These boots are gonna walk all over
you People
seem to be pretty shocked over this incident of eight-year-old
Haley Waldman's first communion being
invalidated because a rare digestive condition prohibits
her from eating wheat. And it's true, that's a really
insensitive and undue action taken by the Church. But like with alcoholism, there isn't
just one party causing the problem; you've got the alcoholic,
and the enabler. And I think -- understand, I'm about to make
a really heavy-handed and unfair argument -- the parents are a
bit at fault for allowing this to continue. Here's
how.
The problem is clearly the Church's refusal to be
flexible and understand the changing needs -- or, hell, just
the basic needs -- of its followers. But the problem is
enabled by the parents' return to the church. The second graf
of the above-linked story sums it all up:
Now, Haley Waldman's mother is
pushing the Diocese of Trenton and the Vatican to
make an exception, saying the girl's condition should
not exclude her from the sacrament, which
commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ before
his crucifixion. The mother believes a rice
Communion wafer would
suffice.
This
incident is part of a series of exclusionary actions the
Church has taken recently, including threats to denying
communion to certain politicians and kicking gay-rights
believers out of certain churches. And just like all
those other people who were excluded, when Waldman's mother comes crawling
back, it tells the church one thing: they can abuse their
faithful and not lose them. It's similar to a politician who
realizes that his constituants' votes are not tied to his
actions. If they'll vote for him whether he serves them well
or not, what incentive does he have to serve them
well?
Haley Waldman's mother should do one thing, and
that's to say, "You know what? If the church can't accept
my daughter because she has a rare digestive disorder, then I
can't accept the church."
I'm no historian (or
Christian, for that matter), but from what I understand,
Christianity pretty much gained its power by excluding people.
For example, it came into ancient Rome and declared, as it had
never declared before, that homosexuality is a sin and will be
rewarded with an eternity in hell. The declaration was made,
as far as I understand, because it directly contradicted what
the Romans believed. And so, they all became fearful that
their lifestyle was wrong, and converted to Christianity to
save themselves. Thousands of years later, it
appears the Church is still operating under that premise
-- and even worse, it still works.
Push people away,
and they'll only want to come closer. If that persists, I
can't imagine what incentive the Church would have to change.
But if people started leaving the Church, well, I think we'd
have a whole different game to watch.
