Open Discussion: What do you notice when you visit other churches?

Often, visting another church can give you a fresh perspective on your own. In this season of summer vacations and time away, many people have the chance to worship with another community.

One of the things I’ve been noticing in my travels this summer is the prominence of the baptismal font in many recently-remodeled sanctuaries. These fonts are large enough to allow for baptism by at least partial immersion.

The baptismal font at St. Mary's Cathedral, Colorado Springs, CO.
The baptismal font at St. Mary's Cathedral, Colorado Springs, CO.

I’ve been struck by the difference between passing by a little dish of holy water and having to walk around a sizable pool. The symbolic aspects of baptism — of dying to an old way of sin and rising to new life, the living and life-giving water that God provides, and the reminder of this baptism every time we enter the sanctuary — really come to life in a font of this size.

What do you notice when you visit another church? The music? The preaching? The processions? The furnishings? The congregation?

Chris Ángel

Chris has served as a church musician in the Roman Catholic church for over twenty-five years. He holds degrees in mathematical and computational science, music performance, and theology from Stanford University, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Saint John's School of Theology·Seminary. He served as an editorial assistant for <I>Pray Tell</I> from 2010 to 2012, and he is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Theology (Liturgical Studies) at the University of Notre Dame.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

68 responses to “Open Discussion: What do you notice when you visit other churches?”

  1. Fran Rossi Szpylczyn

    I come upon this post as I am about to head out the door to work… I shall return, but offer a few thoughts. The baptistry is certainly something and the size and placement of such means to many things. Having had the chance to take classes about sacraments and sacred space design with Richard Vosko, I always notice things like that.

    I am also very aware of the placement of the Tabernacle… Is it directly behind the altar, as in the Church of my youth or is there a Reservation chapel? Where I worship, the Reservation chapel is sadly so hidden, yet I never like the directly behind the altar.

    Having been on vacation last week, I entered the local Catholic church and immediately noticed the placement of the Tabernacle and that there were bells waiting to be rung. That said, I was quite taken by the soaring beauty of the Sanctuary and the really wonderful windows.

    Music of course… a sharp memory of walking into a most beautiful and very full church that I had never been to. The organ began, the music started and I began to sing and sing loudly, only to notice the stares, particularly that of the organist. I quickly silenced my voice.

    I always notice if I am welcomed and as someone disposed to hospitality, am very aware when I am not welcomed. Recently I visited a Presbyterian church and pretty much everyone knew that I was not a regular visitor and I was warmly welcomed. I would not expect this at a Catholic church, but it is nice when there are friendly greeters and actually very necessary, IMO.

    Reply
  2. Janet Caschetta

    As I enter a church first thing I notice is the sanctuary. Is there a cross or crucifix? Is the environment welcoming? Is the design of the whole church focused on the altar or the comfort of worshippers? As the mass begins I notice the particpation of the people, are they engaged? I love visiting and experiencing services in different churches and even different cultures. What an amazing faith we share !!

    Reply
    1. Fran Rossi Szypylczyn

      “As the mass begins I notice the particpation of the people, are they engaged?” So important – thanks for saying that!

      Reply
  3. Charles Day

    Different things with different churches, but I love the sameness that causes the differences to stand out. At a church in Palm Coast, FL, I was struck by the opulence – ushers in matching red blazers for example. In a church in a working class neighborhood in Mobile, AL, the sweet voice of a lone cantor in an old style choir loft stood out. Often I spend way too much time noticing architecture, particularly in old churches. In Ireland, on the east coast, in a fairly new church, Mass begins with kneeling ‘at the foot of the altar’ for the greeting and introductory prayers. On the west coast of the island, in an ancient church, modern rubrics were followed. There are a number of churches in Europe that don’t have pews, and therefore, no kneelers. In all that, there is more that is the same than there is that is different.

    Reply
  4. Mary Wood

    Although a Catholic for 56 years, and now in my mid 70s, I am still an inter-church person. I rejoiced when Vatican 2 brought us Christians closer together, with more obvious similarities between our still different styles of worship. I nearly replied to the previous article (on worship strategies subsequent to the introduction of the new English translation) with some account of the way I spent yesterday morning, but my experience fits better here.

    I am a non-driver, so limited to my small town for Sunday worship. Last year our rather stolid parish priest of 11 years was moved elsewhere, and we received a younger man with some very definite ideas. As I have commented before, he believes the OF English Mass which has enfolded us and nourished us for 40+ years (his entire lifetime!) is a “very bad translation.” His strong preference for all “liturgy-things retro,” indicates his fantasy-traditional cast of mind. Required to offer Mass in English for the parish on Sundays, he has jumped the gun and already uses the priest’s portion of the version due to be introduced in England and Wales next month. His celebration of Mass in an English form which he regards as unworthy clearly causes him (and us) to suffer considerable tension at what should be a very precious moment in the week. Yesterday morning was no exception.

    I’m well known in most of the town’s mainstream churches and often attend the C of E church nearest me. I know both the vicar and her assistant priest well and several of the congregation through inter-church activities in town. The welcome they offer to non-members is truly heartening and I appreciate their liturgy and sharing. Nevertheless, I cannot feel fully at home there, and I know I would not attend so frequently if I were more comfortable in my own Catholic church.
    [Cont]

    Reply
  5. Mary Wood

    Yesterday however, I broke new ground by attending the local URC (broadly = Presbyterian) church, which happened to be offering a Holy Communion service. The minister is about the same age as my priest, but married with three children. Whereas the Catholic studied in Rome (late vocation), the URC minister studied in UK and spent a sabbatical a couple of years ago in Atlanta where he spent time at the Candler School and studied under Brueggeman and others. Yesterday’s service was breath-takingly good.

    The welcome was embarrassingly astonished from the sundry elders, welcome-stewards and friends, but I weathered that and observed that in this church they all come good and early and exchange their “Peace” informally in the 15 mins or so before the service is due to start. This service opened with a hymn by Marty Haughen, ALL ARE WELCOME, and as I sang the 5 verses I could not but reflect that the Gospel living and witness it describes are far more characteristic of this URC congregation than my own.

    The first part of the service was informal, without being patronising, and the children responded well. These very young persons were entrusted with taking the collection bags round, though under the watchful eyes of their mothers! In “my” church only senior adults, preferably male, are allowed to collect money. Then the children were sent away to their own instruction and the adults had their turn. A very serious and challenging reading from Romans 12 was the basis of our sermon and then the Communion rite began with extempore prayer by the minister, relevant to the theme and to the needs of the times. He used the scriptural words of consecration without elaboration and then after the Lord’s Prayer in common together, he issued an invitation to all to share the “Open Table.” He showed the elements in a slight elevation – “BREAD OF LIFE – CUP OF SALVATION” – and all who wished received together.

