I
itsjustintime
Guest
Not employed by the diocese, I’m the individual in the household who probably has the most formation and experience with Canon Law in general. Regarding the second item, understood, please see thread above.
- Status
I
itsjustintime
Guest
The neighboring priest has obtained permission. The director of the apostolate has obtained permission. The director of Young Adult ministry has obtained permission.
L
LateranBasilica
Guest
Ok , I understand you live there. I read your past threads and understand you are not in formation for Priesthood.
As far as a tabernacle wirh a blessed sacrament whose key is denied to the Priest, there is something not quite right going on here. Speak to the Bishop and step back from this. I can understand why Adoration would be denied in a situation where quite frankly, the key to the Tabernacle is for want of better words, stolen.
Is there ADoration offered within a reasonable distance in a Church?
The issue for the Bishop is the mess this seems to be , ie stolen keys
As far as a tabernacle wirh a blessed sacrament whose key is denied to the Priest, there is something not quite right going on here. Speak to the Bishop and step back from this. I can understand why Adoration would be denied in a situation where quite frankly, the key to the Tabernacle is for want of better words, stolen.
Is there ADoration offered within a reasonable distance in a Church?
The issue for the Bishop is the mess this seems to be , ie stolen keys
Last edited:
I
itsjustintime
Guest
Thanks for the insight Lateran Basilica 
, I’ll note your valuable insights.
Regarding the chapel, it is quite literally across the street from the Church.
We are very blessed.
, I’ll note your valuable insights.Regarding the chapel, it is quite literally across the street from the Church.
We are very blessed.
L
LateranBasilica
Guest
These are not insights, stealing a Tabernacle key by a member of the laity is very serious, given the Blessed Sacrament is still inside
I
itsjustintime
Guest
I agree, the priest should be the one in sole possession of the key unless there is an extraordinary situation.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Last edited:
T
tafan2
Guest
Does the priest know where the key is kept? If not, does he even know it has been hidden/stolen? I think you guys are in danger of losing your oratory all together. I can certainly imagine a Bishop being apprised of the situation and saying, “we will fix this”.
I
itsjustintime
Guest
I would never use the term stolen; this is false. The key was entrusted to a house member by the priest following receiving permission from the Bishop. It was at one point in the sacristy. Eventually, it was hidden by the one person entrusted to keep the key. In this event, there was adoration held in accordance with Canon Law regularly.
The individual entrusted with the tabernacle key allowed others to know where it was. In this event, some individuals within the household are allowed to know where it is, while others, not. Following this, we have discovered, in accordance with Canon Law, exposition of the blessed sacrament should only be allowed to be administered by a special designee “extraordinary minister of the Holy Eucharist” under extraordinary circumstances. Here we do not have extraordinary circumstances (the priest lives next door).
With this understanding, I am now under the impression that there are no extraordinary circumstances and therefore no member of the laity should be in individual possession of a tabernacle key. The key should be returned to the priest.
The individual entrusted with the tabernacle key allowed others to know where it was. In this event, some individuals within the household are allowed to know where it is, while others, not. Following this, we have discovered, in accordance with Canon Law, exposition of the blessed sacrament should only be allowed to be administered by a special designee “extraordinary minister of the Holy Eucharist” under extraordinary circumstances. Here we do not have extraordinary circumstances (the priest lives next door).
With this understanding, I am now under the impression that there are no extraordinary circumstances and therefore no member of the laity should be in individual possession of a tabernacle key. The key should be returned to the priest.
T
tafan2
Guest
Ok, doesn’t sound so bad, but our overreaction seems justified, as the information keeps changing. For example, this:
seems to certainly contradict your earlier statement the individual hiding the key was not the one who was supposed to have the key:
C
CRV
Guest
Good that the Bishops permission was obtained.
Should be left in the Sacristy, considering as in an earlier post you mentioned this “chapel” is literally opposite the Church.
Ordained Clergy or a deputed Extraordinary Minister of Communion to expose or repose the Blessed Sacrament - only. The general lay person does not have this faculty/permission/right/ability to expose and repose by their own authority.
Agreed, by what you’ve posted there are no extraordinary circumstances, and yes as the priest is literally over the road …
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
But there is no one with proper authority over them and leading/directing their discernment?
And, there is a RadTrad who has absconded with the key to the tabernacle because he doesn’t like the 1983 code of canon law? And this person is also discerning the priesthood? In communion with Rome?
This all sounds very odd.
If this is a formation house and/or apostolate with a priest attached to it, why are you on CAF asking questions about adoration when you have a priest and the chancery at your disposal?
I
itsjustintime
Guest
“Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.” -Proverbs 15:22
I
itsjustintime
Guest
I agree with this statement. He did abscond the key 1 time.
Last edited:
L
LateranBasilica
Guest
Hidden is a very loose term, I would translate to stolen, as the key is not accessible , especially to clergy i.e. the Priest in charge.
How long ago was this key hidden, and why does this person continue to ‘hide’ the key. What would happen for instance, if that one person was not around for some reason.
This is really an abuse of trust.
I would also be taking the Bishop’s advice on this and not attempting to interpret Canon Law.
Does the Priest know where the key is and does the Priest have access to the key
Has the Bishop formally declared this a formation house, is it under the direction of the Bishop?
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
So the lay guy gets to contradict the priest on liturgical requirements and hide the tabernacle key, thus denying the priest and others access to the Blessed Sacrament and effectively holding Jesus hostage in this disagreement?
If this lay guy is in formation for something, his director should be stepping in.
