Do all Latin Rite parish priests have the "right" to say the Novus Ordo ad orientem?

[Lepanto]

Do all Latin Rite parish priests have the canonical or liturgical “right” to say the Novus Ordo Mass ad orientem?

(If so, I realize that the bishop may frown upon and harass such a priest, but that’s a separate issue.)

If you believe that a priest does have such a right, please cite your sources.

Thank you!

 

[Caesar]

Do all Latin Rite parish priests have the canonical or liturgical “right” to say the Novus Ordo Mass ad orientem?

(If so, I realize that the bishop may frown upon and harass such a priest, but that’s a separate issue.)

If you believe that a priest does have such a right, please cite your sources.

Thank you!

I dont have any sources, but I believe it is certainly allowed for any priest to celebrate Mass, even public ones, ad orientem. A freestanding altar is not mandatory for the celebration of the Novus Ordo.

 

[Brendan]

I’ll pull up the referecese. but the N.O liturgy is written for an ad orientum Mass

During the Elevations, for example the rubirics say for the “priest to turn and face the populace”

In addition, the CDWDS has ruled that a bishop may not prohibit a priest from saying the Mass ad orientium. This came out when Bishop Foley of Birmingham, AL attempted to forbid EWTN from saying the Mass ad orientum,.

The CDWDS determined that the bishop does not have that authority, ( the bishop does have the authority to restrict the television broadcast of a Mass, which Bishop Foley then used to restrict broadcast of ad orientum Masses)

 

[Joan_M]

Do all Latin Rite parish priests have the canonical or liturgical “right” to say the Novus Ordo Mass ad orientem?

(If so, I realize that the bishop may frown upon and harass such a priest, but that’s a separate issue.)

If you believe that a priest does have such a right, please cite your sources.

Thank you!

Actually, most of the Masses celebrated inside St. Peter’s Basilica are, of necessity, ad orientem. Why? Because most of the altars are flat against the walls of the basilica!

 

[John_Lilburne]

Do all Latin Rite parish priests have the canonical or liturgical “right” to say the Novus Ordo Mass ad orientem?

(If so, I realize that the bishop may frown upon and harass such a priest, but that’s a separate issue.)

If you believe that a priest does have such a right, please cite your sources.

Thank you!

From the 2002 General Introduction to the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“299. The altar should be built apart 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. …”.

In 2000 the Latin edition of the GIRM was published. This paragraph began “299. Altare maius exstruatur …”. In the edition published in the Roman Missal in 2002 it had changed to “299. Altare exstruatur …”. I am not saying this is a significant change, simply pointing out that a change was made to this paragraph between 2000 and 2002.

On 25 September 2000 a letter was written by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. It is at adoremus.org/12-0101cdw-adorient.html . In short it gives the answer “no” to the question: The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has been asked whether the expression in no. 299 of the Instituto Generalis Missalis Romani constitutes a norm according to which, during the Eucharistic liturgy, the position of the priest versus absidem [facing towards the apse] is to be excluded.

I have difficulty understanding it, but perhaps this part of the answer is important: “When it is a question of ancient churches, or of great artistic value, it is appropriate, moreover, to keep in mind civil legislation regarding changes or renovations. Adding another altar may not always be a worthy solution.”

There may be situations in an old church where the only altar is against the apse. To say that “Mass must be facing the people” means saying Mass cannot be celebrated in this church. So in this case it is not forbidden.

The 2002 GIRM includes:
“243. Then the principal celebrant takes a host consecrated in the same Mass, holds it slightly raised above the paten or the chalice, and, facing the people, says the Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God). With the concelebrants and the people he continues, saying the Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy).
244. Then the principal celebrant, facing the altar, says quietly, Corpus Christi custodiat me ad vitam aeternam (May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life), and reverently receives the Body of Christ.”

In a normal situation perhaps this means that the loud prayer will be directed to the people, the prayer said quietly will be with a focus on the altar. But the alternative understanding is that it is for the unusual situation of the priest being between the people and the altar.

Another way of thinking about this: If there is Mass with only one minister, but not congregation, where will the one minister be? It does not specify that he must be on the opposite side of the altar to the priest. At least in the case of the one minister being a deacon it would seem inappropriate. Probably an altar server would be to the side, near the credence table.

