M
Mommyof02green
Guest
Thank-You everyone for your replies 
For the most part they have been informational and helpful.
For the most part they have been informational and helpful.
- Status
C
centurionguard
Guest
Actually; the large Catholic religious next to our cities cathedral carries the Onehda sacramental wine brand along with another popular brand from the monastic vineyards in Fresno, California named Cribari. catholicsupply.com/churchs/wine.html
Scroll down the bottom of the page after clicking on the link.
I guess I was surprised that this subsidiary wine brand was part of the bigger U.S. wine company Gallo Wines.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Would any wine with additives be invalid or just illicit?
C
centurionguard
Guest
I wonāt answer for Father David; however the only restricted wine that canāt be used as sacramental wine is fortified wineā¦meaning extra alcohol added, which wouldnāt make such wine a true fermented wine. The second criteria is that wine used sacramentally for Mass purposes must be ecclesiastically approved.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Iām just thinking for ācases of emergencyā. If an earthquake struck, the parish crumbles to the ground and with it the bread and wine in the sacristy are lost. People want to celebrate Mass to ask for help from God and for the people who have died in the tragedy. I know that wheat bread with some mixture is valid but illicit during normal circumstances. So in the same scenario, say one person in the neighborhood has his win collection in a concrete room that was spared, which wines can they use and which they canāt?
M
MarkThompson
Guest
I canāt quite answer that question, but I can provide a couple of sources and let you see what you can make of them.
(Edited to add: you may find this Zenit Q&A to be of interest on this question.)
Redemptionis Sacramentum:
[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. 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. 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.
Code of Canon Law:
Can. 924 Ā§1. The most holy eucharistic sacrifice must be offered with bread and with wine in which a little water must be mixed.
Ā§2. The bread must be only wheat and recently made so that there is no danger of spoiling.
Ā§3. The wine must be natural from the fruit of the vine and not spoiled.
GIRM:
322. The wine for the eucharistic celebration must be from the fruit of the grapevine (cf. Lk 22:18), natural, and unadulterated, that is, without admixture of extraneous substances.
De Defectibus:
IV - Defect of wine
- If the wine has become mere vinegar, or is completely bad, or if it has been made from sour or unripe grapes, or if so much water has been mixed with it that the wine is adulterated, there is no Sacrament.
- If the wine has begun to turn to vinegar or to become corrupt, or if it is souring, or if it is unfermented, being made from newly pressed grapes, or if it has not been mixed with water, or if it has been mixed with rose-water or some other distillation, the Sacrament is valid, but the celebrant is guilty of grave sin.
. . . - If he finds out, before or after the Consecration, that the wine is completely vinegar or otherwise corrupt, he is to follow the same procedure as above, as if he were to find that no wine had been put into the chalice, or that only water had been put in.
- If the celebrant remembers before the consecration of the chalice that there was no water added, he is to put some in at once and say the words of the Consecration. If he remembers this after the consecration of the chalice, he is not to add any water, because the water is not necessary to the Sacrament.
- If a defect either of bread or of wine is discovered before the consecration of the Body, and the material needed cannot be obtained in any way, the priest should not continue any further. If after the consecration of the Body, or even of the wine, a defect in either species is discovered, and the material needed cannot be obtained in any way, then the priest should continue and complete the Mass if the defective material has already been consecrated, omitting the words and signs that pertain to the defective species. But if the material needed can be obtained with some little delay, he should wait, in order that the Sacrament may not remain incomplete.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Mark, I think the āforbiddenā part says it all. If you are unsure if its valid matter or not, then donāt proceed.
N
NewEnglandPriest
Guest
I try to follow the example of the Holy Father 
J
Joe_5859
Guest
Terrible! ā¦Funnyā¦ but terrible!I try to follow the example of the Holy Father
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Them Germans love their beerI try to follow the example of the Holy Father
F
FrDavid96
Guest
I donāt think the Church provides a direct answer to that. Anything other than pure grape wine is illicit, so any additives at all make it illicit matter. That much is clear.
What is not clear though, is how much of an additive (or sweetner, or fresh grapes, or fruit juice, etc.) will cause it to be not just illicit but outright invalid.
