Page 4, 10th May 1985

10th May 1985

Page 4

Page 4, 10th May 1985 — Diminishing Sacrament
Close

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.

Tags


Share


Related articles

Tom Coyle

Page 10 from 7th June 1985

The Tabernacle At Pinner

Page 7 from 17th September 1965

Thelivingilifurgy

Page 10 from 19th April 1985

Getting Back To Basics In Our Understanding Of The Mass

Page 6 from 3rd September 1999

11 „

Page 2 from 22nd July 1966

Diminishing Sacrament

IN HIS article April 19, Mr Coyne makes the case "for the Blessed Sacrament -to be reserved in a beautiful and dignified chapel of its own . . ."
The idea of a Blessed Sacrament chapel is now new; many basilicas and cathedrals have always had one, such a chapel being part of the original design, not an afterthought.
What has caused distress to the faithful is that in a number of our small, devotional churches, the tabernacle has been removed from its original setting and the Blessed Sacrament has been rehoused in 'a safe set in a wall outside the Sanctuary, a chapel has not been created.
The other form of unacceptable reordering is putting the tabernacle around the corner and out of sight. A stranger wishing to "make a visit to the Blessed Sacrament" cannot find where they have put HIM.
This does not meet the "While the preferred position requirements of the Council (for the chair) . . is the apex . .
which states: "The place of the this is not always practicable ..." reservation of the eucharist "The celebrant should be clearly should be truly pre-eminent". In seen to preside. In a small either case the fact is that the church, with a clear view of the status of the Blessed Sacrament sanctuary from the entire seating has been diminished, be it area, such a position might well intentional or not. be facing across the sanctuary" (para 134).
In the immediate postconciliar period there was much confusion on this aspect of reordering. Indeed many of us got the impression that it was necessary to move the tabernacle from the central, traditional position. It was only with mature study of all the relevant documents, which did not come into the hands of the nonspecialists until the publication of Flannery's "The Conciliar and post Conciliar Documents"
— 1975 — that one could begin to have second thoughts.
I am surprised to find that Mr Coyne ignores the teaching of our Bishops on this all important subject, contained in the Directive of the Bishops'
Conference of England & Wales: The Parish Church, Principals of Design and Reordering. CTS 31st December 1981.
This excellent directive has been given such poor publicity it is possible that Mr Coyne has not heard of it.
Those in favour of moving the tabernacle from the central position have laid great emphasis on the importance of the Celebrant's Chair, and the need to place it in the apex.
The result being that with the tabernacle out of the way, and the altar moved forward the celebrant is now seated at the focal point of the Church.
Here again their Lordships have restored our thinking to a proper balance:
I am confident that if our Bishops' pronouncement is given the publicity which it deserves there will be little room for that "School of Thought" mentioned by Fr Hanshell, March 22, which is "... against adoration of the Blessed Sacrament inside as well as outside Mass."
Aohn Roche
90, Colchester Road, Halstead, Essex




blog comments powered by Disqus