Cardinal Robert Sarah has made additional comments about the so-called “ad orientem” or eastward direction for the Eucharistic Prayer wherein priest and people all face one direction for the canon of the Mass. As widely reported, he has expressed a desire for priest to teach on and implement the option by the first Sunday of Advent.
I have noted earlier my support for his view and my hope to further teach and implement this option on a more regular basis. As I continue to teach the faithful about the Eastward “orientation” of Mass I want to present some of what I have offered. Soon enough I want to put my reflection in a letter format to my congregation. What follows is a series of separate reflections I have made in verbal settings.
This is not a scholarly paper, just a pastor’s attempt to explain and encourage the faithful to lay hold of the vision of the eastward orientation, even if at first it puzzles them. At the end of these brief reflections there is also a concern I express.
Historical errors. Mass facing the people is a modern phenomenon. It was largely unknown in the ancient world. Back in the 1960s and 70s it was widely thought that the early Christians faced each other for the Mass. But these conclusions were based on dubious theories about Masses celebrated in the days of persecution in the so-called “house churches” where the faithful gathered in secrecy for Mass. The ancient Christians did not call these places “house churches” but rather, the Domus Dei (the house of God). The term “house church” conjures up informality and fueled an emphasis on the Mass as a simple meal. But such liturgies were anything but informal and meal-like. The descriptions we have of them indicate a great deal of formality, and as ancient texts and recent archeological findings in places like Dura Europa show, the liturgy was directed eastward. I have written more on this here. Note the following excerpt from the Didiscalia written in 250 A.D. and see the formality and Eastward direction.
Now, in your gatherings, in the holy Church, convene yourselves modestly in places of the brethren, as you will, in a manner pleasing and ordered with care. Let the place of the priests be separated in a part of the house that faces east. In the midst of them is placed the bishop’s chair, and with him let the priests be seated. Likewise, and in another section let the laymen be seated facing east. For thus it is proper: that the priests sit with the bishop in a part of the house to the east and after them the lay men and the lay women…Now, you ought to face east to pray, for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east… And if there is one to be found who is not sitting in his place let the deacon who is within, rebuke him, and make him to rise and sit in his fitting place… Likewise, the deacon ought to see that there are none who whisper or sleep or laugh or nod off. For in the Church it is necessary to have discipline, sober vigilance, and attentive ear to the Word of the Lord.
So presumptions that the early Masses were informal meal-like experiences around tables do not seem to be born up by evidences such as this.
Orientation is about the Cross, not the compass. While it is true that the ancient Church, and many ancient peoples faced east, toward the rising sun to pray, and while this remains ideal today, it is not always possible to position buildings “compass-east.”
As people settled in cities, the city grid did not always permit the orienting of the church’s apse to the East. Thus, As Cardinals Ratzinger and others have pointed out, the cross came to take on the point of focus and became a sort of Liturgical East. All faced the crucifix to pray.
Later as tabernacles came to occupy a space in the center of the altar, the Crucifix, altar and the tabernacle were all aligned on the same axis. This remains an ideal combination today and the bishops have rightly encouraged us to have our tabernacles in the central axis of the Church where it can be truly central and prominent.
Thus the happy coincidence occurs that we face the altar, the tabernacle and the crucifix. Here are two symbols of Christ, and one his true presence. Jesus Christ is the center of our life, as such wherever we face, when we face him, we are properly oriented.
It is for reasons such as this that Cardinal Ratzinger (who also preferred that we should one day return to the common eastward orientation) encouraged that, even when Mass was said facing toward the people, a crucifix should be placed on the altar to remind us that we are facing the Lord, not each other.
Through Christ our Lord. As I noted in a previous article here, the Eucharistic Prayer is wholly directed to the Father. Thus why do we face Christ? Simply put, we pray to the Father through Christ our Lord. Thus our prayer of adoration and gratitude in the Eucharistic Prayer is directed to the Father, but is directed there through Christ our Lord. We the members of Christ’s Body look to the Father through Jesus, and speak to him through Jesus. We gaze upon him as it were, up and through Christ on the Cross. Visually we are reminded of all this by the Crucifix, Tabernacle and altar we face together.
I stand with you! As a priest and a pastor I have a complex relationship with the congregation in the sacred liturgy. As the celebrant of the Mass I act in the person of Christ the Head, and thus I am a sacrament and sign of his presence as the true High Priest of every liturgy. Christ stands at the head of us looking to the Father and offering him perfect praise. We behind him look also to the Father.
So, as a priest I am for the congregation the celebrant and a sign of the presence of Christ. But with you the congregation I am a brother. Thus, I, like them stand before God like a blind beggar or a languishing leper. I stand before the crucifix, I stand before the Lord, seeking and pleading for his mercy and grace. This is more beautifully symbolized by us having a common “eastward” stance before God looking for the Lord to return and begging mercy and grace in the meantime.
Christ will come again. The Crucifix is more than a reminder of the historical fact of the Passion. The crucifix points to the whole paschal mystery: the passion and death, resurrection and ascension. Further, the crucifix also has an eschatological significance that Christ will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. As such, when we look to the cross we look for Jesus to come again. We proclaim your death O Lord, and profess your resurrection, Until you come.
