Bishop Paprocki: Place tabernacle in center of sanctuary

[larsont7]

I what way? Meaning that there is EF Mass, also?

No, it is still an OF Mass, only ad orientem. It’s similar to what you might see on some Masses on EWTN. We do have an EF parish in our archdiocese of which I belong, but I was speaking of a parish that only does the OF. We consider it our “sister parish” because there are several people who attend both churches.

 

[glendab]

Hello Tim. [edited] The multiple use of Tabernacles in the Cathedral at Philly is a matter more of custom and discipline than Canon Laws. They were installed as alternate Altars grew in number for Votive Masses and those Priests who visited often served Votives to honor or ask for the Intercession for various needs. A secondary Altar with a secondary Tabernacle is also okay. Look around your own parish and note that you probably have two side Altars; one for the Blessed Virgin Mary and one for St. Joseph. These were added so Votive Masses could be said. They used to be a regular occurrence, but sad to say, I once asked for a Votive Mass to be said by a younger Priest and he had no idea what I meant so I explained it to him.

 

[TimothyH]

I’m not aware of anyone who says this.

Rather, it is true that both the center-of-church and side-chapel location of tabernacles are fine. It is also true that there are plenty of closetesque “chapels” out there that are not located in a prominent place, are not decorated, and seem to be hidden due to ideological or faulty theological reasons (ever read stuff written by some disparaging adoration? usually also such authors vehemently disparage central tabernacles), and that is a problem. It seems to be a problem not confined to any one part of the United States. Sure, the bishop doesn’t speak for any other diocese, but what I have said is pretty prevalent in many places.

For my part I don’t especially care if the tabernacle is in a chapel, but it should be blindingly obvious where it is, easy to find, and readily accessible. It shouldn’t be some tiny broomcloset with one prie-dieu and no art and (of course) ugly carpet in a wealthy suburban church that seats 1000 people; that seems pretty ideological and yes, I can think of a few places with this situation.

That’s all fine but the article cited in the OP was not about what the Church at large should do or what is correct to do but what this particular bishop commanded to be done.

I direct that in the churches and chapels of our diocese, tabernacles that were formerly in the center of the sanctuary, but have been moved, are to be returned as soon as possible to the center of the sanctuary in accord with the original architectural design. dio.org/pastoral-letters/ars-celebrandi-et-adorandi.html

Those are his own words from the pastoral letter to the clergy and faithful of his own diocese. We can discuss what should be done in Churches in general but that is not what this was about. It is about this particular bishop’s command. His command has zero bearing on any Church outside of his jurisdiction.

And his command has nothing to do with Churches designed to have the tabernacle someplace other than the center of the sanctuary but only those which have been moved in discord with the original architecture. If it was designed to have the tabernacle in the side chapel then there it stays.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

courageouspriest.com/bishop-paprocki-direct-eucharist-center-sanctuary

My question is, in an case like our Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, where the tabernacle is in a separate adoration room to the side of the sanctuary, is it possible that the Blessed Sacrament be kept in two places? Could they add a tabernacle at the center of the sanctuary (and somewhat satisfy one of the criticisms of our cathedral), and still keep the Eucharist in the Adoration room, where many of us go for silent prayer and adoration?

The canon which I previously cited…

*Can. 938 §1. The Most Holy Eucharist is to be reserved habitually in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory. *

…applies to diocesan Churches including Cathedrals. It is possible to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in two places in such a Church but it would be a violation of canon law. Anyone who wishes the Blessed Sacrament to be present in two tabernacles in a diocesan Church therefor wishes the pastor of the Church to violate canon law.

Others have been writing about what happens in convents and monasteries but these are likely exempt religious orders. What an exempt religious order does in matters of public worship is not relevant to the discussion. Exemption is described reasonably well at catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=4491.

-Tim-

 

[christofirst]

The canon which I previously cited…

Can. 938 §1. The Most Holy Eucharist is to be reserved habitually in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory.

…applies to diocesan Churches including Cathedrals. It is possible to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in two places in such a Church but it would be a violation of canon law. Anyone who wishes the Blessed Sacrament to be present in two tabernacles in a diocesan Church therefor wishes the pastor of the Church to violate canon law.

Others have been writing about what happens in convents and monasteries but these are likely exempt religious orders. What an exempt religious order does in matters of public worship is not relevant to the discussion. Exemption is described reasonably well at catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=4491.

-Tim-

Thank you, again. I know this is for some a contentious issue, and I sort of regret posting in the first place. I was only naively wondering if there might be some way to satisfy everyone. My bad. Thanks again.

