Posted on 08/12/2004 10:41:10 AM PDT by sidewalk
BRIELLE, N.J. -- An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot consume wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained none, violating 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 _ celiac sprue disease _ should not exclude her from participating in the sacrament, in which Roman Catholics eat consecrated wheat-based wafers to commemorate the last supper of Jesus Christ before his crucifixion.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Actually, if anything He seems to be standing Himself in opposition to the "Wisdom" of Ecclesiasticus rather than quoting it, nor does He call it "Scripture" as He does the true Old Testament in many of His other qutoes. That's beside the point: Why won't you answer my simple question? How long have you gone without being hungry? If you do indeed grow physically hungry, then how can you say that you are eating the physical body of Christ?
I'm pretty much a newcomer to these threads, and I watch in horror as Christians of all stripes repudiate day, after day, after day, Christ's Command to "Love one another, as I have Loved thee." It is striking, and the reason one sees bumper stickers that proclaim, 'Lord, save me from your followers.' It is ineffably sad, and tremendously embarrassing. Goodness, gracious, how can Peace possibly prevail as such?
I spent many years away from the Catholic Church, and it is of late (last couple of years) that I have returned. There are a few things I disagree with the Church on, primary among them being The Doctrine of Infallibility. While certainly not an expert on Scripture or Church History, from what I do know, it is a counter-intuitive Doctrine in very large measure.
I do believe that God makes the Holy Spirit available to the Pope, but as I see it, God does not take away his free will, his free thought, etc. Obviously, The Holy Spirit can make no error, but to claim that the Pope is accordingly infallible, is to reduce him to a tool of the Holy Spirit. And, to me, that seems totally at odds with Scripture as I understand it.
I have no desire to rail against the Pope, he is probably a very Holy Man, 100x the person I am, and perhaps my views put me outside the acceptance of the Church, but it is very hard for me to feel worried about that, when the entire heirarchy seems loathe to act vehemently against the pederasts, those Church 'leaders' who moved them from sight to sight, syncretism (sp?), etc.
The Church's first impulse when the pederast scandal broke, like an ossified State, was to convene a 'Conference' about the matter. Zero tolerance? How about Zero Confidence?
What keeps me a Catholic is the Liturgy. I feel so connected to the Lord during the Sacrifice of the Mass that I just can't abandon it. If my judgements are in error, I ask the Lord to forgive me and lead me to the truth. But, what I currently believe, is that it is not correct to believe that the Pope, not just this Pope, any Pope, is not capable of error as it relates to Church teaching.
And I do believe Paul's admonishment that Charity is the greatest of all three.
Actually, the Holy Spirit is available to every believer; He is the indwelling presence of God in the heart or every Christian.
I was speaking of the Pope specifically however, that's why I worded the sentence the way I did.
Excellent point. Especially considering the priest who offered to "give her Holy Communion" doesn't/didn't know that his actions invalidate the sacrament.
Perhaps you misunderstand the Scriptural concept of free will.
I think I have now discussed the point fully enough in opposition to those who vehemently oppose the grace of God, by which, however, the human will is not taken away, but changed from bad to good, and assisted when it is good. I think, too, that I have so discussed the subject, that it is not so much I myself as the inspired Scripture which has spoken to you, in the clearest testimonies of truth; and if this divine record be looked into carefully, it shows us that not only men's good wills, which God Himself converts from bad ones, and, when converted by Him, directs to good actions and to eternal life, but also those which follow the world are so entirely at the disposal of God, that He turns them whithersoever He wills, and whensoever He wills,--to bestow kindness on some, and to heap punishment on others, as He Himself judges right by a counsel most secret to Himself, indeed, but beyond all doubt most righteous ... Was it not of their own will that the enemies of the children of Israel fought against the people of God, as led by Joshua, the son of Nun? And yet the Scripture says, "It was of the Lord to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that they might be exterminated," ... Did not Absalom choose by his own will the counsel which was detrimental to him? And yet the reason of his doing so was that the Lord had heard his father's prayer that it might be so. Wherefore the Scripture says that "the Lord appointed to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, to the intent that the Lord might bring all evils upon Absalom." ... Still, did these Philistines and Arabians invade the land of Judah to waste it with no will of their own? Or were their movements so directed by their own will that the Scripture lies which tells us that "the Lord stirred up their spirit" to do all this? Both statements to be sure are true, because they both came by their own will, and yet the Lord stirred up their spirit; and this may also with equal truth be stated the other way: The Lord both stirred up their spirit, and yet they came of their own will. For the Almighty sets in motion even in the innermost hearts of men the movement of their will, so that He does through their agency whatsoever He wishes to perform through them,--even He who knows not how to will anything in unrighteousness ... From these statements of the inspired word, and from similar passages which it would take too long to quote in full, it is, I think, sufficiently clear that God works in the hearts of men to incline their wills whithersoever He wills, whether to good deeds according to His mercy, or to evil after their own deserts; His own judgment being sometimes manifest, sometimes secret, but always righteous. (Augustine, On Grace and Free Will, 41-43)
Consider, Albion, that your theory would also derogate from the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.
