Altar dedication - any info?

  • Thread starter Thread starter InspiritCarol
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

InspiritCarol

Guest
Hey,

We are have managed to convince the poor old Archbishop to come out to the middle of nowhere to dedicate our new altar (which is a real work of art).

This is a very big deal and is doing a lot to add new life to our very beat down community.

I was hoping some of you might have some interesting background/history on altar blessings (something I have managed to miss in all my decades of cantoring).

So far, the best we could come up with to “publicize” the event is the following.
The rite for the dedication of a church and an altar is rightly considered among the most solemn liturgical services. A church is the place where the Christian community is gathered to hear the word of God, to offer intercession and praise to him, and above all to celebrate the holy mysteries, and it is the place where the holy sacrament of the Eucharist is kept. Thus it stands as a special kind of image of the Church itself, which is God’s temple built from living stones. And the altar of a church, around which the holy people of God gather to take part in the Lord’s sacrifice and to be refreshed at the heavenly meal, stands as a sign of Christ himself, who is the priest, the victim, and the altar of his own sacrifice. From the office of the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship, May 29, 1977, Pentecost.
In my opinion, this wording might be fine for the faithful, but is very off-putting for the ex-Catholics and the non-Catholics we would like to have share in this special event.

Any “spin-doctors” out there that can help re-word or give us some better material to work with?

Thanks, in advance.
Carol
 
Hey,

We are have managed to convince the poor old Archbishop to come out to the middle of nowhere to dedicate our new altar (which is a real work of art).

This is a very big deal and is doing a lot to add new life to our very beat down community.

I was hoping some of you might have some interesting background/history on altar blessings (something I have managed to miss in all my decades of cantoring).

So far, the best we could come up with to “publicize” the event is the following.

In my opinion, this wording might be fine for the faithful, but is very off-putting for the ex-Catholics and the non-Catholics we would like to have share in this special event.

Any “spin-doctors” out there that can help re-word or give us some better material to work with?

Thanks, in advance.
Carol
From the Old Catholic Encyclopedia (History of the Christian Altar):