    Reply
  6. Mary Wood

    A profound silence rested upon the assembly. Slight pause, final hymn and we left.

    I was ready to be appreciative and understanding, but I was shaken and immensely enriched by this unpretentious, non-aggressive Christian worship of a gathered community that I already knew as an immense power for social care and integration in the town. The heavens opened as I left – it was rain, not a Voice, but I am challenged and comforted.

    My own parish priest has established a weekly Tridentine Latin Sunday Mass in our church in the late afternoon, so I plucked up courage to attend this celebration. There were four other persons there, three adult members of one family and a lone gentleman as well as the priest. These five celebrated a Sunday Mass with no other congregation, with readings in Latin from the old lectionary but with leaflets and missals provided free. Indeed it seemed sad.

    But, I graze where I find pasture, and next time the URC folk won’t be quite so surprised when I join them after my own early Sunday Mass of Obligation.

    Reply
  7. Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh

    Picky me . . . I notice if the overall space is clean and if the sanctuary is free of clutter. I then take in the overall design of the space including sanctuary furnishings, color of the walls and floors, pew arrangement, and how the natural light, if any, fill the space. By this time I am aware of the smell – has incense been used recently, are votive candles burning, giving the space a “Catholic” fragrance that transports me back to my youth.
    By this point, some particular item may have grabbed my attention – a spectacular crucifix, a refurbished painting in the sanctuary, a finely made altar or presider’s chair, or an entry-way baptismal font. Not infrequently, what grabs my attention is a “catalogue” altar and/or ambo – lifeless, dull, unedifying.
    Promptly I will look for an organ console and/or pipes or speakers, hoping that, if the latter, they have been cleverly hidden.
    Overall I am looking to see if the space has been very carefully planned, from the overall layout down to the placement of the fire alarm annunciators, the wall sockets, and the HVAC vents. When the vents are the second most prominent feature of the walls of the sanctualry, my heart sinks a bit and I sigh . . .
    One of the most pleasant experiences I ever had upon entering a church for the first time was at St. Procopius Abbey in Illinois. Standing in awe of the brick and wood interior, I realized that I was seeing exactly what I was supposed to see – the altar, the ambo, the chair, the congregational seating – and nothing else. No mundane items such as vents (cleverly placed along the floor behind the seating bench for monks in the sanctuary), no empty credence table (hidden in an alcove designed for that purpose), nothing that was not a part of the liturgy.
    Ahhhh. Well done!

    Reply
  8. Tom Poelker

    Entering an empty church I am first notices the setting and how it affects the Mass.

    Is there a prominent and noble place for the Liturgy of the Word, or just a lectern? Are the seats of the ministers placed so that they are also obviously hearers of the word or are they some place where they can easily become another focal point during the L/W, every movement, gesture, or grimace highly visible and potentially distracting?

    Is the Ambo going to be a visual obstruction for the Liturgy of the Eucharist? Does the presider’s chair follow the GIRM and avoid suggesting a throne?

    Is there a multiplication of crosses/crucifixes instead of a good place for the single processional cross? Does the liturgical space have noble simplicity or is it filled with fussy additions? Is this a space for the celebration of Mass free of other distractions and temptations to private devotions? Does the tabernacle have a chapel appropriate for adoration and meditation or just some niche?

    Is there the ability to celebrate at the one altar but in a reduced space for smaller congregations? Has the architect learned this trick from synagogues?

    Are the arrangements for the music ministers such that the director can guide the congregation as well as the ministers? Do the arrangements look like the musicians are there to present a concert for an audience or as if they are part of the congregation and assisting them in their participation in song? Is there a great big, prominent, and expensive organ installation that I am I supposed to notice? Why?

    Is that font actually practical for use by catechumens of all ages and a minister, or does it show more effort to be an artistic expression than a functional place? Does it take a long stretch for one to reach the water or is it easily at hand for signing oneself on the way in or out? Is this entrance the one to the gathering space and then parking area or some “formal” but less-used entrance?

    Reply
  9. Tom Poelker

    MJK “When the vents are the second most prominent feature of the walls of the sanctualry, my heart sinks a bit and I sigh . . .
    One of the most pleasant experiences … I was seeing exactly what I was supposed to see – the altar, the ambo, the chair, the congregational seating – and nothing else … nothing that was not a part of the liturgy.”

    Yes, this speaks to me of noble simplicity and good craftsmanship.

    I despise churches and theater sets which draw more attention to themselves than to the actions they host.

    The liturgy is not the presentation of an epic; its space not for display of opulence. We come together for communal action. The space should facilitate that and not draw attention to itself, either as an artistic statement or as an inelegant engineered housing.

    Does anyone else look to see if there are multiple ways and places to hang seasonal decor in and around the entire space, not just on the front wall?

    Reply
  10. Alan Robinson

    What do I first notice when I visit a Church ?
    How ugly,thoughtless and empty are most Catholic churches in England now after the “new reformation” and how (usually) beautiful,Catholic-looking,liturgical and cared-for are most Anglican churches. I almost never want to fall to my knees and pray in the reformed Catholic churches and strangely, after being a Catholic for twenty-seven years, I often want to linger and pray in the Anglican ones.
    There are many glorious exceptions to these very general rules.

    Reply
    1. Tom Poelker

      I notice that this response has nothing to do with liturgy.

      Reply
      1. John Drake

        Sure it does. How can an ugly church enhance and inspire your “full, conscious and active participation” ?

      2. Fran Rossi Szypylczyn

        I can’t seem to “reply” to John Drake’s comment… that said, my reply is this: I happen to belong to a vibrant parish but one that is quite poorly laid out due to odd renovations and honestly, quite barren and not pretty at all. Yet I was astounded to find a welcome place and wonderful liturgy in spite of all this. We are exploring a new renovation, thanks be to God, and it will enhance worship, but it is not a block to good FACP in my experience.

      3. John Drake

        “We are exploring a new renovation, thanks be to God, and it will enhance worship…”

        Fran, my point exactly. Otherwise why would you go to the expense and trouble of remodeling your church? I never said ugly was a “block”. I said how can ugly enhance and inspire.

    2. Dunstan Harding

      I almost never want to fall to my knees and pray in the reformed Catholic churches and strangely, after being a Catholic for twenty-seven years, I often want to linger and pray in the Anglican ones.
      —————————————————-
      I’d say the same applies to many Catholic churches here in the U.S. too. So many of our churches are as inviting as a traffic court. Mere auditoriums with the grand piano and organ pipes getting more attention than the altar or ambo.