... Moses or of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and the other prophets, who, lifted in ecstasy above the natural operations of their minds by the impulses of the Divine Spirit, uttered the things with which they were inspired, the Spirit making use of them as a flute-player breathes into a flute ... (Athenagoras, Plea for Christians, 9)
How could this be so under your theory of free will, in which men cannot be instruments of the Spirit?
"Shall yet" - the translation of the Latin "adhuc" - denotes a future time and therefore may be taken in the same sense as Christ's words.
He is Wisdom Itself - are you denying this?
Since you asked, I'm rather hungry right now. It's a good thing I'm not a goofy freelance Scripture-interpreter, or this might cause me mental anguish.
See Exodus xix.3,6. Moses said the same thing to the Israelites, calling them a "priestly kingdom" - and yet there were three "priesthoods" in the Old Covenant: the universal, the ministerial, and the high. This shadows the New Testament perfectly.
So are we going to play the "selective quoting" game for the Church Fathers as well? Well, let me oblige you:
"Again, giving directions to His disciples to offer to God the first-fruits of His own, created things -- not as if He stood in need of them, but that they might be themselves neither unfruitful nor ungrateful -- He took that created thing, bread, and gave thanks, and said, "This is My body." And the cup likewise, which is part of that creation to which we belong, He confessed to be His blood, and taught the new oblation of the new covenant; which the Church receiving from the apostles, offers to God throughout all the world, to Him who gives us as the means of subsistence the first-fruits of His own gifts in the New Testament, concerning which Malachi, among the twelve prophets, thus spoke beforehand: "I have no pleasure in you, saith the LORD Omnipotent, and I will not accept sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun, unto the going down [of the same], My name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is My name among the Gentiles, saith the LORD Omnipotent;" -- indicating in the plainest manner, by these words, that the former people [the Jews] shall indeed cease to make offerings to God, but that in every place sacrifice shall be offered to Him, and that a pure one; and His name is glorified among the Gentiles" (St. Iranaeus)
"The very women of these heretics, how wanton they are! For they are bold enough to teach, to dispute, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures--it may be even to baptize. Their ordinations, are carelessly. administered, capricious, changeable. At one time they put novices in office; at another time, men who are bound to some secular employment; at another, persons who have apostatized from us, to bind them by vainglory, since they cannot by the truth. Nowhere is promotion easier than in the camp of rebels, where the mere fact of being there is a foremost service. And so it comes to pass that to-day one man is their bishop, to-morrow another; to-day he is a deacon who to-morrow is a reader; to-day he is a presbyter who tomorrow is a layman. For even on laymen do they impose the functions of priesthood" (Tertullian).
1. "Study the Word for yourself and follow Him!"
Sure--we should all study the Word for ourselves. But there is need to tally our interpretations with tradition as well. The Eucharist is a good example of why personal interpretation is inadequate. From the earliest days of the Church, these words of Christ to eat his Body and drink his Blood had been taken literally. He used specifically graphic--even repulsive--language to make sure he was not misunderstood. In fact, he was NOT misunderstood and many immediately took offense: "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"
Some say that Christ was using a Hebrew expression, "eat my body", to mean "accept what I am teaching." But the Jews did not interpret Christ's words in this way, but instead they took him literally and show their umbrage. After which, Christ responds with even more emphasis: "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him." That is rubbing it in! In fact, he wants to make sure they get his meaning--and there is no further explication to mitigate the impact of what he has just said. In other words, he was saying, "Take it or leave it."
What's more, the Greek itself is unusually literal. The word phagein is used, which means, "to eat". Later he actually uses the word trogein, which means, "to chew". It was so literal in fact, that many of his followers abandoned him at once. Even today, it's tough to accept this. But tradition demands it--it is the consistent teaching of the Church from ancient times into our own. None of the apostles taught otherwise. If they had, their disciples, the Church Fathers, would have said so. But none had taught this doctrine in any other sense than most Catholics understand it today.
So also with much else in Scripture. Political correctness and human respect exert tremendous pressures in this day and age to conform our interpretations to the prevailing doctrines and prejudices of the age. Thus because science precludes the possibility of miracles, many are prone to interpret the Gospels as non-historical mythic accounts. Tradition insures this does not happen.
2. "But that's just a return to a mock-Levitical system! Christ Himself is our High Priest now (per the whole book of Hebrews) who offered Himself up for our remission of sins."
