We take communion monthly and use different kinds of breads -- wafers, loaves, matzoh, or flatbread.

We do offer people the choice of wine or grape juice out of consideration for those who have strong scruples against consuming alcohol. We neither force them to drink against their conscience, nor limit the freedom of those who disagree. I think it's a reasonable and gracious accommodation.

I see your point and understand your concern. Let me explain how we handle the situation in our church. My wife's best friend has Coeliac Disease so we try to be considerate of her situation when having any food at our Gathering. If she is going to be at our gathering during the Lord's supper we just circumvent the whole issue by using gluten free bread for everyone. Now it is a little easier for us because we are a small cell type church with 10-15 people. If you had a larger group it would be more difficult.

I think that having a severe medical situation that in some cases can result in hospitalization and death is slightly more pressing than someone being on the Atkins diet. So in those cases I would react differently.

Huh.
Maybe evangelicals should rediscover the use of the Monstrance. Then they can "take in" the Body of Christ with just their eyes.

It would make those long drawn out, once a month, poorly-planned, forced/faked emotion filled, where-they-tack-communion-on-the-end-because-the-pastor-can't-get-over-himself-to-preach-a-shorter-message Sundays much easier to get through.

I kid. I kid.

I am onboard with the use of different breads (based on necessity, not preferences) and with giving the option of wine or grape juice, as I think this can all be done while still maintaining the focus of partaking in communion in remembrance of Christ.

However, I can say that I was a little unnerved by the account which Tony Jones gave in The New Christians where he said that they purposefully buy fancy breads for communion and then afterwards the children fight over who gets to eat the leftovers. There was something in the tone and conduct of his recounting which to me just reeked of someone who is more concerned with sticking it to the traditional church than they are about actually keeping with the essence of what Jesus directed.

i think we make waaaaaaaaaaaaay too many accomodations for people. Here's the bread, take it or leave it. Life's too short to worry about this stuff. Nothing to see here, move along...

We don't have the issue with the bread (one loaf, wheat) but just the blood.

We offer both common cups and individual glasses. A few years ago, we were asked if we could provide some water in the small cups for recovering alcoholics in the congregation.

But white wine and water are very hard to distinguish. So recently we switched to purple grape juice.

Unfortunately the one person who can't tolerate the gluten in the bread is also allergic to grapes. So now we will have to discuss water, juice and wine.

Part of the issue is people feeling excluded or set apart if they don't appear to be taken the wine/bread like everyone else. Offering a blessing instead hasn't been a true answer.

We commune nearly every service so it is a big issue.

Charles Welch wasn't just happy because of a coincidence, his father had invented the process because he was a teetotaler. See this from Wikipedia.

"The method of pasteurizing grape juice to halt the fermentation has been attributed to an American physician and dentist, Thomas Bramwell Welch in 1869. A strong supporter of the temperance movement, he produced a non-alcoholic wine to be used for church services in his hometown of Vineland, New Jersey. His fellow parishioners continued to prefer and use regular wine. His son Charles E. Welch, also a dentist, eventually gave up his practice to promote grape juice. In 1893 he founded Welch's Grape Juice Company at Westfield, Chautauqua Co. NY. The product was given to visitors at international exhibitions."

I'm not even sure what to say to this post. But I have this voice welling up inside me that wants to say something...something like STOP THE MADNESS! I grew up Catholic. It was a big deal to go from sipping from the communal chalis of wine to dipping your wafer into the cup presented at the altar. Presumably, this change was made after much Vatican dialogue and in recognition that it's kind of gross to drink from the same cup as a bunch of strangers. I've always been grateful for this seemingly small adaptation to a significant ritual, and yet I think it may have become the first slide down a really slippery slope. When I attended my first Protestant service, I was surprised and somewhat amused by the little vials of grape juice. I assumed Protestants were either too cheap, lacking in sophistication, or simply sensitive to the struggles of alcoholics, and thus, grape juice was the "wine" poured out. You lose the sense of communal need for Jesus's blood and body when you try to apportion it in individual servings and according to the dietary needs of everyone in a faith community. Communion is not about satisfying our need for a particular food or drink for our bodies. It's about Jesus. Anything that diverts us from this truth is a disservice to those seeking to understand the reality of his body broken for us, his blood poured out for many.

