Guest Jed Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 ...because she suffers from Celiac Disease, an autoimmune disease that gives one an intolerance to gluten, which is found in wheat, barley and rye. People who suffer from this disease cannot digest products made from any of the aforementioned grains, and must strictly adhere to a gluten-free diet. Complications from not doing so include further diseases such as stomach cancer. As such, Haley Waldman, who is 8 years old, was told her First Holy Communion was invalid, since she used a wafer that did not contain any wheat. CBS and CNN reports the story. To Catholics - Does this make any sense to exclude people who have diseases that they have no control over? I find this story particularly disturbing since I, like this little girl, was diagnosed with Celiac disease. I'm not Catholic, though. I put this topic here since I doubt it could receive the maturity I think it deserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 This is bigotry of a most idiotic kind. Disregarding someone from religious practices due to a disease they have no control over, had no choice in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE BADGER: Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 Yes I agree with insanesith. That is preposterous. People like that ruin the name of the Lord, and Christianity in the like. Communion is just a symbol of the sacrifice of the Christ. Bread for His flesh and wine for His blood, just as Jesus and His twelve used in The Last Supper. It doesn't have to be a cracker and grape juice. It could be a chocolate chip cookie and some milk. It is just a symbol of acceptance and obedience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 That is bullsh*t. Now I'm not a religious guy by any means but not allowing someone to do join a religion becuase of something they can't help is bullsh*t of the highest order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topshot Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 To be honest, I agree with the above posts. What the pastors at that church did was pure bigotry, plain and simple. If she doesn't want to or can't eat anything with the said grains, they SHOULD at least respect her wishes and let her choose a food that has none. But being the high-and-mighty people they think they are, you would've thought they could at least have done that, instead of causing controversy within the very own walls of the church itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 I find it funny that the Church isn't letting her participate in the First Communion, just because she has a disease which God gave her... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druid Bremen Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Originally posted by Tyrion I find it funny that the Church isn't letting her participate in the First Communion, just because she has a disease which God gave her... Haha very true! Let the girl tell them that! lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoxStar Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Its anyone's guess unitil the Catholic Church blows up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted August 25, 2004 Share Posted August 25, 2004 i don't get where they got the "must contain wheat" bit from? Anyone have any idea? I don't remember ay rules about it in the bible. Is holy communion even mentioned in the bible? (as a ritual, not the last supper). Its odd how these people who are supposed to know the MOST about Jesus's teachings seem to know the least about what he was actually trying to say. I somehow doubt he expected that just because he used bread that everything ever after would have to contain wheat... and even if he had, i somehow doubt he would have turned down a little girl... i sometime think the most offputting thing about religion is religious people... "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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reborn Outcast Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Originally posted by toms i don't get where they got the "must contain wheat" bit from? Anyone have any idea? I don't remember ay rules about it in the bible. Is holy communion even mentioned in the bible? (as a ritual, not the last supper). Yes, I think it's when Moses is in Egypt, and God tells him to prepare for his last supper there before they escape. (Around that time I think.) And, I am a Christian (but not Catholic) and even I must say that is a terrible thing that happened to that girl. God allowed that disease in her, for some purpose unknown to us, but known to him. Maybe he put it in her just for this moment, for a shakedown of the Church's rules. Either way, it is complete bullsh*t that she's not allowed to have her First Communion because of things she can't control. For the first time, I must say, "Shame on the Catholic Church." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast Yes, I think it's when Moses is in Egypt, and God tells him to prepare for his last supper there before they escape. (Around that time I think.) I believe in the article they said that the bread Jesus ate in the last supper had wheat, thus for the First Communion you have to have some form of wheat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 I think you guys are taking it wrong... She WAS allowed to take part in the communion, the fault goes not to the pastor or the church, but who ever it was who told her that her first holy communion was no valid... Either way, salvation is not based on a practice, but thats a different matter. Its one thing to say she cant take the communion, and another to LET her, than say it was not valid... I wish that teachers and leaders in the church would back up what they say with actual fact and basis, rather than making crap up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 You people are lacking an important bit of information that most news sources are leaving out to make this whole affair seem more