the flu. (dang that was a long time ago)
Posts: 3956 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one's forcing her to drink the wine - her mother has no problem with her drinking the wine. Also, I don't think that it's illegal to give underage people the amount of wine required for communion (which I understand is only a sip).
Great minds think alike, Pix.
Thanks, Dag, for answering my question. Maybe it's time for me to look over my Christianity notes.
posted
I'm pretty certain that children are allowed communion wine. You only get a few drops after all.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, You mentioned two thousand year-old traditions. Some Catholic traditions that we think of as eternally Catholic, are more recent innovations, such as priests marrying. I would really like to see a link to the history of this dogma, and, like Tom, would like to know the basis for the need for wheat. I believe what you say is true, I would just like to know the history.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In South Caroline, which is the first state I found a link for, Communion wine for underage drinkers is perfectly legal:
quote:If I'm under 21 can I drink alcohol at home with my parents' permission? You can drink alcohol at your parents' home with their permission. You can also drink alcohol as part of a religious ceremony, as long as the alcohol was purchased legally. Communion is an example of a religious ceremony where it is legal to consume alcohol. S.C. Code Section 20-7-320
posted
I personally can't figure out why the type of grain in the pita being passed around at the Last Supper is considered a relevant "tradition" for the sacrament, when things like the date, the Jewish prayers recited, the robes being worn, and the oils being anointed are NOT relevant.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The first element is wheaten bread (panis triticeus), without which the "confection of the Sacrament does not take place" (Missale Romanum: De defectibus, sect. 3), Being true bread, the Host must be baked, since mere flour is not bread. Since, moreover, the bread required is that formed of wheaten flour, not every kind of flour is allowed for validity, such, e.g., as is ground from rye, oats, barley, Indian corn or maize, though these are all botanically classified as grain (frumentum), On the other hand, the different varieties of wheat (as spelt, amel-corn, etc.) are valid, inasmuch as they can be proved botanically to be genuine wheat.
The necessity of wheaten bread is deduced immediately from the words of Institution: "The Lord took bread" (ton arton), in connection with which it may be remarked, that in Scripture bread (artos), without any qualifying addition, always signifies wheaten bread. No doubt, too, Christ adhered unconditionally to the Jewish custom of using only wheaten bread in the Passover Supper, and by the words, "Do this for a commemoration of me", commanded its use for all succeeding times. In addition to this, uninterrupted tradition, whether it be the testimony of the Fathers or the practice of the Church, shows wheaten bread to have played such an essential part, that even Protestants would be loath to regard rye bread or barley bread as a proper element for the celebration of the Lord's Supper.
posted
Actually, I KNOW why the Jewish custom demands unleavened wheaten bread. I'm just surprised that the Catholics choose to recognize that specific aspect of Passover when neglecting the rest of it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Note that it allows for the possibility of non-wheat grains in some theologians writings, but it's unsure. And some of these grains may also have gluten, I think.
I'm not saying wheat is the only possibility. I'm saying that it's possible that wheat is the only possibility, if that makes sense.
quote:I personally can't figure out why the type of grain in the pita being passed around at the Last Supper is considered a relevant "tradition" for the sacrament, when things like the date, the Jewish prayers recited, the robes being worn, and the oils being anointed are NOT relevant.
Those weren't the things being referenced when Jesus said, "this."
Non-Jews were not supposed to conform to Jewish law upon becoming a follower of Christ. So the essential element was extracted.
I'm at a loss to imagine why you feel qualified to decide which parts are essential.
quote:When it comes to powerful Biblical imagery, few words can match the status of wheat -- the grain that first must fall to the ground and die before being reborn as the Bread of Life.
Well, most grains have to fall and "die" before they can grow into another plant. It does seem to be based on geography. Whatever a people's "corn," it would have to become an encased seed before growing again.
quote: With the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, the wheat-only position for Communion wafers is strongly held. The Vatican office ruled in 1994 that men with celiac disease should not be ordained. A Vatican official told NCR that it's a matter of fidelity to revelation. "If a candidate cannot celebrate the Mass under the forms instituted by Christ, that is an obvious problem," the official said -- though another official noted that the norm is subject to the judgment of a local bishop.
I just think that is really sad. Glucose intolerant need not apply. Isn't it hard enough getting priests into the church these days? Is this true?
quote:He pointed out that Jennifer could drink from the Communion cup and receive the full presence of the Eucharist.
The Richardsons said Twomey's solution was unacceptable because a celiac sufferer could accidentally be exposed to gluten through the chalice.
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that the parish would be willing to keep the children's portion of the wine separate so it couldn't be contaminated. If a rice wafer on the altar is acceptable, surely a separate cup would be as well.
Further quotes from the article:
quote: Walsh also said the Richardsons had been assured that an uncontaminated Communion cup could be used for Jennifer to receive the precious blood of Christ.
Annette Bentley, president of the American Celiac Society and a practicing Catholic, told the Associated Press that some priests quietly make a substitution to help parishioners. "To be Christian is to be more flexible," Bentley said.
Gary Macy, theology professor at the University of San Diego, said allowing rice wafers as an exception for people with celiac disease is a reasonable option, despite a clear sacred tradition that elevates wheat and wine to important places of status in church ritual. The tradition is unlikely to be changed on an institutional level, he said. But making an exception "does not change the whole ritual," Macy said. "All kinds of things have been dispensed within the history of the church."
Macy said the important role of symbols in worship should not obscure the more important sacramental reality: "The Real Presence of the Lord is there for persons whether they receive Communion or not." Modeling the life of Christ and living a holy life are at the crux of the gospel, Macy said. "The most important thing is not the symbolic act but what the symbolic act stands for."
As for Twomey's proposal that Jennifer receive Communion from the cup alone, Huck and Macy both said the church had been remiss by failing to convey to Catholics that Communion in either species constitutes the complete body of Christ. The cup, Huck said, has been regarded by many as a "secondary symbol."
Servite Fr. John Huels, a professor of canon law at Ottawa's St. Paul University, proposed a third possibility. "If for some medical, psychological, or other reason a communicant declines to drink from the chalice, the diocesan bishop could grant a dispensation to allow the person to [dip] the edge of a rice wafer -- unconsecrated, of course -- in the precious blood," he told NCR. "The person would be receiving under one species, that of the wine, but would be receiving the whole Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity."
Frankly, it's hard to have a good opinion of the parents from this article. A reasonable solution was offered; why wouldn't they take it?
posted
It also said it (the part about the priests) was subject to the local bishops' decsions. Is the whole wheat business subject to the bishop's decision? I am so confused.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
And, to clarify, the essential element of the Passover supper was the fact that the bread was made at least partially of wheat? Because, let's face it: the wafers used today bear no other resemblance to the bread being referenced.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Walsh also said the Richardsons had been assured that an uncontaminated Communion cup could be used for Jennifer to receive the precious blood of Christ.
This quote made me wonder - since the wine and bread are thought to become the body and blood of Christ - would they still retain their non-flesh and blood compounds after consumption? Should the gluten base even be a factor? Is this really just a test of their faith?
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always been kinda partial to this scripture regarding this issue myself:
quote:LISTEN to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Lord, your God, and your Redeemer, whose word is quick and powerful. For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory -— remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins.
Of course, that's from the LDS Doctrine and Covenants so our Catholic friends don't believe it -- but it makes it so that we don't have to worry about silly arguments like this either, and haven't needed to since August of 1830 when this was written down.
And I have to agree with the previous people who said that if the wine is considered enough by itself, why is this even coming up at all? I agree that it just sounds like a smear on Catholics, trying to promote an image of stodgy intolerance. And that says more about the reporter than it does the church.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
