Tabernacle Location---What say you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter michaeldaniels
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree…good post:thumbsup:
bpbasilphx said:
We need to remember why the Mysteries are reserved to start with.

It’s to be able to provide the Eucharist for the sick, shut-ins, and those in danger of death as a Viaticum.

Devotional purposes are secondary to this.

Therefore, security of the Holy Mysteries should be a major consideration in where and how they are reserved.

Eucharistic doves and hanging spherical pyxes (both of which I’ve seen) are incredibly beautiful, but not very practical or secure.

Therefore an aumbry built into the wall would be the best way: probably over the Proskomedia in a Byzantine church and in the main sanctuary (where ever would look best) in a Western church.
Click to expand...
 
I voted for the second option. The tabernacle should be front and center! 👍
 
DihydrogenOxide said:
Mother Angelica said something like this about it once, “It’s like going to meet someone at their house, after they’ve asked you over. They ask you to come in. You walk in the door in the living room and you can’t find them in the house. You soon find out they’re outside on the side porch or they are out on the back porch. It’s their house and they’re not in their home. You go to see them, and you have to go out to the side porch or back porch to find them where they are hiding.”

That is exactly how it is with Jesus in the holy tabernacle when he is in the Church. The church is Jesus’s house, not some social meeting house or a dance hall. It is where Jesus literally dwells. Why would you want to relocate him into some dark small room somewhere or off to the side.

It’s some garbage, once again, certain priests or lay or even bishops ran off with when they thought they could do anything after V2 was passed. V2 doesn’t tell people to change the position of the altar, but they just did their own thing anyway. It makes the church people centric.
Click to expand...
Great analogy.

Mine is that the Tabernacle is like a throne, a seat for the King.

Where else could it be located, but in the place of honor? Imagine taking a tour of a royal palace, and finding the throne in a pile of other furniture, in a dusty storage room.

“Hm. I guess these people don’t think very highly of their own king.” 😦
 
When I went to St. Louis for a job-related conference back in 2008, I visited several beautiful churches (including both Cathedrals). One of the churches that I visited was the college parish of St. Francis Xavier. I had my own St. Mary Magdalene experience. The church was open (as they were preparing for a wedding). Inasmuch as the interior architecture was grand, it was as though, lamentably, the vandals got inside and did, what a prelate friend of mine calls, a “wreckovation.” The altar was reduced to a wooden table and it was very hard to find the Tabernacle. I finally found it. It was pushed off to the side and hidden.

It reminds me of what San Antonio has (and hopefully, that will become a thing of the past). Many of the Tabernacles were pushed off to the side, even in the older churches. The two notable exceptions that I can recall are St. Francesco di Paola and Immaculate Heart of Mary, as their Tabernacles are where they should be. From what I understand, the push is now to restore the Tabernacles to their proper location.

Now, from what I recall, Cathedrals have a seperate area for the Blessed Sacrament, as the Corpus Christi (TX) Cathedral and St. Louis Cathedral (new basilica) have. St. Peter’s Basilica has a special chapel for the Blessed Sacrament as well. Our Cathedral has a chapel, but, in the past, we have used it as the Altar of Repose on Holy Thursday.
 
QUOTE: Originally posted by recondelta

As long as the Tabernacle is in a place where you can see it and kneel or sit and pray, or just think, it’s fine. I am not committed to any particular location. While I respect the feelings of those who like the center location, I find it hard to believe that a particular location is “better” than any of the others. To me, it is the presence of Jesus that matters
DihydrogenOxide said:
Would you want Jesus, the king, to be front and center?
Click to expand...
In my life, yes. In a Church, I’ll say it again: I am not committed to any particular location. Jesus is there and He is available and, to me, that is all that matters.
 
One of the reasons I would prefer to go back to the tabernacle in the center is that I sort of think of the Church as Christ’s throne room. As such His “throne”, that is the tabernacle. Should have “pride of place”.
Yes Christ is available whether the tabernacle is centered or not, but still It seems that the Church should be “built around His throne” rather than have Him off to the side somewhere like an afterthought. 🤷

Peace
James
 
Before my church was renovated, the tabernacle was on a side altar. I perfer it to be in the center of the altar because it makes it noticeable and it makes it the center of attention.
 