      I’m always surprised to find mainline protestant churches have moved far away from the pulpit-centered halls they were 40 to 50 years ago. With often very good choirs, a much friendlier reception from elders and the pastor, liturgical paraments , stained glass windows, even tabernacles , vigil light stands, and other appointments. Some more adventurous congregations have plenty of latin music too.

      Lutherans have installed statues,crucifixes, and tabernacles. They use incense and traditional Mass vestments both in the Missouri Synod and the ELCA. Many with features one would have found in Catholic churches without exception at one time, but are rarely seen in the Walmart and Marriott Motor Inn “worship centers” built in more recent years.

      Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches more and more seem to have taken to heart Pope Benedict’s call for praying eastwards with a cross/crucifix-centered liturgy. While we have largely dismissed the pope’s recommendations, except for the more traditional parishes now moving rapidly to institute the “Benedictine altar” of six candlesticks and a crucifix, antependium on the altar, with ad orientem liturgies.

      Reply
  11. Jack Wayne

    I tend to notice the architecture first and general atmosphere. Is it an old church that was ruined through bad remodeling choices that make it look like someone’s dated rec room, or did they actually respect the architecture of the place and make limited but tasteful changes that will remain timeless? Is there one of those giant baptismal fonts with the running water that everyone complains about because it makes you have to go to the bathroom or tortures you when you do have to go but don’t want to leave at that particular point in Mass? Are there welcoming people outside, but a reverent silence and prayerful atmosphere inside?

    After that I notice differences from what I’m used to and similarities. American Catholic music is surprisingly homogeneous, while many churches don’t use consecration bells or patens (something that is nearly still universal in my area).

    Reply
  12. Karl Liam Saur

    I listen deeper before I look deeper. That is, I listen for the aural dimension of the space. Unfortunately, the aural dimension is very typically treated as the beggared step-sister of the optical dimension, and many liturgical problems can flow from that.

    Reply
  13. Halbert Weidner

    The posts have been very informative. They seem divided between those who go into a church looking for liturgical aspects and those who want devotional items. A home or a side chapel is a good place for devotional items. I should think that a church is primarily for the larger community gathering for the great celebrations of sacraments in all their fullness including exercising options such as immersion at baptisms. I find it especially wonderful when the ambo gets full attention and is not stuck off to the side. We have not yet, it seems to me, gotten used to a full celebration of the liturgy, Proclamations and Sacramental responses because we still prefer third tier items of devotion that depict salvation events but do not sacramentally make them present in a full way.

    Reply
  14. Charles Culbreth

    Off topic warning, administrative question:
    Has the blog policy regarding sequentially extended comments spread out among multiple boxes changed?

    Reply
    1. Mary Wood

      I presume this query is prompted by my own comment which extended over 3 entries? Have I contravened praytell guidelines? I am truly sorry if so, but my Sunday experiences were very vivid for me, and I’m glad I have been able to share them.

      I think it makes a difference whether one goes to a strange or unfamiliar church primarily to observe or also to worship. On this occasion I went for both reasons, and in addition I was nourished. For that I am grateful.

      Reply
      1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
        Anthony Ruff, OSB

        Mary – we do limit comments to one commbox. First time offense, don’t worry about it.
        awr

  15. Paul Inwood

    The first thing to look at is how the assembly seating is configured.

    Is it a Gothic tunnel in which the congregation can only see the back of each other’s heads? Or is it a place where people can relate to each other visually and so participate as a community?

    My most recent good experience was visiting the Church of St Vincent de Paul at the Motherhouse of the Sisters of Nazareth in Nazareth, Kentucky. Here, the reordering has been done in such a way that the celebrating community is drawn in around the table of the Lord. The way in which the foremost benches have been cut up and given mitred corners so as to bend round in a quasi-semicircle I found very well done and very powerful.

    Only after I have seen how the assembly is configured will I look at the other primary symbols: font, ambo, altar, chair. The location of the tabernacle is not a primary concern, nor the cross, paintings, etc.

    Windows and lighting, however, have a vital role in creating the mood of the space. I confess to being a great fan of the windows in St Mary’s Cathedral, San Francisco, and of the lighting in the church at Taizé. The height and configuration of the ceiling is also important. High roofs draw the spirit up, while a lower or horizontal ceiling can be oppressive and really press people down.

    Reply
  16. Anthony Butler

    The first thing that I look for is the Blessed Sacrament. I’m always curious as to the ways in which folks reserve the consecrated bread. Sometimes it is grand, and sometime it is simple, and sometimes it is gaudy. Some places have separate chapels, which I really like so long as the tabernacle can be seen during regular Sunday liturgies. When the Blessed Sacrament is completely removed, it sends a message that it is too special for “everyday.”
    The Blessed Sacrament is that which unites us as the people of God, and it should be central to our Church architecture as a symbol of the faith we profess. This is what I notice first, but there are many other things that I begin to notice later.

    Reply
  17. Peter Haydon

    What do you notice?
    The decoration is one thing. Usually it is not just to be pretty but to convey meaning. See Malcolm Miller on Chartres.
    Coutances has some wonderful stained glass too.
    http://www.pbase.com/ericdeparis/gothicmasterpiece
    See Les Vitraux

    Reply
  18. Jack Rakosky

    Although my sample is small, Orthodox Church of America (OCA) parishes are extremely welcoming.

    In my first experience decades ago, I went to an OCA parish for the first time on the first Monday of Lent. I remember entering and either picked up or was handed a service book, but nothing else special.

    At the end of the service as I was headed to the door, coming at me was the Choir Director who asked me if I was Orthodox. I said I was Roman Catholic. He said he had noticed me singing the music, and hoped I would join the choir for the next night’s service which I did.

    Wow, instant incorporation of myself and my talents into a parish without any elaborate bureaucracy!

    But that very personal tailored response has been my experience in OCA parishes since. They are small so new people are instantly recognized, but they do not overwhelm you with false depersonalized greetings. They start a conversation and respond very personally, meeting you where you are. If as in my case, you are coming primarily for the Liturgy of Hours, that is fine with them.

    They are very welcoming of Catholics and Protestants, many of whom become members. They have priests who were Catholic and Protestant. Their current Metropolitan of North America was baptized an Episcopalian and converted when he was nineteen.

    They have a balance of traditional and innovation. They have a lot of traditional chant and polyphony, but they have been constantly innovating with new chant and polyphony. I suspect some of the innovation would be a little too folksy for some RC traditionalists but remember old Russian folk melodies influenced chant and polyphony. Women are taking more roles than before as cantors, and readers. A lot of the adolescents and college age people are especially encouraged to take these roles and participate in the choir.

    When I left the city and parish described above, I visited the pastor to say goodbye. I have never even thought of doing that in a Catholic parish.

