Vatican rules no gluten free bread in Eucharist

[Del]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

That is really the heart of it. And a worthy objection, in my opinion.

If this were some new rule, I would also be appalled.

But the essence here is to prevent abuses. The Church has used grape wine and wheat flour since the time of the Apostles, for deeply biblical reasons.

All we are saying is that commercial "gluten-free" products are not assured of keeping biblical purity. Let's make sure that we stay with what we were given from the Apostles as we strive to accommodate those with modern allergy problems.

This letter offers guidance toward how we can do both -- preserve the integrity of the gospel sacraments and the health of believers. It is pastoral care when we need it, which is why Jesus gave us a Church.

[hugodrax]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

Pretty damned obvious, wouldn't you say? But my hand is always out to you, Fred. Hope you know that.

[Thunktank]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

Shall we also cut to the chase that Catholics (this one anyway) takes the Eucharist seriously enough to entrust it to great God ordained authority?

It's not a big deal, Fred. It's simply a way to guard the Tradition handed down to the church from the Apostles. It wasn't a rule made in opposition to anyone or to be insensitive to anyone.

[DepartedLight]

My opinion?

1. The RCC is tone deaf to persons who may be harmed by consuming either of the elements. They're more interested in preserving tradition than the physical health of the flock. I imagine the issue is seen as one of the slippery slope type; If they move on this small issue, the next ting you know they'll be ordaining lesbian priestesses. This church has never minded excluding certain parts of the population from their sacraments based on conditions which are beyond the individuals control.

2. Why does it matter? If transubstantiation is true, then bread could be made of sawdust and Our Lord could surely turn it in to flesh as easy as He does wheat bread.

3. I don't know that anyone is so intolerant of gluten that even a tiny bit of wheat bread will cause harm. But I'm not a doctor. And I still think it's a good thing that the church appears to be concerned with the physical well being of the congregants. It's like banning wheel chair ramps because the church buildings have traditionally had steps leading to the front door. (And no, I'm not equating walking up the steps with a sacrament. I'm saying that celiac could be accommodated as easily as visible illness' and infirmities are.)

My 2nd x-wife was. When we were doing the Roman Catholic thing together it presented issues. One Sunday as we usually did, she was behind me in line. When I received the Host, she would just followed me to the cup. The Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister who was female, snidely asked her if she had forgotten a step. And there I was with Eucharist on my breath and seething rage in my heart.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

QFT.

"We don't need no stinkin' Pope. And those that need a stinkin' Pope are sheeple who must be liberated."

[Del]

Several years ago, we had a YOUTH 2000 retreat led by some visiting Franciscan Friars of the Renewal. Two of the friars were gluten-intolerant, one of them profoundly so.

They brought their own supply of low-gluten hosts. Preparing for Mass, the priests set up the altar with the special host ready.

At the time, gluten-free hosts were crumbly, nasty-looking bits which seemed like they might fall apart at the slightest touch. The Sacristan discarded the "defective" host and replaced it with a regular one, not knowing that it was special. Gluten intolerance awareness was still a new thing at the time.

This caused a bit of crisis, as Mass started for several hundred teens while someone had to rush back to the residence to get another gluten-free host before the Offertory.

[Del]

My opinion?

1. The RCC is tone deaf to persons who may be harmed by consuming either of the elements. They're more interested in preserving tradition than the physical health of the flock. I imagine the issue is seen as one of the slippery slope type; If they move on this small issue, the next ting you know they'll be ordaining lesbian priestesses. This church has never minded excluding certain parts of the population from their sacraments based on conditions which are beyond the individuals control.

2. Why does it matter? If transubstantiation is true, then bread could be made of sawdust and Our Lord could surely turn it in to flesh as easy as He does wheat bread.

3. I don't know that anyone is so intolerant of gluten that even a tiny bit of wheat bread will cause harm. But I'm not a doctor. And I still think it's a good thing that the church appears to be concerned with the physical well being of the congregants. It's like banning wheel chair ramps because the church buildings have traditionally had steps leading to the front door. (And no, I'm not equating walking up the steps with a sacrament. I'm saying that celiac could be accommodated as easily as visible illness' and infirmities are.)

