Cooking with wine

[thebigcheese]

This isn't a response to any recent question (though it's definitely in the archives). I was just thinking about this since my roommate used a rum sauce in the dinner she made for us. Even though she swears by the recipe, I thought it tasted nearly identical to my non-booze version of the same dish. Anyway, just to get some opinions here: What do you guys think about cooking with alcohol? Is it kosher with LDS standards? And does it really taste THAT much better than cooking without?

Personally, I don't make a habit of ordering stuff cooked in wine at restaurants, and I don't use it when I'm cooking at home. But I don't feel that strongly about it either. I've had a few other dishes cooked with wine before, and I thought they were good. Meh. Maybe I'm just a fence sitter. If I hear any authoritative evidence either way, I could be easily swayed.

BYU might take issue with it since the Honor Code explicitly states that you must not possess any alcohol in your apartment. But other than that, I'm unaware of any specific Church policy regarding this issue.

[Marduk]

I have several recipes that use wine, and no, it doesn't taste nearly the same without it. I think it is fine, and totally jives with LDS standards. I can attest that many members of the board feel the same way, as I fed them a recipe made with wine.

[ahem.]

I've only ever used Chinese rice wine, which is also sold as "rice seasoning," so I'm not sure that counts. I have no issue with it. If a dish has a strong wine flavor, I might not like it as much. I usually come across this issue with sauteed mushrooms, interestingly enough. But I've never spent much time around anyone who cooks with wine very often, so I can't give a very good insight into the flavor.

For the most part, it's not something I have around, and not something I'm going to go buy just for a half a cup in a recipe. So I just substitute or find other recipes.

[NerdGirl]

I think it's fine. I use cooking sherry in a lot of sauces and stews and white wine in my famous roasted vegetables. And I can definitely taste the difference. The Honor Code might be an issue (but not for me), although you could make the point that it refers to alcohol intended for drinking and not alcohol intended for cooking, since the plenty of BYU students probably have things like vanilla extract, rubbing alcohol, and that purple Cinique toner in their apartments, all of which are full of alcohol.

[ahem.]

There are plenty of desserts you can get tipsy from, and I definitely thing the honor code would have an issue with that.

I think it's kind of one of those things you just have to figure out for yourself.

[Gimgimno]

I take issue with a lot of desserts--I probably would decline uncooked rum in a dessert topping--but as a general rule, I'll eat anything where the alcohol has a chance to burn off and the flavor of the alcohol isn't a focal point of the dish.

So yeah, cooking wines of any kind are on the table for me because all of them taste like salty trash by themselves, but really can contribute to overall dishes. We have rice, red, marsala, and white cooking wines in our kitchen and I personally don't think there's anything wrong with that.

[C is for]

I figure this is in Reader Response because you hit it in the archives?

(I mean, I assumed it so strongly that when I would've been the first to respond I almost just replied a snarky "Search the archives". But that's not what you're asking for.)

I don't really care if people use cooking wines. Our family doesn't, but that's just because we aren't good enough cooks to ever need it. I went and searched the archives myself just now and thought Claudio's second reason in...this made a lot of sense -- alcohol-soluble flavors need some alcohol to dissolve in. So, it seems to make things taste better.

As long as it's cooked out. (Obviously; no inebriation here!)

[Marduk]

I take issue with a lot of desserts--I probably would decline uncooked rum in a dessert topping--

Why does that matter? You realize that the amounts of alcohol are nominal even when not cooked, right? And that even soft drinks have alcohol in them?

Also, even when cooked, all the alcohol does NOT cook off. Even cooked for many hours, the food will still have a modicum of alcohol.

[Dragon Lady]

This is a question I've asked myself a lot over the last few years. I probably won't ever cook with them, if for no other reason than I could never bring myself to buy them. I'm not sure how I feel about eating dishes made with alcohol in restaurants. I've done it before. Sometimes unknowingly.

I still don't have an answer for myself.

[C is for]

There are some foods that have so much alcohol in them that you can get "pretty well hammered" by eating them. Mainly desserts.

As long as "modicum of alcohol" doesn't result in "pretty well hammered", it doesn't matter that there's a little bit there.

[vorpal blade]

In our family we avoid all alcohol in our food or drink. We had a question as to whether we should use the kind of vanilla with alcohol and decided against it. I was unaware that any soft drinks properly labeled with their ingredients contain any alcohol. It is my understanding that much alcohol remains even after cooking for hours.

[Marduk]

There are some foods that have so much alcohol in them that you can get "pretty well hammered" by eating them. Mainly desserts.

As long as "modicum of alcohol" doesn't result in "pretty well hammered", it doesn't matter that there's a little bit there.

Not really. I mean, to get "pretty well hammered" is a fairly high blood alcohol content; I'd say anything over .10. Even for a tiny person (read: around 100 lbs) that's about 3 drinks. For someone my size, it is around six. Speaking in wine terms (since wines are what are commonly in desserts, usually brandies or rum) that's around 15-30 oz. An average dessert serving is around 1 cup to 1 1/2 cups. Even if it was PURE alcohol (which really isn't possible, I'd estimate high alcohol content desserts are at most 10%) that would not be enough to get even somebody fairly tiny drunk. Maybe a bit tipsy, but like I said, those alcohols are an INGREDIENT, not the exclusive content.

