Church Admission Fee

[jimrob]

I started this thread because I will shortly be visiting Tuscany where the Cathedrals in Pisa, Siena and Florence have an entrance fee. What is more, it’s all organised by the tourist office who sell the tickets and staff the barriers. On my last visit to Venice, I found that entrance to the cathedral was free, but a number of smaller churches had a charge.

We need to decide which of our buildings are for liturgical use and which are tourist attractions. We can then decommission those that are principally museums and sell the buildings to the local authority to use as a cash cow. I’d have no objections to being charged to enter a decommissioned church. We could then use the proceeds on a building that is more easily maintained and dedicated to the worship of God.

If I get any response from the Vicars General of Pisa, Florence and Sienna (once they’ve stopped laughing at my Italian) I’ll add it to this thread.

 

[farmersboy]

best to downsize the size/stature of churches one wants to visit perhaps.

here’s a dinky one:

*This delightful triangular building was designed by Sir Thomas Tresham (father of one of the Gunpowder Plotters) and constructed between 1593 and 1597.

It is a testament to Tresham’s Roman Catholicism: the number three, symbolising the Holy Trinity, is apparent everywhere…*

english-heritage.org.uk/daysout/properties/rushton-triangular-lodge/

alas, one will still have to pay a small amount unless one is a member of english heritage.

 

[Urn]

Let me first point out that I’m not a cheapskate. I appreciate that the upkeep of churches and cathedrals can be expensive and when I visit a church or cathedral that’s not my own, I make a contribution towards its upkeep. However, I am becoming increasingly concerned at the practice of charging an admission fee where churches are popular with tourists.

A church is not a museum or an art gallery, it is the house of God. Admission should be free to all whether they have come to pray or just to look. I believe that we receive a blessing if we enter a church in prayerful mood and charging or paying for that blessing is the grave sin of simony. Does anyone know if there are any pronouncements from Rome on this subject?

Yes I know you can avoid the charges by arriving at Mass time, but that is not the point. I have no objection to giving money to the church - I just don’t expect it to be a commercial transaction. I have now taken to writing the the Vicars General of cathedrals in Europe where there is an entrance fee.

When we finally approach the pearly gates, we can have confidence that our entrance fee has been paid for us. Those who seek to charge us to enter our churches may find otherwise.

I have to agree very strongly. On the last Holy Thursday I planned to stop at 6 of the California Missions to pray the Breviary on my way to Los Angeles. The first two (San Miguel Archangel and San Luis Obispo de Tolosa) did not charge but I left a little something. Both very good experiences.

Santa Ines in Solvang was horrible. I asked the lady in charge (with Breviary in hand) if I could simply pray in front of the tabernacle? She was curt in telling me I couldn’t without paying the $5.00 admission. She seemed stunned when I turned on my heel and left.

I paid the admission at Santa Barbara because I wanted to tour it anyway. I suspect there is no way I could have entered the church to pray without paying. San Buenaventura was perfect. They charge, but they saw I was there to pray so they gave me a pass. San Fernando de Espana also gave me a pass.

 

[jimrob]

Here are some extracts from Canon Law which may or may not be relevant:

Can. 1210 Only those things which serve the exercise or promotion of worship, piety, or religion are permitted in a sacred place; anything not consonant with the holiness of the place is forbidden. In an individual case, however, the ordinary can permit other uses which are not contrary to the holiness of the place.

Can. 1220 §1. All those responsible are to take care that in churches such cleanliness and beauty are preserved as befit a house of God and that whatever is inappropriate to the holiness of the place is excluded.

Can. 1221 Entry to a church is to be free and gratuitous during the time of sacred celebrations.

It’s not for me to interpret Canon Law, but it seems an entry charge is permitted at times when there’s no celebration going on and it’s the bishop’s decision whether making the place a pay-to-enter tourist attraction is contrary to the holiness of the place.

 

[liturgyluver]

I have never encountered a single church that would charge people entry for prayer or for worship. That said, there are some popular churches and cathedrals that charge admission outside of service times for visitors and tourists - during this time most would provide a side chapel for prayer as visitor numbers during admission times make an type of prayer generally impractical.

