Sacramental wine requirements

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Winemakers have told me that as well and it brings up a good point. I read on another thread like this that distilled spirits made from grapes (brandy) could be added to sacramental wine as a preservative. Given that brandy is not natural (it’s processed) I don’t see how that could be possible?

I think that fortified wine would be a no-no. If you read my earlier post, you’ll see that it is not necessary to add sulfites if you take care in cleanliness.

Glass carboys? You’re not talking about commercial quantities are you?

You can get glass carboys as small as one gallon.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Yes you did. The difference between making wine at home and and making wine on a commercial basis.

You mean besides the licensing requirements.

That is the biggest difference between the two. And they vary from state to state. In my home state of Ohio, when I contacted the governmental agency that handles that, I was told it would take a minimum of 200,000 - 250,000 to get started as a commercial winemaker (I think even more for distilling). And that was several years ago. That is all the required licenses and required equipment. There are requirements for building, equipment, etc. And don’t forget all the added taxation. I think Ohio is one of the worst states for taxation of wine.

As a home winemaker in Ohio, I can make up to 250 gallons per year (I think, I’d have to check the statute to be certain). That 250 gallons includes all wines - grape, apple, etc. As a home winemaker, I cannot sell or gain profit by the wine in anyway - but I am allowed to give it as a gift to friends and family.

A commercial winemaker can use either fresh grapes or juice. I believe that fresh grapes are more popular, but juice is certainly used. In fact, I visited a winery in North Carolina that used juice exclusively. Of course the use of juice necessitates the use of sulfites (the juice maker will add them to the juice) and balancers - especially energizers and nutrients.

As for the actual production - the biggest difference between commerical and home winemaking is the same as in almost any endeavor. A home winemaker can give more care than a commerical winery. A commercial winery must be concerned with raw output - as much quantity as possible. As a result, many shortcuts are taken. For instance, the extensive use of sulfites; the use of whole laboratories to detect and correct any balance deficiencies; the overlooking of potentially bad fruit (which even more necessitates the usage of sulfites); etc.

Now some home winemakers will use juice - and that will already have sulfites in it to preserve it before the winemaker even gets possession of it. I prefer to use fresh grapes, but sometimes I cannot find a merchant that has fresh grapes of the variety I want. But, I maintain that there is a certain quality that fresh grapes have that juice cannot duplicate.

Sometimes it is best to press immediately after crushing to use only the juice (but note that we’re starting with fresh grapes). This is the case to get a white wine from a grape that has a red skin (i.e., Pinot Grigio).

Another thing to note between wine meant for sacramental purposes and other purposes is aging. That is because the use of wood would be contrary to the rubrics of no additions. Wood adds flavor to the wine, that’s why we use it. In addition to flavor, it helps age it with time - the biggest thing to help this is the tannins in the wood (oak I believe is the best wood in this regard). Without the addition of wood, wine has a flavor that is often described as “young”. It also will very likely be harsh in its flavor (the tannins would help this out immensely).

The bottom line of differences is that commercial winemaking will emphasis the science while home winemaking will emphasis the art.

If you are interested in winemaking, I can recommend some books and periodicals.

Any more questions?

 

[Paten]

Hello,

I think that fortified wine would be a no-no. If you read my earlier post, you’ll see that it is not necessary to add sulfites if you take care in cleanliness.

You can get glass carboys as small as one gallon.

I’m not at all sure one can produce commercial quantities of wine without using added sulfates – at least without great risk of the wine souring.

Small glass carboys are not the issue. Big ones are. I’ve never seen large glass carboys used to hold wine – they are all some sort of polymer.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

JMJ_coder,
because of the large volumes thats required of commercial wine producers, they can’t chance things going wrong, where they would have to eat the cost of hundreds of thousands of gallons of bad wine.

Hence, they’ll add sulfates to stabilize the wine, rather than risk the chance that they’d end up bottling vinegar.

Jim

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

I’m not at all sure one can produce commercial quantities of wine without using added sulfates – at least without great risk of the wine souring.

because of the large volumes thats required of commercial wine producers, they can’t chance things going wrong, where they would have to eat the cost of hundreds of thousands of gallons of bad wine.

