Pope wants crucifix at the centre of ALL westward-facing altars during Mass, says papal MC. So why do our bishops ignore him?

[JReducation]

Is it important that the crucifix be at the center of the altar, as opposed to a crucifix standing separately just beyond the altar?

Right now, because it’s not a law, there is no strict definition as to where the crucifix has to be. But if I’m reading the article correctly there are the three options that I posted above. Since one of them is “looking toward heaven” I would assume that the crucifix can be anywhere that is within sight of the celebrant and the congregation. Don’t take this as Gospel. Because until we have a decree on this, if we ever get one, my interpretation of the Holy Father’s proposal could be incorrect. There are some churches that have crucifixes suspended over the altar. I’ve seen those. I’m wondering if that is acceptable under the proposal. I just don’t know and I doubt that anyone does.

The thing about these proposals is that until they are written into law, if and when, one does not have all the specifics. I always say that it is best not to assume that one knows excactly what ought to be done or conclude that it must be done, until you see it on paper OR a traditionis establish for an extended period of time. There is a provision in canon law that if something is a custom for an extended period of time, it becomes law until it is changed. Let’s assume that we begin to place a table top crucifix on the altar. In 50 years or so, it would become law, even though it was never decreed. By the way, the number 50 is my own. Canon law does provide for an exact number of years, but I can’t remember it off the top of my head. It’s not something that I refer to that often.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[rlg94086]

Unless its actually inserted into liturgical documents then the Pope is entitled to prefer something but no one else is under any obligation to do it.

I didn’t mention obligation. What is your objection to facing a crucifix while offering the Mass? Just that you aren’t obliged to? You are not obligated to face the people when offering the Mass? Why the preference?

 

[Ocarm]

Let’s assume that we begin to place a table top crucifix on the altar. In 50 years or so, it would become law, even though it was never decreed. By the way, the number 50 is my own. Canon law does provide for an exact number of years, but I can’t remember it off the top of my head. It’s not something that I refer to that often.

The minimum period required for practice to become custom is ‘thirty continuous and complete years’ (canon 26 of the 1983 Code). Centenary and immemorial customs (that is, those persisting respectively for 100 years, or for more years than can be reasonably calculated e.g. since sometime in the middle ages but no-one knows exactly how long) have even greater force.

For details, see: vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4.HTM

And I’m pretty sure you had all that information somewhere in your fact-filled brain, Brother JR!

 

[bkovacs]

Hi Brother JR,

Not everyone has mentioned it as a point of disobedience. However, I can’t understand why someone would find the idea presented by the Holy Father objectionable. Are people repulsed by the idea of the priest having a crucifix on the altar?? I personally don’t get it.

Because they want the priest to be the center of attention. They need eye contact with the priest. Just like in protestant churches, where the pastor is the center of attention while he is preaching.

 

[jc-servant]

Because they want the priest to be the center of attention. They need eye contact with the priest. Just like in protestant churches, where the pastor is the center of attention while he is preaching.

No one has objected to the crucifix, so I don’t know who the “they” is that a couple of you seem to be arguing against. No one has said they want or need their priest to be making eye contact, so let’s not insert a false argument where there is none.

I asked a question that was graciously answered by Brother JR. Others have sought clarification of something that was posted without good explanation which he also explained in a gracious manner that I for one appreciate. Hopefully we can leave it at that gracious level.

 

[Digitonomy]

Because they want the priest to be the center of attention. They need eye contact with the priest. Just like in protestant churches, where the pastor is the center of attention while he is preaching.

The crucifixes I’ve seen on altars are generally about 6" high. Those who perceive the priest to be the center of attention will continue that misperception, and will have no trouble making eye contact if that is what they seek. So your allegation makes no sense.

 

[jc-servant]

Brother JR,

Thank you for the helpful info. I was on retreat at a monastary recently where there was a small crucifix on the altar in addtion to one on the wall and I wondered why that was done. I had only seen that previously when a retreat was held somewhere so that mass was not in a Catholic chapel or church and the priest brought his travel kit with him for mass and confessions.

