High Altars

  • Thread starter Thread starter Servus_Pio_XII
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Servus Pio XII:
Problem…if you go by the strict definition of Main Altar, the church hasn’t got one.

It has, at this point, what I call a “crate altar” which is simply a wooden construction, fully movable, which has a cloth over it. Going by that, you could actually say that there is no altar in the sanctuary permanently.

The tabernacle used to be what the pastor described as a “bread box” in a corner. There was no tabernacle until he came along. Only the Last Supper scene survived from the High Altar.

So, while Mass can still be offered upon the secondary altar, there would only be one main altar in the sanctuary, which would also hold the tabernacle.
Click to expand...
That “crate” is the “main altar.” Even thought it is moveable rather than** fixed**, it’s still the main altar. We too have such a “crate” although it’s quite historic.

I’m not sure how your parish got along without a tabernacle, but thank G-d it has one now. There is absolutely no requirement for the main altar to have a tabernacle upon it. In fact, there is what the Church says on that matter:

GIRM #315. It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated.
 
Exactly. So, therefore, the Mass could be celebrated on the current altar, and the High Altar contains the tabernacle. It works.
 
Servus Pio XII:
Exactly. So, therefore, the Mass could be celebrated on the current altar, and the High Altar contains the tabernacle. It works.
Click to expand...
That’s not what you said – you are changing your story. In any event, that so-called crate is the main altar, and that former altar-against-the-wall is now simply a fancy credence table.
 
40.png
AltarMan:
That’s not what you said – you are changing your story. In any event, that so-called crate is the main altar, and that former altar-against-the-wall is now simply a fancy credence table.
Click to expand...
Alterman and everyone else:

We have a set-up like that at St. Mary’s, although I maintain that it would be diffucult for someone to do a Mass non Ad orientum… There is an alter in back of the High Alter that you see in the photo on this page:

stmaryoftheangels.org/index.html
stmaryoftheangels.org//worshiptradition.html

stmaryoftheangels.org/permanentgraphics/sanctuarypartybishop.jpg

The members of the St. Lawrence Guild tell me that one could say a Mass from between the two alters, although it would be a bit of a squeeze.

I’ve seen some parishes on the WEB where the Tabernacle sites on a Stone about 3-1/2’l x 3-1/2’w x 3-1/2’h and the High Alter (10-1/2-1/2’l x 3-1/2’w x 3-1/2’h) sits directly in front of that, about 6’, with both on a large platform (24’l x 20’w x 3’h) so that both are elevated, but not so much that people have to crane their necks.

I think this had a lot to recommend it, esp. if you can get a Crucifix with a 10’ ft croosbeam and have the two saints positioned as they are at St. Mary’s.

Destroying the High Alters is what Puritans did in Britain and Ireland in the 17th Century. Why were, and are, Catholics doing this horrible thing in the 20th and 21st Centuries?

In Christ, Michael
 
40.png
AltarMan:
That “crate” is the “main altar.” Even thought it is moveable rather than** fixed**, it’s still the main altar. We too have such a “crate” although it’s quite historic.

I’m not sure how your parish got along without a tabernacle, but thank G-d it has one now. There is absolutely no requirement for the main altar to have a tabernacle upon it. In fact, there is what the Church says on that matter:

GIRM #315. It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated.
Click to expand...
Bah humbug to that. The priests at Jasna Gora celebrate Mass at the main chapel on the main altar with the icon and tabernacle in place. I’d like to see what would happen if a bishop or someone else were to put a little Protestant table in front of that true Catholic altar and icon. :tsktsk:
 
That’s not what you said – you are changing your story. In any event, that so-called crate is the main altar, and that former altar-against-the-wall is now simply a fancy credence table
Click to expand...
Not at all. As I learn more about the nature of the arguments against, I am proving that it is still, indeed, a good idea to rebuild the altar. In addition, as I learn more regarding points in which I am mistaken, I still justify my case…or would you prefer I hold onto arguments which have already been proved inconsequential?
 
40.png
EddieArent:
Bah humbug to that. The priests at Jasna Gora celebrate Mass at the main chapel on the main altar with the icon and tabernacle in place. I’d like to see what would happen if a bishop or someone else were to put a little Protestant table in front of that true Catholic altar and icon. :tsktsk:
Click to expand...
“Bah humbug” to an instruction from the Catholic Church? Sad.
 
