How one picture makes the case for ad orientem.

[Don_Ruggero]

It would perhaps make more sense if you consider that in most (but admittedly not all) Churches which have ad orientem Mass (in the Ordinary or Extraordinary Form) typically have the Tabernacle on the Altar itself, rather than in a side chapel. That way the elevation is not simply happening “facing a Crucifix”, but facing the Blessed Sacrament. Throughout a Mass ad orientem, the entire congregation and the Priest face in the same direction towards the Altar on which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved as an act of recognition and worship towards a single focal point: God present among us on His Altar.

That’s not to say there’s not theological value in versus populum. In both forms each are done for specific reasons for the expression of a particular theological virtue rather than merely as a “theatrical” preference.

No, actually, it does not make more sense to consider it in light of what you propose. The theology underlining this moment in the liturgical action has its own meaning that has nothing to do with whether or not the reserved sacrament is in the vicinity.

As for the focus of the people, the focus is, properly, on the unfolding synaxis.

 

[twf]

It would perhaps make more sense if you consider that in most (but admittedly not all) Churches which have ad orientem Mass (in the Ordinary or Extraordinary Form) typically have the Tabernacle on the Altar itself, rather than in a side chapel. That way the elevation is not simply happening “facing a Crucifix”, but facing the Blessed Sacrament. Throughout a Mass ad orientem, the entire congregation and the Priest face in the same direction towards the Altar on which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved as an act of recognition and worship towards a single focal point: God present among us on His Altar.

That’s not to say there’s not theological value in versus populum. In both forms each are done for specific reasons for the expression of a particular theological virtue rather than merely as a “theatrical” preference.

You realize that placing the tabernacle in the centre of the high altar was not by any means universal prior to perhaps the 19th century? Even after that many cathedrals continued to use side chapels. This is not a post-Vatican II innovation.
That being said, in my own archdiocese, the Archbishop has decreed that the tabernacle must be front and centre in the sanctuary.

 

[jilly4ski]

Frankly, this drawing is non-sensical to me. In all my decades of the priesthood, I have never lifted my head to address a carved work of art…least of all to act as though it was the Lord I was addressing. It is a piece of art.

Maybe it would make more sense to you if you consider who is being worshiped, who is doing the worshiping, and what the priest’s role in the worship is.

If you think of the priest as more like the drum major in a marching band, then ad orientem makes sense. The drum major in a band most often faces the same direction as his band, leading them to were they need to go, and when he needs to address his band (keep them in time or to cue them) he turns around and faces them.

Whereas, in western culture, we associate someone facing a crowd, as someone in authority teaching, or lecturing, or addressing. It is practical but it also has symbolism for us. Teachers stand at the front of class, politicians stand at the front of crowds, the bosses stand at the front of the room, preachers stand at the front of churches, etc. It symbolizes power and authority.

And do you not participate in Good Friday services and the Veneration of the Cross?

(I typically go to a Church where ad orientem liturgy would be impossible and that’s ok, I also go to a Church that still has its original high altar which is still in use, and all its masses are ad orientem, though only one Mass is in the Extraordinary form, and the Mass I attend is the Ordinary Form in Latin. It is a beautiful Mass. Related to that point, I sing in the choir there, last week we did Gounod’s Saint Cecilia’s Mass, and we are in the choir loft, no one can see us, but we still manage to lead the congregation in musical worship).

 

[Stat_Crux]

You realize that placing the tabernacle in the centre of the high altar was not by any means universal prior to perhaps the 19th century? Even after that many cathedrals continued to use side chapels. This is not a post-Vatican II innovation.
That being said, in my own archdiocese, the Archbishop has decreed that the tabernacle must be front and centre in the sanctuary.

Yes I was aware that it wasn’t by any means universal. Hence the “not all” in my comment.

 

[felsguy]

Maybe it would make more sense to you if you consider who is being worshiped, who is doing the worshiping, and what the priest’s role in the worship is.

And do you not participate in Good Friday services and the Veneration of the Cross?

You are seriously asking this of a man who has been a priest for many, many years, has taught liturgy and other subjects in seminaries, and has held a wide variety of other positions in his long career?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You are seriously asking this of a man who has been a priest for many, many years, has taught liturgy and other subjects in seminaries, and has held a wide variety of other positions in his long career?

You find it remarkable, eh?

Now you would have insight into why anyone who begins with the words that you quoted of the other poster would receive a very icy stare followed by the priest turning his back and walking away, preferably before the person had finished speaking…but after a mental note that if such a person had held any ministry or function in the parish, it was now terminated.

:yup:

 

[jilly4ski]

You are seriously asking this of a man who has been a priest for many, many years, has taught liturgy and other subjects in seminaries, and has held a wide variety of other positions in his long career?

Yes, I asked that in light of the follow conversation, obviously the answer is that he has, so I was trying to point out the answer was rather disingenuous, instead of acknowledging that one had misspoke.

Frankly, this drawing is non-sensical to me. In all my decades of the priesthood, I have never lifted my head to address a carved work of art…least of all to act as though it was the Lord I was addressing. It is a piece of art.

Never, not symbolically or metaphorically?

No.

As for the first paragraph, it was merely an attempt to frame the issue in a way where others could at least acknowledge there sound opinion on the other side of their views.

As I mentioned, while I like ad orientem masses, I am perfectly happy with masses being said facing the congregation, but am more on the side of options. If the priest likes to say mass ad orientem and the church architecture allows for it, then go for it. If however the priest would prefer not to say mass ad orientem and the church architecture allows for it, that is fine too. But ad orientem worship is hardly illogical based solely on false nostalgia.

 

[pianistclare]

Most people aren’t confused. They don’t look for things to be confused about. They see the elevated host, know it’s Jesus, and adore him. Because that is what they have been taught.
And it’s fine.

Amen.

 

[pianistclare]

You are seriously asking this of a man who has been a priest for many, many years, has taught liturgy and other subjects in seminaries, and has held a wide variety of other positions in his long career?

+1

Even in the face of persons highly educated…it’s shocking to me.
We used to respect priests. I know even now, if I spoke like this to my boss…???
(He’s a priest)
I’d be out of a job. Pronto.