This doesn't seem right

[FireDragon76]

I have been diagnosed the past few years with Irritable Bowel Syndrome, but in the past few months, it's got a new twist- I seem to have trouble digesting gluten (in wheat, barley, and rye) and A1 casein (in cow milk- goat milk may be easier but it's $$$). Consuming either causes days of constipation and pain, and leads to fibromyalgia flare-ups. My gastroenterologist did a colonoscopy and bloodwork and doesn't believe I have Coeliac disease, but I am skeptical- rarely this sort of bloodwork is a false-negative and people have the condition anyways.

This has wrecked havoc with my spiritual life. At first I continued to receive the Eucharist at the Independent Catholic parish I went to. But finally I just decided not to risk it, as repeated fasting from wheat and challenging again confirmed I was intolerant of wheat. Even the small amount of wheat in the Host began to trouble me in my mind as I started to see all wheat as basically poison to my body that I didn't want (misery has a way of causing that sort of aversion), and doubting the Sacrament lead to further spiritual issues. Right now I'm not sure what to believe exactly, sometimes. It almost feels like someone is playing a big prank on me, and I'm missing the humor.

I have occasionally visited the local Episcopal cathedral because I've started to become disilluniosed with the liberal Independent Catholic focus on the Eucharist (which is self-intinction and since they don't bring the chalice down to me, I cannot receive anyways) and the moralistic preaching there (albeit focused more on social activism). I've delt with so much pain, I have a real sense of heaviness and the brief moralistic sermons seem to leave me feeling dry. I talked to the deacon at the IC church but the bishop has been so ill and busy he hasn't gotten back to me.


I talked to an Episcopalian deacon on sunday and he said he would have to talk to the pastor at the Eucharistic service at the cathedral. The pastor (whom I have talked to before, the canon at the cathedral) came to me before the service and explained to me that he would just let me drink from the Chalice and the sacrament would be valid.

At the distribution of Communion in the small chapel, the priest went around with a minister. But when he came to me, I think he looked a bit perplexed on what he should do, he holds up the Host and says "The Body of Christ", shows it to me in front of my face, then puts it away. The whole thing seemed very ackward. Soon afterward the minister with the chalice followed behind him and seemed to walk past me until I gestured to bring the Chalice to me as I wanted to receive it. I left feeling grateful that I had received communion at all but upset that the whole thing was handled in what felt like a haphazard fashion. In some ways, I think I'd just prefer the Medieval practice of "Ocular Communion", where the laity don't actually receive the species at all, to what is going on.

 

[Willie T]

I read this. Then I asked my wife to read it. We were both just speechless, and looked at one another, wide-eyed. I mean, we were totally speechless. She just sat back down at her computer, and went back to work.

Everything you described is just so foreign to us, that I feel like I picked up a science fiction novel. I sure hope someone can help you.

 

[Albion]

I have been diagnosed the past few years with Irritable Bowel Syndrome, but in the past few months, it's got a new twist- I seem to have trouble digesting gluten (in wheat, barley, and rye) and A1 casein (in cow milk- goat milk may be easier but it's $$$). Consuming either causes days of constipation and pain, and leads to fibromyalgia flare-ups. My gastroenterologist did a colonoscopy and bloodwork and doesn't believe I have Coeliac disease, but I am skeptical- rarely this sort of bloodwork is a false-negative and people have the condition anyways.

This has wrecked havoc with my spiritual life. At first I continued to receive the Eucharist at the Independent Catholic parish I went to. But finally I just decided not to risk it, as repeated fasting from wheat and challenging again confirmed I was intolerant of wheat. Even the small amount of wheat in the Host began to trouble me in my mind as I started to see all wheat as basically poison to my body that I didn't want (misery has a way of causing that sort of aversion), and doubting the Sacrament lead to further spiritual issues. Right now I'm not sure what to believe exactly, sometimes. It almost feels like someone is playing a big prank on me, and I'm missing the humor.

I have occasionally visited the local Episcopal cathedral because I've started to become disilluniosed with the liberal Independent Catholic focus on the Eucharist (which is self-intinction and since they don't bring the chalice down to me, I cannot receive anyways) and the moralistic preaching there (albeit focused more on social activism). I've delt with so much pain, I have a real sense of heaviness and the brief moralistic sermons seem to leave me feeling dry. I talked to the deacon at the IC church but the bishop has been so ill and busy he hasn't gotten back to me.


I talked to an Episcopalian deacon on sunday and he said he would have to talk to the pastor at the Eucharistic service at the cathedral. The pastor (whom I have talked to before, the canon at the cathedral) came to me before the service and explained to me that he would just let me drink from the Chalice and the sacrament would be valid.