Servus Pio XII:
Not at all. As I learn more about the nature of the arguments against, I am proving that it is still, indeed, a good idea to rebuild the altar. In addition, as I learn more regarding points in which I am mistaken, I still justify my case…or would you prefer I hold onto arguments which have already been proved inconsequential?
Click to expand...
You have done no such thing. Just read the last several posts to see just how convoluted your logic is. In brief, you’re wrong.

While I would never support the demolition of an against-the-wall altar simply for the sake of modernization (they make great credence tables) nor would I ever support the demolition of one in a historically important building, it would be rather odd to spend money to rebuild one.
 
Servus, I sympathize with your instinct that a High Altar conveys an intangible “sensus catholicus” to a sanctuary.

It is certainly no less inappropriate than some of the modern art that adorns so many churches today. It would permit location of the tabernacle in the traditional central axis point of the church, as is currently being advocated by certain traditional voices in the church.

A high altar, with a centrally located tablernacle, would also be appropriate for any church that has, or is planning to have, a TLM. The new GIRM has no force on celebrations of the TLM, therefore reasonable compromises need to be made for such dual rite churches. Given that an investment in a sanctuary modification is made for the long term, the possibility of TLM celebration at some point in the future is reasonable to consider when conducting long-range planning.

I must point out to AltarMan, that his advocacy of using a high altar as a credence table is not supported by any authoritative source. In the absence of clarity from the GIRM, the most widely accepted, and academically impeccable, reference on such matters today is Msgr. Peter Elliott’s Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, second edition. Paragraph 57 supports the traditional positioning of a credence table on the left of an altar where Holy Mass is celebrated v*ersus populum, *and to the right of an altar where Mass is celebrated ad orientem.
 
Dear AltarMan,
I think it would be extremely innapropriate to use the old high altar(I’m assuming you’re including the reredos and not just the mensa) as a credence table. For one thing, particularly when the new altar is devoid of artistic merit, having a beautiful and ornate credence table is not in keeping with the importance of the altar. Imagine…a beautiful and prominent ‘centrepiece’ …for OFFERINGS, etc. and a "crate " (to use SPXII’s terminology) for the greatest liturgical act possible :ehh: ). :hmmm:

Dear AlexB,
Is it a requirement that parish masses celebrated according to the missal of 62 should be done at a high altar with a tabernacle? As far as I remember, the only requirement was that it should be of stone and fixed (unless impossible) .
 
40.png
AJV:
Dear AltarMan,
I think it would be extremely innapropriate to use the old high altar(I’m assuming you’re including the reredos and not just the mensa) as a credence table. For one thing, particularly when the new altar is devoid of artistic merit, having a beautiful and ornate credence table is not in keeping with the importance of the altar. Imagine…a beautiful and prominent ‘centrepiece’ …for OFFERINGS, etc. and a "crate " (to use SPXII’s terminology) for the greatest liturgical act possible :ehh: ). :hmmm:

Dear AlexB,
Is it a requirement that parish masses celebrated according to the missal of 62 should be done at a high altar with a tabernacle? As far as I remember, the only requirement was that it should be of stone and fixed (unless impossible) .
Click to expand...
1.) When the altar against the wall is used as a credence table and not a altar, the mensa containing the relic should be removed.
 
AJV:

You are correct, there is no imperative to celebrate a TLM at a high altar positioned against a reredos or wall. Celebrating at a freestanding altar ad orientem is permitted, and fully described for the first time in the latest edition of Fortescue’s Ceremonies of the Roman Rite.

However, if a church had both a fixed, freestanding altar and a traditional high altar with an intact mensa, it would be against sensibilities to use the freestanding altar. I would put that in the same league as using a pair of prie-dieus for distribution of Holy Communion in a church that still had a usable communion rail. Therefore, any church contemplating (re)installation of a high altar certainly should weigh as a factor, the possibility of using it for a TLM.
 
40.png
AlexB:
Servus, I sympathize with your instinct that a High Altar conveys an intangible “sensus catholicus” to a sanctuary.

It is certainly no less inappropriate than some of the modern art that adorns so many churches today. It would permit location of the tabernacle in the traditional central axis point of the church, as is currently being advocated by certain traditional voices in the church.

A high altar, with a centrally located tablernacle, would also be appropriate for any church that has, or is planning to have, a TLM. The new GIRM has no force on celebrations of the TLM, therefore reasonable compromises need to be made for such dual rite churches. Given that an investment in a sanctuary modification is made for the long term, the possibility of TLM celebration at some point in the future is reasonable to consider when conducting long-range planning.

I must point out to AltarMan, that his advocacy of using a high altar as a credence table is not supported by any authoritative source. In the absence of clarity from the GIRM, the most widely accepted, and academically impeccable, reference on such matters today is Msgr. Peter Elliott’s Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, second edition. Paragraph 57 supports the traditional positioning of a credence table on the left of an altar where Holy Mass is celebrated v*ersus populum, *and to the right of an altar where Mass is celebrated ad orientem.
Click to expand...
It’s no longer an altar without a mensa. In any event Elliott’s book carries no official weight – it’s not a Church document.
 
40.png
EddieArent:
Bah humbug to that. The priests at Jasna Gora celebrate Mass at the main chapel on the main altar with the icon and tabernacle in place. I’d like to see what would happen if a bishop or someone else were to put a little Protestant table in front of that true Catholic altar and icon. :tsktsk:
Click to expand...
No one wants to touch the icon and the altar because history tells us better. The only people who tried to move the icon were the Hussites and the Swedes (when they were fervent Protestants). Also, it would be impractical because the chapel has normally 2500 people at any one time yet it can only fit 500 people snuggly.
 
40.png
AlexB:
AJV:

You are correct, there is no imperative to celebrate a TLM at a high altar positioned against a reredos or wall. Celebrating at a freestanding altar ad orientem is permitted, and fully described for the first time in the latest edition of Fortescue’s Ceremonies of the Roman Rite.
Click to expand...
Dear AlexB,
Do you know of any site online where it is possible to read Fortescue’s book? It is difficult for me to receive religious material where I am.

For all those interested the following site has quite a few documents on the liturgy(like the old pontifical) -before the reforms resulting in the missal of 70 as well as documents during that period of transition from the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ mass and other material such as an older version of Msgr. Elliots “Ceremonies of the modern roman rite”. Unfortunately its in French 😦 but nothing that babelfish can’t help you get the gist of.

Ceremoniaire
 
You have done no such thing. Just read the last several posts to see just how convoluted your logic is. In brief, you’re wrong.
Click to expand...
While I would never support the demolition of an against-the-wall altar simply for the sake of modernization (they make great credence tables) nor would I ever support the demolition of one in a historically important building, it would be rather odd to spend money to rebuild one.
Click to expand...
Could you please cite what it is that you wish me to notice? Obviously I didn’t get the same impression you did from the past posts.

I DO NOT WANT a credence table, but want to restore an ALTAR to the parish which was thus desecrated. If only you could see the drywall abomination which is up now (in place of the High Altar)…or the blank wall which was there until quite recently.

Or, I have a better idea, why don’t we invest money in hanging burlap banners all over the church? Is that a worthwhile use of money and time? Why not try to make the crate look prettier? How about we take out the sancturary wall so that everybody can see the choir?

There is no better way to restore a parish to God than to build and altar to He who is the Lord.
 
Your parish already has an altar of sacrifice.

While it may indeed be lamentable that the former against-the-wall altar was demolished, it would make absolutely no sense to rebuild it.

Because your parish already has an altar of sacrifice…

As far as the burlap banners go, that’s your idea, not mine.
Servus Pio XII:
Could you please cite what it is that you wish me to notice? Obviously I didn’t get the same impression you did from the past posts.

I DO NOT WANT a credence table, but want to restore an ALTAR to the parish which was thus desecrated. If only you could see the drywall abomination which is up now (in place of the High Altar)…or the blank wall which was there until quite recently.

Or, I have a better idea, why don’t we invest money in hanging burlap banners all over the church? Is that a worthwhile use of money and time? Why not try to make the crate look prettier? How about we take out the sancturary wall so that everybody can see the choir?

There is no better way to restore a parish to God than to build and altar to He who is the Lord.
Click to expand...
 
Or you could just rebuild the High Altar, dump the crate and suggest your priest celebrate the Pauline Mass ad orientem on the new High Altar.

Benedict would be soooooo happy. :clapping:
 
Here Here!

I take it that I am going to like Benedict…a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top