So for this type of Mass the 2002 GIRM has:
“268. After the commixtion, the priest quietly says the prayer Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei vivi (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God) or Perceptio (Lord Jesus Christ, with faith in your love and mercy). Then he genuflects, takes the host, and, if the minister is to receive Communion, turns to the minister and, holding the host a little above the paten or the chalice, says the Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), adding with the minister the Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy). Facing the altar, the priest then partakes of the Body of Christ. If, however, the minister does not receive Communion, the priest, after genuflecting, takes the host and, facing the altar, says quietly the Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy) …”

The phrase “facing the altar” only appears in the case above, in n. 244 and n. 268.

References:
Missale Romanum, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2002, ISBN: 8820972719, page 68.
Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000, ISBN 88-209-7012-0, page 79.

 

[LilyM]

There may be practical issues with it in churches that have freestanding altars, but apart from that it’s permitted as far as I’m aware.

 

[m134e5]

Mass must also be celebrated on an altar that does not have a Tabernacle containing the Sacrament on it. Old high altars won’t have this problem if they were constructed properly, but many were made improperly, and sometimes side altars from bigger churches have become the high altar in smaller ones- side altars would not have been built for a tabernacle, so the tabernacle would not be able to go in the reredos- it would have to rest on the altar itself- making it illicit to celebrate Mass on when the Sacrament is reserved there.

Any Latin Rite priest may celebrate Mass Ad Orientem any time he wants to- provided there is enough room in the sanctuary in front of the altar to do it.

 

[BobP123]

Mass must also be celebrated on an altar that does not have a Tabernacle containing the Sacrament on it.

I have not heard this. What’s the reason for this exactly? Distractions? The Tabernacle (with or without the Sacrament) is very much Scripture-based.

 

[Brendan]

From the 2002 General Introduction to the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“299. The altar should be built apart 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. …”.

One thing to be aware of, the English translation of GIRM 299 is a bit imprecise. The Latin is a little more clear

Altare maius exstruatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebratio versus populum peragi possit, quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit.

The ‘quod’ modifies the main premise of the sentance, the first clause, the ‘Altare maius exstruatur a pariete seiunctum’; that the altar should be built away from the wall whenever possible.

The secondary clause, to allow a Mass facing the people, is not modified by the qualifer.

 

[palmas85]

Mass must also be celebrated on an altar that does not have a Tabernacle containing the Sacrament on it. Old high altars won’t have this problem if they were constructed properly, but many were made improperly, and sometimes side altars from bigger churches have become the high altar in smaller ones- side altars would not have been built for a tabernacle, so the tabernacle would not be able to go in the reredos- it would have to rest on the altar itself- making it illicit to celebrate Mass on when the Sacrament is reserved there.

Any Latin Rite priest may celebrate Mass Ad Orientem any time he wants to- provided there is enough room in the sanctuary in front of the altar to do it.

There is no prohibition on celebrating Mass at an altar that has the Tabernacle upon it in which the Blessed sacrament is present,

At least if there is I have never heard of it.

 

[Caesar]

Mass must also be celebrated on an altar that does not have a Tabernacle containing the Sacrament on it. Old high altars won’t have this problem if they were constructed properly, but many were made improperly, and sometimes side altars from bigger churches have become the high altar in smaller ones- side altars would not have been built for a tabernacle, so the tabernacle would not be able to go in the reredos- it would have to rest on the altar itself- making it illicit to celebrate Mass on when the Sacrament is reserved there.

Any Latin Rite priest may celebrate Mass Ad Orientem any time he wants to- provided there is enough room in the sanctuary in front of the altar to do it.

I’ve never heard of this. I have seen photographs of the old High Altar in the Cathedral I attend the NO at, and the tabernacle was on the Altar itself, not in the reredos.

 

[dylanschrader]

One thing to be aware of, the English translation of GIRM 299 is a bit imprecise. The Latin is a little more clear

The ‘quod’ modifies the main premise of the sentance, the first clause, the ‘Altare maius exstruatur a pariete seiunctum’; that the altar should be built away from the wall whenever possible.

The secondary clause, to allow a Mass facing the people, is not modified by the qualifer.

Bingo.

