The Matter of Wine

108. Wine of the vine. For valid consecration only and every wine of the vine can be used which is substantially incorrupt. But wine is understood as liquor pressed from ripe grapes of the vine.

a. Therefore invalid matter includes all other liquids which by their nature are not wine, such as beer, juice pressed from fruits (apples, pears, etc.); also juice pressed from unripe grapes (agresta), which does not yet have the nature of wine; then wine which they call second wine, i.e., pressed again from grapes already pressed, with water poured on them (Jora), of which the greater part is water; vinegar, which is corrupted wine; distilled wine, which is a substance other than wine; and finally wine made by art, which is not wine of the vine. For although by art it may be composed from the same elements which are found in natural wine, nevertheless it is not valid matter unless it has its origin from the vine.¹

b. Valid matter is juice pressed from dried grapes, provided that it is so prepared that from its odor, color, and taste it is recognized to be wine.²

c. Pressed: for liquor not yet pressed, but still existing in the grapes, cannot be consecrated, both because the matter to be consecrated must be present in the state of drink (Suarez), and because the words of consecration, this is my blood, would not designate the liquor, but the whole mass of the grape (Lugo).

d. Incorrupt: for corrupted wine is no longer wine. Therefore the rubric of the Missal has: "If the wine has become entirely vinegar, or has been pressed from sour or unripe grapes, or so much water has been mixed with it that the wine is corrupted, the sacrament is not effected."³

e. Wine in which alcohol is not contained (alkoholfreier Wein) is not valid matter, because it is not wine, since a greater or lesser quantity of alcohol is an essential element of wine. For wines which naturally contain only five percent alcohol contain the minimum quantity of alcohol, while those which contain twenty percent alcohol contain the maximum quantity; but all have some.⁴

Note. Every wine, whether white or red or mixed from both, whether strong or weak, of whatever region and origin, is valid matter of consecration, because in all there is the true nature of wine. And although stronger wine is more fitting to the dignity of so great a sacrament, nevertheless because today ordinary wine is more easily established to be genuine, it is to be preferred to better wine, unless it is certain that this latter is pure and unmixed.

¹ Missale rom., De defectibus, IV, 1.

² Holy Office, 22 July 1706; and to the question "whether it is licit to celebrate with wine made from dried grapes" (Rosinen) it responded on 10 Apr. 1889: "It is licit, provided that the liquor is recognized from color and taste to be true wine." The manner in which this wine is made can be found in Lehmkuhl, n. 162.

³ Missale rom., De defectibus, IV, 1.

⁴ The Holy Office on 1 June 1910 declared that wine from which all spirit of wine (alcohol) is removed by art is neither licit nor valid matter of consecration.

109. Licit matter. In order licitly to consecrate, there must be used wine which, after fermentation has been completed, is perfect, pure, and incorrupt.

a. Must, or juice recently pressed from ripe grapes, is valid matter, but gravely illicit matter of consecration: valid indeed, because the Church holds it as valid, since it is wine, although not yet perfect;¹ but illicit both because it has mixed with it parts which are not consecrable, and because it is not perfect wine.

b. If aromatics or other liquids are mixed with wine, and indeed in a small quantity, so that it retains the substance of wine and is simply held as wine, the matter will be illicit, but not yet invalid. Indeed it can even be licit matter if a small amount is added for preserving the wine.² But a notable quantity of aromatics or of another liquid added to wine constitutes this as invalid or at least doubtful matter.

Wine preserved in casks gradually diminishes somewhat by evaporation (durch Verdunstung). The empty space arising in the cask from this must be filled so that the wine may be preserved. It is indeed better that the cask in which wine for the sacrifice of the Mass is contained be filled up with natural wine; nevertheless, for this end water also can be used without the wine ceasing to be valid and licit matter of consecration. For a foreign substance can licitly be mixed with wine in a small quantity when it is necessary for preserving the wine.

c. Wine becoming sour, which is somewhat acid and begins to be corrupted, remains valid matter and, when other wine is lacking, can licitly be used, because it preserves the nature of wine and is not substantially changed. But wine notably becoming sour, which is not yet vinegar, although perhaps it is valid matter because it is not wholly corrupted, is certainly gravely illicit.

d. Whether frozen wine is valid matter is disputed; but all concede that it is not licit to consecrate frozen wine, because this is contrary to the usage received in the Church. Therefore it must be liquefied before consecration.

Those who affirm that it is valid matter bring forward the reason that wine is not corrupted by freezing but only accidentally changed, and that consecrated wine, if it is frozen, retains consecration. But those who deny that it is valid matter bring forward much stronger reasons: for they say that the matter is not in the state of drink; besides, the words of consecration designate a liquor, not a solid mass. Moreover, nothing follows from the fact that consecrated wine, if it is frozen, retains consecration; for if consecrated wine is absorbed by some solid substance, it remains consecrated, but wine absorbed by a solid substance cannot be consecrated, just as neither can wine from grapes not yet pressed.

¹ Missale rom., tit. 4, n. 2.

² On this matter the decree of the Holy Office of 31 July 1890 must be noted, which permits that, for preserving weak wine longer, there be mixed with it a certain quantity of spirit of wine (alcohol), provided that the spirit has been extracted from the fruit of the vine, and the alcoholic quantity added together with that which the wine in question naturally contains does not exceed the proportion of twelve percent, and that the mixture be made when the wine is very fresh. Indeed, for preserving strong and extraordinarily sweet wines the same Holy Office on 5 Aug. 1896, in a special case, permitted the addition of an alcoholic quantity which did not exceed the proportion of seventeen or eighteen percent, provided that the mixture was made when the tumultuous fermentation had begun to subside.

110. To the wine to be consecrated a small amount of water must be mixed, not from the necessity of the sacrament, but from the precept of the Church by reason of the end, obliging under grave sin.¹

a. The reasons on account of which water is to be mixed with the wine to be consecrated are: alpha. the example of Christ, who is believed to have consecrated in wine mixed with water; beta. that the water and blood which flowed from the side of Christ may be signified; gamma. that through the wine and water the twofold nature of Christ may be signified; delta. that through the mixture of water and wine the union of the Church with Christ the head and the union among the faithful may be signified, which union is the effect of this sacrament.

b. This precept seems so grave to theologians that they admit no case in which it is licit to celebrate if the lack of water is foreseen. And if someone had forgotten to pour in water at the proper time, he must supply the defect, if he notices it before the consecration of the chalice, even immediately before the consecration of the wine, but not afterward, because nothing may be mixed with consecrated wine which is not consecrated.

c. One or another little drop of water suffices, and the quantity of water added to the wine ought not to exceed eight or ten drops, although water can be poured in up to an eighth, indeed up to a fifth, part of the wine without the matter becoming doubtful. But the quantity of water added which exceeds a third part of the wine renders the matter doubtful, and, if the wine is not strong, even invalid. Therefore, if by chance too much water had been added, some wine must again be added.

d. It is permitted to use acid, gaseous, or alkaline water (Mineralwasser), provided that it is natural and drinkable.²

e. Finally, water must be mixed with the wine at the altar in the chalice itself. A mixture made before Mass in the cruet would not suffice, even if it had been made by the priest himself, because the mixture belongs to the sacred rite according to which, by the precept of the Church, the sacrifice of the Mass must be offered.