scandalous than it really is. For Holy Communion, you can partake of either the bread or the wine. It does not matter wich. Also, the bread can be specially made wafers that contain only the barest traces of wheat. The mother of the girl in question said no to both these options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Originally posted by Radd You people are lacking an important bit of information that most news sources are leaving out to make this whole affair seem more scandalous than it really is. For Holy Communion, you can partake of either the bread or the wine. It does not matter wich. Also, the bread can be specially made wafers that contain only the barest traces of wheat. The mother of the girl in question said no to both these options. That was already addressed in the article: The Diocese of Trenton has told Waldman's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten host, drink wine at communion or abstain entirely, but that any host without gluten does not qualify as Holy Communion. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying even a small amount of gluten could harm her child. Gluten is a food protein contained in wheat and other grains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 That quoted part of the article does not at all address the wine. It mentions it, but does not say anything other than that the mother passed on the low gluten wafer. No response to the wine at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Originally posted by Radd That quoted part of the article does not at all address the wine. It mentions it, but does not say anything other than that the mother passed on the low gluten wafer. No response to the wine at all. Er... The Diocese of Trenton has told Waldman's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten host, drink wine at communion or abstain entirely, but that any host without gluten does not qualify as Holy Communion. This paragraph says that the Diocese of Trenton told the mother about the low-gluten wine. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying even a small amount of gluten could harm her child. Gluten is a food protein contained in wheat and other grains. That paragraph is in response to the previous paragraph, in this one the mother rejected the wine offer because even the small amount of gluten in the wine could harm her child. Do you understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 The Diocese of Trenton has told Waldman's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten host, drink wine at communion or abstain entirely, but that any host without gluten does not qualify as Holy Communion. I'm reading it as three seperate options being given here. A low gluten host or wine or abstaining entirely. Not all wine contains gluten, in fact most wines don't by my understanding. I read a seperate newspaper article, unfortunately I don't have it here to quote it for you, that stated that the church offered wine as a gluten free alternative, as opposed to the wafer wich needs gluten/wheat to be considered bread in the Church's eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 http://food4.epicurious.com/HyperNews/get/wine/995.html That link features a web board discussion based soley on gluten in wine. They do post some sources. Worth checking out. I've heard from some people that some churches claim you must drink both the wine and eat the wafer, while I know that other churches use non-alcoholic wine wich would be very much akin to a gluten free wafer if you ask me. Most churches I've been to don't even offer wine, instead substituting grape juice and relying on the wafer for the communion itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Originally posted by Radd I'm reading it as three seperate options being given here. A low gluten host or wine or abstaining entirely. Not all wine contains gluten, in fact most wines don't by my understanding. I read a seperate newspaper article, unfortunately I don't have it here to quote it for you, that stated that the church offered wine as a gluten free alternative, as opposed to the wafer wich needs gluten/wheat to be considered bread in the Church's eyes. Ahhhhhhhh Heh, sorry, the wording in the first article was a bit tricky. I thought that low-gluten host, drink wine at communion was a single option. Well, now I see what you mean, and now I feel dumb. However, now I'm not so sure I was entirely wrong, as wouldn't you still need to consume something that has some form of gluton? I've never had my First Communion by the way(Not even a Christian, actually) so please forgive me if some of my arguments use fallicous statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Oh, no worries. I'm not a very good catholic, to be honest. Parents stopped going when I was little, and I've since been to dissallusioned by how the Church has handled many matters whenever I've considered going on my own. So my familiarity with Catholic dogma is tenuous at best in some cases. I get my arguments from other statements I've read that the gluten only applies to the wafer. Bread or wine must be used. Understandable, sure. Their religion, they make and follow the rules. However, if it's true that either bread or wine will suffice, then there is that option for those who suffer this disorder to choose wine instead of bread. By my understanding gluton is only found in wine if a specific filtering process is used, in wich case the gluton is a byproduct of that filtering process. However, that does not make wine, wine, unlike wheat being a basic element of bread. I'm also familier with the trend in our society to label certain things as unethical simply because some arbitrarily placed figurehead arbitrarily decides it is so. Such a case is that people under the age of 21 drinking alcohol is somehow evil and wrong. I can easily see the mother not wanting her underage daughter drinking alcohol even for a church function for this very reason, but that's simply my own conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 