Catholic church invalidates 8 year-old's first communion due to wheat allergy!

[EllisDTripp]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--communioncontrove0812aug12,0,6656242.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire

8-year-old's first Holy Communion invalidated by Church

By JOHN CURRAN
Associated Press Writer

August 12, 2004, 2:25 PM EDT

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.

"In my mind, I think they must not understand celiac," said Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman, 30. "It's just not a viable option. How does it corrupt the tradition of the Last Supper? It's just rice versus wheat."

It's more than that, according to church doctrine, which holds that communion wafers must have at least some unleavened wheat, as did the bread served at the Last Supper.

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.

"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," said Bishop John M. Smith.

"Hosts that are completely gluten-free are invalid matter for the celebration of the Eucharist," Smith said in a prepared statement released Thursday by the diocese.

Celiac sprue disease, an autoimmune disorder, occurs in people with a genetic intolerance of gluten.

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.

It isn't the first such communion controversy. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Natick, Mass., girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer.

Some Catholic churches allow the use of no-gluten hosts, others don't, according to Elaine Monarch, executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, a Studio City, Calif.-based support group for sufferers.

"It is a dilemma," said Monarch. "It is a major frustration that someone who wants to follow their religion is restricted from doing so because some churches will not allow it."

"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.

Haley Waldman, a shy, brown-haired tomboy who loves surfing and hates to wear a dress, was diagnosed with the disorder at 5.

"I'm on a gluten-free diet because I can't have wheat, I could die," she said in an interview Wednesday.

Last year, in anticipation of the Brielle Elementary School third grader reaching Holy Communion age, her mother told officials at St. Denis Catholic Church in Manasquan that the girl could not have the standard host.

The church's pastor, the Rev. Stanley P. Lukaszewski, told her that a gluten-free substitute was unacceptable.

But a priest at a nearby parish contacted Pelly-Waldman after learning about the dilemma, volunteering to administer the sacrament using a gluten-free host.

She said she won't identify the priest or his parish for fear of repercussions from diocese.

On May 2, Waldman _ wearing a white communion dress _ made her first Holy Communion in a ceremony at the priest's church. Her mother, who also suffers from celiac and had not received communion since her diagnosis four years ago, also received.

But last month, the diocese told the priest that Waldman's sacrament would not be validated by the church 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?"'

Now, the mother is seeking papal intervention. She 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 said in the letter.

For her part, Pelly-Waldman _ who attends 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.

Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press

[Epiphany]

The real sad fact here is that a wafer cannot be blessed anymore by a guy in a robe, than myself, a woman who has given her life to Christ, is celibate by choice (well, until marriage), and filled with the holy ghost.

Where did Jesus say that he gave man the blessing to turn wine into blood and bread in body? He didn't. I bless my food before I eat it, and it is not anymore or any less special than a priest praying over communion.

I think the Catholic church needs to do some praying. Do they honestly believe that the Lord would have turned down one of his disciples during the last supper if they were allergic to the food?

[mynameiskc]

that's kinda messed up. though in symbolic purposes, if her body rejects the "body of christ" the symbolism is sorta lost. but damn, man, get some gluten free wafers. our church used them.

[Jozak]

Before people get pissed off, this is a rare disease, and probably has not happened in God knows how long. I think it's safe to guess they will make an exception for her, it might take some time, but when you have a large church with a lot of people, there can be red tape, unfortuently.



The real sad fact here is that a wafer cannot be blessed anymore by a guy in a robe, than myself, a woman who has given her life to Christ, is celibate by choice (well, until marriage), and filled with the holy ghost. Once again, you fail to grasp the teachings of the Catholic Church. He is more than just a guy in a robe, he is a priest. Christ commissioned the apostoles to do this. It's called Apostolic Succession, and is a very important teaching in the Church. Communion blessing is not the only rule where Apostolic succession comes in to play either, by any means. I don't want to stray off topic, however, I do think women should be allowed to be priests, I think most Catholics feel this way to. But, until we get another pope, it's not going to happen. Pope John Paul is very, (in my opinion too) conservative.

