The documents from Vatican II do not say anything of the sort. Can you tell us the name of the book and whether it contains any purported references or citations for this claim?My sister has a book which says that the priest is supposed to have his back to the people when he says Mass according to the Vatican II documents. That the altar should be away from the wall and the priest facing the people was a later addition to the original documents. Can you clarify?
The subtle wording of this paragraph (possit - possibile) clearly indicates that the position of the celebrant priest facing the people is not made compulsory. The instruction merely allows for both forms of celebration. At any rate, the added phrase “which is desirable wherever (or whenever) possible (quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit)” refers to the provision for a freestanding altar and not to the desirability of celebration towards the people.13
Nonetheless various news reports about the revised General Instruction seemed to suggest that the position of the celebrant versus orientem - or versus absidem - was declared undesirable, if not prohibited.
This interpretation however has been rejected by the Congregation for Divine Worship in a response to a question submitted by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna. The response is dated 25 September 2000 and signed by Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estévez, then Prefect of the Congregation, and Archbishop Francesco Pio Tamburrino, its Secretary:
In the first place, it is to be borne in mind that the word expedit does not constitute an obligation, but a suggestion that refers to the construction of the altar a pariete seiunctum (detached from the wall) and to the celebration versus populum (towards the people). The clause ubi possibile sit (where it is possible) refers to different elements, as, for example, the topography of the place, the availability of space, the artistic value of the existing altar, the sensibility of the people participating in the celebrations in a particular church, etc. It reaffirms that the position towards the assembly seems more convenient inasmuch as it makes communication easier (cf. the editorial in Notitiae 29 [1993] 245-49), without excluding, however, the other possibility.
However, whatever may be the position of the celebrating priest, it is clear that the eucharistic sacrifice is offered to the one and triune God and that the principal, eternal, and high priest is Jesus Christ, who acts through the ministry of the priest who visibly presides as His instrument. The liturgical assembly participates in the celebration in virtue of the common priesthood of the faithful which requires the ministry of the ordained priest to be exercised in the eucharistic synaxis. The physical position, especially with respect to the communication among the various members of the assembly, must be distinguished from the interior spiritual orientation of all. It would be a grave error to imagine that the principal orientation of the sacrificial action is towards the community. If the priest celebrates versus populum, which is legitimate and often advisable, his spiritual attitude ought always to be versus Deum per Iesum Christum (towards God through Jesus Christ), as representative of the entire Church. The Church as well, which takes concrete form in the assembly which participates, is entirely turned versus Deum (towards God) as its first spiritual movement.14
I met Fr. Lang in person three weeks ago. He is a very holy priest and his knowledge of the liturgy is vast. You cannot go wrong with his excellent book. Even Pope Benedict XVI highly recommends Fr. Lang’s work.Obviously, the relevant paragraph of the General Instruction must be read in light of this clarification.15
The part of your post that I bolded and underlined is not exactly true. Mass versus populum was said at a parish in my diocese back in 1952. WITH the full approval of the Vatican. Before you can chime in and say that “Oh well, it must have been a modernist parish” I can tell you that Fr. Patrick Peyton CSC launched his worldwide Family Rosary Crusade from that parish in 1947. It is one of the most traditional parishes in this diocese to this day!The Council did not say that Mass should be celebrated facing the people,that is not in Vatican II, it is not mentioned. It is not even raised in the documents that record the formation of the Constitution on the Liturgy, it didn’t come up. Mass facing the people is a not requirement of Vatican II, it is not in the spirit of Vatican II, it is definitely not in the letter of Vatican II.** It is something introduced in 1969**.
By the way, never in the history of the Church, East or West, was there a tradition of celebrating Mass facing the people, the only time that such a thing happened was during the reformation when Bishop Cranmer introduced this along with a table instead of an altar.
Cranmer was head of the English church under Henry VIII.
Where was the tabernacle?The part of your post that I bolded and underlined is not exactly true. Mass versus populum was said at a parish in my diocese back in 1952. WITH the full approval of the Vatican. Before you can chime in and say that “Oh well, it must have been a modernist parish” I can tell you that Fr. Patrick Peyton CSC launched his worldwide Family Rosary Crusade from that parish in 1947. It is one of the most traditional parishes in this diocese to this day!
Note that a free standing altar doesn’t immediately mean versus populum.Where was the tabernacle?
The versus populum altar was ordered as preference in 1964
adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html#anchor36495058
- The main altar should preferably be freestanding, to permit walking around it and celebration facing the people. Its location in the place of worship should be truly central so that the attention of the whole congregation naturally focuses there.
The Sacrosanctum Concilium did not make any decision about the altar.