Psycho-Babble Social Thread 380784

Shown: posts 1 to 21 of 21. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 9:55:44

Here's an interesting news item:
Brielle, N.J.
Communion denied because wafer contained no wheat.
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.
The little girl said, "I'm on a gluten-free diet because I can't have wheat. I could die."

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Susan47 on August 22, 2004, at 10:38:54

In reply to communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 9:55:44

Confirms what I think of organized religion.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 11:41:22

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Susan47 on August 22, 2004, at 10:38:54

ponder on this

If the Roman Catholic church opens the door to rice wafers...
well then maybe some people are allergic to both rice and wheat.
What then?
I am on a low carb diet...
a protein wafer would be better for me.
Protein is more authentic anyway since the host is considered the body of christ....

I remember being scolded for asking just such questions in catechism class 40million years ago.
Oh the mind of a child.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by JenStar on August 22, 2004, at 18:59:58

In reply to communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 9:55:44

I was really interested in that story.

On the one hand, I couldn't help but think that wheat allergies are seldom as life-threatening as this girl made out, and the girl (or perhaps more likely her mom) are trying to make trouble/get noticed/etc.

But on the other hand -- why shouldn't they make a fuss? Shouldn't the sacrament be more about the ideology than the physical piece of bread? What's a religious person to do if the church won't admit them b/c they can't eat the host?

I mean -- if it's supposed to be Christ's actual blood/flesh -- what does it matter what it started out as, whether wheat, rice, or French loaf? In Jesus' day, they didn't use specially formulated wheat wafers that were sanctified by a special authoritative council. They used whatever was handy and local and available.

I have read a lot about how the arbitrariness of religious rules is what makes them work -- once you realize that it isn't the rule itself that matters so much but rather adherence to the rule, you are freed up to appreciate the deeper truths. I suppose the church is loathe to change the policies for this girl -- they've decided that their rule is wheat-wafers. But such inflexibility seems ridiculous and really just at complete odds with the heart of what is SUPPOSED to be Catholic religion!

All it does (in my mind) is make the Catholic church into a bigger mockery and public fool that it already was. It saddens me, and as a sort-of Catholic, I feel the church is just going to die. Stupid church! Why can't you just fix yourself?

Sorry for the rant. I'm feeling bitter b/c I was raised Catholic and tried to really get into it...and now there is so much ugliness being exposed that I am almost embarrassed to say I am Catholic...

JenStar

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 20:18:46

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by JenStar on August 22, 2004, at 18:59:58

There is an illness where a person is unable to eat wheat. It's is such that if you eat wheat you will get so ill you may die. This illness is not fabricated. I have heard of it and known people who have had it.
I think it's rather heroic of the family to stand by their daughter and demand that the chruch pay attention to health concerns. I too was a Roman Catholic and have found the church less than flexible.
We will see.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by fallingstar on August 22, 2004, at 21:29:01

In reply to communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 9:55:44

My mouth dropped open when I read this one. I was raised Catholic, but my GOODNESS! That is awful. That poor little girl.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by daisym on August 23, 2004, at 6:22:55

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by fallingstar on August 22, 2004, at 21:29:01

It is the individual Priest who make the differences. He should have made it possible for the little girl to participate...and not said anything else. Sounds like she did make her first communion so someone, somewhere did something.

Our Church is incredibly flexible. We have a ton of kids. We had a situation with a developmentally disabled little boy whose mother was very devote. I'm not sure how much he "understood"...another "rule"...but we did it anyway. It was a wonderful celebration of spirit and his family was very touch and moved as was everyone in attendance.

I went to Latin Mass yesterday. It was so beautiful and it touch my soul. I think you have to open yourself up to what you need from God, or a Spirit or whatever, take that and try to ignore the rest. I'm not saying organized religion is for everyone, but I always encourage people to remember their history and the fact that the Church doesn't commit sins, people do.

Just some thoughts from a "flexible" catholic.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Camille Dumont on August 23, 2004, at 13:16:00

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by daisym on August 23, 2004, at 6:22:55

I guess these people never gave a second thought to the fact that the communion is supposed to be a SYMBOLIC act ... and who the heck cares about the nutritional content ... is rice "less" representative than wheat of the "body of christ" ... some people. That girl is probably has celiac disease ... its a very real disease and if you eat wheat you both get tremendously sick AND you are doing more or less permanent damage to your digestive system.

