Adoration Via Bullet Proof Glass

[dUSt]

I know we've talked about this before, but I forgot and I don't feel like searching...

 

In order to have perpetual adoration, the Holy Eucharist must be accompanied at all times. Yet, the Holy Eucharist can be left alone when secured within a tabernacle.

 

I think that many or most churches may not offer adoration because they cannot find volunteers to commit to it.

 

So, with the advancement of modern technology, as far as transparent materials such as ballistic glass made from polycarbonate and thermoplastic, is it conceivable that we may be able to view the Eucharist inside such containers or behind such protection in the future?

 

For example, a transparent tabernacle, or a monstrance setup in a space behind bullet proof glass?

[Amppax]

I know we've talked about this before, but I forgot and I don't feel like searching...

 

In order to have perpetual adoration, the Holy Eucharist must be accompanied at all times. Yet, the Holy Eucharist can be left alone when secured within a tabernacle.

 

I think that many or most churches may not offer adoration because they cannot find volunteers to commit to it.

 

So, with the advancement of modern technology, as far as transparent materials such as ballistic glass made from polycarbonate and thermoplastic, is it conceivable that we may be able to view the Eucharist inside such containers or behind such protection in the future?

 

For example, a transparent tabernacle, or a monstrance setup in a space behind bullet proof glass?

 

NOPE.  At least not the tabernacle.  Code of Canon law canon 938: 

 

 

§3. The tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved habitually is to be immovable, made of solid and opaque material, and locked in such a way that the danger of profanation is avoided as much as possible.§4. For a grave cause, it is permitted to reserve the Most Holy Eucharist in some other fit-ting and more secure place, especially at night.

 

Can't be transparent.  Hmm, the next paragraph does make exception's for grave cause, but I don't think perpetual adoration would count, simply because the law only stipulates that the Church be open for part of the day for veneration, its a few paragraphs up from these two paragraphs.  I'm intrigued by the second idea though.   

Edited December 10, 2012 by Amppax

[dUSt]

I guess my question is, can the code of canon law be changed? If opaque materials were the only "secure" material at the time this law was written, was the purpose of putting "opaque" in there a matter of keeping the Eucharist secure, or was the intent of including that word truly so we could no "see" it?

[Amppax]

I guess my question is, can the code of canon law be changed? If opaque materials were the only "secure" material at the time this law was written, was the purpose of putting "opaque" in there a matter of keeping the Eucharist secure, or was the intent of including that word truly so we could no "see" it?

 

Well clerical celibacy is a canon, and that could be changed.  So yes, it could change, but currently, it's against the rules. Your second Idea is interesting.  It actually reminds me of what we have here at Franciscan.  Our perpetual adoration chapel has glass cover in front of the monstrance.  This is because in the past, people had broken in and attempted to steal the host (actually the story I heard was that they succeeded, but Franciscan legends aren't the most trustworthy).  However, the host still needs to be attended when it is exposed.  

Edited December 10, 2012 by Amppax

[CatholicCid]

Also, a related canon:

 

Can. 942 It is recommended that in these churches or oratories, there is to be each year a solemn exposition of the blessed Sacrament for an appropriate, even if not for a continuous time, so that the local community may more attentively meditate on and adore the eucharistic mystery. This exposition is to take place only if a fitting attendance of the faithful is foreseen, and the prescribed norms are observed.

 

Emphasis added. 

[AnneLine]

dUSt, I think you are raising a really interesting question, and an important one.  Because it really is about intent and reality, isn't it.  A big metal box LOOKS more secure... but there have been many stories of whole tabernacles being stolen and the Blessed Sacrament tossed to the side of the road.  (Makes me sick to type, but that is reality.....).  

 

We currently are MUCH more likely to use bullet proof plexiglass stuff to protect human treasures.....

 

After the pieta' was injured in St. Peter's SHE went behind the bullet proof partition......

 

And the witness factor of being able to SEE the Blessed sacrament is also an argument in favor to me.  Lord knows I wasn't (and am not!) in favor of the 'chrystal cathedral' type of church, but when they were talking about what to do with the structure and what to re-name it I semi-fancifully wondered about consecrating a G I A N T host and putting Him up so He could be seen through a GIANT Plexiglass enclosure all over the Orange diocese...  and renaming the Cathedral in honor of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus....  What a wonderful thing to be able to kneel in one's home and adore Him from afar.....

 

I see that CatholicCid has raised another good objection about the adoration of the faithful.. but as I just noted, there could be arguments made both ways... Of course, I guess that also means He could be distained from afar as well.... but I would think, knowing the Heart of my God, that He'd be open to anything that would let us grow closer to Him in love.    

 

Just pondering this.....  really interesting question......