JRKH said:
One of the reasons I would prefer to go back to the tabernacle in the center is that I sort of think of the Church as Christ’s throne room. As such His “throne”, that is the tabernacle. Should have “pride of place”.
Yes Christ is available whether the tabernacle is centered or not, but still It seems that the Church should be “built around His throne” rather than have Him off to the side somewhere like an afterthought. 🤷

Peace
James
Click to expand...
In our church, and a neighboring church I attend, the Tabernacle is off to the side, but most prominent. In both churches, there are kneelers in front of the Blessed Sacrament, as well as places to sit for private prayers and devotions. Because of the architecture of both churches, this is not possible if the Tabernacle is back behind the Altar. The neighboring church is newer, with a special niche(?) just for the Tabernacle. If anything, in both churches, the Tabernacle is more of a focus than if it were behind the Altar.

AND… If the Tabernacle is behind the Altar, should you always genuflect if you approach the front of the church(except, of course, when the Tabernacle is empty)?
 
Front and center, preferably on a big marble High Altar! Thankfully that’s the way it is in my parish. They also decorate and light candles on the high altar and never by any means ignore it, even though the Mass is celebrated on the wooden table-style altar in front of the High Altar.

Unfortunately, in some of the older parishes around here, the old high altar was torn out and the tabernacle moved to the side or elsewhere. Some of the newer parishes were built that way.

But the trend is reversing! Parishes are starting to move the tabernacles back to the center of the sanctuary. Our cathedral was built in the mid-60s and never had a high altar - although it has a beautiful, prominent green marble table-style altar - and the tabernacle is in a small side chapel off the right transept. They are currently raising money to, among other renovations, build a High Altar for the tabernacle in the sanctuary!
 
recondelta said:
In my life, yes. In a Church, I’ll say it again: I am not committed to any particular location. Jesus is there and He is available and, to me, that is all that matters.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t you rather Jesus, in the tabernacle Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, to be placed in a place of honor rather than wherever in the Church?
 
I’m fine with “The tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved should be placed in a part of the church that is prominent, conspicuous, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer” (canon 938 §2). 😉
 
LindaSK said:
In our church, and a neighboring church I attend, the Tabernacle is off to the side, but most prominent. In both churches, there are kneelers in front of the Blessed Sacrament, as well as places to sit for private prayers and devotions. Because of the architecture of both churches, this is not possible if the Tabernacle is back behind the Altar. The neighboring church is newer, with a special niche(?) just for the Tabernacle. If anything, in both churches, the Tabernacle is more of a focus than if it were behind the Altar.
Click to expand...
In our church too the the tabernacle is to the right of the altar and is fairly prominent. In a church just up the road it is in a seperate “chapel”. In the Church where I grew up, renovation directives from the archdiocese “forced” the parish to place the tabernacle “out of sight”. The parish fought this though and received approval for their to be a “screen” so that the tabernacle is now behind the alter seperated by a screen. This way at least one can still see the tabernacle.
AND… If the Tabernacle is behind the Altar, should you always genuflect if you approach the front of the church(except, of course, when the Tabernacle is empty)?
Click to expand...
Yes.
In fact you should genuflect when you enter or leave your pew, and if you cross in front of the tabernacle.
Years ago, and you can still see this at EF parishes, anytime the altar boys crossed in front of the tabernacle they would genuflect. Even when they were just lighting the candles fo rmass, or moving the missal from the right side to the left side of the altar.
If you want to see a good example of “proper form” with the tabernacle in the center, just watch the daily mass on EWTN (8 am, noon, 7 pm ET)

Regardless of the various arguments - I still think that the Tabernacle should be front and center, if for no other reason than simplicity. No trying to figure out just where to put it so as to satisfy everyones opinion, - No trying to figure out where it is in any given church one walks into, - No trying to figure out if one should genuflect toward the tabernacle or bow toward the Altar, etc. etc. etc.
The tabernacle, Prominently housed on a “High Altar” behind the Main Altar would place Christ in His rightful place of being the focus of the entire space, which is why churches developed as they did over the last many ceturies up until recently.
Such an arrangement would have the added effect of making more churches “architecturally ready” for the celebration of the EF. Something that the Holy Father is encouraging in every parish.

Peace
James
 
michaeldaniels said:
This is not a polarizing thread…nor is it my intention for it to be so. Simple question, where do you prefer the Tabernacle? It has been my experience…and I know I have not been to every Church that they either have the 1) Tabernacle in the Center of the High Altar/or behind the free standing Altar in the Center (which is basically the same I guess, just a difference in Altars???) 2) Located in a side chapel 3) located in some obscure room attached to the Church

My preference is option 1…I prefer to see the Tabernacle in a position of prominence, which is in the center of the High Altar or in the case that there is only a free standing altar, it is place behind it, against the wall in the center. I think it shows the proper reverence and respect…I do not like to see it when it has been relegated to a place on the side of the Church, and the Bishops Cathedra or the Priest’s chair is place in the center of the sanctuary instead…that just odd to me
Click to expand...
My preference is option 1…I prefer to see the Tabernacle in a position of prominence, which is in the center of the High Altar or in the case that there is only a free standing altar, it is place behind it, against the wall in the center. I think it shows the proper reverence and respect.

