Child allergic to host

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlessedBe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Martini said:
So the anti-Catholic bigotry is exposed…
Click to expand...
Oh, no you don’t. I am NOT “anti-Catholic,” and it’s extremely rude of you to suggest it. The fact that I do not agree with your view of God does not mean I am “anti-Catholic.” I am not a believer in your religion, but I have still devoted a good part of my life to it. I have attended your masses and helped teach your children the rosary. I said the Lord’s Prayer every single morning with my students. The parish knew I wasn’t Catholic and did not require me to do any of this, yet I did so anyway so as to be a role model. I believe my teaching responsibilities include following the wishes of the parents for their children’s spiritual formation. I have participated in Catholicism to the greatest extent my conscience will allow.

I am not anti-Catholic. In spite of the fact that I disagree with many Catholic teachings, it is not my place to approve or disapprove of the beliefs of others. I can only speak for my own conscience, my own knowledge of spiritual things. You are free to believe and practice as you wish as long as you allow me the same courtesy. I am only “anti-Catholic” to the extent to which Catholic teachings or Catholic people attempt to interfere with my own spiritual practices. But that would not really be “anti-Catholic,” but “anti-interference,” applicable no matter what your religion is.

“Bigot” is a loaded word and an unkind one at best. And, in my case, inaccurate. Frankly, though, I was expecting to have to deal with a remark like this. I’m sorry that you don’t like that my idea of deity differs from yours. Too bad for you. I’m bracing myself for the “I am a poor, discriminated-against Catholic” post that is sure to follow, for wherever someone is accused of bigotry, a tearful martyr is rarely far behind!

I was under the impression that this board was for discussion. When everyone agrees, there’s little to discuss, so I recommend you get used to differing opinions. I am hardly the only one who doesn’t believe as you do, and while there are certainly “bigots,” being a non-believer doesn’t put one automatically into that category!
Martini said:
It’s right next to the passage where God proclaims the Sacred Scriptures as the only means in which He speaks to us and guides us.
Click to expand...
I was asking for a specific reference in the Bible, chapter and verse.
 
boppaid said:
I taught a child like this in public school. His parents couldn’t afford to homeschool as they needed both incomes to pay the necessities. We had to be extremely careful. Thank God he never had a reaction!
Click to expand...
The reactions I’ve seen on this board aren’t unexpected, although I have to say I’m disappointed in the number of people who genuinely don’t seem to think such cases exist.

I didn’t start this topic as a place to debate whether my story is true. It is; that’s reality, and if someone chooses not to accept it, it’s not my problem. I started it as a place to talk about what might be done for the child.

I only wish I could find a link to one of the newspaper articles that was printed about this case. I know I cut the article out of the paper, so I’ll look for it today if I have time.
 
BlessedBe, you have to understand that for some of us, the need to have everything in life as close to black and white as possible excludes the ability to accept that such a child could indeed exist.

It’s the same with children who are born with indeterminate sex. Some Christians just cannot get used to the notion that every created person doesn’t come clearly stamped with their sexual identity.

The harm that can come from such attitudes is that science and the secular world are left to deal with these conundrums of life and Christians come across as being intolerant and uncaring.

I believe the “spiritual communion” option is what was open to this boy. God cannot be measured by human standards; who knows what spiritual riches He blessed this boy with in place of being excluded from receiving the Eucharist.
 
seekerz said:
I believe the “spiritual communion” option is what was open to this boy. God cannot be measured by human standards; who knows what spiritual riches He blessed this boy with in place of being excluded from receiving the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
I agree with the above… OP, you asked in your original post to know what we (practicing Catholics) thought about this particular situation. What we think is irrelevant. We cannot judge God any more than you can for things that exist or happen in this world. It is what it is, like it or not, and really the only thing that matters is what the Church can do for the child in this situation. 🤷 If you truly seek answers in regard to this I would suggest that you speak with the priest at the church where you teach, the bishop, etc. and I am sure you will find answers to your questions.
 