Facing the Cross together we communally look for Christ to come again. This beautiful and happy thought is also declared in the embolism of the Our Father, where we await the blessed hope and the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Yes, together we stand looking to the east: “When will he come?!” Come Lord Jesus! And may you find us looking for you, in joyful hope.
Ok, just a few thoughts of mine.
But let me reiterate the concerns that Cardinal Sarah needs to address to the world’s bishops on this matter. Otherwise the wishes and attempts of priests may prove dead on arrival. While it is true that a priest can use this option on his own, Bishops who are displeased with such a notion can apply a good deal of pressure on priests who seek to fulfill the request. It is not merely that some bishops might be “nasty” about it. Rather, most priests do not seek to do things (and optional things at that) that are displeasing to their bishop or might create dissentions among the faithful. Consensus among priests and bishops to respect the option of eastward orientation and the wish of Cardinal Sarah is going to be important for success in bring forth a wider use of it. Even if a particular priest or bishop does not prefer such an option, an official communiqué from the Cardinal (not just a talk at a liturgical conference) can go a long way to defuse conflicts. A letter “on Vatican stationery” can assist mutual respect in this matter.
Priest too who support the option to face east might also assist the faithful by implementing the option at certain Masses, but not all. We who support the Eastward stance of the Eucharistic prayer have insisted all along that this is an option. And thus we might demonstrate a pastoral solicitude for those who prefer the Eucharistic prayer facing the people even after our teaching. If this thing becomes a liturgy war it will be a countersign and is doomed to failure and overreaction.
To reiterate, an official communiqué from Cardinal Sarah to the world’s bishops is important to preserve charity among bishops and priests. Pastoral prudence is also very important for those of us who would like to more widely use the Eastward option. This will be a hard change for some. And while I feel very strongly that the eastward orientation of the Eucharistic prayer is best, I do not seek to do to others what was done to us all in the late 1960s as changes railroaded through our churches at the hands of enthusiastic clergy but bewildered parishioners.
As always, your comments and corrections are appreciated. I am grateful if you would address the issues, not me. This helps keep the conversation going between all the readers. Caritas!
View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
Hardly the same as the 1960-70’s hwy-jacking of the Mass by liberals and free masons….3 cheers for the Cardinal!!!!
@ RodH I recently heard a talk by convert professor/author Joseph Pearce. He stated that “we converts want a no-nonsense Catholicism.” I see you’ve found that in the traditional Latin Mass [TLM] offered by FSSP. My Norwalk, Connecticut parish offers a solemn high TLM as the principal Mass every Sunday at 9:30 AM. My wife and I—as well as our convert-pastor—likewise prefer “no-nonsense Catholicism”.
Regarding “Posted by Christopher Schaefer on Tuesday, Jul 26, 2016 12:10 PM (EDT)”.
Thank you for your kind words. I and others were run plumb out of our local parish {along with 6 priests in 10 years…} by the local deacon and his buddies. But it was that event that allowed me to find our wonderful FSSP parish so praise God for it! The Bishop refused to send another Priest into the lion’s den so that parish now has a sacramental Priest only, a wonderful Priest, too, as were most all the others.
But my newly converted son-in-law {I led my entire adult family to the Catholic faith} just pressed for a weekly Rosary so I’m back to lead that at least. Praise God for my son-in-law. He is a fine young man and loves the Lord Jesus and His Church.
@ RodH There’s an old saying: “A convert is more Catholic than a Catholic”. I’m married to a convert (she a former Baptist who converted to Catholicism at age 18!), so I can vouch for how true this is. My pastor—also a convert!—summed this up: unlike a cradle Catholic, he had to study the faith, decide it was true, then make that ‘swim across the Tiber’, even though it meant the loss of friends, financial difficulties, etc. (He had been an Episcopalian pastor who, in addition to his now-Catholic priestly duties, had to take a teaching job to support his wife and children.)
Hang on to your Bible, Catechism and Denzinger, RodH. (You also could add John Henry Newman to that list.) I hope you teach an adult Bible or Catechism class at your parish.
“I believe Jesus would face the congregation.”
Except, of course, he didn’t (at his Last Supper).
Regarding: “Posted by Peter Aiello on Sunday, Jul 24, 2016 12:39 AM (EDT)”. Wow… That is the point. READ the Scripture and you find the FORMALIZATION OF THE CELEBRATION OF THE EUCHARIST BY NONE OTHER THAN ST PAUL HIMSELF.
Regarding: “Posted by Suzanne on Sunday, Jul 24, 2016 11:19 PM (EDT)”. Now we find the schmaltzy wristband theology of WWJD entering a thread of comments on how WE are supposed to worship HIM?
Monsignor Pope…I think a good start for the Church might just be a rerun of CCD. From the beginning.
Honestly, I’m glad I was raised Protestant. That enabled me to convert and thereby along the trail receive an excellent RCIA training. Having a Bible, a couple Catechisms and a copy of Denzinger around the house has sure made navigating thru the murky waters of Feel Good Semi-Protestantism that seem to flow pretty much everywhere in the Catholic Church today…
I believe Jesus would face the congregation. Throughout the gospels, the most outstanding trait of Jesus is His desire to create a personal relationship with everyone he met. He spoke to them, looked them in the eye, reached out and touched them.
