Thursday, December 21, 2006

documentation

This from an entry at Zenit News Service, by Fr. McNamara (May 2, 2006 - ZE06050220). It seems to indicate a desire for something other than what we have here; although Fr. McNamara does make the observation that there is much flexibility permissible.

From the GIRM:

308. There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.


I'm informed by a student at TAC that the old GIRM made no mention of a corpus. This is fascinating, because it is in miniature, an example of the Church seeing fit to define that which was once universally understood.

3 comments:

  1. I'm guessing that the old GIRM took for granted that Catholics would display a crucifix.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mark, maybe you should remind your bishop of what the GIRM says, so they can replace the cruifix in your Cathedral to its place of honour, and get rid of the swan dive Christ. I'm sure there's a Protestant church that would take the Ressurifix cross off your bishop's hands!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mark, maybe you should remind your bishop of what the GIRM says, so they can replace the cruifix in your Cathedral to its place of honour, and get rid of the swan dive Christ.

    Not when the chancelloress of our diocese is a nun who wants to be a priest. When a bishop surrounds himself with such aides, don't hold your breath.

    ReplyDelete