Girl's communion not valid, according to church
 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...mmunion_denied

A girl who cannot digest wheat has been told that her first communion was not valid because communion wafers must contain wheat.

I saw this in the paper this morning... I feel badly for the girl

There are alternatives to the traditional wafers used in communion. Heck, oreos (without the creamy middle) are even acceptable according to one priest I know :D

But yeah, I feel bad for the girl and I think the Church needs to figure something out here.

It's stories like these that make me wonder if practicing organized religion is a good idea. :rolleyes:

I don't know how common celiac disease is, but what do other Christians do if they have the disease?


ETA: The church my mom used to go to growing up used actual wheat bread... not the waffers. It may have been special because it was an Easter mass... but the whole "unlevened" bread tradition was thrown out the window.

I feel bad for her too... just another example of the Catholic Church's inflexibility :(

Can she take communion wine instead? They're both equally valid.

I don't see it as an example of the Church's inflexibility. I see it as an example of the Church being faithful to her teachings and individuals wanting things the way they want them.

The child and her mother were offered an alternative. Why didn't she just take the wine, which is just as much Jesus' body and blood, soul and divinity as is the wafer?

Was that a Catholic Church?

I played the church service at our national convention, our Grand Chaplain was Episcopal -- didn't use the unlevened bread either. It was just torn up white bread.

I may have missed it in the article, but I didn't see anything about the girl having been offered wine as an alternative. That probably would have been a better way to handle it - no question as to its validity. It does draw a distinction, though - most Catholics take either bread or both - I've never seen anyone take just wine, and wine is not always offered to the congregation.

Interesting. I currently attend an Anglican church. My church has two services, one at 9:30 am and another at 11:15. The 9:30 one is more modern, and the communion bread is definitely not a traditional communion wafer. In fact, it's slightly sweetened! The 11:15 one, which is the one I normally attend is more traditional.

She can take just wine and it would be valid. This is just another example of wah wah whiny parents. They've been offered an option and are refusing it, so phooey on them. A lot of these food allergies are BS anyway. (Sometimes they are real, but a lot of the time they're total BS.)

We had a congregant who was a recovering alcoholic and he didn't take the wine (we have actual wine) in little cups. Yes, maybe it made him a little "different" but the important part was that he received the Sacrament. Obviously this family thinks making their point is more important than that.

Yes-- destruction of the small intestine is BS... :rolleyes:

And I agree- the Catholic Church was offered an alternative and they turned it down- phooey on them.
And if they keep pushing it- proof that organized religion is harmful to people. Catholics wanting a little girl to get gastrointestinal cancer...

No, it is an example of ONE PRIEST'S inflexibility (and w/ holes in his medical information). Big difference.

There were several people w/ celiac sprue in the parish I used to live in. (Which, incidentally, serviced the Texas Medical Center, so you had ALL kinds of medical issues cropping up.) It's not as rare as the article is making it out to be.

The pastors all made it clear that if someone was in this very situation, approach them directly and let them know. That way, they could receive either a VERY small piece of the wafer, or just wine and everything was OK.

This quote is very telling. The alternative was offered - MOM rejected it. The Church tried to help, Mom is making the issue here. The rest of the article shows how flexible the RCC is w/ medical issues.

No need to slame the church over an isolated quote in the article, or over what seems to be a misunderstanding.

--add

But I don't think the alternative was acceptable. In this case, gluten is basically poison for her. If it were me, and the church was saying "You need to take this poison", I'd say no. The option of "Okay, well then just take a little bit of poison" doesn't seem that much better :(

That's why the "wine only" option was presented. (notice there were TWO different options given in the quote posted) No gluten in communion wine.

Mom turned that down too, and it had nothing to do w/ gluten.

--add

I understand that the girl has a serious medical condition. She could have received only the blood and not the body, and it would have been legitimate. I think that shows flexibility.

This thread makes me remember my childhood when my parents decided to have me tested at this quack place to see if I had food allergies. After taking about half my blood (enough that I passed out and had a seizure), they determined that I was allergic to brewer's yeast, chocolate, wheat and several other things.

My diet consisted of rice bread instead of wheat bread for sandwiches, all kinds of dried fruit, just strange fuid altogether. Probably why I can eat just about anything now and appreciate it.

