Question on the historical placement of the Tabernacle, etc

[mVitus]

I’m not sure how accurate this is, but I recall reading somewhere that part of the reason the priests stopped versus populism was that after Constantine made Christianity the official religion, he donated many buildings for churches. And these buildings often had racks for scrolls in the back. So a priest would get the scroll in the back and be facing that way during the readings. Again, not sure if that’s actually accurate.

 

[misstherese]

The following text is from the Didiscalia , a document written in about 250 AD.

Now, in your gatherings, in the holy Church, convene yourselves modestly in places of the brethren, as you will, in a manner pleasing and ordered with care. Let the place of the priests be separated in a part of the house that faces east. In the midst of them is placed the bishop’s chair, and with him let the priests be seated. Likewise, and in another section let the lay men be seated facing east. (Prayer was conducted facing east, not facing the people.) For thus it is proper: that the priests sit with the bishop in a part of the house to the east and after them the lay men and the lay women , (Notice that men and women used to sit in separate sections) and when you stand to pray, the ecclesial leaders rise first, and after them the lay men, and again, then the women. Now, you ought to face to east to pray for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east. (Again, note that Mass was NOT celebrated facing the people as some suppose of the early Church. Everyone was to face to the east, both clergy and laypeople. Everyone faced in the same direction. The text cites Scripture as the reason for this. God is to the east, the origin of the light.)

As for the historical placement of the tabernacle I suggest checking this out: The Placement of the Tabernacle

 

[Dovekin]

Placing the Tabernacle

This is an old article from EWTN with some history in it.

FWIW, i agree with the friar as well.

 

[Rob2]

Hello everyone. I watched a video on youtube

@siculocatholic , is there any possibility of your posting the video so that we can watch it ?

 

[CilladeRoma]

I have no problem with the Novus Ordo if it is done according to the books which, btw, presupposes that the priest is facing ad orientem.

This is not exactly true.

After the council, a Consilium was put together to look at how to reform the Mass. They put out the following document

1. The main altar should preferably be freestanding, to permit walking around it and celebration facing the people. Its location in the place of worship should be truly central so that the attention of the whole congregation naturally focuses there.

So, no, the OF was not particularly meant to be celebrated ad orientum, but it can be.

And, to just add to the tabernacle issue, the same document says the following:

1. The eucharist is to be reserved in a solid and secure tabernacle, placed in the middle of the main altar or on a minor, but truly worthy altar, or, in accord with lawful custom and in particular cases approved by the local Ordinary, also in another, special, and properly adorned part of the church.

It is lawful to celebrate Mass facing the people even on an altar where there is a small but becoming tabernacle.

 

[Joe_5859]

1ke is talking about the friar, not Oraetlabora. And you have said multiple times you believe the friar is wrong. But the friar is not wrong.

I like seeing the tabernacle front and center, too. But it’s simply not true that it was always and everywhere in that position from the very earliest days of the Church.

Before assuming the friar is wrong and looking for evidence to “prove” he is wrong, you should consider the possibility that he is correct.

 

[siculocatholic]

https://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/tabernac.htm

To all who responded, thank you. I will include this link which sums up what you were trying to say and what I was. To be clear, I was talking about the standard parish.

Here is the link:

https://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/tabernac.htm

With this I rest my case.

God Bless.

 

[JulianN]

sadly, with the exceptions of traditinal Franciscans and those of EWTN, many Franciscans are heretical.

Whoa! You did not just say this.

 

[CilladeRoma]

I’m not sure how sharing someone else’s opinion is “resting your case”.
The Church allows the Odinary discretion in how to do things. There is no mandate that the tabenacle must be front & center.

You don’t have to like it, but to accuse clerics of “modernism” and being “heretics” because they disagree with you is beyond the pale and has been reported to the moderators.

 

[CilladeRoma]

No, I reported you for your remarks about the clergy. That is against forum rules.

 

[CilladeRoma]

That is way above your or my pay grade to make that determination.

It is expected that we treat clergy with respect on this forum

 

[siculocatholic]

No, respect is earned not just given. Many priests in the sexual abuse scandal were “respected” and look at the mess we are in.

 

[steve-b]

Hello everyone. I watched a video on youtube from this young Franciscan Friar whose youtube channel is called “Breaking in the Habit.” I commented on one of his videos that a church that he was going to speak in was, well, ugly and looked like a whitewashed protestant church. And as is sadly the case with many of these churches, the Tabernacle was not in the middle. To make a long story short, in our conversations he told me that the tabernacle was not placed in the center of the altar until medeval times and that in the early days the priest faced the people rather than east or liturgical east. Can someone point me to links that prove that the tabernacle was in the center of the sanctuary and that the priest from earliest times faced east? Here is one of his responses to me:

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. I said nothing about putting the priest at the center (although, if I did, I think the letter to the Hebrews and the book of Revelation, both of which describe our early worship, would agree with me. The priest, in persona Christi, is the center of the worship. But that’s neither here nor there.) What I am saying is that the sacrifice taking place–not some sacrifice that took place yesterday and is being held for the sick–is the central purpose of the mass.

I’m not really sure what you’re getting at with traditions as the tabernacle only became a central feature of churches in the middle ages, as with “ad orientem.” It should also be pointed out that “ad orientem” does not mean “facing the tabernacle” or “back to the people,” but obviously, “to the east.” This idea only applies to some churches as it was not always the practice to build a church facing east. St. Peter’s in Rome, for example does not face east.

I recommend, truly, that when we start using the word “tradition” as an argument, we use it to mean something more than just “medieval” or “baroque.” Our tradition dates back much farther than these recent times, and there is a whole rich (and varied) history that has accommodated many different traditions. We are the “catholic” Church, a Church that recognizes the universality of our faith, that it cannot be held to a particular custom or culture, and throughout our history our worship has taken many different forms.

Thanks in advance.

consider this explanation which also contains canon law in the explanation. Is it better to place the tabernacle in a side chapel? | Catholic Answers

In my parish the last pastor moved the tabernacle off the altar to a small room made into a chapel. There were few of us who complained. We have a very liberal parish.

 

[steve-b]

enought said. Liberal is the key here and frankly, liberal is what is killing the faith.

Actually I see all of it as a series of life long tests. Our job then in all this, is to pass the tests. Considering the tabernacle and who is in it. Jesus is to be front and center…ALWAYS!