My church frustrates me to no end when it comes to communion. We had a pastor who did a fabulous job of explaining the reasons for why we did it the way we did it, but the deacons slowly began to ignore everything he said. We now take communion in our seats, using freezer-burned cubes of white bread (they keep it in the freezer month to month) and a tiny chalice of welches, usually white-grape-pomegranite because one of the deacons likes it better then grape. We quit intiction sometime last fall because "it's flu season and we don't want people to get sick." I'm sorry, if you think you're going to get the flu from communion, where is your faith in God?

I'm tempted to make light of this topic. But as pointed out, there are some serious implications. When it comes to communal cups, sure let's poo-poo the flu. But what about AIDS? It's a real issue. Do you really want the guilt of spreading disease because you used 'faith' and not common sense?

Let's stick to the truth and the principles behind communion, and end all self-indulgence at the communion table. And we need to recognise that that necessitates that we be charitable to the needs of individuals as they participate in the symbol.

BTW, the Atkins diet is still kicking around? Who knew...?

the whole point is missed. Christ was reminding his disciples to feed the poor,
not instituting a new form of ritual or legalism.

see hebrews 13:9-10

and those who see communion as a joining in on the death of Christ until he comes again seem to forget: HE LIVES!

I think the blog question is a difficult one but coeliac disease can be extremely severe in some cases. I have an acquaintance whose daughter suffered severe weight loss before they figured out that she was a coeliac.

Although our tradition uses a single loaf, I do have the coeliac square - as they are here in the UK - on the communion table along with the loaf. I have to say that I can't understand at all why why having the gluten-free square on the communion table would be more individualistic than having the person bring their own and having it blessed separately?

I also have a number of people who are diabetic and so far no one has ever indicated that the small amount of non-alcoholic wine would upset their insulin. But if that were truly the case, I would also seek an alternative.

I would definitely draw the line at at catering for peoples' weight-loss diets. Given the small amount of bread and wine ingested at communion, this is just pandering to either individualism or to obsession.

Since when did stale crackers and watered-down grape juice constitute a meal anyway? When we come together, it is not the Lord's Snack we celebrate.

What began as a communal meal is now neither communal nor a meal: what we do under the guise if Eucharist/Lord's Supper doesn't necessitate discerning the body (of Christ as constituted by those gathered to remember his death and resurrection). So our proclamation is neutered ("you call _that_ community") and we eat and drink judgement on ourselves.

the whole point is missed. Christ was reminding his disciples to feed the poor,
not instituting a new form of ritual or legalism.

see hebrews 13:9-10

Wow! You must seriously be reading one of those new fangled emergent Bibles or something! I agree that Christ is not instituting a new ritual to follow (which means that this isn't something that is necessary for us to do), but I don't see anywhere that the Bible teaches us that communion is about feeding poor people.

We have to choose...

1. Offer glutton free so people with health needs the prevent them from using the regular bread can still participate or...

2. Offer just the regular bread and realize this means several people will not be abale to particiapte.

I think #1 is a reasonable and sensitve response.

Also - I think it is always helpful to have a non-alcoholic option for the communion cup. This is a very loving and supportive step for many people who are battling an alcohol addiction on a daily basis. For many, even a small sip can be a difficult or even dangerous thing for them.

1 Corinthians 10:31-32
So, whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God.

So, what's big deal about substitution of one type of bread or wine for another for the good of our brothers and sisters? Can traditions glorify God?

Todd,

"new fangled emergent books"?
Really.

Readings that foreground a preferential treatment for the poor have been around long before the "emergent boogeyman".

I'll make sure I put "emergent" on my list though...right after "liberal" and "hollywood".

I kid, I kid.

Nathan, I'm just not sure where the reading that Christ instituted it to remind them to feed the poor could come from (as far as in the Scriptures, not as in who would espouse something like this). And since I doubt many people on this blog are reading books from medieval liberal Christians it seems like there is only one sensible candidate for this type of nonsense. I would be interested in knowing how one would come to such a conclusion though, cause I just don't see it.

Todd,

Just to be clear, I don't buy the particular "reading" we are discussing either.

However, it seems that I've heard that kind of reading before within the framework of the wide and wooly world of various "liberation" theologies.

Given the wideness of the conversation, I'm not doubting that there might be some in the "emerging church" who buy it, but as one who also identifies with--and has been enormously helped by--the E conversation I can say that nobody I've known/conversed with has ever propounded such a reading.

