Water in the wine

[Miriam1947]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

 

[Miriam1947]

Dupe post

 

[jbarbaretta]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

Pray for him and your parish. God may find ways to keep him from getting too bored, but in my opinion, prayer is the best solution to these kind of issues/concerns/problems.

 

[jbarbaretta]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

Pray for him and your parish. God may find ways to keep him from getting too bored, but in my opinion, prayer is the best solution to these kind of issues/concerns/problems.

 

[JM3]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

I would inform the Bishop and let him handle it.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

50.] The wine that is used in the most sacred celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances.[127] During the celebration itself, a small quantity of water is to be mixed with it. Great care should be taken so that the wine intended for the celebration of the Eucharist is well conserved and has not soured.[128] It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or provenance, for the Church requires certainty regarding the conditions necessary for the validity of the sacraments. Nor are other drinks of any kind to be admitted for any reason, as they do not constitute valid matter.

1. Grave Matters

[173.] Although the gravity of a matter is to be judged in accordance with the common teaching of the Church and the norms established by her, objectively **to be considered among grave matters is anything **that puts at risk the validity and dignity of the Most Holy Eucharist: namely, anything that contravenes what is set out above in nn. 48-52, 56, 76-77, 79, 91-92, 94, 96, 101-102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115, 117, 126, 131-133, 138, 153 and 168. Moreover, attention should be given to the other prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law, and especially what is laid down by canons 1364, 1369, 1373, 1376, 1380, 1384, 1385, 1386, and 1398.

 

[JM3]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

I would inform the Bishop and let him handle it.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

50.] The wine that is used in the most sacred celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances.[127] During the celebration itself, a small quantity of water is to be mixed with it. Great care should be taken so that the wine intended for the celebration of the Eucharist is well conserved and has not soured.[128] It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or provenance, for the Church requires certainty regarding the conditions necessary for the validity of the sacraments. Nor are other drinks of any kind to be admitted for any reason, as they do not constitute valid matter.

1. Grave Matters

[173.] Although the gravity of a matter is to be judged in accordance with the common teaching of the Church and the norms established by her, objectively **to be considered among grave matters is anything **that puts at risk the validity and dignity of the Most Holy Eucharist: namely, anything that contravenes what is set out above in nn. 48-52, 56, 76-77, 79, 91-92, 94, 96, 101-102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115, 117, 126, 131-133, 138, 153 and 168. Moreover, attention should be given to the other prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law, and especially what is laid down by canons 1364, 1369, 1373, 1376, 1380, 1384, 1385, 1386, and 1398.

 

[EricFilmer]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it…

…His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

50.] The wine that is used in the most sacred celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances.[127] During the celebration itself, a small quantity of water is to be mixed with it. Great care should be taken so that the wine intended for the celebration of the Eucharist is well conserved and has not soured.[128] It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or provenance, for the Church requires certainty regarding the conditions necessary for the validity of the sacraments. Nor are other drinks of any kind to be admitted for any reason, as they do not constitute valid matter.

If I understand the OP correctly, the priest in question used to mix a few drops of water with the wine in the main chalice and the communion cup. Now he has elected to only put water into the main chalice. To be fair to this priest, this is not a violation of Redemptionis Sacramentum. The gifts of bread and wine that are placed upon the altar represent a single sacrificial offering, despite being spread out in different cups and patens. For example, when the priest lifts a large Host during the Eucharistic Prayer, it likewise represents all the little Hosts present on the altar. Moreover, if there are more that one paten on the altar containing Hosts, the priest does not have to have a large Host in each paten.

In the same manner, the main chalice represents the entirety of the gifts of wine that were brought to the altar. In light of all this, when a priest places a few drops of water into the wine of the main chalice, he has fulfilled the requirement of Redemptionis Sacramentum because this represents water being added to the totality of the wine present at the altar. It does not matter if the wine is divided into different cups, because they are all part of the same offering. I once asked a Benedictine monk who taught sacramental theology this very question. He said that adding the water to the wine was a symbolic act (necessary, but still symbolic) and that it was ok to only add the water to the main chalice. This action symbolically represented the water being added to the whole offering.

Some priests and bishops only add the water to the main chalice. Some priests and bishops add water to the chalice and all the cups present. It is simply the preference of the person who is the presider (or the deacon) at a particular Mass.

