bread, plain old bread...and it does not matter what its made from... ..it is in REMEMBRANCE of Christ.
She had a wafer made without the wheat...so what. Splitting hairs is not what Jesus is about, and WHERE in Lords'supper do you see a recipe for the flour??? IF he wanted a special bread he would have given the recipe where the Lord's Supper is spoken about....this is nonsense, Perid.
Show me where Jesus gave out the ingredients for bread of the Last Supper. It does not have anything to do with Ezekials bread cause that was for a different purpose in OLD Testament.
Thanks for getting to the bottom of the Catholic/"Reformist" argument over the Eucharist. To Catholics, it's not only a remembrance. It is also the same eternal Sacrifice of Calvary, but through unbloody means. I think the "Reformists" can agree that the consequences of Christ's Sacrifice are eternal.
Back when I was a protestant, we literally used cubes of Wonder Bread and Welches grape juice. It didn't matter what it was made from since "communion" was just a ritual reenactment. As Catholics, we take the "This is my body..." literally. Like the early Christians, we believe that the bread and wine is truly changed into Christ's body and blood. In this way, each and every Mass is a miracle. That is why we are so precise in how it is conducted. Those who believe otherwise can do it however they please, with whatever they want.
Careful -- you're about to get into the argument about transubstantiation, consubstantiation, and so on. The folks in this article believe that the bread becomes the real flesh of Christ, so it's a pretty big deal to them.
As for me, I think an insistence on wheat (and not some other sort of bread) is indeed quite pharasaical.