Catholics demand explanation for PM Stephen Harper pocketing communion wafer at LeBlanc funeral

[CreekDog]

Source: Saint John, New Brunswick Telegraph Journal

A senior New Brunswick Roman Catholic priest is demanding the Prime Minister's Office explain what happened to the sacramental communion wafer Stephen Harper was given at Roméo LeBlanc's funeral mass.

During communion at the solemn and dignified service held last Friday in Memramcook for the former governor general, the prime minister slipped the thin wafer that Catholics call "the host" into his jacket pocket.

In Catholic understanding, the host - once consecrated by a priest for the Eucharist - becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ. It is crucial that the small wafer be consumed when it is received.

Monsignor Brian Henneberry, vicar general and chancellor in the Diocese of Saint John, wants to know whether the prime minister consumed the host and, if not, what happened to it.

...

"If I were the prime minister, I would at least offer an explanation to say no offence was meant, and then (clarifying) what happened to the consecrated host is in order," he said. "I would hope the Prime Minister's Office would have enough respect for the Catholic Church and for faith in general to make clear whatever happened."

...

Requests for comment left with Harper's media office were not immediately returned on Tuesday.

What Harper did or didn't do at the ceremony quietly raised questions at the ceremony in Memramcook Friday.

When Harper took the host, "everybody just paused and said, 'What did he do with it?'"‚" said one official who watched the pool feed with reporters who were not inside St. Thomas Church in Memramcook.

...

"I would feel very sorry for the prime minister if he wasn't informed about what the procedure is," Weisgerber said. "I would find it terrible if we put him in an embarrassing situation.

"My concern is at a funeral of that level everyone knows what the protocol is."

...

Given his church background, Harper might not have known exactly what was expected of him as a Protestant at a Roman Catholic mass, Mackey suggested.

"I don't think by himself as a Protestant adherent he'd be aware of the nuances," said Mackey, who added there would be people in his inner circle who should have advised him.

For a number of years, in Calgary and in Ottawa, Harper has worshipped at churches within the Christian and Missionary Alliance, said Mackey.

...

Read more: http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/722036

---

I found the article interesting. Just the image of "pocketing" the host is rather humorous. Maybe he was going to test it for DNA. :hide:

[xchrom]

1. fundy catholics. -- nt

[baldguy]

18. You don't have to be a fundie to believe in the transubstantiation of the Eucharist.

If he wanted to participate in the Communion, he should have taken the wafer. If he didn't to take the wafer, he shouldn't have taken part. There's no requirement for visitors to a Catholic Mass to take Communion - like at a funeral or a wedding. If he wanted to offend Catholics unnecessarily, he behaved perfectly.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftyMom]

84. Yeah, you do.

Hell, I came from a pretty fundie Catholic family and a pretty fundie parish and *nobody* ACTUALLY believed in transubstantiation. Being devout doesn't mean you're dumb.

[No Elephants]

104. Did Catholics behave perfectly toward non-Catholics attending the funeral?

At a funeral, you know there will be people there who are not Catholics. How about making them feel welcome and giving them an alternative to taking Communion that does not make them feel like an anthill in a picnic basket? Or even some directions as to what they are welcome to do since they cannot, consistent with the rules of the Church, take communion?

Don't assume everyone knows your beliefs and rules, then excoriate them when they don't.

[TankLV]

116. If I remember correctly, UNLESS you're a CATHOLIC, you SHOULDN'T participate in Communion AT ALL...

You may attend mass, but only those that are FULL MEMBERS of the Catholic Church may receive Holy Communion.

He shouldn't have participated, and I fault those around him for not informing him of the proper protocol.

Altho I detest the guy, I have to give him a break on this one.

He probably thought it best "not to participate" on his own, so he put it in his pocket.

Can't fault a "non-believer" for not knowing...

[No Elephants]

127. That's correct. And IF YOU ARE CATHOLIC, you should know that. And, if you are Christian, your

goal is to behave as you believe Christ behaved. Especially if you are a Christian clergyman. Especially if you are a Catholic priest, who believes himself uniquely qualified to turn bread and wine into the body of Christ, just as Christ himself did.

I don't think public humiliation and demands for apologies over a mistake at a danged funeral were His style. Especially when the priest is as much to blame for not knowing that the Prime Minister is not Catholic as Harper is for not knowing about a Catholic religious belief.

[nealmhughes]

45. Most Anglicans, Methodists, and all Lutherans as well as the Eastern Orthodox and Copts

and Oriental Orthodox Churches all believe in some form of the "Real Presence." The RC Church just has a longer definition of what that entails, involving species, substance, and accidents, all Platonic metaphysics.

In short, if you don't eat it all and drink it all, it goes into the tabernacle and all the wine is usually drank by the person handing out the chalice or the presiding priest/minister.

You do not take it home with you or flush it. The vessels are cleaned in a special sink that drains directly onto earth that is consecrated, not into the sewer.

Most uber Protestantns do hold that the meal is entirely figurative and has no spiritual gifts to offer at all. Others disagree, as do the churches listed above. Catholics and Orhtodox and Anglicans believe that it actually imparts an inward grace, which, to be blunt, is the forgiveness of sins and direct union with God.

[regnaD kciN]

47. Correct, except...

...that the RC definition of transubstantiation is base on Aristotelian metaphysics, not Platonic. Aristotle was a huge influence in the development of Roman Catholic doctrine, mainly because Thomas Aquinas used his categories as a basis for his own theology.

[PassingFair]

51. Many Anglican, Methodists and Lutherans were BURNED

and/or tortured for not buying into this
"miracle".

[Celeborn Skywalker]

101. Lutherans and most Anglicans believe in the Real Presence.

They always have. You saying differently doesn't change this fact.

[No Elephants]

105. Catholics believe that it is literally the body of Christ. Most Protestants don't. He is

Protestant. Maybe he is even PINO and doesn't know much about religion in general, let alone the Catholic belief that the wafer is literally the flesh of Christ. Maybe someone whispered to him while he was on line that only Catholics were supposed to consume it and he had no idea what to do at that point. And there is no evidence that he flushed it.

[struggle4progress]

156. I've never seen anyone, Catholic or Protestant, pretend to take communion in this way --

and Harper is an evangelical fundy

[Butch350]

54. Well, it's not like he dipped it in coffee or anything?

[rurallib]

2. They can really satisfy as a mid morning snack.

[madrchsod]

52. i like mine with some cheeze in a can

[TankLV]

119. They always stick to the roof of my mouth - then I spend the rest of the mass trying to get it off..

That's why I prefer my Ukrainian Catholic rite of the Catholic church - we get a spoonful of wine and BREAD dropped on our tongues to consume...MUCH better!!!

[greyl]

3. It was later found hanging from his rear view mirror.

[KansDem]

4. Maybe he's particular about what he eats...

And didn't want a wafer that might contain high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, and artificial flavorings and colorings...

I know I wouldn't no matter whose "body and blood" it became!

[Gwendolyn]

13. It's the same stuff they make budgie cracker treats from. n/t

[KansDem]

71. Ewwwwwww!!!!

NabiscoWorld



Ingredients: ENRICHED FLOUR (WHEAT FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMINE MONONITRATE {VITAMIN B1}, RIBOFLAVIN {VITAMIN B2}, FOLIC ACID), SUGAR, SOYBEAN OIL, HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED COTTONSEED OIL, WHEY (FROM MILK), EGGS, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, SALT, LEAVENING (BAKING SODA, CALCIUM PHOSPHATE), MONO- AND DIGLYCERIDES (EMULSIFIER).

:puke:

No wonder he pocketed the wafer!

[proteus_lives]

73. I love nilla wafers.

[progressoid]

144. With peanut butter.

Mmmmm

[Howardx]

5. satanist most likely

"Host desecration is a form of sacrilege in Christianity, involving the mistreatment or malicious use of a consecrated Host, or communion bread. Throughout history, a number of groups have been accused of desecrating hosts; because of the religious importance of the consecrated wafer, the accusation is one of metaphysical evil and hostility towards God."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_desecration

[The abyss]

62. I was just tempted to remind people of that little tid-bit

when I saw your comment.

Thanks for posting!

[daleo]

6. "I did not have pocket communion with that wafer". n/t

[No Elephants]

106. LOL

[lindisfarne]

7. He's either a vegetarian or only eats organic meat. n/t

[HeresyLives]

8. It's being called 'Wafergate.'

:)

[PassingFair]

27. LOL...

I detest Stephen Harper as much as
the next guy, but THIS?

This is crazy!

:crazy:

[pattmarty]

9. Take it home for the dog??????

[CC]

10. When did the Catholic Church start allowing

non-Catholics to take communion in a Catholic Mass? None of them around here will allow it not even at a funeral.

[JerseygirlCT]

29. They don't - but they also don't check your baptismal certificate

before administering the sacrament.

I don't understand why he wasn't informed of this beforehand, if he didn't know.

[No Elephants]

107. I've never been informed beforehand. Whose job is it to do that? The grieving widow?

I don't understand why a priest officiating at the funeral mass of a politician would not realize that non-Catholics were likely to be present and announce that Catholics were now welcome to approach for Communion and non Catholics were welcome to approach for a blessing or to remain seated until the Catholics had finished receiving Communion. It's not as though it's the priest's first funeral mass where non-Catholics were present. It may have been the first time for this guy.

[TankLV]

120. He has "people" - MANY "people" - he should have been properly prepared and informed...

It's NOT Harper's fault at all...

This whole thing is SILLY...

What you said is entirely THE way it SHOULD have been done...our priest used to do that on special occasions, such as Weddings, etc, when Non-Catholics were likely to be present.

I FAULT THE PRIEST on this one - IT'S ENTIRELY THE OFFICIATING PRIESTS FAULT for this one!!!

[JerseygirlCT]

138. He has a staff. People to prepare him for every official outing

There's no reason he shouldn't have been prepped for this as well.

I agree that it would have been nice of the priest to make such an announcement. Some seem to feel any break in the liturgy is not good, however. Could be he was one.

[damntexdem]

38. Well, they won't invite Harper to take communion again, anyway.

;-)

[KamaAina]

11. Why would he go up there in the first place?!

I was raised Catholic, but never confirmed. So at Mass, I'd just stay back when everyone else went up front to receive Communion.

You can imagine my surprise when, at an Episcopal Christmas Eve service years later, they brought it out to me (!!) -- but that's another story altogether...

[No Elephants]

108. You were raised Catholic, so you know the rules. He wasn't, so maybe he did not know.

[tomm2thumbs]

12. I thought it was symbolism, do they actually think it turns into flesh, like a miracle occurs?

or am I misreading the article

[daleo]

14. Yes, I am quite certain it is supposed to be a miracle

More than a few medieval wars were fought over these arcane points of religious dogma.

[Zhade]

89. Insanity. To think so many died for this superstition.

What's next, a mass killing of those who spill salt?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

140. Oh, no!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EK-Efbarkbg/Rh-hN7Z5uVI/AAAAAAAAAgM/Xo0JEBW1f6Q/s400/Morton+Salt+umbrella+girl+.gif ............

[Zhade]

181. LOL! Nice.

NT!

[MilesColtrane]

19. Transubstantiation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

[JerseygirlCT]

30. Yes. Transubstantiation - is Catholic doctrine

actually some Episcopalians believe that, too. We're just a lot less dogmatic about it and allow for different understandings.

Most Protestants understand it as a symbolic thing. But Catholic doctrine is that the host IS the body of Christ.

[pnwmom]

39. Not flesh in which DNA could be measured. But the belief is that the blessed host

somehow incorporates God, rather than just being a symbol.

[AngryOldDem]

48. Careful...them's fightin' words.

I once called it "symbolism" and a lot of Catholics present went off on me. But I still see it as such and am still waiting for a plausible explanation of Christ's saying at the Last Supper: "Do this in memory of me." Call me literalist, but to me taking the host and the blood are symbols of the Last Supper and Crucifixion. I am reminded, in other words, of Christ's sacrifice when I take the body and blood.

But that's not the company line.

Regardless, the PM should have showed more respect. He could have just gone up and gotten a blessing, if he was not a practicing Catholic. Pocketing the host is about the worst thing you can do short of throwing it on the floor and grinding it under your heel. There's even strict protocol about how to dispose of the **crumbs** and leftover wine -- er, blood.

[No Elephants]

110. Key being what the pronoun "this" refers to. Before Christ

said that, he said of the bread, this is my body which is broken for you. Then he ate the bread, which he had just said was his body. Next, he said of the wine, this is my blood which he shed for you. Then he drank the wine, which he had just said was his blood. So, if you take his words literally, he had just eaten his own body and drunk his own blood. Then he said, Do this in remembrance of me. And, if you take those words literally as well, the pronoun reference for "this" is eat my body and drink my blood--as I just did--in remembrance of me."