Anyhow, yeah, a lot of these food allergy things are complete BS. And then again, some are very real.

Communion Bread
 

Taualumna wrote...Taualumna, unfortunately, I can top that....from what I gather, our Reverand forgot the communion bread one Sunday and had to run across the street to purchase bread.
I was sitting near the front and was pretty shocked to see black things in the bread and what appeared to be swirls in the bread. Murmurings were all though the church before the plate made it to the back...
Yep, we had communion with cinnamon raisin bread! :rolleyes:

You poor thing. :( The doctors tested my sister for all sorts of allergies. She couldn't drink milk or eat wheat for a while. Luckily, she was negative for all food allergies. She was positive for all the skin test allergies. Mold and spores are bad for her.

Okay, I missed the part where the girl was offered wine only as an alternative. Maybe the Church isn't that inflexible after all. :) I was under the impression that she had been told that she MUST take the wafer for her first communion, and that the wafer MUST contain wheat, even though doing so would make her ill, and even though wine-only is a perfectly valid option for communion.

Poor little girl - she thought she'd gone through this rite of passage enabling her to partake in a sacrament central to Catholicism, and now she's been told "sorry kiddo, it doesn't count". :(

LOL @ the cinnamon raisin communion bread! What's next, challah? ;)

Absolutely. A few dudes need a quick seminar on medical issues relating to the Eucharist, and it won't be a moment too soon.

You really wanna see something interesting? How about administering the Blessed Sacrament to bone marrow transplant patients in isolation? Very common where I used to work. ;)

--add

The whole thing is outrageous and even though I am not Catholic, even I would say it is un-Christian to deny a religious rite because of a life-or-death dietary need. WWJD?

I was raised Jewish and it is well acknowledged that Jews follow the law of God. Christians follow the love of God. (Hence the Jews being the "chosen" people-- toiling on earth under God's law with promise of reward in the afterlife). This isn't a theological debate to talk about the merits of Judaism or the merits of Christianity, though. It is just that despite our following the "law" of God, it is also said, that with all of our fasting days, it is always acknowledged that the young, old and ill are exempt because their bodies have different needs. I believe Christianity, which practices the love of God, can look past the law of God in such a case as with this little girl. I have two friends with severe gluten allergies; one of these friends lost her mother due to the disease.

To summarize, I think we are all in agreement that this incident is not representative of the compassionate nature of the Church. and it is atypical. I expect it will be reversed.

I think 33girl was saying that SOME of the food allergies are BS, not all of them.

Also, I don't think this situation should stand as representative of all Catholics or all organized religion either. That's a pretty big blanket statement.

ISPP, chill.

I know there are food allergies - my old boss is violently allergic to nuts, MSG or any sort of legume. She was almost in a car accident once because she was having an allergy attack - the restaurant she'd just visited swore there were no nuts on a dish and there were.

But you can't tell me that every other child out there has a food allergy that severe, which seems to be the case these days. cough cough munchausen by proxy cough cough

Read the rest of the thread.

--add

Same here. Sorry 'bout that.

Ditto. We're always saying how one bad person does not a bad chapter make. The same thinking applies here.

I think a key issue we're missing here is whether or not a different type of wafer can be confected into the Eucharist. Just because a priest says the words of consecration over an Oreo does not mean that the Oreo became the body and blood of Christ.

The requirements for the wafer are for a reason. Christ took unleavened bread at the passover supper and instituted the Eucharist. He didn't take rice cakes or cinnamon bread (hee!) or Doritos. He used unleavened bread and said, "THIS is my body.".

People seem to think that the Church makes up these "guidelines" will-nilly and is a big old baddy when it won't change them. In this particular case, the mom is asking the Church to do something it can't do... use a fundamentally different substance than the one Jesus used. Even if the priest was willing to use a rice wafer, it might not become a consecrated host. It wouldn't "take", so to speak.

Then the poor girl is just receiving a rice wafer and not her Lord and her God. Everyone present would be worshiping rice. And that's the sin of idolatry. (not that they'd be culpable for it, if they didn't know)

At the last big church gathering I attended we had a garlic herb dinner rolls and sparking wine for the communion at the Young Adults service. For germ reasons I dip my "body" into the common cup instead of drinking from it. The sparkling wine fizzed over when I dipped my garlic herb Jesus into it. Somehow we also set the cross on fire and made a joke that it was a sign from God to be Mothodists instead of Lutherans.

