Lavabo Water vs. Water Mingled with the Wine?

[Solomonson]

I went to Mass today and as expected, my parish was a ghost town. A substitute priest from a nearby friary was the celebrant. I noticed he used two separate vessels of water – one for the lavabo and one for adding to the wine.

After Mass at breakfast I asked him about this. He seemed delighted that someone noticed. He asked me to take a guess? I said that back around 33AD, I suspect potable water was at a high premium so they used drinking water to mix with the wine and non-potable water for the lavabo?

He said that I was correct – he seemed VERY pleased! Looking back I really appreciated the detail of his Mass. He used a burse, a chalice veil and a pall, which I rarely see anymore.

Has anyone else ever heard this before? Very interesting historical detail. It was nice that he is preserving it.

 

[Phemie]

I went to Mass today and as expected, my parish was a ghost town. A substitute priest from a nearby friary was the celebrant. I noticed he used two separate vessels of water – one for the lavabo and one for adding to the wine.

After Mass at breakfast I asked him about this. He seemed delighted that someone noticed. He asked me to take a guess? I said that back around 33AD, I suspect potable water was at a high premium so they used drinking water to mix with the wine and non-potable water for the lavabo?

He said that I was correct – he seemed VERY pleased! Looking back I really appreciated the detail of his Mass. He used a burse, a chalice veil and a pall, which I rarely see anymore.

Has anyone else ever heard this before? Very interesting historical detail. It was nice that he is preserving it.

We always used a separate cruet for the lavabo water, when it was poured.

The second to last Pastor decided that the lavabo bowl that was presented to him would already contain the water so there has been no pouring during the lavabo for the past 7 years. The reason? The altar servers didn’t know how to pour. I mean, really?? How about you teach them to do it properly? Neither of the last 2 pastors has changed that.

 

[Solomonson]

We always used a separate cruet for the lavabo water, when it was poured.

The second to last Pastor decided that the lavabo bowl that was presented to him would already contain the water so there has been no pouring during the lavabo for the past 7 years. The reason? The altar servers didn’t know how to pour. I mean, really?? How about you teach them to do it properly? Neither of the last 2 pastors has changed that.

That used to happen at my parish long ago when there was extremely pressure to make the Mass as basic/utilitarian/stripped as possible.

Thank goodness those days have passed.

 

[poche]

We have always used a separate cruet for the lavabo and the lavabo. this would be the first time I heard of them using the same cruet/pitcher for both the lavabo and the wine.

 

[paperwight]

We have always used a separate cruet for the lavabo and the lavabo. this would be the first time I heard of them using the same cruet/pitcher for both the lavabo and the wine.

Same here. The cruet for the chalice is much smaller and quite fiddly compared with the jug used for the lavabo, for one thing. It’s easier for the server to pour from the jug, and it also means there is plenty of water available if there’s an accident.

 

[Crusaderbear]

Good Job Solomonson! You probably made that priests day - someone actually interested in what he does during the mass!

 

[Chatter163]

While in the early Church the potable and non-potable water sources may have been the case, certainly in more recent centuries only one water cruet was used. The rubrics of the old Missal (which were quite precise) directed only one water and one wine cruet be used.

From what I recall, the trend of having separate water containers arose in the 1980s, and only in some places.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

While in the early Church the potable and non-potable water sources may have been the case, certainly in more recent centuries only one water cruet was used. The rubrics of the old Missal (which were quite precise) directed only one water and one wine cruet be used.

From what I recall, the trend of having separate water containers arose in the 1980s, and only in some places.

That’s certainly my memory from serving in the '50’s.

 

[tee_eff_em]

While in the early Church the potable and non-potable water sources may have been the case, certainly in more recent centuries only one water cruet was used. The rubrics of the old Missal (which were quite precise) directed only one water and one wine cruet be used.

From what I recall, the trend of having separate water containers arose in the 1980s, and only in some places.

To be honest, I’m not positive what the practice of my parish is? I am *pretty *sure it is a single cruet for admixture, lavabo, and purification, but I could be mistaken?

I know when I was in the habit of a daily Mass held on a college campus’s nondenominational chapel, a single cruet was used – Most likely for convenience and due to a paucity of space for storing the items needed for Catholic Masses.

But I also know that the parish of my youth (FTR in the 1970s) utilized a cruet for the admixture and purification, and a separate stainless steel pitcher and bowl for the lavabo. It must have been the preference of the pastor, because it was a particular bugaboo of the parochial vicar to break “lazy” altar boys of the habit of simply pouring the contents of the bowl back into the pitcher after Mass, rather than walking it back to the sacristy sink to empty it. (Ewwww )

:twocents:
tee

 

[Solomonson]

Now that I think about it, they use a rather large ewer and basin for the lavabo at papal Masses. Much, much larger than the pitcher/cruet used to add water.

 

[Solomonson]

Good Job Solomonson! You probably made that priests day - someone actually interested in what he does during the mass!

I wasn’t a big deal but that priest did make a special effort to use a chalice veil, pall and burse along with the separate cruet and ewer. He clearly has a profound respect for the Mass.

I’m not sure why some priests seem to make a special effort to strip away every semblance of solemnity within the Mass? In the end, down deep, that says something gravely wrong to me.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

To be honest, I’m not positive what the practice of my parish is? I am *pretty *sure it is a single cruet for admixture, lavabo, and purification, but I could be mistaken?

I suspect you know this, but it’s not necessary to use separate vessels for the water. A nice touch - I admire that attention to detail. Only commenting for the sake of the reader who may not be aware.

 

[Inisfallen]

That’s certainly my memory from serving in the '50’s.

And mine, from the sixties.

 

[Solomonson]

While in the early Church the potable and non-potable water sources may have been the case, certainly in more recent centuries only one water cruet was used. **The rubrics of the old Missal (which were quite precise) directed only one water and one wine cruet be used. **

From what I recall, the trend of having separate water containers arose in the 1980s, and only in some places.

I’ll have to find some footage of a papal Mass from the early 1960’s. I seriously doubt they were using the same flagon for both adding water to the wine and for the lavabo.

Though the rubrics of the EF do list what to prepare for the celebration of the Mass, I don’t think using separate cruets/flagons and ewers would in any way be wrong. It would simply be a matter of going above and beyond.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

I’ll have to find some footage of a papal Mass from the early 1960’s. I seriously doubt they were using the same flagon for both adding water to the wine and for the lavabo.

Though the rubrics of the EF do list what to prepare for the celebration of the Mass, I don’t think using separate cruets/flagons and ewers would in any way be wrong. It would simply be a matter of going above and beyond.

Given the many special rubrics associated with a Solemn Pontifical Mass - including the Pope’s privilege of receiving the Precious Blood through a golden straw - I’m not sure how dispositive practices in such a Mass would be in terms of shedding light on this issue. In fact, I can’t imagine that in the case of such a Mass, a single water vessel would have been used, vs. a golden ewer and basin.

 

[otjm]

I wasn’t a big deal but that priest did make a special effort to use a chalice veil, pall and burse along with the separate cruet and ewer. He clearly has a profound respect for the Mass.

I’m not sure why some priests seem to make a special effort to strip away every semblance of solemnity within the Mass? In the end, down deep, that says something gravely wrong to me.

Well, I am sorry that what you call solemnities are lacking in Masses you attend. You are thus blessed to not be living in the time of the earliest Church, as such niceties simply didn’t exist; but to go from niceties to no niceties as stripping solemnity from the Mass seems a bit beyond the pale as I suspect those earliest Masses were equally solemn.

60 years ago we had two cruets - one for water and one for wine. As we moved to the period of having both Species available to the communicants, all I have seen is one cruet, for water. And one seems to have sufficed for water for the last 60 years.

And having attended numerous Masses at our local Trappist abbey, with only a chalice and a purificator, I fail to have observed any lack of solemnity on the part of the presiding monk priest - including the abbot.

 

[johnnykins]

I’ll have to find some footage of a papal Mass from the early 1960’s. I seriously doubt they were using the same flagon for both adding water to the wine and for the lavabo.

Though the rubrics of the EF do list what to prepare for the celebration of the Mass, I don’t think using separate cruets/flagons and ewers would in any way be wrong. It would simply be a matter of going above and beyond.

At the parish where I grew up they used only one water cruet in the Mass in the 50s and 60’s.

And, where the rubrics specifically called for one cruet/flagon, it would be an abuse, illicit, to use 2.

HMMM just looked and couldn’t find a rubric on “one cruet”…so it may not be illicit in the EF

 

[otjm]

At the parish where I grew up they used only one water cruet in the Mass in the 50s and 60’s.

And, where the rubrics specifically called for one cruet/flagon, it would be an abuse, illicit, to use 2.

HMMM just looked and couldn’t find a rubric on “one cruet”…so it may not be illicit in the EF

Perhaps we all need to be a bit cautious when we read the rubrics. It is up to Rome as to what is absolute and what is not considered absolute, but may well look like it is.

To wit: some years ago Cardinal George submitted a dubium, concerning posture which had been changed in the most recent go-around. Cardinal Arinze’s answer was that Rome had no intention of being so absolutist about the matter.

While some rubrics are widely acknowledged to be limited to what is said, we need to not fall into the presumption that all rubrics are.

 

[Phemie]

Perhaps we all need to be a bit cautious when we read the rubrics. It is up to Rome as to what is absolute and what is not considered absolute, but may well look like it is.

To wit: some years ago Cardinal George submitted a dubium, concerning posture which had been changed in the most recent go-around. Cardinal Arinze’s answer was that Rome had no intention of being so absolutist about the matter.

While some rubrics are widely acknowledged to be limited to what is said, we need to not fall into the presumption that all rubrics are.

The funny thing is that the posture had not been changed. The posture of standing from after the Consecration to the end of Mass, except for sitting in the period of silence after Communion, was the same as it had been in article 21 of the universal 1970 GIRM. Nobody seemed to pay much attention to it back then though.

The US National Conference of Catholic Bishops had, at its meeting in November 1969, made one adaptation to article 21: it decreed kneeling from after the Sanctus to after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer for everyone. In later years it allowed bishops to decide for their diocese whether to kneel for the entire prayer or only for the Consecration.

 

[Solomonson]

Well, I am sorry that what you call solemnities are lacking in Masses you attend…

Thanks. It has improved to some degree at my parish in recent years. Before that it was almost as if someone had purposely trimmed away any semblance of reverence or solemnity in the Masses that were celebrated at my parish.

A turning point was actually our local paper. An obviously biased reporter wrote a story about how beautiful the “ceremony” was at my parish. Someone wrote a very informative letter to the editor in response lamenting the loss of reverence and solemnity.

Within days the wine glasses and pottery cereal bowls were replaced by gold chalices and ciboriums that the parish already owned. Same with the processional crucifix that reclaimed its place, pushing aside a “cross” made of wooden dowels that held a banner.

There were a great many changes after that letter to the editor. All very positive.

I wish there were more.