Where did Jesus say that he gave man the blessing to turn wine into blood and bread in body? He didn't. I bless my food before I eat it, and it is not anymore or any less special than a priest praying over communion. Your pot roast or steak is not the Body/Blood of Christ!!! You do not have the power vested in you to do so, either. That is the most absurd, simplistic comparison I have heard yet, and is somewhat insulting as well. My family prays before meals to, but we are not turning dinner in to the body of Christ. It is more of a thanksgiving, so to speak. Christ set down the law the night of the last supper, he commissioned his apostoles to continue to do communion (in the literal sense I might add as well)

I think the Catholic church needs to do some praying. Do they honestly believe that the Lord would have turned down one of his disciples during the last supper if they were allergic to the food?I think you should do some praying--about how you think your pot roast is even in the same category as Holy Communion.


And finnaly, I will show what the early Christians/Church fathers beleived when communion was done during the mass: (Real Presence)

Ignatius of Antioch:
I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).


Cyril of Jerusalem

"The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ" (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).


Justin Martyr
"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" ([i]First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).


Tertullian

"[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed , in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God" ([i]The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).

[Epiphany]

Once again, you fail to grasp the teachings of the Catholic Church. He is more than just a guy in a robe, he is a priest.
The Father of my parent's Catholic church sips wine at a retaurant bar and has his body raveged with cancer from cigarette smoke. The holy ghost isn't dwelling in that temple! You cannot touch sin in one hand and God in the other. He might be a priest, but him blessing my food isn't much help. My Apostolic Pentecostal Pastor, on the other hand, is alcohol free, smoke free, and filled to the brim with the holy ghost. Hmmm, who should be praying over a wafer?


Your pot roast or steak is not the Body/Blood of Christ!!! You do not have the power vested in you to do so, either.
Power comes only by the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:8). Unless a priest has been baptized into Jesus Christ (by his name) and filled with the spirit of God, he has no power. Jesus said do ALL things in his name. Not in trinity titles.

[mynameiskc]

The Father of my parent's Catholic church sips wine at a retaurant bar and has his body raveged with cancer from cigarette smoke. The holy ghost isn't dwelling in that temple! You cannot touch sin in one hand and God in the other. He might be a priest, but him blessing my food isn't much help. My Apostolic Pentecostal Pastor, on the other hand, is alcohol free, smoke free, and filled to the brim with the holy ghost. Hmmm, who should be praying over a wafer?



Power comes only by the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:8). Unless a priest has been baptized into Jesus Christ (by his name) and filled with the spirit of God, he has no power. Jesus said do ALL things in his name. Not in trinity titles.
wow. so according to your rules, no priest or leader of the church will ever be allowed to bless anything, since they're all sinners. the holy ghost will dwell in whatever temple he's asked to enter. that's the point. addictions aside, what's wrong with wine? see, this is one of the reasons i'm not a pentecostal, ya'll are too willing to judge other people's actions.

[Jozak]

The Father of my parent's Catholic church sips wine at a retaurant bar and has his body raveged with cancer from cigarette smoke. The holy ghost isn't dwelling in that temple! You cannot touch sin in one hand and God in the other. He might be a priest, but him blessing my food isn't much help. My Apostolic Pentecostal Pastor, on the other hand, is alcohol free, smoke free, and filled to the brim with the holy ghost. Hmmm, who should be praying over a wafer?
So what?! He is a priest, he is human, he is going to sin just like your pentecostal pastor.

HOW IS SIPPING WINE AND SMOKING A SIN?????? It's not. I could care less if your pastor is filled with the "Holy Ghost", he is far from an ordained priest.


Power comes only by the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:8). Unless a priest has been baptized into Jesus Christ (by his name) and filled with the spirit of God, he has no power. Jesus said do ALL things in his name. Not in trinity titles.
Yeah, I am going to beleive your Holy Roller Pentacostal interpretation of the bible over what the Apostoles and early Church fathers practiced, those that were closest to Christ. Absurd. What King James did was dangerous, and I don't know how people can sleep at night knowing that they are using a bible,created by an anti-catholic king, who removed 7 books out of it--a political, non eccelestial figure nonetheless. Besdies that, all priests have made their First Communion, Baptism, and Confirmation (recieving of the holy spirit) so they obviously fit your criteria.