My parish has a large basilica style church where the altar is huge and under the center of the dome on a large raised area up about 6 steps from the pew level. Obviously our permanent crucifix in there in order to be clearly visible is huge, with Jesus life-size or a bit larger. It is gorgeous in my opinion out of what looks to be olive wood, so even an uneducated person (about anything Catholic) would be more likely to look at it than our priest. However, it is mounted on the wall directly next to the domed section (to the rear of, above and slightly behind the priest/deacon’s chairs). To adhere to the suggestion of the Holy Father would we still need a crucifix sitting on the actual altar if our priest is celebrating N.O.? From the far back or in the balcony it would barely be visible to the people, although I suppose our priest could see the back of it. The current one actually prays “heavenward” anyway, so it might not even matter.

I thought the info posted about the orientation of churches so that the prayer would be facing east was quite interesting. Given our cruciform shape some of us would always be facing a different way and that is also how our 1st basilica for the US was built in Baltimore. I went there on a visit and felt quite at home given the similarities with my parish church in shape and size. One difference that I like better at my parish is that we have huge stained glass windows high on the east and west walls (the short arms of the cross shape) that depict the crucifixion to the west and the resurrection to the east. Afternoon masses have the setting sun blazing through the reddish tones in the crucifixion window and it is amazing for meditation before mass. On Easter morning the earliest masses get a similar time to meditate upon the resurrection window back lit from the sun if they are seated facing the east.

Given the shape of churches built in this style, wasn’t someone always facing other than eastward? I know the Haggia Sophia (spelling may not be right) used to be a Catholic church and it is domed. If you know, was it built in the shape of a crucifix inside that long ago or is it just domed? From photos I’ve seen I can’t tell. They told us on the church tour in Baltimore that to get the “basilica” designation from the Holy Father a church must be in that shape of a crucifix, so it would seem like a pretty old design for the large buildings.

 

[Rachel84]

I dont think our local Catholic Church has a crucifix up at the alter at all…Thats bad, right?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Hi Brother JR,

Not everyone has mentioned it as a point of disobedience. However, I can’t understand why someone would find the idea presented by the Holy Father objectionable. Are people repulsed by the idea of the priest having a crucifix on the altar?? I personally don’t get it.

I don’t think ANYONE would find the idea objectionable. What IS objectionable (and all too common in these fora) is the immediate leap to the charge of disobedience (or modernism…or heresy). We are lead to believe (at the least) that the Holy Father WANTS something over which he is being thwarted or we are lead to believe (at the most) that he has ordered something over which he is being disobeyed. Neither, it turns out, is the case.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I dont think our local Catholic Church has a crucifix up at the alter at all…Thats bad, right?

Is there a Crucifx IN the sanctuary DURING Mass? That is what is mandated, if I am not mistaken. It can be the processional Crucifix.

 

[JReducation]

Is there a Crucifx IN the sanctuary DURING Mass? That is what is mandated, if I am not mistaken. It can be the processional Crucifix.

You are correct. The crucifix need not be fixed or anchered in any way. It can be carried in the procession and inserted into a stand. But you must have a crucifix on the sanctuary when you celebrate mass.

That being said, I have never seen a Catholic church without a crucifix or some kind of cross. Often, in Franciscan chapels and churches that we build, there is no proper crucifix, but there is the San Damiano icon, which is an icon of Christ crucified, but not an actual crucifix. If I’m correct, the Eastern Catholics do not have crucifixes in the sanctuary. They carry it in the procession. But they usually have an icon of Christ Crucified or of the risen Christ on a cross.

Speaking of icons, one thing that we often forget is that even though icons are not as common in the Roman Rite, they are used and have been used for hundreds of years. If anyone reads the biography of St. Francis, the chapel of San Damiano, which he rebuilt, did not have a crucifix. It has never had one. What the biographers call a crucifix is actually an icon. Certain parts of Europe made greater use of icons than other parts. Often the icons were shaped like a cross with the corpus painted on it. The one at San Damiono is very intersting. It not only has the corpus, but it also has the Trinity, the Virgin Mary, the Risen Christ over the head of the corpus, the apostles and other biblical personalities. It tells the story of the birth of the Church.

The point that I’m trying to make is that within the Catholic Church there are many variations on the theme of the crucifix. The Benedictine crucifix is also very interesting and different from the classical crucifix. It looks more Western than the Franciscan cross.

From what I’ve seen the Holy Father use, I don’t get the sense that he has a preference for a particular type of crucifix. The one that they use at St. Peter’s is very ornate and very classical. But if you take a drive across town to St. John Lateran, the crucifix that the Holy Father uses there is very simple. It’s made with two flat gold bars that cross each other.