Not going to debate, because what you believe is between you and your God, IMO, but you said you were waiting for an explanation of "Do this in rembrance of me" that leads to the conclusion that a change occurs when the priest, standing in for Christ, repeats that incident.

I like the explanation that a Congregationalist pastor gave me about Communion when I asked him if he believed in transubstantiation. "Somehow, SOMEhow, He is with us."

That was all that he needed to know and all the explanation that I needed at that moment. Plus, I don't think he wanted to dis anyone else's beliefs. He was a gentle soul who believed Christians should unite, or at least co-exist co-operatively and peacefully. (RIP, sweet Fr. Hal)

[AngryOldDem]

203. Thanks.

I am with Fr. Hal in that I think Christ somehow in some way is always with us.

Your explanation, by the way, is one of the clearest I've seen. But I still can't fully accept it.

[No Elephants]

112. Went off on you, simply for not knowing the details of a religion that is not yours? How Christian!

[mitchum]

68. Yes...I am always amazed that there are any Catholic writers...

since apparently
they have a hard time
grasping the concept
of metaphor

[No Elephants]

109. Yes, literally the body of Christ. Not a speck is supposed to go astray. That's why

the priest at one time would ONLY put it on your tongue. If given in hand, some speck too small to be seen might go astray. In those days, this never would have happened. Now, soome priests take their cue from the people receiving. If they open their mouths, it goes into the mouth. If they extend their hands (usually cupped together), it goes into their hands,.

But, there was no reason to assume that a Protestant would know any of that.

[Posteritatis]

195. In 45% Catholic nation, I think it's reasonable to expect the head of gov't to know that (nt)

[progressoid]

146. Transubstantiation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

In Roman Catholic theology, transubstantiation (in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσίωσις (metousiosis)) means the change of the substance of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ occurring in the Eucharist while all that is accessible to the senses remains as before.<1><2>

Some Greek confessions use the term "transubstantiation" (in Greek, metousiosis), but most Orthodox traditions play down the term itself, and the notions of "substance" and "accidents", while still holding that the elements of bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. Other terms such as "trans-elementation" ("metastoicheiosis") and "re-ordination" ("metarrhythmisis") are more common among the Orthodox. Most or all Protestant Reformation churches do not accept an actual change.

[RandySF]

15. I've been to many Catholic weddings/funerals/services

As a protestant, I just hung back in my pew while other went forward to take communion. Seems like he could have just done the same. However, I think he was just ingorant of the significance. Cathlolics should cut him some slack on this one since it's not like he went to speak at Bob Jones U.

[daleo]

16. His protocol people should have known the proper way of doing things

It is hard to believe that the PM's protocol officers would not have made him aware of procedure.

[No Elephants]

111. It's harder to believe that a politician attending a funeral wanted to offend

the grieving family and all Catholics present.

[JerseygirlCT]

139. I certainly don't think he intended to offend. But that's not really the point

he did. I'd say someone in his position ought to be somewhat familiar with these sort of things. Given that he obviously is not, he should have been properly prepped by his staff.

[JerseygirlCT]

32. But as someone in his position - wouldn't you think a staff person

would have informed him of the protocol? It just seems very very odd to me that he'd not know that before attending the service.

[No Elephants]

113. Please see Reply 147.

[Hissyspit]

17. Breaking News: Organized religion continues to suck.

[imdjh]

20. Catholicism, especially Irish Catholicism has a history of superstition and pocketing wafers.

Above and beyond the basic superstition, of course. Back when many Catholics went to mass more often than Christmas and Easter, some Catholics would save up the wafers for a rainy day, like a vitamin or good luck charm. This is probably why many churches place the wafer directly on the tongue, but even then there have been folks known to palm it.

Kids are known to do this as well.

[undeterred]

24. Kind of like cheeking your pills at the mental hospital?

[imdjh]

26. lol nt

[JerseygirlCT]

33. That's interesting... never heard of that

And I've got an Irish Catholic family, to be sure.

[ourbluenation]

76. me neither and I'm as irish as paddy's pig. must be a cultchy thing. n/t

[dugaresa]

189. never heard of it and hard to believe as I came from a very catholic family

that was steeped in both church rituals as well as the "pagan-leftover" stuff. The kind of rituals that started in paganism and got swirled into catholicism in order to get converts to migrate to the church.

Perhaps you have it confused with the Christmas wafers that some folks purchase for these pagan left over rituals. Christmas Eve is specifically one time where some Catholics use these wafers at home for specific purposes. They are made of holy wafer but aren't from the Mass.

[imdjh]

191. Maybe that's it. My mom told me about it years ago. I'm old now.

[happygoluckytoyou]

21. poor guy was on a low host diet

[No Elephants]

114. Not to mention a low ghost diet. Sorry.(Just could not help myself.)

[undeterred]

22. They don't want the body of christ to go through the dry cleaners.

It makes a terrible mess.

:hide:

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Heh.

:thumbsup:

[Oregone]

23. I hope Harper e-Bays it.

My respect for him would grow greatly.

[JerseygirlCT]

28. Why the heck did he do that?

If he didn't know the protocol, you'd think someone could have informed him beforehand. And as a non-Catholic, he shouldn't have been receiving, anyway - again, something any Catholic could have told him.

How weird.

[santamargarita]

31. Maybe he lost his appetite...

the wine filled him up

[hunter]

34. Before one visits ANY church it makes sense to learn the traditions beforehand...

...especially if you are a major political figure. You'd think a Prime Minister wouldn't be so clueless, but then again, we had George W. Bush...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. +1

Everything I read about this Harper character indicates stupidity of Bushian proportions.

[PassingFair]

41. Funerals and weddings are public functions.

If the family is so worried that
their "traditions" are going to
be violated, maybe they should only
invite those of their own congregation.

Would make for some pretty paltry attendance, no?

[hunter]

58. Oh bother.

I'll bet you've got sense enough not to visit the kiddie park naked or serve a rabbi pork.

There are all sorts of things we do to get along with other people.

Yes, funerals and weddings are public functions but you are still a guest in somebody else's house.

I know gay couples who love Catholic weddings, and they are not shy about small public displays of affection inside the church, but they do have the common sense and good manners not to mess with the host.

I think Fundamentalist Christian weddings are the worst, especially when you get a minister who lectures the woman on how she must obey her husband. My favorite Fundamentalist minister was one who admonished everyone in attendence about the evils of flirting. No flirting? At a wedding? Oh my G...! He must have decided everyone was having too much fun. There were quite a few people who spent the rest of the celebration furtively flirting and I'm sure quite a few of them went off to have wild sex afterwards. He'd tell us we're all going to hell, I'm sure.