Article Second. On the Proximate Matter

Proximate matter is called by some the use of remote matter, or of bread and wine in consecration; by others, consecrated remote matter, or the species insofar as they contain the body and blood of Christ.

¹ Council of Trent, sess. 22, c. 7, De sacrif. miss.; Cn. 814.

² Holy Office, 11 Aug. 1904.

I. The matter required for validity is wine from the vine, whether white or red, whether mixed from each, whether strong or weak. There is required:

1. Wine, as is clear from what was said in n. 140 and from the things to be said under 2.

2. Wine from the vine, as is deduced: 1. from the fact that Christ used that matter;¹ 2. from the Decree of Eugene IV; 3. from universal Tradition; 4. from the fact that only the assigned liquid, according to common estimation, is called true wine.

3. Whether white, etc. The reason is that all the wines assigned are true wine.

Corollary I. Valid matter is:

a) Must, that is, recently fermented wine not yet cleared from sediment; indeed, as they deduce from chapter Cum omne, De consecratione, distinction 2, and from the Roman Missal,² even wine recently expressed from grapes and not yet fermented. Vermeersch,³ however, requires that it have begun to ferment.

b) Wine from dried grapes, provided it is duly prepared, so that "from color, odor, and taste it is recognized to be true wine";⁴ in which case it is also licit to use it.

c) Wine to which a small amount of another liquid has been admixed. If a notable quantity is admixed, the matter easily becomes doubtful.

Corollary II. Invalid matter is:

a) Liquid expressed from fruits other than grapes, for example from apples, cherries, currants, or from grains, even if perhaps it is called wine; likewise spirit of wine. The same seems to have to be said of wine made by chemical art, even if it consists of the same elements as ordinary wine. The reason is that it is not wine from the vine.

b) Juice not yet expressed from grapes. Likewise verjuice or omphacium, that is, juice from unripe grapes.⁵ Likewise lora, that is, liquid from grapes previously pressed and, a great quantity of water having been poured over them, pressed again. But if water is poured in a smaller quantity, the matter will be valid or doubtful.⁶

c) Sapa or defrutum, because although it contains the substance of wine, nevertheless it has obtained the nature and use of food.

d) Vinegar, because it differs substantially from wine. If wine becomes sour from initial corruption, the matter will easily be doubtful; otherwise if it is from the fact that the grapes were not perfectly ripe.

e) It is disputed whether frozen wine is valid matter. Now it seems to have to be affirmed, both because by its nature it is drinkable, and because the Blood of Christ remains under the species of frozen wine;⁷ this proves that wine is not corrupted by freezing.

Nor should you object: just as the water of Baptism must be liquid, so also the wine of the Most Holy Eucharist. Response: I deny the parity; for the water of Baptism must be liquid by reason of washing, that is, of the proximate matter of Baptism; but drinking, by reason of which wine would have to be liquid, is not the proximate matter of the Most Holy Eucharist.

¹ Matthew 26:29.

² On Defects, title IV, n. 2.

³ Theologia Moralis, III, 371.

⁴ Holy Office, 22 July 1706 (Collectanea, n. 270); 7 May 1879 (Collectanea, n. 1518).

⁵ "Today, however, often from unripe grapes wine is made which has the appearance of true wine, sugar being added, which is lacking to the grapes. But when the quantity of sugar thus added would exceed that which is found in must, the matter would be at least illicit" (Geniot-Salsmans, Theologia Moralis, II, n. 121).

⁶ Today, after grapes have been pressed once, a solution of sugar is commonly poured over them several times, and a quantity of wine five times greater than that which would have been obtained from the berries once pressed is obtained.

⁷ Roman Missal, On Defects, title X, n. 11.

II. The matter required for liceity is wine:

1. Fermented and cleared from sediment. It would be a grave sin without grave necessity to consecrate wine not yet cleansed from sediment. Nevertheless it is permitted to use wine cleansed from sediment through evaporation and condensation, provided fermentation is not excluded.¹ Likewise it is a grave sin without grave cause to use wine notably infected with sediment. Nevertheless it is permitted to consecrate wine that is merely turbid.

2. Pure, that is, not mixed with foreign matter, for example with aromatics. Nevertheless the Holy Office² permitted that spirit of wine be admixed to weak wine, "provided the spirit has been extracted from the produce of the vine and the alcoholic quantity, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of 12%, and the admixture is made when it is very fresh." Indeed the same Congregation permitted³ that the spirit of wine be increased up to 17-18 percent, if this is required for preserving very strong and extraordinarily sweet wines. The use of port wine seems illicit, because it contains too much spirit of wine, namely 18-21 percent.

3. Not becoming sour. "If the wine has begun to become sour or corrupted, or has been somewhat sharp... the sacrament is confected, but the one confecting sins gravely."⁴ These words, with several authors, are to be taken thus:

a) If the wine becomes sour from initial corruption, in which case the matter becomes doubtful, that is, it becomes doubtful whether it is wine or vinegar, proceed according to what was said in n. 147.

b) If the wine becomes sour from natural sharpness, arising from the fact that the grapes were not perfectly ripe, the matter is valid but illicit; in this case these things hold:

1. If it becomes notably sour, it is permitted to use it when grave necessity urges, provided it is certainly wine (St. Alphonsus, VI, 207).

2. If it becomes only slightly sour, per se indeed, as the Roman Missal expressly declares, it is mortal to use it; but these things are not to be urged so far that it would not be permitted to use it if other wine is lacking (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.). Finally, one who celebrates in another's church, or as a religious subject does not have care of the wine, should proceed without scruple even if the wine is a little sour, the danger being thrown back upon the rector of the church or upon the superior.

