Crackers for Jesus
The way Catholics pursued a young student for "kidnapping" a communion wafer
By Paula Kirby Published 04 September 2008Catholics in the United States are in shock. In outpourings of distress, they are declaring themselves the victims of a "vile" act and hate crime, and are demanding redress for their sufferings. What has occasioned all this? One Sunday this summer, Webster Cook, a student at the University of Central Florida, attended Mass in the students' union and, instead of swallowing the communion wafer, made off with it.
Cook had tried to return to his seat with the wafer in his hand so he could, he claimed, "show it to a friend, who was curious about the Catholic faith". When a female church official attempted to wrest it off him, Cook shook off his assailant and hotfooted it out of the door. He returned to his dorm with the host and refused to return it until he had received an apology from the Church for his rough treatment at the hands of the church member.
It wasn't long before the hate mail started, followed by death threats. These can perhaps be explained away as the expected reaction of the Christian lunatic fringe, but the local Catholic diocese itself was only a little more measured. Here is the response of Father Miguel Gonzalez, a priest with the diocese: "It is hurtful. Imagine if they kidnapped somebody and you made a plea for that individual to please return that loved one to the family. If anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it."
According to Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, it was even worse than that. Accusing Cook of holding the wafer "hostage", he went on: "It is hard to think of anything more vile than to intentionally desecrate the Body of Christ."
Clearly not wanting to take any chances, the campus Catholic ministry despatched a nun to stand guard over the Eucharist at future Masses. The university, perhaps doubting the power of a nun, took the step of sending in armed police officers. The ministry also called for Cook's expulsion from the university, and filed charges against his friend, whose offence was to have been present at the time of the incident.
Father Gonzalez acknowledged, though, that the church also needed to be absolved of sin - not for failing to turn the other cheek, nor for the threats of violence made in its name, but for having failed to protect the wafer. "We have to make acts of reparation," he said. "The whole community is going to turn to prayer. We'll ask the Lord for pardon, forgiveness, peace."
The story was taken up by P Z Myers, a biology professor at the University of Minnesota, on his blogsite (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula). Myers positively revelled in the sheer lunacy of the unfolding events, and responded to the priest's call to repentance with the words: "Get some perspective, man. IT'S A CRACKER."
In a rerun of the response to Cook's actions, first came the hate mail, next the death threats, and then the call for Myers to be dismissed from his post. He wrote on his blog: "I even have one email that says I should be fired, that the author would like to kill me, and that I only criticise because Catholics are so gentle and kind."
Happily, the University of Central Florida and the University of Minnesota have taken a saner view of the affair and decided - with an intimidated Cook now having returned the wafer - to take no action against the three men.
It is not necessary to condone Cook's behaviour to feel queasy at the sight of a church overreacting and indulging in bullying and, yes, hatemongering. Hypocrisy, too. Never mind the desecration of "the Body of Christ"; for far too many years, priests in positions of power and influence desecrated the bodies of young boys, and for far too many years these acts were hushed up because they were deemed to be "a Church matter". So, what a contrast when the abuse is perceived as being directed against the Church, rather than perpetrated by it.
Yet still the Church demands the right to be regarded as the moral compass of an increasingly secular world. Webster Cook's story shows the case to be thin. Wafer-thin, you could say.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists


7 comments
Paula Kirby goes for the jugular and counterposes abuse of a host by some deranged or juvenile 'scholar' with the abuses within the Catholic Church. Wow, we didn't see that punchline coming! Maybe Paula can next take up the cause of 'curious' Muslims who might find themeslves on the wrong side of clerical oppression? Or maybe not.
Having grown up in a devote Catholic family, of course I fulfilled all my religious obligations, which included serving as an Alter Boy. I wonder if people only knew how many times communion wafers were dropped on the floor, only to still given to parishioners during communion. Wouldn't this be a mortal sin and a much greater vile desecration "the Body of Christ", then what Webster Cook did, I guess not. I had to laugh at the lengths in which they pursued this poor young man for keeping "his" communion wafer, instead of ingesting it on the spot. Give me a break, hate mail and death threats over a vanilla wafer. God knows what they'd do if he was thirsty and sipped a few drops of Holy Water, crucify him in front of the student union perhaps?