I fully support your sentiments here.
But like some others in this thread I am left perplexed at the rational of priests and bishops after Vatican II as to why they got the message to tear down numerous High Altars. Was it the adulterated sickness of Modernism?
Most Catholic churches in Europe didn’t follow this trend. Why North America?
I have heard flimsy excuses from priests saying it would be irreverent for them to put their backs to the Tabernacle, after the main altar was turned around with the priest facing the faithful. [edited]
 
Our personal preferences regarding the placement of the Tabernacle are irrelevant. The Church has issued several documents, when taken together, provide a definitive answer about the placement of the Tabernacle in ordinary parish churches.

Several years ago, my parish priest asked me to research the proper placement of the Tabernacle in parish churches (keep in mind that different rules apply to Cathedrals and Basilicas).

I treated the assignment as if I were researching and writing a legal brief. These are my conclusions based on my research:
Code: 
1). There can only be one tabernacle in a church (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 1). 

2) The tabernacle must be located in the church, not in a separate chapel located outside the main church building (Eucharisticum Mysterium, sections 53-54; Inaestimabile Donum, section 24; Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2; Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1183, 1379).

3) The tabernacle must be located in a prominent (e.g. readily noticeable) place in the church (Inter Oecumenici, section 95; Inaestimabile Donum, section 24; Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

4) The tabernacle must be located in a truly noble position in the church (Inaestimabile Donum, section 24). 

5) The tabernacle must be located in a conspicuous (i.e. obvious) position in the church (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

6) The tabernacle must be located in a part of the church that has been beautifully decorated (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

7) The tabernacle in which the Eucharist is regularly reserved must be immovable (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 3).

8) The tabernacle must be located in a most worthy place with the greatest honor (Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1183, 1379).
While the tabernacle does not have to be located on main altar there is nothing in the documents of the Second Vatican Council or the post-conciliar documents that prohibit it. On the contrary, several documents specifically mention the main altar as an appropriate site for the tabernacle. It is difficult to imagine a place for the tabernacle that could have more prominence, is more conspicuous, has greater honor, or has more nobility than the main altar.

“Built of Living Stones” was published by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (now known as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops). This document states that it is a replacement for Environment and Art in Catholic Worship (EACW). However, “Built of Living Stones” is not an official document and therefore is not legally binding on Catholics, despite having been published by the American Catholic Bishops

Code of Canon Law, section 455, lays out the requirements for a conference of bishops to issue general decrees. It requires a two-thirds vote by all the members of the conference. It also states that “…such degrees do not have binding force, unless they have been legitimately promulgated, after having been reviewed by the Apostolic See.”

“Built of Living Stones” was not submitted for a two-thirds vote of all the American Catholic Bishops. Instead, it was submitted for a majority vote of the bishops in attendance at their November 2000 meeting. The document was approved by a voice vote, without a counting of the yeas and nays. To the best of my knowledge, it has never been submitted to the Holy See for approval.

The Preface of Built of Living Stones describes the document as a set of "guidelines that can serve as the basis for the diocesan bishops to issue further guidelines and directives for their dioceses. The Preface goes on to state:

“Where the document quotes or reiterates norms from liturgical books and the Code of Canon Law, those prescriptions are binding on local communities and dioceses."

Therefore, by its own wording, Built of Living Stones is only binding on American Catholics when it quotes from official, authoritative sources such as Canon Law or liturgical books approved by the Magisterium.
 
Robert_Burke said:
Our personal preferences regarding the placement of the Tabernacle are irrelevant. The Church has issued several documents, when taken together, provide a definitive answer about the placement of the Tabernacle in ordinary parish churches.

Several years ago, my parish priest asked me to research the proper placement of the Tabernacle in parish churches (keep in mind that different rules apply to Cathedrals and Basilicas).

I treated the assignment as if I were researching and writing a legal brief. These are my conclusions based on my research:
Code: 
1). There can only be one tabernacle in a church (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 1). 

2) The tabernacle must be located in the church, not in a separate chapel located outside the main church building (Eucharisticum Mysterium, sections 53-54; Inaestimabile Donum, section 24; Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2; Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1183, 1379).

