Can my Pastor do this?

[pnewton]

When we had our latest restoration we had to get everything approved through the diocese. If the tabernacle is moved, you will miss the benefit of having Christ present front and center at all times. I have noticed in Church’s that have done this, they lose the genuflection entering and leaving the sanctuary, as is proper. But it leaves one with a loss of the sense of the holiness of the sanctuary. I can not imagine what archetictural goal would be worth such an action.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

When we had our latest restoration we had to get everything approved through the diocese. If the tabernacle is moved, you will miss the benefit of having Christ present front and center at all times. I have noticed in Church’s that have done this, they lose the genuflection entering and leaving the sanctuary, as is proper. But it leaves one with a loss of the sense of the holiness of the sanctuary. I can not imagine what archetictural goal would be worth such an action.

It’s only proper to genuflect before entering the sanctuary at the start of mass if the Blessed Sacrament is in the sanctuary, either behind the altar or at one side.

When the Blessed Sacrament is reserved elsewhere, those who are in procession bow together before entering the sanctuary, then the priest goes to the altar, genuflects, and kisses it. This still gives a sense of the holiness of the sanctuary.

 

[Psalter]

I think it is the celebration of the Eucharist (the Mass or DL) that is the source and summit of our worship. Joining ourselves to Jesus’ sacrifice in the mass is our highest worship of the Father.

OK, I agree the Sacrifice of the Mass is the highest form of worship, but it is also our belief that the Eucharist itself is a perpetual sacrifice even outside of Mass.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

OK, I agree the Sacrifice of the Mass is the highest form of worship, but it is also our belief that the Eucharist itself is a perpetual sacrifice even outside of Mass.

Do you mean that the Blessed Sacrament reserved in the tabernacle is a perpetual sacrifice? Would you please give references for that.

Of course, the Blessed Sacrament is the person of Jesus really present to us in a sacramental way. Jesus is God, the eternal Son of the eternal Father. The book of Revelation shows John’s vision of Jesus standing in front of the Father like a lamb that is slain, in effect, a sacrifice. God lives in eternity, not in time, so Jesus’ sacrifice which took place in time, is always present to the Father, not just when mass is celebrated. However, I would really like your documentation from the Catechism or elsewhere that the Blessed Sacrament is a sacrifice.

 

[Aramis]

That’s a good point - and our parish has traditionally been used by some Eastern Catholics for their liturgy as well. Somehow I ended up going once and the priest faces the Tabernacle…I wonder if they have moved to a different church? Mind you, we only have two Catholic churches in my city, which is sad when you consider that it has a population of 130,000.

But I guess I don’t have to tell you where my pastor stands in his willingness to offer the EF of the Mass

The rubrics for the Divine Liturgies of the Byzantine Rite presume a tabernacle upon the holy table within the Altar, and in the shape of a miniature church. Note that the term “Altar” has a slightly different meaning; it is not the table, but the area inside the iconostas, or, when using a Roman, Armenian or Syriac Rite parish, everything on the dais.

The Byzantine Rite requires ad orientam facing of the celebrant.

My parish uses a “retired” chapel at a Roman parish for our mission.

But, make note: It is inappropriate to judge the rubrics of one Rite by those of Another.

Likewise, there have been exceptions to the requirement for the Tabernacle to be on or behind the Altar in the EF back when it was the normative mass… Certain cathedrals and shrines had it in a nearby side-chapel which usually opened to the dais.

The article in the old Catholic Encyclopedia is clear… it was not always on the high altar. Here’s the entry:
Tabernacle
tt=78

(TABERNACULUM).

Tabernacle signified in the Middle Ages sometimes a ciborium-altar, a structure resting on pillars and covered with a baldachino that was set over an altar, sometimes an ostensory or monstrance, a tower-shaped vessel for preserving and exhibiting relics and the Blessed Sacrament; sometimes, lastly, like today, it was the name of the vessel holding the pyx.

