Diocese of Trenton refuses to break the rules

  • Thread starter Thread starter darcee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Stellina, I believe you are absolutely correct. There is no requirement in this country that a child ever receive communion in the Catholic Church. Since there are international laws (i.e. Canon laws) which supercede any local requirements, the Church will easily prevail in any attempt by this mother to sue.

On the otherhand, there has been movement on this issue over the last century and there is room for more compromise if the Church wants to go that direction. Canon law never used to have the wheat requirement, that’s a very new development. So it could be reversed following special dispensations and proper documentation.

There is an issue with certain Celiac sufferers injesting wine. The yeast created in making the wine is also an intolerable substance. I watched one interview with the mother and child and it was brought out that while the mother is indeed able to handle the wine, her daughter is not. There was an attempt to let her try it and she was in agony as a result.

Now there is a dispensation in place for using Mustum, but I think that’s where the mother is trying to stand on principle…unwisely. The fact that the daughter can handle Mustum and that it was offered to her is what makes the mother’s arguments selfish.

Just for kicks, I did a search on www.celiac.org for the word “Communion”. There are 3 very informative articles on there about Catholics with Celiac’s disease.

The most interesting is this one, noting that a prominent cardinal who suffered from Celiac’s disease was the champion for the low-gluten Eucharist that is now available:

celiac.com/st_prod.html?p_prodid=369&p_catid=&sid=91hH9H0-o0HE3fD-49104030219.54

This article shows that the position paper of the Church and the low-gluten hosts were both developed with the assistance of doctors who are specialists in the treatment of Celiac’s disease:

celiac.com/st_prod.html?p_prodid=370&p_catid=&sid=91hH9H0-o0HE3fD-49104030219.54

And finally, this article shows why Americans are separating themselves from others around the world who suffer from this horrible disease:

celiac.com/st_prod.html?p_prodid=696&p_catid=&sid=91hH9H0-o0HE3fD-49104030219.54

So the issue is really whether American doctors can force a stronger position than their highly learned counterparts in Europe. Frankly, I think not. The American position of 100% gluten free is unrealistic at best. There is even the opportunity for the child to receive the slightest little sliver of a low-gluten Eucharist in with a small amount of properly consecrated Mustum through Intinction so that she can partake of both forms without compromising her health. But as extreme as that is, it’s not enough for the mother. So is she being unrealistic? Yes. Can she pursue this with Ratzinger? Sure. Will she prevail? Probably…many, many years from now.
 
Kim, you missed this from her interview with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC:

PELLY-WALDMAN: Well, I believe that this a cannonball, a man made ball. And I do not believe Christ would want my child to obey a canon law that could be potentially harmful to her.

I believe the church can grow and change to meet the needs of the people. And as I’ve increased awareness of our plight, I‘ve really shown the Catholic church is an overwhelming response of support and an outpouring of compassion for Haley and for all Celiacs.

OLBERMANN: Where are we in terms of numbers? In terms of Celiac? It‘s probably something nobody in the audience has ever heard of before, isn‘t it?

PELLY-WALDMAN: Right. But the most recent study out of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Celiac Research is suggesting now that 1 in 133 people actually have Celiac.

OLBERMANN: What sort of percentage of that? Nationwide, is it two or three percent?

PELLY-WALDMAN: Yes, yes.

OK, so somebody explain this to me. If the statistic is that 1:133 people in the world suffer from this disease and there are more than 1 BILLION Catholics in the world, wouldn’t that equate to at least 7,518,797 Catholics who suffer from this disease? It’s amazing that we’re only hearing about this now.
 
More interesting, though, is the actual letter to Cardinal Ratzinger:

416 Evergreen Avenue

Brielle , NJ 08730

July 14, 2004

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Dear Cardinal Ratzinger,

My eight year old daughter Haley suffers from Celiac Sprue. Celiac is a malabsorption syndrome in which the body’s immune system attacks the lining of the small intestines in response to a food protein called Gluten. The small intestines are where the digestion and absorption of nutrients occurs, and therefore damage to such results in malnutrition. Haley herself suffers from Osteopenia (bone loss) as a cumulative result of the Gluten she consumed before she was diagnosed with this disorder. People with celiac are also more likely to develop cancer, including intestinal lymphoma, with repeated exposure to even trace amounts of Gluten.

The prognosis for a person with Celiac is good if the offending grains are removed, in their entirety, from the diet. Strict adherence to a Gluten-Free diet allows the intestines to heal, and significantly decreases one’s risk of developing cancer. In fact a study done by two Italian researchers, Giovanni Corrao, and Dr. Robert Corazza found a significant increase in the death rate of Celiacs (six times higher) that did not adhere to a strict Gluten Free diet.

One of the most common misconceptions about Celiac Disease is that it is a food allergy. Celiac Disease is not a food allergy but an idiosyncratic reaction to food proteins that can prove fatal.

Celiac disease is also much more widespread than previously suggested. The most recent study out of the University of Maryland Center for Celiac Research found that one in every 133 people has Celiac Disease. Celiac is also prevalent amongst Irish and Italian populations, both of which are often Roman Catholic.

In recent times the Catholic Church has acknowledged those afflicted with Celiac Disease and church doctrine allows the use of a Low-Gluten host (about .01 percent, or one part in 10,000) in place of the traditional host. The Catholic Church states that the host must contain some Gluten for it to be the valid body of Christ. The Low-Gluten host is not an option for Haley because even trace amounts of Gluten can be toxic to a Celiac. Dr. Joseph Murray, a gastroenterologist and expert on Celiac disease at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minn. emphasizes that going on and off the Gluten-Free diet make it less effective, putting a Celiac at an increased risk of further complications. I believe the church leaders must suggest the use of the Low-Gluten host out of lack of knowledge regarding Celiac Disease, for it is incomprehensible why the ingestion of toxins would be seen as a viable option.

…continued…
 
…continued…

Church doctrine also allows the use of Mustum, a partially fermented, low alcohol wine, in place of the Eucharist. The Catholic Church does acknowledge under the law (CIC, canon 843) that Holy Communion may be received through the precious blood alone. The use of Mustum is not an option for Haley because as a parent, I believe no amount of alcohol is appropriate for a child. The Catholic Church maintains the Mustum must contain some alcohol for it to be the valid blood of Christ.

The question I pose to you Cardinal Ratzinger is how the use of a Gluten-Free host would corrupt the traditions of the Last Supper. It is not my understanding that Christ asked his disciples to remember him through wheat bread. I think the will of God, or the divine law, conflicts with this Canon Law. I do not believe Christ would want a child to obey a canon law that could be potentially harmful to her. This debate violates the sacredness of my conscience, which is the very heart of my connection to God. My obedience to God’s law requires me to simply love good and avoid evil, and I fear the present dispute is one over a church, or man made, law rather than of God’s commandment.

I do not understand why the Vatican views the consumption of a rice based host as a threat to establishing God’s kingdom. In focusing on this detail, we are failing to acknowledge the essence of our faith which is justice, mercy, and honesty. Christ himself warned the religious leaders of his time of “Straining out the fly while swallowing the camel” (Mt23: 23-24) and I fear the religious leaders of our time are guilty of the same.
I have been warned by the diocese of Trenton that if I choose to allow Haley to consume rice based host I would be breaking canon law, and Haley would be receiving merely a wafer, and not the true presence of Christ. In my heart, however, I believe the personal relationship between Christ and my child will not be corrupted based on such a technicality.

I have myself been accused of being uncompromising and inflexible in my efforts, but I believe the Catholic Church to be the one culpable of intransigence. 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.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman

cc: Cardinal Francis George, OMI United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on the Liturgy
Code: 
 Most Reverend John M. Smith Bishop of Trenton
 
Where Pelly-Waldham really fails is her understanding of Mustum. The Catholic definition, coming from her own documents, shows that clearly there isn’t an alcohol issue, other than her own desire to make a point:

II. Concerning permission to use mustum:
  • A. The preferred solution continues to be Communion per intinctionem, or in concelebration under the species of bread alone.
  • B. Nevertheless, the permission to use mustum can be granted by Ordinaries to priests affected by alcoholism or other conditions which prevent the ingestion of even the smallest quantity of alcohol, after presentation of a medical certificate.
  • C. By mustum is understood fresh juice from grapes, or juice preserved by suspending its fermentation (by means of freezing or other methods which do not alter its nature).
 
Panis Angelicas:
Jesus is God.

Jesus established One hierarchical Church.

Jesus passed authority on to that Church. “Whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; whatsoever you hold bound, will be held bound.”

Therefore: Church law is God’s Law.

The Church has indicated where exceptions may be made. Ordinarily, persons do not receive solely from the chalice. But those with celiac’s disease are permitted to do so.

If a member of the Church rejects what the Church lays down, then it is that individual, not the Church, who is in error.
Click to expand...
Very well and succinctly put. Good show!
 
Loyola rambler, thanks for the compliment - my memory of anything legal is about as dim as a 25 watt bulb! 😉

Thanks also for reproducing that letter, because it reveals the type of person behind it. I also read the story on MSNBC.com, which quoted this self-righteous mother hen at length but failed to quote a single official representative of the Church. That’s “fair and balanced” journalism?