 

[EricFilmer]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it…

…His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

50.] The wine that is used in the most sacred celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances.[127] During the celebration itself, a small quantity of water is to be mixed with it. Great care should be taken so that the wine intended for the celebration of the Eucharist is well conserved and has not soured.[128] It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or provenance, for the Church requires certainty regarding the conditions necessary for the validity of the sacraments. Nor are other drinks of any kind to be admitted for any reason, as they do not constitute valid matter.

If I understand the OP correctly, the priest in question used to mix a few drops of water with the wine in the main chalice and the communion cup. Now he has elected to only put water into the main chalice. To be fair to this priest, this is not a violation of Redemptionis Sacramentum. The gifts of bread and wine that are placed upon the altar represent a single sacrificial offering, despite being spread out in different cups and patens. For example, when the priest lifts a large Host during the Eucharistic Prayer, it likewise represents all the little Hosts present on the altar. Moreover, if there are more that one paten on the altar containing Hosts, the priest does not have to have a large Host in each paten.

In the same manner, the main chalice represents the entirety of the gifts of wine that were brought to the altar. In light of all this, when a priest places a few drops of water into the wine of the main chalice, he has fulfilled the requirement of Redemptionis Sacramentum because this represents water being added to the totality of the wine present at the altar. It does not matter if the wine is divided into different cups, because they are all part of the same offering. I once asked a Benedictine monk who taught sacramental theology this very question. He said that adding the water to the wine was a symbolic act (necessary, but still symbolic) and that it was ok to only add the water to the main chalice. This action symbolically represented the water being added to the whole offering.

Some priests and bishops only add the water to the main chalice. Some priests and bishops add water to the chalice and all the cups present. It is simply the preference of the person who is the presider (or the deacon) at a particular Mass.

 

[JM3]

If I understand the OP correctly, the priest in question used to mix a few drops of water with the wine in the main chalice and the communion cup. Now he has elected to only put water into the main chalice. To be fair to this priest, this is not a violation of Redemptionis Sacramentum. The gifts of bread and wine that are placed upon the altar represent a single sacrificial offering, despite being spread out in different cups and patens. For example, when the priest lifts a large Host during the Eucharistic Prayer, it likewise represents all the little Hosts present on the altar. Moreover, if there are more that one paten on the altar containing Hosts, the priest does not have to have a large Host in each paten.

In the same manner, the main chalice represents the entirety of the gifts of wine that were brought to the altar. In light of all this, when a priest places a few drops of water into the wine of the main chalice, he has fulfilled the requirement of Redemptionis Sacramentum because this represents water being added to the totality of the wine present at the altar. It does not matter if the wine is divided into different cups, because they are all part of the same offering. I once asked a Benedictine monk who taught sacramental theology this very question. He said that adding the water to the wine was a symbolic act (necessary, but still symbolic) and that it was ok to only add the water to the main chalice. This action symbolically represented the water being added to the whole offering.

Some priests and bishops only add the water to the main chalice. Some priests and bishops add water to the chalice and all the cups present. It is simply the preference of the person who is the presider (or the deacon) at a particular Mass.

The water should be added to the wine before the wine is distributed to the chalice and the other cups being used. Wine without water added that is given to the congregation would appear to me to be invalid matter. That is why I would inform the Bishop and trust in his judgement.

 

[CB_Catholic]

My priest has recently stopped putting water in the parishioners’ wine. I asked him about it.

His answer: He didn’t want things to become routine so thought he would change things up. I asked him why not put the water in the parishioners’ wine first instead of second. That would be a change up.
His answer: Not putting water into our wine did not make it invalid. But he had to put water into his wine. Because that is a rule.

He has been the parochial vicar for a bit over a year. Before that he was the vocations director for the diocese.

If he is already bored, where will we be in a few years if he becomes the pastor?

There is already talk that he wants to dump the Latin mass.

When I first read this I was puzzled by the priest’s answer to your question. Not putting water into the parishoner’s wine is hardly a way someone bent on change whould “change things up”. They would do something more noticeable. He probably felt it was unnecessary to pour water into all the other chalices, when it is only required to pour it into his. Our priests only pour the water into their chalice.

I think your priest was being lighthearted, making a little joke. I’ve made the same little joke myself. If I do things little bit differently than my family or husband is used to, they’ll ask me why, and I’ve told them basically the same thing–“Oh, I thought I’d shake things up around here a little”. I don’t think your priest is bored–I think you didn’t understand his little attempt at humor. Perhaps he didn’t feel like he had to justify his action, but didn’t want to tell you that and come off as rude, so he made a little joke.

I wouldn’t take this so seriously if I were you. He just probably prefers to do it his way and it’s as he told you, it’s perfectly legitimate. And as for rumors–just consider them for what they are–rumors. Don’t spread them and don’t worry about them.

