Catholic Church invalidates eight-year-old's First Communion because the celiac sprue disease sufferer ate a wheat-free host. Article found here:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/104-08122004-346938.html

-- Jacob R. (jacobrainey@hotmail.com), August 13, 2004

Answers

The Church did not "invalidate" the child's first communion. There is no possible way to "invalidate" a validly received Eucharist. What the child received was NOT the Eucharist, therefore she DIDN'T make her first Holy Communion, therefore there was nothing to "invalidate". All she ate was a rice wafer, which is invalid matter and cannot possibly be consecrated.

Hopefully the priest responsible for this sacrilege and the needless additional suffering caused to this family will be disciplined.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 13, 2004.

It's too bad they didn't receive the Precious Blood, then they'd be o.k.

Frank

I agree with Paul, you can't take away what never was.

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), August 13, 2004.

Both species of Holy Communion (Bread and Wine) are in and of themselves the Eucharist.

Wine should have been offered and taken.

Though, it is very hard for me to fault a priest who was trying to pastorally care for the 8 year old.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), August 13, 2004.

I see nothing pastoral about giving a child a fake Holy Communion and causing her family the anguish that is the obvious and inevitable result of such an act. If he was a priest he should have known the facts. If he chose to ignore the truth and lie to this child's family, then I have no problem at all faulting him, because he was at fault.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 13, 2004.

I don't understand why the priest was willing to find a wheat free host, but couldn't get the unalcoholic wine which is much easier to find. Dispensations are regularly given in the case that children who cannot recieve the regular host and cannot ingest alcohol may recieve the unalcoholic wine.

What was that priest thinking?

-- Brian (Brian@Brian.com), August 15, 2004.

These days, there are priests who don't even believe in the Real Presence or in Transubstantiation; they view the Eucharist as merely a symbol, not as the actual Body of Christ.

So, if that's the way they think, why wouldn't they figure that rice is equally acceptable as a symbol? (of wheat or of the Body)

I'm not saying that this is the case here, I'm just offering it as a possible explanation.

-- JJ (nospam@nospam.com), August 16, 2004.

Contrary to the reporter’s statement, “church doctrine, which holds that communion wafers must have least some unleavened wheat”, the wafers must consist ONLY of unleavened wheat flour and water. The article also gives the false impression that even a tiny amount of wheat gluten will kill a person with coeliac disease. Most of them had been eating wheat products for many years before being diagnosed. A very small amount of wheat gluten (as in a small particle of normal unleavened bread) would have little or no ill effect. Coeliac patients could ask to be given only a very small piece of a communion host. No matter how small the particle, it is still the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus which is received.

There have been suggestions the Church should allow, for cultural reasons, rice instead of wheat as the grain for the communion bread in countries such as Japan, where rice has an almost religious significance as the basic food of the people. But of course this is only on the level of theological theory, and no priest has a right to anticipate any such practice being legalized.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), August 16, 2004.

The priest did make a mistake.

What I hate to hear is people bad-mouthing priests.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), August 17, 2004.

O ye of little faith...

John 6:32-35 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world." Then they said to Him, "Lord, always give us this bread." Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst."

So much for transsubstantiation.

-- M Burke (micahnshaina@yahoo.com), August 17, 2004.

Why stop there? Why withhold part of the Word of God? Let me finish it for you ...

... "I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh. Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat? So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him."

There! Now we know what Jesus REALLY had to say on the subject. You see, Catholics don't pick and choose scriptures to try to create an illusion of support for our beliefs. Catholics don't accept a belief unless it is in full accord with EVERY passage of scripture.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 17, 2004.

Steve wrote:

"The article also gives the false impression that even a tiny amount of wheat gluten will kill a person with coeliac disease. Most of them had been eating wheat products for many years before being diagnosed. A very small amount of wheat gluten (as in a small particle of normal unleavened bread) would have little or no ill effect. Coeliac patients could ask to be given only a very small piece of a communion host."

Yes, and people breath in pollution every day. No, it does not kill them, but over time they can develop serious health effects from it.