 

[phil19034]

The canon which I previously cited…

Can. 938 §1. The Most Holy Eucharist is to be reserved habitually in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory.

…applies to diocesan Churches including Cathedrals. It is possible to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in two places in such a Church but it would be a violation of canon law. Anyone who wishes the Blessed Sacrament to be present in two tabernacles in a diocesan Church therefor wishes the pastor of the Church to violate canon law.

Others have been writing about what happens in convents and monasteries but these are likely exempt religious orders. What an exempt religious order does in matters of public worship is not relevant to the discussion. Exemption is described reasonably well at catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=4491.

Thanks for this post. Follow up question: so when I see two tabernacle candles lit at the same time (one in the main sanctuary and one in the Chapel sanctuary) the pastor is technically in error correct? Or is it possible that there is some kind of “dispensation” which some of these parishes are receiving? Or could it be simply temporary located in both shortly before and after a mass?

I wonder what’s really going on?
-Tim-

 

[phil19034]

The canon which I previously cited…

Can. 938 §1. The Most Holy Eucharist is to be reserved habitually in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory.

…applies to diocesan Churches including Cathedrals. It is possible to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in two places in such a Church but it would be a violation of canon law. Anyone who wishes the Blessed Sacrament to be present in two tabernacles in a diocesan Church therefor wishes the pastor of the Church to violate canon law.

Others have been writing about what happens in convents and monasteries but these are likely exempt religious orders. What an exempt religious order does in matters of public worship is not relevant to the discussion. Exemption is described reasonably well at catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=4491.

-Tim-

Thanks for this post. Follow up question: so when I see two tabernacle candles lit at the same time (one in the main sanctuary and one in the Chapel sanctuary) the pastor is technically in error correct? Or is it possible that there is some kind of “dispensation” which some of these parishes are receiving? Or could it be simply temporary located in both shortly before and after a mass?

I wonder what’s really going on?

 

[TimothyH]

Thanks for this post. Follow up question: so when I see two tabernacle candles lit at the same time (one in the main sanctuary and one in the Chapel sanctuary) the pastor is technically in error correct? Or is it possible that there is some kind of “dispensation” which some of these parishes are receiving? Or could it be simply temporary located in both shortly before and after a mass?

I wonder what’s really going on?

It could be any of those. I am a sacristan have left the candle lit accidentally after Jesus was moved from the Church to the chapel. I just forgot to blow out the candle.

Whatever the reason, I don’t worry about it because it is not my responsibility. God has not put me in charge of it and the Pastor of the Church may have a reason which I don’t know about. It’s his issue to deal with, not mine.

God has put me in charge of my children’s dinner and my own prayer and sacramental life, and the letter from the HOA which says I have to have a tree removed. When God puts me in charge of the tabernacle I’ll worry about it. When I’m a sacristan I worry about it. When I’m not a sacristan I don’t. I let those who are in charge of it worry about it.

Problem solved.

-Tim-

 

[pnewton]

I guess I do not understand the purpose of this letter, at least how things work in our diocese. All architectural designs have to be approved by the bishop already. It would be like him telling himself what he can do. Does he not do this in Illinois?

 

[Tigg]

The bishop in the article speaks only for his own diocese. He has zero control over anything that happens in any other diocese.

I’m always skeptical of anyone or anything (websites included) which claim to know better than everyone else and seek to correct the rest of us in our great, unwashed ignorance.

-Tim-

Your comments disturb me as they seem uncharitable toward a holy and faithful bishop who has done much good over these past few months. Bishop Paprocki, May God Bless you abundantly as we know you are a man after His own heart.

 

[TimothyH]

Your comments disturb me as they seem uncharitable toward a holy and faithful bishop who has done much good over these past few months. Bishop Paprocki, May God Bless you abundantly as we know you are a man after His own heart.

The first sentence is a statement of fact. No bishop can command anything outside of his own diocese. The bishop’s command that tabernacles which have been removed from the center of the sanctuary be returned only applies to his own diocese.

The second sentence was my personal opinion about a website and has nothing to do with His Excellency Bishop Paprocki.

If my first sentence is a statement of fact about the bishop’s jurisdiction and my second sentence is an opinion about a website, then how am I uncharitable and how are you disturbed? How have I questioned the Bishops’ holiness or faithfulness?

-Tim-

 

[pnewton]

The second sentence was my personal opinion about a website and has nothing to do with His Excellency Bishop Paprocki.