Yet this was Jesus' intent--according to the most ancient sources. All the ante-Nicene writers testify to this, that the Liturgy of the Eucharist was sacrificial and propitiatory, as well as a memorial meal. That again is not something the Church invented, but a truth which was passed-down from the beginning. Trent merely repeats what it received in saying this, rejecting a more metaphoric Protestant understanding. Yes, Jesus is the High Priest, but this in no way precludes a priest from offering to the Father that Sacrifice again and again in the Name of Jesus. Of course we differ from Protestants in this--but not because we wish to, but because that is what has been passed-down from the apostles from day one.
3. I agree with what you say about rituals. They are necessary and natural for all societies everywhere. But some rituals are sacramental--i.e., signs which confer a grace that would otherwise be absent.
Thank you VERY much for that link!
Sounds as if the reporter was just happy trying to write something that might embarass the Church.
Without imputing metaphorical language and in a strictly literal sense, I would choose to reject such a belief and acceed to obedience to the words of YHWH my Creator that we not eat blood, nor do we eat flesh of man.
However, since I do see it as metaphorical, I can see Yeshua and how he continues to make reference to himself and reveal himself in terms of the Passover and feast days. Passover is a "remembrance", so when he says "Do this in remembrance", he is further showing his link to the observance of the Passover. He also links this to the eating of the flesh of the lamb of the Passover meal and the tradition of drinking wine(blood of the vine) signifying the blood of the covenant.
B'rakhot
Having read through this thread and seeing some rather vitriolic posts from Catholics toward Protestants, I wonder: Didn't a Catholic council a while back called Vatican II declare that non-RCC churches and members thereof were nonetheless to be considered Christian as long as certain things (which seem to me to apply to most Protestant branches) were the case? If so, if Catholics attack Protestants as being not of Christ/bound for hell/etc., aren't they in disagreement with their own church doctrine? (Or am I misunderstanding the whole situation there?)
Having read the same thread, it's my observation that the vitriol is not necessarily one-sided. That being said, the Second Vatican Council attempted to change the language of how Catholics refer to Protestants, insisting on the term "seperated bretheren," but it did not and can not change the fact that Protestantism is a heresy which is an offense to God. Catholics should always strive to be charitable towards those who embrace the errors of the Reformers, but should never be tolerant of the errors themselves.
Yeah there are nasty posts going both ways, which saddens me. I guess brothers and sisters in Christ are no more immune to hair-pulling and name-calling than those physically of the same family are :)
Found this article. I wonder if the mom would let the child try this? I still can't figure out why she won't let the child have the Precious Blood....
http://www.catholicreview.org/articles2/Newlowglutenhostsafeforceliacdiseasesufferers.htm
New low-gluten host safe for celiac disease sufferers
By Christopher Gaul
Senior staff correspondent
The University of Maryland researcher whose ground-breaking study revealed that celiac disease is dramatically more prevalent in the United States than previously thought said he is sure a newly developed, low-gluten eucharistic host is safe for the vast majority of sufferers of the little- known digestive disorder.
“This is really wonderful news and is going to make a big difference in the lives of what we now know to be the many people in this country who have celiac,” said Dr. Alessio Fasano, whose 2003 research discovered that more than two million Americans suffer from celiac.
Prior to the publication of the University of Maryland Center for Celiac Research study, the disease was thought to be rare. But now it is clear that it’s twice as common as Crohn’s ulcerative colitis and cystic fibrosis, said the professor of pediatrics, medicine and physiology who is a parishioner of St. Paul in Ellicott City.
“If there are about 300 people in church for Mass on Sunday, then we now know that two or three of them at least are likely to have celiac,” said Dr. Fasano, who noted that the disease affects about one in 130 Americans.
Celiac disease is a digestive disorder that is triggered by the protein gluten, which is found in wheat, barley and other grains. The Vatican requires that hosts must contain some gluten, an ingredient essential in the making of actual bread, but no one in the U.S. had developed a host with a low enough quantity of gluten that celiac sufferers could tolerate without harm.
That was until last month when, in a monastery in the rolling hills of northwest Missouri, members of the Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration produced a wheat host that contained a mere 0.01 percent of gluten, a level low enough to be perfectly safe for celiac sufferers, Dr. Fasano said.
“We had been trying to develop a really, really low-gluten bread for the past 10 or more years,” said Sister Rita Dohn, O.S.B., who heads the Benedictine Sisters’ altar bread department. “After all these years of trial and error we finally did it and we’re so thrilled for people with celiac who can now receive the host.”
Sister Rita said the challenge she and her fellow Sisters faced was trying to keep just enough gluten in the bread to meet the requirements set by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, yet an amount small enough to pose no threat to celiac sufferers, as determined by medical experts.
The level achieved by the Benedictines was even lower than that of a low-gluten host developed in Italy recently and approved by the Vatican and the scientific committee of the Italian Celiac Association.