There was recently (2 or 3 years ago) an incident involving a child who had a peanut allergy so serious that they were unable to fly on airplanes because merely being exposed to the dust from the open packages of airline peanuts could kill them. This is why most airlines have replaced peanuts with pretzels. There was also a girl with the same severe allergy that died after kissing her boyfriend who had eaten a peanut butter sandwich earlier in the day. Such incredible allergies most certainly do exist.
 
Blessed Be- For what it’s worth, I didn’t find your posts anti-Catholic at all. But then again I do tend be one of those dreaded liberals who doesn’t mind people having beliefs different to mine. 😉 The poster who said that the scripture verse was, “right next to the passage where God proclaims the Sacred Scriptures as the only means in which He speaks to us and guides us” was being flip. We believe that we are guided as much by Sacred Tradition as Holy Scripture. The point being, we cannot change Tradition any more than we can change Scripture. Although we may feel sorry for this kid, the Church can’t really do anything to help the situation, other than advising him on spiritual communion as has been suggested.
 
estesbob said:
The point beng made was a child this aqllergic would have to spend their life in a"clean room" . I seriously doubt the child mentioned exists. However if they do the answer is very clear-they cant physically recieve communion. Its not a matter of the Church being insensitive-its a matter of the child being handicapped to th extent reception is impossible.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I suggest no human who is allergic enough to require a 911 call after his arm came in contact with cracker crumbs could be educated in a typical classroom setting with 20+ other kids.
 
BlessedBe said:
…No. Really. This is not about gluten or alcohol or grapes. Frankly, I thought I was pretty clear in the original post. This poor boy had a total of seven things he could eat, and would still react occasionally to even those. He even had reactions just to the scent of foods, even familiar ones…
Click to expand...
What were the seven?
 
BlessedBe said:
Oh, no you don’t. I am NOT “anti-Catholic,” and it’s extremely rude of you to suggest it. The fact that I do not agree with your view of God does not mean I am “anti-Catholic.” I am not a believer in your religion, but I have still devoted a good part of my life to it. I have attended your masses and helped teach your children the rosary. I said the Lord’s Prayer every single morning with my students. The parish knew I wasn’t Catholic and did not require me to do any of this, yet I did so anyway so as to be a role model. I believe my teaching responsibilities include following the wishes of the parents for their children’s spiritual formation.** I have participated in Catholicism to the greatest extent my conscience will allow.**
Click to expand...
Yet you didn’t know the answer to your original question? I stand by my comments.
BlessedBe said:
I am not anti-Catholic. In spite of the fact that I disagree with many Catholic teachings, it is not my place to approve or disapprove of the beliefs of others. I can only speak for my own conscience, my own knowledge of spiritual things. You are free to believe and practice as you wish as long as you allow me the same courtesy. I am only “anti-Catholic” to the extent to which Catholic teachings or Catholic people attempt to interfere with my own spiritual practices. But that would not really be “anti-Catholic,” but “anti-interference,” applicable no matter what your religion is.
I stand by my comments.
Click to expand...
BlessedBe said:
“Bigot” is a loaded word and an unkind one at best. And, in my case, inaccurate. Frankly, though, I was expecting to have to deal with a remark like this. I’m sorry that you don’t like that my idea of deity differs from yours. Too bad for you. I’m bracing myself for the “I am a poor, discriminated-against Catholic” post that is sure to follow, for wherever someone is accused of bigotry, a tearful martyr is rarely far behind!
Click to expand...
I stand by my comments.
BlessedBe said:
I was under the impression that this board was for discussion. When everyone agrees, there’s little to discuss, so I recommend you get used to differing opinions. I am hardly the only one who doesn’t believe as you do, and while there are certainly “bigots,” being a non-believer doesn’t put one automatically into that category!
Click to expand...
The Church has a definitive teaching on this matter. It’s a done deal.
BlessedBe said:
I was asking for a specific reference in the Bible, chapter and verse.
Click to expand...
Asked and answered.
 