3) The tabernacle must be located in a prominent (e.g. readily noticeable) place in the church (Inter Oecumenici, section 95; Inaestimabile Donum, section 24; Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

4) The tabernacle must be located in a truly noble position in the church (Inaestimabile Donum, section 24). 

5) The tabernacle must be located in a conspicuous (i.e. obvious) position in the church (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

6) The tabernacle must be located in a part of the church that has been beautifully decorated (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 2).

7) The tabernacle in which the Eucharist is regularly reserved must be immovable (Code of Canon Law, section 938, subsection 3).

8) The tabernacle must be located in a most worthy place with the greatest honor (Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1183, 1379).
While the tabernacle does not have to be located on main altar there is nothing in the documents of the Second Vatican Council or the post-conciliar documents that prohibit it. On the contrary, several documents specifically mention the main altar as an appropriate site for the tabernacle. It is difficult to imagine a place for the tabernacle that could have more prominence, is more conspicuous, has greater honor, or has more nobility than the main altar.

“Built of Living Stones” was published by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (now known as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops). This document states that it is a replacement for Environment and Art in Catholic Worship (EACW). However, “Built of Living Stones” is not an official document and therefore is not legally binding on Catholics, despite having been published by the American Catholic Bishops

Code of Canon Law, section 455, lays out the requirements for a conference of bishops to issue general decrees. It requires a two-thirds vote by all the members of the conference. It also states that “…such degrees do not have binding force, unless they have been legitimately promulgated, after having been reviewed by the Apostolic See.”

“Built of Living Stones” was not submitted for a two-thirds vote of all the American Catholic Bishops. Instead, it was submitted for a majority vote of the bishops in attendance at their November 2000 meeting. The document was approved by a voice vote, without a counting of the yeas and nays. To the best of my knowledge, it has never been submitted to the Holy See for approval.

The Preface of Built of Living Stones describes the document as a set of "guidelines that can serve as the basis for the diocesan bishops to issue further guidelines and directives for their dioceses. The Preface goes on to state:

“Where the document quotes or reiterates norms from liturgical books and the Code of Canon Law, those prescriptions are binding on local communities and dioceses."

Therefore, by its own wording, Built of Living Stones is only binding on American Catholics when it quotes from official, authoritative sources such as Canon Law or liturgical books approved by the Magisterium.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this informative thread.

Of course - Regardless of what the “official documents” say, I know of two churches near here that do not comply with one or more of the above. One Church has the tabernacle in a seperate adoration chapel and, while it is not “detached” fromt he Church, it could hardly be called, “conspicuous (i.e. obvious)”, or “a most worthy place with the greatest honor”.
The other Church had to fight with the Archdiocese to Keep the Tabernacle from being completely hidden from view.

I pray that these trends will gradually reverse and the Tabernacles will return to their rightful places.
I truly think that over time, as the EF becomes more accepted, Church guidelines will begin to bring the tabernacle back to it’s proper place.

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
Thank you for this informative thread.

Of course - Regardless of what the “official documents” say, I know of two churches near here that do not comply with one or more of the above. One Church has the tabernacle in a seperate adoration chapel and, while it is not “detached” fromt he Church, it could hardly be called, “conspicuous (i.e. obvious)”, or “a most worthy place with the greatest honor”.
The other Church had to fight with the Archdiocese to Keep the Tabernacle from being completely hidden from view.

I pray that these trends will gradually reverse and the Tabernacles will return to their rightful places.
I truly think that over time, as the EF becomes more accepted, Church guidelines will begin to bring the tabernacle back to it’s proper place.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
James,

Sadly, I also know of cases where priests have deliberately hidden the Tabernacle away from public view. I honestly don’t know why any Catholic priest would do this. Are they ashamed of our Lord? Do they not believe in the Real Presence?

I hope that given time, Pope Benedict will be able to bring about a “reform of the reform.”

[edited]
 
Robert_Burke said:
James,

Sadly, I also know of cases where priests have deliberately hidden the Tabernacle away from public view. **I honestly don’t know why any Catholic priest would do this. Are they ashamed of our Lord? ** Do they not believe in the Real Presence?

I hope that given time, Pope Benedict will be able to bring about a “reform of the reform.”

[edited]
Click to expand...
**I honestly don’t know why any Catholic priest would do this. Are they ashamed of our Lord? ** You bring up a very good valid point.

I think it’s important that we pray hard for our misdirected priests who don’t know or blatantly ignore the proper place of prominence for the Tabernacle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top