No Steve, it may not kill her, but it could do serious damage. Numerous studies have shown that even the smallest amount of gluten takes up to a year to get through the human body. Multiply your small piece of Communion by 52 weeks (or more if she went to Daily Mass).

And we are not talking about just celiacs. May daughter is not a celiac - she is autistic, an affliction that now affect 1 in every 250 children in the US. Again, numerous studies have shown that an autistic child's ability to function improves dramatically when gluten is removed from their system. We stopped giving our daughter gluten products about 18 months ago - about six months ago, her language skills improved dramatically as did her behavior. Coincidence? I think not.

The answer may be to just partake of the wine, but does not a piece of the host have to be present in the wine?

My daughter will be eligible for Communion in two years. I hope this is resolved by then for her health.

Pax et Bonum.

Thomas

-- Thomas (psalm23@catholic.org), August 27, 2004.

A piece of the host must be added to the consecrated wine in the chalice. But additional containers of wine may be on the altar, as is often the case at masses where large numbers of people will be receiving under both species. These are consecrated at the same moment as the wine in the chalice, and a piece of the host is not added to these containers. So, if the minute amount of gluten that might dissolve into several ounces of wine from one small particle of the host is still a problem (I can't imagine that it would be) the priest could set aside a small portion of wine before the consecration, which could remain free of contact with the host. It takes some special consideration, but we give special consideration to people with other special needs. This should be no different.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 27, 2004.

Paul,

You would be surprised at how much damage a little bit of gluten could do to someone, especially if repeatedly taken given that it takes so long to get through the human body.

That being said, you are the first person that has mentioned the extra chalices that have no host. Thank you. I knew there was a way.

Pax et Bonum

Thomas

-- Thomas (psalm23@catholic.org), August 27, 2004.

An option for those with Celiac Disease:

Benedictine nuns discover way to produce low-gluten Communion hosts

"Gluten content: .01 percent. Safe enough, according to Fasano and other medical experts, for consumption by almost all celiac suffers."

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), August 27, 2004.

So, using Catholic logic, since "I am the bread..." means bread literally turns in to Christ's flesh, "I am the vine" must mean that Jesus is really a plant. What was that about Catholics don't "accept a belief unless it is in full accord with EVERY passage of scripture"? Remember, Christ tells us exactly what He's talking about: 35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst."

Christ doesn't initiate the Eucharist here, in fact, it is many days prior to that event. Therefore, to connecting these two things regardless of the lack of context, and in opposition to the Divine context Christ gives us in v35 is simply to engage in eisegesis.

One partakes of Christ's flesh by coming to Him and drinks His blood by believing in Him, just as Christ Himself says in v35.

-- Micah (micahnshaina@yahoo.com), August 27, 2004.

"I am the vine" is obviously an analogy because it provides an immediate basis for comparison, which is the first requirement of an analogical example. For a good analogy to work, there must be an obvious answer to the statement "A (the analogy) is like B (the reality) BECAUSE? ...". Jesus is like a vine and we are like branches BECAUSE? ... the branches derive life from the vine, and cannot sustain their own life unless they remain connected to the source of life. Beautiful analogy!

In stark contrast, the statement "this is My Body" cannot be an analogy or metaphore. For it to work there would have to be an obvious answer to ... "a piece of bread is like a human body BECAUSE? ...". Maybe you see a logical basis for comparison there but I sure don't. Jesus was a master of analogy. All of His parables are complex and beautiful analogies. But if He was attempting an analogy here, He really missed the target.

When Jesus preached about eating His flesh and drinking His blood, everyone who was listening to Him recognized that He was speaking literally. Otherwise, why would they have murmured among themselves, saying "how can this man give us His flesh to eat and His blood to drink?" If they thought He was merely speaking symbolically, why would they find it necessary to "leave Him and follow Him no more"? And most telling of all, if this crowd of people were walking away from eternal life over a simple misunderstanding, because they thought He was speaking literally when He wasn't, why didn't Jesus just explain His real meaning instead of sitting there and letting them all walk away?