At the distribution of Communion in the small chapel, the priest went around with a minister. But when he came to me, I think he looked a bit perplexed on what he should do, he holds up the Host and says "The Body of Christ", shows it to me in front of my face, then puts it away. The whole thing seemed very ackward. Soon afterward the minister with the chalice followed behind him and seemed to walk past me until I gestured to bring the Chalice to me as I wanted to receive it. I left feeling grateful that I had received communion at all but upset that the whole thing was handled in what felt like a haphazard fashion. In some ways, I think I'd just prefer the Medieval practice of "Ocular Communion", where the laity don't actually receive the species at all, to what is going on.

It sounds to me like the priest was trying to accommodate you, and there were a few rough edges in the thing since this is a very unusual situation. He may not have faced it before, although he probably has dealt with alcoholics who request some way around receiving the wine. So although I appreciate that the unfolding of this went awkwardly for you, I'll bet that he has it in mind now how not to hesitate, or whatever, the next time.

Still, I'd suggest you speak with him again and get both of you on the same page as to what will transpire, and then you shouldn't have repeated difficulties. (BTW, the holding up of the host and saying those words are both typically RC these days, not, as you thought, improvisation).

I also suspect that the other priest or whoever the assisting cleric was hadn't been filled in properly on what was to happen, leaving him to conclude that you were receiving some sort of blessing like an unbaptized person might. He may also have figured out the real situation by now and is also prepared to not make the mistake he did another time.

 

[FireDragon76]

Still, I'd suggest you speak with him again and get both of you on the same page as to what will transpire, and then you shouldn't have repeated difficulties. (BTW, the holding up of the host and saying those words are both typically RC these days, not, as you thought, improvisation). .

Yes, though usually I've heard it as "Receive the Body of Christ". To me it just seemed to be bizarre because obviously, I wouldn't be receiving it, so those words were academic.

I actually wouldn't mind it if the church was into having a Catholic type of exposition of the Sacrament (with a monstrance and so on), but this is a broad church, not into Catholic touches like that. In other areas, though, I'm realizing I'm increasingly not really Roman Catholic (I believe I am more amenable to Lutheranism).

It's a weird turn of events for me because the Eucharist was usually the high point of my Christian life, and as is probably known, I've been a sacramentalist. Now its made me scratch my head and wonder "How do those other people do it?" (the low church, non-sacramental types).

I've heard of celiacs and other people who have problems with the Eucharist but it was always one of those issues of "there but the grace of God go I". Now, I suppose, it's my turn at it.

On the positive side, now that I've figured this all out, my health seems to be gradually getting better. But my spiritual life has really been shook up.

 

[Albion]

Yes, though usually I've heard it as "Receive the Body of Christ". To me it just seemed to be bizarre because obviously, I wouldn't be receiving it, so those words were academic.

You're right that it isn't usually what's said at the distribution, but it is what's said a bit earlier when the priest , facing the congregation, elevates the host and says exactly that. So I think he may have been borrowing it for your purposes, possibly for the very reason you mentioned here (you wouldn't be receiving it). We don't know for sure, of course, but it seems purposeful to me.

 

[ebia]

I have been diagnosed the past few years with Irritable Bowel Syndrome, but in the past few months, it's got a new twist- I seem to have trouble digesting gluten (in wheat, barley, and rye) and A1 casein (in cow milk- goat milk may be easier but it's $$$). Consuming either causes days of constipation and pain, and leads to fibromyalgia flare-ups. My gastroenterologist did a colonoscopy and bloodwork and doesn't believe I have Coeliac disease, but I am skeptical- rarely this sort of bloodwork is a false-negative and people have the condition anyways. This has wrecked havoc with my spiritual life. At first I continued to receive the Eucharist at the Independent Catholic parish I went to. But finally I just decided not to risk it, as repeated fasting from wheat and challenging again confirmed I was intolerant of wheat. Even the small amount of wheat in the Host began to trouble me in my mind as I started to see all wheat as basically poison to my body that I didn't want (misery has a way of causing that sort of aversion), and doubting the Sacrament lead to further spiritual issues. Right now I'm not sure what to believe exactly, sometimes. It almost feels like someone is playing a big prank on me, and I'm missing the humor. I have occasionally visited the local Episcopal cathedral because I've started to become disilluniosed with the liberal Independent Catholic focus on the Eucharist (which is self-intinction and since they don't bring the chalice down to me, I cannot receive anyways) and the moralistic preaching there (albeit focused more on social activism). I've delt with so much pain, I have a real sense of heaviness and the brief moralistic sermons seem to leave me feeling dry. I talked to the deacon at the IC church but the bishop has been so ill and busy he hasn't gotten back to me. I talked to an Episcopalian deacon on sunday and he said he would have to talk to the pastor at the Eucharistic service at the cathedral. The pastor (whom I have talked to before, the canon at the cathedral) came to me before the service and explained to me that he would just let me drink from the Chalice and the sacrament would be valid. At the distribution of Communion in the small chapel, the priest went around with a minister. But when he came to me, I think he looked a bit perplexed on what he should do, he holds up the Host and says "The Body of Christ", shows it to me in front of my face, then puts it away. The whole thing seemed very ackward. Soon afterward the minister with the chalice followed behind him and seemed to walk past me until I gestured to bring the Chalice to me as I wanted to receive it. I left feeling grateful that I had received communion at all but upset that the whole thing was handled in what felt like a haphazard fashion. In some ways, I think I'd just prefer the Medieval practice of "Ocular Communion", where the laity don't actually receive the species at all, to what is going on.

