right out of the globahst hymnal: Therncartel would be bad for free trade; werncouldn’t browbeat European farmers forrnopen markets if we have local trade barriersrnourselves; we wouldn’t be able to importrndairy products from New Zealand; itrnwould not be in the spirit of NAFTA andrnGATT; other regions would form theirrnown compacts, and—horror of horrors—rnregionalism might spread over the wholernnation. Notably, these arguments camernfrom the congressman and the universityrnextension agent, already indoctrinated.rnStill, I was undaunted. I wrote the storyrnanyway—warts and all — and a hardhittingrneditorial supporting the concept.rnUnfortunately, my editor thought myrnstory worthy of page 11 of that week’s edition,rnafter being bumped for a barn firernand a rollover accident involving an underagerndriver. Then, my publisher wasrnunhappy that I used the words “treacherousrnglobalist” and described the congressmenrnand agribusiness employees asrn”slaves.”rnI would not give up. My idea neededrnto reach beyond our 4,700 circulation tornother newspapers in the upper Midwest.rnI e-mailed the story and editorial to hundredsrnof them. Some asked to use it;rnsome asked me never to e-mail themrnagain. But most of the replies came inrnthe form of returns from addresses that nornlonger existed. Moreover, there were norntelephone calls or letters to the editorrnfrom the public—one way or the other—rnon the issue. Nothing even from the congressman.rnWliat did the silence mean? Was thernidea still sinking in, or did nobody care?rnWas it still being thought out, or laughedrnoff? As a lone reporter at a small newspaperrnin a town most have never heard of—rnand not really a recognized expert on thernsubject—I should have realized that it’srntoo much to think I had the plan to saverncivilization as we know it, and that itrnwould work, if only other people took mernseriously. I had my idea, and they gave itrna hearing. In a world full of ideas, that’srnprobably the best I could do. The end resultrncan only be judged in the distant future.rnWill my home and other rural areasrnof the Upper Midwest still have farmsrndotting their landscape, or tract housing?rnThat will be the clincher.rnThere are signs of hope. Wisconsin’srnDairy 2020 board, which provides staterngrants to struggling dairy operations, gavern$800,000 of taxpayer money to five investorsrnfrom New Mexico to start a 2,000-rnherd factory farm in Evansville, which isrnlocated in Rock County along the Illinoisrnborder. But the project was quashed byrnlocal residents. Closer to home, residentsrnin nearby Martell Township voted tornkeep out any large dairy operation. Theyrnare now wrestling with the Pierce Countyrnboard to keep their resolution intact.rnWhile neither case may have had anythingrnto do with the proposed cartel, theyrnboth have something to do with preservingrna way of life, which was my point allrnalong.rnSean Scallon is a reporter who lives inrnEast Ellsworth, Wisconsin.rnLetter FromrnInner Israelrnby Jacob NeusnerrnGift of F i n e s t . . . Rice?rnAs a rabbi once accused of being “too softrnon the Catholic Church”—liking Catholicismrntoo much to make that particularrnLutheran comfortable — I read with specialrnsensitivity the report on a young girlrnand her family who left the CatholicrnChurch for a liturgical reason, of allrnthings.rnAccording to the Associated Press, thernyoung girl suffers from celiac disease,rnwhich causes her to get sick from eatingrngluten, a protein in wheat and otherrngrains. She can safely eat rice. ButrnChurch law requires the Host to be madernof wheat, so the family left the Churchrnand went Methodist “where the rules onrncommunion are more flexible becausernMethodists believe the bread and winernare symbolic, not the actual transubstantiatedrnbody and blood of Jesus.” That’srnhow the AP reported the case.rnThe Church’s position is explained byrna spokesman for the Boston archdiocesernin this language: “Bread is central to thernEucharist because of the imagery ofrnScripture, because of the prayers of thernChristian community going back thousandsrnof years.” The Vatican takes thernmatter seriously enough that, in 1994, itrnissued rules for all bishops to follow.rnAmong them: “Special hosts (which dornnot contain gluten) are invalid matter forrnthe celebration of the Eucharist.” And,rnthe AP continued, citing the parish priestrninvolved in the case,rn”I think part of the problem is wernare so accustomed to all these littlernround, pre-cut hosts we’ve lost anyrnreal sense we’re taking part in onernloaf,” says the Rev. Austin Fleming,rnpastor of Our Lady of ChristianrnFlelp Church in Concord. “Wernmany are sharing one bread andrnbecoming one with Christ. Werncan’t make different flavors for differentrnfolks and maintain that theologicalrnreality.”rnFar be it from a rabbi to intervene inrnCatholic canon law and liturgy, but therernis another explanation to consider. First,rnso the Church has always maintained,rnthe Eucharist derives from the Last Supper,rnand the Last Supper corresponds to arnPassover Seder. Now, as a matter of fact,rnmatzah (the unleavened bread of thernPassover Seder) fcan be prepared onlyrnfrom wheat or kindred grains of the samernclassification. To fulfill one’s obligationrnto eat unleavened bread, the bread mustrnbe capable of leavening but not leavened,rnso Mishnah-tractate Pesahim 2:5: “Thesernare types of grains through bread madernfrom which a person fulfills his obligationrnto eat unleavened bread on Passover:rn(1) wheat, (2) barley, (3) spelt, (4) rye,rnand (5) oats.” Wliat the five grains havernin common is that all ferment.rnThat doesn’t tell the whole story. Forrnwhat other activity is a grain that fermentsrnrequired? The dough offering, takenrnfrom dough prepared from the same fivernspecies of grain, must be given while therndough is being prepared; if the dough isrnmade from other species, however, arndough offering is not separated from therndough —it is exempt. Wliat about rice?rnIt is explicitly excluded, according tornMishnah-tractate Hallah 1:4: “The followingrnare exempt from dough-offering:rnrice, sorghum, poppy, sesame, andrnpulse.” Wliat these have in common isrnobvious: They do not respond to the enzymesrnthat engender life in the mixturernof water and the flour of wheat, barley,rnspelt, oats, or rye. To this, Hallah 3:7rnadds.rnOne who makes dough from a mixrrnture of wheat flour and rice flour—rnif. .. the dough has the taste of cerealrnwheat, it is subject to doughrnoffering. And a person fulfills hisrnobligation to eat unleavened breadrnAUGUST 2001/35rnrnrn