We’ve had our first discussion about the relocation of the tabernacle. One of my predecessors did a fine job of modifying the sanctuary for the new Missal of Paul VI. The altar is noble and the ambo is quite fitting for the proclamation of the Word. Two modifications have not stood the test of time. First, the new presider’s and assistants’ chairs were intended to be at the level of the old altar. That position was abandoned some time ago. Second, the tabernacle was relocated off center and at an angle beside the pillar to the sanctuary arch, a position I have observed would be more appropriate for a potted plant or a religious statue. Its position is neither noble, dignified, beautiful or prominent; nor is it on a side altar, on the old main altar, or in a chapel.
Some might think I am foolish for opening a discussion about this issue and would argue that I should simply get a ruling from the bishop to relocate the tabernacle to the “right” place. So, I am a fool, and on our first adventure into a discussion of the issue, I have learned a lot.
I learned that moving the tabernacle back to its central location in the sanctuary would symbolize a return to pre-Vatican II non-participatory Masses. For them, the new Mass is awe inspiring, and the movement of the tabernacle out of the center of the sanctuary was a key that opened the possibility of that new experience.
I learned that having the tabernacle close to the people made Christ very close and accessible at a very difficult time, and that moving the tabernacle behind the altar would put a barrier between them.
I learned that having the tabernacle off on the side makes it seem like Christ is not the center of our parish life, and that when some genuflect and some walk right by without acknowledging Christ’s presence it appears disrespectful. I learned that it is disconcerting to visit a church where the tabernacle is not readily visible, making one wonder, “What have they done with Christ?”
I learned that having the tabernacle close to the door by which people come and go makes it easy to ignore him when our minds are focused on something else.
I learned that even raising the issue makes some feel like it is a devious plot to foist an ad orientem celebration over on the parish. And I learned that what seems obvious and in keeping with our faith and the integrity of the building, means something else entirely to some others.
And above all, I learned that we can have a difficult but respectful conversation when we truly try to listen and understand. We’ve made a start and the conversation will take a while. I’ll keep you posted.
Posts
2 comments:
Excellent start to such a process, Fr. Davis. While the placement of a tabernacle in the church is important it is not of such prime importance that it need be rushed. Many of the changes that were mandated by Sacrosanctum Concilium and the Missal of Pope Paul VI were instituted in such a hasty way that they were often done improperly and without any kind of catechesis. I think taking things slowly and letting people be informed, both by your own teaching and hearing other parishioners views, is far better. Harder. But better.
In the parish I grew up in, after a much needed refurbishing in the 1960s, the tabernacle was placed on a small altar to the side of the sanctuary. years later a small "roof" was installed over it; still later a good heavy cloth was hung behind the altar from roof to floor and kneelers were put before. Finally, a couple of years ago the tabernacle, with teaching both from the pulpit and in the parish bulletin, was moved to the center of the sanctuary and the presidential chair was moved to the side. A long process, but done in such a way that there was little perceptible rancor.
Sorry, the above was by me. Forgot to sign out of the work account.
Steve
Post a Comment