However, I respectfully disagree with you on the chances of her success. You say that she will probably succeed in many, many years and I just don’t think so. As a few other people have noted, this is really not an issue of canon law, but rather the essence and form of the sacrament that our Lord gave us. He consecrated bread made from wheat, of which gluten in some amount is an intergal component, and wine made from grapes. He didn’t consecrate milk and cookies. P.S. I would be interested in hearing about recovering alcoholics handling the consumption of the Precious Blood - wouldn’t there be a similar problem?

Anyway, my feeble Christian charity can’t take any more of this. I went from the legal profession to education, where I quickly learned that parents of children with special needs are often very angry people and quite dangerous to cross even in a respectful & well-intentioned manner. While all of them indeed bear a heavy burden, some are obviously more interested in their own personal agendas which may have little or nothing to do with their child’s problems. My own mother, who has one child with a serious & chronic disease and turns to prayer instead of fighting, would be telling me to pray for this woman right now, but like many of her suggestions, I find it hard to follow…
 
The letter makes it clear that the mother’s refusal of wine or mustum for use in communion is not for medical reasons. It is simply because of her opinion that “no amount of alcohol is appropriate for a child.” Even a drop of the precious blood is sufficient to receive Christ whole and entire.

JimG
 
40.png
stellina:
P.S. I would be interested in hearing about recovering alcoholics handling the consumption of the Precious Blood - wouldn’t there be a similar problem?
Click to expand...
No Catholic laity is required to partake of the Eucharist in the form of wine.

To receive Eucharist under one form (form of bread or form of wine) is to partake of Holy Eucharist.
 
Quote loyola rambler
PELLY-WALDMAN:
Click to expand...
Well, I believe that this a cannonball, a man made ball. What I heard her say was, “Well, I believe that this is a Canon law, a man-made law.” (I watched her interview on CBS)

From her letter to Cardinal Ratzinger
I think the will of God, or the divine law, conflicts with this Canon Law.
Click to expand...
Why do I snicker when I read this? This lady who doesn’t have a good grasp of the Source, Summit, and Center of our Faith is telling the Cardinal what the will of God is!
I do not believe Christ would want a child to obey a canon law that could be potentially harmful to her.
Click to expand...
Some things are a test of Faith. I wonder if she ever read the story of Abraham and Isaac?
This debate violates the sacredness of my conscience, which is the very heart of my connection to God.
Click to expand...
“…violates the sacredness of my conscience…”??? Is she a new ager? I am unfamiliar with the “sacredness of conscience.” Maybe it’s a Catholic teaching…Could anyone explain this to me? Or is she making something up here?
 
loyola rambler:
PELLY-WALDMAN: Right. But the most recent study out of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Celiac Research is suggesting now that 1 in 133 people actually have Celiac.

OLBERMANN: What sort of percentage of that? Nationwide, is it two or three percent?

PELLY-WALDMAN: Yes, yes.
Click to expand...
Must be that new math.
 
It’s sad that the mother of this child has made such a frakus of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. It seems to me that there is no faith at all that receiving the Precious Blood contains the whole and entire Christ just as the consecrated host contains the entire Christ- Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. If this mother thinks otherwise, she has done her child a grave disservice!

I agree with the Lord when He said, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find FAITH on the earth?” That is the ULTIMATE QUESTION!!
 
Panis Angelicas:
From her letter to Cardinal Ratzinger Why do I snicker when I read this? This lady who doesn’t have a good grasp of the Source, Summit, and Center of our Faith is telling the Cardinal what the will of God is! Some things are a test of Faith. I wonder if she ever read the story of Abraham and Isaac? “…violates the sacredness of my conscience…”??? Is she a new ager? I am unfamiliar with the “sacredness of conscience.” Maybe it’s a Catholic teaching…Could anyone explain this to me? Or is she making something up here?
Click to expand...
I’d like to know this too.

And also, who helped her write this letter? What Christian Faith does he or she belong to?
 
Apparently, this woman is completely ignorant of what the Eucharist is (the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ), and what it takes to become That (a validly ordained priest and the proper form and matter). She apparently rejects the second point (she’s probably in favor of women priests too), so I’m thinking she doesn’t believe the first, either. The fact that she’s so upset b/c she was told the rice host was invalid tells me that she doesn’t believe in the Real Presence (unfortunately, many Catholics don’t). It was not a punishment, she was being informed that her daughter did not receive the Real Presence, as she couldn’t have w/o a wheat host. “Changing the rules” won’t change that. She and her daughter can eat all the allegedly “consecreted” rice hosts they want, but they won’t be receiving Jesus. It’s impossible. If she doesn’t believe that, then she doesn’t accept the authority of the Church, which makes her a protestant, and the Catholic church is just the “denomination” she currently chooses to attend.