 

[EricFilmer]

The water should be added to the wine before the wine is distributed to the chalice and the other cups being used.

No, that would be in violation of the rubrics of the Sacramentary.
From page 370 of the current English Sacramentary:

“The deacon (or the priest) pours wine and a little water into the chalice…” (emphasis added)

Wine without water added that is given to the congregation would appear to me to be invalid matter. That is why I would inform the Bishop and trust in his judgement.

Bishops are busy people. Why burden them with things like this? The priest in question is following the rubrics and is faithful to what he was taught in seminary. Moreover, he is doing exactly what countless other priests do, as well as deacons and bishops. There is no liturgical violation and the method used by the priest does not invalidate the sacrament. I say give this priest and his bishop a break. We, as a Church, have enough problems dealing with real issues of liturgical abuse, and this isn’t one of them.

 

[japhy]

Some priests add the water to the container of wine before pouring it. Others add it to each chalice individually. Others add it only to the principal chalice.

Although it is legally required to add water to the wine, it is not a matter of validity: wine consecrated on its own is still truly consecrated, but the priest sins gravely by not adding water.

The question is, if the priest pours the wine into chalices first, must he add water to each chalice? For the past few centuries, that was never a matter of concern in the Roman Rite, since there was only one chalice used; but since Vatican II, it has become an issue.

Although the water is not essential for the validity of the sacrament, the Church holds it in great importance and it must never be omitted. The Council of Trent even went so far as to excommunicate whoever denied the need for this mixture (see Canon 9, Session XXII).

…]

ome readers asked if water should be placed in all of the chalices when more than one is used for the Eucharistic celebration.

The norms are not very precise on this question. It appears that this is the preferred option and the one that best corresponds to the tradition that water be added to the wine used for consecration. Yet, this is not specifically mandated.

Several liturgists suggest that adding water to the principal chalice alone sufficiently fulfills the symbolic meaning of the rite and the liturgical norms. They argue that the several chalices are in an analogous situation to that of the small hosts present in additional ciboria and adding water to one is symbolically adding it to all.

Both options are probably legitimate unless the Holy See states otherwise. source]

 

[DavidFilmer]

“The deacon (or the priest) pours wine and a little water into the chalice…”

I think some people may not realize that there can be only one chalice - any additional vessels are cups. The words of consecration are spoken over the chalice alone, and the chalice alone is elevated, yet the effects apply to all cups. It is not allowed to have more than one chalice on the altar, even if the Mass is being celebrated by more than one priest.

There is no liturgical instruction or precedent to add water to anything other than the chalice, and it would be a (minor) violation of liturgical instruction to do so. It would be treating the cups as if they were chalices.

 

[japhy]

This thread is duplicated, and until that’s fixed, here is my response from the other thread:

Some priests add the water to the container of wine before pouring it. Others add it to each chalice individually. Others add it only to the principal chalice.

Although it is legally required to add water to the wine, it is not a matter of validity: wine consecrated on its own is still truly consecrated, but the priest sins gravely by not adding water.

The question is, if the priest pours the wine into chalices first, must he add water to each chalice? For the past few centuries, that was never a matter of concern in the Roman Rite, since there was only one chalice used; but since Vatican II, it has become an issue.

Although the water is not essential for the validity of the sacrament, the Church holds it in great importance and it must never be omitted. The Council of Trent even went so far as to excommunicate whoever denied the need for this mixture (see Canon 9, Session XXII).

…]

ome readers asked if water should be placed in all of the chalices when more than one is used for the Eucharistic celebration.

The norms are not very precise on this question. It appears that this is the preferred option and the one that best corresponds to the tradition that water be added to the wine used for consecration. Yet, this is not specifically mandated.

Several liturgists suggest that adding water to the principal chalice alone sufficiently fulfills the symbolic meaning of the rite and the liturgical norms. They argue that the several chalices are in an analogous situation to that of the small hosts present in additional ciboria and adding water to one is symbolically adding it to all.

Both options are probably legitimate unless the Holy See states otherwise. source]

 

[Miriam1947]

Thanks for the responses, I appreciate it.

We have three cups on the altar, one for the priest, the other two for the parishioners.
***It’s those two individual cups that he no longer adds water to. ***

It is not so much the question of validity (I understand that is not a problem), it’s a question of attitude. For a year he did it the same as every other priest in the parishes, then he changed it. Is he already burned out? Is he bored? Is he tired of it all? It can be very stressful here since this is an old parish and he is a young priest. I will pray for him.