4. A very small amount of natural water should be admixed to the wine (canon 814). The admixture, however, must be made by way of ceremony, that is, at the altar and in the chalice; hence an admixture before the sacred rite, even by the priest himself, for example made in the cruet, does not suffice. If the admixture has been omitted and this is noticed before the consecration, it must be made immediately; if it is noticed after the consecration, it must be omitted.⁵ For the rest, observe:

a) The admixture of water is not required for validity, as the Roman Missal has it.⁶ Nevertheless it is prescribed, as is clear from the Council of Trent,⁷ from canon 814, and from the rituals. Yet more probably it is not of divine law but only of ecclesiastical law; this is deduced from the fact that neither in Sacred Scripture nor in Tradition is a divine origin indicated, and ecclesiastical documents, notably the Council of Trent,⁸ rather insinuate that it is an ecclesiastical precept (St. Alphonsus, VI, 208).

b) The precept obliges under grave obligation, as the Roman Missal says.⁹ The reason is that its ends are grave, namely so that there may be signified: 1. the water and blood which flowed together from the side of Christ; 2. the union between Christ, who is represented by the wine, and the faithful, who are represented by the water;¹⁰ 3. the union of the twofold nature in Christ (St. Thomas, III, q. 74, a. 6; St. Alphonsus, VI, 208). Indeed the obligation is considered so grave that scarcely ever is it permitted to consecrate without water admixed. Natural water is required, so that one would sin gravely who used, even in necessity, water which was not natural (St. Alphonsus, VI, 208, 2).

c) Only a very little or little water must be admixed.¹¹ One or another small drop suffices, although a somewhat greater quantity is urged. Yet it must especially be guarded against that the admixture be made up to a third part of the quantity, since that would render the matter doubtful (St. Alphonsus, VI, 210).

d) The admixed water, according to the opinion of all, is converted into the Blood. But it is disputed whether it is converted into the Blood without first having been converted into wine, or whether it is converted first, at least according to common estimation, into wine, then into the Blood. Those who admit the first argue from the fact that the molecules of the admixed water remain numerically the same, or retain their individuation. Those who hold the second reason from the fact that the molecules of water do not remain numerically the same, but receive a new individuation from the greater quantity.

¹ Holy Office, 5 August 1896 (Collectanea, n. 1950); 22 May 1901 (Collectanea, n. 2113).

² 30 July 1890 (Collectanea, n. 1735).

³ 5 August 1896 (Collectanea, n. 1950); 22 May 1901 (Collectanea, n. 2113).

⁴ Roman Missal, On Defects, title IV, n. 2.

⁵ Cf. St. Thomas, III, q. 74, a. 5, ad 2; Benedict XIV, Institutiones, 77, n. 2.

⁶ Roman Missal, On Defects, title IV, n. 7.

⁷ Session 22, chapter 7.

⁸ Loc. cit.

⁹ On Defects, title IV, n. 2.

¹⁰ Council of Trent, session 22, chapter 7.

¹¹ Council of Florence; Roman Missal, Ritus servandus, title VII, n. 4.

“Whether wine made from dried grapes (commonly called zibibbo) can be employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass.—Response. Let the decree of Friday, 22 July 1706, be given, namely: ‘It is lawful, provided that the liquid to be extracted from zibibbo, or dried grapes, is recognized from color, odor, and taste to be true wine.’” Holy Office, 7 May 1879.

“It was set forth by a Bishop of France that, since the wine of that place has an acidic taste owing to an excess of tartaric acid, it is customarily sweetened with potassium tartrate, a salt which is extracted from the lees of wine and which forms, with the excess tartaric acid, potassium bitartrate, which precipitates to the bottom of the cask. It was therefore asked whether this wine, thus treated, was lawful for the Mass.—Response. It is not expedient.” Holy Office, 9 May 1892.

“To guard against the danger of the corruption of wine, two remedies are proposed: 1. Let a small quantity of brandy be added to natural wine. 2. Let the wine be heated to sixty-five degrees. Are these remedies lawful in wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and which is to be preferred?—Response. The wine as set forth in the second place is to be preferred.” Holy Office, 8 May 1887.

“In several parts of Gaul, ... the white wine which serves for the unbloody Sacrifice of the Mass is so weak and feeble that it cannot be preserved for long unless a certain quantity of spirit of wine (spirito, alcohol) is mixed with it.—1. Is a mixture of this kind lawful? 2. And, if affirmative, what quantity of foreign matter of this kind is permitted to be added to the wine? 3. In the affirmative case, is it required that the spirit of wine be extracted from pure wine, or from the fruit of the vine?—Response. Provided that the spirit (alcohol) was extracted from the fruit of the vine, that the added alcoholic quantity, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of twelve percent, and that the mixture is made when the wine is very new, there is nothing to prevent the same wine from being employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass.” Holy Office, 30 July 1890.

“The sweet wine which is customarily employed for the Sacrifice of the Mass in Spain naturally contains spirit beyond the proportion of twelve percent. It is asked: 1. Whether the mixture of ten parts of spirit per hundred, which, as experience establishes, is altogether necessary for the preservation of the sweet wine, can be continued. 2. Whether wine thus made can be employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass.—Response. Negative in relation to the Sacrifice of the Mass.” Holy Office, 15 April 1891.

“Since it is difficult to buy unmixed wine in Europe, ... already for many years it has seemed safer and easier to the missionaries of this Vicariate to make wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass in this very region. The grapes, however, which are found in the northern parts of the Chinese Empire contain an exceedingly small quantity of sugar; from this it comes about that the wine pressed from them for the Sacrifice of the Mass has only the smallest portion of alcohol and therefore can scarcely be preserved incorrupt, especially in view of the prolonged and intense heats of summer, which are most favorable to corruption. The inconvenience is removed and wine is obtained which can be safely preserved and is not disagreeable to sight, taste, or smell, if ten pounds of cane sugar (that is, from the grass-like plant botanically called Saccharum officinarum and commonly called in French canne à sucre) are added to one hundred pounds of grapes immediately after they have been crushed, and this mass is then fermented in the customary manner. When it has ceased to boil, from one hundred pounds of the mass (containing nine pounds of sugar according to what has been set forth), sixty-seven pounds of wine are obtained, which, as it is lawful to conjecture from chemical calculation, contain in practice at most four and a half pounds (that is, about one-fifteenth part of the total weight) of alcohol generated from the sugar. In other words, by the aforesaid operation true wine from the vine is obtained, one hundred parts of which have six or seven parts of heterogeneous alcohol—that is, alcohol not produced from the vine—mixed with them. We have retained this practice the more willingly as it becomes more impossible for us from day to day to obtain spirit of wine (alcohol) generated from the vine. But now, since a certain doubt has arisen, it is humbly asked: 1. Whether this practice is safe for obtaining wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass. If negative: 2. Whether it is valid. 3. What if wine of this kind was employed in Masses owed in justice?

