The differences would occur during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. During the Introductory Rites, Liturgy of the Word, and Concluding Rites the priest is not at the altar.Can someone explain to me how a OF Mass said Ad Orientem is celebrated?
I ask because I would like to know what differences are observed between the Mass said Versus Populum VS Ad Orientem.
“Ad orientem” is Latin for “to the East”. It does not mean “his back to the people”. This is a common misconception.The difference would be the priest would face the altar with his back to the people (ad orientem) as opposed to facing the people over the altar (versus populum).
Yes, well worth remembering. After all, at the high altars in the major basilicas of Rome (including St. Peter’s), Mass is celebrated at once ad orientem and versus populum.“Ad orientem” is Latin for “to the East”. It does not mean “his back to the people”. This is a common misconception.
How rare. Lucky you.My parish only has a high altar, and all Masses are offered ad orientem.
If you took the time to read my entire post rather than taking a single sentence out of context then you would realise THAT is what I said.“Ad orientem” is Latin for “to the East”. It does not mean “his back to the people”. This is a common misconception.
I think he was simply expounding upon that point in an effort to expand the dialogue. I don’t think his post was meant to be corrective of yours.If you took the time to read my entire post rather than taking a single sentence out of context then you would realise THAT is what I said.
I might be inclined to agree with you if not for two things: 1. he cited my post; 2. I’ve seen this happen all too often on here where posters take another’s response out of context and nitpick holes in it.I think he was simply expounding upon that point in an effort to expand the dialogue. I don’t think his post was meant to be corrective of yours.
From what I’ve seen, it’s somewhat rare to have a High Altar and a fixed (i.e. immovable) free-standing altar. In such a case, the High Altar is usually relegated to being a repository for the tabernacle. In any case, that arrangement should actually not present a serious problem with using the free-standing altar ad orientem. Whether the High Altar remains, was moved forward (thus becoming the fix free-standing altar), or was destroyed, one thing that sometimes happens is that the free-standing altar sits on the edge of a step, but even that is fairly easily remedied by a movable platform of the same height as the step. I’ve seen that done a few times, and it seems to work. It may not be the usual 3 steps, but it is serviceable.It occurred to me that if a trend ever develops wherein priests become more and more inclined to celebrate ad-orientem, most sanctuaries are going to end up being unfriendly to that because of the duplication of altars in most churches that were built before Vatican II. In most such churches, the original altar remains and a new altar has been placed in front of it.
I suppose, when a priest wants to celebrate ad-orientem, he would do so at the original altar, rather than at the new altar. In cases of new altars that are easily removable, no problem of course: just wheel it into the sacristy. But what about new altars that are every bit as permanent as the original altars? A pastor couldn’t very well tear the new altar down, because what if his successor (or the other priests on staff) wish to celebrate versus populum?
Leaving it, however, presents a really awkward visual scenario: an altar in front of the altar, unused, avoided, processed around, unadorned. It would be bizarre. I suppose the priest could use the new altar, instead, but then it would become instantly redundant.
I predict that this back and forth between ad orientem and vs. populum is really going to cause alot of confusion in the sanctuaries of many parishes in the years to come.
Good point. Thankfully, that’s why my pastor had the front altar removed and placed into storage (he said, “I’d throw it out, but it belongs to the church”…wouldn’t it be nice if all of those post-Vatican II priests who tore out the altar rails, statues, religious art, high altars, confessionals, etc. had the same value for things that didn’t belong to them?I predict that this back and forth between ad orientem and vs. populum is really going to cause alot of confusion in the sanctuaries of many parishes in the years to come.
You know, when I was a kid, I never actually realized that the original altar was actually an altar; I didn’t know what it was: to me it was just that “thing” behind the altar. I just assumed it was some decorative design element created to, as you say, surround the tabernacle. When I later learned that it was actually an altar, and that Mass was celebrated on it, and that the table altar wasn’t there at all in former times, I was astounded.From what I’ve seen, it’s somewhat rare to have a High Altar and a fixed (i.e. immovable) free-standing altar. In such a case, the High Altar is usually relegated to being a repository for the tabernacle. In any case, that arrangement should actually not present a serious problem with using the free-standing altar ad orientem. Whether the High Altar remains, was moved forward (thus becoming the fix free-standing altar), or was destroyed, one thing that sometimes happens is that the free-standing altar sits on the edge of a step, but even that is fairly easily remedied by a movable platform of the same height as the step. I’ve seen that done a few times, and it seems to work. It may not be the usual 3 steps, but it is serviceable.
I don’t disagree, of course, but as the olde saying goes: one does what one can with what one has. No, using the free-standing altar where a High Altar still exists is not optimal, but it does work. To me, better that ad orientem, than the *versus populum * “table” effect.In my opinion, the presence of two main altars in any given sanctuary constitutes a liturgical monster. But it also presents practical issues, now, with changing liturgical perspectives.
I’m always amazed when I read a post by someone who belongs to a (non-traditionalist) parish at which the “new” altars have been removed and at which the “ordinary form” of Mass is celebrated at the old altar ad orientem. It’s unheard of in my diocese. There are two parishes in the diocese at which the old Tridentine Rite is celebrated, sponsored by Una Voce, or something, but no church at which the standard Mass is celebrated ad orientem. And it’s something I have yet to actually see, anywhere. I’m glad to hear that this is the norm for some churches, though.Good point. Thankfully, that’s why my pastor had the front altar removed and placed into storage (he said, “I’d throw it out, but it belongs to the church”…wouldn’t it be nice if all of those post-Vatican II priests who tore out the altar rails, statues, religious art, high altars, confessionals, etc. had the same value for things that didn’t belong to them?
Every priest who has celebrated Mass in our church absolutely loves the ad orientem position (many are from outside of our parish, but come to offer weekday Masses). They all say it makes the Mass so much more prayerful for them, and enables them to concentrate on Who it is they are praying to.
That’s great that you have this going on at your parish. I just think that’s amazing; I;ve never seen it before.The attached picture shows my Parish Priest celebrating Mass ad orientem at a new freestanding altar.