C
Carryingmycross78
Guest
It sounds like you need to contact your bishop. I’m sure the young men will turn over the key to the tabernacle to him. And let the bishop make the decision on how to proceed. Perhaps the tabernacle should be moved to a new location.
J
JohnLilburne
Guest
The first post has: “I’ve heard that exposition tabernacles are a viable option for offering perpetual adoration where there may not be enough adorers”.
No, this is not a solution.
From the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis sacramentum:
“[138.] Still, the Most Holy Sacrament, when exposed, must never be left unattended even for the briefest space of time. It should therefore be arranged that at least some of the faithful always be present at fixed times, even if they take alternating turns.”
The liturgical book ends the period of exposition with the blessed sacrament being returned to the tabernacle. If this is not done then the liturgical book is not being followed.
From Holy Communion and the Worship of the Eucharist Outside of Mass:
“88. If a period of uninterrupted exposition is not possible, because of too few worshippers, the blessed sacrament may be replaced in the tabernacle during periods which have been schedule and announced beforehand. This reposition may not take place more often than twice during the day, for example, about noon and at night.
The following form of simple reposition may be observed: the priest or deacon, vested in an alb, or a surplice over a cassock, and a stole, replaces the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle after a brief period of adoration and a prayer said with those present. The exposition of the blessed sacrament may take place in the same manner (at the scheduled time).”
In n. 91 it discusses the Minister of Exposition:
“In the absence of a priest or deacon or if they are lawfully impeded, the following persons may publicly expose and later repose the holy eucharist for the adoration of the faithful:
a) an acolyte or special minister of communion;
b) a member of a religious community or of a lay association of men or women which is devoted to eucharistic adoration, upon appointment by the local Ordinary.
Such ministers may open the tabernacle and also, if suitable, place the ciborium on the altar or place the host in the monstrance. At the end of the period of adoration, they replace the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. It is not lawful, however, for them to give the blessing with the sacrament.”
The other way the period of exposition may end is with benediction:
“100. After the blessing the priest or deacon who gave the blessing, or another priest or deacon, replaces the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle and genuflects.”
In n. 10 it discusses the tabernacle:
“10. The holy eucharist is to be reserved in a solid tabernacle. It must be opaque and unbreakable.”
In the Code of Canon Law, Canon 938 §3 “The tabernacle in which the blessed Eucharist is habitually reserved is to be immovable, made of solid and non-transparent material, and so locked as to give the greatest security against any danger of profanation.” (From 1997 New Revised English Translation, published by Harper Collins Liturgical.
So a transparent “Exposition Tabernacle” is not a legitimate solution.
[Excerpts from the English translation of Holy Communion and the Worship of the Eucharist Outside of Mass © 1974, International Commission on English in the Liturgy Corporation. All rights reserved.]
No, this is not a solution.
From the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis sacramentum:
“[138.] Still, the Most Holy Sacrament, when exposed, must never be left unattended even for the briefest space of time. It should therefore be arranged that at least some of the faithful always be present at fixed times, even if they take alternating turns.”
The liturgical book ends the period of exposition with the blessed sacrament being returned to the tabernacle. If this is not done then the liturgical book is not being followed.
From Holy Communion and the Worship of the Eucharist Outside of Mass:
“88. If a period of uninterrupted exposition is not possible, because of too few worshippers, the blessed sacrament may be replaced in the tabernacle during periods which have been schedule and announced beforehand. This reposition may not take place more often than twice during the day, for example, about noon and at night.
The following form of simple reposition may be observed: the priest or deacon, vested in an alb, or a surplice over a cassock, and a stole, replaces the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle after a brief period of adoration and a prayer said with those present. The exposition of the blessed sacrament may take place in the same manner (at the scheduled time).”
In n. 91 it discusses the Minister of Exposition:
“In the absence of a priest or deacon or if they are lawfully impeded, the following persons may publicly expose and later repose the holy eucharist for the adoration of the faithful:
a) an acolyte or special minister of communion;
b) a member of a religious community or of a lay association of men or women which is devoted to eucharistic adoration, upon appointment by the local Ordinary.
Such ministers may open the tabernacle and also, if suitable, place the ciborium on the altar or place the host in the monstrance. At the end of the period of adoration, they replace the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. It is not lawful, however, for them to give the blessing with the sacrament.”
The other way the period of exposition may end is with benediction:
“100. After the blessing the priest or deacon who gave the blessing, or another priest or deacon, replaces the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle and genuflects.”
In n. 10 it discusses the tabernacle:
“10. The holy eucharist is to be reserved in a solid tabernacle. It must be opaque and unbreakable.”
In the Code of Canon Law, Canon 938 §3 “The tabernacle in which the blessed Eucharist is habitually reserved is to be immovable, made of solid and non-transparent material, and so locked as to give the greatest security against any danger of profanation.” (From 1997 New Revised English Translation, published by Harper Collins Liturgical.
So a transparent “Exposition Tabernacle” is not a legitimate solution.
[Excerpts from the English translation of Holy Communion and the Worship of the Eucharist Outside of Mass © 1974, International Commission on English in the Liturgy Corporation. All rights reserved.]
L
LateranBasilica
Guest
I would like to point out this must be a Public Association of the Faithful, recognised as such within the Diocese by its Bishop.
I
itsjustintime
Guest
Are exposition tabernacles ever allowed then?
I
itsjustintime
Guest
Yep, it’s a lay association recognized by the Bishop, that was my first question also, so I think it’s a good one 
.
.- Status