You could ask them to get some gluten free hosts.

Fwiw the Archbishop of Melbourne is in the same position as you.

 

[FireDragon76]

You could ask them to get some gluten free hosts.

Fwiw the Archbishop of Melbourne is in the same position as you.

How does he handle that? You've got me curious now because one of the things I have thought about, off and on, is holy orders at some point in my life, but, I think being gluten intolerant could potentially be an issue.

I think I might be able to tolerate a slight amount of gluten, as I've received the Host in the past without ill effects. But of course it makes me nervous to do so because there's still the grey area of what's going on exactly in my intestines (insurance is not yet ready to pay for more testing until I jump through more hoops). Some people with Celiac disease have a silent variety that doesn't produce all the classic symptoms (like diarrhea and nausea), and yet their intestines are basically being eaten up by the reaction with wheat.

My understanding is that Anglicans have no commitment to the Host actually being made from wheat, is that true? So unlike Roman Catholics, they could use rice flour and xantham gum to make the bread?

I do think I will plan a meeting with the pastor to talk about these issues in further detail.

 

[ebia]

How does he handle that?

Gluten free wafers

You've got me curious now because one of the things I have thought about, off and on, is holy orders at some point in my life, but, I think being gluten intolerant could potentially be an issue. I think I might be able to tolerate a slight amount of gluten, as I've received the Host in the past without ill effects. But of course it makes me nervous to do so because there's still the grey area of what's going on exactly in my intestines (insurance is not yet ready to pay for more testing until I jump through more hoops). Some people with Celiac disease have a silent variety that doesn't produce all the classic symptoms (like diarrhea and nausea), and yet their intestines are basically being eaten up by the reaction with wheat. My understanding is that Anglicans have no commitment to the Host actually being made from wheat, is that true? So unlike Roman Catholics, they could use rice flour and xantham gum to make the bread? I do think I will plan a meeting with the pastor to talk about these issues in further detail.

The canons of the CofE do say they must be made from "wheat, good and wholesome", I'm not sure elsewhere or whether anyone in England would enforce that.

I know of a priest who doesn't drink the wine (because of a predisposition to alcholism) so there isn't fundamentally anything stopping one being ordained but only communing in one kind.

 

[Willie T]

Are the little commercial "wafers" Holy? If this is something you really feel you have to do, why not bring along your own slice of gluten-free bread?

 

[ebia]

Are the little commercial "wafers" Holy?

Not until the consecration.

 

[Willie T]

Not until the consecration.

Well, arrive a little early and get your slice of bread "consecrated", and that should take care of it, right?

 

[Albion]

Well, arrive a little early and get your slice of bread "consecrated", and that should take care of it, right?

OK, the little joke has run its course. You understand that this is not the place for you to debate the merits of Anglican practices, either directly or through satire. Thanks.

 

[Willie T]

It's not a joke at all. If he feels eating bread is a necessity, and he cannot take wheat. Then why should a big deal be made of any of this?

Simply buy himself the bread he CAN eat, and get it made acceptable to him. There is, then, no problem. Frankly I think any church leader should be embarrassed to put a church member in such an awkward position.

 

[Albion]

It's not a joke at all. If he feels eating bread is a necessity, and he cannot take wheat. Then why should a big deal be made of any of this?

Simply buy himself the bread he CAN eat, and get it made acceptable to him. There is, then, no problem. Frankly I think a church leader should be embarrassed to put a church member in such a position.

I asked you politely, Willie.

 

[Merrily]

I have been diagnosed the past few years with Irritable Bowel Syndrome, but in the past few months, it's got a new twist- I seem to have trouble digesting gluten (in wheat, barley, and rye) and A1 casein (in cow milk- goat milk may be easier but it's $$$). Consuming either causes days of constipation and pain, and leads to fibromyalgia flare-ups. My gastroenterologist did a colonoscopy and bloodwork and doesn't believe I have Coeliac disease, but I am skeptical- rarely this sort of bloodwork is a false-negative and people have the condition anyways.