The purpose clause with ‘ut … possit’ is inserted into ‘Altare … a pariete seiunctum, quod expedit …’ If they had wanted ‘quod expedit’ to refer to ‘celebratio versus populum’ it would have said ‘ut facile circumiri et in eo celebratio versus populum, quod expedit …, peragi possit’ or similar.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I don’t see why a freestanding altars should inhibit ad orientum. I think it would be beautiful on our altar (esp. if we ever manage to move the tablernacle from the left as you see it here to the center).

ourlady.org/church/church/2005/chris8.JPG

You can’t tell because the altar is covered, but it’s solid marble. There’s plenty of room for the priest to celebrate ad orientum.

 

[chevalier]

I think I’ve been to an ad orientem pauline mass once, but can’t recall.

 

[Nekic]

You know, this all depends on which was the church faces.

The definition of Ad Orientem is “towards the east”.
If your church faces west, and the priest faces the congregation, then he is already saying mass ad orientem.
Convenient loophole for the cause of saying mass facing the people.

This is the same for the altar at St Peters. Its a freestanging altar, and thats how it was even before the Second Council of the Vatican.
Every mass said on that altar is ad orientem, ever since it was built.

 

[dylanschrader]

You know, this all depends on which was the church faces.

The definition of Ad Orientem is “towards the east”.
If your church faces west, and the priest faces the congregation, then he is already saying mass ad orientem.
Convenient loophole for the cause of saying mass facing the people.

This is the same for the altar at St Peters. Its a freestanging altar, and thats how it was even before the Second Council of the Vatican.
Every mass said on that altar is ad orientem, ever since it was built.

Yes, but there is such a thing as “liturgical East,” that is, “versus apsidem,” “facing the apse” for Churches that do not actually face East. St. Peter’s is so old, that the priest would face East, but it is likely that the people would have faced East also with their backs to the altar.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Yes, but there is such a thing as “liturgical East,” that is, “versus apsidem,” “facing the apse” for Churches that do not actually face East. St. Peter’s is so old, that the priest would face East, but it is likely that the people would have faced East also with their backs to the altar.

Close, but not quite. It is true that the whole congregation would have faced east, but it is highly unlikely that they would have done this in such a way as to have their backs to the altar. Rather, liturgical historians surmise early congregations would have stood in an arc - if the altar faced the apse, the people would have arced with the altar as a focus, and if the altar faced the nave they would have arced with the altar more like the keystone.

(I wish I knew how to put in a diagram, but my attempt failed utterly due to automatic formatting.)

 

[Nekic]

(I wish I knew how to put in a diagram, but my attempt failed utterly due to automatic formatting.)

The diagram turned out in the automatic email notification I received.
Half a success…

 

[demerzel85]

No special indult/permission was required for this… cardinalseansblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/saying-mass-in-the-saint-philip-chapel-2.jpg

 

[japhy]

Mass must also be celebrated on an altar that does not have a Tabernacle containing the Sacrament on it.

I have not heard this. What’s the reason for this exactly? Distractions? The Tabernacle (with or without the Sacrament) is very much Scripture-based.

There is no prohibition on celebrating Mass at an altar that has the Tabernacle upon it in which the Blessed sacrament is present, At least if there is I have never heard of it.

I’ve never heard of this. I have seen photographs of the old High Altar in the Cathedral I attend the NO at, and the tabernacle was on the Altar itself, not in the reredos.

m134e5 is at least half-right. Eucharistiae Sacramentum, n. 6, reads:
In the celebration of Mass the chief ways in which Christ is present in his Church emerge clearly one after the other. First, he is present in the very assembly of the faithful, gathered together in his name; next, he is present in his word, with the reading and explanation of Scripture in the church; also in the person of the minister; finally, and above all, in the Eucharistic elements. In a way that is completely unique, the whole and entire Christ, God and man, is substantially and permanently present in the sacrament. This presence of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine “is called real, not to exclude the other kinds of presence as though they were not real, but because it is real par excellence.”

Consequently, on the grounds of the sign value, it is more in keeping with the nature of the celebration that, through reservation of the sacrament in the tabernacle, Christ not be present Eucharistically from the beginning on the altar where Mass is celebrated. That presence is the effect of the consecration and should appear as such.
Whether this constitutes a necessity that the tabernacle not be located on the altar is perhaps up for debate, but the document clearly shows preference for the opposite practice.