[Epiphany]

So what?! He is a priest, he is human, he is going to sin just like your pentecostal pastor.Yes, everyone sins. The difference? You cannot claim God and one hand and cling to sin with the other.

HOW IS SIPPING WINE AND SMOKING A SIN?????? It's not. I could care less if your pastor is filled with the "Holy Ghost", he is far from an ordained priest. And as you have said repeatedly, the Catholic church is based on tradition. When the apostles broke away from tradition and the Pharises spoke against it, they were repremended by Christ. Sorry, Jesus said that he gave power to those filled with the holy ghost. A priest who isn't filled with the holy ghost is just a man reading from the Bible. Anyone can read a Bible passage and talk about it. It's sad that the holy ghost isn't being taught in Catholic churches they way the Bible tells us. Jesus himself said that water and spirit are necessary to enter into Heaven. The difference between an, "Ordained", priest, and a true man of God? It's kind of like college. The courses in the holy ghost are working towards a degree. Simple traditions of man that tell a priest that they are ordained, are like non-credit courses.

Who ordains someone to be a teacher of the word? GOD, not man. God gives direction in the life of those he sends in his name. Man does not.


Yeah, I am going to beleive your Holy Roller Pentacostal interpretation of the bible over what the Apostoles and early Church fathers practiced, those that were closest to Christ. Those who are closest to Christ were filled with the holy ghost! How do we know this? Acts says, "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in new tongues as the spirit enabled them." Which happened after Jesus told them it would. My pastor is filled with the holy ghost just as the apostles were. They spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost and so does my Pastor and congregation. This is what those who were closest to Jesus did and this is what we as his followers now do. Holler Roller? Yes.... what were the apostles? Holy Rollers! They were on fire for Christ, they spoke in his name, and they were filled with his spirit. My pastor's interpretation? Correction.... When God ordaines one to preach, they must first be filled with his spirit. Read the Bible... The holy spirit is a counselor, a teacher, a guide. My pastor does not, "interpret," the Bible. Rather, the holy ghost speaks through my pastor. He does not read a passage from the Bible and sit and tell us a little story like the priests do in the Catholic churches I have attended during much of my childhood. My pastor prays, and fasts and is filled with the holy ghost (All the things those apostles did) and the spirit of God living inside of him shows him the way. Just as the holy ghosts shows the way of truth to the rest of believers he dwells inside. Which is what Jesus tells us in the Bible that he would do. My Holly Roller pastor follows God's word, not rules and traditions of men.

How do you think that God showed his people that they were filled? He didn't say, "You will have a wonderful feeling inside"? No, he said, "with foreign lips and strange tongues".

I would love to hear a Priest defend his actions against the word of the Lord! If I was to walk into my parent's church and start praying in the Spirit, people would look at me like I was insane. Which is interesting because they claim to profess God's word, yet they simply, "forget", about Acts? It's funny how Catholic churches around the world celebrated Pentecost this past year, but ignored the account of how it took place. It was amusing some Catholic churches around the area had signs reading, "Pentecostals welcome."

Besdies that, all priests have made their First Communion, Baptism, and Confirmation (recieving of the holy spirit) so they obviously fit your criteria.Peter said: "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins and you will be filled with the Holy Spirit (Actts 2:38)

Didn't Jesus say to Peter that he was the rock he would build his true church on? Hmmm..... Well Peter says in the name of Jesus and priests aren't baptized in the name of Jesus. If salvation comes under no other name than his (Acts 4:32), and he died for our sins, then being baptized in his name makes sense which is why Peter mentioned this.