    Reply
  19. Jordan Zarembo

    Genuflect. Bless with holy water. Don’t forget to genuflect to the tabernacle or sacrament chapel.

    Go and find the Lady Chapel as soon as possible. Light a votive (in my case, usually for a family intention). Seems that there’s been a bit of inflation even in the Eternal City: ten years ago a votive in Rome was usually 500 lire. Now it’s often €0.50 or occasionally even €1. Inflation spares nothing, even petitions for the intercession of Our Lady. 🙂

    I always like walking into a church during the preface or even at the beginning of the canon. This reminds me that a church is a ever-active font of salvation and grace for the world, unfolding anew despite my presence.

    Reply
  20. Steve Adams

    -Location/Size of baptismal font/pool
    -Location/placement of tabernacle
    -Implementation of silence in the liturgy

    If the third is not well implemented, I am “lost,” and feel way too rushed and that my participation in the liturgy has been diminished by the person(s) who planned it and chose to ignore the GIRM and STL sections on sacred silence. (Pet peeve, sure you can call it that! Haha!)

    Reply
  21. John Hillas

    I honestly first look for the tabernacle, and if I don’t find it in the church’s central axis of view, I feel somewhat sad. I’m a child of the Vatican II Mass but will never, ever, EVER understand why one would move the tabernacle off to the side in a parish church.

    I can see the symbolism of a prominent baptismal font near the entrance of the church, but this may not work in all spaces. What’s more important is that we remember our baptism when we dip our fingers into the water regardless of where it happens.

    Reply
    1. Tom Poelker

      I will never, ever, understand why some want to put the tabernacle where the priest will routinely have his back to it.
      ————
      The tabernacle does not belong in the space where the community celebrates the action of the Eucharist because it is a distraction toward devotion for the result of the action when all should be participating in the action itself. That is the simple version.

      There is also the complications introduced by the devotional tendencies to acknowledge the reserved presence in interruption to the ongoing action.

      There is also the basic question of whether the liturgical space is a place for communal action or for private devotion.

      There is also the problem with people practicing personal devotions wanting to control and limit the actions of those gathered for the communal acts of liturgy.

      The devotional adoration of the reserved Eucharist is neither the main purpose of a liturgical space nor completely compatible with communal prayer.

      Besides, 😉
      it facilitates the tendency to use the tabernacle as a cupboard for serving leftovers.

      Reply
      1. Stanislaus Kosala

        The body of Our Lord is never ‘a leftover’, His presence is sustained there as long as the appearance of bread remains, and it is the same Lord and the same Divine Liturgy that is celebrated eternally. There are no ‘leftovers’ strictly speaking. The holy gifts are not static things, they hide a personal presence.
        I never have a problem concentrating on the Mass if the Tabernacle is in the sanctuary, and I’ve never heard anyone complain about it. Where have you heard people complain about it?
        The devotional adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is absolutely compatible with communal prayer when the liturgy is not celebrated as attested by centuries of saints, popes and magisterial documents. Indeed, Pope Paul VI placed the growth of devotion to the reserved sacrament as one of the goals of the reform of the liturgy after the council:
        “We earnestly hope that the restoration of the sacred liturgy will produce abundant fruits in the form of Eucharistic devotion”
        “And so, with the aim of seeing to it that the hope to which the Council has given rise—that a new wave of Eucharistic devotion will sweep over the Church—not be reduced to nil through the sowing of the seeds of false opinions, We have decided to use Our apostolic authority and speak Our mind to you on this subject”
        -From his encyclical ‘Mysterium Fidei’.

      2. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
        Anthony Ruff, OSB

        Mr. Kosala,

        I’m pretty sure this is a misunderstanding. You’re taking offense when none is intended, and you’re defending what doesn’t need defending and what no one is denying. To call the Blessed Sacrament ‘leftovers’ is to speak analogously. We should zealously avoid being scandalized by such analogous language when it comes to sacraments, for they are, precisely as signs/symbols, analogous to all sorts of things in the natural/mundane world. This is instrinsic to the very nature of a sacrament. And it follows from the incarnation.

        awr

      3. John Hillas

        I agree that it’s awkward to have the priest’s back to the tabernacle. Perhaps a solution is to re-orient him so that both he and the people are facing the same direction. 😉 Having grown up with the priest facing the people at mass (except for when I had the pleasure of attending with Orthodox family at Divine Liturgy), I find that the centrality of the altar-table actually seems to get lost with the priest, deacon or other ministers standing behind facing us. Non-verbal communication cues can be more powerful than verbal, and so although the prayers are audibly addressed to God at Mass, the fact that they are stated facing the congregation seems to distract me from that fact.

        I’m all for the reformed liturgy, and active participation in liturgy (something we could learn a great deal from the Orthodox about). However, separating the centrality of the altar AND the tabernacle was a mistake, IMO. The tabernacle depends upon the altar and does not distract from the action thereupon. It reinforces the the continuity of Christ’s one sacrifice re-presented in time but without beginning or end. I see the tabernacle and remember that the liturgy that I participate in today, is the same liturgy as happened immediately prior and will continue on until the end of time, no?

        I guess fundamentally Tom, our difference is not that I disagree with your points, but I don’t think that it’s an either/or with regard to communal participation/private devotion; it’s a both/and. We are complex beings and are capable of grasping many different layers of reality at once. Simplified rights don’t need to mean that we can’t still appreciate overlapping layers of meaning/symbolism.

  22. Alan Robinson

    Someone wrote that my point had nothing to do with liturgy; someone wrote that liturgical questions are divided from devotional ones. I would like politely to disagree. The church’s design and architecture shapes the liturgy, informs and permits it. The liturgy leads to devotion; the subjective aspect is surely there to increase our love and worship and faith in the Almighty.The objective aspect is the honour glory and worship of the Almighty God and Father. I think that the architect and designer J.N. Comper wrote that a good church should “bring you to your knees”.

    Reply
    1. Fran Rossi Szypylczyn

      I was trying to reply to John Drake, above, in a comment about your comment, so I will repeat it here, hope that is ok.

      I can’t seem to “reply” to John Drake’s comment… that said, my reply is this: I happen to belong to a vibrant parish but one that is quite poorly laid out due to odd renovations and honestly, quite barren and not pretty at all. Yet I was astounded to find a welcome place and wonderful liturgy in spite of all this. We are exploring a new renovation, thanks be to God, and it will enhance worship, but it is not a block to good FACP in my experience.

      Reply
    2. Tom Poelker

      It is not the function of the liturgy to lead to devotional behavior. Devotions are an accretion in Christian prayer, not to be discouraged, but not a particularly desirable thing either. They work for some personality types, not others.

