the consecrated species will continue to act on the world as though they contained gluten and alcohol, since those characteristics are, properly speaking, accidents.
Agreed.
the celiac issue was a major roadblock to my return to the Church and even now my conscience is not in conformity with Church teachings.
when He instituted the sacrament of the Eucharist, Jesus surely knew that a small percentage of humans suffered from celiac disease, some to a severe degree – there are people who get very ill when they use a fork cross-contaminated by any food with gluten. I’m not talking about feeling bad, but devastatingly sick.
but the Church didn’t know about celiac until the 20th century, so it is not surprising that it would insist on only the purest wheat because…
Bread can be made out of a variety of things that don’t put my daughter in the hospital if she accidentally ingests gluten. Her personal agony is, I believe, not pleasing to God. Let me put it another way, 20 centuries of that kind of suffering cannot be pleasing to God.
So knowing what we know now, I don’t understand why the Church can’t bend, just a little.
I understand what you mean, where you’re coming from. And, of course, none of us should want your daughter to suffer the effects of consuming gluten-- she definitely should avoid it inasmuch as we are able to prevent it!
The reason we use wheat bread, and only wheat bread, for the Eucharist is that it’s the only kind of bread that scripture and sacred tradition guarantee is valid matter. We know we’re authorized to use it and that it’s valid. Yes, people can and do make bread from other ingredients, such as rye or rice, just as people can and do make wine from other ingredients, such as plums and peaches. But we do not have any guarantee from either scripture or sacred tradition that these other ingredients are valid matter for the Eucharist. We’ve not been authorized to use anything other than wheat bread and grape wine. Similarly, we have the guarantee of scripture and sacred tradition that water is valid matter for baptism; we do not have authorization from the Lord to use beer or pineapple juice instead.
If the Church had invented the sacraments herself, the Church would have the authority to change the matter. Not having invented the sacraments, the Church does not believe that she has the authority to change the matter. In a similar vein, Pope John Paul II wrote “the Church does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination.” The Church isn’t withholding ordinations she is authorized to perform; rather, the authority has been withheld from the Church-- she isn’t authorized to perform do it.
Unfortunately for your daughter, this means that her condition will not allow her to receive the Eucharist under the species of bread. That is a very sad thing, and I will not try to deny the loss or any sorrow she may feel as a result. It makes me very sad, too.
If she is not allergic to grape wine, however, she may receive the Eucharist under the species of wine (as long as she receives from a chalice to which no particles of the Host have been added, and
that can be arranged). This should be a cause of great joy, because in such a manner she would be receiving
the whole Christ in the blessed Sacrament, just as every other communicant does.
Like I said, I am not trying to deny the loss or any sorrow your daughter may feel in having to bypass the Eucharist under the species of bread. Any sorrow she may feel is real, no one should deny it. But I do hope she will be able to receive
the whole Christ in the blessed Sacrament under the species of wine.
for this post; to understand once and for all, because my spiritual journey may rest on this.