My 2nd x-wife was. When we were doing the Roman Catholic thing together it presented issues. One Sunday as we usually did, she was behind me in line. When I received the Host, she would just followed me to the cup. The Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister who was female, snidely asked her if she had forgotten a step. And there I was with Eucharist on my breath and seething rage in my heart.

There is a simple solution to this:

Abolish "extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion" -- except when they are truly needed, which isn't very often.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

And there I was with Eucharist on my breath and seething rage in my heart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCyg45TJEHY

[Thunktank]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

[hugodrax]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

[Thunktank]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

No one would have gone nuts if Jesus would have used gluten free bread.

[Del]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

No one would have gone nuts if Jesus would have used gluten free bread.

Jesus should have just taken orders.... "Who wants matzoh? Who wants panini? Anyone want a rice cake?"

We could have avoided the Great Schism, the Reformation, and everything!

[infidel]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

No one would have gone nuts if Jesus would have used gluten free bread.

Or if the bread actually changed into something other than bread *mic drop*

[Del]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

No one would have gone nuts if Jesus would have used gluten free bread.

Or if the bread actually changed into something other than bread *mic drop*

Yeah.... Like He did at Cana. Or when He multiplied the loaves and fed the 5000.

This notion that He changes bread into His living flesh and then multiplies this throughout the world is just too hard to hear.... It still looks like bread that we bought from the Sisters at the monastery. Does He think we are stupid? Does He think He is God or something? Jeez!....

[FredS]

. . . And there I was with Eucharist on my breath and seething rage in my heart.

This reminds me of the time Colton admitted that sometimes he finds it difficult to make it from the confession of sin immediately to the meal without sinning. I think of that comment often. This is one reason I sit towards the front of the sanctuary. If I had to wait five minutes in line behind an attractive lady in a slightly tight blouse, or an adulterous husband, or a bratty teen, I'd have to stop the whole deal when I got to the bread to make a new confession of my sinful thoughts.

Also, I'm sorry if I offended when I suggested that transubstantiation was like some sort of parlor trick that could just as easily be done with sawdust as with wheat bread. Though I don't accept your notion of the event, I absolutely believe in the Real Presence in some mystical way that I may not be able to understand.

[tuttle]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

That is really the heart of it. And a worthy objection, in my opinion.

If this were some new rule, I would also be appalled.

But the essence here is to prevent abuses. The Church has used grape wine and wheat flour since the time of the Apostles, for deeply biblical reasons.

All we are saying is that commercial "gluten-free" products are not assured of keeping biblical purity. Let's make sure that we stay with what we were given from the Apostles as we strive to accommodate those with modern allergy problems.

This letter offers guidance toward how we can do both -- preserve the integrity of the gospel sacraments and the health of believers. It is pastoral care when we need it, which is why Jesus gave us a Church.

To be honest, I brought this up, not because I'm cringing at Papal Authority, but because (aside from it being a relevant topic both in the news, and something our church does) I thought it was 1) oddly exclusionary and 2) confusing.

1) I find it odd that they'd nix gluten free, but still be cool with grape juice in special cases. Why is it cool to allow one man's exception to the norm and exclude the other? I guess it seems somewhat arbitrary once non-alcoholic juice and GMOs are involved. Which leads to:

2) I find it confusing that the argument being made for this is that the wheat must be pure. How is genetically modified wheat "pure"?

I guess there could be a third reason, and that is slightly theological. I'm trying to imagine what Paul would be thinking, especially in light of such sayings as, "So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together." I know there are good reasons for people to be excluded from the Supper, I just thought this was an odd reason for excluding certain people from partaking the bread.

[hugodrax]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

That is really the heart of it. And a worthy objection, in my opinion.

If this were some new rule, I would also be appalled.

But the essence here is to prevent abuses. The Church has used grape wine and wheat flour since the time of the Apostles, for deeply biblical reasons.

All we are saying is that commercial "gluten-free" products are not assured of keeping biblical purity. Let's make sure that we stay with what we were given from the Apostles as we strive to accommodate those with modern allergy problems.

This letter offers guidance toward how we can do both -- preserve the integrity of the gospel sacraments and the health of believers. It is pastoral care when we need it, which is why Jesus gave us a Church.