I’m not planning on writing to the bishop, he has more than enough on his plate and he is a very good bishop.

Thanks again, all of you who have responded.

 

[Lapey]

I would inform the Bishop and let him handle it. The bishop has more important issues to worry about then what we think are abuses. We need to learn how to go to mass to pray the mass, not nit pick the ministers. This is how most bishops would handle a complaint about this, ignore the complaint.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

50.] The wine that is used in the most sacred celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances.[127] During the celebration itself, a small quantity of water is to be mixed with it. Great care should be taken so that the wine intended for the celebration of the Eucharist is well conserved and has not soured.[128] It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or provenance, for the Church requires certainty regarding the conditions necessary for the validity of the sacraments. Nor are other drinks of any kind to be admitted for any reason, as they do not constitute valid matter.

1. Grave Matters

[173.] Although the gravity of a matter is to be judged in accordance with the common teaching of the Church and the norms established by her, objectively **to be considered among grave matters is anything **that puts at risk the validity and dignity of the Most Holy Eucharist: namely, anything that contravenes what is set out above in nn. 48-52, 56, 76-77, 79, 91-92, 94, 96, 101-102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115, 117, 126, 131-133, 138, 153 and 168. Moreover, attention should be given to the other prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law, and especially what is laid down by canons 1364, 1369, 1373, 1376, 1380, 1384, 1385, 1386, and 1398.

What is there to inform the bishop about, because he is bored??? There is no abuse by this action. I admit the priest could have been a little more charitable in his explanation.

It is not required for validity or lucidity to put water in each challis, only one. Neither is it illicit nor does it invalidate the Sacrament if he chose to put water in all vessels.

This is another case of “reading into” the rules. Just read the texts for what it is, don’t add anything.

 

[Lapey]

I think some people may not realize that there can be only one chalice - any additional vessels are cups. Please provide source document to back up this claim. If it is the GIRM, notice that it is used in singular, this is becuase it is one sacrifice, not one chalice. The words of consecration are spoken over the chalice alone, not trueand the chalice alone is elevated, this is simple logistics, you cannot safely raise all of the vessels containing the sacred species with a celebrant and a deaconyet the effects apply to all cups. It is not allowed to have more than one chalice on the altar, even if the Mass is being celebrated by more than one priest.???

There is no liturgical instruction or precedent to add water to anything other than the chalice, and it would be a (minor) violation of liturgical instruction to do so. Sorry, there is no violation. It would be treating the cups as if they were chalices.They are chalices.

Can you please site the document where this is addressed? A challis is a chalice. If there are 5 on the corparal with wine to be concecrated, one is the celebrants chalice and the others are chalices, why would I not be able to call them such?

I hope I don’t appear too harsh, it just gets old always having “liturgical experts” pick apart everything that is done by the sacred ministers within the liturgy. Are there abuses by bishops, priests, and deacons in the mass, yes, most deffinitely; but this is not an abuse, it is a lack of understanding on the part of the laity.

 

[Lapey]

The water should be added to the wine before the wine is distributed to the chalice and the other cups being used. option, not a mandate Wine without water added that is given to the congregation would appear to me to be invalid matter. Although it may appear to you to be invalid, but it is not. That is why I would inform the Bishop and trust in his judgement.Please allow the bishop to be bishop, not personal liturgy conformers. He would probably ignore this complaint without response.

 

[Phemie]

I think some people may not realize that there can be only one chalice - any additional vessels are cups.

The words of consecration are spoken over the chalice alone, and the chalice alone is elevated, yet the effects apply to all cups. It is not allowed to have more than one chalice on the altar, even if the Mass is being celebrated by more than one priest.

There is no liturgical instruction or precedent to add water to anything other than the chalice, and it would be a (minor) violation of liturgical instruction to do so. It would be treating the cups as if they were chalices.

NOT SO! Redemptionis Sacramentum says:

[105.] If one chalice is not sufficient for Communion to be distributed under both kinds to the Priest concelebrants or Christ’s faithful, there is no reason why the Priest celebrant should not use several chalices.[193] For it is to be remembered that all Priests in celebrating Holy Mass are bound to receive Communion under both kinds. It is praiseworthy, by reason of the sign value, to use a main chalice of larger dimensions, together with smaller chalices.

 

[dconklin]

The water should be added to the wine before the wine is distributed to the chalice and the other cups being used. Wine without water added that is given to the congregation would appear to me to be invalid matter. That is why I would inform the Bishop and trust in his judgement.

I think chemistry is being confused with the power of God.