“Response. Spirit or alcohol which was extracted from the fruit of the vine is rather to be added to wine for the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and its quantity, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, is not to exceed the proportion of twelve percent. A mixture of this kind is to be made when the so-called tumultuous fermentation has begun to subside; and according to the mind: The mind is that, if the missionaries are unable to procure spirit of wine, they should obtain it themselves by distilling the wine of the country, or they should mix dried grapes with the grapes of the country, causing them to ferment together.” Holy Office, 25 June 1891.

“In Brazil it is exceedingly difficult to make true wine for the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass ... unless it be made in that very region. Now, the grape in these places is so weak and watery that, in order to obtain tolerable wine, some sugar from the plant which we commonly call canna de assugar must be mixed with the must; and wine is also made in this manner, which priests commonly use in the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass. But now, the response of the Sacred Roman and Universal Inquisition issued on 25 June 1891 having become known, doubts and anxieties of conscience have arisen.... Whether wine thus made can or cannot safely be employed for the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass.

“Response. In place of sugar extracted from the sugarcane, commonly called canna de assugar, spirit of alcohol is rather to be added, provided that it was extracted from the fruit of the vine, and that its quantity, added to that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of twelve percent; a mixture of this kind is to be made when the tumultuous fermentation, as they say, has begun to subside.” Holy Office, 5 August 1896.

“The Archbishop of Tarragona in Spain sets forth that the sweet wines which are made in this region and are greatly desired by priests for the celebration of Mass already exceed twelve degrees of alcoholic strength after the first fermentation, which the wines of Marseilles do not reach even with the permitted addition of alcoholic liquid.—Nevertheless, in order that these generous and sweet wines, although endowed with greater strength than the wines of Marseilles, may safely be exported to foreign nations, they must possess eighteen degrees of alcoholic strength; otherwise, because of their very sweetness, they are liable to new fermentations and, during transport by sea, for the most part become sour. For this reason our wine merchants implore a favor similar to that which was granted to the petitions of the Bishop of Marseilles praised above, namely, the faculty of fortifying with spirit or alcohol extracted indeed from the fruit of the vine the wines, especially the sweet ones, so that those which naturally reach more or less fifteen degrees of alcoholic strength may rise to eighteen. For thus the corruption which they are accustomed to undergo from repeated fermentations is prevented, and they can be conveyed more safely to foreign nations which lack wine suitable for offering sacrifice becomingly.—Furthermore, as they say, in some regions of Spain there prevails a most ancient custom by which many priests make wine for themselves for the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass, either by first evaporating the must by fire or by drying the grapes in the rays of the sun; this custom seems to be warranted by the declaration of the Holy Office on 22 July 1706 concerning wine made from dried grapes. 1. Whether so much spirit or alcohol extracted from grapes may be added to the aforesaid wines, especially the sweet ones, for their preservation that they rise to about seventeen or eighteen degrees of alcoholic strength, without thereby ceasing to be suitable matter for the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass. 2. Whether it is lawful, for the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass, to use wine obtained from must which before vinous fermentation was condensed by evaporation with fire.

“Response. To the first: In view of the newly adduced matters, provided that in the proposed case the spirit was extracted from the fruit of the vine, and that the alcoholic quantity to be added, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of seventeen or eighteen percent, and that the mixture is made when the tumultuous fermentation, as they say, has begun to subside, there is nothing to prevent the same wine from being employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass.—To the second: It is lawful, provided that a boiling of this kind does not exclude alcoholic fermentation, and that the fermentation itself can be obtained naturally and is in fact obtained.” Holy Office, 5 August 1896.

“A pernicious abuse has grown up in your parts, namely, that a greater quantity of water than of wine is placed in the Sacrifice, whereas according to the reasonable custom of the universal Church more wine than water is to be placed in it. Therefore We command your Fraternity that you neither do this nor permit it to be done in your province.” Honorius III, chapter 13, On the Celebration of Masses.

“The Armenians coming into union with the Holy Roman Church are not to be permitted to perform the Sacrifice of the Mass with wine alone, for several reasons: 1. Because, although a mixture of this kind of water with wine is not of the necessity of the Sacrament but only from a precept of the Church, concerning which the Pope can dispense, nevertheless, because water is mixed with the wine to be consecrated from Apostolic tradition, and because Christ is believed from the testimonies of the Holy Fathers to have done this, in no way ought a rite of sacrificing of this kind to be tolerated or permitted to the Armenians. 2. Because a rite of this kind of the Armenians either involves the heresy of the Monophysites or at least is most suspect of it; for Nicephorus, in book 18 of his history, chapter 53, clearly said that the Armenians consecrate wine alone in order by this to show that there is only one nature in Christ the Lord. 3. Because the Holy Council of Florence, in the Instruction to the Armenians, by the word We decree, commands the united Armenians to mix a little water with the wine in the Sacrifice. 4. Because the Armenians always petitioned the Apostolic See that a rite of this kind be permitted to them, and nevertheless it was always denied to them; for Gregory VII, as in his first epistle of book 8, Alexander III, Callistus III, Eugene III, Eugene IV in the said Council of Florence, John XXII, Benedict XI, and finally Paul V, in his Apostolic Letters to Melchizedek, styled Catholicos, who consecrated this Archbishop of Lviv, expressly refused to permit a rite of this kind. 5. Because, finally, Luther approved a rite of this kind, and the Calvinists observe the same in their Supper; and if the aforesaid rite were permitted to the Armenians in the Kingdom of Poland, the Calvinists, who are found there in no small number, would calumniate the Roman Church, namely, that she had changed her judgment and agreed with them. And canon 24 of the Third Council of Carthage under Pope Siricius, and chapters 1, 2, and 3, On Consecration, distinction 2, agree with this resolution.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 30 January 1635; C. 797.

1. Donatus, a new priest, celebrating his first Mass, confected the Eucharist from bread indeed of wheat, baked by pure fire, but kneaded with rose-water; and from wine expressed from sour grapes, or not mature grapes, to which nevertheless sugar had been mixed, so that it altogether had the flavor of sweet wine.

Quaer. Whether Donatus consecrated validly?

