Are We Walking to Heaven Backward? A Pastoral Consideration of Liturgical “orientation.”

  • Thread starter Thread starter sw85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
Technically this is true. However, didn’t Vatican II appoint committees whose job it was to reform the liturgy in accordance with the rest of Vatican II’s provisions? (Collegiality, ecumenism, pastoral concerns, etc.)
Click to expand...
Although everything else that was changed, regarding the Mass, does have its roots in Sacrosanctum Concilium, and the principles for change are clearly stated (with the details to be worked out later) even provision for the further extension of Latin (beyond the limited suggestions actually stated in SC) is there in SC. But there is absolutely nothing at all that relates to dropping ad orientem, not the slightest implication, not even a hint.
 
jimrob said:
The Apostles sat around a table with Jesus at their centre. Over the centuries we have managed to change this from a gathering to a queue with the priest speaking to God and the rest of us lined up behind him. **The Second Vatican Council put Christ back into the centre of our celebrations rather than confining Him to the East Wall.
**
Anyway, my church was built with the West end facing East.
Click to expand...
Are you sure?

Regarding the bold, this is flatly false.
 
The GIRM does address orientation in Church construction norms
299. The altar should be built separate from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. Moreover, the altar should occupy a place where it is truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns.[115] The altar should usually be fixed and dedicated.
Click to expand...
Here’s reference 115:
[115]Cf. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Instruction, Inter Oecumenici, September 26, 1964,
no. 91: Acta Apostolicae Sedis 56 (1964), p. 898.
Click to expand...
 
Can a priest be facing the altar in the ordinary form of the mass at all? I guess I have just never seen it done so I would not know.
 
FYI, Here is Pope Emeritus Benedict on the subject.

He devoted an entire chapter of his book “The Spirit of the Liturgy” to the issue of orientation.

ignatiusinsight.com/features2006/ratzinger_altareast_jan06.asp

Some highlights
The turning of the priest towards the people has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its outward form, it no longer opens out on what lies ahead and above, but is closed in on itself. The common turning towards the East was not a “celebration towards the wall”; it did not mean that the priest “had his back to the people”: the priest himself was not regarded as so important. For just as the congregation in the synagogue looked together toward Jerusalem, so in the Christian liturgy the congregation looked together “towards the Lord.” As one of the Fathers of Vatican II’s Constitution on the Liturgy, J. A. Jungmann, put it, it was much more a question of priest and people facing in the same direction, knowing that together they were in a procession towards the Lord. They did not close themselves into a circle, they did not gaze at one another, but as the pilgrim People of God they set off for the Oriens, for the Christ who comes to meet us.
Click to expand...
For the Liturgy of the Word is about speaking and responding, and so a face-to-face exchange between proclaimer and hearer does make sense. In the Psalm the hearer internalizes what he has heard, takes it into himself, and transforms it into prayer, so that it becomes a response.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, a common turning to the East during the Eucharistic Prayer remains essential. This is not a case of something accidental, but of what is essential. Looking at the priest has no importance. What matters is looking together at the Lord. It is not now a question of dialogue, but of common worship, of setting off towards the One who is to come. What corresponds with the reality of what is happening is not the closed circle, but the common movement forward expressed in a common direction for prayer
Click to expand...
 
I hope the priest faces the altar, because otherwise he spills the wine and the bread all over the floor. Embarrassing.
 
Let me first of all say that you are going to get about five posts in this thread by users who think they are being clever: your question is phrased incorrectly, technically, but everybody knows what you mean.

Anyway, the answer is yes.
 
Zooman77 said:
Can a priest be facing the altar in the ordinary form of the mass at all? I guess I have just never seen it done so I would not know.
Click to expand...
In the Ordinary Form:
  • Priest stands at the altar on the opposite side of it to the people and faces them over it, often called versus populum, is permitted and the most frequently seen.
  • Priest stands at the altar on the same side of it as the people, facing towards it in the same direction as the people, often called ad orientem, is permitted but is less frequently seen.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
I really like your monastic comparison. Unfortunately, I think this issue will remain unresolvable, with each side holding onto its mental image of what worship should be, the everyone facing (liturgical) east behind the leadership of the priest model, and the circle / family model. I find it odd that most Catholics (hopefully) could explain why we have “closed” Communion, but that some insist that a liturgical posture gathered around the altar of sacrifice with Christ in the center is somehow “wrongfully closed.”** “Wherever two or three are gathered in my name (and facing East), there I am among them…” **I don’t have that particular translation.
Click to expand...
Realizing that this line doesn’t really settle the matter, I still am adding it to my “Top Ten Classic Lines Found On CAF” 🙂

.
 
