Case LIII: Reconsecration of a Portable Altar

The question about reconsecration of an altare portatile is frequently brought up. It has often been laid before the S. Cong. Rituum and apparently contradictory answers have been given. This is due probably to the fact that the question was accompanied by special circumstances, which, while influencing the answer of the Congregation, were not mentioned in the text of the decision. De Herdt’s Sacrae Liturgiae Praxis, says about it (Tom. 1, p. 243, § 177): If the sepulcher is intact and the sacred relics are preserved, but the episcopal seal impressed in Spanish wax over the sepulcher has been erased, then according to the decree of May 23, 1846, the portable altar needs a new consecration because the identity and authenticity of the relics are not established; but according to the decree of March 11, 1837, celebration may take place on such an altar provided the consecrated stone or portable altar is intact; and according to the decree of September 23, 1848, a portable altar whose seal is broken, or on which the seal placed over the relics enclosed in the sepulcher does not exist, does not lose its consecration unless the sepulcher or its cover has been broken, or that cover has been removed. To understand these decrees, which seem contradictory, it must be considered that the episcopal seal is not something essential to the consecration of a portable altar, as is also clear from the pontifical, in which no mention is made, in the consecration of a portable altar, of an episcopal seal to be placed upon the sepulcher; thus the seal must be regarded only as a sign or testimony of the authenticity of the relics and of the consecration of the altar that has been performed. Therefore a portable altar whose seal impressed in Spanish wax over the sepulcher does not exist or has been erased does not lose its consecration unless the sepulcher or its cover has been broken, that is, the small stone which closes the repository of the relics, or even if this cover alone has been removed; nor does it need a new consecration provided it is certainly established from continuous use or otherwise that the altar was duly consecrated. But if the episcopal seal has been erased and it is not certainly established from continuous use or otherwise that the altar was duly consecrated—as when the altar has fallen out of use and has been kept by laypeople, etc.—it needs a new consecration, even if the sacred relics are found preserved, according to the cited decree of May 23, 1846, because the identity and authenticity of the relics are not established and, consequently, neither is the consecration of the altar.

The decision of May 23, 1846, above referred to, is quite similar to the one of February 28, 1880, as above reprinted. But even in this case, the Congregation does not maintain the essential necessity of the episcopal seal, for in the same inquiry: dubium II utrum sepulchro apponi possit et debeat sigillum Episcopale? it answers: apponi posse: i. e., therefore, if the stone is really consecrated, the seal may or may not be added afterwards; in each case it is allowed to use the altar.

The noteworthy point of the decision of February 28, 1880, lies in the words: nisi constet (Altaria) rite fuisse consecrata. This proof requires only a certitudo moralis, namely, that the altar-stone had always been considered consecrated, has always been in use, and that there is no visible sign of an opening of the locking-stone (operculum). Compare with this the wording of the above cited decision of March 11, 1837. Doubt II. Are altars to be interdicted if the sepulcher exists without a seal? Doubt III. Is that at least to be carried out when the sepulcher is visible but no trace of a seal placed upon it remains?—Answer. Provided the consecrated stone or portable altar is intact, celebration may take place upon it.

Let us consider the matter in praxi. The locking of the altarstones takes place at the consecration, and the little stone cover is firmly cemented. Then these consecrated stones are placed in reserve, and they are only sealed when the bishop causes them to be distributed. The seal is simply placed upon the stone by someone in the episcopal chancery, to show which bishop has performed the consecration. It is well known that sealing wax falls easily off the hard stone. An awkward pressure, the carelessness of a sexton while decorating the altar, suffices to knock off the brittle seal, especially when not placed in an appropriate depression, but on the surface of the stone.

Such decisions of the S. Congregatio cause considerable anxiety to pastors, and if the seal on the portable altar is broken or entirely gone, they think the stone must be immediately dispatched to the bishop for reconsecration, when in fact it has been in constant use for a long time, and has been examined in many visitations. Hence the rule is to examine carefully the locking-stone and its cementing, and if everything there is found solid and in place, there is no need to be anxious and troubled about presence or absence of the seal.

F. v. Oer.