There was no doubt in the mind of anyone present that Jesus was speaking literally about eating His flesh and drinking His blood. Once this fact became obvious to all, a division occurred between those who had sufficient faith to accept what Jesus said on the authority of Him Who said it, even though they did not fully understand it, vs. those who lacked the faith to do so. The same thing continues to happen today. Jesus says "My flesh is true food; My blood is true drink". You say "sorry Jesus, you may be God, but you got it wrong. Your flesh is only symbolic food, your blood only symbolic drink." Now, who do you suppose I am going to believe? You? Or God?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 27, 2004.

"Gluten-Free Living endorses nuns' low-gluten Communion hosts

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- A magazine devoted to people with celiac disease has endorsed a low-gluten Communion host made by Catholic nuns in Missouri as "perfectly safe" for celiac sufferers. The quarterly magazine, Gluten-Free Living, came out shortly before a public controversy emerged over a New Jersey mother's fight to change the Catholic rules for such hosts. The church requires bread made from wheat, containing at least some gluten, for the celebration of the Eucharist. Gluten is a protein in wheat, rye, barley and oats that binds the baked bread. In people who have the genetic disorder known as celiac disease or celiac sprue, gluten causes an immune reaction that can lead to severe damage of the intestinal lining and a number of other health problems ranging from chronic diarrhea and anemia to osteoporosis. In the magazine, a nun- pharmacist wrote that she analyzed the low-gluten hosts produced by the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration in Clyde, Mo. Her conclusion: "On average, a whole host could contain no more than 37 micrograms of gluten.""

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 01, 2004.

Wheat and grapes are fine if that is what you have. But, say you have a major blight, as I mentioned before, that destroys everything. Or let's move 'way into the future, and we're on a planet that just won't support those plants, and the ship's supply runs out. What do you do?

Bread is a universal concept. The "staff of life", I think it has been called. What it is made of or how it is made shouldn't even be the issue. I don't know if all cultures have fermented beverages (I don't drink alcohol, so am not that familiar with wines, etc.), unless you count the "hooch" from sourdough starter. You don't grow grapes everywhere, even on this planet. Bread, on the other hand, can be and has been made from many foods, depending on what is available.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), September 01, 2004.

Suppose you had some friends over for the Super Bowl and you ordered a few pizzas. When they were delivered they were a strange yellow color. You asked the delivery person to explain, and he said ...

"Well, we ran out of tomato sauce so we used apple sauce instead. Tomato sauce is fine if that is what you have, but after all, sauce is a universal concept. It can be and has been made from many foods, depending on what is available. What it is made of or how it is made shouldn't even be the issue. Do you have a problem with this?"

I don't know about you, but my reply would be "yes, I have one very basic problem with this ... IT ISN'T PIZZA!". Because it does not meet the minimum requirements for pizza. It is not what is defined as pizza. It is something entirely different.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), September 01, 2004.

You've never had a sliced fruit pizza with cream cheese and a sugar-cookie crust? You do need to get out more, Paul. Or lasagne made with thin slices of zucchini instead of noodles? Not to mention lo-carb pizzas that have NO crust, simply some cheese browned in a pan 'til it's crispy, then toppings added. Have you ever thrown your crust on the BBQ grill to prepare it for pizza, instead of using the traditional oven? Thin crust or deep-dish pizza crust? I think tuna fish on pizza is eeeewwwww, but they fix it that way in Amsterdam.

As to the Eucharist, I don't know, could they have pulverized the wafers (pre-consecrated) in a food processor to crumbs, then calculated a very small portion (say a level 1/32 of a teaspoonful) that would not cause a reaction, but would still satisfy the requirement?

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), September 01, 2004.

See, now you've made me hungry. An applesauce, cheese, and sausage pizza. Sounds good to me, lol.

And would you still eat your yellow pizza once you found out they were yellow tomatoes (the little pear-type ones) and not red?

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), September 01, 2004.