But like some other people on here, it only confirms how I view most organized relitions ... something I prefer to stay far far away from.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Camille Dumont on August 23, 2004, at 13:22:44

In reply to communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 9:55:44

On a very interesting side not, if this were Canada, such an action from pretty much any church would SOOOOO be grounds for a human rights lawsuit ... you can't discriminate people because of their handicaps.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by deirdrehbrt on August 23, 2004, at 15:22:48

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Camille Dumont on August 23, 2004, at 13:22:44

Ok.... grew up catholic, and now threw up catholic.

I just erased a whole lot of venting.... this issue is quite triggering for me, but all I can say is that the church does what it wants. It is a 'top down' organization. period. If you want or need something else, you've got to get to the people with the authority to make the changes or exceptions that you need. This girl will probably get to receive communion, but it will have to be with a special dispensation, or she will receive the wine only.
I don't know... that's enough from me.

Dee.

 

Re: organized religions

Posted by Dr. Bob on August 23, 2004, at 16:08:10

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Camille Dumont on August 23, 2004, at 13:16:00

> Confirms what I think of organized religion.

> like some other people on here, it only confirms how I view most organized relitions ... something I prefer to stay far far away from.

Just a reminder, please be sensitive to the feelings of those who belong to organized religions, too. Thanks,

Bob

 

devil's advocate argument!

Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 16:26:33

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by Jai Narayan on August 22, 2004, at 20:18:46

Yes, I know the disease isn't fabricated. It can cause gastric distress, cramping/bloating (similar to lactose intolerance), and over time the chronic inflammation -- if wheat is continually ingested -- can make the body more susceptible to certain kinds of cancer. (At least, that's what I got out of a few studies I found on the web.)

Here I go with the "devil's advocate" position -- please don't read if this topic will make you mad! (I like to argue; for this topic, I'm genuinely unsure of which way I lean: in favor of the church, or in favor of the girl/mother, or a combo of both. Arguing for one or the other side helps me figure things out. My arguments are not meant to be insulting or offensive to any person here!)

Although celiac disease can cause great discomfort, research doesn't indicate that most people have a fatal reaction to small quantities of wheat. It's hard to believe that eating ONE HOST (in order to receive the sacrament of First Holy Communion) could cause instant death or severe gastric distress. Most studies show that it's the long-term effects of wheat that are the most worrisome to sufferers of the disease.

Also, the church did offer the girl a low-gluten wafer, which she & her mother refused.

I believe the Church's stance was that the wheat wafer needed to be taken at least once, for the official sacrament. After that, the girl could receive the spiritual benefits of communion regardless of whether the wafers had wheat or not.

By refusing to do it even once, it seems to me that they are taking a stance against the church, when they could probably make do with some of the alternatives offered.

Also, if you ARE truly religious, isn't the body of Christ worth some cramping and suffering on a one-time basis? Think of what the Christian martyrs endured...doesn't it seem that if one really wants to know God, a little diarrhea shouldn't stand in the way?

[although: could it be called "child abuse" if the parent of a celiac-disease child encouraged that child to eat wheat one time only for a religious sacrament, knowing it might cause some cramping and diarrhea?]

Now I'm not saying that all of that is my "official" position on this topic, but it's the arguments I mentally review when I think about it. I also have lots of arguments on why the Church SHOULD offer a wheat wafer.

Fun stuff...

As a point of interest, is there anyone out there who thinks the girl should just take the wheat wafer and be done with it?

JenStar

 

Re: devil's advocate argument!

Posted by Atticus on August 23, 2004, at 19:51:37

In reply to devil's advocate argument!, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 16:26:33

OK, as someone who was raised in an intensely Roman Catholic Irish family, I'd like to add another wrinkle to this discussion. Although all Protestant denominations acknowledge that taking the communion wafer and drinking the communal wine is symbolic, Roman Catholicism does not see things this way due to the concept of "transubstantiation." In a nutshell, Roman Catholicism argues that at the moment you accept the host and wine, they literally, not figuratively, transform into the actual flesh and actual blood of Christ -- a kind of mystical cannibalism. (Always tasted like a piece of paper and a slug of wine to me.) As this is official church dogma, why would it really matter if the flesh and blood were transubstantiated from wheat or from something else. The point is, the church doesn't believe it's still wheat when you accept it into your mouth; it's supposedly human meat at that point. So even by the church's own logic, the argument in favor of wheat makes no sense. The concept of transubstantiation is considered "dogma," meaning it's based on the word of God and can't be changed by human beings. However, the use of wheat-based wafers is considered "doctrine," created by human beings, and therefore potentially subject to change. This doesn't happen much in an organization that only cleared Galileo less than a decade ago of heresy, but the switch from Latin masses to masses held in English (or whatever the native tongue of the worshippers happens to be) under Pope John in the 1950s does illustrate that changes in doctrine are not unheard of. Just my two cents. Atticus

 

Re: devil's advocate argument! » Atticus

Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 20:11:41

In reply to Re: devil's advocate argument!, posted by Atticus on August 23, 2004, at 19:51:37

Atticus,
I think that's one of the best arguments against the wheat-wafer-is-a-must! It makes so much sense logically. (Remember I said that I was doing Devil's Advocate...your argument is a great one for the other side of the story!)

