Location of ambo and altar

[callbr549]

I’m converting from the Episcopal church. In all the Episcopal churches I’ve been in the altar is at the center of the sanctuary; it was the focus point of worship. The ambo was off to the side. We were always taught that since communion was the greatest thing that happened in church, the altar should be the center of attention.

In the fairly new RC church I’m going to for RCIA the ambo and the altar are side by side, neither one is really in the center. Not only that, they appear to be the same piece of furniture, with the exception of a small stand that holds the book up at an angle on the ambo. In some of the parish literature about their building, history, etc, there is some comment to the effect of “since Jesus is present both in the eucharist and in the word, we place altar and ambo side by side” (not a direct quote, but the meaning at least)

This just seems wrong. Can anyone point to magisterial documents that address location of altar, ambo, etc.

One more thing, the “tabernacle” (a large copper sphere) is in a small room at the side of the church, not visible to 90% of the congregation. When I come into church I’m used to genuflecting toward the tabernacle, which in every other church I had been to was near the altar or at least in the sanctuary area. In this case do I turn 90 degrees away from the altar and genuflect in the direction of this side room?

Thanks,
Rob

 

[Nettie]

callbr549:

One more thing, the “tabernacle” (a large copper sphere) is in a small room at the side of the church, not visible to 90% of the congregation. When I come into church I’m used to genuflecting toward the tabernacle, which in every other church I had been to was near the altar or at least in the sanctuary area. In this case do I turn 90 degrees away from the altar and genuflect in the direction of this side room?
Rob

Yes, you could turn toward the side room to genuflect. (This would be a good sign to the other members of this apparently liberal parish). The altar, however, should be reverenced by a respectful bow, since the tabernacle is not present. You don’t genuflect to the altar.

 

[DivotDan]

Our parish is remodeling our church, so I’m very interested in the answer to the ambo location question.

 

[Classicist]

Referring to the Ambo as “Altar of the Word” and the Altar as the “Altar of the Eucharist” is a common practice among those who ignore the teachings of the Church.

Some “progressives” or “liberals” believe Christ is present in the readings to exactly the same degree as He is personally present in the Eucharist. This is not right at all, and is a form of idolatry.

I would try to find a church with a more traditional setup. The placement of liturgical things often tells you what people believe.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Our parish is remodeling our church, so I’m very interested in the answer to the ambo location question.

First, this is an old thread so don’t be surprised if it’s locked.

Next, I’m wondering if this really is a consideration anymore. We seem to be leaps and bounds more grounded liturgically than in 2004. Much of the confusion and ambiguity (“anything goes, I’m okay, you’re okay”) is gone or greatly reduced.

I really can’t imagine any Catholic architect or liturgist today recommending or even cooperating with a parish that wants to build in a trendy style with the altar and ambo in this weird arrangement. I would probably kindly back out of the business arrangement if I was in such a position. I’m not even sure this sort of thing can be called a trend anymore, as I think that sort of thing is on its last breath.

Essentially I think this is silly. It may be well-intentioned, and I don’t judge someone’s intentions unless I factually know them from his mouth or fingers, but unless there is truly some unusual compelling reason to do this, I don’t see why this would be done. It looks odd, is out of place, and the oddness of the arrangement calls attention to itself rather than to the individual pieces (altar and ambo) themselves.

I wouldn’t say odd/70s-ish liturgical setups determine orthodoxy–there are plenty of cash-strapped parishes that have truly awful and drab churches but which are nevertheless very orthodox–but liturgical tendencies and related things are at least very much correlated with orthodoxy, or lack of it. So I’m not saying a parish who today chooses to build or renovate in an odd way such as this is necessarily teaching in CCD classes that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead and blah blah, but I think such a thing shows a tendency towards a certain way of thinking and I’d be very interested nevertheless, and not very surprised, to know if such a parish does indeed tend teach errant things as well.

If you think I’m reading too far in to this, please know that I’m not accusing you or your parish of anything. I’m just offering my two cents from my perspective. If I walked in to a parish with a dinky little altar on one side of the sanctuary and an ambo on the other side, I’d have a negative reaction. The form of a Church–indeed the form of anything–communicates. If you don’t want a certain message to be received by people, don’t send it.