None of these attributes are represented by a priest turning his back on the congregation during the most important and intimate moment of the Mass. On the contrary….turning your back on someone is a sign of alienation and rudeness. Certainly not something Jesus would ever condone.
Keep facing your flock, Father. That’s what Jesus would do.
Apparently the early love feasts were informal. In 1Corinthians 11:17-34, Saint Paul criticizes the Corinthians for being excessively informal to the point of not recognizing their purpose. The passage from the Didiscalia says nothing of the gathering being a Eucharistic meal. It speaks of hearing the Word of the Lord.
“So presumptions that the early Masses were informal meal-like experiences around tables do not seem to be born up by evidences such as this.” Does the Didiscalia carry more weight than Scripture?
And how many of the sick, starving and poor will this help?
Christ gave us two rules, and said we would be judged on our compassion. Facing east contributes to none of these and offers little except division and distraction.
Is not God omnipresent? This obsession and arguing seems a sad waste of time and energy. Can we not allow our Lord outside the little boxes of our minds we try to squeeze Him into? Can we not allow ourselves to see that God has chosen to make His people His dwelling place, His Temple. Can we not seek and see our Lord?
I read Msgr. Pope’s article with interest, and believe it would help many Christians to better understand why East, and what Liturgical East means.
.
Many commenters here, and many others elsewhere, have shared their preferences, inclinations, and opinions about facing Liturgical East - both pro and con - as well as about a number of other liturgical matters. Many have ably defended their views about all these.
.
The question that I would ask each of us to ask of ourselves is this: “How does Jesus wish Mass to be celebrated?” After all, it is His Divine Majesty’s own Holy Mass; He instituted it; and He is present as the sacred Victim and Priest at every celebration of Holy Mass as it takes place everywhere in the world.
.
I suppose many people might say, “Oh, Jesus doesn’t care. Any way we see fit to celebrate Mass should be fine with Him.” If that were true, I would find it a peculiar state of affairs - after all, Jesus transformed ordinary bread and wine into His very Body and Blood so that we might partake of Him, thus transforming us into Himself, and this He did the night before He shed every last drop of His blood upon the Cross to accomplish the most enormous project in mankind’s history - the redemption of men and women who had been lost and slaves to sin and death.
.
And all of this is presented anew to the Father, and to us, at every Mass. At each Mass the Eternal becomes as fresh as this morning’s dewdrops on the lawn. This is momentous material! Redemption! Heaven! Union with Him! His Sacrifice! All of these events and their consideration, are more important, and more wonderful than our favorite team winning the SuperBowl, or our buying our dream house, than our child being accepted on full scholarship into the school of her choice, or even us winning a 62 billion dollar PowerBall lottery!
.
How would He like to see the proceedings go?
.
I don’t know the answer to that question - that’s above my pay grade. I would like Him to be asked, though. And in the meantime, when I attend the celebration of the ordinary vernacular Mass at my ordinary local parish each Sunday, perhaps it means something to Jesus that we bow our heads in prayer, pay attention to the prayers, prepare our hearts ahead of hand, keep a reverent silence, and sing His praises with all our heart, mind, and strength, and try to carry some of the graces we’ve received out into our everyday lives.
.
Sometimes when it’s cold out, I mix up a batch of Swiss Miss cocoa, and I stir in a little extra cocoa, some vanilla extract, and some whipped cream if I have it on hand. I’ll ask my husband, “do you want the regular cocoa? Or the extra special kind?”
.
He always wants the cocoa “extra special.”
.
The Mass. There’s no way we can make it too special.
Carol Goodson wrote:
“At the Last Supper, Jesus was sitting at table with His disciples when He instituted the Eucharist. He was facing them, and then handing around the bread and wine”
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, what can one say about comments which are totally uininformed? Tables for formal meals, both Jewish and Gentile, in Our lord’s time, were either crescent-shaped or sigma-shaped. all the feasters sat on one side of the table; the other side was left free so that those serving the meal could set dishes and courses, remove and replace them. In other words, the famous Leonardo da Vinci painting of the Last Supper is a Renaissance fantasy, with no relation to the setting of the actual Last Supper (which one may see depicted more historically accurately in the mosaics of San Vitale in Ravenna).
Carol Goodson’s comment, in short, is premised on a mistaken notion, and so leads to an irrelevant conclusion.
I reject the politicization of this issue, as we all should.
I would have to see this in practice and pray and reflect on it.
It has been in my mind this last month as I attend mass and one thing has struck me…during the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest celebrant is acting in alter Christus…and we in a sense are re enacting the Last Supper…so it seems very appropriate that we are all gathered around a table with Christ/the priest at the head facing us.
Am I missing something?
Good commentary! My comments presume Cardinal Sarah’s issued a suggestion, not a directive.
In some areas, Latin is used for the Sanctus and Agnus Dei only during Advent and/or Lent. No problem. So why not go ad orientem at, say, one Sunday Mass in the parish each week of Advent? Announce it in advance, explain it, ask for open-mindedness, and tell them you’ll be interested to know, after Advent, how they felt about it. Repeat at Lent.