But I'm sure that the Vatican will pull out some antiquated rulesbook and negate it, somehow. They will argue that because it's "always been done this way" that it always MUST be done that way. Do you think they would need a Vatican Council to change the wheat rule? (It seems like so much work...too much work- to make a change!)

I have to admit that I always balked mentally at the idea of transubstantiation. I much prefer to think of it as a spiritual acceptance of Christ's body. I wish the Church would change that...they work so slowly to keep up with modern thoughts!

To me, it really seems that some of the things they fight against (female priests, priests getting married, birth control, gay marriage, etc.) as 'weakening' the Church would only make it stronger. They could modernize without hurting the core of the belief system...they'd only need to change some of the trappings.

I really do worry about the future of the Catholic church.

Thanks for responding!
JenStar

 

Re: devil's advocate argument! » JenStar

Posted by Atticus on August 23, 2004, at 20:25:05

In reply to Re: devil's advocate argument! » Atticus, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 20:11:41

I agree about transubstantiation. When I made my first Communion in the second grade, I was terrified that I would throw up when the wafer turned to flesh on my tongue. The whole idea was really frightening to me at that age, and I'd just gone through the unnerving process of making my first confession a few months earlier. Talk about a year of traumas! I do think that another Vatican Council is long overdue, but I'm not hopeful about what would come out of it. If the church only admitted that it was wrong about the sun revolving around the Earth in the 1990s -- hundreds of years after Galileo proposed it and after scientific research had proven it beyond any reasonable doubt -- I don't know what chance something like allowing priests to marry would have, let alone female priests. You're right. It is sad that an institution that could be such a source of support simply refuses to make what strike me as such common-sense changes. Atticus

 

Re: devil's advocate argument! » JenStar

Posted by tabitha on August 24, 2004, at 1:40:21

In reply to devil's advocate argument!, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 16:26:33

>..doesn't it seem that if one really wants to know God, a little diarrhea shouldn't stand in the way?

JenStar, my I join your fan club? That just cracked me up.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat

Posted by Jai Narayan on August 24, 2004, at 6:40:59

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by daisym on August 23, 2004, at 6:22:55

> I went to Latin Mass yesterday. It was so beautiful and it touch my soul.

***Wow, A Latin Mass....now that I do miss. The mass lost something for me when the mass changed. I loved the beauty and the ritual of the Latin Mass.
I'm so glad. Was it a high Mass?
I happy your church is supportive and makes you happy.

 

Re: devil's advocate argument! » tabitha

Posted by JenStar on August 24, 2004, at 10:51:44

In reply to Re: devil's advocate argument! » JenStar, posted by tabitha on August 24, 2004, at 1:40:21

Yes, if I can join your fan club too! I've always been impressed with the strength you show in overcoming difficult situations in group & regular therapy.

Thanks for making my day with your wonderful comment! :) I feel special & happy now. :)

JenStar

 

to JenStar (off this topic)

Posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 25, 2004, at 2:58:32

In reply to devil's advocate argument!, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 16:26:33

An ole friend of my used to say that term "devil's advocate" a lot. Ah, your first name wouldn't start with J and end with and e by chance?

 

Re: to JenStar (off this topic)

Posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 25, 2004, at 3:04:06

In reply to to JenStar (off this topic), posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 25, 2004, at 2:58:32

You answered my question in another post by your occupation. My friend wasn't in that particular occupation. So, you aren't she. Hmm, is my grammer right? I need a grammer class. Sorry to interrupt the thread.

 

Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat » daisym

Posted by Dinah on August 25, 2004, at 9:27:08

In reply to Re: communion denied/ wafer contained no wheat, posted by daisym on August 23, 2004, at 6:22:55

Oh, I'm so glad you said that, Daisy. I'm no longer Catholic (and was only half catholic when I was), but I do recall that individual priests had, in practice if not in theory, a fair amount of flexibility in these things.

So while I've talked with a person who was divorced (not at his choice) and was devastated to be refused communion, I also remember that my husband talked a lot about these things with a priest who was a lot more willing to bend.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.