I just bring this up because my experience on CAF tells me that some people get nervous about things such as this. They worry about what exactly does the crucifix have to look like, how big, what should it be made of and so forth. The message here is that there is no rule on this. The rule, as it stands right now, is that you must have a crucifix on the sanctuary during liturgy.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[rlg94086]

I don’t think ANYONE would find the idea objectionable. What IS objectionable (and all too common in these fora) is the immediate leap to the charge of disobedience (or modernism…or heresy). We are lead to believe (at the least) that the Holy Father WANTS something over which he is being thwarted or we are lead to believe (at the most) that he has ordered something over which he is being disobeyed. Neither, it turns out, is the case.

I certainly have not made that leap. I only asked if someone disagreed with my assessment of what the Holy Father mentioned. The answer was that we aren’t “under any obligation to do it.” We aren’t “obligated” to believe or do a lot of things that the Holy Father says, but I believe that his statements have merit and authority.

When I disagree with something said by the Holy Father or one of our Bishops, I try to question my own preferences first. I certainly don’t know or understand as much about Church teaching and theology as they do. Where prudential judgment is allowed, and after much prayer and discernment, I may come to a contrary view; but, I still hesitate to say “I’m right.”

 

[JReducation]

I certainly have not made that leap. I only asked if someone disagreed with my assessment of what the Holy Father mentioned. The answer was that we aren’t “under any obligation to do it.” We aren’t “obligated” to believe or do a lot of things that the Holy Father says, but I believe that his statements have merit and authority.

When I disagree with something said by the Holy Father or one of our Bishops, I try to question my own preferences first. I certainly don’t know or understand as much about Church teaching and theology as they do. Where prudential judgment is allowed, and after much prayer and discernment, I may come to a contrary view; but, I still hesitate to say “I’m right.”

The only thing that I would see here is that this is a case where a bishop or a religious superior of men may say, “I’m not going to impose that on my priests.” He may not be saying it because he feels that he’s right or wrong. He simply chooses to leave it up to the individual priests. If it becomes a law, then he has to enforce the law. That’s a whole other story.

Having been a superior myself, I know there are some things that I choose not to push, because they are not law. There are many other things that are law that I have to stay on top of. I don’t have any priests in my house at the moment. But I did. I had to make sure that they had the proper faculties from the diocese before they went to hear confessions, preach or witness marriages outside of the religious house. Inside the religious house the order grants the faculties. But three steps outside the door and you’re on the bishop’s turf.

This has nothing to do with crucifixes, but it’s an interesting story. I was superior in a house within another diocese, years ago, where the local bishop sent a memo that all priests, seminarians and brothers were to wear Roman collars. I had to politely ask the chancellor to remind the bishop that he could not order religious men to dress in Roman collars, because religious men can wear a habit, if they choose not to wear a Roman collar. But I did tell my guys to wear the collar, if they wanted to do so. I could not order them to do so. The rule does not allow a religious superior to do that. There are certain things that are forbidden and this was one of them. I could demand a habit, but not a collar.

I mention this little anecdote, because most people in the pews are not aware of all the canons, decrees, rules, constitutioins and other forms of legistlation that exist within the Church and sometimes bishops and superiors find themselves not knowing whether they are coming or going. You have to sit down and think about it and find out what regulation takes precedence in what case. These things happen behind closed doors so that the average person in the pew is none-the-wiser. As a bishop or superior of men, your job is to sort through this maze of regulations and preserve communion with everyone involved.

I can see bishops and superiors waiting for a change in the missal itself. In the meantime, you allow those who want to do so to place a crucifix on the altar. Waiting for a decree or a change in the rubrics makes life much easier, because then you adopt the rules in your diocese or your community accordingly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I certainly have not made that leap. I only asked if someone disagreed with my assessment of what the Holy Father mentioned. The answer was that we aren’t “under any obligation to do it.” We aren’t “obligated” to believe or do a lot of things that the Holy Father says, but I believe that his statements have merit and authority.

When I disagree with something said by the Holy Father or one of our Bishops, I try to question my own preferences first. I certainly don’t know or understand as much about Church teaching and theology as they do. Where prudential judgment is allowed, and after much prayer and discernment, I may come to a contrary view; but, I still hesitate to say “I’m right.”

That is a great attitude.