**7. Deconsecration Rites: Past**

The North-American pastoral theologian Michael Weldon makes the following critical observation concerning the profanation decree:

"This mandate ( ... ) terminates a building's blessing by the simple declaration of the local Bishop. This reflects good ecclesial order but perhaps an unbalanced ritual mathematics—an inflated sense of the performance power of an official declaration. With all the ritual prescribed for the dedication of a building, a ritual density during its lifecycle, the accomplishment of its closure with a simple episcopal declaration lacks a ritual sense. Major levels of ritual make a parish; so little is required to unmake it." (Weldon 2004, pp. 52–53).

Weldon, based on his experiences as a pastor involved in the reorganization of parishes and the subsequent church closures, analyzed such conflict-laden processes and designed rites to help people cope with the trauma church closure may cause. In the context of church desecration Weldon makes reference to the penitential rite of reparation and describes pre-Vatican II medieval rites, which:

"( ... ) prescribed elaborate ceremonies if a building was profaned. These included 'lustrations'—blessings with baptismal water, later 'Gregorian' water (water, salt, ashes, and wine), a circling of the building's exterior with lament psalmody, the washing of the place of defilement with blest water and the singing of the Litany of the Saints." (Weldon 2004, p. 132).

Winfried Haunerland states that there has never been an *Ordo*; a binding order of liturgical acts within Roman Catholic liturgy, in the *Pontificale Romanum* or the *Rituale Romanum* for church deconsecration and that all known sources are of a local diocesan nature (Haunerland 2016, p. 83). He also points to the fact that although the Roman liturgical books before Vatican II did not contain any rules or regulations concerning deconsecration rites, there were West German liturgical books from the first half of the 20th century that did describe rites for the demolition of consecrated altars and consecrated churches (Haunerland 2016, p. 69). These rites mainly focused on the deconsecration of the altar. The priest, on explicit instruction of the bishop, should, together with other priests, kneel down in front of the altar, and pray silently the Lord's Prayer and Ave Maria, thereafter Antiphon, Versicle and Oration of the Saint were to be recited out loud. The altar stone or altar mensa should then be removed without damaging it and washed off by the priest. Haunerland assumes that this washing is a ritual withdrawal of the initial anointment, since this "washing off" is also described in the 1913 published journal *Ephemerides Liturgicae* with reference to the twelve anointed crosses (Haunerland

2016, pp. 70–71). The relics are to be removed with extreme care from the altar(s). Although the altar deconsecration is the central act, when it comes to chapel or church deconsecration as a whole, there are further references on how to deal with this ritually, a few days before the physical destruction of the church, relics should be transferred to another, by the bishop designated, church. This transfer in some cases is conducted by the clergy as well as the faithful in a procession. Statues and images of saints should be transferred as well. These transferals should be conducted before the altar is deconsecrated (Haunerland 2016, pp. 71–72).

A detailed historical overview of profanation rites is provided by the theologian Christine Zimmerhof in her contribution on liturgy of church profanation (Zimmerhof 2012). Zimmerhof describes rites of reconsecration ("Wiedereinweihung") after a church has been desecrated in the time until the decretals of Gregory IX in 1234 AD. A church could lose its dedication by events such as the demolition of the church or of the altar, the removal of the altar, the shedding of blood, murder, or the sinful outpour of human semen (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 12–16). With the issuing of the decretals, a source of canon law, the reasons for reconsecrating a church were reduced, only through the demolition of the main part or the complete structure of a church building, could the building lose its consecration. Other violations could be repaired by purification rites. Until the time of the Council of Trent, the secular use of a church building was something undesired by the church and all measures were taken to upkeep all churches and church reuse, as we have come to know it nowadays, was unthinkable. The preferred solution when a church could not be preserved was that it would be demolished and many churches were indeed demolished with reference to the Council of Trent. Trent did not stipulate how a church deconsecration should be ritually conducted, the only stipulation was that an immovable crucifix should be erected at the place where the church once stood (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 16–19). After Trent, several diocesan initiatives emerged such as the rules that had to be observed in case of church and altar profanation as described in the *Acta Ecclesiae Mediolanensis*, and more specifically therein the description of the deconsecration rite *De ratione adhibenda in Ecclesiis, Altaribusque profanandis* of bishop Charles Borromeo in 1576. In this document, the actual profanation rite, which took several days, is described and this rite consists of the transfer of relics and statues to another church, the assembly of the clergy of the old church, as well as the clergy of the new church and the faithful, the demolition and removal of altars, the exhumation of bones, the procession to the new church, and the erection of a crucifix at the place where the church was situated as a permanent remembrance. Zimmerhof argues that pastoral-liturgical elements did play a role in this rite since the faithful move to the new church in a procession and also aid in exhuming the dead. It is noteworthy, according to Zimmerhof, that there is no mention of the celebration of the last Mass or the removal of the host from the tabernacle, whereas the transfer of the relics and statues are given a lot of attention. The demolition of the altar seems to be the decisive act that deconsecrates the church. The issuing of a profanation decree is not mentioned in the document (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 19–22). The remarkable fact that the Eucharist is not mentioned anywhere in the older liturgical books in relation to church deconsecration could, according to Haunerland, be explained by the fact that in these historical cases, most church buildings may have already not been in use for a long time (Haunerland 2016, p. 78). Zimmerhof furthermore describes the rite of altar deconsecration in the 1591 published *Ornatus ecclesiasticus* of Jacob Müller, which is partly based on the document of Borromeo, which is more detailed. In this document, it is described that the altar should be prepared as if a Mass were to be celebrated there. The religious official conducts several rites in word (prayers, creed) and act (kneeling down, extinguishing candles, removing statues, washing the altar, removing the relics from the altar, demolishing part of the stipes of the altar with a hammer) (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 25–28). Zimmerhof also describes the way in which two other historical documents deal with altar exsecration, such as a 14th century Mainz pontifical (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 28–29), and the deconsecration regulation of the Münster diocesan synod of 1655 (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 29–30). The deconsecration regulation of the Paderborn diocesan synod of 1688 also deals with altar exsecration, but with church or chapel deconsecration as well. Relics and statues and images of saints must be transferred to another, by the bishop designated, church in the presence

of the faithful and the clergy of the church it is to be transferred too. After the exsecration rite, the altars should be destroyed and a crucifix should be erected where the church once stood (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 30–34). Other local West German deconsecration rites document slight variations of the Paderborn synod of 1688 (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 34–36). The final historical example Zimmerhof presents is the above mentioned in 1913 published deconsecration rite in the journal *Ephemerides Liturgicae*, which also refers to the *Acta Ecclesiae Mediolanensis* and which corresponds for the most part with the rite that has been described there. It differs from that rite in the sense that the bishop as initiator and overseer of the rite is not mentioned here and neither are the faithful or the clergy of the new church. In the 1913 rite, the altar exsecration is, for the first time, not the only act that effects the deconsecration of the church, but also the removal and washing of the twelve crosses on the walls should establish this (Zimmerhof 2012, pp. 36–37).
