Ordinary Form Ad Orientem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Inquisitor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The_Inquisitor

Guest
Can a priest, of his own choosing, freely celebrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass ad orientem or is there some special rule regarding this? Is or can a priest be obligated to celebrate the Mass facing the people? Thank you all in advance!
 
The_Inquisitor said:
Can a priest, of his own choosing, freely celebrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass ad orientem or is there some special rule regarding this? Is or can a priest be obligated to celebrate the Mass facing the people? Thank you all in advance!
Click to expand...
My understanding is that a priest is allowed to say Mass ad orientem if he so chooses. I don’t even know if his bishop is allowed to forbid him.

I personally can’t stand versus populum. It completely downplays the sacrificial nature of the Mass, and we have only been doing it for fifty years - ad orientem is the more ancient of the two ways.
 
WetCatechumen said:
My understanding is that a priest is allowed to say Mass ad orientem if he so chooses. I don’t even know if his bishop is allowed to forbid him.

I personally can’t stand versus populum. It completely downplays the sacrificial nature of the Mass, and we have only been doing it for fifty years - ad orientem is the more ancient of the two ways.
Click to expand...
Amen. A good number of Catholics who DO attend Mass every Sunday I would imagine don’t even have a clue that the Mass is the One Supreme Sacrifice…😦

And of course facing the people and making it seem like a get together doesn’t seem to work out too well…
 
WetCatechumen said:
My understanding is that a priest is allowed to say Mass ad orientem if he so chooses. I don’t even know if his bishop is allowed to forbid him…
Click to expand...
No, the bishop cannot forbid the celebration of the OF Mass Ad Orientum.

This was made clear when Bishop Foley of Birmingham, AL attempted to forbid EWTN from celebrating Mass Ad Orientium. He was overrulled by Rome, stating that it was not in the power of bishop to forbid this legitimate Norm.
 
The_Inquisitor said:
Can a priest, of his own choosing, freely celebrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass ad orientem or is there some special rule regarding this? Is or can a priest be obligated to celebrate the Mass facing the people? Thank you all in advance!
Click to expand...
Yes. He can. He doesn’t need any special permission. The “rule” is actually the Roman Missal which allows for either position.

On the other hand, a priest is still bound by obedience to his bishop. A bishop could require one or the other as a matter of uniformity for his diocese, and if that happens the priest would have an obligation to follow the bishop. This comes down to asking “what does the bishop say?”

A bishop who says “you must do it this way because that’s what the liturgical norms require” would be in the wrong.

A bishop who says “either way is permitted but for uniformity in this diocese, I want it done one way” would be acting within his own competence. The priest has an obligation on both a moral and a liturgical level to obey the bishop, as the bishop is the pastor and chief liturgist of the diocese.

The end result would be the same, but the way the bishop says it would make all the difference.
 
The bishop can’t stop the priest from doing so but the bishop can transfer the priest to another parish if its causing problems…
 
Brendan said:
No, the bishop cannot forbid the celebration of the OF Mass Ad Orientum.

This was made clear when Bishop Foley of Birmingham, AL attempted to forbid EWTN from celebrating Mass Ad Orientium. He was overrulled by Rome, stating that it was not in the power of bishop to forbid this legitimate Norm.
Click to expand...
That awesome that he “got told” haha. But aren’t they still obligated to celebrate versus populum for televised Masses?
 
While the priest does have the option of celebrating Mass ad orientem or versus populum, there are parts of the missal which imply that the priest is celebrating ad orientem - for example,before the “Orate, fratres” the priest is instructed to stand “at the centre of the altar, facing the people”, extend and then join his hands… Again, before the “Ecce Agnus Dei” it says: “The priest genuflects. Taking the host, he raises it slightly over the paten, and facing the people, says aloud…”. Such instructions only really make sense if the priest is facing ad orientem - if it was assumed that the norm was to be versus populum celebration of the Holy Mass, there would be no need to instruct the priest to face the people at certain points, since he would already be facing them anyway.