R. As regards the bread kneaded with rose-water, the matter is doubtful, and therefore this species was doubtfully consecrated. In Rubr. de Defect. § 3. n. 2 it is said: "If it is made (the bread) from rose-water, or from another distillation, it is doubtful whether it is confected." But as regards the wine expressed from sour grapes or not mature grapes, from Rubr. de Defect. § 4. n. 1., the matter is altogether invalid, and therefore the sacrament was not confected. But the sugar mixed in could indeed have simulated the taste of wine, but could not make true wine.

2. "It was set forth by a Bishop of France that, since the wine of that place has an acid taste, due to an excess of tartaric acid, it is customarily sweetened with potassium tartrate, a salt which is extracted from the lees of wine, and which forms with the excess tartaric acid a potassium bitartrate that precipitates to the bottom of the cask. Meanwhile it was asked whether this wine so treated was lawful for Mass.

R. "It is not expedient." S. O. 9 May 1892. M. E. v. 7. p. 2. p. 204.

3. Paul, a missionary among Easterners, asks whether he can give communion to Easterners in his own Church of the Latin rite, and whether he can give them communion in unleavened bread.

4. Peter, likewise a missionary among Easterners, asks whether Latins can receive communion in the Churches of the Easterners, and whether they can receive communion in leavened bread.

Quaer. What answer is to be given to each missionary?

R. In the Letter of S. C. de P. F., 30 Apr. 1862, to the Apostolic Delegate of Egypt, these things are contained as regards the proposed questions: "The second doubt concerns the reception of the sacraments which the Easterners make in the Latin Churches, namely of penance and of the Eucharist... Regarding the sacrament of the Eucharist, it is fitting to distinguish the Easterners who, according to their own rite, use unleavened bread, from those who use leavened. For the former there is no prohibition, nor can the Eastern bishops forbid their own subjects to receive the Eucharist from Latin missionaries in their churches, it being well understood in cases in which parochial right does not enter. But for the others, that is, for those who, in Eucharistic matter, use leavened bread, it must first be noted that they also can receive holy communion in Latin churches, provided they receive it according to their own rite, and from national priests, as Benedict XIV teaches in the Encyclical Allatae sunt, at numbers 33, 35, 36. Indeed, sometimes this is a necessity for those places where the Easterners do not have churches of their own rite. But it is another thing if the users of leavened bread wished to receive communion from the Latins in unleavened bread. Two rules have been established for the users of leavened bread: the first is that they cannot at their own choice communicate in unleavened bread when they have the opportunity of doing so in their own rite; the second is that when there occurs the difficulty of communicating in leavened bread, they can do so also in unleavened bread, not only in the article of death and to fulfill the Easter precept, but also in other cases, as is established in the pastoral instruction of Benedict XIV, Eo quamvis tempore § Neque etiam.

"In the third doubt the Latins are treated, that is, the users of unleavened bread. These can communicate in the Eastern churches in their own rite from priests who use unleavened bread, but they cannot without pontifical dispensation communicate in leavened bread, even though there should occur the difficulty of communicating in unleavened bread. The maxim is found established in the Constitution Etsi pastoralis of Benedict XIV, n. 12 of § VI, where it is said absolutely that Latin laypeople are altogether prohibited and forbidden to receive communion from Greek presbyters under the species of leavened bread. Consistently, the Holy Office and the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda have always prohibited the users of unleavened bread from communicating in leavened bread; and only in the cases in which there occurred the total lack of priests of their own rite, and of those of another rite in which consecration is made in unleavened bread, have they implored for them the pontifical dispensation, which, however, has not been granted except for the two cases of true necessity, namely of Viaticum and of the Easter precept." Collectan. S. C. de P. F. n. 735. I. M. 505.

But very recently, by the Decree of the same S. C. de P. F., 18 Aug. 1893, Monitore Ecclesiastico Conversano v. 8. p. 2., p. 79., "to all the faithful of whatever rite, whether Latin or Eastern, dwelling in places in which there is no church and priest of their own rite, the faculty is granted in the future by the Holy See of receiving Most Holy Communion, not only in the article of death and for fulfilling the Easter precept, but also at any time for the sake of devotion, according to the rite of the church existing in the aforesaid places, provided it is Catholic."

And in Blessed Leo XIII, Orientalium dignitas, the day before the Kalends of December 1894, these things are contained: "Where there is lacking a priest of their own rite to whom the Eastern Patriarch may entrust the spiritual administration of his own people, there let a parish priest of another rite undertake their care, one who uses the same species as they themselves, unleavened or leavened, for consecrating; those are to be preferred who use them in the Eastern rite. - But let the faithful have the faculty of communicating in either rite, not only in those places where no church nor priest of their own proper rite is available, as was decreed by the Sacred Council for propagating the Christian name on 18 Aug. 1893, but also where, because of the distance of their own church, they cannot approach it except with grave inconvenience; concerning this let the judgment belong to the Ordinaries. And let this remain fixed: that one who has communicated by another rite or on another day is not therefore to be judged to have changed rite, but in all other duties continues to remain attached to his own parish priest...

"For a woman of the Latin rite who has married a man of the Eastern rite, as also for an Eastern woman who has married a Latin, it will be intact that, on entering or during the marriage, she may pass over to the rite of the husband; but when the marriage has been dissolved, there will be free power of resuming her own rite."

From these Documents the solution to be given to each missionary is clearly evident.

5. A Latin priest, in consecrating the bread, omitted the words which precede the consecration, who on the day before, etc. But a Greek priest, in consecrating the bread, omitted the words, which shall be given for you.

Quaer. Whether each consecration was valid?

R. Affirmatively. There are not lacking those who hold that those words who on the day before, etc., although they are not part of the form, nevertheless are necessarily required for the validity of the form. But this opinion, as Lugo says, d. 11. n. 39., is rejected by all. The altogether convincing reason is that the Fathers and Councils say that this sacrament is confected by the words of Christ, and not by others. But those words who on the day before, etc., are not the words of Christ, but of the Evangelist. Cf. Conc. Flor. Decr. pro Iacob. E. M. 521.

But although the Greeks add to the form of consecration of the bread those words, which shall be given for you, nevertheless these do not belong to the essence of the form. For, as the Roman Catechism says, n. 19., "we are taught by the holy Evangelists Matthew and Luke, and likewise by the Apostle, that this is the form: This is my Body. For it is written: While they were dining, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said: Take and eat, This is my Body. Since this form of consecration was indeed observed by Christ the Lord, the Catholic Church has perpetually used it." - Lugo d. 11. s. 3., D'Annib. 241. 387., I. M. 521. 524.

6. Laelius the sacristan warned Narcissus the priest, who was soon to celebrate, that he should wish to consecrate the small host already placed upon the altar. But at the time of the oblation, since he had not found the small host upon the altar, he made the oblation in the usual manner of the larger host, and consecrated it. But then, folding the Corporal, he found the small host, which had been placed under the Corporal.

Quaer. Whether the aforesaid small host was consecrated?

R. It seems that that small host was not consecrated. The reason is that, since Narcissus sought it upon the altar and did not find it, he seems already not to have had the intention of consecrating another host than the larger host. Wherefore he implicitly retracted the intention he had previously had. Moreover, those words, this and here, signify matter that is certain, present, and placed nearby. Wherefore, just as the consecration would be invalid if the matter were placed far away, for example, if it were more than 50 paces away, so also it would be invalid if the matter were not placed in sight, for example, if it were placed in a pyx kept in the tabernacle. Hence the consecration is also not valid if the host is placed under the corporal. - I. M. 510.

"For consecration it is required," says Castropal. punct. 6. num. 5., "that the matter to be consecrated be present to you, so that you can point it out by the pronoun this or here, and perceive it by sense; otherwise it will not be present to you in a moral and human manner. It does not stand in the way of this presence that it is contained in some vessel or linen cloth; for by reason of the container the content is present to you. It would be otherwise if bread or wine were placed behind a wall or a linen cloth, because then by no sense can you point out that matter. And it is the same if the bread exists under a cloth, or in the tabernacle, because it does not exist there as in a container which can be perceived by sense. Thus Suar., Vazq., Bonac., Aegid. de Coninch., Paul. Laymann." La-Croix l. 6. p. 1. n. 443. 444., D'Annib. p. 3. n. 388.

7. Aloysius, lying ill with a grave disease, after sacramental confession had been completed, received Viaticum. As soon as the sacred host had descended into the stomach, Aloysius is seized by a sudden and unexpected vomiting, and casts out the sacred host, which appears intact. The physician is consulted, who declares the matter altogether accidental, and says that Aloysius can receive Viaticum again without any new danger of vomiting. Wherefore Aloysius and his parents ask the parish priest to be willing to minister the Most Holy Viaticum again after lunch.

Quaer. Whether the parish priest can minister the sacred Viaticum again in the Case?

R. Negatively. For it is contrary to the practice of the Church to minister sacred Viaticum twice in a day, and while the same danger of death remains, to the sick person. For Aloysius, notwithstanding the vomiting, truly received Viaticum. For it was altogether verified that he ate the Body of Christ. Wherefore he also received sacramental grace. I. M. 496. For the use of this sacrament is had in the eating of the Body of Christ; when this eating has been verified, the fruit of the sacrament is received, according to Christ's clear promise of grace to be given: He who eats the bread shall live forever. But eating in this sacrament must certainly be understood as in other foods, which certainly, in a human manner, are said to have been eaten not when they are only in the mouth or in the throat, but when they have already descended into the stomach, and are already judged to have been irrevocably swallowed. Cf. Lugo d. 12. s. 2.

172. 1. Valid matter of wine. For validly consecrating wine, it is altogether required that it be uncorrupted wine from the vine, whether white, red, or mixed from both, that is, liquid expressed from mature grapes of the vine.

Therefore, every other liquid is invalid matter, for example, beer; distilled wine, such as Cognac; artificial wine; wine made from apples and other fruits; and so forth. The following are also invalid matter: a) grapes, because they are not a drink; b) wine made into vinegar or corrupted in another manner, for example, by the infusion of a great quantity of water; c) wine from which all alcohol has been removed by art,⁴² because alcohol appears to pertain to the essence of natural wine.

On May 7, 1879, the Holy Office, to the question, "Whether it is lawful to celebrate with wine made from raisins or dried grapes?"⁴³ replied: "It is lawful, provided that the liquid is recognized from its color and taste to be true wine." Missionaries, therefore, living in regions where fresh grapes cannot be had and wine cannot easily be brought from distant regions can readily procure for themselves wine from these dried grapes, provided, however, that they wait for the fermentation of the must.

⁴² German: Alkoholfreier Wein (alcohol-free wine).

⁴³ German: Rosinen; French: raisins secs; Italian: zibibbo (Collectan. de Prop. Fide, n. 1518). The following method can be used: Upon a quantity of dried grapes is poured the same or a slightly greater quantity of pure water. The grapes, absorbing the water, swell; after one day they are pressed. The juice thus obtained is must, which begins to ferment shortly afterward, and after some time true and pure wine is obtained.

173. 2. Licit matter of wine. For licitly consecrating wine, it is required that the wine be:

a) Fermented.

Therefore, must, or juice recently expressed from mature grapes, is indeed valid matter but illicit, because it does not appear to be perfect wine and has various non-consecrable substances mixed with it. Liquid expressed from unripe grapes (agresto, verjus) is not valid matter because it is not yet wine.⁴⁴

b) Pure.

Therefore, it is illicit to employ wine which is cloudy, or to which aromatics, colors, or sugar have been added. The Holy Office permitted, on July 30, 1890, that wine spirit⁴⁵ be mixed with weak wine, provided, however, that: 1. this spirit is extracted from the fruit of the vine, not from apples or sugar; 2. the entire quantity of spirit now contained in the wine thus mixed does not exceed 12 percent; 3. the admixture is made while the wine is still very recent, so that one substance can be produced from the wine and spirit through fermentation. Indeed, the same Holy Office on August 5, 1896, permitted that the alcoholic spirit could be increased up to 17-18 percent if this is necessary for preserving very generous and extraordinarily sweet wines.⁴⁶

c) Not yet turning sour nor frozen.

For wine turning sour is not indeed totally corrupted, but it is already beginning to be corrupted. Frozen wine is doubtful matter for consecration; therefore, it must first be liquefied before it can licitly be consecrated or, after consecration, before it can licitly be consumed.⁴⁷

d) A small quantity of natural water is to be mixed with the wine to be consecrated.

Thus it is required by a grave precept of the Church.⁴⁸ The reasons for which the Church has prescribed the admixture of water are: 1. the example of Christ, who is believed to have consecrated with wine mixed with water; 2. the signification both of the Blood and water flowing from the side of the dead Christ and of the union between Christ and the faithful. For Christ, who is God, is signified by the wine, while the faithful, who are creatures, are signified by the water. All theologians teach that this precept is so grave that in no case can a priest consecrate wine without the admixture of water; and if a priest has forgotten to pour water into the wine, he must supply this defect before the consecration, but not afterward.