Nevertheless anyone who invites me to their wedding, or anyone who I cared enough about to go to their funeral, deserves my respectful behavior no matter how farfetched I think their religion is. Although I do confess I have pushed the boundaries a bit...

But pocketing the host is just stupid.

[PassingFair]

64. I agree that it is stupid.

But not that it is horrifying.

Or even bothersome.

[daleo]

59. This wasn't any old family funeral

It was a funeral for the former Head of State, and therefore similar to a state function.

[Zhade]

90. And THAT'S the scary part -- that a religion was endorsed at a state function.

NT!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

137. No, it's just courtesy to find out how to behave at any ceremonial occasion

If I knew that someone was going to attend a Japanese wedding (and if the family has a Shinto wedding, only the reception is usually open to outsiders), I'd be sure to tell them about the major differences between an American and a Japanese wedding reception, such as being expected to bring a gift of money in a certain amount in a specific type of envelope.

Also, if you go to a Japanese funeral, you wear all black--a black dress or kimono for women and a black suit for men.

That's what you do if you want to keep attention focused on the purpose of the ceremony instead of on yourself. You do what's expected of you.

[Umbral]

197. Before visiting ANY church... one should reconsider. nt

[Bossy Monkey]

35. Ah. I can handle this, NB Catholics: He's an idiot. Glad to be able to clear that up for you n/t

[baldguy]

46. This is the most likely explanation.

If he was respectful, he'd admit his mistake.

I wouldn't hold my breath, though.

[No Elephants]

115. See, and I think, if people were Christian about it, this public humiliation would never have begun

in the first instance. These demands, this apparent need to humble him, etc. is not anything I read about in the Gospels. Why Christians seem so enamored of judgment and condemnation in light of what Jesus said about those things is beyond me.

[damntexdem]

36. Saving it for later?

Better than pocketing the wine, in any case.

[No Elephants]

117. Not many churches pass the wine anymore. (Not many pass the whine, either, if we judge by the OP

and a lot of the posts on this thread).

[judesedit]

37. Maybe he thought someone was trying to poison him???

You never know what goes on behind the scenes of that oligarchy.

[Spazito]

42. If there is a way to screw something up, Harper can be counted on to do exactly that...

What an idiot, I can't wait until he is dumped by the Canadian people, sooner rather than later I hope.

[arikara]

53. Harper is Canada's very own

version of Sarah Palin.

What an embarrassing goof.

[CreekDog]

60. But unlike Palin, Harper does have a brain

in fact, if you take off his hair, you can see it! :think:

[Posteritatis]

193. Stockwell was more Palinesque, really

Harper's a fairly bland puppet-of-the-Republicans type figure, while Day was actively endorsing eugenics for single mothers and similarly ridiculous ideas into the late nineties.

[lumberjack_jeff]

43. I hope that if Obama goes to communion, no one drops untested food in his mouth.

If I were president or PM of a country, I'd be careful about what I eat too.

[arikara]

75. Thats a plot for Dan Brown

A large public funeral and the one adulterated wafer is given to a non-catholic head of state who was ill advised enough to line up for communion. Was the wafer randomly given out... or was the priest in on the plot?

:rofl:

[lumberjack_jeff]

95. Damn, you're right! I wonder if he's in the phone book. :) n/t

[Hassin Bin Sober]

49. Maybe he took it home and put Bar-b-Q sauce on it.

[madrchsod]

50. oh noooo..brian wants to know what happened the wafer.....

of course he could have waited for an explanation.

what would Christianity be without those ancient pagan rituals...

[juno jones]

55. Probably going to be used for some unholy ritual of satanistic black mass

child sacrifice that requires a host blessed by a priest and served at a funeral. :sarcasm:

Personally, I take any and all eucharists offered. :P

[bitchkitty]

56. Watch for it on ebay! n/t

[IndianaGreen]

79. Ding! Ding! Ding! We got a winner here!

Opening bid for Jesus $1.00

[madmom]

57. If he would "feel terrible" about embarrassing him, why bring it up?

[Libertas1776]

61. I am a little surprised at a lot of the insensitive comments posted

but I guess maybe I am a little biased since I was raised Catholic (but I ain't anymore)
Nevertheless, It is a matter of respect. Like another poster said, If you go into a mosque you take your shoes off, or if a man attends a service at a synagogue, whether he is Jewish or not, he should wear a yarmulke and so on.

Now don't get me wrong, I am no fan of organized religion at all but I still have the good manners to respect their beliefs and hope that they would mine as well.

I can recall a instance when I was younger and attending a service, possibly Easter, maybe Pentecost. Whatever it was, Catholic high holiday or not, what happened should never take place. When the important holidays rolled around all the "less observant" or "Christmas and Easter only" Catholics showed up with their 10 member families and piled into all the front pews while all the regular observants like us were pushed to the back so they could get in good with the big man upstairs. Needless to say, their young weren't too observant on church practices since they never went period. And I am sure it went for some of the adults as well.

They threw the host onto the floor, hid them into the missals, threw them into the trash. I remember seeing two young girls just casually chewing on their hosts like it was a cracker, all the while giggling and laughing. At the same time, I saw a priest staring at them as they walked away and I could tell he was visibly upset.
I never bought the whole transubstantiation thing or whatever and really just thought of it has representative of Christ cause I could never really believe it was physically HIM. Anyway, you could still see how it can offend someone who actually believes it is Christ, as odd as it may sound.

Even now, if I ever attend a service in a Catholic Church for a wedding or a unfortunately a funeral, when the Eucharist time comes around, I respectfully sit back in my pew and let others pass me by and just observe. I don't partake because I am no longer a practicing catholic. It is as simple as that, a matter of respect.

It is not just some wafer, it is a very important part of a lot people's beliefs and that numbskull Harper should have known better.

[PassingFair]

66. I'm an atheist, but if someone wants to say a blessing before they eat at my house,

they can.

I won't burst a blood vessel over it.

Even if it violates MY "traditions".

[baldguy]

69. What if they came over to your house for dinner, but refused to eat with an "infidel"?

Would you feel insulted?

[PassingFair]

74. I would certainly not demand a public apology.

I would be bemused and think they
were jerks.

But Harper didn't storm out of the
church calling anyone papist scum....

And if someone came to my house and
took the veal and decided that they
didn't want it, I wouldn't flip out
over it, either!

:crazy:

[Zhade]

92. Why would they come over if they thought him an infidel?

Your analogy doesn't work.