That is, at the present time in ecclesiastical usage it is only the name for the receptacle or case placed upon the table of the high altar or of another altar in which the vessels containing the Blessed Sacrament, as the ciborium, monstrance, custodia, are kept.** As a rule, in cathedrals and monastic churches it is not set upon the high altar but upon a side altar, or the altar of a special sacramentary chapel; this is to be done both on account of the reverence due the Holy Sacrament and to avoid impeding the course of the ceremonies in solemn functions at the high altar.** On the other hand it is generally to be placed upon the high altar in parish churches as the most befitting position (“Cærem. ep.”, I, xii, No. 8; “Rit. rom.”, tit. IV, i, no. 6; S.C. Episc., 10 February, 1579).

Emphasis mine. newadvent.org/cathen/14424a.htm

 

[dawid]

Authority in the Church follows a hierarchical path from the pope through the bishops, the parish pastors to the parishioners.

It’s the bishop’s responsibility and priviledge to make decisions concerning those parish churches within his diocese.

We had a parish priest who changed parts of the church building against the wishes of the archbishop.
He was sanctioned!

I recommend your parish pastoral council obtains the bishop’s approval before you proceed with any alterations.

The bishop should also entertain the wishes of the parishioners.

 

[ethelzguy]

Some of you have already addressed Psalter’s comments. Thanks.

I wanted to bring these Cathechism quotes forward:

**1324 The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life.” “The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch.”

2031 The moral life is spiritual worship. We “present [our] bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God,” within the Body of Christ that we form and in communion with the offering of his Eucharist. In the liturgy and the celebration of the sacraments, prayer and teaching are conjoined with the grace of Christ to enlighten and nourish Christian activity. As does the whole of the Christian life, the moral life finds its source and summit in the Eucharistic sacrifice.**

These quotes pretty clearly demonstrate that the consecration or reception of Holy Communion represents the “source and summit” of our faith, as opposed to consecrated hosts stored in a tabernacle. The Sacrement of Holy Communion is in reception. Consecrated hosts in a tabernacle is presence, not reception.

BTW, I am neither Lutheran nor a Heretic, thank you.

 

[pnewton]

When the Blessed Sacrament is reserved elsewhere, those who are in procession bow together before entering the sanctuary, then the priest goes to the altar, genuflects, and kisses it. This still gives a sense of the holiness of the sanctuary.

I know this. But when you go into a Church that is not your own and they are playing hide the tabernacle, then it is hard to know which is which.

 

[Psalter]

Some of you have already addressed Psalter’s comments. Thanks.

I wanted to bring these Cathechism quotes forward:

1324 The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life.” "The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch."

2031 The moral life is spiritual worship. We “present [our] bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God,” within the Body of Christ that we form and in communion with the offering of his Eucharist. In the liturgy and the celebration of the sacraments, prayer and teaching are conjoined with the grace of Christ to enlighten and nourish Christian activity. As does the whole of the Christian life, the moral life finds its source and summit in the Eucharistic sacrifice.

These quotes pretty clearly demonstrate that the consecration or reception of Holy Communion represents the “source and summit” of our faith, as opposed to consecrated hosts stored in a tabernacle. The Sacrement of Holy Communion is in reception. Consecrated hosts in a tabernacle is presence, not reception.

BTW, I am neither Lutheran nor a Heretic, thank you.

Ethelzguy, the Eucharist is a “Sacrament” outside of the reception of Holy Communion…it IS a Lutheran idea that the “sacrament” is the action of receiving and not the thing itself. That’s why we refer to the “Blessed Sacrament” inside the tabernacle, even if we aren’t actually receiving it.

 

[Ruthie]

Do you have some kind of committee about spending? You could bring up to them the question, why should we send a lot of money to move the tabernacle a mere 20 feet? It will be expensive to tear down all that concrete and steel.

What really concerns me is that he wants to replace the tabernacle with his own chair. Just who are we worshiping here? Even at our Cathedral, our dear Archbishop Chaput sits to one side of the altar.

Ruthie

 

[ethelzguy]

Ethelzguy, the Eucharist is a “Sacrament” outside of the reception of Holy Communion…it IS a Lutheran idea that the “sacrament” is the action of receiving and not the thing itself. That’s why we refer to the “Blessed Sacrament” inside the tabernacle, even if we aren’t actually receiving it.

