I enclose a clipping from our local parish magazine in relation to the building of a replacement "worship centre" (or church) at this rural parish's second largest population centre.
The article counters objections to the "outsighting" of the tabernacle by deferring to "liturgical requirements set by the archdiocesan committee headed by Dr Tom Elich." This same gentleman previously had his trendy alterations to the local senior parish church in Beaudesert soundly rebuffed by its parishioners.
It seems incomprehensible that the Magisterium would condone the wholesale devaluation of the tabernacle (and what it contains) from anything less than the focal point of prayer, devotion and adoration within a church building proper.
The reason the church building is (according to the article) "no longer the quiet reflective place it used to be" is that it has over the past number of years not been demanded so by those in clerical authority - another "cart before the horse" rationalisation.
Surely returning the church building to its original intent - "My house is a house of prayer" - and according the tabernacle pride of place therein is both logical and appropriate. Or are we contending with a stealthy attack on belief in the Real Presence, as just about every other tenet of faith has been derided by some progressive theologians?
Parish priests seem to feel obliged to support archdiocesan directives and requirements over any personal feelings. The question is how do these directives/requirements get in place when they do not always reflect, or are, at best, a selective interpretation of guidelines and boundaries set by the highest universal Church authority?