In my personal opinion, I think the Church has avoided answering this one directly, because if Rome were to say (just for example), that wine with 3% fresh grape juice is the threshold for validity, then many people would go out and start using it intentionally. Just my own thoughts on that part.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
The simple answer is āonly those wines made only from grapes using a natural process of fermentation.ā How one determines what those wines would be is an open question. Generally speaking, most (not all, but most) very good quality wines would be valid matter, unless the label clearly says otherwise. Thereās no way to be absolutely certain though without contacting the vintner and asking. Thatās why the Church requires that wine used at the altar be approved by some legitimate sourceāwhich is usually the bishop of the diocese where the winery is located, or his representative (chancellor, vicar general, etc).
Once we eliminate all the obvious invalid wines (blackberry wine, sangria, wines that say theyāve been sweetened or fortified), I would then look only at those that come from a particular year (the word escapes me), as opposed to those that are blended from different vintages, because the blending would at least make it more likely that something else was added.
Although I want to qualify this by repeating that one should not trust a wine unless it is approved, most good quality wines are valid matter, after we eliminate the obvious. In fact, most approved altar wines are in-fact āregularā wines sold on the shelf, but they simply have a different label.
A
Angel_Bradford
Guest
A
AHapka
Guest
White wine has also specifically been used to point out that the species still retains the same appearance, but in actuality turns into the Blood of Christ.
C
centurionguard
Guest
Funny perhaps; but I canāt actually believe that the photo reveals that what is contained in the vessel is actually Beer!Terrible! ā¦Funnyā¦ but terrible!
I guess the other shocking reality in this picture is that the vessel looks as though its crystal or glass
I thought vessels of these kind were forbidden unless its a carafe.
M
Mommyof02green
Guest
Those were altered pictures. Itās amazing what someone can do with photoshop (or any other quality photo editing software). In the other picture the pope was holding up a pretzel. We both know that at pretzel would never passed. Iām sure the cup along with itās contents were altered, added, to the picture. I highly doubt the Pope was holding a glass or crystal vessel. The only way to be sure is to track down the original picture in which those images were made from.Funny perhaps; but I canāt actually believe that the photo reveals that what is contained in the vessel is actually Beer!
I guess the other shocking reality in this picture is that the vessel looks as though its crystal or glass
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Just curious since you brought it up. A pretzel is still bread, right? So what if its wheat pretzel? It would still be valid matter. There is no prescription on the outward appearance of bread.
Just a thought.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
Thatās actually a good point - I had dismissed this as an obvious joke and assumed it would be completely invalid, but I think you are correct that the salt, butter, leavening, etc would probably just make it illicit, not invalid. And there is certainly no obstacle to having the host in a different shape.
M
malphono
Guest
Neither salt nor yeast would render it invalid (even in the Latin Church), but I donāt believe the butter is acceptable. Leavening other than yeast (in the case of pretzels I think its baking soda, maybe baking powder, too) would also seem to be enough of an additive that it changes the character of the finished product in such a way that it isnāt even called ābreadā in common parlance.
Letās take an example. The common English rendering of āQuāils mangent de la briocheā of Marie Antoinette fame, is ālet them eat cakeā. The circumstance, of course, was that she reputedly said this when she learned that the peasants had no bread ("ā¦les paysans nāavaient pas de pain"). Although brioche is made from wheat flour, water, and yeast, it has enough other ingredients (butter, eggs, milk, sugar, etc) that it is not bread. Even Marie Antionette, the privileged youngest daughter of Maria Theresia, was, evidently, quite aware that brioche is not bread. If itās not bread, itās not āvalid matterā (in Western terms). (NB: I took this an an example, but do not mean to imply that Marie Antionette was heartless or anything of the sort. From what Iāve seen, she was actually a good-hearted person but one whose life was so privileged from the start that she simply had no clue of the horrible circumstances in which the people (āpeasantsā) lived.)
A pretzel isnāt much different than brioche. Itās neither made as, nor eaten in lieu of, bread. If one wants to take the argument to the extreme, we can look at WheatThins as an example. Ultimately they are crackers made from wheat, salt, leavening (plus who-without-a-degree-in-in-chemistry knows-what else), but would anyone consider same to be ābreadā (i.e. āvalid matterā for the Eucharist)?
- Status