This has wrecked havoc with my spiritual life. At first I continued to receive the Eucharist at the Independent Catholic parish I went to. But finally I just decided not to risk it, as repeated fasting from wheat and challenging again confirmed I was intolerant of wheat. Even the small amount of wheat in the Host began to trouble me in my mind as I started to see all wheat as basically poison to my body that I didn't want (misery has a way of causing that sort of aversion), and doubting the Sacrament lead to further spiritual issues. Right now I'm not sure what to believe exactly, sometimes. It almost feels like someone is playing a big prank on me, and I'm missing the humor.

I have occasionally visited the local Episcopal cathedral because I've started to become disilluniosed with the liberal Independent Catholic focus on the Eucharist (which is self-intinction and since they don't bring the chalice down to me, I cannot receive anyways) and the moralistic preaching there (albeit focused more on social activism). I've delt with so much pain, I have a real sense of heaviness and the brief moralistic sermons seem to leave me feeling dry. I talked to the deacon at the IC church but the bishop has been so ill and busy he hasn't gotten back to me.


I talked to an Episcopalian deacon on sunday and he said he would have to talk to the pastor at the Eucharistic service at the cathedral. The pastor (whom I have talked to before, the canon at the cathedral) came to me before the service and explained to me that he would just let me drink from the Chalice and the sacrament would be valid.

At the distribution of Communion in the small chapel, the priest went around with a minister. But when he came to me, I think he looked a bit perplexed on what he should do, he holds up the Host and says "The Body of Christ", shows it to me in front of my face, then puts it away. The whole thing seemed very ackward. Soon afterward the minister with the chalice followed behind him and seemed to walk past me until I gestured to bring the Chalice to me as I wanted to receive it. I left feeling grateful that I had received communion at all but upset that the whole thing was handled in what felt like a haphazard fashion. In some ways, I think I'd just prefer the Medieval practice of "Ocular Communion", where the laity don't actually receive the species at all, to what is going on.

There are Gluten Free communion wafers available.
Eden sells one brand..
Peoples Square Wafers: Gluten Free, Pack of 50 | Free Delivery when you spend £10 @ Eden.co.uk
Also for RCs there's a very reduced Gluten brand but I can't find a link to those only this Canadian article.....
http://read.thestar.com/?origref=ht...gle.co.uk/#!/article/51af28577b1eacacd502fea1

 

[Rurik]

When we have had to deal with this, we used gluten free hosts (that the parishioner took care of) that were put into a pyx and placed onto the side table with all the other elements. When it was time for communion the server would just place it on the table along with all the other elements. When it was time for the person to commune one of the servers would either communion the individual or open the pyx and stand by the priest with the pyx open so he could administer it. How it was done varied from priest to priest.

It was not a big deal it took some getting used to the mechanics but we all got used to it and it worked in no time.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

I don't have experience with any other Episcopal churches, but mine routinely offers an alternative gluten-free host for those who require it. And real wine (good wine at that) is standard, but we also offer grape juice for those who can't/shouldn't have alcohol. If those options are not standard practice, I think they should be. It isn't a great deal of trouble or expense, and it means a lot to people with those needs.

 

[ebia]

I don't have experience with any other Episcopal churches, but mine routinely offers an alternative gluten-free host for those who require it. And real wine (good wine at that) is standard, but we also offer grape juice for those who can't/shouldn't have alcohol. If those options are not standard practice, I think they should be. It isn't a great deal of trouble or expense, and it means a lot to people with those needs.

Offering a grape juice raises a whole set of other questions - is it okay to offer something other than wine? How does one offer it?

 

[FireDragon76]

For the moment, I'd just like a quick way to just receive the chalice without the Host... and I don't think there should be the automatic assumption that you are a communicant just because you show up at a church service.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

Offering a grape juice raises a whole set of other questions - is it okay to offer something other than wine? How does one offer it?

I remember the story of missionaries in the Amazon jungle who did communion with Coca-Cola and potato chips, because that was all they had. Just my opinion, but under the circumstances I think it was valid. The substances were wrong, but their hearts were right with God, doing the best they could with what they had.

But, hey, what do I know? I'm a former Pentecostal and still new to the apostolic/liturgical way of doing things.

Seriously, I do believe real wine is the proper/best thing to use. But there are people who aren't allowed to have it for medical reasons, or because they're recovering alcoholics afraid that it might cause a relapse. And also there are those with a personal conviction against consuming alcohol. I disagree with that, but I can respect it. I think in any of those circumstances it's best to settle for what you can have, rather than forgo it entirely. Possibly non-alcoholic wine might be an acceptable compromise? Though I've never had that and don't know if any of it is any good.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll pour myself a nice glass of cabernet.