Wednesday Liturgy: When a Church Is Desacralized
ROME, DEC. 18, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.Q: I am from Pennsylvania and due to significant demographic changes in the last couple of decades, many Catholic houses of worship have been closing, oftentimes being converted to secular (and, sadly, unseemly) purposes such as nightclubs. My question: While the Anglican usages provide for a "desacralization" of a house of worship in the book of "Incidental Services," I understand that in Roman rite there is no such rite or office, not even in the so-called Tridentine usage. My understanding is that the mere removal of the altar, relics, and other appurtenances performs this function. If this is correct, it seems at the least peculiar; if so, why would there not be such a rite? -- K.Y., Butler, Pennsylvania
A: I have not been able to find anything regarding a specific rite of relegation to profane use, probably because, until recently, a Catholic church rarely lost its consecration, even if no longer frequently used.
In the past a church would lose its consecration or solemn blessing in two principal cases.
One case was through the destruction of the greater part of its walls. But even in this case it was not desacralized if the walls were destroyed and rebuilt in several stages. Nor was it desacralized if new walls were less than the original.
Another case is if the local bishop reduces the building to profane use, as is still foreseen in Canon 1222 of the Code of Canon Law, to wit:
"§1. If a church cannot be used in any way for divine worship and there is no possibility of repairing it, the diocesan bishop can relegate it to profane but not sordid use.
"§2. Where other grave causes suggest that a church no longer be used for divine worship, the diocesan bishop, after having heard the presbyteral council, can relegate it to profane but not sordid use, with the consent of those who legitimately claim rights for themselves in the church and provided that the good of souls suffers no detriment thereby."
This relegation to profane use takes place only after the bishop issues a formal decree removing the church's dedication or consecration.
The subsequent removal of relics, altar and other items of sacred art is a consequence of this decree, but not necessarily the cause of the building losing its consecration.
In order for the decree to be valid, the bishop must first obtain the consent of any persons (juridical or physical) who can claim rights over the church. In practice this means the consent of the parish usually through the pastor unless the parish has already been suppressed.
If the church or the land on which it is built is the property of a religious institute, then the consent of the competent religious authority is also required.
In some rare cases a physical person might have a claim on a church such as a major donor whose grant was accepted on condition that the church would remain a sacred place for a certain period.
The bishop must also determine that the proposed use of the place will not be sordid. This is a prudential judgment that can vary according to time and place. But every effort should be made that no unseemly activities should be allowed in the future.
In at least one country in which the Church has had to close several relatively modern churches, it has preferred to have them demolished rather than turned over to unseemly use. This is not usually possible when closing churches that have significant architectural or historical merits.
As far as possible the artistic treasures of relegated churches should find a new home in other churches in the diocese or in other Catholic domains. This is both a sign of continuity of the faith in spite of demographic changes and an act of respect for those generations who built the original churches with so much love and sacrifice.
The beauty of no small number of modern church buildings has been greatly enhanced at relatively low cost by incorporating altars, stained glass windows, statuary, and other decorative elements from older no longer used churches.
A: I have not been able to find anything regarding a specific rite of relegation to profane use, probably because, until recently, a Catholic church rarely lost its consecration, even if no longer frequently used.
In the past a church would lose its consecration or solemn blessing in two principal cases.
One case was through the destruction of the greater part of its walls. But even in this case it was not desacralized if the walls were destroyed and rebuilt in several stages. Nor was it desacralized if new walls were less than the original.
Another case is if the local bishop reduces the building to profane use, as is still foreseen in Canon 1222 of the Code of Canon Law, to wit:
"§1. If a church cannot be used in any way for divine worship and there is no possibility of repairing it, the diocesan bishop can relegate it to profane but not sordid use.
"§2. Where other grave causes suggest that a church no longer be used for divine worship, the diocesan bishop, after having heard the presbyteral council, can relegate it to profane but not sordid use, with the consent of those who legitimately claim rights for themselves in the church and provided that the good of souls suffers no detriment thereby."
This relegation to profane use takes place only after the bishop issues a formal decree removing the church's dedication or consecration.
The subsequent removal of relics, altar and other items of sacred art is a consequence of this decree, but not necessarily the cause of the building losing its consecration.
In order for the decree to be valid, the bishop must first obtain the consent of any persons (juridical or physical) who can claim rights over the church. In practice this means the consent of the parish usually through the pastor unless the parish has already been suppressed.
If the church or the land on which it is built is the property of a religious institute, then the consent of the competent religious authority is also required.
In some rare cases a physical person might have a claim on a church such as a major donor whose grant was accepted on condition that the church would remain a sacred place for a certain period.
The bishop must also determine that the proposed use of the place will not be sordid. This is a prudential judgment that can vary according to time and place. But every effort should be made that no unseemly activities should be allowed in the future.
In at least one country in which the Church has had to close several relatively modern churches, it has preferred to have them demolished rather than turned over to unseemly use. This is not usually possible when closing churches that have significant architectural or historical merits.
As far as possible the artistic treasures of relegated churches should find a new home in other churches in the diocese or in other Catholic domains. This is both a sign of continuity of the faith in spite of demographic changes and an act of respect for those generations who built the original churches with so much love and sacrifice.
The beauty of no small number of modern church buildings has been greatly enhanced at relatively low cost by incorporating altars, stained glass windows, statuary, and other decorative elements from older no longer used churches.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
11:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home