According to the U.S. bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, the Benedictine Sisters’ bread contains unleavened wheat and water, is free of additives and conforms to the requirements of the Code of Canon Law, canon 924.2.
“This low-gluten content is still enough gluten to confect bread for the Eucharist,” the committee determined. “(It) is the only true, low-gluten altar bread known to the Secretariat and approved for use at Mass in the United States.”
However, committee officials cautioned that while gluten-intolerant persons may be able to consume the low-gluten host, or some portion of it, they are “strongly advised” to check with their personal physicians first. Prior to the development of the low-gluten host, U.S. bishops had advised celiac sufferers to receive Communion only in the form of consecrated wine.
The celiac issue was thrown into the public spotlight in the U.S. in 2001 when the parents of a five-year-old Boston girl with celiac disease left the Catholic Church after their pastor would not allow them to substitute the wheat host with a rice wafer for her first Communion.
Until the results of Dr. Fasano’s study were made known last year, doctors rarely diagnosed celiac disease in their patients who suffered from symptoms of gastrointestinal discomfort or distress.
“I look back and I think, how many patients over the years have I missed who had celiac disease whom we said had IBS (irritable bowel syndrome)? Hundreds, hundreds,” said Mercy Medical Center’s Dr. Michael Cox, a gerontologist for the past 25 years.
He said that of the patients who now return to him with symptoms of IBS, five to 10 percent are testing positive for celiac.
“I’m diagnosing more and more people with celiac now,” Dr. Cox said. “It’s out there in unprecedented numbers. I’ve diagnosed more patients with celiac in the past year than in all my 25 years of practice.”
The contact information for ordering low-gluten hosts is:
Congregation of Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, Altar Breads Department, 31970 State Highway P, Clyde, Missouri 64432. Phone: 1-800-223-2772.
"Without imputing metaphorical language and in a strictly literal sense, I would choose to reject such a belief and acceed to obedience to the words of YHWH my Creator that we not eat blood, nor do we eat flesh of man."
Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. He repeated himself several times, and they knew what he meant. People started getting up and leaving. They heard him, they no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically.
On other occasions when there was confusion, Christ explained just what he meant (cf. Matt. 16:5–12). Here, where any misunderstanding would be deadly serious, there was no effort by Jesus to correct. Instead, he repeated himself for greater emphasis. If they mistook what he said, why no correction? Instead, he lets these people, his own disciples, walk away. He doesn't call them back. Instead he looks at the Apostles, and asks them if they are going to walk away as well.
Instead, Christ takes the matter far beyond symbolism by saying, "For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" (John 6:55). He continues: "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me" (John 6:57).
The Greek word used for "eats" (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of "chewing" or "gnawing." This is not the language of metaphor.
Regarding the low-gluten hosts of the Benedictine Sisters.
As a traditional Catholic who suffers from Celiac Disease, I was happy to learn of these low gluten hosts had been approved by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
But all is not as it seems in this case. The sisters had actually found a way to get around the ruling from the Vatican and from canon law on the subject. They found a way to confect "bread" (their hosts actually look more like a brown corn flake) without a gluten component in their mix. They had their hosts (which they had made by mixing two different types of wheat starch - from which all or nearly all the gluten had been removed) tested for gluten using the "Elisa Test". The lowest amount this test can detect is .01%. No gluten was detected at all so .01% is what they said it contained. It really only contains imperceivable traces of gluten which happily makes them safe for celiacs, but it skirts the requirement that the wheat not be modified in such a way that bread cannot be made from it. They have managed to make a wheat starch flake that sticks together well enough to be used for a communion wafer. The bishops have approved it but there are so many other sacrileges they have approved of that this is meaningless.
I ordered some of these "altar breads" myself and gave them along with what information I had about them to the pastor of my SSPX chapel seeking his approval for their use in my case. He submitted the information to Bp. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, the canonist for the Society. The bishop's ruling was that they are not valid matter for the Eucharist. Below is his letter stating his reasoning on this.
Celiacs can receive the Eucharist under the species of wine - the Precious Blood - at SSPX chapels with prior approval but after the manner of the Eastern rites from a special spoon not from the Chalice. This is so that the consecrated vessels are touched only by the priest, which is the traditional practice.
I have yet to receive Holy Communion in this way but only because of foot-dragging on the part of my pastor and my passive stance with him. I have received a small partical of the Host once a year, usually with a violent reaction as the result. But I am used to occasional reactions of this sort. They are hard to avoid in a wheaty world.
I have kept my Easter obligation though technically I could be dispensed from it. Our Lord suffered to be able to give Himself to us. I figure I can suffer to receive Him at least once a year.
I was hoping for approval of these low-gluten hosts but I am satisfied with the bishop's answer. If I were willing to make do with questionable validity I would still be in the novus ordo. Deo gratias, I am not.
JMJ --- Roger
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.