[No Elephants]

123. That's not even close to what Harper did.

[rd_kent]

154. I'm surprised

I too, am an atheist, and most of my friends know how I feel about prayer, especially in my house: not a chance! When I go to their house and they want to say a prayer before a meal, I keep silent and allow them to do their thing without interruption or comment.
I have had only one incident where a newcomer came for dinner (there were 12 of us) and he said "can we say grace?" I replied, you are free to pray to yourself, but I ask that while you are in my home, you respect my way of doing things and if I am at your house, I will do the same. We had a great dinner and that person is now a very close friend.

[Zhade]

91. Sorry, there is NO obligation to respect beliefs. They're NOT off-limits.

Now obviously, if one goes to the trouble of attending a function in a church or what have you, it makes sense to be respectful -- but then, you *choose* to be respectful.

No one has a right to DEMAND that their beliefs be respected. Period.

[No Elephants]

122. Thing is, he probably never intended to disrespect anyone's belief at a funeral.

[Zhade]

182. Indeed. I'm still at a loss as to why not eating a cracker is insulting.

Some believers are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too wrapped up in their persecution complex.

[JerseygirlCT]

145. As a public official, he has more obligation than your average citizen.

And as you say, if you can't be respectful, you shouldn't attend.

[rd_kent]

155. While I agree with you in principle

in this case, he should not have chosen to participate. I understand the anger he has caused, and if he had just CHOSEN not to take communion, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[mamaleah]

102. I guess it makes them feel as though they are

more of a progressive. "Ooooh! I bash religion! That makes me super left!!"

In truth it makes them as disgusting as Fred Phelps is.

[No Elephants]

124. Bashing religion and criticizing the stance of this priest on this issue are not one and the same.

Neither is making a joke about this incident. Plenty of posts here do simply bash faith of any and all kinds, but this thread is certainly far from the worst I've seen here in that respect.

[mamaleah]

173. I didn't mean you personally.

There is a difference between criticism and bashing, I know that. A few on this thread have crossed that line, but the religious are fair game for many.

At best, bashing religion only makes people less likely to listen to true constructive criticism. At the worst, it confirms what the right likes to say: Democrats wanna take away your Bible and send you to a re-education camp.

[Zhade]

183. Point of order: criticizing beliefs (rather than those who believe) is NOT intolerant.

Demanding undeserved respect for belief, simply because it's fervently held, IS intolerant.

[No Elephants]

121. And I am surprised at the un-Christian behavior and arrogance of the priest.

No politician attends a funeral with the intention of offending the grieving family, the priest, others attending, 45% of the country and Catholics everywhere. Yet, that is the tone taken by the priest and many of the posters on this thread. So, he made a mistake. Does he have to be publicly shamed? Is that really what Jesus would have done?


You know why people don't enter a synagogue without a yarmulke? Not because they keep one at home and know to bring it with them. Because someone is sitting at the door behind a table full of yarmulkes and handing them one as they welcome them to the service.

Was it a mystery to the priest that the Prime Minister was not Catholic? Was it a mystery to the priest that many non-Catholics would be present? What did the priest do to make them feel welcome and make sure no non-Catholic took the host by mistake? His only role in this is to publicly humiliate someone who obviously made a mistake? Really?

[JerseygirlCT]

147. Was it a mystery to the PM that nearly half his constituents are

R. Catholic? And that taking a moment to be apprised of customs would be the polite and smart thing to do?

[JerseygirlCT]

143. I just read that about 45% of Canadians are R. Catholic

Given that, it's even more shocking that he didn't know, or at the least wasn't prepared by his staff.

I totally agree with you. I was also raised R. Catholic. Once I was received into the Episcopal Church, however, I stopped taking communion when I was home and attending church with my parents. Of course, when my mom visits me, she's perfectly welcome to communion from our point of view, but not supposed to receive according to RC beliefs. Sometimes she does, anyway. Our priests do always make an announcement about all baptised people being welcome to receive, and others welcome to come up for a blessing. I've not usually heard any such announcement in RC churches, though.

[dugaresa]

190. you mentioned chewing on the host. It was a big no no when I was a kid

yet when my daughter made her communion they encouraged it now. I nearly fell over.

[CHIMO]

63. It's Now

Up to Flaherty to straighten out the PM. Perhaps Charest could provide some rear guard support.

[truthisfreedom]

65. Could be a wheat allergy.

I'm just sayin'.

[peace13]

128. The Catholic Church refuses to offer a gluten free host.

My 83 year old friend works her butt off for the church but can't take communion because she has Celiac Disease and the host has gluten in it.

[mitchum]

67. Stealing a magic cracker!

[kitty1]

70. Wow; Like a scene out of Angels and Demons.....

Big time conspiracy here. PM refuses host wafer.
Is it a sign of the upcoming apocalypse, or could the PM have been a little ignorant of the proceedings and kept it for an afternoon snack.
Nothing to see here folks. I hope the Catholic Church understands that this is trifle in the Cosmic scheme of things really.
Focus on important stuff.

[hedgehog]

72. This was an extremely rude action. Everyone else went and

ate the Host, why did he stick it in his pocket?

I am reminded of a group of us who attended a friend's wedding at a Lutheran Church. The Catholics there took Communion even though it would give some Catholics fits because it was more important for us to honor our friend than to engage in a debate about whether this was the Real Presence or not. We all automatically extended our palm even though the Lutherans there took the Host between their finger and thumb. It was done with respect.

My Father in law is a high school graduate who worked as a truck mechanic. He has attended Catholic ceremonies with us such as First Communions and weddings. He doesn't believe the Catholic interpretation of Communion, so he doesn't take it. Apparently he is both more sophisticated and more courteous than the PM of Canada!

[No Elephants]

129. It would be rude only if he knew better and did this with the intent to offend. You are

assuming the worst case scenario, even though it is highly unlikely that a politician did anything at a funeral with an intent to offend.

[hedgehog]

150. How can anyone live in Canada or the US and not know that you're

supposed to eat the communion wafer? Taking communion in Catholic or Protestant churches turns up in dozens of movies.

[IndianaGreen]

77. He's got Jesus in his pocket!

"God is my co-pilot"

and some such nonsense!

[janx]

87. Dog is my co-pilot. n/t

[JVS]

78. Why the fuck would anyone do that unless they were planning a host desecration?!?!?!?!

BURN HIM I SAY!!!!!

[JVS]

80. BTW, that Priest should be disciplined. Harper isn't Catholic and should have never been offered...

the wafer in the first place.

