Priest Faces People

  • Thread starter Thread starter rwoehmke
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rwoehmke

Guest
Why is it often said that having the priest face the people is undesirable? It would seem that if Christ is indeed present in His People Gathered that this would be most appropriate.

The “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963) used Pius XII’s encyclical Mediator Dei (1948) as its model when it asserted in article No. 7:

To accomplish so great a work Christ is always present in his church, especially in liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass both in the person of his minister, “the same one now offering through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,” and most of all in the eucharistic species. By his power he is present in the sacraments so that when anybody baptizes it is really Christ himself who baptizes. He is present in his word since it is he himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in church. Lastly, he is present when the church prays and sings, for he has promised “where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them” (Mt 18:20).

The article mentions the presence of Christ in the church first. Other modes of Christ’s presence are enumerated—for example, his presence in the presider, his presence most especially in the eucharistic species, his presence in the sacraments and in the word proclaimed from the Scriptures. But it is Christ’s presence in the church, specified as the church gathered for worship, that is the basis for the possibility of all the other modes of presence.

The desire to worship facing East seems to me to make some sense, but otherwise…? About half the churches I have attended Mass in face in such a way that the only way to face East is to turn sideways at the altar or in the pews. Apparently it has become more a measure of which way the lot faces than what the ancient practice has been. :confused:
 
When it is impossible to face actual east most churches compromise and have a “liturgical east.” In my Melkite parish the church building we bought faces north and south so we cannot face east.

As for the priest facing the people – there are all kinds of arguments on both sides that depend on allegory as the basis for their claim. The primary reason for the priest facing east (or, at least, in the same direction as the people) is that this is traditionally what has been done since we moved out of the home church model.

Deacon Ed
 
From where I stand (and sit and kneel, LOL), the priest facing the people for the entire Mass has been the single most destructive element of the liturgical reforms, even more so than the virtual abandonment of Latin.

In most places, this has elevated the priest’s personality to a far greater level than it ever was. Because the people can see the priest, his face, his body movements (some would say his body language), his human self becomes a distraction; he ends up addressing the people about many items, more than just the Mass texts. The temptation to ad-lib and even change Mass texts becomes greater. Some people like Father X’s Mass more than Father Y’s Mass, because Father X seems more sincere, reverent, sympathetic, holy, charismatic, whatever. The priest is supposed to be the Alter Christus; his appearance, eye color, facial expressions, hand gestures, speaking abilities, etc. should be completely irrelevant.

The Mass ends up being more horizontal than vertical. The priest is indeed the presider of the liturgical assembly, as Vatican II tells us, but having him face the people throughout the liturgy helps many of us to forget that the Mass should cause us all, priest and people, to together focus on God. Having both face the altar, with the priest leading the people’s prayers before God, reinforces this notion far more visually than the other way. It also reminds us that he is more than just a presider; he is a priest and he offers the Holy Sacrifice.

By having the priest make eye contact with the congregration (which was never done in the Tridentine Mass, even when the priest faced the people and said Dominus vobiscum), this causes a human interactive element to become a focal point of the Mass. (“Hmm, Father always looks at So-and-So. I wonder why he never looks this way?”) But most of all, the emphasis on the Eucharist as meal (which it certainly is) and the repartée between the altar and the congregation has contributed to a de-emphasis on the Real Presence and the sanctity of the Mass, as well as reduced reverence for the Blessed Sacrament. Everything from people’s demeanor, behavior, manner of dress and distractions during Mass (cell phones, etc.) leads back to the informality that was engendered by turning the altar around (followed by the removal of communion rails).
 
ad orientem = facing east = “facing the same direction as the people” = “with the people” = “with his back to the people”

versus populam = against the people = “facing the people” = “with his back to God in the East”

How do you wish to compare the two?

One posture has the priests back to the people while the other has his back to God “in the East”

One posture faces the people while the other faces God.

One posture is in common with the people while the other is against the people.

The actions are determined by how we define each posture. I think the literal translation of the latin probably captures the best definition.
 
With respect to those more learned that I, I would just like to voice my opinion on this subject.

I like having the priest face the congregation. As I see it, the priest represents Christ. So, I see it as having Christ face me. I wouldn’t want Christ’s back to me, as if I were too ugly for him to look at.

That’s just my opinion, for whatever it’s worth.

Scout
 
Scout,

you should read the relevant section in (then) Cardinal Ratzinger’s The Spirit of the Liturgy. His arguments seem strong to me.
 
40.png
drforjc:
Scout,

you should read the relevant section in (then) Cardinal Ratzinger’s The Spirit of the Liturgy. His arguments seem strong to me.
Click to expand...
Well, since I haven’t read them, I can only go by what I know and see. I wasn’t asking for an explanation or for someone to tell me that I’m wrong to think this way. I was just saying that I like things the way they are. I don’t see why we always have to want something different-why we can’t be happy with what we’ve got. At least we’ve got priests. There are many places in this world that don’t even have that and they’d be grateful to have one and wouldn’t care which direction he’s standing.

Scout :tiphat:
 
Another reason the priest should face God instead of the people is because he is our leader, leading the pilgrim church on earth through forest and desert to the heavenly new Jerusalem. How can you lead if you’re not looking where you’re going?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top