So while both orientations may be acceptable, the missal itself gives a clear indication that ad orientem is actually the norm, while versus populum is the exception. Even the Vatican Council in Sacrosanctum Concilium said that in new churches altars should be built away from the wall to allow for the possibility - and only the possibility - of celebrating Mass facing the people. Furthermore, there was no requirement whatsoever for existing churches to replace their existing altars with freestanding ones.
 
FrDavid96 said:
Yes. He can. He doesn’t need any special permission. The “rule” is actually the Roman Missal which allows for either position.

On the other hand, a priest is still bound by obedience to his bishop. A bishop could require one or the other as a matter of uniformity for his diocese, and if that happens the priest would have an obligation to follow the bishop. This comes down to asking “what does the bishop say?”

A bishop who says “you must do it this way because that’s what the liturgical norms require” would be in the wrong.

A bishop who says “either way is permitted but for uniformity in this diocese, I want it done one way” would be acting within his own competence. The priest has an obligation on both a moral and a liturgical level to obey the bishop, as the bishop is the pastor and chief liturgist of the diocese.

The end result would be the same, but the way the bishop says it would make all the difference.
Click to expand...
With all that in mind. Regardless of the way the Bishop says it, could he refuse to allow the indult in his diocese to celebrate Mass ad populum? I have not read the indult, so I am not sure if it follows the same rules as the indult for female altar servers.
 
DeepeningFaith said:
With all that in mind. Regardless of the way the Bishop says it, could he refuse to allow the indult in his diocese to celebrate Mass ad populum? I have not read the indult, so I am not sure if it follows the same rules as the indult for female altar servers.
Click to expand...
Which indult? I haven’t read it either. Frankly, this is the first I’ve heard that there even is an indult. More information?
 
FrDavid96 said:
On the other hand, a priest is still bound by obedience to his bishop. A bishop could require one or the other as a matter of uniformity for his diocese, and if that happens the priest would have an obligation to follow the bishop. This comes down to asking “what does the bishop say?”

A bishop who says “either way is permitted but for uniformity in this diocese, I want it done one way” would be acting within his own competence. The priest has an obligation on both a moral and a liturgical level to obey the bishop, as the bishop is the pastor and chief liturgist of the diocese.
Click to expand...
Some months ago, when we were in the midst of H1N1, there was a thread or two about whether the bishop could forbid Communion on the tongue, even in the interest of public health. The prevailing opinion here, backed by a letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship was that the bishop did not have the authority to forbid a liturgical norm of that nature.

What differentiates that scenario from the current discussion?
 
Spirithound said:
Some months ago, when we were in the midst of H1N1, there was a thread or two about whether the bishop could forbid Communion on the tongue, even in the interest of public health. The prevailing opinion here, backed by a letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship was that the bishop did not have the authority to forbid a liturgical norm of that nature.

What differentiates that scenario from the current discussion?
Click to expand...
The difference is that receiving on the tongue is the universal norm, and it’s also been defined as a right. That means that the bishop cannot take away that right. Receiving on the hand is (or at least started) strictly an indult, which has been extended by virtue of being incorporated as an option into the US GIRM (making the option not so much an indult, but now the liturgical law in the US). No matter what though, Communion on the hand is still a variation from the norm, and cannot be forced upon anyone; most of all because forcing in the hand denies the right of receiving on the tongue, and removing people’s exercise of their rights requires a high standard.

The position of the priest, however, is a different because the universal norms do not state one way or the other which must be done. It’s not that we have with-the-people as the norm, but toward-the-people as an indult. Since both options exist, the bishop can choose one for his own diocese–in my opinion. This gets back to what I said earlier, that the bishop cannot say that toward-the-people is a matter of liturgical law, but he can say that he wants one option to be used within his diocese–at least at Masses celebrated in public. There is no “right” to attending Mass where the priest faces with the people, nor a “right” of the priest to face that way–at least not to my knowlege. It is an option, yes, but not an outright right.

What I’m saying here is that a variation from the norm is different from a situation of two equal norms; and that there’s a difference between denying a right and exercising one of several options. At least that’s how I see it.
 
