Praxiteles

The Sarkamentshaus in the Muenster of Ulm in Germany which is 90′ high

@johnglas wrote:

‘…not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration (cf. above, no. 303)’. So much for the liturgical ‘unsuitability’ of having two altars which invariably means vandalising the ‘old’ altar in preference for a flimsy wooden structure or a misshapen lump of rock..

And as we are at it, here are a few more precepts from the Genral Instruction tot he Roman Missal outlining current liturgical law:

295. The sanctuary is the place where the altar stands, where the word of God is proclaimed, and where the priest, the deacon, and the other ministers exercise their offices. It should suitably be marked off from the body of the church either by its being somewhat elevated or by a particular structure and ornamentation. It should, however, be large enough to allow the Eucharist to be celebrated properly and easily seen.115

[Nothing there about demolishing altar rails]

299. The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. The altar should, moreover, be so placed as to be truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns.116 The altar is usually fixed and is dedicated.

[Nothing there about the NECESSITY of having a Volksaltar -it is all very open]

303. In building new churches, it is preferable to erect a single altar which in the gathering of the faithful will signify the one Christ and the one Eucharist of the Church.

In already existing churches, however, when the old altar is positioned so that it makes the people’s participation difficult but cannot be moved without damage to its artistic value, another fixed altar, of artistic merit and duly dedicated, should be erected and sacred rites celebrated on it alone. In order not to distract the attention of the faithful from the new altar, the old altar should not be decorated in any special way.

[Nothing there about demolishing old altars]

Full text here:

http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/revmissalisromanien.shtml

and original text here:

http://www.binetti.ru/collectio/liturgia/missale_files/igmr3ed.htm

@AoifeR wrote:

Hi,

Simple question…maybe not so simple, but we’ll see…could anyone tell me what the Greek-looking building on Sean McDermott St. is?

I walked down that street for the first time the other day and this building (though it’s in an awful state) stands out a mile in contrast to the flats and other dreadful buildings around it.

I coudn’t see anything on it that would identify it for me. It’s got some Greek script across the front, but I can’t read Greek… Any info would be greatly appreciated, it’s spiked my curiosity and I won’t be able to rest till I know what it is!

Thanks,

Aoife

From what I can gather, the church was built from 1845-1846 by Duncan Ferguson, a drawing master at the Royal Dublin Society. Well before 1900, it had been converted to a flour mill.

Praxiteles has been unable to see the full text of the inscription, bt what he has seen translates as [Dedicated?] fo God our Saviour. If you can get the full inscription we shall have a further look. DIsgraceful what has happened to the facade. So much for the Dublin CIty Council’s committment to architecture/heritage.

And here we have the current general norms for the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament as stipulated in the General Instruction to the Roman Missal – the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani

The Place for the Reservation of the Most Holy Eucharist

314. In accordance with the structure of each church and legitimate local customs, the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.125

The one tabernacle should be immovable, be made of solid and inviolable material that is not transparent, and be locked in such a way that the danger of profanation is prevented to the greatest extent possible.126 Moreover, it is appropriate that, before it is put into liturgical use, it be blessed according to the rite described in the Roman Ritual.127

315. It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated.128

Consequently, it is preferable that the tabernacle be located, according to the judgment of the Diocesan Bishop,

Either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in a form and place more appropriate, not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration (cf. above, no. 303);

Or even in some chapel suitable for the faithful’s private adoration and prayer129 and which is organically connected to the church and readily visible to the Christian faithful.
316. In accordance with traditional custom, near the tabernacle a special lamp, fueled by oil or wax, should be kept alight to indicate and honor the presence of Christ.130

317. In no way should all the other things prescribed by law concerning the reservation of the Most Holy Eucharist be forgotten.131

And here is a piece of legislation on Eucharistic reservation which is still in force:

http://www.romanrite.com/nullo.html

Another example of a Sakramentstabernakel this time from St. Martins in Kortrijk in Belgium

On tabernacles:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14424a.htm

@johnglas wrote:

Prax: A fascinating and erudite defence of the concept of the Real Presence and – more to the architectural point – of the existence of the tabernacle. But – where do you put it and what should it look like? By the late 19th century the convention had developed in almost all churches of having the tabernacle (of which only the door was ever seen, and that only when the veil was drawn back) as an integral part of the reredos or retable of the main altar – although there were sometimes tabernacles in the ‘side’ altars (or at least one of them – the ‘altar of repose’). The contemporary trend for free-standing tabernacles has led to an unfortunate ‘dumbing down’ of the whole concept of Reservation. Tabernacles are often crude objects on even cruder pedestals and any sense of mystery has been lost (or diminished).
I have never been a fan of ‘exposition’ and its growing popularity is very unfortunate. In medieval Scotland, the sacrament was reserved in a ‘Sacrament-house’, a kind of cupboard recessed into the wall, surrounded by a richly-decorated architrave drawing attention to the numinous nature of its contents. Something like this would be preferable to the current style and practice. I like the idea of a special Sacrament Chapel, distinct from the main or principal altar, but this is suitable only in larger churches or where an appropriate chapel already exists. I do not advocate destroying original altars to achieve this!
A not unsympathetic visitor to a Catholic church recently compared a modern tabernacle to a birdcage! There was no malice intended, but it perhaps suggests that we need a contemporary architectural expression that is worthy of what it is intended to contain.

I agree with you on the dumbing down of the whole iea of reservationa and of its Eucharistic implications – a sad reflection of the of the almost demised theology of the Eucharist currently informning many “liturgista” who (if we are lucky) subscribe to a form of Luthern dynamism (the Eucharist is the action) putside of which there is no Eucharist -hence the current fad of displacing the tradition Last Supper with the Event at Emmaus as the classical evangelical typos for the Eucharist.

To answer your question, shall we start here: Sacramentum Caritatis, 22 February 2007, no. 69: (the fruit of the deliberations of the last Syond of Bishops):
The location of the tabernacle

“69. In considering the importance of eucharistic reservation and adoration, and reverence for the sacrament of Christ’s sacrifice, the Synod of Bishops also discussed the question of the proper placement of the tabernacle in our churches. (196) The correct positioning of the tabernacle contributes to the recognition of Christ’s real presence in the Blessed Sacrament. Therefore, the place where the eucharistic species are reserved, marked by a sanctuary lamp, should be readily visible to everyone entering the church. It is therefore necessary to take into account the building’s architecture: in churches which do not have a Blessed Sacrament chapel, and where the high altar with its tabernacle is still in place, it is appropriate to continue to use this structure for the reservation and adoration of the Eucharist, taking care not to place the celebrant’s chair in front of it. In new churches, it is good to position the Blessed Sacrament chapel close to the sanctuary; where this is not possible, it is preferable to locate the tabernacle in the sanctuary, in a sufficiently elevated place, at the centre of the apse area, or in another place where it will be equally conspicuous. Attention to these considerations will lend dignity to the tabernacle, which must always be cared for, also from an artistic standpoint. Obviously it is necessary to follow the provisions of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal in this regard. (197) In any event, final judgment on these matters belongs to the Diocesan Bishop.”

And something on the Marini book and its efforts to block the reform of the reform:

http://www.archden.org/dcr/news.php?e=457&s=3&a=9644

For a reply to the above scroll down to p.98 of the link:

The Spirit of the Liturgy or Fidelity to
the Council: Response to Father Gy
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Antiphon has done a wonderful service in making this exchange available in English. Perhaps it might now think of making the famous Ratziner/Kaczynski échange in Stimmen der Zeit available to a wider public! Just a suggestion.