Amish commercial winemakers likely won’t use sulfites (though this isn’t as universal among them as it was even ten years ago).

You’re right in that because they are commercial dealing with large volumes, they don’t want to take any risks - what business does. There are pros and cons for using sulfites.

Of course, how much volume of sacramental wine would a commercial winery produce. They could easily produce enough sacramental wine without any sulfites without risking ruining their main wine lines.

But, we are talking about businesses and they can and will have variations between them. Most likely, how much is the business in it for the Church? A winery that’s just here to make a buck may not care to be as stringent and try to get away with as much as they can. A winery that runs as an apostolate for the Church (wouldn’t that be novel ) would likely try to do things as perfectly as possible, even if that meant a potential loss of revenues.

Hence, they’ll add sulfates to stabilize the wine, rather than risk the chance that they’d end up bottling vinegar.

This is less an issue of vinegar (only a specific bacteria makes vinegar and it isn’t everywhere) and sulfites at this stage as it is about corks and cork material. But that is a whole fascinating other discussion.

Small glass carboys are not the issue. Big ones are. I’ve never seen large glass carboys used to hold wine – they are all some sort of polymer.

Generally 15 gallons will be the largest glass carboys made. I have seen occasionally larger, but this is uncommon. That wouldn’t preclude a commercial winery from using them. The winery in North Carolina I mentioned earlier made and stored all their wine in glass carboys (6 gallon carboys as memory serves). The specific equipment used will vary from winery to winery - as with any business. For instance, at the Biltmore winery in Asheville, N.C. (yeah, I took a tour of North Carolina wineries a few years back ) used huge fermenters (stainless steel, I think - must have held several hundred gallons in each). They then stored them in wood barrels to age.

So it depends on the specific winery, and also on the quantity made - several hundred gallons per year or thousands upon thousands of gallons per year.

 

[Marilynclssc]

Being new what does GIRM stand for or mean the other one is OD I think?

 

[roanoker]

Talk about legalism! Talk about pharisaic!! Just use some wine! That’s what Jesus did. I doubt that He was concerned about sulfites and such. This is the kind of thing that turns people off about Catholicism. This is man-made legalism-not rules from God…

 

[Paten]

Talk about legalism! Talk about pharisaic!! Just use some wine! That’s what Jesus did. I doubt that He was concerned about sulfites and such. This is the kind of thing that turns people off about Catholicism. This is man-made legalism-not rules from God…

There is a reason for the rules. Without them, I’m sure some would be trying to use sparkling wine (sugar added), port (fortified with brandy), sherry, saki (rice wine), plum wine, dandelion wine, etc. etc. Which would eventually slippery-slope to Welch’s grape juice, Budweiser and Jack Daniels.

While there might indeed be commercial sacramental wine sold that has no added sulfates, I’m fairly certain there is some that is sold with added sulfates – for “Catholic use” to boot.

 

[Wonko_the_Sane]

Why not make sure you are using the right wine by getting goons from the Jesuits in South Australia?

 

[Paten]

I looked at the pallet of sacramental wine at my parish this morning. This wine is made by a fairly famous winery that survived prohibition largely by making wine for the Catholic Church. Each box said “contains sulfates.”

Do wineries have to label wine with no added sulfites with “contains sulfates?” That will be the next thing I research.

 

[Paten]

from dioceseofgallup.org/id44.htm

“The wine must be natural wine of the grape and not corrupt. Wine made from other fruit or chemically composed is not valid for the Eucharist. Likewise it cannot have additives such that it would be substantially altered, nor may water in equal or greater quantities than the wine be added. **The addition of sulfites as a purifying agent does not render the wine corrupt.” **

from madisoncatholicherald.org/2002-09-12/bishop.html

“Bullock pointed out that, according to Paragraph 284 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and Canon 924 of the Code of Canon Law, the wine for use at Mass must be pure grape wine without additives. Any foreign substances in the wine such as flavoring or herbs, or wines made from other substances, are not acceptable.
**
The presence of sulfates in the wine is acceptable, however, because they are a preservative used throughout the industry. Grape juice or wine coolers are not to be used, he said.**”