Personally, I like both ways. I think that some people are a little quick to dismiss versus populum. There are benefits to it, as there are benefits to ad orientem.
 
Our parish celebrates the Mass Ad Orientem. We have members from over 50 miles around who belong. It is very reverent and the hymns are very traditional.

We also receive kneeling at the altar rail and I have never seen anyone receive on the hand.

Our pastor also mentions what is appropriate to wear for Mass and I would said at least half of the women wear dresses. Many wear head coverings.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
 
Brendan said:
No, the bishop cannot forbid the celebration of the OF Mass Ad Orientum.

This was made clear when Bishop Foley of Birmingham, AL attempted to forbid EWTN from celebrating Mass Ad Orientium. He was overrulled by Rome, stating that it was not in the power of bishop to forbid this legitimate Norm.
Click to expand...
Can you provide documentation for this?

I ask becuase my fiancée and I are due to get married in her home parish, in the diocese of Cleveland, OH. We would like the Mass offered facing with the people; it’s what we believe in. The young assistant pastor, who will be celebrant, would probably be sympathetic to our request. However, the pastor, who was at seminary in the 1970s, claims that the bishop has forbidden Mass facing with the people in churches with freestanding altars. He has not provided any evidence for this, so I don’t know the nature of the request - did he just say he preferred it, when speaking off-the-cuff at a clergy retreat? Or was it promulgated with full force as Law for his Particular Church. Where is the reference (L’Osservatore Romano? Acta Apostololicae Sedes? Notitiae?) that says such a request by the bishop is irrelevant or non-binding?
 
Vincent1984 said:
Can you provide documentation for this?

I ask becuase my fiancée and I are due to get married in her home parish, in the diocese of Cleveland, OH. We would like the Mass offered facing with the people; it’s what we believe in. The young assistant pastor, who will be celebrant, would probably be sympathetic to our request. However, the pastor, who was at seminary in the 1970s, claims that the bishop has forbidden Mass facing with the people in churches with freestanding altars. He has not provided any evidence for this, so I don’t know the nature of the request - did he just say he preferred it, when speaking off-the-cuff at a clergy retreat? Or was it promulgated with full force as Law for his Particular Church. Where is the reference (L’Osservatore Romano? Acta Apostololicae Sedes? Notitiae?) that says such a request by the bishop is irrelevant or non-binding?
Click to expand...
Vincent,
The young priest might indeed be willing, but the pastor might not allow it. The pastor’s reasoning might be wrong, his justification from liturgical law might be wrong, but if he doesn’t want it done that way in his parish church, the asistant has an obligation to abide by the pastor’s decision. Since you say the assistant “would probably be sympathetic” that leads me to think you haven’t outright asked yet. By no means am I discouraging you from asking. I’m only trying to prepare you that the final answer might be “no.” I would not suggest forcing the issue because this puts the young priest into a difficult position indeed, and one that could have some very negative effects on him. If this is what you want, then certainly make the request; just be ready to accept the answer either way.
 
Thank you, Father, for your advice. We consider the young priest to be a friend of ours, and we certainly do not want to place him in a difficult position. I am aware that in for all practical purposes, the pastor’s say is final in these matters. We have asked obliquely - trying to avoid putting him on the spot - and his response referred, via the pastor, to the bishop’s supposed prohibition, perhaps dating back to a previous bishop and almost certainly before our friend was ordained.

We have had our marriage prep classes with a different priest (we live a long way from my fiancée’s home parish) and he suggested the best way to avoid putting the assistant pastor in trouble, would be to approach the pastor ourselves. The pastor is not really a ‘detail’ man, and for all I know he may have got the wrong end of the stick about what the bishop said. So before we meet him ourselves, I want to have chapter and verse about whether a bishop can issue such a decree. Perhaps he would then make an exception to the norms of the parish, for our Mass which will not be part of the normal schedule.

So the much-publicised EWTN case interests me. Are there any public documents from Rome which comment on the bishop’s ability to remove the option of ad orientem at private Masses?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top