OT: I think that in young kids their livers haven't fully formed so alchohol can damage them. However this is only under the age of about 6 or so. (this may be complete rubbish, but i remember hearing it somewhere). In many countries (france especially) it is common to give kids watered down wine as part of their meals. ---------------------------------------- Imagine if they sat down a group of kids, told them the story of the last supper and said "now kids, what was the important point of this story?" I somehow think even the kids would have been smart enough not to say "the wheat". And if they did they'd probably get told off for not taking it seriously. --------------------------------------- The catholic church as an organisation has become so wrapped up in it's own history, politics, revisions and rules that it seems to have become almost entirely detached from the original POINT. This is a small example, but personally i think that the fact that they are telling people in the AIDS ridden third world that condoms are both wrong and "have gaps in that will let the virus through" is not only politcs gone made, it is downright evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Originally posted by toms OT: I think that in young kids their livers haven't fully formed so alchohol can damage them. However this is only under the age of about 6 or so. (this may be complete rubbish, but i remember hearing it somewhere). In many countries (france especially) it is common to give kids watered down wine as part of their meals. Thats because wine is actually good for the body in small doses(a glass and a half a day I think?) because its made out of natural ingrediants (mostly grapes). I think its awesome that the church denied that girl her religion. Shows how FACIST the church really is. Expand your Imagi-Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Fact, many churches that use wine in communion use watered down wine. That and you only take a sip. Given this and all the other facts presented in this thread I can only come to the conclusion that those still blaming the Church, are doing so because they are looking for a reason, any reason, to badmouth the Church. That or people just aren't reading other's posts. I mean, come on people. there are many, many much more valid reasons to critisize the Church. There is no reason whatsoever to take something completely out of context and alter the facts to make the Church seem wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 ??? IMHO it is still the fault of the church, it still shows a lack of comprehension and compassion on the part of the church, still shows how they are absrbed in their own little world of rules... if you are arguing that, becuase it might not harm the girl she should have wine and gluten free bread then i would say that it is up to the mother whether she wants her eight year old having alchohol. I still don't get the gluten free wafers bit though... are they saying that you can only have GF wafers if you have real wine (and that GF wafers with fake wine doesn't count?) or that you can have one or the other fake, but not both, if they are being picky about the contents then i don't see how the content of one affects the content of the other. Otherwise they are just giving contradictory messages. confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted September 11, 2004 Share Posted September 11, 2004 It sounds to me like there is a two-fold cause for blame here. 1) The mother. She refuses to allow her daughter to take wine for communion (apparently, or else the matter would be solved). Wine is 100% substitutable theologically for the bread in the sacrament of the Eucharist. If the church (the locale one) was refusing to provide wine, then they would be at fault. 2) The Church organization (either at the local parish level or the diocese) is at fault for first allowing the rice wafer for communion and then claiming it invalid. A breakdown in communication must have occured or else they should have refused the option to use a non-wheat wafer. The issue of making different recipes for the species (the technical name for the two "types" of communion) would come up if you had a person who: 1) couldn't have any alcohol and 2) couldn't have any wheat. I have a mild allergy to wheat, and (being Catholic) I take the wine when I go to communion. However at times I take the bread (especially if I'm at a parish who doesn't provide the wine or runs out due to poor planning). Being such a small amount it's usually no big deal. However my allergy is very mild compared to her's. While a difficult case, it sounds to me like the mother is being obstinant about the wine option, and the article doesn't say why. The miniscule amount of alcohol shouldn't be an issue (she's Catholic right?), and if it's just that she doesn't want her daughter to appear "different," well, there's no going around that. People in wheelchairs can't pretend that they have trouble getting around "normally" they have to accept their disability and live with it. It's nothing to be ashamed of, and if people stare, that's their own problem. But, I'm speculating reasons here, the article doesn't say why. Some folks are trying to change the subject by throwing in their own little digs at the Catholic Church (nothing new in these types of discussions). If you want to debate about the Church's stance on condom usage (and the prohibition against sex outside of monogamous marriage), or the lack of full democratic elections of priests, feel free to start another topic... Finally, in the case of appealing to the Magisterium (basically, the Pope and higher up bishops), there is such a thing as a "dispensation" (making an exception to some rule) and perhaps a good case for it. But the leadership has to make the call on it. To me it sounds like the mother is throwing out the baby with the bath-water. Either I get things my way or the Church has to change the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.