Water mixed in with the Wine

  • Thread starter Thread starter MaryleeDorian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MaryleeDorian

Guest
What is the Church’s teaching as to why the priest mixes water into the wine? I have found three different answers in three different books, but could not find a reference in the Catechism The answers I found are:
  1. From ancient Jewish sacraments water was always added to cut the wine.
  2. To represent the water and blood that came from Christ’s side at the crucifixion.
  3. Per St. Cyprian, the water represents us.
 
I’m sorry I can’t answer your question but it seems I’ve heard #2 before. I do, however, have a question myself that should come under this same thread. I was at Mass the other day and our Deacon while preparing the wine for consecration poured wine into the chalice and some into a vessel for lay consumption. He added a drop of water to the chalice but not to the other cup. Does that effect whether the wine is concecrated or not?
 
I’m hoping #3 is the correct answer. According to what I read, St. Cyprian said that the water, representing the people is mixed with the wine and through transubstantiation becomes the blood of Christ. In other words, in this way we are united with Christ in the sacrifice.

Referring to your question–I wouldn’t think this affects the real presence–or are you referring to the vessel?
 
St. Cyprian wrote:
For because Christ bore us all, in that He also bore our sins, we see that in the water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood of Christ. But when the water is mingled in the cup with wine, the people are made one with Christ, and the assembly of believers is associated and conjoined with Him on whom it believes; which association and conjunction of water and wine is so mingled in the Lord’s cup, that that mixture cannot any more be separated.
Click to expand...
Deacon Ed
 
I would say that it is number 2. I heard a dean of a Byzantine Catholic seminary speaking about the Liturgical roots from the bible and from the pre-Christian Jewish community. I recall him making a few points about the water and the blood coming from the side of Jesus. He was comparing this passage to a passage from Revelation I think and one from genesis that spoke of a river and a tree. I can not recall what his point was with the mentions of the water and blood. This is the first thing I thought about when I saw the title to this thread.
 
One book said that the crucifixion idea came about during the middle ages.
 
40.png
MaryleeDorian:
What is the Church’s teaching as to why the priest mixes water into the wine? I have found three different answers in three different books, but could not find a reference in the Catechism The answers I found are:
  1. From ancient Jewish sacraments water was always added to cut the wine.
  2. To represent the water and blood that came from Christ’s side at the crucifixion.
  3. Per St. Cyprian, the water represents us.
Click to expand...
I believe that this is one of those that has no right answer of the three presented. This is a question of symbolism. All three are true.
 
michael servant:
I’m sorry I can’t answer your question but it seems I’ve heard #2 before. I do, however, have a question myself that should come under this same thread. I was at Mass the other day and our Deacon while preparing the wine for consecration poured wine into the chalice and some into a vessel for lay consumption. He added a drop of water to the chalice but not to the other cup. Does that effect whether the wine is concecrated or not?
Click to expand...
What he did was incorrect, but it did not affect the Consecration.
 
My pastor told me it is a old tradition from St Paul. In the early Church Eucahrist was a actual feast and supper. They would drink tremendous amounts of the Blood. Of course they would get a tad bit tipsy and then it would go down hill from there. So they began to add water to thin out the wine. I forget what book this was in 1 Corithians maybe?
 
40.png
Jermosh:
My pastor told me it is a old tradition from St Paul. In the early Church Eucahrist was a actual feast and supper. They would drink tremendous amounts of the Blood. Of course they would get a tad bit tipsy and then it would go down hill from there. So they began to add water to thin out the wine. I forget what book this was in 1 Corithians maybe?
Click to expand...
Actually the supper or community meal took place before the actual celebration of the Mass. St. Paul notes that many were too drunk to be able to participate and instructs them to eat at home before coming to the Eucharistic celebration. In the Jewish Passover meal the “cup” is always mixed with water.
 
Originally Posted by michael servant
I’m sorry I can’t answer your question but it seems I’ve heard #2 before. I do, however, have a question myself that should come under this same thread. I was at Mass the other day and our Deacon while preparing the wine for consecration poured wine into the chalice and some into a vessel for lay consumption. He added a drop of water to the chalice but not to the other cup. Does that effect whether the wine is concecrated or not?
Br. Rich SFO:
What he did was incorrect, but it did not affect the Consecration.
Click to expand...
Brother Rich: What was incorrect?
As a new deacon (9/2003) we were taught that the water only goes in the chalice & not the flaggen. (GIRM 178, pg 52 doesn’t even mention the flaggen)

But I know a priest that likes to pour the wine into the chalice himself so we are told to pour water into the flaggen as we recite our "By the mystery of this water & wine…

I’d be interested in what you have to say.