I think they’ll come to appreciate it, unless you have a parish chock full of folks who simply hate tradition. And for them, it will do them good to realize, in a more or less nonthreatening way, that their opinions are not the measure of the whole Church. It might help them become more open-minded. These traditional forms have a beauty and a power to draw souls. Not for no reason have these forms endured for 2,000 years.
It seems to me bishops who have concerns would be open to this. This also creates fertile ground for, later on, painlessly making at least one of the Sunday Masses ad orientem on an ongoing basis…
There is not going to be an official directive from the Vatican on this, certainly not under this papacy. So it is up to priests (especially pastors) to make it happen if they truly believe facing God is superior to facing the people during Mass.
I’d be interested to hear from priests who actually do so, on a Sunday morning (not on the 3rd Tuesday afternoon of the month, etc.). The only way ad orientem direction will ever be accomplished for the masses (pun intended) is when priests indeed have the courage to do so, recognizing their “career” in a given diocese will be affected by an upset bishop.
This is not easy. But at some point, after talking about doing this for decades (including through the entire pontificate of Benedict XVI, who offered such a liturgy a mere once per year, even after writing in favor of ad orientem), priests are going to have to lead rather than waiting for a miracle. You are in our prayers, Fathers! (Now, please, just do it.)
Regarding “Posted by Deacon John Edgerton on Tuesday, Jul 19, 2016 12:25 PM (EDT):”
As a convert to the faith from a Protestant background, possessing as I do a Masters in Theology and Philosophy from a Protestant Seminary, I agree a class on the rubrics and the symbolism of dress and actions should be part and parcel of every Catholic parish. Right on! The message of salvation is embodied and taught in both the words and actions of the Mass. Or should be…
I rarely attend Mass in the Ordinary Form anymore. Actually, only when I have to during a visit or wedding, etc. I simply find the Mass much more reverent and meaningful in the Extraordinary Form. The fact that the priest is facing the same way I am is easy to understand in the EF as the Mass “event” itself is much simpler to understand in my experience. Coming from a Lutheran past I found the OF to be “Lutheran” as if it was a simple copy thereof. I mean that not trying to represent one “faction” over the other, but speaking as one who simply didn’t see much difference in the two; Lutheran vs OF Mass. I’d have said the Roman Missal was simply altered to reflect as much as possible the Lutheran service if anyone asked and in fact, I got in hot water in RCIA for stating it just like that before I knew how much of a buzz such a statement would cause. I remember saying “I remember somewhere saying that the modern Catholic Mass copied an older form of the Lutheran service. Isn’t that right?” As an ex-Lutheran, it sure seemed like it to me. It still does, right down to the whole meet and greet that takes place slam in the middle of the “service”. Just my observation.
Anyway, I prefer the EF and am so blessed to have an FSSP parish only 1 1/2 hours away from home. It is our registered home parish now and I love it; Actual guaranteed Catholic doctrine and the EF to-boot!! Doesn’t get much better than that.
For anyone who needs to help others understand and appreciate the Mass better, I recommend this beautiful series of very short videos, produced by the Liturgical Institute. Please share widely, because they are great!
http://www.elementsofthecatholicmass.com/
One of the first commentators above said that with all the other crises going on in the world, is this ‘ad orientem’ issue all that vital? That the world IS falling apart is to me, a most significant reason for priest and people to ‘turn together and face the Lord Who comes…’ When I first read about Cardinal Sarah calling for ‘ad orientem’ and his quoting the entrance antiphon for the First Sunday of Advent I was struck by the symbolic gesture of both priests and people begging God to come and save us. Every few days there is another atrocity somewhere in the world! Please everyone, this is much more than just about liturgical matters…and very significant that Cardinal Sarah is calling for this change NOW. We are beyond human solution…we must beg for a divine intervention and the Mass is where that happens…
We must face The Tree of Life.
The Tree of the Cross is The Tree of Life.
http://www.wisdom88.org/#!blog/c22ed
To ask, in view of all the turmoil in th world, whether the rubrics of Mass, including the posture of the celebrant, should be an issue is to overlook the ancient truth “lex orandi, lex credendi” usually translated as “as we pray so we believe.” Consequently, that liturgy which most clearly demonstrates the truth of what is transpiring in the Mass, namely the changing of bread and wine into the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ is much to be preferred to a liturgy which lacks such clarity because the former stimulates the growth of faith and holiness and the latter, whether the participants are conscious of it or not, will, over time, erode faith and growth in holiness. We are now living with the results of 50 years of just such erosion because of a liturgy that has diminished a sense of the sacred and if the plummeting of belief in the Real Presence among Catholics is not an issue I don’t know what is.
