Spiritual reality to Catholic Church: Girl’s first Communion invalid because wafer didn’t contain wheat (the girl suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat).
Spiritual reality according to Scripture: “[Jesus] replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: “‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.”
Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him ‘unclean’ by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him ‘unclean.’” – Mark 7:6-8, 14-15
Such is this false reasoning by the Church, that a Communion wafer must contain wheat. Jesus condemned this kind of behaviour and regulatory practice among the Pharisees, yet it can apply to anyone who subverts the Jesus’ message with textual conscription. Jesus’ proclamation that nothing outside could make one unclean was revolutionary, since Judaic law was built upon the duality of nature, that things were either “clean” or “unclean”, as designated by God. Not only did this serve as a sort of pre-government regulation health code, but was a conceit that figured throughout the Old Testament as a measure of the absolutes of the Law, the demands of holiness placed upon men by God, and man’s inability to conform to said Laws–just another indication that man could not and cannot live on bread alone (the Law) but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (God’s physical presence, so close you can hear his words).
What does a non-wheat Communion wafer have to do with cleanliness?
This is a sticky issue for me, since I don’t endorse giving children Communion unless they are in fact aware of the intent of the ritual. I’m not talking about doctrinal history, the hermaneutics of Christ’s death and resurrection and the Supper that preceded both that became the cornerstone of the Communal sacrament–just a basic knowledge and understanding of what Christ’s sacrifice means and an active belief in that sacrifice and more importantly, Christ’s resurrection that provides salvation.
Given that she does know what Communion means and believes that Christ has saved her, what is the difference between a wheat wafer or a rice wafer? Is one clean and the other not? Is one more holy than the other? The Church has made it about the bread, not the body–exactly as the Pharisees had done with their Corban rules of holy washing, of clean and unclean foods, of daily life, of spiritual life.
When Jesus said “Do this in remembrance of me,” somehow I doubt he was thinking “gluten-only bread, please”. The Pharisees in the Catholic Church would do well to consider that.
Scripture Musings
Rice or Wheat?
Discussion
Comments are disallowed for this post.
Categories
- 2004 Oscars
- Abortion
- Advertising
- Art
- Blog Maintenance
- Blogs of War
- Book Review
- Carnival of the Vanities
- Christian Carnival
- Court Cases
- Culture and Society
- Fifty Word Fiction
- Film Journal
- France
- Fringecast
- General Blogs
- General Essays
- General Links
- General Rants
- ireland
- Israel & Palestine
- Links
- Motion
- Movie Review
- Photography
- Poetry
- Political Essays
- Political Rants
- Politics
- Portfolio
- Religious News
- Rest In Peace
- Scripture Musings
- Search Engine Optimization
- Storyblogging
- Summer Olympics 2004
- The Leavers
- Turnpike Blues
- Uncategorized
- Web
- Web 2.0
- Writing
- Zen Musings
Most Emailed
- N/A
© 2004 Fringeblog. 
Actually, it’s not only the catholic church that wants the gluten in the wafer- lutherans and anglicans seem to take it pretty seriously as well. And they would quote New Testament verses up the wazoo in order to defend their liturgy. Where you see endless legalistic entanglements in their rituals, they think they are more closely abiding to biblical scripture. They’re pretty fierce about the gluten; don’t piss them off by dismissing the issue by comparing them to Pharisees and quoting a few verses.
Of Men and Rice
Maybe it’s being a convert with so much left to learn, or maybe it’s the place in the religious discussion in which I feel called to stand, but it still tends to surprise me when people feel compelled to comment…
Cleanness or uncleanness, whether spiritual or ritual or otherwise, simply has nothing whatever to do with this situation. The sacraments are real, established by the Lord Jesus Christ, and entrusted to the authority of His Church to maintain until His return. Competent Church authority has determined, over the centuries, what is required for the validity of the sacraments, in fidelity to the commission given by the Lord and His Apostles. For the Holy Eucharist, wheaten bread and grape wine are required. Anything else, to put it simply and perhaps crudely, just doesn’t work.
I feel a ripple effect coming on.
According to the article:
“This is not an issue to be determined at the diocesan or parish level, but has already been decided for the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world by Vatican authority,” Trenton Bishop John M. Smith said in a statement last week.”
Translation: This is NOT open to question.
But apparently, this rule was put in jeopardy quite a while ago.
The article ALSO states that some Catholic churches allow “no-gluten hosts, while others do not.” It does not specify time, place, or number, but it makes clear that this has been in practice long enough to mention it.
I believe that if the Vatican does not want to appear hypocritical, it is only logical to assume that the Catholic Churches allowing no-gluten hosts will either be ordered to stop, or completely cut off.
Not to mention the abrupt invalidation of X number of saved Catholics who received communion with a no-gluten host, right?
How would you like to get a call claiming that your communion had been invalidated?
While I find the Vatican’s staunch refusal to back down from what it believes to be precious and invaluable scriptural doctrine, I also believe that we have a case of seeing the forest for the trees.
Now, I’m not saying we should disregard scripture. I’m also not claiming to know God’s mind, here. But at the heart of this matter– what is at STAKE, here– is the salvation of a young girl’s soul, and her acceptance of Christ as her Lord and Savior.
And that is a LOT bigger deal than squabbling over what type of grain you use.
So…if you are allergic to wheat…you are…automatically going to hell? Or, what? You can be saved, but you can’t take communion?
Person 1: I’m going to hell.
Person 2: What? Are you bad? Are you an aetheist or something?
Person 1: Nah. I’m allergic to wheat.
Person 2: ?
Person 1: Yep. It kind of limits my sandwich eating too.
As to “ripple effects,” the sacraments are what they are. Any unfortunate results that arise from their abuse are, likewise, what they are. (One thing that must be kept in mind about the Catholic faith is that it is very realistic; that is, it proceeds from and points to realities. The woman in the article needs to learn this.) But God is both just and merciful, and we trust that He would not apportion any blame to somebody who acts in good faith, though other persons may have failed to act in good faith. I do not wish to minimize the bad consequences of invalid sacraments. We do need to keep in mind, however, that though the Church is bound by the sacraments as God has instituted them, God Himself is not so bound and can supply by His Grace what has been lacking.
As to this specific case, I see that the girl’s mother specifically rejected the option for her daughter to communicate under the form of wine only. The woman declines to have her daughter partake of the body, blood, soul and divinity of Our Lord and Savior because she can’t do it the way her mother thinks she should be able to. ISTM, then, that the woman is willful and judgemental and wants to have everything her own way, and I cannot see how she has her daughter’s best interests in mind.