Pope Pius XII... wooden altars, lack-there-of crucifixes, etc

[truevaticanii]

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table, to want black eliminated from the liturgical colors, and pictures and statues excluded from our churches; to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings of the divine Redeemer” -H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII

Hmm… interesting because, uh… some Novus Ordo parishes have taken out their beautiful stone altars to replace them with wood… and many priests no longer use the liturgical black, and I have seen places where statues actually were removed and icons removed and the crucifixes are turned into works of modern art showing no suffering of Christ…

 

[otjm]

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table, to want black eliminated from the liturgical colors, and pictures and statues excluded from our churches; to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings of the divine Redeemer” -H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII

Hmm… interesting because, uh… some Novus Ordo parishes have taken out their beautiful stone altars to replace them with wood… and many priests no longer use the liturgical black, and I have seen places where statues actually were removed and icons removed and the crucifixes are turned into works of modern art showing no suffering of Christ…

Personal opinions do not make for doctrine. They may be correct for the time, or incorrect; or correct at a different time. The issues he mentioned were all at best disciplinary. It was his opinion at the time, and at the time his opinion was the rule. Subsequently the rule changed. It certainly could be argued that the change was not wise, or not the best; but it was specifically an opinion about a rule, and rules are subject to change - which they did.

 

[truevaticanii]

Personal opinions do not make for doctrine. They may be correct for the time, or incorrect; or correct at a different time. The issues he mentioned were all at best disciplinary. It was his opinion at the time, and at the time his opinion was the rule. Subsequently the rule changed. It certainly could be argued that the change was not wise, or not the best; but it was specifically an opinion about a rule, and rules are subject to change - which they did.

Never said it was doctrine–just pointed out his words of wisdom… and they most def. still apply today—ESPECIALLY the comment about the crucifix, which will ALWAYS apply.

 

[otjm]

Never said it was doctrine–just pointed out his words of wisdom… and they most def. still apply today—ESPECIALLY the comment about the crucifix, which will ALWAYS apply.

You are right; you did not say it was doctrine, and I did not accuse you of doing so. However, in these forae, there are those who are so taken with some rules as to elevate them to the level of being forever binding.

Time will tell if the changes that have been made since Vatican 2 will continue or not. Some expected Benedict 16 to come in and make a wide sweep and obviously he has not. Then too, some considered him the “Pope’s rotwiller” before he was elevated, and his conduct since being elevated has seen that to be a false characterization.

John Paul 2 obviously had a major focus on Communism. Benedict 16 appears to have a major focus on healing past issues and unity, in particular not only with the SSPX but also with the Orthodox, with whom JP2 had such little progress. Whoever is our next pope may have a focus on liturgy; or there may be other issues in the Church which to him seem far more important. As an aside (and granted that there are very good reasons why it is so extremely slow) there was much talk about the EF becoming wide spread and popular; the world wide statistics show otherwise. Interestingly, in his accompanying letter to SP, Benedict 16 predicted as much.

So whether or not there will be changes in the OF to any great extent remains in the realm of wishful thinking. Anything that does change will probably be very gradual over decades, not years, if the last 40 years are any indication.

In other words, there is nothing happening now that would indicate that altars would not look like they do today, 20 or 30 years from now. Obviously that could change; it is just that there are no indicatiors.

 

[peary1]

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table, to want black eliminated from the liturgical colors, and pictures and statues excluded from our churches; to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings of the divine Redeemer” -H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII

Hmm… interesting because, uh… some Novus Ordo parishes have taken out their beautiful stone altars to replace them with wood… and many priests no longer use the liturgical black, and I have seen places where statues actually were removed and icons removed and the crucifixes are turned into works of modern art showing no suffering of Christ…

that is true, but there appears to be a contemporary movement towards making the inside of a church building more traditional in appearance. I am sure people are now tired of worship in buildings that look like airliner hangars.

 

[tabsie3210]

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table, to want black eliminated from the liturgical colors, and pictures and statues excluded from our churches; to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings of the divine Redeemer” -H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII

Hmm… interesting because, uh… some Novus Ordo parishes have taken out their beautiful stone altars to replace them with wood… and many priests no longer use the liturgical black, and I have seen places where statues actually were removed and icons removed and the crucifixes are turned into works of modern art showing no suffering of Christ…

Some, but not all, I’m happy to report! Ours continues to have beautiful statues and icons (we just recently had two new statues, one of St. Raphael and one of St. Michael, installed in our Narthex), a stone altar, the Tabernacle directly behind the altar and directly beneath our large and beautifully designed Crucifix (and both are always lit, 24/7, unless we totally lose power like what happened during Hurricane Ike), a statue of Mary in the garden just outside the church, etc.

You know, with all the Catholic Churches I’ve visited, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a single one that didn’t have statues, Crucifixes, and a stone altar. I think that Novus Ordo parishes still have a lot of reverence in their hearts for the Lord. We’re very lucky.

 

[archangel04]

Some, but not all, I’m happy to report! Ours continues to have beautiful statues and icons (we just recently had two new statues,** one of St. Raphael and one of St. Michael**, installed in our Narthex), a stone altar, the Tabernacle directly behind the altar and directly beneath our large and beautifully designed Crucifix (and both are always lit, 24/7, unless we totally lose power like what happened during Hurricane Ike), a statue of Mary in the garden just outside the church, etc.

You guys are so luck. I desire so much that we could get 3 statues of the 3 archangels in the my parish. I can’t compalin as we still have a stone alter, crucifix, and tabernacle. We even removed the carper around the alter and place beutiful white ceramic.

One thing I am going to ask of the priest is if we can say the prayer to St. Michael after the Mass.