I have always appreciated Msgr. Popes articles and comments as I do on his thoughts regarding the “ad orientam” or facing East in celebrating Holy Mass. However, before all else, most of our people, in my 30 years of diaconal ministry, do not understand the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, from the appointments on the altar, to the vesting of the priest Celebrant, to the wpirituality (not just the rubics), but the meaning behind each action. In doing this on many Cursillo Retreats, it was astonishing to see the added interest and devotion by the laity to the Mass. I was once told by the Liturgy Office in Washington) that an “Instructional Liturgy” or Explanatory Mass could be presented at any Sunday Liturgy provided that the pauses for explanation did not change any part of the Mass. Who is doing this on a parish level? This lack of understanding, in my opinion, is why most teenagers find the Mass “boring” and many adults pray their own prayers the best they can since they do not fully understand the “persona Christi” role of the priest and the humility he shares with each of us who are conjoined with him.Add to that most do not understand the Grace of God which comes to us through Christ Jesus as an Indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the Communion of the Physician and divine intercourse which takes place when we receive our risen Incarnate Son of God in Holy Communtion. Notice when the Tabernacle Door is closed how the priest moves quickly to the closing Prayer, the dismissal and the recessional music starts with few pausing to give thanks for being “temples of God in such an awesome reality” called to share the Good News of Salvation. Turn the altars around, turn the priest away from us…not until most understand the incredible representation of the life of Jesus in the Gospel (Jesus spent three years teaching before he prayed his first Resurrection Mass) and then being able to stand at the Cross and at the Table of the Sacrificial Meal and be moved to yearn to grow in the never ending Kingdom which began for us at Baptism. Pope Benedict once remarked that if we have a good homily, a good ritual and good music, but are not there to adore, we have nothing. We have to do more than to turn East but never add Latin for it separates from the Vulgate of each culture. Respectfully, Deacon John M. Edgerton
On 10 April 2000, the Congregation for Divine Worship issued an official response about this matter:
This dicastery wishes to state that Holy Mass may be celebrated versus populum or versus apsidem. Both positions are in accord with liturgical law; both are to be considered correct.
There is no preference expressed in the liturgical legislation for either position. As both positions enjoy the favor of law, the legislation may not be invoked to say that one position or the other accords more closely with the mind of the Church.
In addition to those bishops who come out firmly about facing east, it seems to me the good Cardinal Sarah is himself violating the intent of this law by using his position as Prefect to express his personal preference for one position over the other. The appropriate and acceptable way to discuss this topic is with respect for differing views and an objective reading of the law…. not pushing a personal preference and disparaging the other side of the argument. Both sides are guilty.
Either way, it seems unfortunate that we can devolve the conversation to such a low level over such a trivial thing…. it appears the liturgy wars are alive and well.
Thank you Msgr. Pope for your careful analysis. I do remember facing the tabernacle (east) along with the priests. I think it may be time to go back to traditional and meaningful worship. If we all face east, then together we are all worshiping God. The priest is not praying to a wall; he is facing the tabernacle where Our Lord is actually present body, soul, and divinity.
GITA - Chennai - India
a. What about the homily, distribution of Communion and Final Blessing; Should these be facing the East as well?
b. The world is falling apart on account of so many other crises;
Is this “East-turning” such a vital issue?
Many of the ancient churches in Rome, e.g. St. Clement’s, has altars with celebrant facing the people. St. Peter’s in the Vatican had no platform in front of the altar. The one there is a more recent addition. The Pope always faced to majority of the people in he nave of the basilica, not facing in the same direction as they.
Note that General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] No. 299 and its description of the altar, as well as No. 310 and its description of the chair are taken directly from ‘Inter Oecumenici’, September 26, 1964, nos. 91-92. We already can see in this “instruction” the mischief that Msgr. Annibale Bugnini was up to—because the Second Vatican Council itself made NO mention of the altar or of the priest’s “chair”. It is important to note what precedes this, i.e. No. 90: “In building new churches or restoring and adapting old ones…”. Yet there NEVER was a decree from Rome ordering that all existing church structures must undergo any changes whatsoever.
So, if we were to look at long-standing tradition—rather than Bugnini’s radical meddling—then if the priest is celebrating the 1969 ‘Ordinary Form’ at a high altar that is NOT free-standing (i.e. with a reredos, etc.) the priest would stand or sit at a sedilia on the right (“liturgical South”) side of the sanctuary during the Introductory Rites through the Creed. In the ‘Ordinary Form’ this arrangement makes it a rather simple matter for the priest to turn slightly towards the people at the very beginning of Mass per rubrics, then turn slightly towards the altar for the Penitential Rite, etc. It is the long-standing convention of the Roman Rite, that the priest faces East—unless specifically instructed to do otherwise.
Much of the current confusion regarding “orientation” is the result of an erroneous understanding of the ancient layout of the early Roman basilicas. They are constructed “backwards”, i.e. with the altar in the West end. The original practice was for the people, at the “Sursum corda”/”Lift up your hearts”, to turn THEIR backs to the priest and face the open doors in the East end of the basilica. Thus, all would be facing the rising sun streaming into the doors, representing the final coming of Christ: “For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” (Matthew 24:27). The awkwardness of this arrangement never caught on elsewhere, the more common arrangement being for the altar to be placed in the East end, so only the priest had to turn. Much more detail about this can be found in “The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background” by Msgr. Klaus Gamber; English edition, with preface by Jos. Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict), published in 1993.