So, it is your position, that a priest sitting in a confessional IS the Sacrement of Reconciliation?

I have provided documentation to support my position.

If you are going to continue calling me names, please have the decency to support your position with documentation.

Thank you.

 

[mattkubes]

Do you have some kind of committee about spending? You could bring up to them the question, why should we send a lot of money to move the tabernacle a mere 20 feet? It will be expensive to tear down all that concrete and steel.

Good idea Ruthie, I’ll have to find out about that. At least I’m not the only one who is confused about this particular “renovation.”

What really concerns me is that he wants to replace the tabernacle with his own chair. Just who are we worshiping here? Even at our Cathedral, our dear Archbishop Chaput sits to one side of the altar.

I mean he wouldn’t be the first. But in any case, I think it makes more sense to have the chairs off to the side - you wouldn’t believe how many of my classmates thought that we did all the sitting/standing/kneeling out of respect for the priest and the priest’s posture (in fact, that’s what we were taught in our Catholic schools). With that amount of confusion today, it just makes sense to keep Jesus front and centre.

 

[Psalter]

So, it is your position, that a priest sitting in a confessional IS the Sacrement of Reconciliation?

I have provided documentation to support my position.

If you are going to continue calling me names, please have the decency to support your position with documentation.

Thank you.

Ethelzguy, you didn’t provide documentation…you quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which actually supports MY position, and merely interjected YOUR OWN belief into it to make it say what you want it to say.

The priest sitting in the confessional is not the Sacrament of Reconciliation because the priest himself is not the Real Presence of Christ, is he?

Tell me this, Ethelzguy:
It is the Eucharist only the “Eucharist” when you RECEIVE it, or can you call it the Eucharist even when it is in the tabernacle? Does the Real Presence of Christ remain in the sacred species, or does it depart after the reception of Holy Communion?

 

[CradleCath]

So, it is your position, that a priest sitting in a confessional IS the Sacrement of Reconciliation?

I have provided documentation to support my position.

If you are going to continue calling me names, please have the decency to support your position with documentation.

Thank you.

He/she called you no names. He simply said that the IDEA that the Eucharist is not the source & summit of our faith…unless & until someone receives it…is a Lutheran teaching. It is. Christ does not need a human being to receive Him, in order to be the source & summit of our faith. He is the beginning & the end… the whole of our faith, regardless of what we do or don’t do.

 

[JReducation]

Some of you have already addressed Psalter’s comments. Thanks.

I wanted to bring these Cathechism quotes forward:

1324 The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life.” "The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch."

2031 The moral life is spiritual worship. We “present [our] bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God,” within the Body of Christ that we form and in communion with the offering of his Eucharist. In the liturgy and the celebration of the sacraments, prayer and teaching are conjoined with the grace of Christ to enlighten and nourish Christian activity. As does the whole of the Christian life, the moral life finds its source and summit in the Eucharistic sacrifice.

These quotes pretty clearly demonstrate that the consecration or reception of Holy Communion represents the “source and summit” of our faith, as opposed to consecrated hosts stored in a tabernacle. The Sacrement of Holy Communion is in reception. Consecrated hosts in a tabernacle is presence, not reception.

BTW, I am neither Lutheran nor a Heretic, thank you.

I believe that the confusion comes from the interchangeable use of the term “Eucharist” in the English language.

We use the term for both the liturgy and the Blessed Sacrament. This is not as common in other languages and therefore less confusion, still some, but less.

When the Church teaches that the Eucharist is the summit of our life it is referring to the liturgy of the Eucharist. This does not take anything away from the Blessed Sacrament. Obviously there would be no Blessed Sacrament if there were no celebration of the Eucharist. We have to remember that the Eucharist in this case refers to the liturgy.