In the UK charges are generally limited to the a few cathedrals, most of the others ask for voluntary donations. I have noticed in Spain and Italy admission charges are very common and also in Germany at some of the bigger cathedrals.

 

[coachdennis]

Here are some extracts from Canon Law which may or may not be relevant:

Can. 1210 **Only those things which serve the exercise or promotion of worship, piety, or religion are permitted in a sacred place; anything not consonant with the holiness of the place is forbidden. In an individual case, however, the ordinary can permit other uses which are not contrary to the holiness of the place. **Can. 1220 §1. All those responsible are to take care that in churches such cleanliness and beauty are preserved as befit a house of God and that whatever is inappropriate to the holiness of the place is excluded.

Can. 1221 Entry to a church is to be free and gratuitous during the time of sacred celebrations.

It’s not for me to interpret Canon Law, but it seems an entry charge is permitted at times when there’s no celebration going on and it’s the bishop’s decision whether making the place a pay-to-enter tourist attraction is contrary to the holiness of the place.

Refrring to the bold: Isn’t this what was one of the arguments used by people in the 1970s and 1980s to strip many of the churches of the art and statues in churches and whitewash? Sometimes following a false interpretation of canon law can have some very bad results and would certainly stop the reason for people coming to these churches to see the art, etc.

Also, what you and others are describing in their encounters seems in line with canon law – again, what’s the problem?

If you don’t like it (which is your right) you have two choices – complain (which you have) or don’t go except for Mass.

 

[Phemie]

I have never encountered a single church that would charge people entry for prayer or for worship. That said, there are some popular churches and cathedrals that charge admission outside of service times for visitors and tourists - during this time most would provide a side chapel for prayer as visitor numbers during admission times make an type of prayer generally impractical.

In the UK charges are generally limited to the a few cathedrals, most of the others ask for voluntary donations. I have noticed in Spain and Italy admission charges are very common and also in Germany at some of the bigger cathedrals.

I recently visited many churches throughout Europe. All were open to the public at no charge but generally there was an area (roped off in some, a separate room with a closed door in others) with a sign that read “Reserved for prayer, please do not enter unless you are coming to pray.”

Upon entering I always looked for the lamp indicating that the Blessed Sacrament was present. In some churches it was hard to tell, there were “sanctuary lamps” burning by various altars leading me to wonder if the Blessed Sacrament was actually in any of the Tabernacles. In others it was obvious that it wasn’t present except in the ‘reserved for prayer’ section.

 

[malphono]

jimrob;11057997:

Here are some extracts from Canon Law which may or may not be relevant:

Can. 1210 Only those things which serve the exercise or promotion of worship, piety, or religion are permitted in a sacred place; anything not consonant with the holiness of the place is forbidden. In an individual case, however, the ordinary can permit other uses which are not contrary to the holiness of the place.

Refrring to the bold: Isn’t this what was one of the arguments used by people in the 1970s and 1980s to strip many of the churches of the art and statues in churches and whitewash? Sometimes following a false interpretation of canon law can have some very bad results and would certainly stop the reason for people coming to these churches to see the art, etc.

Since the current CIC was promulgated in 1983, I’m not sure that Canon 1210 could have been used during the 1970s, but in any case, I really don’t see how it could be interpreted that way.

AFAIK, the standard interpretation is that a church is a church. IOW, it’s not a town hall or an odeon, or a gallery. The local Ordinary may permit a church to be used for a secular purpose as he may deem appropriate, but only for those purposes which maintain the dignity of the place. I’ve seen cases where a church has been used for concerts of various types, but the concerts are generally of a religious nature. Christmas or Easter recitals, etc, come to mind. And when this is done, and if the tabernacle is in the main church, the Sacrament is moved to a repository elsewhere for the duration of the event (including during the rehearsals). It is also proper to strip the altar in such circumstances, and drape it with a dust cover (which, in my experience, is usually of green felt), but that detail is often overlooked.

Can. 1220 §1. All those responsible are to take care that in churches such cleanliness and beauty are preserved as befit a house of God and that whatever is inappropriate to the holiness of the place is excluded.

Can. 1221 Entry to a church is to be free and gratuitous during the time of sacred celebrations.

