Posted on 12/05/2013 7:48:10 AM PST by Alex Murphy
I feel no need to make a case as my Church tradition goes back to time immemorial and no one ever remembers using anything but wheat—so I am not going to sweat it. “This is what we have always done as far as we can remember so this is what we are going to continue to do” is good enough. If you are Catholic, you should not have a problem with that, and if you aren’t Catholic, you can do whatever you feel like. We understand the Catholic form of worship, in its main lines, to have been given by God. If you accept that, you follow it, but if you don’t accept it, there is no reason to follow it.
“To be exact, the bread (which is derivative of Passover matzo) can be made from any of the 5 grains five grains mentioned in the Bible as appropriate: wheat, barley, spelt, rye or oats -— the grains are all listed as OK in Exodus.
The only one with gluten is wheat, I believe.”
They ALL contain gluten in varying quantities.
For a true coeliac (as opposed to someone with gluten intolerance), even the slightest amount of gluten can trigger cramps and intestinal bleeding lasting from hours to several weeks.
Even so, capybaras would seem to violate the warm blooded proscription.
No, I am not a Catholic. I was just giving my opinion because it does not make any sense to me to deprive a number of Catholics from receiving something they consider essential for their spiritual lives! It reminds me of a day, long ago, when I was still Catholic and a priest told me I could no longer serve passing out the chalice because I was not able to finish it afterwards. I am on a medication that has very severe reactions with alcohol, but the priest insisted it was “safe” for me to drink up any left over wine. That, and denying gluten-free hosts to Catholics who suffer from coeliac disease is an example of applying blanket rules indiscriminately! I just happened to think that it was funny to think that, most likely, Jesus did not use wheat matzah at the Last Supper!!
The problem with giving someone a gluten free host is that it is literally a placebo for GOD—”this looks like the Body of Christ, hope it makes you feel good.” If they want those hosts, they can have the hosts—its just that they can’t be presented for consecration because, as best as the Church has been able to determine, they can’t actually be consecrated.
Tradition regarding wheat runs so strong, insofar as I know, that counter-arguments are of minimal value. The financial one is interesting, but given that a few days earlier one of his followers had blown an immense amount on the anointing and the cultural tendency to use the best at Passover, it does not strike me as having much weight on its own, and none when the tradition is thrown in the balance. Have you read Joachim Jeremias on the subject? I best he does have something interesting to say.
Anyone who would give the advice you note about the chalice needs to go over bits of Eucharistic Theology again. As you describe it, the situation could have been better dealt with from about three different angles.
Are you aware that the complete Body and Blood are present in both the consecrated host as well as the consecrated wine?
Someone who is allergic to wheat can received the wine only. Someone who is an alcoholic can receive the consecrated host only.
Are you telling the Catholic Church what to do? Maybe you are the new Pope?
The local priest told my grandmother she could substitute lobster for fish on Friday. I wish I could apologize to her, but that day I got up, ran out of the house, got on my horse (that was at a farm) and did not return until it got too cold that night. I understand now that I worried her half to death, but I still shudder at the idea of eating lobster on Friday!
The problem with giving someone a gluten free host is that it is literally a placebo for GOD
It would be more accurate to call it a placebo for a wheat host.
as best as the Church has been able to determine, they can’t actually be consecrated
Has been determined? I didn't know there was a test to tell if a host was consecrated or not.
Have you read Joachim Jeremias on the subject?
No, I haven't. But now that you mention it, I will!
Anyone who would give the advice you note about the chalice needs to go over bits of Eucharistic Theology again
I think I'm going to check the website for American University in Washington DC. If father Paul is still there, I might send him your suggestion.
So is mine. I was just responding to the post because I would have once pooh-poohed this wheat thing, but in an attempt to lose weight, I learned just how sick the stuff was making me feel -- as well as fat.
BTW, I hear that Stella Artois and Bud Lite are brewed without wheat. Enjoy!
If the bread turns into the literal body of Christ, why is it a problem for people with celiac? It’s not wheat anymore.
I think the wheat thing varies from person to person, but even for a daily communicant, unless one has severe problems I don’t think that the amount of gluten involved is a make or break thing—esp. since one of the problems of being completely off wheat is re-introduction. Never going completely off avoids the problem.
I’ll have to look into Stella Artois. Being in Canada, I wouldn’t even consider Bud Lite beer.
Thanks for the tip.
Your question is answered in non-technical language in post 5, and in technical language in post 16 (post 27 notes that the two are doing the same thing)
“Are you telling the Catholic Church what to do? Maybe you are the new Pope?”
Huh???? I was merely stating a well known medical fact. If you have a problem with that, take it up with your Creator, not me. It seems that you are unaware of the degenerative effects of sin.
While following the Gospel today at Mass, which in the Greek includes the word for wheat, I was struck by two things with regards to the discussion of wheat vs. barley:
(1) in His pre-Passion/Passion discourses the terms used in the analogies point in the direction of wheat being something thought of at the time—which would be more striking if it was an unusual food that was about to be consumed (John 12:24; Luke 22:31).
More importantly, my memory was jarred regarding something I had taught last spring in conjunction with John 6 after picking it up from a commentary: the first fruits of the barley harvest were offered a few days into the Passover, and until they had been offered, one did not eat from the new harvest, which points to John 6 happening during the later portion of the Passover. (I don’t have access to the commentary right now, which would refer to the relevant rabbinic texts and provide analysis because I’m on the road—if you’re interested I could follow up in about a week—but here is a link that gives the general idea http://www.ahbjewishcenter.org/harvest.htm )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.