Martini said:
Yet you didn’t know the answer to your original question? I stand by my comments.
Click to expand...
Many people have come on here asking this question martini and they were Catholic. Gee, I wonder how the OP’s question would have been answered if she was a devout Catholic? :rolleyes: talk about bigorty.
 
What’s more Martini, you did not answer the scriptural questions with anything other than sarcasm.
 
anamchara said:
I am now a preschool teacher and have a peanut allergy in my room as well. People simply don’t understand. With milk allergies, I’ve heard people say things like, “Oh, he’s lactose intolerant.” With wheat people tend to assume it’s a gluten thing, as with Celiac disease. In reality neither of those conditions are allergies.

A while back I had a kid with an egg allergy. That one is especially insidious because people just don’t know how many products contain egg. For instance bread was okay, but pasta and bagels were life-threatening.

For the naysayers who think such a child wouldn’t be in a classroom: even a child with severe allergies has the right to as normal an education as possible. A severe allergy can be considered a disability, and you cannot exclude a child from a classroom if modifications make it possible to include him. This is federal law - in fact, contrary to popular belief, under federal law children with disabilities are the ONLY children who are legally entitled to an education. (Most states have laws entitling “normal” children to one as well. But it’s not federal law.) In educational jargon that’s called the “least restrictive environment.”

With severe allergies, you have to be vigilant about what comes through that classroom door, or even the school door in some cases. It’s not easy, but it’s possible, and it’s certainly not acceptable to suggest a child “just be homeschooled.” Homeschooling would probably more convenient and even safer, but still not necessarily in the child’s best interests.
Click to expand...
 
Rolltide said:
There was recently (2 or 3 years ago) an incident involving a child who had a peanut allergy so serious that they were unable to fly on airplanes because merely being exposed to the dust from the open packages of airline peanuts could kill them. This is why most airlines have replaced peanuts with pretzels. There was also a girl with the same severe allergy that died after kissing her boyfriend who had eaten a peanut butter sandwich earlier in the day. Such incredible allergies most certainly do exist.
Click to expand...
For the record, NEITHER of the people in the two cases I provided lived in a bubble. As far as I know, people with these types of allergies do venture into society, although they need to be very careful.
 
I came here to start a discussion and I got what I wanted. To Martini, whose post I cannot quote since it mysteriously disappeared - I never said I was an expert on Catholicism. Yes, I was immersed in it, but that doesn’t mean I have all the answers. For the record, of COURSE I knew already that this is part of the church’s rules. Obviously it’s a rule, or this wouldn’t be an issue to begin with. That wasn’t the point of my post!

My intent was twofold - to find out the actual Biblical reference from which this rule was created, and to get some opinions and ideas on what people think and feel about this issue. I know some of you feel that your “opinion” on such matters is irrelevant because rules are rules. (I find that incredibly sad, but that’s for another thread.) Besides, even if you follow the rules, are you not even permitted to consider that they might be wrong? I don’t mean a direct challenge, or disobedience, but simply to entertain the very thought that some of these codes might be incorrect or misinterpreted? Is this kind of thinking truly consider a sin in the Catholic faith? If so, how is it that changes are ever made? (And don’t tell me they’re not, because they are!)

I knew I would have difficulty with some people here, and that’s fine. I appreciate the other comments. The folks here are just like the Catholics I worked with before - most of them lovely, but there are always one or two… well, you know.

Since Martini is not cooperating, perhaps someone else could help me out and post the scriptural reference, chapter and verse, from which the idea of having the host be of wheat only is derived. I am not intending to use this information to start another argument - after all, interpretation is such an objective thing, who am I to reject one interpretation or another - it is merely to satisfy my intellectual curiosity.
 
Blessed Be- That’s the thing- there is no scriptural reference. It comes from Sacred Tradition which, to us, is as important as scripture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top