[PassingFair]

82. I don't think they do a card check at the altar...

LOL

[JVS]

83. A priest is still responsible, and Harper is a famous enough person that his religious affiliation..

is on the record.

[No Elephants]

132. Maybe they should, especially if they feel free to disgrace people who make a mistake.

[janx]

85. Why? n/t

[JVS]

86. Because the duty of the priest is to properly administer the sacraments, and he has failed.

[hedgehog]

142. Happens all the time. Generally there are discrete notices

like in the front of the hymnal, and the assumption is that the person presenting himself for communion is there properly.

[janx]

81. Non-Catholics are not allowed to participate in communion in the first place.

I found this insulting as someone who worshiped (or at least respected) Jesus Christ. When attending Catholic mass, I was told that I was not worthy of participating in communion.

I was not allowed to participate. I was told this over and over and over as both a friend of Roman Catholics and a wife of an Irish Catholic.

[IndianaGreen]

88. I don't recall Jesus saying 'Eat this. This is my body for Catholics only'

You do realize that the theology of communion was man-made by a bunch of cardinals centuries after Jesus' death.

[Zhade]

93. You do realize there's not even any extrabiblical evidence Jesus existed, right?

Remember kids, Josephus' "reference" to this alleged Jesus guy was a FORGERY added centuries later!

[kitty1]

94. , I believe the Dead Seas Scrolls contain A Crucified Messiah ..

Scroll which makes reference to a crucified Messiah from the shoot of Jesse, the branch of David, among other things relevant to Christ's existence.

[boppers]

97. You'll have to get in line for that one.

There are multiple figures that loosely match OT prophesy, including the current popular one.

[LeftyMom]

98. So do half the religions of that era in that region.

Mithra being the most obvious one.

I do hope you're not making an argument for a historical Jesus based on genealogy. First of all, it's silly. We know all about the genealogies of various mythic figures of the classical period http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_tree_of_the_Greek_gods which is hardly proof that say, Artemis, actually existed. Secondly, the Bible gives two differing accounts of Jesus' lineage in order to retcon it to the idea that he would be descended from David. Third, all of these arguments for a historical Jesus trace his lineage through Joseph. Which means he was the son of a knocked up teenager and a carpenter, and thus of no consequence at all. Oops.

[No Elephants]

131. The son of a carpenter and a knocked up young woman (you know her age?) can't be

of consequence? Mary Astor, is that you?

If you don't believe the Bible, you don't believe it, but why is it intellectually honest to pick and choose what you do and do believe from the Biblical account?

In fact, isn't the only intellectually honest position that whether Jesus ever lived or not cannot, so far, be either proven or disproven, let alone any specific fact and the rest is a matter of faith?

[LeftyMom]

175. Well, that would clear up that whole "son of god" business, which is the backbone of the religion.

Here's the intellectually honest position:

There is zero evidence that the Jesus figure ever lived. Many of the claims about his life are more consistent with a mythological figure than with a human being. Even the most ordinary claims about his life (where he was born, his hometown, his parentage) do not stand up to casual scrutiny. The whole story sounds like a mish-mash of existing legends, mostly Mithra with some Osiris thrown in.

The logical conclusion is that it's made up.

[IndianaGreen]

103. No such reference exists. The Teacher of Righteousness was murdered in Jerusalem

by his religious rivals, unlike Jesus who was executed as a terrorist by the Roman authorities.

[spoony]

99. You keep spamming this message in every thread

about religion. You do know that that reference isn't the only one, right? You may want to read something besides "Angry Anti-Theist Asshat Digest" if you want a rounded education.

[Zhade]

184. It happens to be true. Deal with it.

NT!

[mamaleah]

188. He might be the publisher of "Angry Anti-Theist Asshat Digest"

Thank you for making me laugh!

[No Elephants]

125. You realize that there is not even any evidence that most people of that

time existed, right? Not specific persons. It as not as though birth certificates were on file at Bethlehem City Hall, or birth announcements got printed in the Nazareth News or crucifixions during Passover were noted in the Jerusalem Journal. Or even marked down in the family Bible. Four gospels is a heck of a lot more evidence that Jesus existed than we have evidence of any other Nazarene existing, yet we accept that Nazarenes existed. Thousands of people in Israel, too, yet we know none of the their names, let alone the names of their posses.

You can argue that Jesus never existed if you like, but please know that particular argument is just silly.

[Zhade]

185. It's not silly when people insist he existed without a shred of evidence.

Not when the religion based on the mythology (cribbed from other mythologies like Mithra) remains so powerful today.

[janx]

179. Of course I do.

I recognize politics. ;-)

[boppers]

96. If you don't want your funeral "disrespected"...

Perhaps it shouldn't involve batshit-crazy rituals.

[spoony]

100. And another religion thread unravels in the standard way.

On DU it's a one-way street isn't it? No matter how innocuous or how slightly related to religion, it's like a bell goes off in some people's heads and they have some overwhelming need to make complete prats of themselves. Another day, just another day.

[Bill McBlueState]

126. i think it's because it's so easy

When there's a big uproar over the treatment of a religious cracker, the "fish in a barrel" crowd likes to pile on.

[No Elephants]

130. It goes both ways. I've seen lots of strings of Fuck religion and fuck Christianity posts

here as well, even if no pro-Christian post has appeared on the thread. The worst of both sides are more than evident, each being "holier" than thou about their respective positions.

[rd_kent]

161. Its hard to have a logical debate with someone

who believes in the unbelievable, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

[mamaleah]

174. So with that the debate shuts down.

The thread is about a Roman Catholic tradition. "It's all Spaghetti Monster BS" does not add to the debate. If you an atheist, you can still debate the issue within the frame of the issue. The debate is not whether or not G-d exists, it's whether or not 1) Harper should have gone for Communion, 2) What he should have done with the Host, and 3) How Harper should smooth it all out. Calling someone's beliefs illogical only shuts down debate and leads to nothing.

[Zhade]

186. The outrage began with people believing in this nonsense. How do you reason with that?

The only reason this is even a story is because people got worked up over a superstitious ritual not being recognized, which they categorize as "disrespectful". Since when do crazy beliefs have to be accommodated just to keep the peace?

It's not at all disrespectful to not engage in a ritual you don't believe in, EVEN IN THE ARENA IN WHICH IT TAKES PLACE.

[mamaleah]

187. Thank you for beautifully illustrating my point.

Nonsense? I guess you believe that our President is a nonsensical person as well.