This is a case where “Better to ask forgiveness than permission” should be applied….everywhere.
Especially since there is no canonical nor rubrical bar to its implementation.
But alas, I bet there are quite a number of Bishops out there that will bar what was done for centuries.
The best way to participate in the correct posture of the Mass, Father, is just to offer the Extraordinary Form. Considering the “indult” that the USCCB is now requiring for a priest to obtain before offering the Mass in the ordinary form ad orientem, it probably will be easier for him just to offer the Mass in the Extraordinary Form. I feel it would be better for him to do so for a host of other reasons, as well.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/07/does-usccb-letter-on-ad-orientem.html
Timothy O’Rourke Jr.
Will, you say change is not always for the better. I agree. So let’s think about getting rid of the changes and returning to the way things were prior to the change, especially because, as you said, you didn’t like those changes anyway.
It is clear from some of the comments made here that there are sincere, devoted Catholics who are ill informed about what the Mass is. It is not a re-presentation of the Last Supper so that it is appropriate to speak of the position of Christ sitting across the table from His apostles. The Mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary In which the priest acting as an Alter Christus (in the place of Christ) offers Himself to the Father and we are enjoined to offer ourselves likewise. It is not a meal, it is a sacrifice. Consequently, the priest and the people facing, together, the crucifix and, hopefully, the tabernacle is the appropriate position.
Mary, now that we can all see what is happening at Mass and most of us don’t believe in the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, how do feel about how the change is working out for us? Maybe, just maybe, it was easier for us back then to see with the eyes of faith what we can’t now see with the eyes of our intellect.
Larry, you’re so right. Jesus was always telling his followers to accept things the way they are. He told them time and again, “Don’t rock the boat.” “Go with the flow.” “Just bow your head and do as the Pharisees tell you.” Yeah, Jesus was not One to question the authority of the brood of vipers who were calling the shots.
Don’t get me wrong—I’m not calling the Church hierarchy Pharisees or vipers. I’m just saying Jesus asked his followers to allow their minds to be enlightened enough that they would know not to make waves and do whatever they were told without asking questions.
@ Carol Goodson: Actually, Jesus most likely was not facing the disciples at the Last Supper. As a devote Jew, He would have been observing the customs of the time with all the participants reclining,arranged in a semi-circle with the seat of honor being on the right. All would have been facing the same direction!
When I was a small child, in the ‘40’s, our church celebrated Mass in both the ‘upstairs’ church and the ‘downstairs’ church. As a student in that Catholic school I came with my classmates on Sundays to celebrate Mass downstairs. From as long as I can remember, the altar in the downstairs church was turned to face the congregation and the priest faced us during the entire Mass. I remember him saying that it was important for children to really ‘see’ what was happening at Mass to better understand it. Of course, it was many years later that all Catholic church altars were turned so that the entire Holy Mass could be fully observed and (hopefully) more greatly understood. I feel very blessed to have experienced this. (By the way, if turning to the East is now suggested…..how will that be fully implemented as many, many churches are built with the altars facing either N, S, or W?) Just asking…...
Perhaps facing East is a good idea, however, I am inclined to leave well enough alone. I am not thrilled with the last round of changes. Change is not always for the better.
This is a very interesting issue and Msgr. Pope’s reflections are a valued contribution to the discussion. Of all the valuable things that he wrote, I am most heartened by his concluding comments about the prudence of compromise – seeking “middle ways,” if you will. After all, this does not appear to need to be an all or nothing deal.
Towards that end, one vision that came to me as I was reading was one that would seek to minimize the tension associated with implementing such a change, while also acknowledging the contributions to our worship that such a change could make. I would see this technique only being used when a Deacon or concelebrating Priest is involved, but reasonable people could clearly see otherwise, and the necessary modifications would appear to be easy and obvious.
During the elevation of the Body and Blood of Jesus at the end of the Eucharistic Prayer, and during the Great Amen, the Priest and Deacon would turn towards the Crucifix and Tabernacle, but do so at an angle so that their backs would not be completely towards the congregation, while bringing the Body and Blood together at the center along the lines that their respective angled bodies are facing. In essence, they would be forming the tip of an arrow pointing towards the Crucifix and Tabernacle.
I personally don’t see why this type of modest approach would even take approval from Rome … or Bishops. As one of my bosses once said to me when I was a junior Army officer some time ago: “The best way to discover the limits of your authority is to exceed them.”
Food for thought….
Let us not be over solicitous of liberal sensitivities. Time is too short. Too many erroneous notions are being allowed to become the norm, e.g Holy Communion in the hand, hand-holding and orans positions during the Pater Noster, liturgical gestures to give back to the priest whilst saying “and with your spirit”, happy birthdays/anniversaries before the final blessing with the congregation’s hands stretched over the recipient like so many Nazi salutes, clapping, “ordinary” EMHCs, Holy Communion under both kinds as the norm… the list of horror goes on and on with no priest or bishop with the guts or vision to stop them.
The perspective offered by the article is well intended as education. My concern is not-so-slow return to the Tridentine Rites and the additional undercurrent of those pressing for a return to Latin. The combination of the two methods returns us to a day when the mass was attended by the faithful and prayed entirely by the presider.