      Christianity is about living the way of life taught by Jesus. Liturgy is about nurturing Christians for the purpose of living that life. Liturgy ought not lead to devotions but to strengthened Christian living in the face of the alternative values of a person’s world.

      The objective of liturgy is not the giving of anything to God. Liturgy is God giving Christian people nourishment through the sharing of Scriptures and of the Eucharistic banquet and through confidence in the support of the community even though Christians lead individual lives.

      Besides, your original comments were all about the externals of architecture, not about the appropriateness of the building for praying the liturgy.

      I think Mr. Comper has a good sales pitch there for his preferred architectural style. It reminds me of many people trying to sell their particular skills to local congregations. Like many of them, it is more about the effect he would like to create, and get others to fund, than being about the purposes and practical needs of liturgy.

      Reply
      1. Jeffrey Pinyan

        Devotions are supposed to lead to the liturgy. But I think it cannot be helped that the liturgy leads individual people to devotions (and this is neither the fault of the liturgy nor of those individuals), seeing as how devotions should be derived from the liturgy. For example, contemplation on the gift of the Eucharist during the Mass (say, after receiving Communion) can lead one to participate in devotion to the Eucharist through adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.

        I’m not sure why you say devotions are “not a particularly desirable thing.” The Church encourages and advocates devotions, especially to the Eucharist.

      2. John Drake

        JP, Mr. Poelker is known on his blog as The “Practical Liturgist”.

        I guess devotions are not practical.

      3. Stanislaus Kosala

        Are you sure you’re right about devotions here? I don’t think that it’s appropriate to refer to them as being ‘accretions’ to liturgical prayer that are not particularly desirable. It seems to me that since Vatican II magisterial documents have emphasized the organic unity of devotions to the liturgy, of having devotions lead to the liturgy, and as having the liturgy in turn inspire forms of devotion(e.g. talk of eucharistic adoration as prolonging the liturgical act). In light of this, wouldn’t it be appropriate for the church building to manifest this organic relationship between devotional life and the liturgy? Rather than being dualistic(devotions here, liturgical prayer there)?
        St. Peter’s in Rome is a perfect example of this, right below the high altar is the confessio of St. Peter, a devotional space if there ever was one. Indeed the Basilica itself is built around the ancient shrine to the Apostle.

  23. Earle Luscombe

    Alan,

    I agree with both your posts. Will be writing a post of my own, this is a great topic, later on today.

    Reply
  24. Alan Robinson

    Fran : sorry – of course your are right. I have happily worshipped in really awful (aesthetically) buildings. On Sunday my family and I went to a parish church which must be the ugliest in this county in the late 1960s period decor for a Traditional Rite Mass.The liturgy took over and kicked us over too. I do think that a beautiful – and not necessarily expensive or splendid- building can point us up to where we hope to go.

    Reply
  25. Stanislaus Kosala

    If I see on the outside that the church was built before the council, I look to see if it was gutted.
    If I see that the church was built after the council, usually I look to see if there are some signs that the unfortunate iconoclasm of the post-conciliar era has begun to lift.
    I never could understand how the tabernacle, sacred images, and shrines distract from the liturgy or the assembly.

    The Mother of God, the angels and the saints are present at every sacred liturgy. I don’t see why depictions of them are necessarily distractions. Sacred images call call to mind the invisible ‘cloud of witnesses’ who always already precede us and whom we join in the sacred liturgy.

    Reply
    1. Tom Poelker

      Self-edited out.

      Reply
  26. Tom Poelker

    SK “The body of Our Lord is never ‘a leftover’, His presence is sustained there as long as the appearance of bread remains, and it is the same Lord and the same Divine Liturgy that is celebrated eternally. There are no ‘leftovers’ strictly speaking. The holy gifts are not static things, they hide a personal presence.”

    Despite your piety, but of course there are leftovers if one makes too much.

    SK “I never have a problem concentrating on the Mass if the Tabernacle is in the sanctuary, and I’ve never heard anyone complain about it. Where have you heard people complain about it?”

    This is a discussion about good liturgical practice. It is not about who is or is not complaining. It is about what are the goals and best means for those who prepare liturgy.

    Somehow, I doubt that you have never allowed your mind to wander to the mystery of the reserved Eucharist during Mass if you value that reservation so much. That is the sort of distraction from the liturgical action which I meant.

    SK “The devotional adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is absolutely compatible with communal prayer when the liturgy is not celebrated …”

    Apples and oranges, SK, “communal prayer when the liturgy is not celebrated” is precisely not liturgy.

    Reply
    1. Stanislaus Kosala

      “You may collect your piety points as you leave the grade school, but of course there are leftovers if one makes too much. ”

      I have no idea what you’re talking about here. It doesn’t seem that you’re responding to my argument that making use of hosts consecrated at a previous mass is notanalogous to leftovers being served from a previous meal. I agree that ideally this would not happen, but I don’t think that it’s correct to characterize it as ‘serving leftovers from the cupboard’.

      “Somehow, I doubt that you have never allowed your mind to wander to the mystery of the reserved Eucharist during Mass if you value that reservation so much. That is the sort of distraction from the liturgical action which I meant.”

      So if I disagree with you about this then I am lying? That’s a great rhetorical trick. Either there are people who have trouble concentrating on the liturgical action because of the presence of the reserved sacrament in the sanctuary or there are not. Enlighten me, how can something be a distraction if it doesn’t distract anyone? Oh, right, sorry I forgot, anyone who says that he/she isn’t distracted by the tabernacle during Mass is just a dirty rotten little liar.

      Reply
      1. Tom Poelker

        First, please note that I withdrew the snarky piety reference quite quickly as inappropriate immediately after first posting. I am sorry that you read and responded in the interval. I apologize for it.

        If you are never distracted by the tabernacle during Mass, why is it so important to you that it be there?

        I do not think that you are lying. I think that you extrapolate your personal practices and preferences without considering the logical implications and without comparing them to the goals and means of liturgy as distinct from other objectives you have in mind. On PTB, I want people to discuss liturgy, not clutter liturgy with other matter, no matter how good that matter is in its proper environment outside of liturgy.

        I am sorry that the leftovers analogy does not work for you. Others on many occasions have found it very descriptive of their own reactions. We had a long thread on this recently. I think you have gone way beyond it not working in the tone in which you have objected.

        Again, your point about the theological connection of reserved species served at another Mass is valid but irrelevant to making a good liturgical decision regarding recourse to the tabernacle during Mass. Theologically, it is a derivative, secondary point. Liturgically, while remaining true, it is irrelevant.