From what I know of Roman Catholicism, all Harper had to do was not go up for Communion. No one would have even blinked over that because he is not Catholic.

If he attended my synagogue, sure he'd be expected to cover his head (as would he be expected to remove his shoes in a mosque - it's a respect thing), but he would not be called to Torah for an aliyah.

How is life up in your perfect "logical" tower? Pretty lonely and dull, it must be, looking down on all of us so often.

[rd_kent]

192. Hmmm, logical tower, huh?

I never thought of myself as being "above" anyone else, just because I'm a rational and logical person that understands the difference between superstition, myths, fairy tales and unfounded claims and the reality we call life. If you think I, and those like me, are in a tower looking down at you, I invite you to shed your fear, open your eyes and climb up and join me. The view is fantastic!

[mamaleah]

198. I choose not to do so, thank you very much.

And you can continue to think of yourself as a better for being to above "fairy tales".

Good luck getting that logical, non-fairy tale believing President elected someday. I hear they are expected record low temps in hell right around that same time.

[rd_kent]

200. It's always a pleasure to see someone willfully choose ignorance!

It is the one thing this country needs more of.

And yes, until someone shows me PROOF of a god, all faiths are just fairy tales that deserve the same amount of respect as Mother Goose. Actually, Mother Goose deserves more.

[mamaleah]

201. And by acting nasty you expected to convert how many to your camp?

That's right. You just make people wish to stick with their beliefs even more. Good job!

[rd_kent]

202. Dude, I'm an Atheist! I don't convert anyone.

That's your job, to convince people to believe in something in the face of contrary evidence. I'm not being nasty, I'm being real. My job is to get people to look at facts and make a rational, informed decision. If this scares you, perhaps you should cease asking scary questions.
Again, I'm not being nasty, you just see it that way.

[mamaleah]

204. Jews do not proselytize.

So no I am not out to convert either.

That said, why can't it be as simple as this: I follow a religion, you do not. Why is it so hard for you to just say that? Are you obligated by something to call what you disagree with "fairy tales"?

[rd_kent]

205. Yes, I am obligated, and here's why.

Organized religion, IMHO, is the single worst thing repressing the population of this planet. Some are less harmful than others,and some do provide kind acts of charity and can be helpful, but those are usually small groups and exceptions. As a whole, religion IS the problem. Its 2010. We have an understanding of the world that could only be DREAMED of just 100 years ago and even modern religious followers would be killed by members of their own church 500 years ago. Religion is unable and/or unwilling to keep up with the actual growth (most call it evolution) of the human species because it would diminish the power it holds over most of the population. If just one person could show me proof that any of it is true, just one, I would eat my words and beg forgiveness. Are you the one? I think not. Is there anyone who can do that? I think not, but I'm waiting.
Now, what say you?

[mamaleah]

206. I wish you best of luck.

You'd have more luck not insulting the faithful. Instead you push people more towards their own faith by acting like an asshat.

You have a long road ahead of you, and one I am willing to bet is going to be filled with disappointment. Disappointment because you will not get what you want, the destruction of people's beliefs. Unless you think the method favored by the Soviets and the Chinese is a good start.

[rd_kent]

209. Hahahaha!

I have your asshat right here. You just show your insecurity with every word.
I wish YOU the best of luck. You are the one that is going to finish their life only to discover it was all for not; that you have been lied to.
I am not bent on the destruction of peoples beliefs, I am bent on destroying the STRANGLEHOLD religion has on this world. I could care LESS what one personally believes or not, I only start to care when it steps on MY right to do as I want.
No, good luck to you, you're then one who needs it as I have already found happiness and fulfillment.

[mamaleah]

210. I didn't know I was unhappy....

I don;t believe I am.

And if you knew anything about religion.....which you don't obviously, you'd know that Jews do not live their lives for the world after. That's Christianity.

So not only are you an asshat, but an ignorant one at that.

Have a pleasant life!

[stumprancher]

176. Outrage

I am appalled at the vitriol and general disrespect shown to the Christian Faith and Ritual by so many on this thread. I can't help but feel that this sort of reaction would not occur were we discussing an egregious breach of protocol at a Jewish or Muslim funeral. on the contrary I think the board would have exploded with outrage.
That said, the responsibility for this incident clearly rests with the Catholic clergy in charge of the funeral, assuming that they did not properly explain what folks should do. The PM’s own protocol folks should also have been familiar enough with the religious practice of nearly half of the Canadian population to have avoided this incident.

[rd_kent]

194. No, I think you misunderstand the point trying to be made

Go back and reread the thread and see if you see what the dissent is really about.
And welcome to DU.

[formercia]

118. He's saving it to put in a Voodoo doll of the next Liberal pick.

Satan never takes communion. :evilgrin:

[ChickMagic]

133. At mass just last week

I accepted the host into my hand and absentmindedly started walking away without
consuming it in front of the priest. I did consume it a few steps away, but he
was eyeing me like a hawk. Receiving the host and pocketing it is a transgression
of great import to the faith of Catholics. I don't know why the priest didn't stop
him from doing it.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

134. Here's the thing: If he's a non-Catholic, he should have just NOT COME FORWARD for Communion

Someone didn't coach him correctly. As a Christian and Missionary Alliance (=conservative evangelical) member, he's probably been taught that Catholics aren't real Christians, but this also made him clueless about how to behave in a Catholic church.

I'm an Episcopalian, and we don't believe in transubstantiation, but we also know that only Catholics are supposed to receive Communion in a Catholic church. That's Church Behavior 101.

To take a secular example, it's like someone who was raised in a strict fundamentalist family and married into my mother's extended family, which is German and Latvian, and therefore appreciative of beer and wine.

This person used to accept the beer or wine and then sneak out and pour them down the sink, when it would have been perfectly OK to say "I'd rather have some pop."

That's what was ass-holish about Harper's action. He was neither here nor here

[No Elephants]

136. Please see Reply 180.

[No Elephants]

135. Amazing to me how people on this thread are all assuming the very worst about

Harper. First, that he did indeed put the host in his pocket. And, second, that he did so knowing that this would offend Catholics.

Both are very unlikely, IMO. Harper was there either because he genuinely wanted to be or because he felt he had to be. In either of those instances, it is highly unlikely that he wanted to do anything that offended anyone present.

Should he have asked a Catholic before he went if there was anything he had to know. Maybe. Maybe he meant to, but never got to it. Not as though nothing ever distracts a prime minister from doing the ideal thin.

But what about the priest? HE did know the rules of communion. He also knew that many non-Catholics are likely to show up at any funeral, let alone the funeral of a public official. What steps did he take to try to confine Communion to Catholics?