Yes. And I will still receive Holy Communion if the hosts are brown (whole wheat) instead of white. :-) The color isn't really the issue. The substance is.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), September 01, 2004.

GT,

Or lasagne made with thin slices of zucchini instead of noodles? Not to mention lo-carb pizzas that have NO crust, simply some cheese browned in a pan 'til it's crispy, then toppings added.

NO, I've never eaten either of these, and God willing, I never will. Philadelphians make the world's best pizza and strombolis btw 8-) ,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), September 01, 2004.

Not to mention cheesesteaks and hoagies. I must have tried every single non-philly "cheesesteak" out there trying to find the real thing, but once you are out of Philly, don't bother. The skill just doesn't exist.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), September 01, 2004.

Has the Church ever made the argument that once the bread and wine are consecrated, that one can't possibly be made ill by them? I know the argument about the alcohol in the wine in effect "sterilizing" the chalice, as well as the practice of wiping and turning. But I have always felt that since it is no longer bread and wine, it is something else altogether and therefore the allergy argument would not apply....

Well, Frank, I am a big fan of thin crust pizza--if they made pizza-flavored tortillas, that would work for me. I have never had an authentic Philly cheesesteak.

And I love clotted cream, which you can't buy in the states, except in these $$$$ dinky little jars. However, I have made a very acceptable substitute by using organic real cream (no thickeners like carragheenan) and just letting it sit past its expiration date by a couple of months unopened in its original container in the fridge. It thickens up quite nicely--as thick as good quality sour cream.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), September 01, 2004.

"Has the Church ever made the argument that once the bread and wine are consecrated, that one can't possibly be made ill by them?"

A: No. The change which occurs, while real, is spiritual in nature. Physically the matter remains exactly the same. People with celiac disease should not eat the flesh, because it still has the physical and chemical characteristics of bread. Persons who suffer from alcoholism should not drink the blood, because it still has the physical and chemical characteristics of wine. And germs that are present can still be transmitted, just as they can be by any other form of food or drink.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), September 01, 2004.

GT,

If you ever get the chance to go within some miles of Philly, make sure you eat a cheesesteak at least once! Everyone who's lived there I'm sure has their own idea of the "best" one, but you should at least get one. My personal favorite place is Dalesandro's on Henry Ave. Can't be beat.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), September 01, 2004.

I notice again that catholic doctrine is more important than the human being. Jesus broke many Jewish laws because they were so harsh on its people, is the treatment of this girl and its family any different. Jesus stopped the mob of stoning the adulterous women. Jesus it is not that goes into the mouth but what comes out. What this attitude shows that the church has little concern for people with genetic deficiencies, it is nor prepared to welcome those even though Jesus showed us that these are the people we should care for most (Jesus went to the lepers, the people shunned by the rest of the community). A question, what is alcohol free wine? is this grape juice? Also giving alcohol to minors is a criminal offence. The church seems to get away with it. Re priests believing in transubstantiation, I did read an article some 35 years ago indicating that 50 % of the priests in Italy at the time didn't. For those that don't know, the family of this girl goes now to a Methodist church.

-- louis paulussen (paulussen@xtra.co.nz), November 05, 2004.

Actually Catholic doctrine is the source of truth and spiritual life for human beings. Which is why it is so essential to ensure that people are receiving the real thing, not only in the form of Christian truth, but also in the matter of Christ's Body and Blood. Human beings are too precious to allow them to be deceived by well-wishing deviates from truth, who would feed them a rice cake and tell them it is God.

As for reading articles, you can find an article that will tell you anything you want to hear. Do you believe everything you read? Or do you just make a point of reading what you want to believe? The real pity is that this family has placed their own pride above the spiritual welfare of their daughter, showing their true colors for all to see. After the colossal stink they made over not having things their own way, it turns out they never believed in the Eucharist in the first place. Otherwise they could never have abandoned Christ's Church for a watered-down manmade substitute.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 05, 2004.

I am sure that the reply to my contribution comes from a devout person possibly a member of Opus Dei, Fokolare, LC or equivalent. Organisations I did consider at some stage in my life. The statement that one can find any comment that satisfies your own views is very correct and applies to each person not only people like me. If anything I get accused of to much questioning and not believing.

