You've Never Heard This Question Before! (Candles)

[Br.Rich_SFO]

In some cases the Church even suggest the sanctuary is NOT the ideal place to repose the Blessed Sacrament. Saint Peter’s comes to mind with all its visitors.

I don’t know why some try to add red herrings to threads…

That is correct in Churches that have heavy tourist traffic or a large number of Weddings and other things going on every day. Otherwise the Tabernacle should be in the Sanctuary.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I’ve figured out how we are going to handle this.

Once communion begins, two servers (both commissioned EMsHC) are going to walk from the sanctuary to the tabernacle. Once there one of the servers will discreetly light a candle in a bugia holder (which will be kept out of sight) and lead the server with the Blessed Sacrament back to the sanctuary after he assists with the tabernacle door and gate.

After communion ends and the server is presented with the ciborium at the altar, he will be led by the other server, again with the candle in the bugia candlestick. This lead server can also open the gate and the tabernacle door.

Done. No abuses. Very reverent.

Where is the celebrant or another priest or deacon? Why is it necessary for a “server” to repose the Blessed Sacrament?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Please prove your assertion! 90+% of the Catholic churches I have been in REQUIRE the priest to leave the sanctuary to distribute communion. They do so at the National Shrine and at Papal Masses. More importantly though, there is absolutely nothing from the Church that prohibits a priest from entering into the nave to distribute communion. I challenge you to prove otherwise!

RS #72 does not apply to my question. I have also NEVER heard anyone other than you suggest a second tabernacle be kept in the sanctuary. It’s wrong to have two tabernacles in the same “room.”. You’ll not I clearly said the tabernacle is in the same “room” as the sanctuary. If was you that brought up separate, discrete chapels.

I understood you to say that the Blessed Sacrament is processed to some place away from the Sanctuary. Maybe I misunderstood.
Two Tabernacles cannot be in used for reserving the blessed Sacrament. Nothing prevents one in the Sanctuary to be temporarily used until the Blessed Sacrament can be transferred to the main tabernacle in an Adoration Chapel. Which is what I envisioned from your original post.

Most celebrants that I have seen come down to the last step and distribute Holy Communion from the step. Some do step down but do not step more then one or two steps away from where they stepped down.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

You are mistaken.

Neither GIRM 154 nor RS 72 apply to the question I asked. Neither precludes a priest, deacon or acolyte from entering the nave (and thus leaving the sanctuary) to distribute Holy Communion. It would be absurd to suggest otherwise based on the actual text:

GIRM 154. *"…The priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. In the dioceses of the United States of America, for a good reason, on special occasions (for example, in the case of a funeral, a wedding, or when civic leaders are present) the priest may offer the sign of peace to a few of the faithful near the sanctuary…" *

**RS 72: **It is appropriate “that each one give the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner”. “The Priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. He does likewise if for a just reason he wishes to extend the sign of peace to some few of the faithful”. “As regards the sign to be exchanged, the manner is to be established by the Conference of Bishops in accordance with the dispositions and customs of the people”, and their acts are subject to the recognitio of the Apostolic See.

It’s absurd that anyone would even cite GIRM 154 or RS 72 in this discussion.

Church documents do not list everything that should NOT be done. They generally list what should be done. In this case I remember in the past discussing the priest leaving the sanctuary for the Sign of Peace. It was determined by others that the documents specifically state that he should NOT leave the sanctuary for the Sign of Peace. I proposed by extension that this implies that he should not leave for any reason during the celebration of Mass.

Done with this discussion. That way I won’t post anything else that is “absurd”!

 

[ChurchTorch]

Church documents do not list everything that should NOT be done. They generally list what should be done. In this case I remember in the past discussing the priest leaving the sanctuary for the Sign of Peace. It was determined by others that the documents specifically state that he should NOT leave the sanctuary for the Sign of Peace. I proposed by extension that this implies that he should not leave for any reason during the celebration of Mass.

Done with this discussion. That way I won’t post anything else that is “absurd”!

You are wrong and you lack the ability to face that.

We’re talking about the distribution of Holy Communion. The Sign of Peace is a red herring in this discussion.

You’re very correct in saying the Church does not list everything that should not be done. Doing so would be impossible. But to suggest “priest cannot leave the sanctuary to distribute Holy Communion?” ** Absolute poppycock!** You “proposed extension” is simply a personal opinion that is not supported by fact or logic.