I suspect she will soon leave the Church for the Episcopalians, Lutherans, or some other form of “Catholic lite” denomination, where they’ll give her and her daughter the communion she wants.

On a side note, if she doesn’t think it’s appropriate for any child to have even a sip of very low alcohol wine, does she think “that” part of the Eucharist is an “adults only” activity? Is she going to petition for grape juice for the minors, so they’re not left out of the “full participation”? Why does she accept the Church’s rules on this (that it must be wine, although she doesn’t want her daughter to have it, and can’t be grape juice), but not on the wheat host?
 
Many children receive a sip of the Precious Blood without any harm. In Europe children often drink some wine with meals. A few drops of wine will not harm the child. Often medicine contains some alcohol, so does she not give her daughter medicine? She seems to be wanting to get attention and try to cause trouble. I sense an agenda.

PS: Wheat has always been required for validity in hosts. This is not going to change. That has been set in stone. So the mother will not prevail now or later.
 
40.png
cestusdei:
PS: Wheat has always been required for validity in hosts. This is not going to change. That has been set in stone. So the mother will not prevail now or later.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that Baptism will remain by water… and not by gasoline?

That annointing of the sick will be by oil and not… orange juice?

I hope that’s what you’re saying 👍
 
40.png
KennySe:
So are you saying that Baptism will remain by water… and not by gasoline?

That annointing of the sick will be by oil and not… orange juice?

I hope that’s what you’re saying 👍
Click to expand...
Now I have heard of Baptism by FIRE! What parish do you attend?
 
Mom tries to make everyone think that she’s acting in her child’s best interests.
But let’s face it. Nothing could be more harmful to this little eight year old girl who seems to want to obey rules, and whose mother is teaching her to defy and challenge them.
If she was half as concerned about this little girl’s eternal soul as she is concerned about the child’s intestinal tract, she would be teaching the child trustful surrender to Divine Providence and obedience to the Magisterium.
Little Haley is at risk ~ and not because of a wheat Host. :nope:
 
Mom tries to make everyone think that she’s acting in her child’s best interests.
But let’s face it. Nothing could be more harmful to this little eight year old girl who seems to want to obey rules, and whose mother is teaching her to defy and challenge them.
If she was half as concerned about this little girl’s eternal soul as she is concerned about the child’s intestinal tract, she would be teaching the child trustful surrender to Divine Providence and obedience to the Magisterium.
Little Haley is at risk ~ and not because of a wheat Host. :nope:
 
40.png
cestusdei:
Many children receive a sip of the Precious Blood without any harm. In Europe children often drink some wine with meals. A few drops of wine will not harm the child. Often medicine contains some alcohol, so does she not give her daughter medicine? She seems to be wanting to get attention and try to cause trouble. I sense an agenda.

PS: Wheat has always been required for validity in hosts. This is not going to change. That has been set in stone. So the mother will not prevail now or later.
Click to expand...
The issue isn’t how many children receive Communion by cup only. The question is whether it will hurt this particular child. Regardless of her statements on CBS, her statements in the letter above show it’s Pelly-Waldham’s own biases and stubbornness that is making her pursue the rice wafer issue.

I hope you’re right that the Church won’t compromise on the wheat issue. But the reality is that they’ve already “diluted” their position and greatly compromised the “only wheat” mandate in Canon law to allow a fraction of one percent of the wafer to be wheat. That’s not splitting hairs, that’s pretty much an outright violation of the “only wheat” legal definition. Reality is that the Church has a history of very slowly compromising things like this just to silence people who become annoying little thorns. This mother very much wants to be one of those annoying little thorns and I’ll bet you a bag of peanuts that before the end of this century, they’ll find another “loophole” to accomodate the sufferers of this disease. If my math is right, then there are several million Catholics who suffer from the disease. Even if this one woman gives up or dies along the way, the reality is that she’s opened the door and the media has taken up the cause. It might come and go through the years, but I’ll bet the Church eventually finds another “compromise” and incorporates it quietly into a future revision of Canon law.

As for the “always been wheat” thingie, not quite true. It’s often been made from Matzo flour, potato flour and other locally available substances through the year. That’s why the Canon law was changed to cite that it must be “only wheat”. But that’s a relatively new development and came out of better access to wheat around the world and safer storage of it. Don’t forget that wheat was the source of Bubonic plague in many countries and back then, no one was mandating that anyone consume it just for religious reasons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top