*4.1. Musealisation and Recontextualisation of the Religious Object in the Ecclesiastical Museum*

The musealisation process of a religious object follows deviation from the original context and functionality. It is, as a rule, the least abusive solution given the object's values in its various material, historical, artistic and symbolic features, and functions as a safeguard for heritage at risk of abandonment, dispersion, abusive use, or irremediable loss. The effectiveness and efficiency of the process depend on the capacity of collections' curators to interrogate the meanings of objects and render them intellectually accessible to visitors.

A core concern in museum studies lies in determining how knowledge is created around objects (Dudley 2010; Fritsch 2021; Hooper-Greenhill 2000; Pearce 1994; Thompson 1994; Whitehead 2012) while recognising that the object interpretation and meanings are not objective or inherent, but, instead, are subjective, being 'situated and contextual' (Macdonald 2006, p. 2). The ecclesiastical museum differs from the others, however, since it is confessional and assumes a catechetical function, inverting the norm of exemption that assists museological practice. Its programme is univocal, without duplicity in the reading and interpreting the facts and concepts it presents, as the Church assumes its doctrine as a unique and universal truth. Therefore, the capacity to propose religious experiences in the museological path is taken, transforming the museum routine into an evangelising mission. To the conventional cultural function of the museum, the Church juxtaposes a spiritual slope to the ones under its tutelage.

The advantage of the ecclesiastical museum arises from its material and symbolic proximity to the original context. The occurrence of shared supervision within the same institutional framework and the geographical proximity between the church and the museum allow some objects to interrupt their museological functioning and temporarily serve in the liturgy, keeping the function that gives them meaning active.

The object is taken as a semiological sign. Thus, inherent to musealisation, there is a process of semantisation of the object, recovering the meaning from its original functionality or use. Like linguistic signs, objects, as semiological signs, have two orders of signification, according to Barthes (2009): denotation and connotation. While, at the denotation level, there is a sign consisting of the signifier and the signified, the connotation uses the first sign (signifier and signified) as its signifier and attaches to it an additional signified sign. For a long time, museums focused on the object's denotation or literal meaning. However, following the intangible heritage valuation, concern for connotation is growing, associating the object with a symbolic and expressive significance, which is dependent on the context in which it is used. The ecclesiastical museum focuses precisely on this second order of signification (connotation) with a pastoral purpose.

The catechetical use of the memory conveyed in the museum does not contradict museological pragmatics, provided that its execution should be rigorous in complying with the conservation and dissemination of collections, as determined by the *ICOM Code of ethics for museums* (ICOM 2017), adopted in 1986 and revised in 2004. Regarding the preservation of disaffected objects or those in permanent or temporary disuse, or the presentation of the respective theoretical fundamentals, the Church asserts itself as the most competent authority and the primary holder of the theological and liturgical knowledge that informs the religious heritage. By attaching catechesis to information, this circumstance works as a positive factor in the recontextualisation of the object in the ecclesiastical museum.

The religious sense is inherent to the programme of the ecclesiastical museum, assumed as an extension of the church and the pastoral action developed there. In this sense, the ecclesiastical museum offers the most favourable environment for the intelligibility of the religious object.