The water to be mixed must be natural and potable, even if it is acidulous, alkaline, or carbonated.⁴⁹

The quantity of water to be mixed must be very small, because according to the more probable opinion this water must be converted into wine and thus consecrated into the Blood of Christ.⁵⁰ This would be impossible if a notable quantity of water were mixed with the wine. Therefore, let the priest take care not to mix more than a few drops, from 3 to 10, with the wine. In some regions water is poured in with the aid of a small spoon, lest the quantity of water be excessive. Such a usage can be tolerated.⁵¹ But if the quantity of added water equaled one third of the wine to be consecrated, the matter would be very doubtful and it would not be lawful to consecrate it. Hence, some portion of wine would then have to be added.

According to the Latin rite, the water is to be mixed with the wine when the priest is already at the altar; therefore, it would not be lawful to pour water into the wine in the sacristy, and still less in the cellar. According to the Eastern rite, however, water is poured into the wine at the beginning of the liturgy and then again, immediately before Communion, water which is hot. This ceremony, approved by Benedict XIV,⁵² signifies that the divinity did not depart from Christ's dead Body while Blood and water flowed from His side.

⁴⁴ Cf. Roman Missal, De defect. Miss., tit. 4, n. 2; St. Thomas, S. theol. 3, q. 74, a. 5 ad 3.

⁴⁵ German: Weingeist (wine spirit).

⁴⁶ Cf. Denz., nn. 1937 sqq.

⁴⁷ Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 207, q. 2; Billuart, De euch., diss. 3, a. 1.

⁴⁸ Cf. Council of Trent, sess. 22, c. 7 and can. 9 on the sacrifice of the Mass (Denz., nn. 945 and 956); Code of Canon Law, c. 814.

⁴⁹ German: Natürliches Mineralwasser (natural mineral water). Holy Office, August 11, 1904 (Analect. eccl. XII [1904], 370).

⁵⁰ Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 74, a. 8, and Roman Catechism, p. 2, c. 4, q. 16.

⁵¹ Sacred Congregation of Rites, February 6, 1858 (Decr. auth., n. 3064 ad 4).

⁵² Constitution Etsi pastoralis, § 6, n. 2.

S. Th. III, q. 74, a. 5-8.

220. Principle I. For the validity of the sacrament there is required wine from the vine. - It is proved:

1. From the institution of Christ saying, Matt. XXVI, 29: I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine...

2. From perpetual tradition, which is established from the Didache IX, 2.

3. From the declaration of the Council of Florence, decree for the Armenians, of the Roman Missal, and of can. 815.

4. By reason of fittingness.

Thus it is fitting a) because only wine from the vine is properly and commonly held as wine, for other liquids are called wines according to a certain likeness to wine of the vine; b) because it signifies more the effect of this sacrament, which is spiritual gladness.

221. Principle II. For usual or potable wine from the vine there is required and there suffices juice, expressed from mature grapes, not corrupted. - Namely, every species of wine is valid matter, of whatever color, region, condition, age it may be, and expressed from whatever mature grapes, even from dried grapes, provided that from color, odor, and taste it is recognized as true wine (Holy Office, July 22, 1706; May 7, 1879; April 10, 1889).

Hence invalid matter is:

1. Liquors or artificial wines expressed from grains, apples, pears, mulberries, pomegranates, or other fruits or herbs, as cider, beer, rythmum, although they have a great likeness with wine.

2. Chemically composed wine, although it contains all the elements of wine.

3. Those things which are from the vine but are not wine, as a) juice still enclosed in grapes, because it is not drink but food, nor properly wine, nor can it be sufficiently demonstrated by the words: this chalice; - b) wine imbibed in a lump of bread, because it is not only wine but also at the same time bread, nor drink but food; - c) verjuice or omphacium (verjus), i.e., liquid expressed from immature grapes, because it is on the way to wine but does not yet have the species of wine; - d) vinegar, which is corrupted wine, because a substantial change has been made by chemical combination between alcohol and the oxygen of the air; - e) vappa or perfectly flat wine, from which namely alcohol, which is an essential element of wine, has evaporated and the wine has become entirely putrid; - f) spirit of wine or burnt wine, etc.

4. Lora (piquette), which is made by water in great quantity poured over grapes already pressed; unless, however, much juice still remained in the grapes themselves, in which case this second wine would be valid matter or doubtfully valid, but gravely illicit.

5. Sapa or defrutum, i.e., must or new wine not yet clarified, but boiled down to a half or a third part, because in common estimation it is no longer wine nor drink, but food.

6. Wine mixed in great quantity with spice or with another liquid: if the liquid is mixed in such quantity that it can be diffused through the whole wine, the whole would become mixed and the species of wine would be dissolved, and it would be a liquid of another species; but if the added liquid were of so small a quantity that it could not be diffused through the whole, the whole would not become mixed but some part of it, and the added liquid would pass into the species of wine and the species of wine would remain.

222. Principle III. For liceity it is required that the wine be 1. perfect, 2. pure, 3. liquid or not frozen, 4. mixed with a very little natural water. - It must be:

1. Perfect from fermentation having taken place, namely, on account of reverence for the sacrament.

Must (mout), i.e., new wine not yet perfectly fermented and clarified, consequently having dregs mixed in which cannot be consecrated, is matter of itself gravely illicit, unless necessity is present, other wine being lacking.

2. Pure, i.e., not mixed, nor becoming sour or putrid, with that souring which indicates begun corruption.

To use these is a mortal sin from its genus, unless necessity is present because other wine is lacking; but it is venial on account of smallness of matter, if, for example, the wine were slightly impure or altogether only a little souring.

Indeed it can be lawful in moderate quantity to add foreign matter, for instance water, spirit of wine, sugar, if it is necessary, for example for preserving or correcting the wine. Thus according to the declaration of the Holy Office, July 30, 1890, it is lawful to use white wine to which a quantity of spirit of wine is mixed, provided that the spirit was extracted from the fruit of the vine, and that the added alcoholic quantity together with that which the wine naturally contains does not exceed the proportion of 12 percent, and that the admixture is made when the wine is very new, i.e., when the tumultuous fermentation decreases. Indeed, if the wine naturally already contains more than 12 percent spirit, it is licitly added up to 18 percent, if it is necessary for preserving wine which is exported (August 5, 1906). Nevertheless, to forestall the danger of corruption of the wine, it ought to be preferred that the wine be boiled to 65 degrees of heat, rather than that a small quantity of the liquor "eau de vie" be added (May 8, 1887); - likewise alcoholic spirit, because it is from the vine, is to be added rather than sugar (August 5, 1896); - nor is it expedient to use a chemical process for correcting the natural acridity of wine (April 27, 1892).