[Gimgimno]

Duckie, I see the reasoning, but there's something disconcerting about soaking cake in 40-80% alcohol and eating it because it only slightly raises my BAL. I know that alcohol doesn't cook out entirely--I'm a chemistry major, for crying out loud--but the amount of alcohol in one serving of dinner where I used a half of a cup of 10% alcohol cooking wine versus a serving of cake that's not just covered, but soaked in rum, are not exactly comparable. At least, I don't think so.

So yeah, tiramisu is a no-go for me, as are most other desserts that showcase the flavor of alcohol. Sorry.

[Marduk]

In our family we avoid all alcohol in our food or drink. We had a question as to whether we should use the kind of vanilla with alcohol and decided against it. I was unaware that any soft drinks properly labeled with their ingredients contain any alcohol. It is my understanding that much alcohol remains even after cooking for hours.

The alcohol content in a cooked item ranges between 5 and 75%. 75% would be for flamed items, if something is allowed to cook between 2-5 hours, it will have around 5%. Cooking things much longer will reduce the alcohol even further, but by such a small amount as to be negligible.

As far as alcohol content in soft drinks, the alcohol content is so low (it is only in the extracts used) that they are not required to label it.

[vorpal blade]

What's the difference between drinking a beer and eating something between 5 and 75% alcohol?

[thebigcheese]

I figure this is in Reader Response because you hit it in the archives?

Precisely.

(I mean, I assumed it so strongly that when I would've been the first to respond I almost just replied a snarky "Search the archives". But that's not what you're asking for.)

You know, I almost asked this question on the Board (just to get some fresh ideas), but I figured I would just get a "search the archives" response. I've already perused the archives on the subject, and now I just want to hear a multitude of opinions. In fact, a lot of my Board questions are like that. The Board is very often my source of second opinions.

[Marduk]

What's the difference between drinking a beer and eating something between 5 and 75% alcohol?

The difference is intent. There is no reason to drink alcohol other than to become intoxicated. There IS a reason to cook with it, which Claudio did cover quite well. It is up to individual decision where that line will lie, of course, but for the record, my bishop knows I occasionally cook with wine, and has no problem with it. He has even suggested some recipes. IF one desired to abstain from ALL alcohol, it would require never partaking of anything that had any sort of extract in it. Even vanilla extracts that don't claim high percentages of alcohol contain between 2-3%. It would require never using alcohol to clean wounds, as very fractional amounts would be absorbed through osmosis. It would require not even breathing anywhere alcohol has been present, as things like stirring drinks can cause small fractions to enter the air. Some choose to only take alcohol through extracts, avoiding the direct use in food. That is fine, if that is what they decide to do, but unless I'm actually DRINKING alcohol, then I am in line with church standards.

[vorpal blade]

I'm sorry, but I find your answer astounding. You think everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner, or a beer after work, intends to become intoxicated?

As a bishop I would not lecture you about whether or not you should cook with wine. That is up to you to decide. But I hardly think that the Church standard is that it isn't okay to drink a cup of wine--unless you first dump it on a cake, and then it is okay to consume it.

I agree that there needs to be a line drawn -- but to argue that because you believe a tiny bit of alcohol is in many foods, and you can be fanatical about it means that anything goes when it comes to alcohol in food, unless it is drunk, is going too far in the other direction.

[thebigcheese]

I was just reading up on this. Everything I looked at seems to emphasize "drinking" alcohol, and not just "consuming" alcohol. I'll just throw a few things out there: (emphasis mine)

5) That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6) And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7) And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.

The Lord commands us not to use wine and strong drinks, meaning drinks containing alcohol. The First Presidency has taught that strong drink often brings cruelty, poverty, disease, and plague into the home. It often is a cause of dishonesty, loss of chastity, and loss of good judgment. It is a curse to all who drink it. Expectant mothers who drink can cause physical and mental damage to their children. Many automobile accidents are caused each year by people who drink alcohol.

And I also agree with these statements:

my bishop knows I occasionally cook with wine, and has no problem with it

I think this is a valid point. Something I've considered in defining my own standards is the temple recommend interview. If my bishop decides that something makes me unworthy to attend the temple, I should obviously avoid it. If not, it's probably not all that bad. But I can also see how this attitude might lead to a lot of justification/abuse of other standards. Like when people try to push the line as far as they can go without "technically" sinning.

What's the difference between drinking a beer and eating something between 5 and 75% alcohol?

I think the answer to this goes back to the principle. What is the principle? Is it to avoid getting drunk? Is it to avoid alcohol in all its forms? Is it to avoid strong drink?

And now I feel like that makes me sound sort of pro-alcohol, but I'm just trying to be objective here. I still don't know what to think exactly. Honestly, I think most of us born-in-the-covenant folks rely primarily on the way we grew up to define standards like this. Including myself sometimes. "Mom did it this way, and she's a good person, so she must be right!"

[ahem.]

my bishop knows I occasionally cook with wine, and has no problem with it

I think this is a valid point. Something I've considered in defining my own standards is the temple recommend interview. If my bishop decides that something makes me unworthy to attend the temple, I should obviously avoid it. If not, it's probably not all that bad.

I think this is a insignificant point. There are things we are allowed/encouraged to make our own decisions about. Using our current bishop's opinion is not the point. Obviously bishops can counsel us, and once we've formed preliminary opinions, they can help us to know we're not crossing important lines.

I had a bishop who would watch rated R movies. So does that make it okay for everyone in his ward to watch them? NO. It's still their individual decision to make. For some people, it is okay. For some people it is not okay.

So all the bishop example demonstrates that it is possible to be a good member of the church and still cook with alcohol. It does NOT mean it is okay for everyone.

PERSONAL DECISIONS, FTW!