 

[malphono]

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table, to want black eliminated from the liturgical colors, and pictures and statues excluded from our churches; to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings of the divine Redeemer” -H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII

Hmm… interesting because, uh… some Novus Ordo parishes have taken out their beautiful stone altars to replace them with wood…

This is merely an observation, but it seems that there is an equation being made here between ad orientem celebration and the material of which the altar is made, and if so, it’s not valid. The requirement was for a consecrated altar stone not for a stone altar.

There are many churches with stone altars (whether solid or table-style, whether old or new) used for the versus populum posture. Irrespective of the material, these often lack the a consecrated stone.

There are also many churches with wooden altars (most of which are quite old and/or very beautifully carved) that are used for the ad orientem posture (always for the EF and sometimes – albeit rarely – even for the OF). Irrespective of the material, these normally have a consecrated stone.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

sjnknox.org/content/view/213/1/

This is a Church nearby me that was completed just a couple of years ago. I think this is a good indication that there are many Catholics in our country that definitely desire a more traditional atmosphere to worship in. SJN Parish is awe inspiring to me.

Notice the stone altar, tabernacle placed in the center behind the altar, and the large prominent crucifix, as well as the art in the dome above. Beautiful.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**It matters not to me what the altar is made from–wood, stone, or formica–just as long as I receive the Body and Blood of Christ from it.

And I assure you in my mission work, I’ve seen the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on some unusual furnishings.**

||sjnknox.org/content/view/213/1/||

**The pink clouds behind the crucifix aren’t to my taste, but the church is lovely.

From my point of view, all it needs is an iconostas.**

 

[malphono]

It matters not to me what the altar is made from–wood, stone, or formica–just as long as I receive the Body and Blood of Christ from it.

And I assure you in my mission work, I’ve seen the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on some unusual furnishings.

True, the actual material from which an altar is of little consequence. But the presence of a consecrated stone (or antimension or tablitho), depending on the particular tradition) on which to offer the Holy Oblation is a different story altogether. That matters. Well, at least it does to me.

 

[PadraigPearce]

That quote is interesting just for the fact that the Pius XII felt he had to mention all those things in an encyclical issued in 1947. Vatican II always gets the blame for the changes, but the release of Mediator Dei showed that the forces that would take over at Vatican II were active enough in the 1940’s to warrant an encyclical. The changes after Vatican II were a very long time in the making.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

**It matters not to me what the altar is made from–wood, stone, or formica–just as long as I receive the Body and Blood of Christ from it.

And I assure you in my mission work, I’ve seen the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on some unusual furnishings.**

||sjnknox.org/content/view/213/1/||

**The pink clouds behind the crucifix aren’t to my taste, but the church is lovely.

From my point of view, all it needs is an iconostas.**

They’re really much more blue in real life

and I agree that there is nothing wrong with celebrating the Eucharist in unusual locations when necessity dictates. as we all know many Masses were celebrated on the hoods of jeeps during WWII by the Catholic Chaplains from all different nations. I think here in America now though we have the resources at our disposal to give great honor and reverence to the Eucharist through our church buildings and we should do so if a parish is financially able.

 

[truevaticanii]

You are right; you did not say it was doctrine, and I did not accuse you of doing so. However, in these forae, there are those who are so taken with some rules as to elevate them to the level of being forever binding.

Time will tell if the changes that have been made since Vatican 2 will continue or not. Some expected Benedict 16 to come in and make a wide sweep and obviously he has not. Then too, some considered him the “Pope’s rotwiller” before he was elevated, and his conduct since being elevated has seen that to be a false characterization.

John Paul 2 obviously had a major focus on Communism. Benedict 16 appears to have a major focus on healing past issues and unity, in particular not only with the SSPX but also with the Orthodox, with whom JP2 had such little progress. Whoever is our next pope may have a focus on liturgy; or there may be other issues in the Church which to him seem far more important. As an aside (and granted that there are very good reasons why it is so extremely slow) there was much talk about the EF becoming wide spread and popular; the world wide statistics show otherwise. Interestingly, in his accompanying letter to SP, Benedict 16 predicted as much.

So whether or not there will be changes in the OF to any great extent remains in the realm of wishful thinking. Anything that does change will probably be very gradual over decades, not years, if the last 40 years are any indication.

In other words, there is nothing happening now that would indicate that altars would not look like they do today, 20 or 30 years from now. Obviously that could change; it is just that there are no indicatiors.

His statment cannot bind any other pope–it is not infallible, nonetheless, his statement is true, and Vatican II sai dnothing about taking out stone altars and replacing them with tables–also said nothing of removing crucifixes or anything like that… it’s just what seems to have saddly happened after Vatican II… I personally believe that Pope Paul VI and Blessed John XXIII would be sad to see some of the changes that have taken place…

 

[truevaticanii]

**It matters not to me what the altar is made from–wood, stone, or formica–just as long as I receive the Body and Blood of Christ from it.

And I assure you in my mission work, I’ve seen the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on some unusual furnishings.**

||sjnknox.org/content/view/213/1/||

**The pink clouds behind the crucifix aren’t to my taste, but the church is lovely.

From my point of view, all it needs is an iconostas.**

As I have stated many times before…

The question should NOT be “Does God really care what sort of an altar we use?”

The question SHOULD be “What is the best we can offer to the Lord?”

 

[truevaticanii]

Just thought I might add this…

I have been to many beautiful Novus Ordo parishes and some very pious Novus Ordo Masses… I posted this quote merely to address those parishes that have done things in opposition to what H.H. Pope Venerable Pius XII is speaking of here.