I indeed question at times the catholic churches. Remember Christ did the same and the way the gospels read he was later in His ministry no longer allowed to that in the synagogue. In my view many of His questions can be asked today in any church.

Truth, I discern from the comment that you claim to know or possess the truth because you are a traditional Roman Catholic. Up to about 40 years ago whether you were a Catholic, Protestant, Muslim or belong to any other religion had little to do with faith or conviction it was simply the result of how politics operated through the centuries from the moment Constantine in a master stroke took away the freedom from the followers of Christ, they again became enslaved to politics.

The reason I am a Catholic is precisely this, I did receive an orthodox Catholic upbringing and been taught partial truths and I later in life learned that what I wasn't told means that we are all human from me a simple sinner to the Pope all with our prejudices and limited understanding of what we are.

As to the original question. When I read this story I couldn't believe it, so I did some research reading comments and articles from various sides. From a comment from a Rabbi I gather Catholic doctrine is even narrower than the Jewish for the Passover meal.

In situations like this I try to test my view on the great commandment (Matt 22) and not on Catholic doctrine. Simply said I can not believe that Jesus would not exclude her from receiving Him, and I find it unbelievable that Jesus can be present in a wheat wafer but does not have the power to enter in a rice wafer.

Please do not see this as a judgement of your or others beliefs, I do not see others views as expressed here as a judgement either.

All I long for is that people on this earth care to live the great Commandment and not like Cain and Abel.

-- louis paulussen (paulussen@xtra.co.nz), November 06, 2004.

It is not a question of what Jesus has the "power" to do. It is a question of what Jesus specifically told us to do. WE do not have the "power" to deviate from the stated will of God.

In any case, this child was not "excluded" from receiving the Eucharist. Her pastor would have taken whatever steps were necessary for her to receive under the form of a sip of consecrated wine. But that wasn't good enough for her parents, who wanted the Church to "redesign" a Sacrament instituted by Christ Himself, especially for them, ignoring the example of Christ and disregarding 2,000 years of constant infallible Church teaching. Some nerve! In the end they demonstrated just how little the Eucharist actually means to them, by abandoning it altogether when they couldn't have things their way. Kind of brings to mind Henry VIII.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 06, 2004.

I believe that my point of view is pretty clear as is yours. However I do not agree that the parents do not understand the importance of the Eucharist (called grand standing here), I find that these parents found participating in full at the celebration of the eucharist so important that they were prepared to leave the church they grew up in.

Catholic doctrine survived again with at least one catholic family less. I know the church takes the attitude that most will stay as they rightly assumed in the schism with the old catholics on the infallibity question.

It reminds me of a saying in the 99.9 % catholic area I grew up in " you keep them uneducated (church), I will keep them poor (employer)"

Paul I am quite happy to have some direct exchanges on catholic issues with you if it interests you but on this issue I think I have expressed my views sufficiently.

-- louis paulussen (paulussen@xtra.co.nz), November 08, 2004.

"I find that these parents found participating in full at the celebration of the eucharist so important that they were prepared to leave the church they grew up in. "

A: Which just happens to be the only place they or their child can receive the Eucharist! Completely illogical! Parallel situation: "They care so much about receiving proper medical care that they are willing to abandon medical care completely because a doctor wouldn't give them a treatment the way they wanted it instead of the way it should be done." Ridiculous!

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 08, 2004.

As you don't seem to be interested in a direct communication my last contribution is that it may help if you read chet Raymo's book skeptics and true believers it may give you an insight in the mind of people, your own and mine

God Bless

-- louis paulussen (paulussen@xtra.co.nz), November 09, 2004.

I think I have expressed my views

I think that statement sums it up. If you submit yourself to the authority of the Church, you embrace its teachings. IF not, then you are not part of the Church anyway. I'll certainly not lose sleep over it!

-- hugh (hugh@inspired.com), November 09, 2004.