Edited December 10, 2012 by AnneLine

[ChristinaTherese]

One of the parishes around my home has quasi-perpetual adoration, because the Eucharist is reserved in a kind of monstrance/tabernacle, I guess. That is, He's in a box made out of some sort of metal (presumably some sort of precious metal), and there are doors that can be opened in the front to expose Him and are closed when Jesus is left alone. This makes it so that they don't need people adoring all of the time. (I don't know any of the specifics of why or how this is licit, though, so maybe this won't help. Also, just a disclaimer, look at my religion label... I don't necessarily know the right terms.)

[dUSt]

That is an interesting concept actually.

 

Imagine this...

 

A room or chapel has a tabernacle in it, behind bulletproof glass--so there is no way to actually get to or touch the tabernacle. The tabernacle is made out of solid metal. Inside the room is a switch or button that opens the door to the tabernacle, exposing the Eucharist. So, when a person is present, the doors can be opened. When the person leaves, the doors could be closed. All the while, the Eucharist remains secure.

 

Is this a scenario that would be allowed according to today's law?

 

[dUSt]

Alternately, a tabernacle could be built in a way that has a bullet proof partition inside of it, with two doors. Therefore, a permanent key (affixed to a chain) would still be used to open the tabernacle from the front, but the Eucharist would remain secure inside the tabernacle behind the bullet proof partition. This would allow the faithful to come and adore the Eucharist, and close and lock the tabernacle door when they left.

[truthfinder]

Well the problem with the button is that more often than not it would be a lay person "exposing" the Eucharist - and that's not supposed to occur except in special circumstances.  The Eucharist really ought to be exposed and reposed by a priest (or deacon I guess) but not the laity not even EMHC's unless there is a real need.  And even though you wouldn't be touching the tabernacle/monstrance, the principle remains the same.  

[dUSt]

Ahhh, another loophole foiled. Drats.

[Slappo]

AnnieLine: Then you would have all sorts of problems with due reverence. Do I need to genuflect to the Cathedral every time I exit a building where the Eucharist would be in sight? Getting out of my car in a parking lot? Why should I go do a holy hour at the church when I can just sit in my front lawn and look at the cathedral with binoculars? I think such a thing would take the solemnity out of reverence and due respect for the Eucharist.

 

 

 

 

Edit: that last sentence is totally butchered and im too lazy to fix it, but not lazy enough to not write a note explaning that it is butchered. I hope you get my drift.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Slappo

[BigJon16]

My parish just started up a perpetual adoration chapel. It took about a year to get everything set and find enough volunteers to cover every hour of the week. But, we began two weeks ago, and it has been really awesome!

 

I think that when we have a big enough love for the Blesses Sacrament to attempt to start an adoration chapel, he helps everything to fall into place in order for it to work. We must trust Him. It will take a lot of organizing and hard work, but His grace is powerful enough to do anything.That's what happened with ours, and I know that other chapel organizers from other cities have similar testimonies.

 

 

So, do you need a see-through tabernacle? I wouldn't think so. Just a resolve to bring Christ to the lives of others in a very profound, physical way.

 

 

[Basilisa Marie]

I thought there was some symbolic significance to having opaque material, like something to do with referencing the Holy of Holies.  

[CatholicCid]

A few other rules that, I believe, would still be in force today. These are from Eucharistiae Sacramentum from the Congregation for Divine Worship:

 

(Discussing lenghty periods of Exposition)

88. Where there cannot be uninterrupted exposition because there is not a sufficient number of worshipers, it is permissible to replace the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle at fixed hours that are announced ahead of time. But this may not be done more than twice a day, for example, at midday and at night.

 

 

(Discussing who can expose the host)

91. The ordinary minister for exposition of the eucharist is a priest or deacon. At the end of the period of adoration, before the reposition, he blesses the congregation with the sacrament.

In the absence of a priest or deacon or if they are lawfully impeded, the following persons may publicly expose and later repose the eucharist for the adoration of the faithful:

a. an acolyte or special minister of communion;

b. upon appointment by the local Ordinary, a member of a religious community or of a pious association of laymen or laywomen which is devoted to eucharistic adoration.

Such ministers may open the tabernacle and also, as required, place the ciborium on the altar or place the host in the monstrance. At the end of the period of adoration, they replace the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. It is not lawful, however, for them to give the blessing with the sacrament.

 

 

 

Paragraph 88 is stating, in my interpretation, that the host should not be exposed/reposed more than twice a day. This would, it seem, limit the possibly of a "slide tabernacle door" or some such button that exposes/reposes the Sacrament when needed.

 

It is also useful to remember that we can (and should) adore our Lord reserved in the tabernacle, even if He is not exposed.

 

 

Edited December 10, 2012 by CatholicCid