It’s not for me to interpret Canon Law, but it seems an entry charge is permitted at times when there’s no celebration going on and it’s the bishop’s decision whether making the place a pay-to-enter tourist attraction is contrary to the holiness of the place.

Yes, an “entry fee” for touristic purposes may be imposed, but such is clearly forbidden for Mass or any other liturgical function. I’ve seen this on rare occasions but, if one stays after the service, one can usually continue to visit, at least for a time. And, as someone noted earlier, there is normally an exemption for those who have come there to pray. This is particularly evident in places having a “Blessed Sacrament Chapel” but does happen elsewhere as well. I’ve also seen cases where areas are roped-off and access to them is limited to “paying visitors” on tour. It can be a bit inconvenient, but (reluctantly, at times) I can see the reasons, one of which is actually consistent with maintaining the dignity of the place. In its way, it seems to me that it’s like the far more common restriction against flash photography.

 

[AuntyP]

Upon entering I always looked for the lamp indicating that the Blessed Sacrament was present. In some churches it was hard to tell, there were “sanctuary lamps” burning by various altars leading me to wonder if the Blessed Sacrament was actually in any of the Tabernacles. In others it was obvious that it wasn’t present except in the ‘reserved for prayer’ section.

This is my main concern - that the Blessed Sacrament is not removed from the churches when they are being used as museums with an admission fee. Apart from the fee, tour groups don’t show reverence, and from their point of view there’s no reason why they should if they aren’t Catholic and have paid to enter. It’s different for Protestant churches because they don’t have the Real Presence.

Perhaps it would be best if it were a rule that the Blessed Sacrament is removed from the churches and there were notices displayed letting the faithful know where is the nearest place they can pray in the presence of Our Lord.

I understand fully that churches, especially old buildings, are expensive to maintain and that the local congregation shouldn’t be expected to bear the cost for the benefit of tourists. Nevertheless, the current haphazard arrangements could be improved.

 

[babochka]

Santa Ines in Solvang was horrible. I asked the lady in charge (with Breviary in hand) if I could simply pray in front of the tabernacle? She was curt in telling me I couldn’t without paying the $5.00 admission. She seemed stunned when I turned on my heel and left.

We found the people at the Solvang Mission to be delightful. Usually, admission to the Mission is through the museum gift shop. Our family arrived for daily Mass because we were blessed to be staying within walking distance. The sisters were delighted with our young children and the priest approached us afterwards to ask where we were from. He then invited us into the mission grounds and never said anything about the fee.

 

[andrewstx]

I am very aware of just how irreveverent (sp) tourists can be. Last time I was in San Xavier mission near Tucson a beautiful Spanish 18th century church covered with iconography, there was a boy with his elbows on the altar, and his young sister was actually SITTING on the altar.

But I have been in some cathedrals that were nearly abandoned and had no charge. Old St. Mary’s cathedral in Chinatown, was one of them.

OSMs is a beautiful gothic cathedral that stood through the 1906 earthquake and fire.

[edited]

 

[Urn]

We found the people at the Solvang Mission to be delightful. Usually, admission to the Mission is through the museum gift shop. Our family arrived for daily Mass because we were blessed to be staying within walking distance. The sisters were delighted with our young children and the priest approached us afterwards to ask where we were from. He then invited us into the mission grounds and never said anything about the fee.

I’m sure it would have been different if I had been there at a Mass time – they really couldn’t have charged in that case.

The curt manner in which I was dismissed in the gift shop was highly offensive. Thankfully Santa Ines is not known to be one of the more remarkable California Missions anyway. I’ll never go back.

 

[Urn]

I am very aware of just how irreveverent (sp) tourists can be. Last time I was in San Xavier mission near Tucson a beautiful Spanish 18th century church covered with iconography, there was a boy with his elbows on the altar, and his young sister was actually SITTING on the altar.

But I have been in some cathedrals that were nearly abandoned and had no charge. Old St. Mary’s cathedral in Chinatown, was one of them.

OSMs is a beautiful gothic cathedral that stood through the 1906 earthquake and fire.

I have never been in the -]“maytag” cathedra/-]l nothing there inspires me except the tabernacle.

Saint Mary of the Assumption Cathedral. Fixed it for you.

 

[Bergon]

I, too, hate paying to go in to a church. If I have to pay and there is an entrance where you cannot get in other than going through a kiosk where you pay then I refuse to go in. I also hate it when you’re admitted free but staff or volunteers pester you for money. I never give them any. If entry is free and no one pesters me I’ll donate.

However, the Church does permit charging entry fees. Canon 1221 says: “Entry to a church at the hours of sacred functions is to be open and free of charge”. Therefore, charging an admission fee at other times is permitted.

 

[Elizium23]

I never got to see the inside of St. Eulalia’s Cathedral in Barcelona. They were charging admission at the time and my Catalan fiancée pitched a fit that she could not freely enter her own cathedral.

On the plus side, I actually got into a small side chapel of the Sagrada Familia where Mass was being celebrated. I did not get to see much of the real inside. And we didn’t do any touristy things like ride the towers to the top.

But I completely understand that my budget prevented me from doing interesting things, and that churches have every right to charge admission in order to pay for upkeep and improvements. Many churches around the world are indeed repositories of fine sacred art, and the fact that worshippers get to visit them for free should be celebrated. I don’t see anything wrong with capitalizing on tourists and lookie-loos.

 

[quiet52]

…We need to decide which of our buildings are for liturgical use and which are tourist attractions. We can then decommission those that are principally museums and sell the buildings to the local authority to use as a cash cow. I’d have no objections to being charged to enter a decommissioned church. We could then use the proceeds on a building that is more easily maintained and dedicated to the worship of God…

People like to visit historical or especially beautiful churches. That is reality. There are many parish churches which are also tourist sites. It’s not “either/or.” You yourself apparently like to visit these churches. The cathedral in my diocese is also a tourist site --and it is an active parish (but it does not have an admission fee, yet). These parishes can choose to remain open only during liturgies, if that’s all they can afford to do, or they can accommodate the tourists the best way they can, even it it means to charge admission so they can afford to do so.

You seem to have a huge sense of entitlement, to be able to visit these sites at will on your terms. Some of these churches “get along” with donation boxes, but sometimes the donations are insufficient and it’s necessary to charge a fee to every non-worshiping visitor. Your portrayal of these parishes as “cash cows” is uncharitable. You’re not running the parishes and have no idea about the expenses involved.

 

[MorEphrem]

What I noticed in Italy was that there was usually a roped off section for prayer that was free although some of the guards would grill you and make sure you were there to pray and not look around.

They are a bit stingy.

It’s a bit of a shame because it makes God’s house into a marketplace (while I was studying in Florence I specifically became affiliated with a group that gave free tours in churches to explain the religious significance of the art and architecture and encouraged people to actually pray while they visited). I have a bit of a problem with this consumerist culture being applied to church because of the vandalism I’ve personally seen done and it’s quite upsetting.

 

[DAWNCUROLE]

While praying to God has no monetary cost, lights, security, ac/heating, janitorial services, etc. all have a cost.

 

[jimrob]

You’re not running the parishes and have no idea about the expenses involved.

Actually I am involved in the finances of running a rather expensive parish. Our church is open all day and we don’t make an admission charge.

Church buildings throughout Christendom, and the art they contain, were placed there for the greater glory of God. If the faithful no longer require such an elaborate church, then someone else should run the place as a museum. What saddens me particularly is the cynical way in which Masses are crammed in at the beginning of the day (even on Sundays) so as not to interrupt the money supply from tourists. I would dearly love to go to Mass at Sienna Cathedral. However, I will be staying in Pisa and the train doesn’t get me there in time.

I can see no problem with churches charging for guided tours and making a charge for other tour operators to pass on to their customers. I can see no problem with making a charge for a licence to take photographs or video. Charging an admission fee is sacrilege. It is time the faithful refused to pay and let the simonists know why.

 

[paperwight66]

I understand that some of the more famous churches and cathedrals in the UK, especially in London (St. Paul’s, Westminster Abbey) now charge admission to deter groups of tourists being herded in as part of their tour of Europe. It was felt that they were just ticking off the sights with no real interest or idea how to behave, and spoiling the experience for others.

I don’t know how much of a deterrent charging is, actually, as presumably it would just be included in the cost of the trip.