Fr. Wiebe has directed you, Fr. Vanderbijl, to the New Advent website, where the "classic" (1908) Catholic Encylcopedia has been copied by volunteers for free use. (A DVD of the most recent edition, under copyright, has a price tag.)  I also have a bound volume of the early edition, and I have found it extremely valuable as a resource.  I appreciate the 1908 edition not only as history from a RC bias or perspective but also because the editors make little or no effort to soften the notion of Rome's infallible magesterium, or teaching authority.  For example, here are excerpts from two different encyclopedic entries, on the topic of "communion under two kinds": 

"Hence although the usage of Communion under two kinds was not infrequent in the early ages [ab initio] of the  Christian religion, yet, the custom in this respect having changed almost universally [latissime] in the course of time, holy mother the Church, mindful of her authority in the administration of the Sacraments, and influenced by weighty and just reasons, has approved the custom of communicating under one kind, and decreed it to have the force of a law, which may not be set aside or changed but by the Church's own authority" (Trent, Sess. XXI, c. ii). Not only, therefore, is Communion under both kinds not obligatory on the faithful, but the chalice is strictly forbidden by ecclesiastical law to any but the celebrating priest."

    "From the disciplinary infallibity of the Church, correctly understood as an indirect consequence of her doctrinal infallibility, it follows that she cannot be rightly accused of introducing into her discipline anything opposed to the Divine law; the most remarkable instance of this being the suppression of the chalice in the Communion of the laity. This has often been violently attacked as contrary to the Gospel. Concerning it the Council of Constance (1415) declared (Sess. XIII): "The claim that it is sacrilegious or illicit to observe this custom or law [Communion under one kind] must be regarded as erroneous, and those who obstinately affirm it must be cast aside as heretics." The opinion, generally admitted by theologians, that the Church is infallible in her approbation of religious orders, must be interpreted in the same sense; it means that in her regulation of a manner of life destined to provide for the practice of the evangelical counsels she cannot come into conflict with these counsels as received from Christ together with the rest of the Gospel revelation."

You may have heard enough, already, about the practice of "Aspersion."  (I submit that you used the word acceptably in your first e-mail, as you may note from my quotation below from a book in my library, "The Ritual Reason Why," Charles Walker, editor, London, 1868. (Walker also wrote  "The Liturgy of the Church of Sarum.") Walker's Ritual has been a traditional guide for  Anglican "high churchmanship."  (I've been there and done that, and I can pretty much take it or leave it ...providing it is not made an article of faith-- as suggested in the articles above-- and does not vitiate Reformation theology.) 
    
Section IV, page 51: 
    112.  "Why is water blessed?"  --Before baptism in order to set apart the element to the service of God in the administration of that sacrament; beforeit is pured inthe chalice at the Holy Eucharist for the same reason; at other times to put the people in remembrance of their baptism and to convey to them the Church's benedictyion in the absence of a minister.
    113.  'Will you explain the last reason?"  --The priest in blessing the water sets it apart for the use of the people and prays God to give His blessing to all who use it.
    114.  It is a very ancient cus;tom for the people to sign themselves on entering and leaving church with wagter so blessed, thus reminding themselves thaty they were set apart to ?God's service in Holy Baptism, and also of the need of inward purity if they would give themselves aright to His worship.  Alexander I, bishop of Rome, speaks of it in the year 109, in terms which show him to be ratifying a custom already in use.  It is therefore in all ;probability a practice dating from the time of the Apostles.  This and the lavabo were doubtless derived from the Jewish ritual, where a swimilar rite is enjoined (Exodus 30:18) for Aaron and his sons.
    115. In the English Church formerly, as still elsewhere, the priest after blessing the water before the Sunday morning service, went round and sprinkled the people with a bunch of hyssop while the choir sang, "Purge me with hyssop, O Lord, and I shall be clean:  wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow."  Or in Eastertide, "I saw water coming forth of the temple out of the right side, Alleluia; and all upon whom this water came were saved and said, Alleluia, Alleluia."  This ASPERSION [emphasis mine]  typified the dew of God's blesssing which is shed upon those who worship Him aright.  [ 
    116.  Salt is mingled with teh water so blessed, both in order to preserve it, and as a type of an incorrupt and innocent life.
    117.  This blessing and aspersion of water, although fallen into disuse in the English Church, are still LEGAL, HAVING NEVER BEEN FORMALLY ABOLISHED, and vessels foer holy or blessed water having been permitted to remain in chaurches as lagte the the sixth year of Edward VI, four years subsequent to the year trhe aornaments in use in which are declared legal.
    118.  "Is not bread blessed in the parts of the Church?"--Yes; in the East, in France, and elsewhere (as formerly in England), bread is blessed after Mass and distributed to the people as a token that they are in the Communion of the Church , even should they not communicate at that Mass, and also to take to sick persons for a like token.
    119. "Why was the usage abrogated in England?"  --Because it was thought the distribution fo the blessed bread tended to make the common people neglect the reception of the Sacrament.
    120.  "By what other names is the blessed bread known?" --In the East as the "eulogia, (i.e., the benediction, or token of goods-will); in England it was called the "holy loaf."
    126.  You have explained the use of blessed water; but why are things when blessed, generally sprinkled with it?"  ---Water is a symbol of God's blessing; the sprinkling therefore signifies that it is the dew of God's benediction, by the minnistry of His priest, whiuch consecrates material things to His service,.  It also shows that as by baptism man, so through man the inanimate creation, is renewed and sanctified.  

Once, preparing for Christmas eve services ,  a distinctly high church bishop asked me to process to the nave to read the Gospel.  (I had two acolytes to bear candles and one bear the Book.)  I had done a little research and responded:  "There are several ways to do that..." and before I could ask his preference, he laughed:  "I know.  Just do it!"  X  Regards.  KnoxDuncan@...