Timeline for Why do Catholics believe transubstantiated host may still affect the gluten sensitive?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 2017 at 10:00 | comment | added | Kadalikatt Joseph Sibichan | In Southern India where I hail from, rice is the staple food, and wheat is a comparatively new base for baking bread . I wonder whether wheat-flour was originally used here for baking the host, as is the practice now. Assuming that rice-flour was used by Catholics for baking the host in the early centuries in places like India , the question loses most of its relevance. If the consecrated host continues to taste, look and smell like wheat, rather than flesh , there is no point it debating over its anatomical properties. " Senses cannot grasp this marvel...." as the hymn goes ! | |
| Aug 18, 2017 at 20:41 | comment | added | Ángel | Host that have zero gluten are not valid matter for communion, per the letter you linked. However, food is termed gluten-free when it has less than 20 mg/kg of gluten (cf. Codex Alimentarius). Thus, you can have gluten-free hosts with gluten enough to be transubstantiated. | |
| Aug 18, 2017 at 13:48 | comment | added | Robert Columbia | There are actually two options for people with Celiac Disorder to receive Catholic communion. One is extra-low gluten bread as mentioned earlier, and the other is to take communion via the wine instead. | |
| S Aug 18, 2017 at 13:21 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improve wording
|
| Aug 18, 2017 at 12:19 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 18, 2017 at 13:21 | |||||
| Aug 18, 2017 at 11:23 | comment | added | OrangeDog | It may add clarity to contrast substance and form (which is why it's transubstatiate not transform). | |
| Aug 18, 2017 at 4:18 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Aug 18, 2017 at 0:05 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 369 characters in body
|
| S Aug 17, 2017 at 23:52 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a missing negation to statement regarding chemical properties and essentialism. Also added an explanatory bit on gluten as an accident of the bread. Former is necessary to this edit, latter can be removed
|
| S Aug 17, 2017 at 23:52 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a missing negation to statement regarding chemical properties and essentialism. Also added an explanatory bit on gluten as an accident of the bread. Former is necessary to this edit, latter can be removed
|
| Aug 17, 2017 at 23:29 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 17, 2017 at 23:52 | |||||
| Aug 17, 2017 at 22:06 | vote | accept | Pigfaricus | ||
| Aug 17, 2017 at 22:05 | comment | added | Pigfaricus | @MattGutting and bradimus, I'll go ahead and accept this as the most helpful answer. Thanks for all of your comments! | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 19:00 | comment | added | bradimus | @Pigfaricus I am not an expert in Realism, so I'm not sure of the relation of the bread to the gluten. My understanding, and I welcome correction, is that the essence of bread subsumes (?) the essence of the gluten as part of the process of making the bread. Some of the properties of gluten become properties of the bread. This should probably be continued in chat rather than comments, but I'm not sure you have enough reputation to join chat. Let me look at that. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 18:27 | comment | added | Pigfaricus | I understand this, but it seems that when comparing gluten with the bread, bradimus is making the former judgement (nominalism) of what something is and isn't, but in the case of comparing the chemical properties of gluten and gluten itself, (s)he is making the latter judgement of what something is and isn't. What I'm arguing is that both comparisons are similar enough that we should be following the same judgement paradigm for both - either nominalism or philosophical idea. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 18:06 | comment | added | Matt Gutting | @Pigfaricus This is exactly the point. The idea that something is the sum of its properties, which is the approach science takes, is called nominalism and dates back to the late 12th or early 13th century. The approach the Church uses to understand what goes on here is a much older philosophical idea, dating back to Aristotle if not before, and says that (to paraphrase a CS Lewis character) what something is, and what it is made of, are different. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:54 | comment | added | Pigfaricus | It is strange in my mind to make a division between the chemical properties of gluten and gluten itself. The chemical properties of gluten seem, to me, to be a substance of gluten, and if gluten is a substance of bread, then the chemical properties of gluten would be a substance of the bread. Perhaps this is devolving into a matter of opinion based on whether or not chemical properties of something = something... | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:44 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:40 | comment | added | bradimus | @Pigfaricus I think it is more accurate to say the chemical properties of gluten are accidents of the bread, rather than the gluten itself. They gluten may be essential to bread. I'm not sure, but the augment the CC makes for not having gluten-free bread suggests that maybe it is essential. I've edited my answer to address some of your comment. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:37 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 565 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:25 | comment | added | Pigfaricus | This is interesting. So are you saying that the gluten in the bread is an accident of the bread? If so, I would consider the chemistry of the bread essential to what the bread is. If the chemistry of the bread isn't essential, why is there supposedly* a problem in not using wheat based bread? * - my understanding, may be wrong in what Catholocism actually says. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:18 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 198 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:13 | history | edited | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 198 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2017 at 17:06 | history | answered | bradimus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |