White Wine?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kevin42
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Franciscan said:
At first when I read this I thought come on we know what he meant. But it brings up an important distinction between symbol and sign. The wine is ‘a sign’ not a symbol. It is an efficacious sign , one that becomes what it signifies. As a sign it points to an exernal reality.
If it were just a symbol than any wine will do, heck you can even have grape juice. But becuase it’s a sacramental sign, it’s necessary to follow the rubrics and the Church’s rules regarding it.And there is nothing that says white wine can’t be used.

So white wine is just as good a ‘sign’ for the Eucharist but red is a better ‘symbol’ of blood.
Click to expand...
For a time Red wine was forbidden throughout much of the Church because people thought the wine was turning into blood fully (substance and accidents ). White wine was used to stem this misconception (and has the added benefits of not staining the altar linens!)
You might almost say that white wine is a better sign of the reality of Transubstantiation, as the accidents cannot be mistaken for that of blood.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday
 
Thursday1 said:
For a time Red wine was forbidden throughout much of the Church because people thought the wine was turning into blood fully (substance and accidents ). White wine was used to stem this misconception (and has the added benefits of not staining the altar linens!)
You might almost say that white wine is a better sign of the reality of Transubstantiation, as the accidents cannot be mistaken for that of blood.
Click to expand...
I think I’ve mentioned on other threads that I know a priest or two who use white wine almost exclusively, so that in case of a Eucharistic Miracle it will be immediately apparent. 😛

tee
 
Thursday1 said:
For a time Red wine was forbidden throughout much of the Church because people thought the wine was turning into blood fully (substance and accidents ). White wine was used to stem this misconception (and has the added benefits of not staining the altar linens!)
You might almost say that white wine is a better sign of the reality of Transubstantiation, as the accidents cannot be mistaken for that of blood.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday
Click to expand...
That’s very interesting. Can you direct me to where I can read about red wine being forbidden?
It seems today that the opposite extreme is more prevalant.-People today don’t confuse the accidents for the Real Presence, they confuse the accidents with the accidents and fail to see the reality beyond the accidents.
There not missing the accidents, they’re missingt the Real Presence.
Given this, and since there is already a precedent set for ‘forbidding one color’ then the Church today would be more more prudent in forbidding white wine.

I think the red wine / white wine controversy(if you wanna call it that) is related to the meal/sacrifice controversy.
To emphasise the meal aspect of the Mass white wine is better.To emphasise the sacrifice aspect of the Mass red wine works best.
 
My :twocents:

I think calling one color better than the other (for whatever purpose: meal/sacrifice) is just weird. I was raised in a parish that used white to the exclusion of red. I have since lived in communities that used white, red, rose and any other color of grape wine you can name. I just don’t have a preference.

The (several) times I have seen this topic come up in this forum has started when someone who was used to one color encountered another and questioned it, simply because it was an unfamiliar experience.

:twocents:
tee
 
Hello Church,

Just a quick question. White wine, used as the wine for consecration, is a big no, no? Right?

God Bless
Nate
 
Wrong. While some may be of the opinion that red wine is a better sign of the Blood of our Lord, any wine made of grapes with nothing added to it may be used in the Mass.

Betsy
 
baltobetsy said:
Wrong. While some may be of the opinion that red wine is a better sign of the Blood of our Lord, any wine made of grapes with nothing added to it may be used in the Mass.

Betsy
Click to expand...
Aye, that’s what the Permanent Deacon at my parish said, though he added, “Red wine is always preferred and white is rarely used.”
 
scottm said:
Aye, that’s what the Permanent Deacon at my parish said, though he added, “Red wine is always preferred and white is rarely used.”
Click to expand...
Perhaps to him, but the Church simply does not support his erroneous personal opinion.
 
baltobetsy said:
Wrong. While some may be of the opinion that red wine is a better sign of the Blood of our Lord, any wine made of grapes with nothing added to it may be used in the Mass.

Betsy
Click to expand...
I agree. In fact I know some Lutherans (yes, I know…) who use white wine expressly to ward-off personal notions like red wine is “better” in any sense of the word.

I also know people that demand that “special communion wine” be used when Two Buck Chuck (unadulterated grape wine) is every bit as good.
 
Orthodox rubrics (and I would assume of the Byzantine Catholic Churches as well) require the use of RED wine, as it reflects the sacramental reality more closely.

Of course, how light can something be and still be called “red” wine?

There was a blush concord I used to use–alas, no longer made–that was of a deep enough color to be distinguished from wine at a glance, yet would not stain the altar linens beyond usability.
 
Why does it matter, red or white? Either way, I don’t see it anyway only the priest does.

Anyway, there is not much to discuss here because after the consecration occurs there is no wine at all anyway. It completely ceases to exist and therefore is neither red or white.
 
BHawkes said:
I also know people that demand that “special communion wine” be used when Two Buck Chuck (unadulterated grape wine) is every bit as good.
Click to expand...
Usually special communion wine is used because it lasts MUCH longer because it is almost always fortified with pure spirit made from grapes. This stops the fermentation which leaves some residual sweetness in the wine and prevents the wine from turning to vinegar in a matter of a couple of days.
 
what if black grapes are spliced with some disease resistant species of, lets say, plums.

the result would look like a grape. genetically be both plum and grape.

would that be valid if you made wine with it and used it for consecration?
 
thechrismyster said:
what if black grapes are spliced with some disease resistant species of, lets say, plums.

the result would look like a grape. genetically be both plum and grape.

would that be valid if you made wine with it and used it for consecration?
Click to expand...
No, because that’s not a grape. Why would you do this, though? grapes are disease resistant and can be made more so by being grafted onto resistant rootstocks.
 
Sure said:
No, because that’s not a grape. Why would you do this, though? grapes are disease resistant and can be made more so by being grafted onto resistant rootstocks.
Click to expand...
more of just something i thought of rather than an actual scenario.

at what point can a grape remain a grape and still be ‘grape’ enough to be used for the Consecration?
 
thechrismyster said:
more of just something i thought of rather than an actual scenario.

at what point can a grape remain a grape and still be ‘grape’ enough to be used for the Consecration?
Click to expand...
I would assume a grape is considered a grape unless it becomes something genetically not a grape, like a grape/plum or grape/apple. As it is, there are many varieties and families of grapes that can be hybridized (if that’s a word).
 
When I was a military chaplain’'s assistant many years ago, the priest said that either red or white wine could be used, but that often the reason white was used was that a spill would leave a less noticeable stain, thus reducing the laundry bill.
For a civic celebration last year, I attended a Lutheran (MS) service. It was announced that the red was “regular wine” and the white was “non-alcoholic wine”, I thought this strange, because our Lutheran chaplain in the Army used the same kind of wine as we did in his monthly communion service.
 
bpbasilphx said:
Orthodox rubrics (and I would assume of the Byzantine Catholic Churches as well) require the use of RED wine, as it reflects the sacramental reality more closely.

Of course, how light can something be and still be called “red” wine?

There was a blush concord I used to use–alas, no longer made–that was of a deep enough color to be distinguished from wine at a glance, yet would not stain the altar linens beyond usability.
Click to expand...
Red wine is not required in the Eastern Catholic Churches. And again, you are wrong. Red wine does not necessarily reflect “the sacramental reality more closely.” It clearly does in your opinion, but that does not make it so.

Again, I know some parishes that use white wine specifically to subtly underscore the fact that the wine becomes His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity and that it’s not simply a cheap symbolic simulation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top