Consecration

No special formula for the consecration of altars was in use in the Roman Church before the eighth century. In substance, however, what we understand by consecration was practiced in the fourth century. This original form of consecration consisted in the solemn transfer of the relics of a martyr to the altar of a newly erected church The translation of the bodies of Sts. Gervasius and Protasius, made by St. Ambrose, is the first recorded example of the kind. (See AMBROSIAN BASILICA.) But such translations of the mortal remains of martyrs were at this time, and long afterwards, of rare occurrence. Relics, however, by which we must understand objects from a martyr’s tomb (the brandea mentioned above), were regarded with only a less degree of respect than the bodies of the martyrs themselves, and served as it were to multiply the body of the saint. This reverence for objects associated with a martyr gave rise to the custom of entombing such relics beneath the altars of newly erected churches, until it ultimately became the rule not to dedicate a church without them. An early example of this practice was the dedication of the basilica Romana by St. Ambrose with pignora of St. Peter and St. Paul brought from Rome (Vita Ambros., by Paulinus, c. xxxiii). St. Gregory of Tours (Lib. II, de Mirac., I, P.L., LXXI, 828) mentions the dedication of the Church of St. Julian in his episcopal city with relics of that saint and of another. When relics of the saints could not be procured, consecrated Hosts and fragments of the Gospels were sometimes used; concerning the use of the former for this purpose the English Synod of Calchut (Celicyth, Chelsea, 816) made a regulation (can. 22). Up to the middle of the sixth century in the Roman Church the solemn celebration of Mass was the only form of dedication. If, however, it had been decided to place in the altar the relics of a martyr, this ceremony preceded the first solemn function in the new edifice. Duchesne points out (op. cit., 406) that the liturgical prayers of the Gelasian Sacramentary recited for the consecration of altars bear the unmistakable stamp of the funeral liturgy, this fact is evidently attributable to the Custom of entombing relics, regarded as representing the bodies of the saints, at the time of dedication. The translation of relics was a second solemn interment of the saint’s body, and hence the liturgical prayers composed for such occasions appropriately bore the characteristics of the burial service. The principal features of the earliest form of consecration in the Roman Church, as given in the Gelasian Sacramentary, are as follows: The bishop with his clergy, chanting the litany, first proceeded in solemn procession to the place where the relics were kept. A prayer was then chanted and the relics were borne by the bishop to the door of the church and there placed in the custody of a priest. The bishop then entered the church, accompanied by his immediate attendants, and after exorcising the water and mixing with it a few drops of chrism, he prepared the mortar for enclosing the sepulchre. With a sponge he then washed the table of the altar, and returning to the door he sprinkled the people with what remained of the holy water. After this he took the relics and re-entered the church, followed by the clergy and people chanting another litany. The sepulchre was then anointed with chrism, the relics were placed therein, and the tomb sealed. The ceremony concluded with the solemn celebration of Mass. The Gallican liturgy of consecration, unlike that of Rome, partook of the character of the liturgy for the administration of baptism and confirmation rather than that of the funeral liturgy. “Just as the Christian is dedicated by water and oil, by baptism and confirmation, so the altar first, then the church, is consecrated by ablution and unction” (Duchesne, op. cit., 407-409). In the eighth and ninth centuries attempts were made by Frankish liturgists to combine the two liturgies of Rome and Gaul, from the result then achieved has developed the actual consecration ritual of the Western Church. In the Greek Church the dedication of the altar was a ceremony distinct from that of the deposition of relics, the two functions were ordinarily performed on different days. On the first day the table of the altar was placed on its support of columns by the bishop in person. After this he proceeded to the consecration which consisted of washing the table, first with baptismal water, then with wine. The altar was next anointed with chrism and incensed. The following day the relics were placed in the sepulchre with the greatest solemnity. Duchesne calls attention to the close resemblance between the Gallican and the Byzantine liturgy for the consecration of altars (op. cit., 416).
 
Wow, guys. These are both extremely helpful.

arkwright, I have a lengthy document telling what and where in the ceremony; the UK explanations will help to make the ceremony so much more meaningful for us all.

patrick457, you’ve come through yet again. It simply never occurred to me that this info might be in the encyclopedia. Especially when my Google search turned up nada.

You’re awesome.

Thanks so much.
 
"with pignora of St. Peter and St. Paul brought from Rome "

What do you make of this term, pignora (pl of pignus): to pawn.

Are the relics considered merely “borrowed”?

As a sad commentary, no-one knows who the Saints are in either the altar at the main parish or this little mission.

~sigh~

Pray for us. 😦
 
"with pignora of St. Peter and St. Paul brought from Rome "

What do you make of this term, pignora (pl of pignus): to pawn.

Are the relics considered merely “borrowed”?
Pignora (‘pledges’, ‘pawns’) is an alternative term for reliquiae (‘something left behind’; i.e. remains, remnants, inheritance): it is an often used synonym in ancient literature. Relics, after all, are the ‘pledges’ or ‘warranties’ of a saint’s holiness and intercessory authority. The saint stands in heaven before God, but the living down here on earth have his/her remains as concrete tokens of the virtus (the mystic potency emanating from a sacred person or thing) possessed by that holy person.
As a sad commentary, no-one knows who the Saints are in either the altar at the main parish or this little mission.
Pray for us. 😦
If I could ask: when was this altar first dedicated? Aren’t there any records of its consecration?
 