  27. Earle Luscombe

    This is what I look for in a church. First, and foremost, does it invite me in to pray, both the interior,and exterior. Does the exterior of the building stand out in it’s enviroment, marking it as a place that’s special. Does the interior focus me toward the altar. Is the altar solid, and beautifully adorned? Is there a rederos? It doesn’t have to be overly elaborate, but needs to blend with the altar. Is the Tabernacle, either centrally placed on the rederos, or in it’s own chapel? Is there a real pulpit, as opposed to a lecturn? Stained glass, perhaps depicting scenes from the life of Christ and the Saints? A good sized font or pool at the west end of the nave. And as I look toward a high ceiling I see a choir loft complete with organ. Then am I welcomed to Mass? If I am alone, am I invited to sit with someone? And that’s my second point. Am I invited to become a part of the community? Finally the thrid point is this: Is the liturgy done simply, but reverently? And that folks is what I look for in a church.

    Reply
  28. Stanislaus Kosala

    AWR: “To call the Blessed Sacrament ‘leftovers’ is to speak analogously. We should zealously avoid being scandalized by such analogous language when it comes to sacraments, for they are, precisely as signs/symbols, analogous to all sorts of things in the natural/mundane world. This is instrinsic to the very nature of a sacrament. And it follows from the incarnation.”

    Fr. Ruff,

    Thank you for your clarification. I agree with what you’re saying, however, I think that precisely if the Eucharist is a sign/symbol then it is possible to talk about the appropriateness/inappropriateness of particular analogies drawn between it and non-sacramental things/events.

    My point is that the analogy entailed in talk of ‘serving leftovers’ is inappropriate because of the sort of presence that is involved in the eucharistic gifts; a presence that is not manufactured at the mass in which the gifts were consecrated like a rubber stamp, but is continually and actively renewed as long as the appearance of bread remains.

    Reply
  29. Jordan Zarembo

    Tom Poelker on August 9, 2011 – 5:55 pm

    Tom Poelker: The objective of liturgy is not the giving of anything to God. Liturgy is God giving Christian people nourishment through the sharing of Scriptures and of the Eucharistic banquet and through confidence in the support of the community even though Christians lead individual lives.

    Martin Luther: He [God] does not first accept our works, and then save us. The Word of God is prior to all else; faith follows it; then love does not cause evil, for it is the fulfilling of the law. (p. 274) […] Therefore, let the priests who offer the sacrifice of the mass in these corrupt and perilous times take care, firstly, that the words of the greater and lesser canons of the mass, together with the collects, which all too plainly re-echo the sense of sacrifice, do not refer to the sacrament but either just the bread and wine which the words consecrate, or to their own prayers. […] Throughout the rite, let the priest bear in mind that the gospel is superior to all the canons and collects, which are but man made […] (p. 288) [1] (my emphases and ellipses)

    —————————–
    Orthodox or confessional Lutheranism has taken many turns over the century. The interaction of Catholicism and the Reformation heritage has profoundly changed all of Western Christianity. Yet, the foundational theology of the Lutheran Eucharist is not that of the Catholic Mass.

    Catholicism requires transubstantiaton, the conscious and sacerdotal offering of the Victim, for the life of the world. For Catholics, testamental promise or the Word of the Gospel institution alone cannot bring us this life.

    ——————————–
    [1] “The Pagan Servitude of the Church. 1. The Lord’s Supper.”Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings. ed. and introduction by John Dillenberger. New York, Anchor, 1962. 256 — 291.

    Reply
    1. Tom Poelker

      Is this an attempt at guilt by rhetorical association? If so, shame on you.

      I think all RCs can accept the sentence from p 274. I think it nefarious of you to pick something from 14 pages later to associate with that theologically true statement.

      I think you have a lot to prove in order to maintain “the foundational theology of the Lutheran Eucharist is not that of the Catholic Mass”. You might want to study the joint theological statements before making further such claims.

      Catholicism, by the way, does not require transubstantiation, but accepts transubstantiation as one correct, but [naturally] incomplete and inadequate, theological statement about Eucharistic theology.

      Since early Eucharistic Prayers did not include words regarding “the conscious and sacerdotal offering of the Victim, for the life of the world”, I think you have a difficult case to prove your claim.

      Just because these were the terms of debate for a number of recent centuries does not mean that they address the essentials of the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Just because the Eucharist is theo-logically connected to Jesus and the cross does not change the essence of the Eucharistic banquet to a sacrificial offering by the assembly. We partake of the sacrifice of Jesus, but that does not describe the essence of what is done in the Liturgy of the Eucharist. It is done, but does not provide the form or essence of what is done.

      Reply
      1. Jordan Zarembo

        This is not guilt by association. Martin Luther has deeply influenced my pietism. Why I cannot agree with him that human beings are simul justus et peccator, I confess that I am constantly in need of confession and a worthy communion. I am always utterly reliant on cooperation with the sacraments. Without cooperation in the sacraments, I am lost to sin. Unlike Luther, who believed that the Atonement was merely imputed to humans, we Catholic know and trust that the Mass literally transforms us completely through grace.

        You are right. I didn’t present this well. Let’s shift into reverse, and go from p. 228: Throughout the rite, let the priest bear in mind that the gospel is superior to all the canons and collects, which are but man made […]

        If Holy Mass is merely a sharing of scripture in the context of a eucharistic banquet, then what are the propers and Canon? I only mention Luther’s prioritization oof the Word over sacramental act because your ideal Mass likewise prioritizes scripture over eucharistic prayer. If the Eucharist is predicated on Verba and not Canon Missae, then indeed there is no Sacrifice of the Son to the Father through the alter Christus. Scripture alone cannot provide the metaphysical change that we Catholics must assent to through dogma.

        Transubstantiation is clearly dogmatic. Cf. The Council of Trent, Session XIII, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist [EWTN].

        2. If anyone says that in the sacred and, holy sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the body and the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the appearances only of bread and wine remaining, which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation, let him be anathema.

  30. Claire Mathieu

    When I visit another church for Mass, I notice: how many people are present, how many are young or old, how many children are there, how many men. How old the priest is.

    Then during Mass I notice the particular interests of the people in that parish, as evidenced by the intercessions; the preaching, of which I am usually critical; whether the lectors can be understood; whether the people sing; whether they read the bulletin or pick their nose or listen during the homily; how reserved or open they are towards me during the sign of peace (where “open” does not necessarily mean effusive, maybe not even with physical contact, but does mean making eye contact and perhaps a smile).

    Reply
  31. Tom Poelker

    JH: “I find that the centrality of the altar-table actually seems to get lost with the priest, deacon or other ministers standing behind facing us. Non-verbal communication cues can be more powerful than verbal, and so although the prayers are audibly addressed to God at Mass, the fact that they are stated facing the congregation seems to distract me from that fact.”