Acts 10:47 Peter says, "They have recieved the Holy Spirirt just as we have"(which was again, during pentecost while praying in the upper room)
and again Peter,"Ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ"

Confirmation:The Eastern Church omits the imposition of hands and the prayer at the beginning, and accompanies the anointing with the words: "the sign [or seal] of the gift of the Holy Ghost." These several actions symbolize the nature and purpose of the sacrament: the anointing signifies the strength given for the spiritual conflict; the balsam contained in the chrism, the fragrance of virtue and the good odor of Christ; the sign of the cross (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13785a.htm) on the forehead, the courage to confess Christ, before all men; the imposition of hands and the blow on the cheek, enrollment in the service of Christ which brings true peace to the soul. (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04215b.htm)

Peter and Philip layed hands and prayed while those, who had been baptized in Jesus named prayed. Then they recieved the holy spirit. They didn't recieve it because of laying of hands, they recieved it through prayer and through God granting it. (Acts says those who were first filled at Pentecost were in the upper room praying). How did they know? They spoke in tongues. All I see in the above paragraph is symbolisim and tradition. Nothing concrete. The Bible clearly states that God would grant the holy spirit to those who seek, but he also gives an example of how we will know. That is through tongues as his word says.

"Confirmation is to baptism what growth is to generation. Now it is clear that a man cannot advance to a perfect age unless he has first been born; in like manner, unless he has first been baptized he cannot receive the Sacrament of Confirmation"

Those in the Bible who recieved the holy ghost did so after baptism in the name of Jesus. Not titles. This is clearly stated!!!

I had transferred to a Christian school and was not attending the Catholic church any longer so I did not make my confirmation. But guess what? I was filled the holy ghost and spoke in tongues (like the Bible said I would) back in February of this year. No priest kissed me on the cheek (thankfully), there was no adopting the name of a saint (as they do here). There was prayer like in that upper room, there were those filled with the holy ghost laying hands on me, and I was feverently praying to God. That is how those in the Bible recieved the Holy Ghost and that is how I did.

Jesus said: "everything you do, do it in my name". Why doesn't that Catholic church do things in Jesus's name if they believe they are Christians?

It's pretty simple if you look at it. The Bible lays it all out for us, yet these false prophets go and change the word around. They tell you what the Bible says according to them. When you are filled with the holy ghost, the spirit of God living inside you tells you what the Bible says according to Him. Not according to man.

Remember, I do not hate Catholics. I simply do not hate anyone. As I have said, my family is Catholic. What I do hate is the false doctorine being spread.

[mynameiskc]

how is the holy spirit not in the priests? i don't think that follows at all.

[LuMpYtRiChOmEy]

--Makin the sighn of the cross.... -Swingin a chicken around yer head... -It all looks the same to me! -pist

[Sage-Phoenix]

LOL :)

Holy communion is purely symbolic act anyway. It doesn't matter what the 'bread' and 'wine' part consists (I know a priest who's done it with big macs and red bull) It is the symbolism that matters.
That an exception can't be made for the greater good of a child is just so sad.

Apparently Catholism is least compatable with my mindset. This kind of crap just confirms it.

[LuMpYtRiChOmEy]

-Ya'd think they could afford to give ya AT LEAST a big mak or something! --The way they get all dressed up an shit -an than ya get a li'l cookie?? -A li'l TASTLESS cookie? -and THATS susposed to be Christs body? --CmonMan... Gimme at LEAST a BIG MAK! -I'd like a mango gelatti wit that too! :) -Just smoke a fat one and youl agreee!! -You'l want a Big Mak too!

[Jozak]

LOL :)

Holy communion is purely symbolic act anyway. It doesn't matter what the 'bread' and 'wine' part consists (I know a priest who's done it with big macs and red bull) It is the symbolism that matters.
It is NOT symbolic. Catholics beleive in the real presence, and have since the begginning of Christianity.

Since you live in England, Anglicans beleive in the real presence as well (I think) and I have never heard of a priest using a big mac and red bull, you want to validate that claim?


That an exception can't be made for the greater good of a child is just so sad.

Apparently Catholism is least compatable with my mindset. This kind of crap just confirms it.
Apparently you did not read the whole article or what I said earlier. First off, this is a rare case, and I am sure they will make an exception for her. It would be foolish not to, so don't get all bent out of shape.

[Epiphany]

It's a nice idea and all, but it is symbolic. Jesus turned water into wine, but he never said that he gave anyone else the authority to turn wine into his blood. He said, "whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst." But we know this was spiritual, not literal water. There is no, "Lake of Jesus" - mineral water and I haven't seen any, "Jesus Juice", for sale.

"Yet indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." The holy spirit and everlasting life in Heaven.... the promise of salvation is the everlasting life. Not bread and wine. Even Jesus himself said, "Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from Heaven, which a man may eat and not die." You aren't going to find this bread in the local supermarket, nor will you find it in a church kitchen. It's salvation from the blood of Jesus. Not yeast.

[Jozak]

actually jozak, and i know you are catholic, holy communiion (the eucharist, the lords supper) is purely a symoblic act - and this is especially the case with the catholic church. Catholicism believes the eucharist to be the source and summit of the life of the church - it is a supreme sacrament. IT is a sacrament, a sign revealing God's grace. However, most Catholics today don't even understand their own faith - the catholic church teaches in the "real presence" sacramentally - not literally. The cahtolic church does not maintain that the celebrant is chomping down on blood and bones of Christ. the church understands it is still just bread and wine - but Christ is still present - he is present sacramentally, not literally - and if this were explained better most Catholics would understand it and most protestants would agree

that is why, when it really comes down to it, the "real presence" is not a divisive issue in church relations.
It IS a divisive issue, and has been for hundereds of years. Protestants, on the whole, beleive it is a, "Symbol of his grace"--that is not even close--we beleive it is the actual body and blood of Christ. Most of what you say I agree with but when it comes down to it, it may taste like bread, but it's not. It has undergone a transformation once the priest blesses it.

[Jozak]

It's a nice idea and all, but it is symbolic.I have yet to see one verse that proves that it was symbolic. Christ said before that happened that whoever ate of his flesh would have everlasting life, and the crowd he was speaking to was appaled. He said, "Does this shock you?"--if he meant it to be a metaphor he would have told the crowd that, as well as the apostoles. What kind of teacher would he have been if he had not? A pretty lousy one. He says point blank--Take this bread and eat it, THIS IS MY BODY- I don't see how this is even a debate.


Jesus turned water into wine, but he never said that he gave anyone else the authority to turn wine into his blood. He said, "Do this in remembrance of me"--he blessed the 12 disciples to go out and do just that, along with countless other things. He gave the 12 a TON of authority, he had to have, he was going back to heaven! Someone was going to have to run the earthly church.

He said, "whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst." But we know this was spiritual, not literal water. There is no, "Lake of Jesus" - mineral water and I haven't seen any, "Jesus Juice", for sale. Yet indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." The holy spirit and everlasting life in Heaven.... the promise of salvation is the everlasting life. Not bread and wine. Even Jesus himself said, "Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from Heaven, which a man may eat and not die." You aren't going to find this bread in the local supermarket, nor will you find it in a church kitchen. It's salvation from the blood of Jesus. Not yeast.It's understanable that was symbolic--he knew and the people knew they would never physically go without thirst. This is a totally different verse and situation.

[Epiphany]

Nevermind, you are a trinitarian.

"He gave them authority" - And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues"...

He gave them authority because they were filled with his spirit, the holy ghost

The point is, I am not saying not to do it, I'm saying that it depends who is blessing the bread. Someone who isn't filled with the holy ghost (by the examples of what we are shown as evidence of) is just a man and a cracker.

We have special communion services during Pentecost and other occasions.

It's been years since I have taken communion, and when i did, it was rather pointless because the Catholic church never had the salvation plan that lined up correctly with God's word and they never had the holy ghost.

[Jozak]

How do you, as a church-goer, recognize or are able to see your pastor is filled with, "The Holy Ghost"??? How did he get it, by what authority and my main concern is actually knowing he has it.

There is somewhat of a safeguard in my church. I think the problem is you beleive a pastor/minister/priest has to have the, "Holy Ghost", where as a valid priest is enough to be able to perform the ceremony of Holy Communion is good enough for me, and that's what it should be. Even the church has stated on numerous occassions we, as parishiners, are not held responsible if the priest is a bad person, like the pedophile priests, if they have doubts about the practice, etc etc,--even they are still able to perform it, otherwise you would have some Catholics really recieving Holy Communion and some not.

I mean what if years later your pastor raped someone or murdered someone, does that mean all that preaching should go to waste, or is invalidated? Of course not, it's the same thing in our church: Communion cannot be invalidated becasue of the sins of the priest. (Unless he is kicked out or somthing like that.)

[LuMpYtRiChOmEy]

--AAAAAAAAAALLLLLRRRITE Then!!! -Please!!!! --Enoughf with alla this "You dis an you dat!" SHIT!!!! -I STILL wanna know why they cant give ya AT LEAST a fukin Big Mack and a Mango Gellati! -It really DOSE kinda fit in with everything elce! -Yous could give out Big Macks and Mango Gellaties and yous could have li'l "BINGO!" game peices! -Just think of the sales it would generate!! --Lemme tell ya somethin buddy, -theres NO FUKIN WAY Id ever consider goin to a church where all they give you is a stinkin li'l cookie an then try an tell ya its got some kinda MEAT in it! --THERE AINT NO FUKIN MEAT IN THERE!!! ---I tasted them things before and THERE AINT NO MEAT IN THERE!!!! --I dont care WHAT ya say.... There aint no meat in there! --WHERES THE BEEF!!!! --Theres NO WAY that youd stand in line at one of MY barbaques for that long and wind up with just a stinkin li'l cookie! :) --WHERES THE BEEF!?!! -I STILL want a Big Mack and a Mango Gellati!

[gnrm23]

transubstantiation...
consubstantiation...
a memorial service, symbolic of unity in christ...
me oh my, a squabble about the nature of the eucharist... not worth killing over (when asked how to tell the good catholics from the bad hugenots (frech protestants), the bishop replied: "kill 'em all; god knows his own!" --- st bartholemew's day massacre)...

~

& a pentecostalist-type dissing the rest of christianity by calling 'em "trinitarian"... (so you "spirit-filled" folks are, what, unitarians? hehheh...)

i suppose most christian denominations could be grouped by which of "the three persons of the trinity" they relate to best: god the father, god the son, or god the holy spirit... (& as to the nature & origin of the holy spirit --- well, "proceeding from the father" vs. "proceeding together from the father and the son" was enough to split the church into "east" & "west" in the 11th century...)

~
i remember a year or 2 ago, there were some AoG(?)/pentecostalists (mostly from australia) who were on these boards, explaining to everyone that if they did not recieve baptism of the holy spirit, and show evidence of such by exhibiting glossolalia &/or other gifts of the holy spirit, that they weren't really christians... okeydokey, whatever...
back in the early days of america, christian communities were divided over the necessity of having a "conversion experience"... sometimes i think america has religion on the brain, i dunno...

~

as to a wheat-based wafer being required - gee, why not rice-flour or barley-flour bread?
(heh, there was a women's group meeting described in an angry letter to "the lutheran" magazine where for the communion service they distributed milk & honey (instead of bread & wine) --- sounds almost like they were ready to let the great goddess back into worship services, yay! yeah, right...)


anyways, shalom....

[LuMpYtRiChOmEy]

--I think everyones missin the point here.... -A li'l bit of milk and honey aint shit either! -Wheres the BEEF!

[LuMpYtRiChOmEy]

--Oh yea...... -And another thing.... -If Jesus really WAS in there wouldnt it be more like a raviolie?

[EllisDTripp]

--Oh yea...... -And another thing.... -If Jesus really WAS in there wouldnt it be more like a raviolie?

ROFLMAO! :)

[HippieLngstckng]

Since I was raised Catholic and saved in a Pentacostal church, I'm not gonna touch the argument that's going on in here, but I would advise people not to be so wrapped up in the letter of the Law that they forget the principle. That's what our L-rd advised when He healed on the Sabbath, so let's look at this from that perspective.

To deny a little Catholic girl the right to receive Communion with the rest of her peers because of an allergy that G-d allowed her to have is ludicrous. They are denying that little munchkin the right to receive Him and finalize her commitment to Him. The good that I see out of this is perhaps the Catholic Church will look over some of their Doctrines, and try to align their teachings with the Gospel more. If they had thought about it from the perspective that I offered in the first place, this probably wouldn't be an issue.

