Do bishops have concerns over Ad Orientum

  • Thread starter Thread starter codefro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jwinch2 said:
And? Me either.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I should have added that I don’t think it’s a matter of preference if one doesn’t have much of a choice or has never witnessed both ad orientem and versus populum positions. But knowing that human nature is such that change is difficult to accept, for example, if the Pope were to suddenly mandate the ad orientem position, I see some validity in your argument.
 
Cristiano said:
I just want to understand the OP definition of ad orientem. Is that the physical east? Is simply turning their backs to the people? Is that facing the tabernacle? What is your definition of the Liturgical East in the case of the Mass? I am asking because ad orientem could be all of the above at the same time and none of the above when taken individually.
Click to expand...
In nearly every case, ad orientem refers to the priest facing the same direction as the people.
 
Windmill said:
It’s “dialogues” like this that make many give up on bringing anything traditional to the OF and they simply go to an EF Mass where they can experience the liturgical universe they read about in saints’ books. Honestly, the uphill battle many would face trying to implement things like ad orientem, Gregorian chant, altar rails, Latin, etc, would be too much to handle. However, if you go to an EF Mass, these things are standard issue without any argument. It’s a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
I sense the push-back on this yes. One thing to note is, the mass is organic and is subject to modification. Due to the movement of Catholics appreciating the EF again- the modifications to the OF most likely would be influenced by the EF. SO maybe not in my lifetime, but I think uniformity will return to the OF along with reintroducing prayers and standards that were in the EF mass- ad orientum, rails, and I want to guess the prayer that the priest prays as he distributes the host will make its way back. Will people be mad? probably. Yet, people were mad at the new translation, but it was good for the faith that it happened. Same with future adjustments that the subsequent Popes may care to implement.
 
Windmill said:
However, if you go to an EF Mass, these things are standard issue without any argument. It’s a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
But even in the EF, it’s not entirely ad orientem. The Gospel is read facing north (the Latin escapes me for the moment) and the vernacular readings and sermon are, of course, done versus populum.
 
ProVobis said:
Sorry. I should have added that I don’t think it’s a matter of preference if one doesn’t have much of a choice or has never witnessed both ad orientem and versus populum positions. But knowing that human nature is such that change is difficult to accept, for example, if the Pope were to suddenly mandate the ad orientem position, I see some validity in your argument.
Click to expand...
I agree that most have not experienced it. Personally, I doubt it would bother me either way as long as the audio was good and I could hear the priest. As mentioned earlier though, it could have some legitimate affect on certain people such as those with hearing issues, etc.

As I suggested above, I think a nice balance might be for the priest to face towards the East when offering prayers, and towards the faithful when speaking in persona Christi. This of course needs to come along with proper catechesis so that people will understand the purpose of praying to the East. Otherwise, I can easily see people thinking that the priest is just praying towards the Crucifix, etc.

Regardless, as noted, I really don’t have a say one way or the other.
 
Heh heh, I had a notion.

A really clever Catholic archictect would make a church so that the sun, at different times of the year, would shine on key spots in the church.

i.e. at the elevation, on the Crucifix, the pulpit, the altar or even the confessionals!

Can you imagine that at well-sung Missa Cantata with organ accompaniment!
 
RogerDeCourcy said:
Heh heh, I had a notion.

A really clever Catholic archictect would make a church so that the sun, at different times of the year, would shine on key spots in the church.

i.e. at the elevation, on the Crucifix, the pulpit, the altar or even the confessionals!

Can you imagine that at well-sung Missa Cantata with organ accompaniment!
Click to expand...
I can see it now. The light moves from middle-right for the epistle to the middle for the canon, from middle left for the last gospel. 🙂
 
ProVobis said:
But even in the EF, it’s not entirely ad orientem. The Gospel is read facing north (the Latin escapes me for the moment) and the vernacular readings and sermon are, of course, done versus populum.
Click to expand...
PV,

You know what I mean here. Of course, in the EF, the Gospel is chanted to the North (on the cantoris) and the vernacular readings and sermons are to the people (versus populum). These would be no surprise to a regular EF Mass-goer. However, having the appropriate parts of the EF Mass ad orientem would be enough to send some mainstream Catholics running out the door screaming “Insensitivity to the ‘Dignity Of Man!!’” if they happened to walk in to such a church.
 