My church offers grape juice and wine, and the bread varies. We have a hippy heath food Co-Op in town and could easily get wheat free bread there if needed, and most people would never notice. The first time I had communion the wafer got stuck to the roof of my mouth, very upsetting.

aephialum- we've had challah before at my home church. We rent space to a group that are Christian Jews, so when we combine worship that's what we use.

ETA: After church we have a coffee/fellowship hour, any leftover Jesus is brought down and put on the table with the cookies and sandwiches. Yeah, I've had a ham & cheese on Jesus before.

When I first read this I obviously didn't pay attention to the whole article. I was like "bastards, she can't have wheat. Why should some stupid silly little rule prevent her from worship?!"
Them having gone back and re-read it. The church offered the mother and her daughter a safer and healthier option. It was refused.
It's really a non-issue. This is not the church being pricks. This is the mother being ridiculous.

Although, I'm wondering. If there is the "wine only" option. Can this girl take communion again? I don't really see what the big deal is, other than the mother making a mountain out of a mole-hill.

ETA: On food allergies, while some might be total BS, you don't know that, and when you hear someone has a food allergey it should be taken very seriously.

Oh man, I love challah bread! There was this awesome bakery across the street from my university called Four Bakers that made it. Now it's a Cosi. :(

Back on topic, I'm surprised that Catholics can take wine minus the bread and it still 'counts' as communion.. It's my understanding that Catholics believe that the wine actually becomes the blood of Christ and the bread the actual body... so I would think you would need both? But I'm not Catholic, so I am probably way off.... just curious. :)

Aurora, you can call your snack foods Jesus but that does not make it so. Sure, you've had a ham & cheese but it sure as heck wasn't on Jesus. But I suspect you already know that. ;)

SilverTurtle, it can be a little confusing because sometimes we Catholics do (inaccurately) refer to the wine as His Blood and the wafer as His Body. Actually.... each contain both. We believe that the tiniest particle of either contains all of Christ.

So if this little girl received but a drop of Communion wine, she would be receiving the same Jesus that those who receive an entire host receive.

Yeah, reading this, I really want to know why the mother won't just take the "wine only" option.

I don't feel like the Catholic Church has a reputation for being particularly accomodating (although it certainly varies by diocese and even church) but in this case, it really just looks like the mother is being a pain in the a**.

And on the food allergies. . .well of course there are serious and legitimate allergies, but I do think its one of those things that's often exaggerated or overstated. I frequently tell people I'm allergic to onions because I hate them so much and otherwise they'll insist "try it, you'll like it."
:rolleyes:

Surprisingly... yes.

Perhaps Krispy Kremes? ;)

ETA because I am apparently post-whoring.

I haven't gone thru communion yet (RCIAA starts in Septemeber, which I may consider...) but I have seen cousins, friends, etc go thru it.
I am under the impression that when it's your first communion, you take both. Is it a church requirement to take both the first time or can you just bypass the bread or wine. I guess I assume this because all the kids I see do it are all excited to take communion and etc. But after the first time they take both or one. I mean if the girl took the wine and the "bread" her communion would technically be valid because she had wine. It would be like she just bypassed bread.

So this is why I am wondering if you are required to take both the first time around.

Re: Communion Bread
 

:eek:

Oh, okay. Thanks for the explanation!

I don't want it to look like I think I'm the resident Catholic expert, because I so am not... but I do teach 2nd grade CCD and just had my own daughter receive her First Communion, so this question I can answer. :)

Nope... you don't have to receive under both species your first time or any time. Different parishes do different things. Some offer both species while others offer just one.

Best wishes as you consider RCIA! I went through it 10 years ago. The classes themselves were a waste of time (not a good parish) but becoming Catholic was/is wonderful! :)

I'm wondering if the girl's mom refused the wine because the cup could contain traces of wheat?

IF it did, and that is one huge "if", it wouldn't be enough to cause a major reaction because of sprue.

--add

Maybe they're exaggerating and maybe they're not. That's up for debate. None of you are doctors or have provided her with a diagnosis. That's not up for debate.

-Rudey