My first thought was that the good Father must not have been around much prior to the introduction of the OF, as the majority of people (and in some areas, almost entirely all) had no clue as to any significance of the priest facing East; it was just the way it was. He seemed to imply that they all understood the posture. They didn’t. It went right along with the good sisters teaching that you absolutely could not chew the Host (and practically, they were right, but that is a different issue).
 
Well I apologize for using improper terminology. I was in a hurry and I could not remember Ad Orietem. I too knew that there would be some wise guys out there!😃
 
Fun fact, the rubrics for the Mass (i.e., the General Instructions for the Roman Missal) actually explicitly instruct the priest to turn and face the people at about seven or eight different places, so the ordinary form of the Mass officially countenances celebration ad orientem.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
I find it odd that most Catholics (hopefully) could explain why we have “closed” Communion, but that some insist that a liturgical posture gathered around the altar of sacrifice with Christ in the center is somehow “wrongfully closed.” “Wherever two or three are gathered in my name (and facing East), there I am among them…” I don’t have that particular translation.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone is saying that it is ‘wrong’, but people are entitled to express why they see the ad orientem position as being a better position in terms of the symbolism inherent in it. It is an opinion that they are, as Catholics, entitled to hold and it is a position for which there does seem to be some merit.
 
Brendan_64 said:
I think we’d get used to it very quickly. I think one of the symbolic strengths of the EF is the priest facing ad orientem at the key sacrificial moments of the Mass. I cannot see why this couldn’t be included into the OF Mass. So long as the priest explained to the congregation why he was going to do this, and was open about it in advance, explaining the rationale, I think most OF congregations wouldn’t have a big problem with it.

Even a bit of Latin used in the OF wouldn’t be an issue for most congregations. Just so long as the priest doesn’t start reading the scripture in Latin, which I do think is a pointless thing to do, even in the EF Mass. I think it was pointless reading the Word to the people when they don’t understand what you’re teaching them? It makes about as much sense (in my opinion) as giving a sermon in Latin.

Personally I’d like the OF Mass with a bit more Latin (but with the Collect, Confession, Scriptures, Gospel, Creed, Prayers of the Faithful, Our Father, etc) absolutely always in the vernacular, and I would have some use of ad orientem position. I’d also like some incense from time to time.

There is very rich symbolism present in both the OF and the EF Masses, I don’t see why we have to choose either one set of symbolism or the other. Why not include the best of both worlds? Perhaps Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum on the EF Mass was a sign to us that both types of symbolism are necessary to help us have a fuller understanding of the Sacrament?
Click to expand...
I too would like to see something along these lines.
 
Brendan_64 said:
Just so long as the priest doesn’t start reading the scripture in Latin, which I do think is a pointless thing to do, even in the EF Mass.
Click to expand...
For the record, in the EF the gospel is actually read facing the north. The reason is supposedly because that’s where the barbarians reigned when Masses were said in Europe. Makes sense to read the gospel in a barbaric language, I guess. 🙂
 
ProVobis said:
For the record, in the EF the gospel is actually read facing the north. The reason is supposedly because that’s where the barbarians reigned when Masses were said in Europe. Makes sense to read the gospel in a barbaric language, I guess. 🙂
Click to expand...
How common is this and when did it begin? I never recall seeing it done so in the 1950s unless the church happened to be oriented in that direction.
 
felsguy said:
How common is this and when did it begin? I never recall seeing it done so in the 1950s unless the church happened to be oriented in that direction.
Click to expand...
Well, “north” is relative. In Low Mass and High Mass (with only a priest) it is read from the altar, with the Missal tilted to the left.

In Solemn Mass, the subdeacon and deacon actually walk and turn completely to the left and face the side wall of the church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top