We know our God to be omnipotent and omnipresent. Which direction the presider faces should be immaterial to our worship. Thus, shall we join around the table of sacrifice of the New Testament and look ‘up’, or shall the presider, far removed from the flock he is leading, remove himself further from the community, rise up the stairs, and say the most important prayers of mass at the ‘high’ altar, to a wall?
Msgr. Pope,
I was born after Vatican II but I have the following comment from your statement:
“If this thing becomes a liturgy war it will be a countersign and is doomed to failure and overreaction.”
Didn’t the change from Latin to vernacular cause a liturgy war? Didn’t this represent a “countersign”. Didn’t this cause an upheaval in the Church? Why was this “shoved” down people’s throats who were “abhorrent” to the change from what I’ve heard from some people?
Why is it that when people want to respect the past and tradition that they are the ones who are “overzealous” or “old-fashion” or better yet “not-progressive”? Why is it going back would be blamed to create more of a rift than what has already been done.
Those who “tolerated” this change has indeed done just that, they have “tolerated” it and not left the Church. It seems that if some masses were to go back to “facing the East” that those who cried for tolerance to the changes will not “tolerate” tradition and they themselves will leave. This is speculation but it seems how it would pan out.
I spoke with a former Lutheran at the church I attend about singing in Latin. He told me that he “hates Latin”. How does it seem that “converts” have come in and changed the Church instead of the other way around? Maybe I’m ranting or being unfair, but it seems I see a double standard when promoting the “Traditional Latin Mass”.
I’ve always believed that going to Mass was to commune with the Lord, not go to some community function and give “high-fives” to everyone. I went to one “Catholic Church” where people were told to “greet” your neighbor before Mass. I couldn’t stand it. It shouldn’t have prevented me from going to Mass but it did. I basically tried to get to Mass as late as possible because I was in no mood to “mingle”. I’m there to pray to set my soul right with God.
Sorry for the rant here Msgr, but why are the ones who want the TLM on the defensive? It’s one thing to get criticized for one’s beliefs from other denominations, it’s another thing to get criticized from within the same walls of faith. Not claiming to be a saint but any stretch of the imagination, but the Saints always got criticized or heckled it seems from within their own order.
From Isaiah: “Thus says the LORD: Put your house in order,
for you are about to die; you shall not recover.”
How can the Catholic Church “evangelize” or spread the “Good News of the Gospel” when within her walls is chaos and no stability.
St. Joseph pray for us.
How I long for a return to the celebration of the Mass in a manner which will inspire reverence and awe.
Can you imagine what takes place every day in our churches happening in the temple? The nswering cell phones, texting, children with I-pads, shouting and yelling across the church after Mass, no thanksgiving after holy communion, ghastly hymns, and applause!!!!!!!
The devil has given us a false Christ and a false Church!!!
God bless Cardinal Sarah and all the priests who will support this.
The clarification made by the Vatican seems to less then encouraging. The clarification reiterated the GIRM 299 about the priest facing the people. I read Father Lombardi’s clarification and I don’t feel very hopeful that facing East will happen. I do think you have made many good points, Msgr.
Would it be proper for the priest to turn and face the crucifix with the congregation during the Eucharistic Prayer?
Will this be a way of looking for the second coming of Christ, just as the early Christians patiently looked for His first coming.?
I’d like to make a comment on this sentence: “Mass facing the people is a modern phenomenon.” Mass facing the apse seems to be more Common in history, at Least since the 900s. But even the Old Mass acknowledged that some altars were built so that the priest faced toward the people, and it gave permission to do this. Thus it is not completely a modern phenomenon. Consider the text of Ritus Servandus, which is a part of the Missal of the Old Mass. It contains an important overview of the Rite of Mass, including the following statement:
“Si altare sit ad orientem versus populum, celebrans versa facie ad populum, non vertit humeros ad altare, cum dicturus est, Dominus vobiscum, Orate fratres, Ite Missa est, vel daturus benedictionem: sed osculato altari in medio, ibi expansis & iunctis manibus, ut supra, salutat populum.” (Missale Romanum 1570 A.D., Ritus Servandus, Chapter 5 Paragraph 3)
Here is a translation of this portion of the Old Missal:
“If the altar faces East toward the people, the celebrant facing toward the people, he does not turn his back to the altar when saying Dominus vobiscum, Orate fratres, Ite missa est, or when giving the blessing, but having kissed the altar in the middle, there extending and joining his hands, as above, he salutes the people.”
Here is a page scan of the page from the original Missale Romanum where this passage occurs: http://bit.ly/29Jd5qJ
The 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia indicates that Masses facing the people have always been permissible. One quote from it that indicates its historical basis is this one: “[T]he fact [is] that in the fourth century the celebrant at Mass faced the people, and, therefore in a church with a western apse, [he] looked towards the East when officiating at the altar.” (Article: Orientation of Churches)
The same work also names several Roman churches where Masses facing the people were the norm (in 1911) because the Altar was on the Western side of the Church and prayer was typically made in them toward the East, where the people were gathered: “[T]he great Roman Basilicas of the Lateran, St. Peter’s, St. Paul’s (originally), St. Lorenzo’s, as well as the Basilica of the Resurrection in Jerusalem and the basilicas of Tyre and Antioch, reversed this rule [of having the high altar in the East] by placing the apse in the western extremity.” (ibid.)