Pignora (‘pledges’, ‘pawns’) is an alternative term for reliquiae (‘something left behind’; i.e. remains, remnants, inheritance): it is an often used synonym in ancient literature. Relics, after all, are the ‘pledges’ or ‘warranties’ of a saint’s holiness and intercessory authority. The saint stands in heaven before God, but the living down here on earth have his/her remains as concrete tokens of the virtus (the mystic potency emanating from a sacred person or thing) possessed by that holy person.
That’s interesting. I must have skimmed over the term taken in context before in the course of my reading. I’m so glad you were able to enlighten me.
If I could ask: when was this altar first dedicated? Aren’t there any records of its consecration?
I plan to call the Archdiocese tomorrow.
My fear now is that the church we are in was never dedicated. It was acquired through a “church swap” with some non-denom. Christian group.
I am continually stunned at how laissez-faire these Catholics are here in the Northwest.
For example, they had the non-Catholic version of the Ten Commandments posted on the wall of the CCD room. Great umbrage was taken when I pointed this out and offered to replace them. 🤷 I did anyway, but kept the old ones so we could discuss the differences. I’m not trying to hurt feelings here after all.

In any case, I’ll get back with what I find out.

One of the older parishioners has come forward and claimed that the relic in the altar is that of the Saint the church is named for. I seriously doubt it since it seems unlikely that we know where this particular Saint is buried.

She indicated that it was common practice to use the Saints’ relics that the churches were named for. I admitted complete ignorance to this practice.

patrick457, have you ever heard of such a thing?
 
For example, they had the non-Catholic version of the Ten Commandments posted on the wall of the CCD room. Great umbrage was taken when I pointed this out and offered to replace them.
WHAT??? :bigyikes::bigyikes::bigyikes::banghead::banghead::banghead:
What explanation was offered for this travesty? How could anyone possibly take humbrage???
 
I plan to call the Archdiocese tomorrow.
My fear now is that the church we are in was never dedicated. It was acquired through a “church swap” with some non-denom. Christian group.
I am continually stunned at how laissez-faire these Catholics are here in the Northwest.
For example, they had the non-Catholic version of the Ten Commandments posted on the wall of the CCD room. Great umbrage was taken when I pointed this out and offered to replace them. 🤷 I did anyway, but kept the old ones so we could discuss the differences. I’m not trying to hurt feelings here after all.

In any case, I’ll get back with what I find out.
Not exactly related, but there are three ways to divide the Ten Words in common use today. The Augustinian reckoning (named after St. Augustine) is of course the one used by Catholics and Lutherans; the Philonic (named after the 1st century Jewish writer Philo) is used by other Protestants and the Eastern Orthodox; and the Talmudic is the one used by modern-day Jews.
One of the older parishioners has come forward and claimed that the relic in the altar is that of the Saint the church is named for. I seriously doubt it since it seems unlikely that we know where this particular Saint is buried.
She indicated that it was common practice to use the Saints’ relics that the churches were named for. I admitted complete ignorance to this practice.
patrick457, have you ever heard of such a thing?
She seems to be have a point. The main altar of a church has to have the same titulus or title as the church itself, which could be any holy person or mystery: from any of the persons of the Trinity to Our Lady and the saints. Hence, St. Martin of Tours’ church’s main altar would be in honor of Martin of Tours, while the main altar of St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York is dedicated to St. Patrick. (I’m using ‘dedicated’ in a loose sense here: properly the altar is dedicated only to God, but under the title and invocation, and in honor and memory of the saints.) The rationale behind this was because the altar is considered to be the key element of a church: the church building is considered to house the altar, as opposed to the altar being supplied to it as furniture.

Ideally, an altar would contain a relic of the saint to whom it is dedicated: going back to the previous example, there is a good chance that an altar dedicated to St. Martin of Tours or St. Patrick would have their respective remains. Of course, this isn’t necessarily the case for churches dedicated to Our Lady or Jesus or the angels (all of whom obviously did not leave any first-class relics behind). Though I guess the only way to know for sure is to look for a copy of the record of the church’s dedication, if you still have them (I think there would be one in the archdiocesan archives and in the archives of the church; I also think that a third copy would have been deposited with the relics). 🤷
 
Expect\plan for, a long Mass.

I was at a dedication for a church in Tanzania that our parish helped construct.

It was a 6 hour Mass.

My pastor said that it was a bit long, the ones in the US he has been at have been in the 4 hour timeframe.
 
Well, after reaching dead-ends at the Parish and with the parishioners, the deacon and the pastor; I contacted the Archdiocese archivist.

He was fantastically nice and helpful. Alas, it was another dead-end, however. He said that that sort of information does not tend to make it up that far.

The relics themselves are in sealed containers (as investigated by the deacon - I would never presume to bother them in any way).

The conclusion is that we should not disturb the permanently sealed containers.

What’s worse is that it appears this current church building was never, itself, consecrated.
:nope:

We’re trying to confirm that, but it is the logical conclusion since the Archdiocese has a record of the consecration of the congregation’s original church building; but no record of a consecration *after *the congregation relocated to a completely different location (not just a new church on the same site). Further, none of the congregants I spoke with recall anything like a consecration even though the move was made in their lifetime.

I’m waiting to make sure Father is okay with me pursuing this with the Archdiocese, or just how *he *wants to proceed.
🤷

I’m just the grunt labor here operating under great constraints.
 
WHAT??? What explanation was offered for this travesty? How could anyone possibly take humbrage???
🤷

I was told that that was how they always did it.

They really took it personally that I would question their ways; like it was a personal attack on them.

🤷

Granted I’m not always spouting sugar-coated diplomacy, especially when I am stating cold hard facts like the fact that the Protestant’s use their particular delineation as a means of attacking the Catholic Church. I may have, tactlessly, pointed out that perhaps that was yet another reason they have lost two whole generations to the Baptist Church. (I’m not making that up – literally: there are only grandparents, and transplants (us and a couple others) at this church; their children and grandchildren either don’t go to church or go to the Baptist church).

patrick457, thank you for pointing out the ambiguity in my post about the Decalogue.
I did not intend to discount the Jewish delineation of the 10 Commandments.
 
Hey,

We are have managed to convince the poor old Archbishop to come out to the middle of nowhere to dedicate our new altar (which is a real work of art).

This is a very big deal and is doing a lot to add new life to our very beat down community.

I was hoping some of you might have some interesting background/history on altar blessings (something I have managed to miss in all my decades of cantoring).

So far, the best we could come up with to “publicize” the event is the following.

In my opinion, this wording might be fine for the faithful, but is very off-putting for the ex-Catholics and the non-Catholics we would like to have share in this special event.

Any “spin-doctors” out there that can help re-word or give us some better material to work with?

Thanks, in advance.
Carol
What part exactly did you feel would make ex/non-Catholics uncomfortable?

Also, re: the Catholic Encyclopedia article - be aware when you are using the information from there that the rite used in the Latin Church to consecrate an altar has changed from the older rite.
 
One of the older parishioners has come forward and claimed that the relic in the altar is that of the Saint the church is named for. I seriously doubt it since it seems unlikely that we know where this particular Saint is buried.

She indicated that it was common practice to use the Saints’ relics that the churches were named for. I admitted complete ignorance to this practice.

patrick457, have you ever heard of such a thing?
It depends when your church was first in use. If it was in the pre-70s, then the following would be likely:

Pre-conciliar rules called for the relics of at least TWO saints to be inserted in the altar. It is more likely that the relic is of the titular of your church, if the titular is a martyr. Only martyrs’ relics could be inserted in the altar, although the custom of inserting the relic of 1 martyr, and then the relic of one other saint was also practiced…so even if the titular of your church is not a martyr, you cannot rule out that the relic in the altar is not of the titular.

There is another possibility - it was frequently very common for congregations in the United States to either begin using the main altar after the church was dedicated, or vice-versa. Thus many old altars in the United States are not fixed altars, per se. What was done is that a portable altar was inserted into a fixed structure.

A portable altar was a small square piece of stone, with relics inserted, and the usual anointings and incision of crosses. Since formerly an altar was always required to celebrate Mass, portable altars were used by chaplains, missionaries, etc. when celebrating the Eucharist outside of churches/when they did not have access to a consecrated altar.

If it was post 1975-77, then the altar could have been dedicated without relics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top