Hokey superstitions and the so-called "swinging the chicken around your head" (ROFL, by the way :p ) have no place in a Christians life, if they are merely a systematic rituals done without thought. It isn't necessary to have all of the hokiness and empty rituals to be a real Christian.

[Jozak]

Ah, the priests were just upset that she wasnt an 8 year old BOY
The chance of that priest being a pedophile is slim, only a tiny minority are, so your biogtry doesn't make much sense.

[HippieLngstckng]

The chance of that priest being a pedophile is slim, only a tiny minority are, so your biogtry doesn't make much sense.
It's unfortunate, but the Church did look the other way for years before they finally made a statement against the pedophilia that has in fact happened over the years, and began looking into accusations.

While it isn't common for priests to be pedophiles, it could be suggested that when a regular human man is denied marriage, and therefore, according to Doctrine, denied sexual interaction, it can lead to perversions.

It's unnatural to be denied such needs as to have one's own family.

[Jozak]

yes, i'm bigoted against cults and child molesters-what can i say, I'm just a dirty sinner...
I'm bigoted against stupid people such as yourself.

Cult? No. Child Molesters? Well, they exsist everywhere unfortunently, including churches. Thankfully it is only a minority and the Church has been working to fix it. Nice try though, really.

[Epiphany]

How do you, as a church-goer, recognize or are able to see your pastor is filled with, "The Holy Ghost"??? How did he get it, by what authority and my main concern is actually knowing he has it.But that is what I am saying..... Authority is given by God. Authority comes after recieving the holy spirit. Jesus said, "I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever. The Spirit of Truth. The world cannot accept him because it neither sees him nor knows him. I will not leave you as orphans, I will come to you. Before long the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live in you, you will also live." (John 14:16-19)

"But when the spirit of truth comes, he will guide you in full truth" (John 16:13)

"Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father has promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the holy spirit" (Acts 1:4&5)

"But you will recieve power when the Holy Spirit comes on you and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in Judea, and Samaria, and to the end of the earth". (Acts 1:7&8)

The Holy Spirit is the spirit of God that lives inside the believer. Mary was first filled with the spirit, that is how she was impregnanted with the Lord. (Luke 1:35) John the Baptists mother, Elizabeth, was filled with the Holy Spirt. (Luke 1:41). The Holy Spirit revealed to Simeon that he would not die before seeing the Lord. (Luke 2:26)

The spirit of God is our direction, our truth, our guidance. Without this spirit we still have a heart of stone...

"I will create in him a new heart of flesh".... the holy spirit is that new heart. It is the heartbeat of God.

This authority only comes by the holy spirit.

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 2:4 "My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power."

My pastor is a validated pastor. First and foremost, God must place a calling on your life to be a teacher of his word. One simply cannot say, "I think I would like to head a church". Secondly, there is process that he must go through to be a validated pastor.

Other men in my church are baptized in Jesus name, they have been filled with the holy ghost, but they are not pastors because they don't have that calling in their life.

I can see the Holy Spirit working inside my Apostolic Pentecostal church. We are being led by the Lord to do outreach by cleaning up the community, having services all around different areas in Indiana, setting up Bible studies in other towns. I can see the Holy Spirit working through the youth department by some of the eight and ten year olds (who are filled with the holy ghost) going out and spreading the gospel in the playground. The Holy Spirit is always leading our church to do something. I can see Pastor as truly being a man of God, because we are both filled with the same spirit. The spirit of the Lord. My pastor... I can not even begin to describe him.

The Lord says we are his, "adopted", children. We have the DNA type of our physical parents here on earth, but when we are are filled with his spirit, we are part of him. He is living inside of us. Jesus says his believers are one. How can this be so? Because by us all having his spirit dwelling in us, we are all made one.


Since I was raised Catholic and saved in a Pentacostal churchSame here. Raised Catholic, attended Christian and Lutheran schools as well, but wasn't truly saved until last year when I began attending the Pentecostal church.