But again, I was just ribbing you.

Todd Burus said:

"Offer glutton free..."

Anyone else catch the irony? :)

As an Anglican, I'm pretty intrigued by the responses here. Thanks to everyone for sharing.

This last month we had matzah bread and we did a little thing on the symbolism of the passover meal and communion and the things they share in common. Usually it's just grape juice (we are baptist) and some very stale waffers. I agree with the person that posted about us just tacking it on the end of the service. I think next month I might put it in the middle. What is sad though is that so much of what we do in church today is aimed at making sure no one is offended and that everyone is happy.

Tim,

Or why not do the work of planning the whole service around the Eucharist?

"I wonder if our first step down this slippery slope was the move away from a communal chalice to those ubiquitous communion cups"

Not hardly. There are far greater problems with believers practicing communion than the elements or cups they choose to use or complain about using. Do you think believers in juggles of Irian Jaya must use only certain elements or cups to truthfully obey the teachings?

Believers self-centered thinking is driven by a weak, self-centered institutionalized system of church where 85% of "giving" is focused on hired experts and special buildings for crowd oriented gathering to make the meeting easy - preparation free and personal expression free - for the givers. Giving isn't giving until it goes beyond the giver! The system mocks the very essence of a giving God. The ceremony of the Eucharist or whatever you want to call it is nauseating to God when believes selfish and shallow behaviors 24/7 contradict it. To obey is better than ceremonial details for remembering what you mock with your life.

Well, really, what did we expect when every OTHER facet of "how we do church" these days is driven by catering to consumers...the music, the seats, the watered-down, "what is God going to do for me?" teaching, the coffee bar in the foyer, etc., etc.???

Not that there's necessarily something WRONG with having some of these things, but they are consumer-driven. Given all of that, why wouldn't people begin to expect that we'd tailor even communion to meet their individual needs?

I understand (kind of) the validity of a need for special bread or juice/wine for extreme cases, but surely there have been these kinds of cases for hundreds of years and people either brought their own or abstained. Why all of a sudden do people believe that it is the church's job to accommodate their personal choices? Because the church has spent the last 25 years doing just that!

On the other hand, I agree with some others who have said that, really, what we eat or drink for communion is far less important that the attitude of the heart that goes with it. In many churches it's just a ritual that has lost any meaning whatsoever, and that is a lot bigger issue than what kind of bread we use.

Much of today's church is planned by personal preferences rather than biblical principles. How can I take the teaching of Christ and make it more palatable to myself and my friends? How can I make communion more to MY liking?
Does God ever get offended when we choose preference over principle?

One year at summer youth camp, our senior higher were asking to have a communion service before we closed camp. It wasn't in our original planning so out of necessity we celebrated communion with potato chips and pepsi. God, I am sure, was delighted!

As another Anglican here, I am also very intrigued by the responses.

Wow!

I have a seminary friend who ministers to street children and their families in Central Asia recall a story where her volunteers after a particularly trying day felt the need to unify and take communion together. All they had available was KoolAid and cake leftover from a party they gave to the children. She remarked that it was one of the most meaningful communion services she had ever had.

We get too hung up on the external and don't consider that wherever our treasure is, there your heart and thoughts will be.

Followers of Christ who suffer from Celiac Disease may feel as though they have been exiled from participating fully in the Lord's Supper due to the disease, not preference.

Collective unity around the communion table might be achieved if one of the following occurs;

1.Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ answers the prayers of healing for those who suffer from Celiac Disease.

2.The church becomes the hands of Christ reaching out and serves gluten free bread to all believers who participate in the sacrament.

By thinking with my heart, if I have offended anyone, please forgive me.

No comments about gluten, but your article brings up another issue pertaining to unity in communion. To be biblical, we need to eliminate the erroneously-used word "broken" in our communion services. (It does not appear in the Greek in I Cor. 11:24; the KJV translators erroneously stuck it in.) Jesus' body was not "broken" and that's critical. John's Gospel accents this (19:36)pointing out how Jesus'crucifixion details fulfilled the O.T. command/prophecy that no bone of the Passover Lamb be broken. (The point was, Jewish Passover participants couldn't separate themselves from others by sending Gentile dwellers in their house off with a leg of lamb to celebrate separately.) The foreshadowing Passover meal was a community meal, just as the Passover sacrifice was a community sacrifice.