If my first sentence is a statement of fact about the bishop’s jurisdiction and my second sentence is an opinion about a website, then how am I uncharitable and how are you disturbed? How have I questioned the Bishops’ holiness or faithfulness?​

The bishop should be given the benefit of the doubt though, without any assumption that he is overreaching his authority. He addressed his letter to* his* parishes, after all. He did not post it here or send it out as an example.

 

[Tigg]

The first sentence is a statement of fact. No bishop can command anything outside of his own diocese. The bishop’s command that tabernacles which have been removed from the center of the sanctuary be returned only applies to his own diocese.

The second sentence was my personal opinion about a website and has nothing to do with His Excellency Bishop Paprocki.

If my first sentence is a statement of fact about the bishop’s jurisdiction and my second sentence is an opinion about a website, then how am I uncharitable and how are you disturbed? How have I questioned the Bishops’ holiness or faithfulness?

-Tim-

I’m always skeptical of **anyone **or anything (websites included) which claim to know better than everyone else and seek to correct the rest of us in our great, unwashed ignorance.

Well, you did say anyone, so clearly I thought you were speaking of the bishop.

 

[TimothyH]

Well, you did say anyone, so clearly I thought you were speaking of the bishop.

I was not. I’m sorry. I should have been clearer.

I was speaking about the people who run the website cited in the OP and not the Bishop. apologize if I did not make that clear.

The bishop absolutely has the authority to teach and correct. In fact he has the responsibility to do so.

-Tim-

 

[drforjc]

I guess I do not understand the purpose of this letter, at least how things work in our diocese. All architectural designs have to be approved by the bishop already. It would be like him telling himself what he can do. Does he not do this in Illinois?

I’m sure it has to do with designs that were made prior to his appointment as bishop of that diocese.

 

[johnnyc176]

I’m sure it has to do with designs that were made prior to his appointment as bishop of that diocese.

Of course it does. If you can’t fix the outside at least you can fix the inside. Here is the whole beautiful pastoral letter by the Bishop…

dio.org/pastoral-letters/ars-celebrandi-et-adorandi.html

 

[Tigg]

I’m sure it has to do with designs that were made prior to his appointment as bishop of that diocese.

Yes, and as we have one older parish in our town that “hides” the Eucharist, we are waiting to see if our new bishop will issue a similar directive.

 

[aTraditionalist]

TimothyH:

Quote:

Originally Posted by glendab

Hello Tim.

Thanks for the reply. That was my reaction as a new Catholic. I once stayed I a Convent of the Missionaries of Charity for 9 months as a volunteer. We had three Tabernacles in the House and all three places had Mass and Adoration in them. One was a private Chapel for the Sisters only and Mass there wasn’t as often as the other two Chapels. Were the Sisters breaking the Canon Laws regarding the number of Tabernacles?

If you think the only laws in the Church are those contained in the Code of Canon Law of 1983, then you are mistaken. The Sister’s provisions were a part of the entire Laws governing the Church under the term customs as were many of the particular practices special to them and them alone. The rest was their own particular Rules. There is also the individual Rules that each Religious Institution lives by and they in their entirety are approved by the Holy See, yet when they are being formed there is a charity given them until they seek approval of the Holy See. Some do challenge them during those times, but that kind of trial is usually part of what makes a Founder or Foundress a Saint. The Rules are just as binding as any Canon Law, perhaps in some regards more so.

I have feelings about some practices that are occurring in our times in the Church. I know they are simply feelings and should be under control, but they are my feelings.

I don’t think there ever will be anyone assigned in the Church to go around to all the places Jesus lays His Divine Head down in the Tabernacle resting waiting for us to come to Him so He can be with us and make sure there is only one Tabernacle per place of worship.

BTW, all three tabernacles always has freshly consecrated Hosts and I was thrilled that I could visit with Jesus any free time I had. I usually went down to see Him last thing before I went to bed for the night to tuck Him in. My bedroom was directly over one of the Chapels where He was and I loved being there . I have the Sister’s address. Perhaps you could write them a letter and quote the Canons to them and ask them to clear out their House. Hmmmm? Sorry. I couldn’t resist.

Glenda

There is really no need to do that. Forget it.

There is a perfectly legitimate reason why the Sisters of Charity do what they did but forget it. Do whatever you want. Believe what ever you want. Take whatever sarcastic and condescending attitude you want with anyone you want. Apparently nine month with the Sisters of Charity didn’t teach you a damn thing.

I’m sorry I replied to you.

-Tim-

Wow. There’s that charity bit again.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android