I’ve also found quotes from people who visited Rome in the 1800s, 1700s, and 1500s all saying the same thing: several important churches in Rome were built so that the priest faced the people while he said Mass, including the Lateran Cathedral and St. Peter’s Basilica. Thus, Mass facing the people seems to have some traditional basis, at least sometimes, in some churches.
Msgr Pope, your proposal is reasonable. Cardinal Sarah’s proposal is quite reasonable.
The reactions by the pope’s press office and the bishop of Westminster clearly indicate they view even this small return to sanity in the Mass as poison.
The current bishop of Rome takes no prisoners. The hammers of hell will come down upon this simple, humble request.
Bet on it.
Just recently I attended a daily Mass whereby the priest during the Eucharistic Prayer, looked at the congregation and supposedly while praying to God, made eye contact and head gestures as if he were speaking to us.
First time I ever felt uncomfortable during that part of the Mass.
Fractio Panis would always face the people.?.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06165a.htm
Our young priest is already doing this, I like it.
Our wonderful priest at the Proto-Cathedral of St James the Greater in Vancouver WA has been ahead of the curve on this development. He started easing into the proper orientation a few years ago during Advent and Holy Week.
We now pray Mass with Eastern Orientation everyday of the year.
Brick by Brick
I see that by about 250 CE the Church had codified the behaviour at Mass. But I think that 1 Cor 11:17-22 at least hint at the situation at Mass was much more fluid during the first century… I am not a scholar or historian, but I see that perhaps in the very early Church, the priest and the people might have faced each other.
If the Church switches back to having the priest face the altar instead of the people, it will seem so much less intimate to me. At the Last Supper, Jesus was sitting at table with His disciples when He instituted the Eucharist. He was facing them, and then handing around the bread and wine:
Mk 14:22-24
While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many.”
...also, very intimate, it seems to me. If the priest is facing toward the altar, we will no longer be able to see his gestures as he performs the Holy Sacrifice, and that will be very hard for me! I love seeing his hands, ordained by a legitimate Bishop of the Church, now having the power to consecrate simple bread and wine, and cause the miracle of Transubstantiation to occur right in front of us. I love seeing him hold up the Host, and then the chalice, for our adoration. I love bowing my head, in awe over what has just happened, and contemplating the fact that I, unworthy though I am, will soon be receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus, the love of my life!
I pray that this change is not imposed. +
Oh dear Lord, please make all this whining stop, please enlighten people’s minds to accept things as they are. Otherwise it will just. never. end. Amen.
We have lost many small things since Vatican II, which, in and of themselves may not seem like such a big deal. But taken together, they have resulted in a catastrophic loss of faith among the multitudes. We have lost the reason why priest “lead” the congregation towards Christ, Who will rise from the East. We rarely see people genuflect or keep a holy silence before Mass or during Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Yet, we wonder why 75% of those claiming to be Catholic don’t even attend Mass on Sunday’s and Holy Days?! Or why 40% of those who do attend Mass do not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist! These are just bare bones basics. Yet, before Vatican II and its misinterpretation by those with ulterior motives, people were reverent, and believing.
Thank you.
I’m an ordinary layman and convert, not a member of any extremist faction, not a scholar at all. But there are several other, deeper explanations why “the East” should be the direction we face in seeking the coming of the Lord. Some of these arise in Judaism out of the OT, as interpreted in Jesus’ time, one reference in a Psalm. Some arise in prophetic imagery of the NT itself.
The Messiah was expected to enter by the Eastern Gate of Jerusalem, which faces the Mount of Olives, which was sealed. It faces the rising of the Sun (and that of the “morning star” just before dawn). I’ve seen this. Anyone can see it today, depending on the season of the year, that “the morning star” preceded (often enough) the rising Sun.
Christ is called the Rising Sun in the NT. Sometimes he is related to “the morning star” in Rev. Sometimes traditionally John the Baptist is compared to “the morning star” (actually the planet Venus which appears as both the morning and evening star on the horizon before dawn or after dusk) which precedes the “rising Sun” representing Christ.
Sometimes Mary is compared to “the star of the seas” - since then then they could navigate to true horizon.
The NT book of Revelation also says that saints or true Christians are marked (on their foreheads) as if by angels just before the rising Sun, ie “in the East.”
So symbolically we “look” for our salvation coming from direction of “the East” where the risen Christ was said to appear.
Thanks, Monsignor. Did you mean to say “ad oriens”, or “ad orientem”?
There is such a reliance in this whole article on metaphors. The true fact is the bread and wine are becoming the actual body and blood of Christ, for us to eat, as He so directed us to do. It seems odd that this integral highlight is being hidden from the people’s view by the priest obscuring the view with his body.
I think you are confusing disparate metaphors with the logistical necessity of having a “meal” with a group of a couple thousand people at one time.
Join the Discussion
We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words. By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines. Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words. Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.
Comments are no longer being accepted on this article.