Windmill said:
However, having the appropriate parts of the EF Mass ad orientem would be enough to send some mainstream Catholics running out the door screaming “Insensitivity to the ‘Dignity Of Man!!’” if they happened to walk in to such a church.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. However, in the 60’s I do remember them beginning to make the Mass much more versus populum. Was the substitution of Latin with the vernacular perhaps just a coincidence? This occured well before the promulgation of the 1970 Missal, by the way.
 
ProVobis said:
I agree with you. However, in the 60’s I do remember them beginning to make the Mass much more versus populum. Was the substitution of Latin with the vernacular perhaps just a coincidence? This occured well before the promulgation of the 1970 Missal, by the way.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, well before the Novus Ordo. IIRC the general introduction of the versus populum table started in 1965 and (to me, at least, unfortunately) spread like a wildfire after that.
 
CB_Catholic said:
You have no idea of how many times I have heard “The priest used to turn his back to us. We couldn’t hear him,.” Or, I don’t like talking to the back of someone’s head." Or, "Why would anyone want Mass in a language they can’t understand?’ Or “The Mass was in Latin and no one could hear the priest, so we prayed the Rosary.”
Click to expand...
Latin is a whole other issue. I agree that where there is no sounds system, or back when there was no sound system, this would be a legitimate issue.

I still do no think this would be a big issue for most Catholics, especially if the theological reason was taught and if it was not presented as papal fiat. Most Catholics that get upset over little things have left, or will leave over something. That is the seed that grew up with roots.
 
RogerDeCourcy said:
Heh heh, I had a notion.

A really clever Catholic archictect would make a church so that the sun, at different times of the year, would shine on key spots in the church.

i.e. at the elevation, on the Crucifix, the pulpit, the altar or even the confessionals!

Can you imagine that at well-sung Missa Cantata with organ accompaniment!
Click to expand...
Well certainly light plays a role in a monastic Church because of the chanting of the Canonical Hours. At the abbey I’m attached to, the architect (modern church, consecrated in 1994) did a superb job with this. The church, in the monastic tradition, is built with the altar to the East and the nave and narthex to the West. Not only does it capture the light of day in an unmistakable way, it catches the light of the seasons as well. As the conventual Mass is at 11 and the consecration takes place just before noon, shafts of light often beam down onto the altar and into the choir. It’s strikingly beautiful.

Incidentally this is, in Benedictine tradition, a bare church with only three statues: St. Benedict, St. Scholastica and the BVM with child. You would complain that it isn’t “Catholic” enough 😉 but it uses natural light to emphasize the liturgy. Vigils, at 5 am, is fully in the dark in winter; in summer, you can see the first light of day slowly build behind the altar. Lauds is in the full blaze of morning light on the choir and altar. At Vespers, soft shadows as the setting sun lights the church from the West. There’s no mistaking what Office is being chanted in that building.

Back on topic, I have only been to one ad orientem OF Mass. It was at the abbey of Monte Cassino (well two actually as I’ve been twice), in Italy. I might add that it was also in Latin 😃
 
codefro said:
God bless Fr. Fessio for his opinions on how the OF should be celebrated

ncregister.com/daily-news/summorum-pontificum-5-years-later
Click to expand...
One of Ignatius Press’s subsidiary groups is Adoremus, which has as one of its goals re-Latinizing the OF Mass. They have even helped setup my men’s Gregorian chant group with 300 of their Mass Of Vatican II worship aids for free just because I contacted them and asked them about it. Any parish that wants to try out the Ordinary Form in Latin can do it on the cheap with these well-crafted worship aids.

Fr. Fessio has celebrated both forms, but he is more in the Reform of the Reform camp than the Return to Tradition camp. He always has been.
 
pnewton said:
I still do no think this would be a big issue for most Catholics, especially if the theological reason was taught
Click to expand...
That “the uneducated masses of the city of Rome don’t understand Greek, so we have to switch the liturgy to Latin” doesn’t quite strike me as a “theological reason.”

😃

hawk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top