[HippieLngstckng]

Same here. Raised Catholic, attended Christian and Lutheran schools as well, but wasn't truly saved until last year when I began attending the Pentecostal church.

I was saved in the Pentacostal Church, and fell away, because I couldn't adhere to all of the rules. Holiness Living, which the Pentacostals believe in, isn't as important to me as correcting my other defects of character (for example, refer to the thread I started entitled "I'm becoming a NUN..." in the Hallowed Tree, if you wanna know what's up ;) ). I think there is a need for churches that don't believe in Holiness Living, and so there is a need for pastors who have a glass of wine and smoke cigarettes. After all, I believe that G-d will put it into your heart if you need to stop doing something because it's holding you back... Some people have other sins that hold them back more.

I think that Christians need to start trying to overcome the obstacles that denominations put into place. I don't know how you guys feel, but I am comfortable in pretty much any Bible believing church that I visit. Exploring the different denominations and their beliefs gives me a better understanding of where we can begin to find common ground.

[Jozak]

I think we can actually AGREE :) (oh Jesus, finnaly, Christians agreeing with each other) that authority comes from God originally. You beleive it comes with the Holy Spirit through your pastor, and we beleive authoirty was given to Peter and the apostoles by Christ, fair enough?

But my other point is you said there IS a process that your pastor had to go through. Priests in a similar way go through a process as well, Seminary school. What process do your pastors go through? And we can both agree that this is administered my man handed down by Christ originally, correct? (that is the whole point of being Apostolic).

I am not really seeing where we are disagreeing on this matter. I can acknowledge that some priests are not fit to be in the church, weather becasue a small % of them are pedophiles or because their faith in the sacraments is lacking, would you agree some pastors are not fit to be heading a church of your denomination? Take into account here man is not perfect, so of course there are people like that everywhere.

My point is we the people, even if your pastor or my priest is not, let's say genuwine, can not be held accountable for that, so as Catholic/Pentacostal parishiners we are not held responsible either, the sacraments are still valid, just as a baptism in your church would still be valid?

I beleive you that your pastor is a man of god (although If he constantly knocks other religions I would question it), and that you adore him and he helps you, and that's great. You have to also understand though most priests are JUST like that. I love going to Mass and hearing my priests talk and talking to them afterward, about anything, they are great mentors, just as I am sure your pastor is.

[Epiphany]

I think we can actually AGREE :) We should just kiss and make up, Jozak

[Jozak]

:) Um...did you read the rest of my post? I think that's a great idea, but I really wanted to know what your response would be regarding our pastors/priests.

[Epiphany]

:) I think that's a great idea;) me too


I think we can actually AGREE :) (oh Jesus, finnaly, Christians agreeing with each other) that authority comes from God originally. You beleive it comes with the Holy Spirit through your pastor, and we beleive authoirty was given to Peter and the apostoles by Christ, fair enough? Well yes... authority was given to Peter and the rest of the apostles by Christ, through the Holy Spirit. Yes, it is administered by man, through Christ.




I am not really seeing where we are disagreeing on this matter. I can acknowledge that some priests are not fit to be in the church, weather becasue a small % of them are pedophiles or because their faith in the sacraments is lacking, would you agree some pastors are not fit to be heading a church of your denomination? Take into account here man is not perfect, so of course there are people like that everywhere. Yes, I would agree that some Pastors are not fit to be heading a church. Disturbing when it happens.

My point is we the people, even if your pastor or my priest is not, let's say genuwine, can not be held accountable for that, so as Catholic/Pentacostal parishiners we are not held responsible either, the sacraments are still valid, just as a baptism in your church would still be valid? Yes, you are right in saying that parishiners would not be held responsible for the actions of their church leaders. As far as validation, on a personal note, I myself would be re-baptized in the event that something had occured with my Pastor.

[HippieLngstckng]

Woo Hoo! :D

I think we can actually AGREE http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif (oh Jesus, finnaly, Christians agreeing with each other) that authority comes from God originally.
Who would have thought Christians could agree???

<<HLS loads everyone up onto her imaginary horse, for an imaginary ride off into the imaginary sunset>>