 

[Joe_Kelley]

from dioceseofgallup.org/id44.htm

“The wine must be natural wine of the grape and not corrupt. Wine made from other fruit or chemically composed is not valid for the Eucharist. Likewise it cannot have additives such that it would be substantially altered, nor may water in equal or greater quantities than the wine be added. **The addition of sulfites as a purifying agent does not render the wine corrupt.” **

from madisoncatholicherald.org/2002-09-12/bishop.html

"Bullock pointed out that, according to Paragraph 284 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and Canon 924 of the Code of Canon Law, the wine for use at Mass must be pure grape wine without additives. Any foreign substances in the wine such as flavoring or herbs, or wines made from other substances, are not acceptable.

The presence of sulfates in the wine is acceptable, however, because they are a preservative used throughout the industry. Grape juice or wine coolers are not to be used, he said."

This appears to also validate the use of fortified wines, such as Port, which I have seen used. The fortifying agent is brandy, which is a pure grape product.

I was originally doubtful of this, but was assured that it was proper. On the other hand I don’t see the necessity of using a fortified wine, but that is a personal opinion.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I looked at the pallet of sacramental wine at my parish this morning. This wine is made by a fairly famous winery that survived prohibition largely by making wine for the Catholic Church. Each box said “contains sulfates.”

Do wineries have to label wine with no added sulfites with “contains sulfates?” That will be the next thing I research.

That would be the question since it was pointed out that most all wine contains sulfates naturally.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

from dioceseofgallup.org/id44.htm

“The wine must be natural wine of the grape and not corrupt. Wine made from other fruit or chemically composed is not valid for the Eucharist. Likewise it cannot have additives such that it would be substantially altered, nor may water in equal or greater quantities than the wine be added. **The addition of sulfites as a purifying agent does not render the wine corrupt.” **

from madisoncatholicherald.org/2002-09-12/bishop.html

“Bullock pointed out that, according to Paragraph 284 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and Canon 924 of the Code of Canon Law, the wine for use at Mass must be pure grape wine without additives. Any foreign substances in the wine such as flavoring or herbs, or wines made from other substances, are not acceptable.
**
The presence of sulfates in the wine is acceptable, however, because they are a preservative used throughout the industry. Grape juice or wine coolers are not to be used, he said.**”

Thanks for the information.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

There is a reason for the rules. Without them, I’m sure some would be trying to use sparkling wine (sugar added), port (fortified with brandy), sherry, saki (rice wine), plum wine, dandelion wine, etc. etc. Which would eventually slippery-slope to Welch’s grape juice, Budweiser and Jack Daniels.

http://www.kegfun.com/images/beerhelmet.jpg

Man, this homily just keeps getting better and better!

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

That would be the question since it was pointed out that most all wine contains sulfates naturally.

Good question. Off hand, I would say no, if there are no added sulfites then you need not add the label - but I’d have to check to be certain. And I’d wager that it varies from state to state.

 

[Paten]

This appears to also validate the use of fortified wines, such as Port, which I have seen used. The fortifying agent is brandy, which is a pure grape product.

I was originally doubtful of this, but was assured that it was proper. On the other hand I don’t see the necessity of using a fortified wine, but that is a personal opinion.

To be honest, it doesn’t validate anything – it’s just the guidelines set by two dioceses which could well be in error. I just wanted to show that there is some disagreement out there.

It certainly dosen’t validate the use of port. Brandy, its fortifying agent is distilled – absolutely not a natural process.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Hello,

Good question. Off hand, I would say no, if there are no added sulfites then you need not add the label - but I’d have to check to be certain. And I’d wager that it varies from state to state.

I would guess that the label is required to warn or remind those who may be allergic to sulfites.