If I were a priest officiating at a funeral of a politician, I would take reasonable steps to keep non-Catholics from Communion, like a simple statement of the Catholic beief about who may receive Communion. I doubt anyone would defy it.

Having failed to do anything at all, I would certainly not then publicly seek or demand explanations from a politician who obviously made an honest mistake, excusable or not. I would probably pray for forgiveness for myself, for not taking any steps to fulfill MY duty to my own religious beliefs. I might thena also call Harper to try, privately, to advise him of the rules, so he would not make the same mistake again.

[Spazito]

157. Harper is the head of State ie the PM of Canada and, as such,...

should have been informed on the 'protocol' if he was unaware of the rites practiced by Catholics at Catholic funerals. It is NOT up to the Church officials to 'educate' the PM on protocol.

Harper's roots are from a racist, homophobic party, the Reform party, and he is due NO sympathy for this stupid faux-pas. He has well-paid staff on hand to educate him as to protocol, they, and he failed, and he has earned all the embarrassment he is receiving for his behavior, imo.

[No Elephants]

158. Maybe his staff failed him. However, a priest does have a responsiblity, both to .

administer Comunnion only to those who should get it and not to publicly humiliate someone for an honest mistake.

BTW, I don't think Harper ever pocketed the host. I started another thread with an article on that.

[Spazito]

164. I don't care if he pocketed it, ate it or used it as a frisbee...

He should have known not to take communion, it is not complicated to understand the necessary protocols related to a Catholic funeral service. It is NOT the responsibility of the priest to 'card' each person who comes forward to receive communion, it IS the responsibility of the person coming forward to know if they are 'eligible' or not, when in doubt DON'T participate, simple enough, imo.

Harper deserves the attention this is getting, imo.

[No Elephants]

168. A Catholic priest said it was ok for Harper to take communion at the funeral. And, regardless of

what Harper does or does not deserve, the priest did not handle it well, IMO.

When you elevate rites over the teachings of Christ as how we're supposed to behave to each other, and elevate judging and condemnation over charity and forgiveness, you've missed the point.

As far as a person attending a funeral having a responsiblity to know if they are eligible for communion or not, that is, IMO, a self important, if not arrogant. view. If it means that much to Catholics, it's really up to them to inform people who are not Catholic and there to attend a funeral what the deal is. Not just Harper, anyone who is there. Adults, kids, everyone. That is simply being a good host. If I have house rules and I invite strangers in, it's really up to me to tell people my rules. If I don't I really cannot condemn them for "violating" my rules.

Sometimes, you have to know that a rule exists before you even know that you don't it. At most or all other Christian churches, the church welcomes and wants you to take communion, whether or not you are a member of that denomination. Why would any Christian unfamiliar with Catholicism assume that a Cathoic Church would be horrified over the same behavior? And unless you assume that, you don't even know to investigate. And the priest is not crying out over the fact that Harper took communion, only that he may have pocketed it, which apparently, he did not do.

If Catholics think it is up to everyone else to figure out their rules before they attend a funeral in a Catholic Church, things like this are bound to happen and the responsiblity is not all on the person who makes the mistake. It's not as though Harper did anything intended to be disrespectful. To the contrary, the pastor of any other Christian Church would have been delighted that so many came forward, no matter what denominations they were.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090708/national/harper_host

[Spazito]

170. Harper is NOT Joe Blow off the street....

He is the titular head of a country and, as such, should be made aware of the simple protocols regarding attending and participating in a funeral service being held at at Catholic Church with all it's attendant rites. Harper, in not bothering to find out the simple protocols, was rude, disrespectful, arrogant and deserving of the criticism he is getting.

Whether one priest feels it was wrong while another has no problem with it is irrelevant, imo. Harper, as Prime Minister, representing Canada, as it were, at the funeral of a former, well respected former Governor General. He was not attending Mass as a private individual and it behooved him to make even the smallest effort to understand the service he was attending, he obviously could not be bothered to do even that.

[glitch]

141. He may be on a restricted diet, no starches or something.

Or maybe he was in the restroom earlier with the priest and noticed he didn't wash his hands. There could be many reasons that aren't a diss to anyone.

[JerseygirlCT]

149. In either situation, he has the option not to come forward to receive

No one frowns on someone abstaining - at any mass, you'll see many who do not receive. He really should have been better informed before attending the funeral.

[brendan120678]

151. Exactly.

It's not that unusual at my church to see people not receiving Communion.

[JerseygirlCT]

152. My father never did

It was quite the unsolved mystery for us kids. We were told simply "that's between Daddy and God."

[No Elephants]

159. Why should he opt not to go forward? You are imputing to him knowledge he very likely did not have

[progressoid]

148. Maybe he filled up on scones before hand and couldn't eat another bite.

[semillama]

153. Whoa - Am I going to be the first to link this to PZ Myers???

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/the_great_desecration.php

[Arrowhead2k1]

160. As much as I love to see Harper embroiled in controversy...

This is just STUPID.

[Vidar]

162. "Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate."

[boppers]

178. LOL, a Lehrer reference on DU?

I love this place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f72CTDe4-0

[No Elephants]

163. Looks like he may well have never pocketed the wafer, after all.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3960859

[Gwendolyn]

165. As they say in some parts of eastern Canada, "you can't know the mind of a squid."

[CreekDog]

166. Wow, this article really caught fire!!!

:wow:

[Algorem]

167. Politicians pocket bread,man.Everybody knows that,man.

[No Elephants]

169. According to an eyewitness, he didn't pocket the wafer.

[sarcasmo]

171. Saving it for a snack?

[Ilsa]

172. Maybe Harper is a vegetarian (if you believe in transubstantiation) or has

celiac disease (if it is just a wheat product). Jesus wouldn't want him getting cramps and the runs, would he?

[ProudDad]

177. Simple. He wants to build his own cloned Jesus at home (n/t)

[midnight]

180. Title of the post just cracked me up. Too funny.

What can the guy say. He was trying to be polite,and got caught up in the whole ceremony?

[krabigirl]

196. It's just a wafer. My god.

[humbled_opinion]

199. Oh My, thats like wearing angel wings to a Wican wedding n/t

[and-justice-for-all]

207. He is making Christ Chex..

It's a fucking cracker, so what...It is symbolic cannibalism for fucks sake.

And he is not even Catholic..... :eyes:

[DeSwiss]

208. ....

[Renew Deal]

211. Harper is such a goofball

:dunce: