Cardinal Sarah asks priests to start celebrating Mass facing east this Advent

[OraLabora]

It has been a number of years now since I was last there, OraLabora…so you would have to help my memory. As I remember, the altar is upon a platform, which we do see in your photos…but the platform, as it is on the side of the altar near the choir stalls, is actually quite narrow. Certainly narrow enough that, as I remember, I would not want to even try to balance myself on it in order to offer Mass on that other side of the altar. I certainly could not have extended my right leg behind me to be able to genuflect. And I can say from experience that one does not like having the sense that one is about to tumble off a platform that is not wide enough so that one is anything but balancing on the edge.

You are quite right, although theoretically I suppose tha altar could be moved to the rear of that platform. But that would do little to remove the awkward feeling of facing east, and creating a sense of complete detachment between the community and the faithful, and the Sacrifice.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Another aspect of this wonderful development might be the dialogue with the SSPX. This change to ad orientem came about as a result of a request by the Holy Father and he has stated that he is aware of the SSPX’s good faith and sacramental practice.

Even if the SSPX were to reunite with the Church now, they would not have to change anything about the orientation. They wouldn’t have to change anything about how they say Mass. It would not make any difference in the dialogue because it is hearts and minds that are involved. The problem goes much deeper than which way the priest faces. But I don’t want to get off topic.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You are quite right, although theoretically I suppose tha altar could be moved to the rear of that platform. But that would do little to remove the awkward feeling of facing east, and creating a sense of complete detachment between the community and the faithful, and the Sacrifice.

I thought the altar was fixed. But, as I say, it has been years.

 

[OraLabora]

I thought the altar was fixed. But, as I say, it has been years.

It probably is, but could possibly be unfixed, repositioned, and fixed again, but not without effort and expense.

 

[phil19034]

Then how is what you propose faithful to what the Cardinal Prefect actually said:

“I believe that it is very important that we return as soon as possible to a common orientation, of priests and the faithful turned together in the same direction – Eastwards or at least towards the apse – to the Lord who comes, in those parts of the liturgical rites when we are addressing God,” the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship said July 5 during his opening address at the Sacra Liturgia conference being held in London.

Hello Father,

Obviously I can’t speak for the Church. My comments here are purely guesswork.

But I would argue (perhaps incorrectly) that (1) when ad orientem was the norm priests were not concelebrating (2) at large masses, like the Chrism Mass, you often have concelebrating the mass from the front pews (3) If 17 priests are concelebrating and they are all on equal footing with the main celebrant, then it’s quite possible that the people in the pews will not see the elevation unless the concelebrants were kneeling.

Therefore, my uneducated guess would be that concelebrating priests would be allowed circle the altar, while the main celebrant would be be ad orientem. Honestly, this would fit will with some medieval art I’ve seen of priests and bishops huddled around the altar during mass. Not sure if that was during the time that conconcelbrating was done or not, but it’s an interesting picture. (if I find it, i will post it)

God Bless

 

[Don_Ruggero]

As a European, I find some of the comments very enigmatic. I’ve said Mass over the years in the United States and in Canada and it is true there is a decidedly non-European mindset there…but still.

I couldn’t even begin to tell you how many times over the decades I have offered Mass ad absidem. It is not an extraordinary thing at all for us. As such, we don’t invest in it any ideological significance.

Many chapels and churches would not, structurally, accommodate an altar facing the people. There wasn’t enough room and we were certainly not going to do elaborate modifications to historically significant centuries old buildings when the directives were principally for structures that would be erected from the point of the decree forward. In the same way, we did not take out communion rails…we just stopped using them.

I have never experienced any real distinction concerning perceptions in the Masses I have said facing one direction as opposed to another – neither on my part or on the part of the congregation. It is only a fraction of the total time of the Mass that I am turned ad absidem anyway. Certainly there was not a sense that the direction the priest faces for those moments has any sort of significance as far as interpreting (or expressing) his ideology. It’s purely practical.

Most Masses I celebrate since retiring are ad absidem because the chapel doesn’t presume any congregation will be present.

The papal chapel in the apostolic palace was the same way…the altar was (and is) ad absidem although Pope Saint John Paul II always invited a certain number of people to his daily Mass until the end approached. (Pope Francis on the other hand celebrates his daily Mass in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta.)

Those who know the Cardinal know that he has personally long seen the value of celebraing ad absidem. What the CDWDS will choose to do and what the Pope will authorise…since the CDWDS operates using derivative authority…will be interesting.

That being said, some seem to think we are talking about going back to a manner more like the vetus ordo Mass. The rubrics for the novus ordo prescribe that the introductory rite occurs at the Presider’s Chair. The Liturgy of the Word unfolds at the ambo. The Creed and Bidding Prayers are at the Chair. The Prayer After Communion and the Blessing are at the Chair. The mensa of the altar is used from the offertory until the communion of the celebrant.

 

[johnnyc176]

Even if the SSPX were to reunite with the Church now, they would not have to change anything about the orientation. They wouldn’t have to change anything about how they say Mass. It would not make any difference in the dialogue because it is hearts and minds that are involved. The problem goes much deeper than which way the priest faces. But I don’t want to get off topic.

I wasn’t talking about in regards to reunification. My point is that the decision to change to ad orientem may have been influenced in some way through the dialogue with the SSPX. Just as the SSPX having full faculties for confession had a great deal to do with the Holy Father being aware of the SSPX’s good faith and sacramental practice.

 

[anon67074017]

This sounds like what is done in Islam with praying towards Mecca.

 

[phil19034]

As a European, I find some of the comments very enigmatic. I’ve said Mass over the years in the United States and in Canada and it is true there is a decidedly non-European mindset there…but still.

I couldn’t even begin to tell you how many times over the decades I have offered Mass ad absidem. It is not an extraordinary thing at all for us. As such, we don’t invest in it any ideological significance.

Many chapels and churches would not, structurally, accommodate an altar facing the people. There wasn’t enough room and we were certainly not going to do elaborate modifications to historically significant centuries old buildings when the directives were principally for structures that would be erected from the point of the decree forward. In the same way, we did not take out communion rails…we just stopped using them.

I have never experienced any real distinction concerning perceptions in the Masses I have said facing one direction as opposed to another – neither on my part or on the part of the congregation. It is only a fraction of the total time of the Mass that I am turned ad absidem anyway. Certainly there was not a sense that the direction the priest faces for those moments has any sort of significance as far as interpreting (or expressing) his ideology. It’s purely practical.

Most Masses I celebrate since retiring are ad absidem because the chapel doesn’t presume any congregation will be present.

The papal chapel in the apostolic palace was the same way…the altar was (and is) ad absidem although Pope Saint John Paul II always invited a certain number of people to his daily Mass until the end approached. (Pope Francis on the other hand celebrates his daily Mass in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta.)

Those who know the Cardinal know that he has personally long seen the value of celebraing ad absidem. What the CDWDS will choose to do and what the Pope will authorise…since the CDWDS operates using derivative authority…will be interesting.

That being said, some seem to think we are talking about going back to a manner more like the vetus ordo Mass. The rubrics for the novus ordo prescribe that the introductory rite occurs at the Presider’s Chair. The Liturgy of the Word unfolds at the ambo. The Creed and Bidding Prayers are at the Chair. The Prayer After Communion and the Blessing are at the Chair. The mensa of the altar is used from the offertory until the communion of the celebrant.

Thank you Father, I always appreciate your posts because they are always filled with wisdom.

Quick question based on your post: when I was growing up in the 80s and 90s almost all the priests who I attended Mass with prayed the intro rites and closing rites from the Altar, only praying the creed from the Chair

I still see some older priests doing this. Was that typical in 80s? I’ve always been a fan of liturgy and ritual (not just Church liturgy and ritual, but organizational too) so these things interest me.

Thank you for your priesthood and God Bless

 

[edwest2]

This sounds like what is done in Islam with praying towards Mecca.

Pointless insult.

Ed

 

[anon67074017]

Pointless insult.

Ed

It is not an insult. I was just comparing it to the Muslim practice of praying towards Mecca. It is sacred in their religion.

 

[thephilosopher6]

This sounds like what is done in Islam with praying towards Mecca.

Jews pray towards Jerusalem.

Christians have been praying towards the east since the time of Jesus. Facing the people is a new phenomenon that has only gained wide practice within the Latin Church since the 70’s.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Hello Father,

Obviously I can’t speak for the Church. My comments here are purely guesswork.

But I would argue (perhaps incorrectly) that (1) when ad orientem was the norm priests were not concelebrating (2) at large masses, like the Chrism Mass, you often have concelebrating the mass from the front pews (3) If 17 priests are concelebrating and they are all on equal footing with the main celebrant, then it’s quite possible that the people in the pews will not see the elevation unless the concelebrants were kneeling.

Therefore, my uneducated guess would be that concelebrating priests would be allowed circle the altar, while the main celebrant would be be ad orientem. Honestly, this would fit will with some medieval art I’ve seen of priests and bishops huddled around the altar during mass. Not sure if that was during the time that conconcelbrating was done or not, but it’s an interesting picture. (if I find it, i will post it)

God Bless

I am endeavouring to understand, though, which value you are advocating for. If you are advocating what the Cardinal has articulated, then having concelebrants positioned where they are seen in OraLabora’s photo is contrary to the value that the Cardinal has articulated: that everyone is facing the same direction. I assume you are advocating that the Presider should be not facing the people?

I was liturgist once upon a time for these sorts of concelebration. Concelebrations such as a Chrism Mass or an Ordination were normally in spaces that were not designed for them or built for these once per year rare occurrences but rather had daily use in mind…so priests would concelebrate from the first pews because no other possibility really existed. But liturgically, that is not at all desirable since the sign should be clear that the presbyterate is separate and distinct from the laity in the nave.