As to the Blessed Sacrament, it has to be preserved ina prominent location where it is noticeable and can be adored by the faithful at times outside of mass. The rule is that it must be in the main body of the church, except in those churches where there is a lot of activity such as tours and so forth. In those cases, a separate chapel is more appropriate to protect the Blessed Sacrament. You find this arrangement in shrines and so forth.

Given the OP’s diagram, I have to agree that it throws the building off balance to move the tabernacle from point A to point B.

In our parish we have the tabernacle on the side wall, but the building is rectangular with the sanctuary and the tabernacle on the wider wall. You can see it from the door. You don’t have to hunt for the tabernacle when you walk inside.

JR

 

[Eliza10]

This is shocking and sad. You should tell him you have scruples about blackmail.

Or, you could thank him for the wonderful opportuity to have the parish choose between God and extras. Tell him you understand his wise pastoral care in placing before the people a real opportunity for sacrifice for Jesus. A way to show Our Lord that we are line with His priorities. Say, “Its a brilliant way to strengthen people’s faith, and save the church money, to boot! Thanks you so much for your spiritual wisdom! How clever of you!”

 

[JReducation]

This is shocking and sad. You should tell him you have scruples about blackmail.

Or, you could thank him for the wonderful opportuity to have the parish choose between God and extras. Tell him you understand his wise pastoral care in placing before the people a real opportunity for sacrifice for Jesus. A way to show Our Lord that we are line with His priorities. Say, “Its a brilliant way to strengthen people’s faith, and save the church money, to boot! Thanks you so much for your spiritual wisdom! How clever of you!”

LOL, that sounds like reverse manipulation.

JR

 

[jmcrae]

This is shocking and sad. You should tell him you have scruples about blackmail.

Or, you could thank him for the wonderful opportuity to have the parish choose between God and extras. Tell him you understand his wise pastoral care in placing before the people a real opportunity for sacrifice for Jesus. A way to show Our Lord that we are line with His priorities. Say, “Its a brilliant way to strengthen people’s faith, and save the church money, to boot! Thanks you so much for your spiritual wisdom! How clever of you!”

 

[JReducation]

You mentioned Archbishop Chaput, so I must assume that you are in the Archdiocese of Denver. Having personally known Charlie Chaput for more than30 years several things come to mind.

1. He’s a Capuchin Franciscan. The Franciscans introduced the tabernacle in the center of the Church. Prior to St. Francis it ws always on the side altar. To someone like Bishop Chaput, this is very normal, not to say that it’s not normal to others. It’s just that in Capuchin friaries the tabernacle is either in the center of the sanctuary or in some prominent place within the sanctuary, which obviously is front centre in every chapel.
2. Bishop Caput is very orthodox. I would not worry too much about the renovations. In most dioceses all renovations of diocesan parishes must pass the approval of the local bishop. Whatever he approves will be orthodox.

Having said that, I can’t gurrantee the aesthetics. I still believe that the drawing you sent would suggest that the projected placement is not aesthetically pleasing, but that’s me.

JR

 

[ethelzguy]

Ethelzguy, you didn’t provide documentation…you quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which actually supports MY position, and merely interjected YOUR OWN belief into it to make it say what you want it to say.

The priest sitting in the confessional is not the Sacrament of Reconciliation because the priest himself is not the Real Presence of Christ, is he?

Tell me this, Ethelzguy:
It is the Eucharist only the “Eucharist” when you RECEIVE it, or can you call it the Eucharist even when it is in the tabernacle? Does the Real Presence of Christ remain in the sacred species, or does it depart after the reception of Holy Communion?

The Real Presence remains, of course. We all know that. But it is a Sacrement when we receive it. That being said, take another gander at the quotes from the Catechism. It should clairfy what I am saying.

I am reminded of a discussion with one of our deacons sometime back, discussing Communion reception. It is often noted, that many people after receiving Communion, look at the open tabernacle and make the Sign of the Cross. His comment was to ask WHY people are looking at the empty tabernacle, when the Blessed Sacrement is on their tongue.

Force of habit I suppose. I have also often noted people coming into Church during Easter weekend, and even though the main tabernacle is empty, folks still genuflect and make the Sign of the Cross facing the empty tabernacle.