To be honest, I brought this up, not because I'm cringing at Papal Authority, but because (aside from it being a relevant topic both in the news, and something our church does) I thought it was 1) oddly exclusionary and 2) confusing.

1) I find it odd that they'd nix gluten free, but still be cool with grape juice in special cases. Why is it cool to allow one man's exception to the norm and exclude the other? I guess it seems somewhat arbitrary once non-alcoholic juice and GMOs are involved. Which leads to:

2) I find it confusing that the argument being made for this is that the wheat must be pure. How is genetically modified wheat "pure"?

I guess there could be a third reason, and that is slightly theological. I'm trying to imagine what Paul would be thinking, especially in light of such sayings as, "So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together." I know there are good reasons for people to be excluded from the Supper, I just thought this was an odd reason for excluding certain people from partaking the bread.

And what conclusion have you already come to, my friend?

[Del]

Shall we just cut to the chase and admit that Protestants (this one anyway) cringe at this level of Papal Authority?

That is really the heart of it. And a worthy objection, in my opinion.

If this were some new rule, I would also be appalled.

But the essence here is to prevent abuses. The Church has used grape wine and wheat flour since the time of the Apostles, for deeply biblical reasons.

All we are saying is that commercial "gluten-free" products are not assured of keeping biblical purity. Let's make sure that we stay with what we were given from the Apostles as we strive to accommodate those with modern allergy problems.

This letter offers guidance toward how we can do both -- preserve the integrity of the gospel sacraments and the health of believers. It is pastoral care when we need it, which is why Jesus gave us a Church.

To be honest, I brought this up, not because I'm cringing at Papal Authority, but because (aside from it being a relevant topic both in the news, and something our church does) I thought it was 1) oddly exclusionary and 2) confusing.

1) I find it odd that they'd nix gluten free, but still be cool with grape juice in special cases. Why is it cool to allow one man's exception to the norm and exclude the other? I guess it seems somewhat arbitrary once non-alcoholic juice and GMOs are involved. Which leads to:

2) I find it confusing that the argument being made for this is that the wheat must be pure. How is genetically modified wheat "pure"?

I guess there could be a third reason, and that is slightly theological. I'm trying to imagine what Paul would be thinking, especially in light of such sayings as, "So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together." I know there are good reasons for people to be excluded from the Supper, I just thought this was an odd reason for excluding certain people from partaking the bread.

We tend to think scientifically, which causes us to wonder whether hybrid seed or GMO manipulation has changed wheat significantly from the heirloom strains of 200 years ago. How does an agricultural biologist see the wheat?

The Church thinks philosophically. Does it have the nature of wheat? Or the nature of not-wheat? In other words, how does God see the wheat?

And then there is the notion of "exclusion." Catholics talk about "making a spiritual communion," when one is not physically able to do so. Or even when one is not "properly disposed" to receive the Sacrament.

In the context of St. Paul's comments, he was not talking about receiving Christ in the Eucharist. He was talking about taking a meal together, in fellowship. The problem in Corinth is that the potluck dinner was confused with the Eucharistic celebration, and St. Paul set that right for us the next time he visited Corinth.

If you ever have an opportunity to worship with an Orthodox community, be very eager to accept the invitation! They will show you how the reverence of receiving Christ in ancient worship is followed by the fellowship of sharing a meal. Clearly separate, but intimately attached. This is what St. Paul was speaking of.

And perhaps some of the best ethnic home cooking you will ever experience.

[Thunktank]

If Jesus was Chinese, would he have instituted a bowl of rice instead of bread? Or what if he visited the native Americans? Would he have used Maize? Or are these youth room questions?

[infidel]

So we shut down purgatory, talk far less about politics and now return to Protestant vs Catholic again. Full circle.

Mary save us!

That happens every five minutes. It's practically required. This one was over before anyone went nuts.

No one would have gone nuts if Jesus would have used gluten free bread.

Or if the bread actually changed into something other than bread *mic drop*

Yeah.... Like He did at Cana. Or when He multiplied the loaves and fed the 5000.

This notion that He changes bread into His living flesh and then multiplies this throughout the world is just too hard to hear.... It still looks like bread that we bought from the Sisters at the monastery. Does He think we are stupid? Does He think He is God or something? Jeez!....

Except neither of those miracles are really analogous