A monastery, on the other hand, will have a daily conventual Mass that presumes all the monks who are priests have a place to concelebrate – and so the layout of the sanctuary should be built to achieve that.

Moreover, although most of the laity experience the liturgy as it is expressed either in their parish church or cathedral, that does not exhaust the expression of the liturgy. A monastic liturgy is properly oriented with the concern primarily, not to say all but exclusive, for the monastic chapter…laity, if they are present at all, is incidental. One should make a provision for them to have some presence, certainly, but the abbatial church is not about providing the liturgy and sacraments to laity or particularly accommodating them. They should, at best, be a teritiary consideration in the design and layout of the abbatial church.

 

[anon67074017]

Jews pray towards Jerusalem.

Christians have been praying towards the east since the time of Jesus. Facing the people is a new phenomenon that has only gained wide practice within the Latin Church since the 70’s.

I never said there was anything wrong with worshipping towards anywhere.

 

[OraLabora]

Hello Father,

Obviously I can’t speak for the Church. My comments here are purely guesswork.

But I would argue (perhaps incorrectly) that (1) when ad orientem was the norm priests were not concelebrating (2) at large masses, like the Chrism Mass, you often have concelebrating the mass from the front pews (3) If 17 priests are concelebrating and they are all on equal footing with the main celebrant, then it’s quite possible that the people in the pews will not see the elevation unless the concelebrants were kneeling.

Therefore, my uneducated guess would be that concelebrating priests would be allowed circle the altar, while the main celebrant would be be ad orientem. Honestly, this would fit will with some medieval art I’ve seen of priests and bishops huddled around the altar during mass. Not sure if that was during the time that conconcelbrating was done or not, but it’s an interesting picture. (if I find it, i will post it)

God Bless

Concelebration happened in the very early Church but fell into disuse. Just prior to Vatican II concelebration was non-existent except at consecration of a bishop and the ordination of priests. For ad orientem, some places have had to make adjustments. At Monte Cassino, pews were installed laterally on both sides of the altar and the main celebrant is the one facing East (but also faces his own community). The concelebrating priests are actually facing 90 degrees of east: half facing north, the other half facing south.

Prior to Vatican II, in monasteries, there was no concelebration. Instead private Masses would be going on simultaneously at side altars where each priest-monk would offer his daily Mass, and one Mass called (and still called) the Conventual Mass, was celebrated at the main altar for the entire choir (lay brothers, which no longer exist, had their own Mass, usually a low Mass very early in the morning before the work day began; choir monks were either priests or monks designated to eventually become priests).

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Pointless insult.

Ed

“Pointless insult?” It is a fact any student of comparative religion knows…along with the theological significance the gesture has in Islam.

In what possible way could remarking the gesture be in any way an insult to Catholic practice?

 

[anon67074017]

“Pointless insult?” It is a fact any student of comparative religion knows…along with the theological significance the gesture has in Islam.

In what possible way could remarking the gesture be in any way an insult to Catholic practice?

Thank you for defending me.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Concelebration happened in the very early Church but fell into disuse. Just prior to Vatican II concelebration was non-existent except at consecration of a bishop and the ordination of priests. For ad orientem, some places have had to make adjustments. At Monte Cassino, pews were installed laterally on both sides of the altar and the main celebrant is the one facing East (but also faces his own community). The concelebrating priests are actually facing 90 degrees of east: half facing north, the other half facing south.

Prior to Vatican II, in monasteries, there was no concelebration. Instead private Masses would be going on simultaneously at side altars where each priest-monk would offer his daily Mass, and one Mass called (and still called) the Conventual Mass, was celebrated at the main altar for the entire choir (lay brothers, which no longer exist, had their own Mass, usually a low Mass very early in the morning before the work day began; choir monks were either priests or monks designated to eventually become priests).

And actually, it was – if I may tell you – a rather bizarre fashion of “concelebration” at best.

As with so much involving the liturgy, this was a reality that the West had lost but that we recovered with the restoration of the liturgy after Vatican II. The Council Fathers specifically directed that there was to be the authentic recovery of concelebration, which had been preserved outside the Western Church.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you for defending me.

You’re welcome…it is simply the truth.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Jews pray towards Jerusalem.

Christians have been praying towards the east since the time of Jesus. Facing the people is a new phenomenon that has only gained wide practice within the Latin Church since the 70’s.

This ,as stated, needs to be clarified because it leaves the impression that everyone was facing east before the 1970s when suddenly everything changed. This is false.

Of all the churches that I have been present in across decades of priesthood – in far more countries that I can count on both hands – the sum is enormous of those that were built before the Council…and even centuries ago…that were not built with an eastward orientation. The parish of my childhood had an altar that faced south…after the Council it faced north. The cathedral, on the other hand, had an altar that faced north and now, since the Council, faces south.

It is an absolute fallacy, as so many recountings of “what was” actually are, that this was either an invariable practice – or that it even was some major concept in our conscious thoughts. It assuredly wasn’t. Unlike in Islam where, in fact, one has to use various methods to calculate and determine in which direction one should face to pray.