    I have heard others raise this valid point before. I like the solution of placing the assembly in a “U” shape on the notional north/west/south sides of the building with the altar in front of the western group and the presider facing east along with the entire assembly for the Eucharistic prayer.

    The Ambo can be at the east end so that all remain facing the same way for the entire service.

    The music ministers can be somewhere among those behind the presider at the west end.

    east wall — — — — — — — — — — — — east wall
    + exit …………………..AMBO ……………………… exit +
    pppppp …………………………………………… pppppp
    pppppp ……………….. [font?] ……………….. pppppp
    pppppp …………………………………………… pppppp
    pppppp …………………………………………… pppppp
    pppppp ……………….. ALTAR ………………. pppppp
    pppppp …………………………………………… pppppp
    ……………………. Presider Chair ………………. ppp
    credence … mmmm …………… a/m a/m ………pp
    table …… mmmmm pppppppppppppppppp ……p
    ………… mmmmmm ppppppppppppppppppp
    ………… mmmmmm pppppppppppppppppppp
    [sacristy] …………………………………………………….exit+

    p=people
    m=musician
    a/m=assisting ministers

    Reply
  32. Tom Poelker

    John Drake :
    JP, Mr. Poelker is known on his blog as The “Practical Liturgist”.
    I guess devotions are not practical.

    Devotions are not liturgical.
    Your guessing or assigning of points of view to me is way off.

    Liturgy is the official public prayer of the church and has different objectives from devotions.

    Devotions have their proper time and place. Devotions are accepted by the church as matters of private practice, even when done in public or in the liturgical space of the community.

    For the past several weeks here on PTB, I have repeatedly come back to the point that specifically we are discussing liturgy here. Introducing devotional objectives is a distraction from accomplishing liturgical objectives.

    When trying to improve the quality of liturgy, as commentators here are supposedly about, it is important to avoid confusing liturgy with devotions, no matter how praise worthy such devotions may be or how they derive from the liturgy.

    Thus, the tabernacle, as a devotional object, is not part of the liturgy, per se. To place it in the liturgical space requires adjusting the liturgical actions to allow for its presence. That is to put the cart before the horse.

    This leads to distinguishing the liturgical space from devotional spaces. We lost this distinction over the centuries when laity resorted to devotions because they were expected to only attend and not participate in liturgy. A public banquet hall, the nearest analogy to liturgical space, not an auditorium, is quite different from a meditation room, where focal/devotional objects are appropriate. The scale and acoustic needs also differ.

    I think this all relates to RCs wanting to come to church only the legally required one hour a week. Many want this hour to contain favorite things of theirs, regardless of their compatibility with liturgy.

    Reply
    1. Stanislaus Kosala

      Where do you get this idea of the paradigm of the church building being a banquet hall?
      And where in the past has there been such a seperation between devotional and liturgical space?

      As for the tabernacle, i’d like to point how in the east the tabernacle is often on the altar, but devotion to the reserved sacrament never developed there.

      I’m also curious, how would you respond to the following:

      ” By virtue of its close relationship to the sacrifice of Golgotha, the Eucharist is a sacrifice in the strict sense, and not only in a general way, as if it were simply a matter of Christ’s offering himself to the faithful as their spiritual food. The gift of his love and obedience to the point of giving his life (cf. Jn 10:17-18) is in the first place a gift to his Father. Certainly it is a gift given for our sake, and indeed that of all humanity (cf. Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20; Jn 10:15), yet it is first and foremost a gift to the Father: “asacrifice that the Father accepted, giving, in return for this total self-giving by his Son, who ‘became obedient unto death’ (Phil 2:8), his own paternal gift, that is to say the grant of new immortal life in the resurrection”.18

      and:

      “The sacramental re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice, crowned by the resurrection, in the Mass involves a most special presence which – in the words of Paul VI – “is called ‘real’ not as a way of excluding all other types of presence as if they were ‘not real’, but because it is a presence in the fullest sense: a substantial presence whereby Christ, the God-Man, is wholly and entirely present”

      – Ecclesia de Eucharistia

      Reply
      1. Karl Liam Saur

        Well, in the Catholic tradition, there liturgy and devotion is a both/and kind of thing, not an either/or kind of thing (oops, is that an either/or statement?), so there is little grist for treating items that have a devotional aspect as necessarily being unclean for liturgical spaces, as it were. But doesn’t stop people from inventing new laws of kashruth. The next thing you know, someone will decide that it’s bad to have stations of the cross in the church, that they need to be sent off to the Island of Misfit Devotional Toys where they will never again disturb the puritanical liturgical eye in the church. The impulse towards rubricism never dies; it is conserved and just finds new objects of attention.

      2. Tom Poelker

        Twisting things again, not paradigm, nearest equivalent in secular architecture.

        Depends on how far in the past one goes, but that is irrelevant anyway if one is seeking best practices rather that what has usually been done.

        In the east, the altar and tabernacle is behind the iconostasis, but your point is irrelevant because no one is claiming that the placement of the tabernacle caused devotion to the reserved Eucharist.

        Why do proponents of the tabernacle seem unaware that best practice has long been, as at St. Peter’s Basilica and many other Roman churches, to have a separate and appropriately decorated and quiet chapel for Eucharistic devotion? The God-houses and God-towers of the great medieval churches were not part of the reredos/altar structure, but often in the apse or another chapel.

        To what would you have me react in your quotations? I have repeatedly affirmed that I accept these theological teachings. What others seem to repeatedly miss is that they are derivative truths about the Eucharist and do not relate to how one conducts liturgy.

  33. Tom Poelker

    Karl Liam Saur : … there is little grist for treating items that have a devotional aspect as necessarily being unclean for liturgical spaces, as it were. But doesn’t stop people from inventing new laws of kashruth. The next thing you know, someone will decide that it’s bad to have stations of the cross in the church,

    It is not a question of unclean, but of more or less appropriate. The most appropriate place for the tabernacle is a Eucharistic chapel [definitely not a little plinth off to the side of the bema]. It is not best to have the tabernacle as an object of devotion present during the celebration of the Eucharist, and perhaps not for any Liturgy. It is not wrong, just not desirable. See my earlier comments suggesting the desire to do so is based on wanting to do other things than liturgy during the required hour.

    The best placement of stations I have seen is to have them along the walls of the side aisles of a three aisle basilican design church, obscured from the nave by the intervening pillars, yet readily available for those who would actually walk the stations in prayer.

    I also have some liking for having the stations on the exterior in climates where that is practical. I think something can also be said for having transportable stations which can be placed more prominently in the liturgical space as part of the Lenten environment.

    It is rare indeed to see stations which by style and placement tend to draw attention to themselves during Mass. That would be the sort of displacement of liturgy by devotion which should be avoided.