 

[Paten]

I checked at my other (the hardcore one) parish today and we use Mont La Salle Altar Wine – the former Christian Brothers Winery. (My other parish buys sacramental wine from the San Antonio winery at sanantoniowinery.com/homefr.html)

From their website:

montlasallealtarwines.com/faq.php#qq1_1

Sulfites in Wine - (Why does the wine label state ‘contains sulfites’? And, what are sulfites?)
Sulfites in wine are nothing new since the yeast cells during fermentation produce a small amount of sulfites and the better winemakers have made tiny additions of sulfites for many centuries. This miniscule amount of added sulfites acts as an anti-oxidant and as a yeast inhibitor which preserves the natural good condition of the wine and retards spoilage. For the information and protection of those few people who are extremely sensitive or allergic to sulfites, U.S. Federal Law, for some time now, requires that wine containing (10) or more parts per million of sulfites be labeled “contains sulfites”. This labeling requirement is mandatory for all wines produced in the U.S. The wines are the same as they were before such labeling was required. Substances that assist in making sound wine and that remain in the wine in minute traces, such as sulfites, have been and are considered by canonists and theologians to be acceptable for the Eucharist. One such approval, as reported in the Sacramentary, was the Holy Office Decree of 2nd August, 1922.

*Is our current Altar Wine approved for Sacramental use?
We at Mont La Salle like to state that we cannot determine how other suppliers make their wine or if it is made according to the requirements of Canon Law. **We know with absolute certainty that Mont La Salle altar wine is made according to Canon Law *and, in addition, our label states our wine is “approved for sacramental use”. As far as we know, there is no other wine offered for commercial sale that makes this statement.

It would be interesting to dig-up that decree from 2 August 1922. As it stands it appears that things are not cut and dried – we cannot say that NOTHING may be added to the wine. It’s clear to me that both of these wineries and others add sulfites to their wine sold for use in the Mass and that it’s OK with the Church. If they didn’t add sulfites you can bet there would be a NO SULFITES ADDED label on each bottle and they would be trumpeting their triumph of producing commercial quantities of drinkable wine without added sulfites.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I checked at my other (the hardcore one) parish today and we use Mont La Salle Altar Wine – the former Christian Brothers Winery. (My other parish buys sacramental wine from the San Antonio winery at sanantoniowinery.com/homefr.html)

From their website:

montlasallealtarwines.com/faq.php#qq1_1

Sulfites in Wine - (Why does the wine label state ‘contains sulfites’? And, what are sulfites?)
Sulfites in wine are nothing new since the yeast cells during fermentation produce a small amount of sulfites and the better winemakers have made tiny additions of sulfites for many centuries. This miniscule amount of added sulfites acts as an anti-oxidant and as a yeast inhibitor which preserves the natural good condition of the wine and retards spoilage. For the information and protection of those few people who are extremely sensitive or allergic to sulfites, U.S. Federal Law, for some time now, requires that wine containing (10) or more parts per million of sulfites be labeled “contains sulfites”. This labeling requirement is mandatory for all wines produced in the U.S. The wines are the same as they were before such labeling was required. Substances that assist in making sound wine and that remain in the wine in minute traces, such as sulfites, have been and are considered by canonists and theologians to be acceptable for the Eucharist. One such approval, as reported in the Sacramentary, was the Holy Office Decree of 2nd August, 1922.

Is our current Altar Wine approved for Sacramental use?
*We at Mont La Salle like to state that we cannot determine how other suppliers make their wine or if it is made according to the requirements of Canon Law. **We know with absolute certainty that Mont La Salle altar wine is made according to Canon Law ***and, in addition, our label states our wine is “approved for sacramental use”. As far as we know, there is no other wine offered for commercial sale that makes this statement.

It would be interesting to dig-up that decree from 2 August 1922. As it stands it appears that things are not cut and dried – we cannot say that NOTHING may be added to the wine. It’s clear to me that both of these wineries and others add sulfites to their wine sold for use in the Mass and that it’s OK with the Church. If they didn’t add sulfites you can bet there would be a NO SULFITES ADDED label on each bottle and they would be trumpeting their triumph of producing commercial quantities of drinkable wine without added sulfites.

Here is what Canon Law says:

The wine must be natural, made from grapes of the vine, and not corrupt.

Material I have read indicates that nothing apart from the natural fermentation process is permitted to be added. So would artificial sulfites be permitted?