It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No more wine with Communion?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Not sure if this is a conpiracy or not ( atleast not yet ), but does have the making's of a an all out Church vs State proceeding.

Maybe.... going to far?



Democratic State Sen. Lowen Kruse has introduced a bill that would eliminate two provisions to Nebraska's underage drinking law which allow minors to drink alcohol in their own homes or at places of worship during religious ceremonies.


Will people have to start showing ID ( insert conspiracy theory here ) when they receive communion?

I can't see how this has become an issue with underage drinking. There must be other ways to tackle the problem rather then through the Church.

Underage Drinking

"Take this, ALL OF YOU, and drink from it, for this is a cup of my Blood"

How can they control this, would they start arresting teens in church if they produce a fake id?

Would they have police with breathelizers waiting in the parking lots?




posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 06:12 AM
link   
I'ts really really bullocks, here in Australia about a year ago they were talking about removing the wine because of potiential illnesses being spread



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 06:18 AM
link   
It won't be able to happen. It's a freedom of religion thing. A good Constitutional lawyer will have a field day with this one.

Oh .. just a side note ... we NEVER drink from the chalice during communion. The germs! When the priest has intinction, we then have the Precious Blood. Otherwise we don't partake of it.

And before someone says that the Catholic church should use those little plastic throw away cups I should say that we can't. It is our belief that the wine is no longer just wine, but that it is the actual Precious Blood of Christ. We can't use those little cups because it would be blashamy to throw away the Blood of Christ at the end of the service.

So for Catholics - it's the chalice. (which my family never drinks from anyways).


Cug

posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

And before someone says that the Catholic church should use those little plastic throw away cups I should say that we can't. It is our belief that the wine is no longer just wine, but that it is the actual Precious Blood of Christ. We can't use those little cups because it would be blashamy to throw away the Blood of Christ at the end of the service.


And to sling this thread more off-topic. Have you read the rules for how you treat the Body and Blood? It covers everything from accidentally dropping it, distruction of the church during services, and even what to do if some bird droppings land in it.

Back on topic...
I don't see anything coming from this. But if it somehoe came to be.. like FlyersFan said Catholics see it as the actual Blood of Christ so you could loophole it by claiming it's no longer wine.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cug
I don't see anything coming from this. But if it somehoe came to be.. like FlyersFan said Catholics see it as the actual Blood of Christ so you could loophole it by claiming it's no longer wine.


Hey, there's a thought.

I don't know how well it would stand up, but someone could probably swing it.

Our church wipes and rotates the chalice after every slurp.

I rarely ever drink from the chalice, usually just take the Host, so germs are not really an issue with me.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 11:07 AM
link   
To me, this is beyond ridiculous. Obviously this Senator is not Catholic. Any amount of wine used in communion, if any is used at all,most use grape juice nowadays, is very minimal. I cannot believe that some would think that wine taken at communion would risk anyones' "sobriety."



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
To me, this is beyond ridiculous. Obviously this Senator is not Catholic. Any amount of wine used in communion, if any is used at all,most use grape juice nowadays, is very minimal. I cannot believe that some would think that wine taken at communion would risk anyones' "sobriety."


In reading the article, the Senator apparently lost a child to a drunk driver. I believe this is one of a longer list of things on his agenda.

I can see his reasoning behind it and feel for his loss, but it seems he is basing his recommendations on personal situation rather than for the good of all.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
To me, this is beyond ridiculous. Obviously this Senator is not Catholic. Any amount of wine used in communion, if any is used at all,most use grape juice nowadays, is very minimal. I cannot believe that some would think that wine taken at communion would risk anyones' "sobriety."


Errrm. Not that it's directly relevant, but the wine used has to be guranteed as "wine". This means it must have undergone natural fermentation processes, but need not be of any particular strength. I don't think things have changed in this respect since the old Catholic Encyclopedia was compiled:

www.newadvent.org...



... For valid and licit consecration vinum de vite, i.e. the pure juice of the grape naturally and properly fermented, is to be used... If the wine... was pressed from grapes that were not fully ripe, or if it is mixed with such a quantity of water that it can hardly be called wine, its use is forbidden (Missale Rom., De Defectibus, tit. iv, 1). If the wine... is the unfermented juice is pressed from the grape, it would be a grievous offence to use it, but it is considered valid matter (ibid., 2)...


This from Pope Pius V's Bull "De defectibus":



If the wine... is unfermented, being made from newly pressed grapes, or if it has not been mixed with water, or if it has been mixed with rose-water or some other distillation, the Sacrament is valid, but the celebrant is guilty of grave sin.


In any case, yes, the amount consumed by a communicant is miniscule though!

Cheers.

Rob.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   
What is his reason for proposing this legislation? Has there been a recent rash of underage church-going youth who drive home drunk after one sip from the Chalice? This is beyond ridiculous. This guy has become a fanatic, I've seen alot of people become hysterical when they lose a child to a drunk driver and that makes absolute sense. But to look for a drunk driver behind every tree and to restrict someone's religous practices is just not right.

Yeah, right, I've been real worried about all those teenage churchgoers who always go joy riding around town after one sip of wine. NOT....



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by d60944

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
To me, this is beyond ridiculous. Obviously this Senator is not Catholic. Any amount of wine used in communion, if any is used at all,most use grape juice nowadays, is very minimal. I cannot believe that some would think that wine taken at communion would risk anyones' "sobriety."


Errrm. Not that it's directly relevant, but the wine used has to be guranteed as "wine". This means it must have undergone natural fermentation processes, but need not be of any particular strength. I don't think things have changed in this respect since the old Catholic Encyclopedia was compiled:



D60, that may indeed be correct. However, what few times I have been to a Catholic Church, the "wine" tasted more like grape juice to me than it did actual wine. Now, I must admit that I have never went to a ROMAN Catholic church, so... that must be taken into account as well.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Considering that the government can declare religious gay weddings illegal, its not any more for them to say that underage people can't drink wine. Or that everyone drinking out of the same cup is a health issue. We don't allow people to sacrifice and butcher animals on the street, without health department oversight, so how is this all that different?



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Considering that the government can declare religious gay weddings


First of all, gay weddings are a civil issue, not a religious one.. The government does have the right and the ability to legislate that...However, with separation of church and state, it has no right to legislate religious practices. None.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join