3. Liquid or not frozen, and indeed under grave obligation, because it must be potable.

It is valid, however, because it retains the substance and denomination of wine, and remains potable by its nature, just as hardened bread is edible, although not proximately; moreover after consecration Christ remains present if the species of wine is frozen, as is established from the Missal.

4. Mixed with a very little natural water (can. 814), which in the celebration of the sacrifice is required under grave obligation from an ecclesiastical precept.

The water is required to be natural; whence to use rose-water or water of another distillation would be a grave sin. The quantity is required to be sensible, but one drop suffices; let it never exceed an eighth or fifth part of the wine, or perhaps a third according to the diverse richness of the wine.

223. The commixture of water and wine 1. is not of the necessity of the sacrament, as is established from the Missal prescribing that it is to be omitted after consecration, De defectibus, c. X, n. 7, and from the manner of speaking of the Councils, which indicate that it is a custom and precept, never an essential necessity; - 2. nor is it of divine precept: for although Christ used water, nevertheless He did not command that all the circumstances of the Last Supper, for example the color of the wine, be observed, but only the substance of the action; - 3. but it is of ecclesiastical law, as is established from the Council of Florence, decree for the Armenians, and Trent, sess. 22, c. 7, can. 9.

But it is a grave precept, although the thing is light in itself, because it greatly conduces to a grave end, a signification of great moment: for it is done a) on account of institution, because it is believed that the Lord, according to the custom of the Jews, mixed water with wine; b) because it fits the representation of the Passion: for water flowed with blood from the side of Christ; c) because it fits the signifying of the effect of the sacrament, which is the union of the faithful people with Christ the head, the exemplar of which union is the union of human nature with the Word: for just as water is converted into wine, so human nature is united to the Word and the people to Christ, and thus they participate in the divine life (Council of Trent, l.c., c. 7).

That water is mixed with the wine, and since wine is nothing except a mixture of several substances among which there is water, hence a little water added passes into wine, and thus is mediately converted into the blood of Christ.

Question 6. What must be said concerning must, and what concerning wine of our region?

Resp. Natural wine from the vine, incorrupt, and every wine from the fermented juice of ripe grape, is valid and licit matter of this second consecration. Another sense has been given by men to this word wine, so that it signifies must, new wine, as it is called, genuine juice of ripe grape not adulterated, containing the elements by which fermentation is naturally procured. The first sense is the most used among men; in this way the word is understood by the Councils, in tradition, and by Theologians for signifying the licit matter of this consecration. Eugene IV, Const. Exsultate Deo; Holy Office, 30 Aug. 1901; 22 July 1706; 7 May 1897; 4 May 1887; 30 July 1890; 5 Aug. 1896. In the Roman Missal, tit. 4, n. 2, we read: "If the wine has begun to sour, or to corrupt, or has been somewhat sharp, or must pressed then from grapes . . . the Sacrament is confected, but the one confecting sins gravely." In the Decree of Gratian, c. 7, D. 1, de consecr.: "If it is necessary, let a cluster be pressed in the chalice and water be mixed." In these cases there can be no question of perfect fermentation, or scarcely even imperfect fermentation, except in a broader sense: fermentation lasts for some time; at most there is had an inception of fermentation of the genuine juice of ripe grape, which contains the elements by which fermentation can be naturally obtained. Such matter can be employed in necessity, as is plain from the Ritual and from the Decree: "This necessity would be verified if fermented wine absolutely could not be had in the region." Gasparri, De Eucharistia, n. 819; Prümmer, vol. 3, p. 139: "Must, or juice recently pressed from ripe grapes, is indeed valid matter but gravely illicit." Biel, Sacri Canonis Missae Expositio, lect. 35: "And in necessity the pressing of wine from a cluster in the chalice is conceded." Suarez, disp. 45, Sect. 1, n. 6; Vasquez, disp. 175, c. 1, 2; Sylvius, q. 74, a. 5; Toletus, vol. 4, p. 162; Génicot-Salsman, vol. 2, n. 171; Gopfert, n. 126. Practically the reason of all is this: because that is wine in substance. "Likewise it is clear from the effect," says Suarez, "because must is warm, intoxicates, and from intrinsic and proper power is purified and ripened, and brings itself to the perfect state. Therefore it is a sign that it is substantially wine." - Cf. Alex. Alensis, De Sacr. Eucharis., q. x. Wine in its ordinary sense, or fermented juice of ripe grape, is valid and licit matter of this sacrament. Must is valid matter, but outside the case of grave necessity is gravely illicit. But concerning wine of our region it must be said that the Fathers of Baltimore wish it to be preferred to any other, even if it is naturally sharp or less flavorful, because it is more easily established that it is genuine. It is licit to employ in the Sacrifice of the Mass wine confected from dried grapes provided that the liquid to be extracted from them is discerned by color, odor, and taste to be true wine. Holy Office, 7 May 1879. For preserving wine it is licit to add a quantity of spirit or alcohol, provided that the spirit was extracted from the fruit of the vine, and the alcoholic quantity added, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of seventeen or eighteen percent, and the mixture is made when tumultuous fermentation has begun to subside: this wine is licitly employed in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Holy Office, 5 Aug. 1896. The wine about which there is question in that decree exceeds twelve degrees of alcoholic strength. Concerning weak wine the following response was given: "Provided that the spirit (Alcohol) was extracted from the fruit of the vine, and the alcoholic quantity added, together with that which the wine in question naturally contains, does not exceed the proportion of twelve percent, and the mixture is made when the wine is very recent, nothing stands in the way of the same wine being employed in the sacrifice of Mass." Holy Office, 31 July 1890.

Besides, by the same decree of the Holy Office, 5 Aug. 1896, it was declared: that it is licit to use wine obtained from must which before vinous fermentation has been condensed by fiery evaporation, "provided that a decoction of this kind does not exclude alcoholic fermentation, and the fermentation itself can be obtained naturally, and in fact is obtained." - Cf. Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, n. 373. - St. Alphonsus, nn. 206 and seq. - Kenrick, nn. 5 and seq. - Lehmkuhl, n. 119, with note 1.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1124, n. 79.