God bless,
Scott
 
I have asked this question before and received both #2 & #3 as answers.
 
While all 3 answers are correct, the prayer that accompanies the action gives the best answer. (I’m writing this from memory so hope I’ve got it correct):

“By the mystery of this water and wine, may we come to share in the divinity of Christ, who humbled himself to share in our humanity.”

The wine represents Christ, the drop of water is us. The water is commingled and becomes one with the wine. By sharing in the Eucharist we become one with Christ.
 
During Divine Liturgy priest says during the Proskomedia the words of Evangelija, “i abije izyde Krov’ i voda.” (there came out Blood and Water) at the time that pours cold water into the Cup. Most Eastern theologians therefore make cold water to represent water flowing from side of Our Lord Jesus Christ at Crucifixion. After placing small piece of Body of Christ in the Cup after consecration, priest pours in Teplota or Zeon in Greek (Hot Water) from a special bottle. This Teplota is to symbolize the descent of the fire of the Holy Spirit and the Fire of Christian Faith. Some Churches no longer use Teplota, but very good meaning symbolism.
 
Deacon Scott:
Originally Posted by michael servant
I’m sorry I can’t answer your question but it seems I’ve heard #2 before. I do, however, have a question myself that should come under this same thread. I was at Mass the other day and our Deacon while preparing the wine for consecration poured wine into the chalice and some into a vessel for lay consumption. He added a drop of water to the chalice but not to the other cup. Does that effect whether the wine is concecrated or not?

Brother Rich: What was incorrect?
As a new deacon (9/2003) we were taught that the water only goes in the chalice & not the flaggen. (GIRM 178, pg 52 doesn’t even mention the flaggen)

But I know a priest that likes to pour the wine into the chalice himself so we are told to pour water into the flaggen as we recite our "By the mystery of this water & wine…

I’d be interested in what you have to say.

God bless,
Scott
Click to expand...
That is correct the water should be mixed in the chalice It would be improper to add the water to the container that the wine is presented in. However it would be better to add the water to the container if one is disobeying and Consecrating it, instead of several chalices anyway. When done correctly several drops of water should be added to each chalice in my opinion. Maybe this is one for Rome since I don’t believe that the GIRM is specific about this.

Since the Fraction is placed into the main chalice only, it may also be that the water needs to be mixed only into the main chalice.
 
I was informed just the other week that the practice started because most wine in the early days of the church was “home brewed” and thus very strong. Water was added to thin it down. The practice stuck and is now part of the Mass. The old ritual and tradition thing that we Catholics are always accused of.
 
We must remember that most, if not all, liturgical actions have a practical side to them as well as an alegorical or spiritual meaning to them. All three answers are correct. However, the first one regarding “cutting” the wine isn’t entirely accurate.

While wine was sometimes contained in skins, it was most often contained in crocks. Ever have a plant in a crockery planter, one of those orange terra cotta thingies? YOu know that it sucks the water right out of the soil. Such it is when wine is stored in such material. The water is leeched out of it and it thickens (if left too long, it becomes like jelly). The practical side of this action was actually to “reconstitute” the concentrated, thickened or even jellied wine.

Alegorically, it represents the font of the Sacraments in the blood and water poured forth from the side of Christ.

Liturgically, it represents, as said above, the reality of humanity – represented by common water – absorbed into the vastnes of divinity – represented by the festival drink, wine. If you want to try it at home, use white wine and put it in a clear glass. Put a few drops of water into it and watch what happens. It’s pretty cool. The water remains seaparate for a few moments, making stringers in the wine, then is absorbed compeltely. At that point, the water is indistinguishable from the wine. And the recreation at the end of the world, when we shall become like God? When we become so absorbed into the Divinity of Christ that huamnity and divinity become indistinguishable.

– Fr. L.
 
Thank you so much, everyone.

I actually posed this question to my 6th grade CFP class. One young man gave (approximately) the # 3 answer. He won the prize.

God bless you all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top