    Reply
    1. Karl Liam Saur

      Here’s a very fine example of a tabernacle in a transept:

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/edmorrissey/5682046550/

      Indeed, in the mother church of the Roman rite.

      I am not of the party that insists on axial alignment of tabernacle in the apse. But I am also not of the party that insists that such an alignment is a problem that needs fixing. I would probably design a new space with the tabernacle in the transept, but I would seriously question the stewardship of “fixing” an axial alignment in an existing space, as it were. Too many people have pushed the ideals towards poles here in ways that the Church itself does not, and I’m agin’ them doin’ that.

      * * *

      On a tangential note, here’s a nifty tabernacle design idea. Baroque is not one of my favorite styles, shall we say, though I can appreciate it. But here, at Neuzelle Abbey, is a tabernacle the top of which serves as a mensa for the table at Emmaus. It’s an example of the Baroque at it’s best – the symbolic integration of Real Action and Real Presence.

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_71ZPiLxOVfU/ShU8yg2zy_I/AAAAAAAADIk/5j3Okd0o6Bo/s400/P1020309.JPG

      Reply
      1. Tom Poelker

        In St. Louis, we have had the opposite problem under Rigali and Burke. Churches with excellent [even according to Burke himself, in one case] Eucharistic chapels, either by original design or by redesign, being ordered to place the tabernacle front and center and no where else.

        The Baroque piece is definitely not to my taste, but since it is not a distraction behind the main altar, it would be an artistic crime to replace it.

  34. Stanislaus Kosala

    Tom Poelker,

    I’ve lived in Rome and am well aware of the placement of the tabernacle in the major basilicas there. I never said that I was against reserving the sacrament outside of the sanctuary, just that I see nothing necessarily wrong with reserving it in the sanctuary.

    Even though an iconostasis is used, it is still the case that whenever the altar is seen, the tabernacle is also seen. My point with this example is that having the tabernacle in the sanctuary need not be an encroachment of a devotional element into a liturgical space.

    The reason why I posted those quotes is that you have said things that seemingly contradict them. I’m sorry if I’ve misread you.

    Reply
  35. Tom Poelker

    JZ “because your ideal Mass likewise prioritizes scripture over eucharistic prayer. ”

    Where did you get this imputation to me?

    So what is your problem with “transubstantiation as one correct, but [naturally] incomplete and inadequate, theological statement about Eucharistic theology.”

    You do not think that transubstantiation explains all there is to know or understand about Eucharist? You do not think that this theological point is the controlling matter in making good liturgical decisions?

    Reply
    1. Jordan Zarembo

      That is fair. I should not have made that assumption. Yet my points about the definition of the Mass stand.

      As for the dogma of transubstantiation: the canon from Trent is an all-sufficient definition. The Mass is also the paschal mystery. However, it can never be denied that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in substance. The Eucharist is also grace given to worthy souls in the banquet of the communion rite. But the Sacrifice and Banquet cannot ever be separated; nor may one part of the Mass be emphasized over the other.

      This is the only revolutionary Catholic church liturgical design: a flat surface covered with a white cloth, a crucifix, two candles, (hopefully) an antimension, a corporal, a chalice, a paten with host, a purifier, water, wine, a basin, a fully vested priest, and a server to say the responses. Hopefully there is a Missal; if not, some priests have a votive Mass memorized.

      What do “I want to see out of the liturgy?”: A devoulty and correctly said Mass.

      What is my “liturgical decision”? A honest confession. An eagerness to receive my Lord and be strengthened by his saving grace. As a confessor in St. Peter’s advised: Imitate the Sacred Heart at all times.

      That is liturgy.

      Reply
      1. Tom Poelker

        Jordan, you seem to have a very minimalist and rubical understanding of liturgy, although with a pretty good grasp of the analytical theology of the Eucharist.

        Many of the specific objects you mention are mere accretions or cultural adaptations.

        Where is the teaching of SC in your posting? Where is the role of the people and the relationship of people to God and the Christian community?

        Devout and correct are so short of the objectives of liturgy, that I wonder if you understand anything about ritual or communal prayer or if you are completely immersed in the devotional and grace producing view of sacraments.

  36. Paul Inwood

    I’m interested to read about tabernacles in the east, and their visibility or otherwise.

    In most eastern churches [with a small ‘c’] there is no functioning tabernacle (although there may be one that is used during liturgy, depending on which Church [with a capital ‘C’] we are talking about). The Blessed Sacrament is reserved, for the purposes of Communion to the sick and housebound only, in a special cupboard in the sacristy. Even when the tabernacle is present, it is normally not visible, being hidden behind the iconostasis.

    Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament never evolved in the eastern Churches. There, the objects of devotion are the icons and other artwork, parallel to the use of statues in western churches.

    Reply
    1. Stanislaus Kosala

      Here is what the great orthodox scholar bishop Kallistos Ware has written on this topic:
      “In every Orthodox parish church, the Blessed Sacrament is normally reserved, most often in a tabernacle on the altar, although there is no strict rule as to the place of reservation. Orthodox, however, do not hold services of public devotion before the reserved sacrament, nor do they have any equivalent to the Roman Catholic functions of Exposition and Benediction, although there seems to be no theological (as distinct from liturgical) reason why they should not do so. The priest blesses the people with the sacrament during the course of the Liturgy, but never outside it.”
      “http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/history_timothy_ware_2.htm

      In most Orthodox churches whenever the altar is visible, so is the tabernacle.

      Reply
    2. Stanislaus Kosala

      Here are some photos of Orthodox churches. The tabernacle is still visible to the assembly even though there is an iconostasis:

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/msabeln/2015946989/in/set-72157604103812333

      http://www.saintprincevladimir.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/DSCN2729.jpg

      http://distancelearning.iocs.cam.ac.uk/uploads/videos/screens/StAndrew-London.jpg

      http://www.stjrussianorthodox.com/images4/firtsconf2010.jpg

      So maybe the tabernacle isn’t a distraction to devotion if the eastern orthodox have it on the altar but they never developed such a practice.

      Reply
  37. Chuck Middendorf

    First thing I notice: Clutter and junk.
    Be it the most “traditional” soaring Gothic church or the most “modern” 1970s new construction; be it an immersion font by the narthex or a tiny “bird bath” font somewhere else, I can’t help by notice how the community takes care of their woship space. Are there leaflet racks and paper everywhere? Unneeded chairs by the altar? Torn hymnals? The disgusting waterglass by the Presider’s Chair? Signs that say “no gum”?

    I’m always struck by the junk alllowed in our churches. And once they appear, they can never be removed.

    Reply

Posted

in

,

by

Chris Ángel

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading