Historical History of the Lavabo?

[Solomonson]

I have always noticed that at Papal Masses, the lavabo water ewer and basin are rather large and distinct from the small flagon used to add water to the wine. I presumed that it dated from the days when potable water was scarce and not used to clean, but just to consume? Does anyone know any history behind this?

I also figured that it’s also just a small reminder that the water being mixed with the wine has extremely important symbolism, that it must be pure and that the process deserves its own flagon. For some reason it looks very chintzy and too utilitarian to me to see the small water flagon (or even a little bottle or pitcher sometimes) used for the lavabo.

Has anyone else ever wondered about this?

 

[pianistclare]

two words:

Pontius Pilate

 

[Solomonson]

two words:

Pontius Pilate

What a nasty response. Pontius Pilate’s washing of his own hands has absolutely nothing to do with the lavabo during the Mass. I was looking for a serious answer. Wrong place apparently.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I have always noticed that at Papal Masses, the lavabo water ewer and basin are rather large and distinct from the small flagon used to add water to the wine. I presumed that it dated from the days when potable water was scarce and not used to clean, but just to consume? Does anyone know any history behind this?

I also figured that it’s also just a small reminder that the water being mixed with the wine has extremely important symbolism, that it must be pure and that the process deserves its own flagon. For some reason it looks very chintzy and too utilitarian to me to see the small water flagon (or even a little bottle or pitcher sometimes) used for the lavabo.

Has anyone else ever wondered about this?

That is not universal. In our parish, the flask is the same one for both, and it is rather small, as only a little water is need to be added to one of the chalices, the presider’s chalice. I doubt there is any symbolism at all, since it is not a universal practice, but rather up to the parish as to what flask to use. (I am not talking about the symbolism of the water being added to the chalice or the wriest washing his hands).

 

[Chatter163]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=697299

 

[Solomonson]

That is not universal. In our parish, the flask is the same one for both, and it is rather small, as only a little water is need to be added to one of the chalices, the presider’s chalice. I doubt there is any symbolism at all, since it is not a universal practice, but rather up to the parish as to what flask to use. (I am not talking about the symbolism of the water being added to the chalice or the wriest washing his hands).

I don’t believe that’s true. Water needs to be added to either the flagon containing the wine before it’s poured into the individual chalices, or water needs to be added to every chalice if done after the portioning of the wine.

 

[paperwight66]

I don’t believe that’s true. Water needs to be added to either the flagon containing the wine before it’s poured into the individual chalices, or water needs to be added to every chalice if done after the portioning of the wine.

In our parish, water is added only to the presider’s chalice. The three others (which are placed already filled on the credence table by the sacristan before Mass) do not get water added.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I don’t believe that’s true. Water needs to be added to either the flagon containing the wine before it’s poured into the individual chalices, or water needs to be added to every chalice if done after the portioning of the wine.

No, it is correct, and also water is NOT to be added to the flagon before it is poured. The priest may add water to his chalice or all the chalices. Here is an article about this, and there are others that can be cited, as well as the GIRM. This has been discussed before on this forum. God bless.

zenit.org/articles/water-and-multiple-chalices/

 

[Solomonson]

No, it is correct, and also water is NOT to be added to the flagon before it is poured. The priest may add water to his chalice or all the chalices. Here is an article about this, and there are others that can be cited, as well as the GIRM. This has been discussed before on this forum. God bless.

zenit.org/articles/water-and-multiple-chalices/

That’s not proof…

Watch at papal Masses. Every chalice gets a shot, from a rather large flagon.

 

[CB_Catholic]

That’s not proof…

Watch at papal Masses. Every chalice gets a shot, from a rather large flagon.

Well if the GIRM isn’t enough for you, I don’t what is. The priest has the option of pouring into one or all chalices. I’m not going to argue the point.

 

[Solomonson]

Well if the GIRM isn’t enough for you, I don’t what is. The priest has the option of pouring into one or all chalices. I’m not going to argue the point.

Hit and run, aye?

No where does the GIRM specify that water is not to be mixed with each vessel of wine, hence the Vatican’s pouring of water into each chalice. You offer Fr. McNamara’s opinion and simply put, it’s not his call.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hit and run, aye?

No where does the GIRM specify that water is not to be mixed with each vessel of wine, hence the Vatican’s pouring of water into each chalice. You offer Fr. McNamara’s opinion and simply put, it’s not his call.

The GIRM simply does not address this particular issue—what to do about the additional chalices/cups.

With regard to the main chalice, yes: wine then water must be poured into it, at the proper time, and in the manner described in the Missal, using the proper words. There’s no question about that.

With regard to other chalices (or cups if used): the GIRM does not specify what must be done. Therefore, local usage is permitted, as long as nothing is done that actually contradicts the GIRM. For example, the other chalices cannot be left on the credence table until the Lamb of God.

 

[Solomonson]

The GIRM simply does not address this particular issue—what to do about the additional chalices/cups.

With regard to the main chalice, yes: wine then water must be poured into it, at the proper time, and in the manner described in the Missal, using the proper words. There’s no question about that.

With regard to other chalices (or cups if used): the GIRM does not specify what must be done. Therefore, local usage is permitted, as long as nothing is done that actually contradicts the GIRM. For example, the other chalices cannot be left on the credence table until the Lamb of God.

I agree. It’s not expressly required nor prohibited. I become a little concerned when some take an absolutely stand (one way or the other on such things) based on the quality of “proof” proffered.

There’s also no prohibition by the GIRM against adding the water to the flagon itself.

 

[FrDavid96]

I agree. It’s not expressly required nor prohibited. I become a little concerned when some take an absolutely stand (one way or the other on such things) based on the quality of “proof” proffered.

There’s also no prohibition by the GIRM against adding the water to the flagon itself.

Maybe, maybe not.

The Missal does describe what must be done with regard to the principle chalice. There’s no flexibility there, and no options. So, it’s not acceptable to add water to a flagon (or small cruet) of wine then pour that wine into the main chalice. That method is contrary to the rubrics.

With regard to filling the ancillary chalice(s) or cup(s) from a flagon at the offertory the rubrics are silent. How that gets done can be (indeed, must be) locally determined.

It’s an important distinction.

 

[Solomonson]

Maybe, maybe not.

The Missal does describe what must be done with regard to the principle chalice. There’s no flexibility there, and no options. So, it’s not acceptable to add water to a flagon (or small cruet) of wine then pour that wine into the main chalice. That method is contrary to the rubrics.

Yes, that’s quite obvious.

With regard to filling the ancillary chalice(s) or cup(s) from a flagon at the offertory the rubrics are silent. How that gets done can be (indeed, must be) locally determined.

It’s an important distinction.

An obvious one too. Those that claim water may not be added to the flagon no matter what based on standing church documentation are mistaken.

 

[FrDavid96]

Yes, that’s quite obvious.

An obvious one too. Those that claim water may not be added to the flagon no matter what based on standing church documentation are mistaken.

I’m saying the same thing that Fr McN— wrote in the article.

Yet, it seems you might disagree with him.

?