Religious zealots have reached well beyond the pinnacle of hypocrisy. We've seen decades of child molestation covered up, Priests caught soliciting male/female prostitutes and lets not forget the far right religious leaders sex and drug scandals. Those who claim to be the keepers of moral high ground, are wallowing in the mud. If we let those who are free of sin to cast the first stone, they wouldn't even be allowed to throw a pebble.
"crackers" indeed. While catholics have a genuine, deeply-held etc etc belief that the wafer is, in actual substance and not as a symbol, the body of their Lord Jesus Christ, british journalists are happy to mock this genuine, deeply-held etc etc belief, even using the cruel pun on 'crackers'.
Quite right too. No point in referring to it as 'the body of Christ' when they don't believe it is. Though how much is displaced frustration from years of having to refer to Muhammad as "the Prophet Muhammad", his book as "revealed" and "holy", etc etc?
Wow. And yet another reason I thank god I'm an atheist.
The Catholic doctrine of literal trans-substantiation is what separates it from the Anglican (protestant) doctrine of symbolic trans-substantiation.
Assuming that this article reasonably states the actual case, and that its facts can be proved, the body of Christ is not the appropriate vehicle through which to turn the Eucharist into a farce. As a sacrament, the Host is blessed by the ordained celebrant and there is a procedure within which surplus communion wafers that have been blessed are handled by the ordained celebrant to whom any sacrament not actually consumed should be returned by a worshipper.
"..show it to a friend, who was curious about the Catholic faith.."
I am surprised that, when a devout worshipper was asked about the Eucharist and the nature and significance of the sacraments, the response was not to refer the enquirer to the Deacon, Curate or Priest.. Not least, the taking of Holy Communion in unrepented sin, is clearly identified as a route to damnation in the articles of religion.
It seems clear that the parishioner who departed from the altar rail with the wafer before it was consumed was not adequately prepared for communion. Otherwise, mischief must have been the aim. Nonetheless the reported response of the Church is extreme and will do nothing to gain converts.
I am now with Richard Dawkins as it seems clear that all denominations of the Christian Church have lost the authority of moral leadership as science eats away at their 'beliefs'. They are taking refuge in increasingly bitter ideological trench warfare of which this case is only one example.
In response to the recent Channel 4 Series presented by Richard Dawkins about Darwin's Theory of Evolution, the Archbishop of Canterbury was surprisingly tongue-tied in upholding even the existence of God, never mind creation and the virgin birth. He tried to adopt some weasel-worded spin to reconcile Science to Christianity. He failed and left no basis on which to support his ministry.
I wonder if this young man didn't go with the intention of causing all this upset.
If he only went to the altar out of curiosity, isn't he guilty of showing deep disrespect not only for the host, but also for the church and the parishioners.
Why was it necessary to go through this performance which I am sure was well planned and used to give him maximum publicity.
Wouldn't a reasonable person have gone to the priest and expressed their interest and curiosity at a more appropriate time.
I am sure the priest would have been happy to show him the host before it is consecrated. He would have also had the chance to ask any questions he wanted answered.
He knew exactly what he was doing. It was a planned and calculated act of disrespect, timed to give maximum offence.
i also find it offensive that if the church is attacked at any time, it is now felt to be permissable to bring up the actions of some priests in the past as a defence and a validation.
Atheists tend to be devoid of reason. If you actually listen to their argument, they are laughable. I have tried to see many time if Atheists can think clearly. Unfortunately, they cant. On Richard Dawkins forum, they could not have a civilised and calm reasoned intellectual debate. They first tried to gag people, and banned others, including myself. They seem to fear a logical argument. It panics them. Some debates at: omrow.blogspot.com. Cheers. UMIST.